Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457): Topic: Poverty and inequality — Study Guide

This guide is for the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025). Poverty and inequality is one of the 22 topics in the topic list in section 3, and that list is used for all three components: Component 1 Written Exam, Component 2 Individual Report and Component 3 Team Project. The syllabus states that knowledge of content is not assessed. So this page does not ask you to learn facts about poverty. It shows you how to use the topic to practise the skills that sections 2 and 4 say are assessed.

Start from the Global Perspectives hub and track your skills on the 0457 checklist. For quick review, use the poverty and inequality revision notes. Then test yourself with the poverty and inequality practice questions.

Coverage table

Syllabus reference	What you must be able to do (from the document)	Where assessed
Section 2, AO1 Research, analysis and evaluation	Research global issues, their causes, consequences and courses of action; use evidence to support claims; analyse and evaluate evidence, reasoning and sources; develop a line of reasoning	Components 1, 2 and 3
Section 2, AO2 Reflection	Consider different perspectives objectively and with empathy; justify a personal perspective with evidence and reasoning	Components 2 and 3
Section 2, AO3 Communication and collaboration	Present arguments, evidence and perspectives clearly and with structure; cite and reference; contribute to the Team Project	Components 2 and 3
Section 3, topics and key terms	Use a topic to explore issues and perspectives; understand “issue”, “perspective”, “research”, “evidence” and “argument”	All components
Section 4, Component 1	Analyse information, arguments and perspectives in sources; evaluate research and suggest how to test a claim; judge the quality of arguments; assess actions. Understand bias, claim, fact, generalisation, opinion, prediction, value and vested interest	Written Exam (1 hour 25 minutes, 70 marks, 35%)
Section 4, Component 2	Devise a global research question on an issue that divides opinion; local and/or national and global perspectives; causes, consequences, courses of action; evaluate sources	Individual Report (1500–2000 words, 60 marks, 30%)
Section 4, Component 3	Identify a local issue; research different perspectives; plan, carry out and measure an action; reflect	Team Project (70 marks, 35%)

Using the topic, not learning it

The syllabus defines an issue as “an important subject or problem for discussion” and a perspective as “a viewpoint on an issue based on evidence and reasoning”. “Poverty and inequality” is a topic, not an issue. Your first skill is to find issues inside it that people disagree about.

In the Written Exam, every source you need is printed in the insert. The syllabus says candidates “are not assessed on their prior knowledge and understanding of the topic”. Background knowledge still helps you read faster and spot weak reasoning. But a mark comes from using the source, not from adding your own facts.

Key terms you will meet in sources

• Absolute poverty: not having enough income or resources to meet basic needs such as food, shelter and clean water.
• Relative poverty: having much less than most people in your own society. In the UK, for example, it is commonly measured as household income below 60% of the median.
• Inequality: an uneven spread of income, wealth or opportunity between people or groups.
• Income and wealth: income is money coming in over time (wages, benefits). Wealth is what you own (savings, land, property).
• Gini coefficient: a single number for income inequality, from 0 (everyone has the same) to 1 (one person has everything).
• Poverty line: an income level below which a person is counted as poor. The World Bank’s international poverty line was updated in June 2025 to $3.00 a day, in 2021 prices adjusted for differences in living costs.
• Multidimensional poverty: poverty measured by several things at once, such as schooling, health and living standards, not just money. The Multidimensional Poverty Index, published by the UNDP and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, uses this approach.

Why these matter for skills: a source that says “poverty is falling” may be using a different measure from a source that says “poverty is rising”. Both can be accurate. Spotting that is analysis.

Issues at global, national and local levels

Component 2 asks for local and/or national perspectives and global perspectives. Component 3 needs a local issue. Practise moving one issue up and down the levels.

