Two errors in targeting poverty

This paper presents an analysis on the controversies surrounding CTA poverty program, which basically revolves around exclusion and inclusion errors in poverty identification. The paper indicates a significant identification error in CTA poverty program as it finds that distribution of CTA poverty population is not correlated to level of well-being in settlements. The paper argues, poverty identification errors have been going on for a long time in exile Tibetan community because of narrow poverty conception accompanied by weak identification criteria. Due to unique exile political system, social policy and particularly poverty policy have received less attention. With little information on causes and nature of the exile poverty, policy elites then come up with their own discourse on a work disincentive, which ultimately led to high external errors in CTA poverty identification. Relevance to Development Studies There are two ways to eradicate poverty in a society. The first is to provide market to the poor and make them engage in economic activity to help themselves. This is more sustainable way to eradicate poverty but it will take longer time because poor also have to deal with lots of other structural issues in a society to earn a better living. So, the second alternative way is to transfer social welfare to poor. It will eradicate poverty in short run but temporarily and it is an important building block for poor to get out of poverty. This paper falls into the later part on social welfare to eradicate poverty. Unfortunately, due to shift in the social policy from Universalism to Targeting, many poor are excluded of such social welfare. Thus, taking exile Tibetan community as research context, this paper tries to understand why many exile Tibetan poor in India, Nepal and Bhutan are excluded from such social welfare.