Purpose This paper aims to address the thesis that poverty is best alleviated by a policy emphasising the growth of per capita average income, a strategy that affords little room for direct pro-poor interventions or a movement towards a more equal distribution of incomes. This policy prescription is based on the empirical finding that cross-country variations in poverty are largely explained by variations in growth rates of average income. Design/methodology/approach The paper contends, as has been done in other commentaries on the subject, that inferring the dictum that “growth is [virtually the only thing] good for poverty” from cross-country evidence on poverty, growth and inequality is neither logically plausible nor normatively compelling. This is sought to be established both through conceptual reasoning and (secondary) data-based analysis. In particular, the thesis under review implicitly rejects the value of counter-factual analysis. Such a hypothetical illustrative analysis is attempted here, using evidence relating to urban poverty, growth and inequality in India. Findings The paper concludes, without undermining the salience of growth, that there is little basis for the pre-eminence accorded to it as the instrument for poverty redress. Originality/value This paper has not been published elsewhere. A collaborative paper by one of the present authors with another scholar, on a similar theme is, however, under preparation for publication.

中文翻译：

---

贫困、增长、不平等：一些普遍的和印度特有的考虑

目的 本文旨在解决以下论点：通过强调人均平均收入增长的政策、一种几乎没有空间进行直接扶贫干预或朝着更平等的收入分配运动的战略，才能最好地减轻贫困。这一政策处方基于实证发现，即贫困的跨国差异在很大程度上是由平均收入增长率的差异来解释的。设计/方法论/方法 该论文认为，正如在该主题的其他评论中所做的那样，从关于贫困、增长和不平等的跨国证据中推断出“增长[实际上唯一] 对贫困有益”的格言是既不符合逻辑，也不符合规范。这是通过概念推理和（二级）基于数据的分析来建立的。特别是，正在审查的论文含蓄地拒绝了反事实分析的价值。此处尝试使用与印度城市贫困、增长和不平等相关的证据进行这种假设性的说明性分析。调查结果 本文得出的结论是，在不削弱增长的显着性的情况下，赋予其作为扶贫工具的卓越地位几乎没有基础。原创性/价值 本文尚未在其他地方发表。然而，目前一位作者与另一位学者就类似主题发表的合作论文正在准备出版。调查结果 本文得出的结论是，在不削弱增长的显着性的情况下，将其作为扶贫工具的卓越地位几乎没有基础。原创性/价值 本文尚未在其他地方发表。然而，目前一位作者与另一位学者就类似主题发表的合作论文正在准备出版。调查结果 本文得出的结论是，在不削弱增长的显着性的情况下，它作为扶贫工具的卓越地位几乎没有基础。原创性/价值 本文尚未在其他地方发表。然而，目前一位作者与另一位学者就类似主题发表的合作论文正在准备出版。