Suchergebnisse

Multivariate poverty measurement methods have been actively developed worldwide in recent years. Such methods include evaluation of limitations to meet basic human needs in terms of housing, clothing, footwear, education, health care, etc. In many countries non-monetary poverty lines are used as official poverty thresholds. But Russia is taking the first steps in this direction. This article presents a poverty assessment in terms of material deprivations, based on the representative survey conducted by Rosstat in 2016. Poverty analysis in terms of material deprivations shows that in Russia the most vulnerable groups are multi-child families and households of the unemployed and pensioners (especially single), as well as families living in rural areas. Such households are characterized by a higher deprivations concentration as well as a higher prevalence of separate deprivations. Measuring poverty in terms of material deprivations cannot replace the monetary poverty evaluation, but it is an important and additional part of poverty assessment. Households of single pensioners have a higher deprivations concentration but they are not poor in terms of absolute income poverty (due to introduction of supplementary pension payments which make their pensions higher than regional poverty thresholds). That means that poverty measurement should consist of a set of different methods that would give a more accurate estimation of poverty and highlight the poorest groups of the population which should be focus of social protection.

In March 2017, the European Union (EU) adopted a new indicator of "material and social deprivation". This measure was developed by Guio et al (2012) and covers the entire population of the 28 EU Member States. It includes 13 deprivation items and replaces the 9-item "standard" material deprivation index adopted in 2009, by the then 27 EU countries and the European Commission, to monitor progress in the fight against poverty and social exclusion at national and EU level. Drawing on the methodology developed in the context of the 1999 "Poverty and Social Exclusion in the UK Survey", Guio, Gordon and Marlier (2012) proposed an analytical framework for producing a suitable, valid, reliable and additive deprivation measure for the EU. Their recommendations were based on analyses of the 2009 EU-SILC material deprivation module. This report extends these analyses using the 2014 EU-SILC data and demonstrates that the composition of the new material and social deprivation indicator remains optimal over a five year period of considerable socio-economic change.

This paper uses new data from EU-SILC for twenty-six European countries to examine the structure and distribution of material deprivation in the enlarged EU. We identify three distinct dimensions of material deprivation relating to consumption, household facilities and neighbourhood environment, and construct indices of these dimensions for each country and the EU as a whole. The extent of variation across countries and welfare regimes is shown to depend on the dimension on which one focuses, as does the strength of the association with household income and subjective economic stress. The index of consumption deprivation has by far the highest correlation with income, provides a highly reliable measure in itself, and allows segments of the population to be identified that are sharply differentiated in terms of their multi-dimensional deprivation profiles. On the basis of this evidence we make some suggestions as to the manner in which the measurement of material deprivation in the European Union should be developed through the proposed special module of deprivation which will form part of the 2009 wave of EU-SILC.

In this paper we use the Portuguese component of the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions {EU-SILC) to develop a measure of consistent poverty in Portugal. It is widely agreed that being poor does not simply mean not having enough monetary resources. It also reflects a lack of access to the resources required to enjoy a minimum standard of living and participation in the society one belor]gs to. The coexistence of material deprivation and monetary poverty leads to the con'cept of consistent poverty. The assessment of material deprivation and the identification of the households and individuals living in consistent poverty could become essential parts of the national anti-poverty strategy and crucial instruments in the definition of the target groups in social policy.

We propose a characterization of a popular index of multidimensional poverty which, as a special case, generates a measure of material deprivation. This index is the weighted sum of the functioning failures. The important feature of the variables that may be relevant for poverty assessments is that they are discrete in nature. Thus, poverty measures based on continuous variables are not suitable in this setting and the assumption of a discrete domain is mandatory. We apply the measure to European Union member states where the concept of material deprivation was initiated and illustrate how its recommendations differ from those obtained from poverty measures based exclusively on income considerations.

This article provides an overview of different aspects of poverty in three Post-Soviet countries: Russia, Armenia and Georgia. It looks into the material situation of households and subjective and deprivation poverty. Source data are the findings of three population surveys, conducted in the considered countries in 2017. The analysis shows a significant level of material deprivation among the population in the studied countries. The most vulnerable categories are rural population, 65+, and families with three or more children. Households in Armenia and Georgia are more dependent on farming and financial aid from their relatives than Russian households. Although the level of material deprivation in Russia is significantly lower compared with Armenia and Georgia, the level of relative subjective poverty in Russia is notably higher. It is likely due to higher inequality, which may point at risks of social instability. This indicates the need for new government policies in Russia that would focus on social development and reduction of inequality and social exclusion

The financial and economic crisis that hit Europe since 2009 has highlighted the need to measure more effectively the impact that certain exogenous shocks can have in the social field. In order to fill this gap and to provide a statistical tool useful to measure phenomena evolving over time, we perform a non-compensatory time analysis of material deprivation in Europe by using the quantitative method known as Adjusted Mazziotta and Pareto Index (AMPI). Material deprivation is a proxy to identify the most suffering groups of people in a specific environment. We consider the material deprivation as the sum of economic stress and forced lack of durable goods. Using Eurostat EU-SILC data, we aim at determining which countries have suffered the most material deprivation and identifying clusters of deprivation. We also determine how material deprivation is evolved over time, from 2005 to 2019. Subsequently, through Influence Analysis, the robustness of the index obtained is evaluated. Our results show that the material deprivation gap between Eastern and Mediterranean countries and all the remaining countries, which already existed before the economic crisis, seems to have widened in the years up to 2015.

This article examines deprivation among unemployed young people. It draws on a comparative survey of 8,654 young unemployed in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Scotland. In spite of an increased knowledge of the relationship between unemployment and poverty,our understanding of deprivation among young unemployed people remains inadequate. How do young people deal with unemployment? Are transitional factors the only explanation for the prevalence of deprivation or should we also consider intergenerational factors? The six countries represent two different welfare strategies, the Nordic universalistic model and the Scottish liberal/ minimalist approaches. The research findings showed diverging tendencies within the Nordic countries. Converging trends between the different systems could also be found, as family support plays the main role in preventing deprivation in all of the countries.

Material deprivation is high on the political agenda in Europe and part of the agreed benchmarks in the EU social inclusion process. This study analyses the link between social assistance benefit levels and material deprivation in European countries. It is shown that the relationship between assistance and deprivation is negative, indicating that material deprivation is less extensive in countries with higher benefit levels. The influence of other relevant contextual effects does not change this relationship to any serious extent. There was no clear effect of public services or active labour market policy on material deprivation, factors essential in the EU discussion on poverty and social inclusion. The results demonstrate that the role of social assistance in combating material hardships should perhaps be strengthened in future EU policy frameworks. The empirical analyses are based on data from the EU-SILC and the SaMip dataset, covering 26 European countries.