it suggests that the additional items collected in 2022 might have a negligible impact on the 2010 consumption aggregate, which raises questions about the plausibility of this implication. Nevertheless, the comprehensive robustness checks performed, including the use of the SWIFT method and backcasting with a pass-through rate, collectively reinforce the robustness of the study's results. These checks confirm that the study's findings are not only resilient to variations in methodological specifications but also to different approaches.

# **V. Final remarks**

This study marks a significant advancement in the analysis of poverty and inequality trends in Bangladesh, showcasing the importance of innovative and robust methodologies in socioeconomic research. Central to its contribution is the reconstruction of these trends using a novel methodology, which incorporates previously unaccounted items into the consumption distributions of 2010 and 2016. This methodological innovation is crucial, as it not only aligns with but also validates the results against other benchmark approaches, thereby reinforcing the reliability of its findings.

The research is particularly significant for public policy, providing a nuanced and accurate depiction of poverty trends, which is vital for effective policy making. While the method introduces a refined understanding of these trends, it importantly does not alter the profile of the poor as identified using the official aggregate. This ensures the compatibility of the new approach with existing studies and recommendations, enabling a consistent poverty profile while simultaneously enhancing the understanding of temporal trends.

The study highlights the critical need for comparable consumption aggregates in analyzing poverty and extreme poverty headcounts, as well as inequality measures over time. For instance, the average poverty lines for 2022 were found to be 21% and 19% higher than the original 2010 and 2016 lines at 2022 prices. In contrast, extreme poverty lines showed a smaller increase of only 6% in both periods. These adjustments suggest higher poverty rates when considering the imputed consumption data. Specifically, the poverty rate in 2016 would have been between 1.7 and 2.3 percentage points higher, and the extreme poverty rate between 3.5 and 3.7 points lower, had a comparable consumption aggregate been available. Similarly, the incidence of poverty in 2010 would have been between 5.5 and 5.8 percentage points higher, and the extreme poverty incidence between 5.1 and 5.4 points lower.

In conclusion, this study not only enhances the understanding of poverty and inequality trends in Bangladesh but also ensures these insights are consistent with established poverty profiles. This balance between novel methodologies and consistency with previous findings makes the study invaluable for policy makers and researchers, aiding significantly in efforts to reduce poverty and improve living standards in Bangladesh. The approach offers a model that could be replicated in similar socioeconomic studies globally, emphasizing the importance of accurate and comparable measurements in understanding poverty dynamics.

25