Conditions for the most robust multidimensional poverty comparisons using counting measures and ordinal variables

The case for an assessment of poverty considering multiple deprivations has been well argued for a long time (e.g. Sen, 2001, 2009). While there is a broad consensus about the multidimensionality of poverty, there is a debate as to whether the multiple indicators of deprivations should be brought together into a composite index or not (e.g. see Ravalion, 2010). On the other hand, it seems that a composite measure of multiple deprivations is unavoidable when the purpose is to quantify the incidence of multiple deprivations within the same individuals. In practice, one of the approaches proposed to measure multidimensional poverty with a composite index is the counting approach, which is based on counting the number of dimensions in which people are deprived (for a discussion of different approaches see Atkinson, 2003). The approach has gained recent popularity with the Alkire-Foster (AF) family of counting poverty indices (Alkire and Foster, 2010).