Multidimensional poverty and social isolation in Poland Methods of analysis and basic results

1. Multidimensionalpoverty and socialisolation in PolandMethods of analysis and basicresults UNITED NATIONSECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE CONFERENCE OF EUROPEAN STATISTICIANS Seminar “The way forward in poverty measurement” Geneva, 2-4 December 2013 Anna Bieńkuńska Central Statistical Office of Poland E-mail: a.bienkunska@stat.gov.pl

2. A source of data for analysis of multidimensionalpoverty and socialexclusionin Poland - SocialCohesionSurvey

3. SOCIAL COHESION SURVEY First of all, it is comprehensive and thus makes it possible tostudy a wide range of information at the level of an individual surveyed, the information being both subjective and objective, covering both material and non-material aspects of the quality of life. Multidimensional social cohesion survey is ‘acombinationof a number of various surveys’.

4. General characteristics of the survey • The information about the household’s condition was recorded in a household questionnaire, while that about respondents at the age of 16 years and over – in the individual questionnaire. At the stage of data processing the data from both questionnaires was combined. • First edition of the survey has been conducted by CSO of Poland in 2011, 2ndeditionis planned for 2015.Cyclic form of the surveyenablescomparability of the resultsover the years. • Effective sample size (2011): Surveyed households – 14873 Surveyed individuals - 13246

5. Applied approach to povertymeasurement In contrast to a classic mono-dimensional approach, in which poverty range is exclusively drawn on the basis of household income or expenditure, the present analysis features three complementary approaches to poverty, namely income poverty, living conditions poverty and poverty in terms of lack of budget balance. Povertyis analysed with reference to households.Personswho are members of the households considered poor are also viewed as affected by poverty.

6. Multidimensionalpoverty Poverty in terms of the lack of budgetbalance Livingconditionspoverty Incomepoverty

7. INCOME POVERTY • Criteria and povertythresholds: • Households’ equivalised monetary income • Poverty threshold – household’s income is equal or below 60% median equivalised households’ income in Poland • Povertyrate: 15,1 % of households

8. DETERMINANTS OF POVERTY MODEL.INCOME POVERTY Assessment of the contributory significance of various factors

9. LIVING CONDITIONS POVERTY • Criteria and povertythresholds: • Aggregate indicator of poorlivingconditionsconsidering dwelling conditions, durables, material and non-material deprivation • Maximum value of the indicator–30 • Poverty threshold –indicator’s value equal • or below 10 • Povertyrate: 13,5% of households

12. Distribution of values of the aggregateindicator of poor living conditions – in % of households GOOD SITUATION POVERTY

13. DETERMINANTS OF POVERTY MODEL.LIVING CONDITIONS POVERTY Assessment of the contributory significance of various factors

14. POVERTY IN TERMSOF THE LACKOF BUDGET BALANCE • Criteria and povertythresholds: • Aggregate indicator considering subjective households’ opinions about their material status and budgetary difficulties (including arrears) • Maximum value of the indicator – 7 • Poverty threshold –indicator’s value equal • or above 4 • Povertyrate: 15,9% of households

16. Distribution of values of the aggregateindicator of the lack of budget balance – in % of households GOOD SITUATION POVERTY

17. DETERMINANTS OF POVERTY MODEL.POVERTY IN TERMS OF THE LACK OF BUDGET BALANCE Assessment of the contributory significance of various factors

18. Multidimensionalpoverty Co-occurence of three forms of poverty Incomepoverty Livingconditionspoverty Poverty in terms of lack of budgetbalance MULTIDIMENSIONAL POVERTY Povertyrate: 4,6% of households

19. % of households

21. DETERMINANTS OF POVERTY MODEL.MULTIDIMENSIONAL POVERTY Assessment of the contributory significance of various factors

22. FROM POVERTY TO SOCIAL EXCLUSION – IS POVERTY RELATED TO SOCIALISOLATION?

23. Social isolation • Unit of analysis: personsaged 16 and more • It was assumed that a person is socially isolated if he/she does not maintain (frequent enough) contacts with the surrounding social environment outside his/her own household. The lack, or sporadic character, of certain types of relations, for whatever reason, was treated as a symptom of isolation. • The social isolation threat was assessed on the basis of a aggregateindicator of social contacts whose values ranged from 0 (a ‘strongly isolated’person), to 10 (a person “strongly integrated with the society”). The social isolation threshold was adopted at 3

24. Distribution of intermediate variables (partial indicators) included in the aggregateindicator of social contacts – in % of persons aged 16 years or more

25. Distribution of values of the aggregateindicator of social contacts – in % of persons aged 16 years or more

26. DETERMINANTS OF SOCIAL ISOLATION MODEL.SOCIALISOLATION Assessment of the contributory significance of various factors

27. POVERTY SOCIAL ISOLATION SOCIAL EXCLUSION

28. COEXISTENCE OF POVERTY AND SOCIAL ISOLATION in % of persons aged 16 years or more % OF PERSONS 67.8 - No symptoms of either poverty or social isolation - Only social isolation (without poverty) 4.9 23.3 - Poverty (at least one form) without social isolation - Simultaneous occurrence of poverty (at least one form) and social isolation –> social exclusion: 4.0 a 1.8 social isolation and one poverty form b social isolation and two poverty forms 1.2 1.0 social isolation and three poverty forms a This item concerns the occurrence of one poverty form, so it does not refer to households in which two or three forms occurred at once. b This item concerns the occurrence of two poverty forms, so it does not refer to households in which three forms occurred at once.

29. DETERMINANTS OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION MODEL.TOTAL EXCLUSION (3 FORMS OF POVERTY + SOCIAL ISOLATION) Assessment of the contributory significance of various factors

30. CONCLUSIONS • Extending the poverty analysis so as to cover income-unrelated aspects allowed us to draw a more complete picture of this phenomenon in Poland. Our analysis has shown thatthere is a group of households whose current income considerably exceeds the income poverty threshold, but which nevertheless face a number of difficulties with balancing their budget, or which live in poor conditions. In Poland, it concerns i.e. the households of older persons. • For use of the social policy, very important issue is the information regarding values of aggregate rates as well as particular symptoms of poverty.

31. CONCLUSIONS • The survey results indicate the lack of strong correlations between poverty and social isolation. Therefore, we feel that with respect to decision-makers and social security systems, attention should be directed towards persons affected jointly by poverty and the lack (or a very limited level) of social relations. • Social isolation in Poland concerned mainly older and disabled persons. • The underlying determinants of social exclusion arethe lack of education, unemployment and disability.