Level	Example issues that divide opinion
Global	Should richer countries do more to reduce extreme poverty elsewhere? Is rising inequality within countries a bigger problem than inequality between countries? How should progress towards the UN’s Sustainable Development Goal 1 (“End poverty in all its forms everywhere”) be measured?
National	Should governments give cash with no conditions, or attach conditions? Should taxes on high earners rise to fund support for low-income families? Should the poverty line be absolute or relative?
Local	Should a town offer free school meals to every pupil or only to low-income families? Should a council cap rents? Is a food bank a solution or a sign that something else has failed?

A strong report or answer shows links between levels. For example, a national rise in food prices (national) can push more families in one town to use a food bank (local). This is part of a global pattern of rising living costs (global).

Perspectives and why they differ

The syllabus wants you to understand “why different people have different perspectives”, not just list them. Perspectives on poverty differ for three main reasons.

1. Different values. Some people put most weight on fairness and need. Others put most weight on reward for effort and personal responsibility. Neither is a fact; both are values.
2. Different interests. A landlord, a tenant, a taxpayer and a charity each gain or lose differently from the same policy. That is where vested interest comes from.
3. Different evidence and experience. A person who has lived on a low income may stress barriers they faced. An economist may stress national data. Each sees part of the picture.

Possible perspectives on one national issue, “Should governments give unconditional cash to low-income families?”:

• A family receiving support: cash lets them choose what they most need.
• A taxpayer’s group: they want proof that public money is used well.
• A charity: it may support cash, or argue that services such as health care matter more.
• An international organisation: it compares programmes across countries to see what works.

Evaluation tip. A perspective is “based on evidence and reasoning”. So you can judge a perspective by asking: what evidence supports it, and does the reasoning follow?

Causes and consequences

The syllabus asks you to analyse “causes of problems and the consequences/impacts of the issue”. With poverty, causes and consequences often form a cycle.

Possible causes (sources will argue about which matter most):

• low wages or insecure work
• unemployment, or loss of a main industry in an area
• rising prices for food, fuel and rent
• unequal access to education and health care
• discrimination against some groups
• conflict, disaster or poor harvests

Possible consequences:

• poor diet and health
• children missing school or leaving early
• debt and stress
• people moving away to find work
• lower trust in government and weaker communities

The cycle. A child in a low-income family misses school because the family needs them to work. They leave with fewer qualifications. As an adult they find only low-paid work. Their own children then face the same pressure. When you explain a cycle, show each link with “this leads to” or “because”. A list of causes earns less than a chain.

Short-term and long-term. A food bank meets a short-term consequence (hunger). It does not change a long-term cause (low income). Making that distinction is good analysis in any answer about action.

Judging sources and evidence

Section 4 says candidates “will benefit from an understanding of the following: bias, claim, fact, generalisation, opinion, prediction, value and vested interest”. It also says you should “analyse and evaluate use of evidence and language”. Poverty sources are full of all eight.

Term	Poverty example (invented)
Claim	“Cash payments reduce child hunger.”
Fact	“The scheme paid 200 families in March.”
Opinion	“The scheme is a waste of money.”
Value	“No child should go hungry in a rich country.”
Prediction	“Poverty will double within ten years.”
Generalisation	“Poor people never save money.”
Vested interest	A landlords’ group arguing against rent caps.
Bias	A report that only quotes people who agree with its funder.

Numbers in poverty sources. Ask these questions every time:

• Which measure? Absolute or relative poverty? Income or wealth?
• Average or median? A few very high earners pull the average (mean) up. The median is less affected.
• Share or amount? A falling share of income does not always mean a falling income. If the whole economy grows, the poorest group’s share can fall while their income stays flat.
• Percentage or percentage points? A rise from 50% to 70% is 20 percentage points, but a 40% increase.
• Who was asked? People surveyed at a food bank are not a fair sample of a whole town.

Language. Words such as “scroungers”, “the deserving poor” or “struggling heroes” carry values. Point to the word and explain the effect on the reader.

Courses of action and their effects

Component 2 asks you to consider different courses of action and propose one. Component 1 asks you to “assess actions”. These are real examples you might find in sources. Each needs evaluation.

