{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.008004926108374385, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.659836065573771, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
False positives or hidden dimensions: What can monetary and multidimensional measurement tell us about child poverty in Vietnam?

A widely used division between poverty measures is that of monetary versus multidimensional measures. This division is based on conceptual and ideological underpinnings as well as empirical and analytical outcomes. Comparisons of the use and outcomes of these methods have shown that they predominantly provide different pictures of poverty in terms of figures of overall levels of poverty as well as groups of poor individuals. This paper adds value to the longstanding and ongoing debate on poverty measurement by comparing the use of a monetary and multidimensional poverty measurement with a special focus on children and extending the empirical analysis beyond conventional methods. In addition to investigating whether overall poverty outcomes or groups of identified poor children differ when using two different poverty measures, we also investigate the drivers underlying these differences. Findings confirm a considerable degree of misidentification when using monetary and multidimensional poverty measurement. Correlation between monetary and multidimensional child poverty is limited and both poverty measures prove to be inadequate to predict poverty in terms of the other poverty measure. An analysis of the groups of poverty suggest that certain demographic groups of children are captured disproportionately by monetary and multidimensional poverty measures and that there are underlying factors that in- or decrease a child�s probability to belong to a specific poverty group.