Introduction

In Mexico, since 2008, poverty has been measured from a multidimensional approach as required by the General Law of Social Development (Ley General de Desarrollo Social-LGDS). To do so, the National Institute of Statistics, Geography and Informatics (Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática-Inegi) and the National Council on the Evaluation of the Social Development Policy (Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social-Coneval) have included the Socio-economic Conditions Module (Módulo de Condiciones Socioeconómicas-MCS) as a supplement to the National Survey of Household Income and Expenditures (Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares-Enigh) to gather statistical information and measure multidimensional poverty (^{Garza-Rodríguez, 2016}). However, due to the statistical representativeness of the survey, measurements are estimated only at the national, state and municipal levels, not at the intra-urban level. This hinders territorial targeting of social programs on an urban scale. Consequently, in Mexico, recently, some local governments, including those of Mexico City and Ciudad Juárez, have undertaken significant efforts to generate their own databases to measure multidimensional poverty at the intra-urban level. These efforts have been aimed at targeting, evaluating and, eventually, replicating social programs in specific territories (^{Sanchez, Boltivinik, Ruiz & Figueroa, 2011}).

In the case of Ciudad Juárez, the high social costs of homicidal violence and the loss of thousands of jobs as a result of the global economic recession between 2008 and 2010 caused an increase in the number of people living in poverty (^{Coneval, 2010}). This resulted in increased numbers of people seeking in-kind support from the various social programs offered by the municipal government to fight poverty. However, in the absence of sufficient resources to meet these needs, additional economic support was requested from other government levels.

Justifying the increase in the requested resources entailed applying a new poverty measurement that would be compatible with the “official” methodology. This is due to the fact that in Mexico, the results of the "official” poverty measurement represent one of the criteria used to assign federal government resources for social programs. In addition, to use the scarce resources more efficiently, the decision was made to measure multidimensional poverty at the intra-urban level and improve the targeting of social programs.

In this context, the aim of this article is to measure the incidence, intensity and depth of multidimensional poverty at the intra-urban level in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua in 2012.

The structure of the article fully corresponds with the objective set. The first section presents the different measures of poverty applied in Mexico, as well as a review of the literature reporting measurements of poverty at the regional or urban level. The second section shows the methodology used to estimate multidimensional poverty at the intra-urban level. The third section describes the performance of poverty indicators in the cities of the northern border and in the specific case of Ciudad Juárez, as well as poverty measurement at the municipal level. The fourth part reports on the results of the incidence, intensity and depth of multidimensional poverty at the intra-urban level in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua. Finally, the conclusions are presented.

Poverty Measurement Methods and its Measurement at the Regional and Intra-Urban Levels

Methodology

In the case of Ciudad Juárez, the “official” methodology to measure poverty proposed by Coneval was used for the multidimensional poverty measurement at the intra-urban level. Several steps were followed to adapt it to the intra-urban level, including TUA selection, sample selection, survey implementation, database creation and the application of Coneval's algorithm to process the data through SPSS.

Sample Allocation

A base number of 688 housing units, approximately equally distributed in 65 TUAs, were considered to assign the sample to the urban level analyzed in the study (See Figure 1). The target population was housing units; thus, a proportional number of housing units were assigned to each TUA based on the framework obtained from the geographical coverage of AGEB in 2010. This ensured total coverage of each study area. In addition, a total of 694 housing units were considered to complement the sample universe studied, in case of a non-response of 15%.

Source: Prepared by the authors based on the XIII Census of Population and Housing (^{Inegi, 2010}).

Figure 1: Creation of territorial units of analysis in Ciudad Juárez (2010) 

The Context of Poverty in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua and its Measurement at the Municipal Level

Several studies noted that northern border states were the most successful in reducing poverty between 1970 and 2000 (^{Anderson, 2003}). In addition, these same states showed a lower percentage of people living in poverty than the national average, especially when considering extreme poverty (^{Camberos & Bracamontes, 1995}). Similarly, ^{Anderson and Gerber (2009)} showed that the difference in per capita income between the border counties in the south of the United States and the border municipalities of Mexico was lower compared to other regions of Mexico. The above was explained by the rapid economic growth in the region. This growth is characterized by a high generation of jobs in the maquiladora industry, allowing social groups to use survival strategies such as those based on sharing multiple and different types of income among household members. This survival model was called “Resources of poverty” (^{González, 1986}), and it depends on the existence and availability of a large number of jobs in the local market.

