An ongoing debate that has attracted much attention since the adoption of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is the topic of poverty reduction. According to such a policy, developing countries increasingly need to achieve a sustained growth rate. However, given that purely economic growth strategies do not necessarily worsen poverty and anti-poverty measures do not necessarily lead to increased growth, it highlighted the need for an alternative approach which, at the same time, would benefit the poor and lead to an increase in poverty. economic growth. This paved the way for the concept of “pro-poor” growth, which links growth, poverty and inequality. In terms of measurement, scholars have characterized it as absolute position or relative position. There is a growing consensus for developing development policies that promote “pro-poor” economic growth. This article will attempt to define the concept of "pro-poor growth", identify specific policies that promote pro-poor growth, and critically examine the arguments for developing development policies that promote pro-poor growth. “pro-poor” economic growth. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was recognized that a “trickle down” approach was the catalyst for development. It was argued that the benefits of economic growth would initially accrue to the rich, but eventually these would trickle down to the poor. Even if poverty may have been reduced indirectly, it cannot be ruled out that a sustained increase in growth does not lead to a reduction in poverty (Kakwani & Pernia, What is Pro-poor Growth, 2000)Defining economic growth pro-poor? In general, "pro-poor" economic growth can be defined as growth that helps the poor and improves their lives...... middle of paper ...... (Ravallion, Pro-Poor Growth: A Primer , 2004). This shows that purely market economic growth does not necessarily benefit the entire population of the country. In support of this argument, Giffins (1977) found that even if growth benefited the poor and poverty was reduced, not all actors in the poor sector would reap the benefits (Fields, 1989). These arguments that growth did not necessarily lead to poverty reduction were likely based on the Kuznet curve hypothesis. In short, income distribution is deteriorating and will only improve when a moderate income level is reached. Subsequently, it could take years before poverty is reduced. However, some studies have shown that there is no linear relationship between income inequality and economic growth (H & JR, 2004). Nonetheless, these points highlight the case for developing development policies.