• Conditional cash transfers. Brazil’s Bolsa Família, launched in 2003, pays low-income families on conditions such as children attending school and having health check-ups. Strength: links short-term help to long-term causes such as low schooling. Limitation: conditions can exclude families who cannot meet them, and cash does not improve the quality of the schools.
• Unconditional cash transfers. Pakistan’s Benazir Income Support Programme, launched in 2008, makes regular cash payments to women in low-income households; its main payment has no conditions attached, though it also runs some conditional schemes. Strength: families choose what they need, and paying women may give them more say at home. Limitation: it depends on accurate data to decide who qualifies.
• Basic income trials. Finland ran a basic income experiment in 2017–2018 for unemployed people. The official evaluation found small effects on employment, while participants reported better wellbeing. Limitation: a two-year trial for one group may not show what would happen if a whole country did it.
• Microfinance. Small loans to people without access to banks. Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006 for this work. Counter-evidence: randomised evaluations in several countries have generally found modest, rather than transformative, average effects on income.
• Local action. Free school meals, uniform swaps, advice on claiming support, community fridges. These suit a Team Project because they are small and measurable.

To assess any action, use the same four tests: Is it effective (does it reach the cause)? Is it affordable? Is it fair (who gains, who loses)? Is it sustainable (will it last)?

Worked example: an exam-style paragraph

Task (invented): A source reports that in a fictional town, 26 of 40 households asked at a community centre (65%) said they had cut back on heating last winter. The source claims “most families in the town are in fuel poverty”. How far does the evidence support this claim?

The evidence gives some support. 65% of those asked said they cut back on heating, which suggests a real problem for some households. However, the sample is small, only 40 households, and it was taken at a community centre. People who use a community centre may already be more likely to need help, so the sample probably over-represents struggling families. This means the result cannot be generalised to “most families in the town”. In addition, “cutting back on heating” is not the same as fuel poverty, which would need data on income and energy costs. Overall, the evidence supports the claim that some households face fuel costs they find hard to meet, but not the stronger claim about most families. A random survey of homes across the town, using a clear definition, would test the claim better.

How it works: knowledge (sample, definition) → application (40 households, community centre) → analysis (why the sample is skewed) → evaluation (a judgement on “how far”, plus a better method).

Individual Report and Team Project ideas

Individual Report. The issue “should be one that divides opinion”, and your question becomes your title. Possible global research questions:

• Should governments give cash to people in poverty with conditions or without?
• Is reducing inequality within countries more important than reducing poverty between them?
• Should high earners pay much higher tax to reduce inequality?

For each, plan a local/national perspective and a global perspective, with sources you can evaluate. See the Individual Report guide and Individual Report revision notes.

Team Project. You need a local issue and an action you can carry out and measure. Ideas: a school uniform and stationery swap; a leaflet on free support available in your area; a collection for a local food bank with a count of items before and after. State how you will evidence the action and measure success. See the Team Project guide and Team Project revision notes.

Common errors

• Writing what you know about poverty instead of using the sources. Topic knowledge is not assessed.
• Treating “poverty” and “inequality” as the same thing. A country can reduce poverty while inequality rises.
• Mixing up absolute and relative poverty when comparing two sources.
• Reading a falling income share as a falling income.
• Calling a 50% to 70% rise “a 20% increase” when it is 20 percentage points.
• Listing perspectives without saying why each group holds its view.
• Proposing “end poverty” as a course of action. An action must be specific, with who does it and how.
• Choosing an Individual Report question that does not divide opinion, such as “What is poverty?”.

For the Written Exam itself, read the Written Exam guide and the Global Perspectives revision notes. Related topics: employment (wages and work) and development, trade and aid.

Official syllabus

This guide follows the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025): section 2 (aims, skills overview, assessment objectives), section 3 (topic list and key terms) and section 4 (details of the assessment and command words). Your teacher will confirm which topics your class uses.