In the case of the state of Chihuahua, in particular the municipality of Ciudad Juárez, the social landscape radically changed starting in 2000. This change was the result of two events: the loss of employment manufacturing dynamics as a result of the downturn in the economy of the United States and a profound insecurity crisis that left thousands of people without an income. One the one hand, the local economy has seen a decrease in the rate of growth of manufacturing employment since 2000, and more than 80 000 jobs have been lost (^{Fuentes, 2009}). In 2005, the local economy grew, but it did not reach the number of jobs it had in 2000. Later, starting in the year 2007, employment fell again as a result of the global economy recession (^{Fuentes & Peña, 2010}).

On the other hand, the insecurity crisis arose as a result of the role of the city as a strategic space for illegal economies, in particular, the flow of drugs into the United States market (^{Fuentes & Peña, 2017}). In that context, a confrontation between rival cartels to control drug trafficking routes and local markets took place and left thousands of people dead and missing. This situation had two effects. One was the closure of hundreds of shops and services in the face of increasing crime rates, including kidnapping and the extortion of businesses, which caused thousands of people to lose their jobs. The other was the social costs of violence; 9 262 homicides were recorded between 2008 and 2012 (^{Monarrez & Cervera, 2013}), most of them young men. For this reason, thousands of homes lost their main economic providers, leaving hundreds of widows, orphans, fathers and brothers helpless. The combination of the two aforementioned factors has exacerbated poverty in the area since 2007.

Similarly, the loss of employment not only means no income but also the loss of social rights, including health care, social security, education and housing. This means that in very short periods of time, the population may suffer from deprivations, and according to the methodology of multidimensional poverty measurement, the bulk of the population will quickly move from vulnerable to poverty to living in moderate poverty and, in some cases, extreme poverty.

In this context, according to Coneval measurements (^{Coneval, 2010}), in the period of 2008-2010, the state of Chihuahua experienced one of the greatest increases in the number of people living in poverty in the country. The reason is related to the fact that their two main urban areas, Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua, experienced the impacts of the recession in the global economy and of the illicit economy more acutely. In this context, the Directorate of Social Development [Dirección de Desarrollo Social] of the municipal government of Juárez was overwhelmed by the increase in requests for funding or in-kind support in all of their social programs, especially with regard to family food rations. Consequently, the decision was made to apply poverty measurement at the intra-urban level with the following objectives: 1) to create a new poverty measurement, 2) to negotiate with other levels of government and obtain more resources and 3) to target their social programs.

The measurement results show that in 2012, people living in poverty represented 39.8%, which is higher than the estimate calculated by Coneval for the state of Chihuahua (35.3%). The number of people living in extreme poverty was 5.6%, 1.8% higher than that estimated for the state of Chihuahua (3.8%). The vulnerable population with social deprivation by income reached 22% and 15.9%, respectively. Finally, the multidimensional non-poor and non-vulnerable population reached 22.3% (see Table 1).

With regard to social deprivation, 64.3% of the population experienced at least one social deprivation, and 11.0% experienced at least three social deprivations. In addition, 31.6% (377 314 people) of the population show deprivations due to a lack of access to social security; 31.4% (786 008 people) show deprivation due to a lack of access to health services; 26.3% (317 179 people) exhibit deprivation due to an educational gap; 29.9% (455 605 people) exhibit deprivation due to a lack of housing quality and space; and 23.6% (355 605 people) show deprivation due to a lack of access to food.

With regard to income, 56% of the population has an income below the wellbeing line, and 15% has an income below the minimum wellbeing line. Thus, due to social deprivation, a high percentage of the population could be classified as moderately or extremely poor.

