A Study of Multidimensional and Persistent Poverty among Migrant Workers: Evidence from China’s CFPS 2014–2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I am grateful for the possibility to become familiar with a manuscript, which has the potential to become a good publication.

Here are my remarks:

1) Abstract:

A good, catchy but thorough abstract that briefly, concisely and clearly summarizes basic goals, approach, method(s), results and conclusions of the paper is a sine-qua-non condition. Its structure should follow the IMRAD scheme and highlight major findings. The authors should note to what extent it would be beneficial: when searching in a database, the abstract is a basis for the main decision whether to download the paper, read it and—eventually—quote it.

Hence, the abstract must be edited.

2) Methodology:

In any methodology, be it in social or natural sciences, the approach is the way of ASKING the research question (and the method is, obviously, the way of answering it). The methodology should clearly outline, in the beginning of any study, at least the following sine-qua-non elements: 1/ Approach --> 2/ Method(s)--> 3/ Data--> 4/ Analysis of the data--> 5/ Results--> 6/ Conclusions and/or Discussion and/or The way forward.

The authors should be more clear and eloquent about their methodology.

3) Approach: 

The authors claim using Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach. So far, so good.

However, firstly, any presentation of Sen's relevant work on capabilites approach is missing in the paper, not to mention extensive referencing of his writings on the subject-matter (which is actually quite rich).

Secondly, since the authors claim that approach to be key in their paper, they must justify why they chose this approach as being the most relevant amongst many others for the purposes of their study.

The two above elements should absolutely feature in the paper: both 1) a comprehensively referenced outline of the chosen approach itself and 2) a substantiated justification of why this approach is chosen and relevant deserve a couple of paragraphs at the very least.

 

Could be improved

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We thank you for their valuable suggestions, all of which have greatly helped us improve the manuscript. We respond to the individual points in detail below, indicating the corresponding changes we have made within the manuscript.

Point 1:  Abstract:

A good, catchy but thorough abstract that briefly, concisely and clearly summarizes basic goals, approach, method(s), results and conclusions of the paper is a sine-qua-non condition. Its structure should follow the IMRAD scheme and highlight major findings. The authors should note to what extent it would be beneficial: when searching in a database, the abstract is a basis for the main decision whether to download the paper, read it and—eventually—quote it.

Hence, the abstract must be edited.

Response 1: Many thanks for the comments. I have learned IMRAD scheme with your help, which will be great help to my future research and article writing. According to your comments, I revised the abstract according to IMRAD scheme. We believe that the revised abstract can more clearly describe my research methods, results and significance.

 

Point 2:   Methodology:

In any methodology, be it in social or natural sciences, the approach is the way of ASKING the research question (and the method is, obviously, the way of answering it). The methodology should clearly outline, in the beginning of any study, at least the following sine-qua-non elements: 1/ Approach --> 2/ Method(s)--> 3/ Data--> 4/ Analysis of the data--> 5/ Results--> 6/ Conclusions and/or Discussion and/or The way forward.

 

Response 2: Thank you for your valuable advice. The problem you mentioned is missing part of my manuscript. Therefore, applicability of A-F method (Line 184-190) are added in this paper.

 

Point 3:  The authors claim using Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach. So far, so good.

However, firstly, any presentation of Sen's relevant work on capabilites approach is missing in the paper, not to mention extensive referencing of his writings on the subject-matter (which is actually quite rich).

Secondly, since the authors claim that approach to be key in their paper, they must justify why they chose this approach as being the most relevant amongst many others for the purposes of their study.

The two above elements should absolutely feature in the paper: both 1) a comprehensively referenced outline of the chosen approach itself and 2) a substantiated justification of why this approach is chosen and relevant deserve a couple of paragraphs at the very least.

 

Response 3: Many thanks for the comments. The explanation of the approach is lacking in the manuscript, because Sen's capabilites approach is so well-researched that we ignore it. Thank you very much for your warning. We have added a separate section (Section 2.2, Line 100-113) to the manuscript to illustrate Sen's capabilites approach, citing relevant books and literature. The reasons for choosing this method are briefly expounded.

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review this interesting article addressing the important issue of migrant worker poverty. The article is well grounded in the literature. The results of the study are credible. Conclusions flow from the results of the study. I suggest you consider adding a description of the research limitations. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We thank you for their valuable suggestions, all of which have greatly helped us improve the manuscript. We respond to the individual points in detail below, indicating the corresponding changes we have made within the manuscript.

Point 1: Comments and Suggestions for Authors：Thank you for the opportunity to review this interesting article addressing the important issue of migrant worker poverty. The article is well grounded in the literature. The results of the study are credible. Conclusions flow from the results of the study. I suggest you consider adding a description of the research limitations.

