Additional measurements include the "chronic poor", the "transient poor" and the "vulnerable" consisting of people who either are constantly in poverty and can not afford basic foodstuffs, in and out of poverty or could be in poverty (Leonor, 1985).
Poverty Category .
1996 .
1999 .
Change.
Poor: .
- Transient Poor 12.4 17.9 5.5.
- Chronic Poor 3.2 9.5 6.3.
- Total 15.6 27.4 11.8.
.
High Vulnerability: .
- Low Level of Consumption 4.7 13.4 8.7.
- High Variability of Consumption 2.1 5.0 2.9.
- Total 6.8 18.4 11.6.
.
Total Vulnerable Group 18.1 33.7 15.6.
Average Vulnerability to Poverty 16.4 27.2 10.8.
Source: Suryahadi, S. & Sumarno, S. (2001) "The Chronic Poor, the Transient Poor and the Vulnerable in Indonesia before and after the Crisis", SMERU working paper. .
Figure 1 indicates that between 1996 and 1999 the measurements of Chronic, Transient and Vulnerable Poor increased by approximately 11 per cent. In comparison to this, Australia" s poverty measurements comprise of Henderson's measurement as well as organisations helping the poor that sources claim that "exaggerate poverty levels in Australia" (Walker, 2002). Nevertheless, Henderson's theory of poverty suggests that "rising costs of life in places of the brink of gentrification were very significant contributors to poverty" (Fincher and Wulff 1998). Henderson highlighted that particular groups experienced poverty differently in various places, indicating a spatial concentration of poverty. Henderson also cites that around 2 million Australian's are under the Henderson Poverty Line. Australia's consumer based society brands people that are lacking in material possessions in poverty such as figure 2, the Smith Family's Report. In direct comparison to Indonesia, Australia's general poverty is relative poverty, "which measures a person's standard of living compared with others in society" (Walker, 2002). Whilst a vast majority of Indonesian's struggle with basic commodities, often referred to in Australia as absolute poverty.