Multidimensional Poverty Measurement at the Intra-Urban Level in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, 2012

The spatial distribution of the different types of poverty shows that the TUAs with the largest populations living in poverty are located in the western and southeastern parts of the city. This is due to the fact that they exhibit the greatest number of deprivations, with an average of 2.5.⁷ In addition, from the historical center toward the south, there is a cluster of TUAs that are vulnerable due to social deprivation. Finally, the TUAs with non-poor populations are concentrated in the northeast (see Figure 2).

Source: ^{Fuentes et al. (2012)}.

Figure 2: Location of the population living in poverty in Ciudad Juárez by TUA (2012) 

In the city there are three clusters of extreme poverty. The first is located in the extreme northwest region, in an area known as Puerto Anapra, which was created through land encroachment and now exhibits a low coverage of public services. TUA 2 is located in this area, where 50% of the population lives in extreme poverty. TUA 3 presents a similar situation, where 42% of the population lives in extreme poverty. The second cluster of TUAs with populations living in extreme poverty is located to the southwest, on the exit to the highway that connects Ciudad Juárez with the state of Sonora. These settlements are informal growth areas characterized by a significant lack of infrastructure. In this area, 38% of the population lives in extreme poverty, and the remaining 62% lives in moderate poverty. The third cluster is located in the southeast, in areas of formal growth through affordable housing programs. TUA 34 is located in this area, where 38% of the population lives in extreme poverty (see Table 2b).

In contrast, the non-poor population is located in the northeast or close to major roadways that connect to the southeast of the city. For example, in TUA 15, 70% of the population is not poor (Table 2a). In TUAs 46 and 50, 66% and 61% of the population are not poor, respectively (see Table 2b).

Lack of access to social security is the indicator that contributes the most in this measure of poverty (see Table 3a). Deprivations due to gaps in social security refer to people who do not have access to benefits such as pensions or retirement. Deprivations in the whole town reached 31.6% of the population. In terms of the spatial distribution, the TUAs with the greatest gaps are grouped in the northwest of the city. For example, in TUAs 2 and 3, 59% and 38.7% of the population exhibit that gap. Similarly, there is another cluster of TUAs located in the neighborhoods surrounding the historic center, such as TUAs 10 and 11, where 53.3% and 61.5% of the residents experience those deprivations. Colonies with high percentages of the population in that situation include San Borja, Franja del Río, Sara Lugo, Ladrillera Juárez, Bosques del Valle, and Cuauhtémoc.

Lack of health services remained in second place. The clusters suffering from this deprivation are located to the northwest and around the Historic Center. In the northwest, for example, in TUAs 2 and 3, 55.6% and 32% of the population, respectively, have no health services. However, most people lacking health services are concentrated in the colonies surrounding the Historic Center, where mainly elderly people who no longer have health services live. For example, in TUAs 11, 12 and 13, 46%, 46% and 51% (Table 3a) of the population lacks health services, respectively. Public policies related to public health should target Franja del Río, Ampliación Ladrillera Juárez, Sara Lugo, Ladrillera Juárez, Oscar González, Buendía, Cumbres, and Paseo del Parque.

Lack of housing quality and space is ranked third as a source of poverty. This need is concentrated in the peri-urban areas, especially in the west. For example, 82% of the people living in TUA 64 lacks this service. Therefore, it is important to target programs territorially to improve housing in colonies such as Municipio libre, Periodista, Telegrafistas, Rancho Anapra, Frida Khalo, and Fray García de San Francisco (see Table 3b).

The estimation of the educational gap in the whole city is 26.3% of the population, which is ranked fourth as a source of poverty. The TUA groupings with educational gaps are located in the northwest and southeast regions. The northwest exhibits the greatest need, including TUAs 3, 4, 5, 14, 18 and 24, in which the percentage of the population with an educational gap ranges from 26.5% to 63%. Similarly, in the southeast, there is a cluster, smaller in size, where more than 50% of the residents of the TUAs have such social problems. The main colonies with the highest educational gaps are Periodista, San Felipe del Real, Torreón, Luis Olague, Constituyentes, Santa Lucia, Valle de los Cantaros, Valle de los Olivos, and Puente del Bravo, among others.