 

Response 1: Thank you very much for your time. Your kind encourage will always support me in my future academic life. The discussion of limitations is the missing part of my manuscript. In our opinion, the limitation of the paper lies in the lack of consistency of the data. Our study discussed the persistence of poverty among China's migrant workers. However, since the CFPS data is sampled every two years, we could not accurately investigate the annual trend of poverty change of the research objects. This is also the part that future research needs to expand and improve. Based on your valuable comments, we have added the description of limitations to the conclusions (Line 481-483).

Reviewer 3 Report

·         The topic of migrants’ poverty is really relevant - but what is the novelty of this article? Do some the specific things appear particularly in China comparing to other countries?

·         How this used methodology could be applied in other countries’? Or what is the experience from other countries?

·         It is mentioned that poverty is multidimensional – but what age groups/what occupation of migrant workers it affects mostly?

·         Figure 1. visualisation could be improved.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We thank you for their valuable suggestions, all of which have greatly helped us improve the manuscript. We respond to the individual points in detail below, indicating the corresponding changes we have made within the manuscript.

Point 1:  The topic of migrants’ poverty is really relevant - but what is the novelty of this article? Do some the specific things appear particularly in China comparing to other countries?

 

Response 1: Thank you very much for your valuable advice. According to your comments, We added the innovation in the manuscript (Line 60-71). In China, rural-urban migrant workers are a unique social problem, whose survival and rights are severely deprived due to the household registration system. However, few scholars pay attention to the poverty of Chinese immigrants, and even fewer scholars study their multidimensional poverty. In addition, we analyze the problem of persistent poverty, which is rare in existing studies.

 

Point 2: How this used methodology could be applied in other countries? Or what is the experience from other countries?

 

Response 2: Thank you very much for your advice. The problem of migrant poverty exists in many countries. Based on your valuable comments, we added the use of this manuscript at the end of the discussion (Line 461-465). This manuscript measures the poverty situation and the change trend of Chinese immigrants individually. It could be a methodological sample for other countries to study individual and chronic poverty.

 

Point 3: It is mentioned that poverty is multidimensional – but what age groups/what occupation of migrant workers it affects mostly?

 

Response 3: Thank you very much for your advice. In our study, the most powerful factors that impact on multidimensional poverty are labor contracts, job security and trade unions. Our study did the overall analysis of migrant worker poverty, highlighting the distribution of poverty on economic level, political freedoms, social opportunities, protective security, transparency guarantees and spiritual poverty. The age and occupation you mentioned are important factors affecting poverty, but they have not been specifically separated from our general analyzing factors. However, your suggestion enlightens us for our future research.

 

Point 4: Figure 1. visualisation could be improved.

 

Response 4: Thank you very much for your advice. Based on your important comments, we have revised the visualization of Figure 1 (Line181). After modification according to your suggestions, we think that Figure 1 now distinguishes index weights more clearly.

Reviewer 4 Report

1.       Sampling and representativeness of the data source: The data source of the research is Chinese Family Panel Studies (CFPS). Since the sampling method or representativeness of the data will directly affect the follow-up research results, it is recommended to add an explanation of how the data is to be sampled and representative. Follow-up research is more reasonable.

 

2.   Definition of Dimension: The manuscript research method refers to Amartya Sen's capabilities approach, but it is mentioned in Line 115-117 that "we measure the multidimensional poverty using the following 115 six dimensions: (1) economic level, (2) social opportunities, (3) transparency guarantees, 116 (4) protective security, (5) political rights, (6) spiritual poverty.”, how these six Dimensions are defined, it is recommended to clearly explain.

 

 

3.   Data validity: Line83 mentions “The unemployed samples were excluded accordingly.” Dimension Transparency guarantees (No employment contract), please confirm if the samples have excluded the unemployed, whether the presentation of Transparency guarantees are all 0?

 

4.    The significance of the increase or decrease of Weights: Line 133-135 mentioned "The weights of each indicator have changed over time. 133 The weights of Inc, Hea, LC and ES has gradually increased. The weights of Edu, MI and 134 LU gradually decreased in the fluctuation.” Please confirm whether the ES continues to increase and whether the MI continues to decrease? In addition, you should also confirm the meaning of the increase or decrease in weight, such as the increase in Inc. Does it mean that Personal annual income is less than 50% of the per capita disposable Increased proportion of income of urban residents?

 

5.    Social systems and institutions: Line 430-431 mentions "During the long-term urbanization, chronic poverty reflects that China's household registration system deprived migrant workers comprehensively." Although society continues to progress and urbanize, the problem of migrant workers, if only Restricted by the social system, whether the discourse and results of the research, or the suggestions that can be given, will be framed or only anchored by the researcher.

