1 / 31

I ndicators of child poverty and child well - being in the EU:

Child poverty and child well-being in Hungary and in the EU EU representation in Budapest 16 June, 2010. I ndicators of child poverty and child well - being in the EU: Suggestions for indicators and monitoring. István György Tóth TARKI Social Research Institute. Outline.

brock
Download Presentation

I ndicators of child poverty and child well - being in the EU:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Child poverty and child well-being in Hungary and in the EU EU representation in Budapest 16 June, 2010 Indicators of child poverty and child well-being in the EU: Suggestions for indicators and monitoring István György Tóth TARKI Social Research Institute

  2. Outline • The project and its context • Domains of child poverty and well-being • Methods of exploring and selecting indicators • Suggestions: a new child indicator portfolio • Overview of child well-being in the EU: selected indicators • Conclusions

  3. The „Study on child poverty” project Commissioned by: DG Employment of the European Commission, Unit E2 Consortium: Tárki Social Research Institute, Budapest Applica sprl, Brussels Steering Committe: Terry Ward (chair) Applica Michael F. Förster OECD Hugh Frazer National Univ. of Ireland Petra Hoelscher UNICEF Eric Marlier CEPS/INSTEAD Holly Sutherland University of Essex István György Tóth TÁRKI

  4. Main tasks carried out within the project Task 1. Empirical analysis of child poverty Task 2. Assessment of the effectiveness of policiesfor combating child poverty Task 3. Recommendations for a limited set of indicators most relevant from a child perspective

  5. The EU policy context of the project • 2005: MarchEU Presidency Conclusions and Luxembourg Presidency initiative on “Taking forward the EU Social Inclusion Process” • 2006: Commission’s Communication ‘Towards an EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child, Communication from the Commission’ • Since 2006: streamlining of Social OMC, more systematic attention to children and reports and recommendations on tackling child poverty and social exclusion produced under PROGRESS by independent experts and anti-poverty networks • 2007: EU Task-Force on Child poverty and Child Well-Being • 2008: formal adoptionof the report and their incorporation into the EU acquis, National Strategy Reports of child poverty • 2009: „Study on child poverty and child well-being” • 2010: planned publication of a Commission staff working paper on child poverty.

  6. How does this project add to the process? • Contributes to developing tools to regularlymonitorchild poverty and child well-being in the Member States • It aims at filling in the Social OMC „reserved slot”for child well being indicator(s) • Provides recommendations forimproving data infrastructure Starting point: Related projects:

  7. Domains of child poverty and well-being(according to the EU Task-Force report) • A. Material well-being:factors relating to the materialresourcesof the household that the child has access to or lacks during his/her development, which include indicators of • (A1) income, • (A2) material deprivation, • (A3) housing, • (A4) labour market attachment. • B. Non-material dimensions of child well-being, which may reflect on both the resources a child has access or lacks during his/her development and outcomesin different stages of this development: • (B1) education, • (B2) health, • (B3) exposure to risk and risk behaviour, • (B4) social participation and relationships, family environment, • (B5) local environment.

  8. Selecting child well-being indicators (a)  Tocapture the essence of the problem, we need indicators reflecting - well-being, predicting future prospects - attention to life cycle elements and intergenerational aspects - the level anddistributionof well-being (social gapbetween the poorer and the more well-off) (b)  be robust and statistically validated - assessment of the statistical reliability (level of mesurement error) - cross country variance (c)  provide a sufficient level of cross countries comparability, - with use of internationally applied definitions and data collection standards (d)  be built on available underlying data, be timelyand susceptible to revision (e)  should be responsive to policy interventionsbut not subject to manipulation

  9. In search of additional indicators: tasks completed within the project • a broad basedcollection of potentially relevant indicatorsin each dimension • work onindicator development(customising the selection criteria) • suggestions forbreakdownswherever possible • to fill out an indicator fichefor each and every indicators (example) • statistical validationof all material indicators (where data allows) • identifying data gaps • formulatingsuggestions

  10. Conclusions of the paper (1-3): 1: Various child ages need to be reflected 2: As an immediate action, new health, education and risk behaviour indicators be introduced

  11. Conclusions (3) There is a need fora comprehensive set of indicators to monitor child poverty and well-being • The new set could: • reflect most of thechild well-being dimensionsas set out in the EU Task-Force report • incorporate OMC indicators already having a0-17 age breakdown • include a few new material well-being indicators(educational deprivation and childcare) • include new breakdownsfor the already existing indicators • a whole range of non-material indicators • This suggestion • could be well basedon the existing indicator development work • would betimely in 2010(European year against social exclusion)

  12. The suggested full portfolio of child indicators and age breakdowns

  13. At-risk-of-poverty rates – overall population and children (percentage below 60% of the national equivalised median income), EU-27, 2007 A1: jövedelem Indikátor: szegénységi ráta Source: EUROSTAT. Notes: Countries are ranked by the at-risk-of-poverty rate of children. Confidence intervals are estimated for 24 countries only, since data on Bulgaria, Malta and Romania are not in the publicly available EU-SILC UDB 2007 (version 01.03.2009). Confidence intervals are provided for Germany, however the German sample is quota sample.