The two indicators with the lowest percentages of the population were a lack of access to food and a lack of access to basic housing services.

In the economic sphere, the population whose income is below the minimum wellbeing line (MWL) represented 33.6% of the population, with most of it concentrated in the northwest and southeast regions. In TUAs 2, 7 and 8, more than 60% of the population experiences this problem. The colonies whose population has the highest deprivations are San Borja, Miguel Auza, Franja del Río, El Sauzal, Francisco Villa, Lomas del Valle, La Mesita, Ladrillera Juárez, and Sara Lugo.

To continue with the measurement of multidimensional poverty, it is necessary to account for a series of measures that indicate the magnitude and state of poverty, including its incidence, intensity and depth. “The measures of depth⁸ and intensity⁹ of poverty are valuable to know how poor people are in terms of both economic and social lacks” (^{Coneval, 2017, p. 44}).

In Table 4, measurements regarding poverty intensity by TUA in Ciudad Juárez are presented. The intensity of poverty is greater in the TUAs in the northwest, such as TUAs 1, 2, 3, and in the southeast, such as TUAs 44, 61, 63 and 64 (see Table 4). In addition, not only is there a higher proportion of poor people in TUAs 1, 2 and 3 but the depth of poverty is also highest in those places, reaching .37, .38 and .35, respectively. This is due to the fact that on average, they present higher numbers of deprivations (2.25, 2.32 and 2.39). In contrast, in TUAs 61, 63 and 64, inhabitants have a lower depth of poverty, .18, .14, and .17, respectively, because they have, on average, the lowest number of deprivations, 1.07, .80 and 1.05.

In the case of incidence, TUAs 1 and 2 have a value of 1.0, which means that 100% of their residents are living in poverty. However, the poverty intensity in TUA 2 is lower than that in TUA 1; therefore, in TUA 2, the population is not as poor.

Conclusions

The progress made in Mexico in compliance with the law of social development has allowed Mexican society to conduct a multidimensional poverty measurement at the national, state and municipal levels (every two years in the first two cases and every five years in the third case). This has made it possible to design a series of public policies that help reduce social deprivation for the population. However, it had been impossible to measure at the intra-urban level due to the statistical representativeness of the information sources, which made targeting social programs at the urban scale difficult.

In this context, the local government of Ciudad Juárez made efforts to measure poverty using the same methodology as Coneval to generate reliable information at the intra-urban level, with the aim of targeting, evaluating and, eventually, replicating social programs. In addition, the objective was to use this information as a negotiation tool with the state and federal governments regarding education, health, housing, etc., to implement programs in the areas with the highest social deprivation.

This information is relevant during profound insecurity crises, as in the case of Ciudad Juárez, where thousands of people have been left without a provider. Sons, fathers, husbands and brothers have been murdered, leaving families without an economic livelihood and social rights. At the same time, due to the global economic recession and the situation of insecurity, thousands of jobs have been lost, which in turn has resulted in no income or medical services, among other effects, contributing to the increase in the indicators of poverty in the city.

In addition, the municipal government of Juárez sought to justify the increase in public resources to address the social crisis and decided to perform a new poverty measurement through the implementation of the “official” methodology because in Mexico, the result of the “official” poverty measurement is one of the criteria required for the allocation of federal government resources for social programs.

The intra-urban level methodology makes it possible to identify people living in poverty and the social deprivation that contributes the most to poverty in each TUA. This makes it possible to implement differentiated public policy actions for each case. Similarly, the measures of intensity, depth and incidence of poverty make it possible to assess both the economic dimension and social deprivations with the objective of targeting public policy programs in the territory.

Finally, it is important to recognize the challenges and limitations of the intra-urban level measurement in Ciudad Juárez. The main challenge is the lack of funds to carry out a survey of thousands of questionnaires with the aim of improving the quality of the estimate. The greatest difficulty was capturing reliable information in the survey regarding income in a context of extreme violence in which people are not willing to provide such information for reasons of safety.