Multidimensional Poverty Index: Any Difference?

Two days ago, some scholars attached to a research facility in Oxford University together with the United nations announced the development of a new instrument for measuring poverty.  The Multidimensional Poverty index (MPI) is intended to take account of the geography and other variables that may affect the material condition of individuals and people. In detail, the piece report by the Radio Netherlands Worldwide site here states that the MPI is comprised of ten factors including education, health and standard of living and how these factors overlap at the household level.

As explained in the piece, the application of the MPI reveals that sub-Saharan Africa has deeper pockets of poverty but the south Asian nation of India has the largest number of poor persons by count.  In addition, this new index also places a further 400 million people in poverty when compared to the UN estimates show.

I am partial to the use of integrated data and innovative algorithms to provide meaning to phenomena. as a result, I concede that measuring poverty precisely has to be a complicated process because poverty is not only about income or the lack of it. However, as I stated earlier here, the production of new measures for different human can sometimes lead one to ask whether more indices necessarily lead to new knowledge or insights about poverty or how to respond to it. so while I respect the deep thinking hat has gone into construction of the MPI, i wonder whether it tells me much more than what common measures such as per capita incomes would. As described so far, I would agree with Paul Hoebink in the story that I remain unsure that a new index is nothing more than a mathematical stunt.