 

6.  Conclusion: The manuscript mentioned in the conclusion "However, approximately 30% of migrant workers have been in multidimensional poverty for seven years, which indicates that migrant workers of China have sever persistence poverty problem." Since the data is sampled every two years, and There are other social factors, and this way of writing suggests careful consideration.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:

We thank you for their valuable suggestions, all of which have greatly helped us improve the manuscript. We respond to the individual points in detail below, indicating the corresponding changes we have made within the manuscript.

Point 1: Sampling and representativeness of the data source: The data source of the research is Chinese Family Panel Studies (CFPS). Since the sampling method or representativeness of the data will directly affect the follow-up research results, it is recommended to add an explanation of how the data is to be sampled and representative. Follow-up research is more reasonable.

 

Response 1: Thank you very much for your advice. It is very important to explain the data representativeness and sampling method, which we have added in the manuscript (Line 82-87). The CFPS is carried out as sampling surveys on residents of 25 provinces (municipalities directly under the central government, and autonomous regions) in China, except Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Xinjiang, Tibet, Qinghai, Inner Mongolia, Ningxia, and Hainan, covering about 95% of China’s population (except Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan). The data in the CFPS are sampled within implicit stratification, multi-stage, multi-level and probability proportionate to size sampling (PPS). Therefore, the data used in our study are nationally representative. In addition, the objects surveyed by this data cover individuals and families in the whole of China, which has strong applicability to the study of immigration.

 

Point 2: Definition of Dimension: The manuscript research method refers to Amartya Sen's capabilities approach, but it is mentioned in Line 115-117 that "we measure the multidimensional poverty using the following 115 six dimensions: (1) economic level, (2) social opportunities, (3) transparency guarantees, 116 (4) protective security, (5) political rights, (6) spiritual poverty.”, how these six Dimensions are defined, it is recommended to clearly explain.

 

Response 2: Thank you very much for your advice. As your valuable comments, we added the theoretical basis of dimension defined (Line 129-131). The revised text can more clearly explain how each dimension is selected and determined. The selection of the five dimensions of economic level, social opportunities, transparency guarantees, protective security and political rights are based on the five instrumental freedoms proposed by Sen. For your convenience, the explanation of each category is shown in the table below. The choice of the spiritual poverty dimension is based on Sen's addition to instrumental freedom in a subsequent article. We have added more comprehensive references to the paper accordingly.

 

Table Instrumental freedoms

instrumental freedoms	Definition
economic level	the opportunities that individuals respectively enjoy toutilize economic resources for the purpose of consumption, or exchange.
social opportunities	the arrangements that society makes for education, healthcare and social services, which influence the individual's substantive freedom to live better.
transparency guarantees	The freedom to negotiations in business, government and any transactions under guarantees of disclosure and lucidity.
protective security	A social safety net that prevents the population, when vulnerable and exposed to critical changes, from succumbing to extreme conditions such as poverty and hunger.
political freedoms	Basic civil rights, including the right to political participation, economic rights, employment rights, etc.

 

 

Point 3: Data validity: Line83 mentions “The unemployed samples were excluded accordingly.” Dimension Transparency guarantees (No employment contract), please confirm if the samples have excluded the unemployed, whether the presentation of Transparency guarantees are all 0?

 

Response 3: Thank you very much for these insightful comments. In our study, the exclusion of unemployed samples is not based on whether there is an employment contract, but on the variables of employment status. In the CFPS data, the survey studied whether the respondents had worked at least an hour in a week. According to this, the employment status of the respondents was judged. If the respondent answers "no", they are judged to be unemployed. We have confirmed that samples have excluded the unemployed. And, the presentation of Transparency guarantees are all 0.

 

Point 4: . The significance of the increase or decrease of Weights: Line 133-135 mentioned "The weights of each indicator have changed over time. 133 The weights of Inc, Hea, LC and ES has gradually increased. The weights of Edu, MI and 134 LU gradually decreased in the fluctuation.” Please confirm whether the ES continues to increase and whether the MI continues to decrease? In addition, you should also confirm the meaning of the increase or decrease in weight, such as the increase in Inc. Does it mean that Personal annual income is less than 50% of the per capita disposable Increased proportion of income of urban residents?

 

Response 4: Thank you very much for your advice. In the description of the index weight’s changing, we use "gradually" to express it is not rigorous. Thank you for your constructive advice. This is our mistake on the logical expression. Based on your advice and the weights of different years in table3, we deleted the wrong expression and added the comparison method to compare the weight changes in 2010 and 2014 (Line 161-164).