  14. Relative median poverty gap for total population and children, EU-27, 2007 (%) A1: jövedelem Indikátor: szegénységi ráta Source: EUROSTAT. Note:Relative median poverty gap has been calculatedas 60% of national equivalised median income. Countries are ranked by the relative median poverty gap for total population.

  15. Primary indicator of material deprivation among children (0–17), EU-25,* 2007 A2: anyagi depriváció Indikátor: depriváltság a 0-17 évesek között Source: Own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007 (version 01.03.2009). Notes: *Excluding Malta. Confidence intervals are provided for Germany, however the German sample is quota sample.

  16. Housing costs overburden rate among children (aged 0–17), EU-25,* 2007 A3: lakhatási költségek Indikátor: túlzott lakhatási költségek a 0-17 évesek között (népesség, %) Source: Own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007 (version 01.03.2009). Note: *Excluding Malta.

  17. Overcrowding rate among children (aged 0–17), EU-25,* 2007 A3: lakhatási zsúfoltság Indikátor: túlzsúfolt lakásban élő gyermekek aránya Source: Own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007 (version 01.03.2009). Note: *Excluding Malta

  18. Difference in average reading literacy scores between pupils who have at least one parent who has completed tertiary education and pupils who have at least one parent with only lower secondary education (or below) B1: oktatás Indikátor: írás/olvasás kompetencia társadalmi különbségei a szülő iskolázottsága szerint (15 évesek) Source: OECD/PISA.

  19. Difference in average reading literacy between 10-year-old pupils who have at least one parent who has completed tertiary education and pupils who have at least one parent with only lower secondary education (or below), 2006 B1: oktatás Indikátor: írás/olvasás kompetencia társadalmi különbségei a szülő iskolázottsága szerint (10 évesek) Source: PIRLS.

  20. Percentage of 4-year-olds who are enrolled in education-oriented pre-primary institutions (2007) B1: oktatás Indikátor: 4 évesek beiskolázottsági rátája Source: Eurostat /LFS.

  21. Infant mortality rate, EU-27, 2007 B2: Egészségi állapot Indikátor: csecsemőhalandóság aránya Source: Data collected by Eurostat from the National Statistical Offices. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/population/data/database (17.08.2009).

  22. Low birth weight, EU-27, 2005 B2: Egészségi állapot Indikátor: alacsony súllyal születettek aránya Source: OECD Family database, based on OECD Health Data 2007 and World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe (Health for All database). www.oecd.org/document/4/0,3343,en_2649_34819_37836996_1_1_1_1,00.html (13.08.2009).

  23. 11-year-olds who report being overweight or obese according to BMI, EU-27, 2005/06 B2: Egészségi állapot Indikátor: túlsúlyosak aránya a 11 évesek között Source: HBSC 2005/06. www.hbsc.org/publications/reports.html (04.08.2009)

  24. Adolescent fertility rate, EU-27, 2005 B3: Kockázatos társadalmi viselkedésminták Indikátor: fiatalkorúak termékenységi rátája Source: OECD based on EUROSTAT data (Eurostat Demographic Data and United Nations Statistical Division). www.oecd.org/document/4/0,3343,en_2649_34819_37836996_1_1_1_1,00.html

  25. 15-year-olds who smoke at least once a week, EU-27, 2005/2006 B3: Kockázatos társadalmi viselkedésminták Indikátor: legalább hetente dohányzó 15 évesek aránya Source: HBSC 2005/06. www.hbsc.org/publications/reports.html

  26. 15-year-olds who have been drunk at least twice, EU-27, 2005/06 B3: Kockázatos társadalmi viselkedésminták Indikátor: „legalább kétszer volt már részeg” 15 évesek aránya Source: HBSC 2005/06. www.hbsc.org/publications/reports.html

  27. 15-year-olds who have ever used cannabis in their lives, EU-27, 2005/06 B3: Kockázatos társadalmi viselkedésminták Indikátor: már legalább egyszer cannabist használó 15 évesek aránya Source: HBSC 2005/06. www.hbsc.org/publications/reports.htm

  28. Conclusions (4-6) There is a need to develop data infrastructure • Context information is neededon child and family related social expenditures, within the OMC reporting routines • Further work on statistical validation necessitates opening up microdata accessto some core datasets on non-material dimensions • Incentives to support substitute or alternative datasets in national contexts is needed

  29. Conclusions (7-11): Further attempts to improve data situation are needed … • … to monitor the social situation of the children of • - migrants • Roma • … to further investigate the potential for utilising nationaladministrative datasets • … to invest inpanel surveys (national or EU level) to facilitate exploring causal relationships • … toinvolve researchersin questionnaire development

  30. Conclusions: - The Hungarian EU Presidency could take on the initiative promote extending Social OMC with indicators to monitor child well being - professional backing: the Tarki study - political backing: - commitment of DG EMPL - continued interest of Belgian Pres.

  31. Final report is available at: www.tarki.hu

More Related