Migration, whether rural-to-urban or international is an important coping strategy in a number of countries. In Armenia, 22 percent of the population live in households with at least one member who is permanently absent, most frequently in Russia and most likely in cities where jobs are easier to find.<sup>18</sup> In Albania, migration (both rural to urban and international) in search of work is the most important coping strategy and estimated remittances total 14 percent of GDP.<sup>19</sup> In Azerbaijan, large numbers of IDPs have moved to the capital, as have more traditional rural to urban migrants. The results have been substantial, albeit largely unofficial, growth in the capital, where as many as 50 percent of all people may now live.

# **4. Revisiting the Extent and Nature of Urban Poverty**

This section investigates the level, sources and forms of poverty in urban areas, paying particular attention to the disparities in urban areas between capital cities and secondary cities, including in access to infrastructure, energy and housing.

# **4.1. Income poverty**

# **4.1.1. Comparisons of income poverty**

The profile of income or consumption poverty is highly variable across ECA countries and the countries do not fit into one general pattern. It is clear, however, that the traditional dichotomy between rural and urban areas hides important disparities within urban areas between the capital city and secondary cities. Table 4.1. summarizes different poverty indicators in each country, according to the latest available year. Note that this table portrays relative poverty, that is, the share of each settlement area’s population falling below the lowest quintile of national income.

**Poverty incidence.** As is true in most of the developing world, the incidence of poverty, or headcount rate (first set of columns in Table 4.1), is considerably higher in rural than in overall urban settlements, with the notable exception of the Caucasus and Moldova (in Kosovo, the two areas are almost even).  The urban:rural poverty ratio (last column of the table) indicates this pattern by a ratio exceeding 1.00 in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova.  It is also striking for the present analysis that in each country, the poverty incidence in Other Urban settlements exceeds that of the Capital City (and in Tajikistan and Bosnia as well as the Caucasus and Moldova, exceeds that of the rural average).  This can also be seen by the relative poverty risk ratios (the fourth set of columns in the table), which compare the poverty incidence in each location to that of the country overall.  In most countries the poverty risk of residents in secondary cities is two to four times greater than that of residents in the capital.

**Degree of income poverty.** The poverty gap and severity indicator are two measures revealing how far the populations fall below income thresholds (see second and third sets of columns of Table 4.1).  Both indicators produce similar patterns, although the severity indicator shows less disparity between rural and urban averages than does the poverty gap.  Again, income poverty is seen to be worse in the rural areas, with the exception of the Caucasus, Moldova and Kosovo.  Among urban areas, poverty is significantly worse in secondary cities than in the capital, with the sole exception of Armenia.

> _Change in Kazakhstan during the 1990s and the Impact of Nationality Population Patterns:  Results  from the Recent Census of Kazakhstan.”  Post-Soviet Geography and Economics.  Vol., 42, No.8, pp. 571-614.; UNHCR.  No date. “The Republic of Moldova:  The Process of Migration in 1989-1996.”, Table 3.1._ <u>http://www.unhcr.md/artpdf/migrat.pdf</u> _<u>.  Accessed Nov. 26, 2003.</u>_

> 18 _World Bank.  2003.  Armenia Poverty Assessment._

> 19 _World Bank. 2003.  Albania Poverty Assessment._

19