Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How does China's 2025 poverty rate compare to other developing countries?
Executive Summary
China’s poverty level in the mid-2020s is markedly lower on the international extreme-poverty scale but depends heavily on which poverty line is used: under the World Bank’s traditional $1.90/day measure China is effectively at near-zero extreme poverty, while higher consumption thresholds ($3.00, $5.50, $8.30/day) place a materially larger share of its population below poverty lines comparable to other developing countries [1] [2] [3]. Comparisons across countries therefore hinge on metric choice, new World Bank PPP updates in 2025, and whether analysts use national lines or international thresholds; these methodological differences explain divergent headlines about China’s relative performance versus peers [3] [4].
1. How low is “extreme poverty” in China — a headline success story?
China’s poverty reduction record is presented as dramatic when using the World Bank’s extreme-poverty benchmark. Multiple analyses cite that China moved from very high poverty shares in the 1980s and 1990s to virtually eliminating $1.90/day extreme poverty, with figures such as 0.3–0.7 percent cited for earlier benchmark years and claims that hundreds of millions were lifted out of extreme poverty [1] [5]. This framing aligns with long-term comparative studies that show China’s poverty-reduction pace outpaced peers like India and Brazil on these narrow thresholds [6]. The key factual anchor is the $1.90/day line — under that metric, China’s headcount is exceptionally low relative to most developing countries, and this single-statistic framing drives much of the “China has ended extreme poverty” narrative [1] [5].
2. Raise the bar and the picture changes — middle-income poverty remains substantial
When poverty lines rise to reflect middle-income country standards, China’s advantage shrinks. Analyses using the World Bank’s $5.50/day upper-middle-income threshold report that in recent years double-digit shares — around 13–17 percent — of China’s population fall below that line, a figure comparable to or worse than some middle-income peers [1] [5]. A separate projection cited a 13.4 percent rate at an $8.30/day benchmark for 2025, highlighting how sensitive rankings are to the threshold chosen [2]. Thus, China’s relative ranking among developing countries is not uniformly superior; it depends on whether the comparison targets extreme poverty or broader standards of adequate consumption and services [1] [2].
3. Measurement matters: new PPPs and updated global lines reshape comparators
Analysts point to methodological changes that materially affect cross-country comparisons. The World Bank’s June 2025 update to global poverty lines and new purchasing-power-parity (PPP) estimates altered what it means to live on $1.90, $3.00, $5.50, or $8.30 per day across countries [3]. These technical revisions change headline poverty rates for China and its peers because relative prices and cost-of-living baskets shift; a country can appear to gain or lose ground without any actual change in incomes. Several sources emphasize that comparisons must specify the poverty line and PPP vintage; failing to do so produces misleading juxtapositions between China and other developing countries [3] [4].
4. Historical perspective: rapid poverty reduction but persistent inequality and regional gaps
Longitudinal comparisons demonstrate China’s exceptional pace of poverty reduction from the 1980s through the 2000s, with steep declines in headcount ratios and large absolute reductions in the number of people in poverty [6] [5]. That historical achievement is factual and distinguishes China from many developing countries, but analysts also document persistent rural-urban divides, regional disparities, and rising income inequality that blunt the universality of the success story [1] [5]. Policymakers and researchers therefore caution that aggregate national rates mask subnational pockets where higher poverty and vulnerability persist, a point often omitted in high-level international comparisons [1].
5. What to watch next: projections, policy sustainability, and the comparator set
Projections cited in the analyses forecast China’s poverty share at various thresholds to decline further by 2026, but these forecasts rest on assumptions about economic growth and targeted social protection [2]. The sustainability of poverty gains depends on policy continuation and structural shifts — including rural development, social safety nets, and labor-market outcomes — which differ across developing countries and influence future rankings [5]. Finally, any fair comparison should be explicit about the comparator group (low-income vs. lower-middle vs. upper-middle-income countries) because China’s classification and the poverty threshold chosen determine whether it appears better- or worse-performing than peers [1] [2] [3].