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 this policy there is a growing need for developing countries to achieve a sustained growth rate. However, since purely economic growth strategies may not necessarily increase poverty and anti-poverty measures may not lead to increased growth, the need for an alternative approach that would both benefit the poor and lead to to an increase in economic growth. economic growth. This pioneered the concept of “pro-poor” growth, linking growth, poverty and inequality. In terms of measurement, academics have characterized it with an absolute or relative position. There has been a growing consensus in favor of 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” economic growth. of the poor." Traditionally, it has been widely In the 1950s and 1960s it was accepted that a waterfall approach was the catalyst for development. It was argued that the rich would initially benefit from economic growth and then the benefits would eventually trickle down to the poor. Although poverty may have been reduced indirectly, it should not be ruled out that a sustained increase in growth may not lead to a reduction in poverty (Kakwani & Pernia, What is Pro-poor Growth, 2000) Definition of pro-poor economic growth? In general, “pro-poor” economic growth can be defined as growth that helps the poor and improves their resources. 2004). This highlights that purely market economic growth may not necessarily benefit the nation's entire population. Supporting this argument, Giffins (1977) found that although growth has benefited the poor and poverty has been reduced, not all poor sectors have benefited (Fields, 1989). These arguments that growth does not necessarily lead to poverty reduction were presumably based on the Kuznet curve hypothesis. In short, income distribution gets worse and will not improve until a moderate income level is reached. Subsequently, this may take years for poverty to be reduced. However, some studies have found that there is no linear relationship between income inequality and economic growth (H & JR, 2004). However, these points highlight the arguments in favor of developing development policies.