 

Point 5:  Social systems and institutions: Line 430-431 mentions "During the long-term urbanization, chronic poverty reflects that China's household registration system deprived migrant workers comprehensively." Although society continues to progress and urbanize, the problem of migrant workers, if only Restricted by the social system, whether the discourse and results of the research, or the suggestions that can be given, will be framed or only anchored by the researcher.

 

Response 5: Thank you very much for your valuable advice. The uniqueness of China's migrant workers lies in the hukou system. However, the sentence you mentioned is not the conclusion of our manuscript, but from the previous research [1-3]. We were doing a wrong conclusion based on their research. Thank you very much for your important comments. The poverty of migrant workers is not only affected by the social system, but also affected by many economic, social and personal factors. The reasons for their poverty are complex, and our statement is not reasonable. Therefore, we have deleted this expression.

 

Reference

[1] Song, Y. What should economists know about the current Chinese hukou system? China Economic Review, 2014, 29, 200–212. DOI:10.1016/j.chieco.2014.04.012.

[2] Liu, Y., Wu, F., & He, S. The Making of the New Urban Poor in Transitional China: Market Versus Institutionally Based Exclusion. Urban Geography, 2008, 29(8), 811–834. DOI:10.2747/0272-3638.29.8.811.

[3] Chan, K. W. The Chinese Hukou System at 50. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 2009, 50(2), 197–221. DOI:10.2747/1539-7216.50.2.197.

 

Point 6: Conclusion: The manuscript mentioned in the conclusion "However, approximately 30% of migrant workers have been in multidimensional poverty for seven years, which indicates that migrant workers of China have sever persistence poverty problem." Since the data is sampled every two years, and There are other social factors, and this way of writing suggests careful consideration.

 

Response 6: Thank you very much for your insignificant comments. Since CFPS data is sampled every two years, the statement "seven consecutive years of poverty" is a wrong estimate of persistent poverty. With this two-year survey data, we can’t get the annual result. This is also a limitation of our study. We have corrected this conclusion in the manuscript (Line 452-455 and Line 479-481).

 

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript has been substantially revised. However, for the analysis results in Table 6, whether the relationship between income poverty and multidimensional poverty can be explained in the Healthy, Medical insurance, and Labor union factors.

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Point 1: The manuscript has been substantially revised. However, for the analysis results in Table 6, whether the relationship between income poverty and multidimensional poverty can be explained in the Healthy, Medical insurance, and Labor union factors.

 

Response 1: Thank you very much for your advice, which makes our research more complete and rigorous. Our answers to your questions are as follows:

Table 6 is not the relationship between income poverty and multidimensional poverty. It is the relationship between different indicators of deprivation in multidimensional poverty. Through relational significance, we discussed whether deprivation in income dimension can explain the deprivation in all the other dimensions. The title of Table 6 was wrong. Thank you for pointing it out. We have revised it in the manuscript (Line 439). Based on the studies of Mahmood, T. et al. (2019) and Rachel Nishimwe-Niyimbanira (2020), we examined the matching degree of these two poverty measures through Spearman correlation test between income indicator and other multidimensional poverty indicators [1,2]. The Spearman’s rank order correlation is a non-parametric test that some scholars use as a tool to compare these two measures of poverty [3]. The null hypothesis states that the two variables are independent. If the null hypothesis were not rejected, it would mean that the income poverty is independent from the multidimensional poverty level, implying both concepts should be taken into account while making and implementing poverty reduction strategies depending on the situation. Our analysis shows that not all pairs are correlated, and even income deprivation is not correlated with some other aspects of deprivation although it is generally claimed to be a measure of poverty that reflects deprivation in other dimensions.

Healthy, medical insurance and labor union are the three variables of the index system constructed in this manuscript. The selection of measurement indicators has been explained above. In Table 6, the correlation coefficients between income poverty and healthy, medical insurance and labor union are sometimes not strong. This suggests that deprivation in income dimension does not always reveal deprivations in healthy, medical insurance and labor union. Therefore, a multifaceted and sustained analysis of poverty is essential.

Your suggestions are very important for the improvement of the manuscript, and we have also added the explanation of Table 6 in the manuscript (Line 420-428).

 

[1] Mahmood, T., Yu, X., & Klasen, S. Do the Poor Really Feel Poor? Comparing Objective Poverty with Subjective Poverty in Pakistan. Social Indicators Research.2019, 142(2):543-580. DOI:10.1007/s11205-018-1921-4.

[2] Rachel Nishimwe-Niyimbanira. Income poverty versus multidimensional poverty: Empirical insight from Qwaqwa, African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development.2020,12(5):631-641. DOI: 10.1080/20421338.2019.1638585.

[3] Novak, N.L., Allender, S., Scarborough, P. et al. The development and validation of an urbanicity scale in a multi-country study. BMC Public Health,2012, 12, 530. DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-12-530.