200 likes | 368 Views
A Framework for Poverty Measurement Using EU-SILC Brian Nolan and Christopher T. Whelan. Outline. The current position on poverty measures and targets Moving forward – the case for a tiered approach Moving forward – a revised consistent poverty measure Conclusions. The Current Position.
E N D
A Framework for Poverty Measurement Using EU-SILC Brian Nolan and Christopher T. Whelan
Outline • The current position on poverty measures and targets • Moving forward – the case for a tiered approach • Moving forward – a revised consistent poverty measure • Conclusions
The Current Position • Poverty defined as exclusion because of lack of resources • Low income on its own does not distinguish those experiencing generalised deprivation • For various reasons, identifies “at risk of poverty” not “poor” • Scale of income growth means relative income poverty rates particularly misleading as sole indicator for Ireland • Poverty has not gone up! • Combining low income with basic deprivation to measure “consistent poverty” captures those in most need
The Current Position • 8 “basic deprivation” items originally used in constructing consistent poverty measure • Adapted set explored in various more recent ESRI studies, which also monitor relative and “anchored” income poverty rates • NAPS global poverty reduction target set in terms of reducing consistent poverty to < 2% • Based on original set of deprivation items • Change from LII survey to EU-SILC means measured deprivation levels higher in 2003
Need for A Framework • No one indicator tells us all we want to know • Both income and deprivation are measured imprecisely • Both living standards and relativities matter • In the short term, improvements in living standards have a major immediate impact • In the medium/longer term, expectations adjust so distance from the median also matters for “participation in ordinary life of society”
A Tiered Approach • Three-tiered approach to monitoring progress suggested by ESRI some time ago • Want to see: • 1/ Real incomes rising and deprivation levels falling for those on low incomes • 2/ Consistent poverty falling (with both fixed and slowly changing set of items) • 3/ Relative income poverty falling • Priority ordering as listed
Monitoring the Tiers • Tier 1: Numbers below income poverty thresholds anchored at a point in time (Laeken); deprivation levels, esp. for those on low incomes (being developed at EU level) • Tier 2: Consistent poverty with both fixed and changing set of items • Tier 3: Numbers below relative income thresholds; numbers persistently below those thresholds; poverty gaps (all Laeken)
Revising Consistent Poverty • EU SILC Data. • Identifying dimensions of deprivation. • Propose a new 12-item basic deprivation index. • 6 items drawn from earlier index relating to food, clothes, heat. • 6 new items relating to acceptable level of involvement in family and social life.
Deprivation Dimensions • Basic : two pairs of strong shoes, a warm waterproof coat, a roast once a week… • Consumption: a telephone, a dish washer, a car… • Housing facilities: bath/shower, hot water, central heating… • Neighbourhood environment: leaking roof & damp, pollution, noise…
Basic Dimension Household & Household members can not afford OLD ITEMS • Two pairs of strong shoes • A warm waterproof coat • New rather than second-hand clothes • Eat meals with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day? • A roast joint (or its equivalent) once a week • Go without heating during the last 12 months through lack of money (ref pers) NEW ITEMS • Presents for family or friends at least once a year • A week’s holiday away from home in the last 12 months • Keep the home adequately warm • Replace any worn out furniture • Have family or friends for a drink or meal once a month • Have a morning, afternoon or evening out in the last fortnight, for entertainment (ref pers)
Deprivation Dimensions by Consistent Poverty Measures (60% & 70% Median Line)
Economic Strain by Consistent Poverty Measures (70% Median Line)
Housing Costs a Heavy Burden by Consistent Poverty Measures (60% & 70% Median Line)
Debt & Expenses Difficulties by Consistent Poverty (60% & 70% Median Line)
Conclusions • Tiered approach should replace sole focus on consistent poverty in measuring progress in NAPS: focus on • Real incomes and living standards • Consistent poverty • Relative income poverty. • With EU SILC, 12-item index captures basic deprivation • Combined with income line and using threshold of 2+, level of consistent poverty similar to original measures. • Identifies distinctive group experiencing generalised deprivation due to lack of resources