1 / 29

Department of Labour Market and Social Policies Social Inclusion Area Rome, Corso Italia 33

The space of capabilities deprivation: the results of the MACaD implementation within the Municipality of Rome 13 by M. D ’ Emilione, L. Fabrizi, G. A. Giuliano, P. Raciti, S. Tenaglia, P. Vivaldi Vera. Rome 22-23 May 2012. Department of Labour Market

elie
Download Presentation

Department of Labour Market and Social Policies Social Inclusion Area Rome, Corso Italia 33

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. The space of capabilities deprivation: the results of the MACaD implementation within the Municipality of Rome 13 by M. D’Emilione, L. Fabrizi, G. A. Giuliano, P. Raciti, S. Tenaglia, P. Vivaldi Vera Rome 22-23 May 2012 Department of Labour Market and Social PoliciesSocial Inclusion Area Rome, Corso Italia 33

  2. What is capability? A capability is defined as the real power of choice that a person has, with respect to a specific system of states of being and doing (functionings), which are actually alternative and available. Capabilities reflect the real degree of freedom that is internal to personal choice of living one kind of life rather than another.

  3. Overview: survey context Context • Municipality of Rome 13: 230.000 inhabitants • Peripheral urban area with constant population growth (aging index significantly lower than the one recorded for the entire city of Rome: 114 vs 161). • Doubled foreign population in the last decade (from 5% in 2000 to 10% in 2010) spread over the entire municipal area. • Extensive settlements’ fragmentation: it is possible to identify at least 11/12 neighborhoods, each with its own distinctive characterization. Social Services • 1,900 individuals in charge (year 2010); • 870 new users (year 2010);

  4. Overview: survey characteristics • field survey carried out, for six months, at the headquarters of the Social Services of the Municipality of Rome 13 (September 2011-February 2012) • it does not consider administrative data but data collected through a specifically designed questionnaire (primary data collection) • it is not an analysis of a population as a whole, but it analyzes the individual condition, with the possibility of collecting data by target groups

  5. Survey objectives and tools Objectives: • to operationalyze the capability approach to support the design and evaluation of local policies • to increase the information available for policies and decision makers both in the planning and evaluation phase • Tools: • multidimensional index which takes into account 6 life domains • questionnaire: • - divided into 6 areas (one for each domain plus a registry); • -108 questions; • - administered "face-to-face" in a protected environment; • - time of administration: about 45 ' • - 570 valid questionnaires collected

  6. Characteristics of the sample • the majority are women (62%) • 45.6% belong to the age group 30-49 • marital status: significant number of widowed and divorced (28%) and unmarried / single women (21%) • 33% live in families with 4 or more members • foreigners are the 20% of the sample with a larger predominance of immigrants from countries of the EU (especially Romania) • 54% has a low to medium level of education (primary and middle) and about 8% has a degree or equivalent • employment status: significant percentage of unemployed (over 30%) and retired/pensioners (over 20%) but also workers with permanent contracts (20% approximately) • about 60% is placed under the poverty threshold (equivalent income) • most people have turned to social services to request economic assistance or a job (employment grants)

  7. House (to be able to) live in a house School (to be able to) learn Work (to be able to) work Social relationships (to be able to) build social relationships Taking care of… (to be able to) take care of… Availability of basic goods to conduct a decent life Capabilities, agency and functionings

  8. Life domains considered • living in a house means to be able to manage the house (to be able to sustain expenditures, to clean it and keep it in order) • income generating means to be able to manage and improve income sources • Being part of a community means to be able to have a good relationship with the environment, to maintain relationships with friends, neighbours, participating in the community life • developing skills, improving education means to be able to improve educational and/or professional level; to have among life goals, the improvement of the education level and be able to implement actions consistent with this goal • being healthy means to be able to take care of your own health and not acting dangerous or risk behaviors • expressing emotions means to be able to express feelings of anger, gratitude, love in all life domains; to be able to make full use of imagination, rationality and creativity in everyday life, to be able to express skills and talents in the workplace

  9. The multidimensional index • the index is based on the “counting approach" (Atkinson 2003), developed among others by Alkire and Foster (2007) and Bossert, Chakravarty and D'Ambrosio (2009) • it is calculated for individuals • the variables considered are dummy type where 1 = deprived • It is sensitive to the degree of awareness of policy makers with respect to the intensity of inequality • it was further adjusted, making it sensitive to the weights assigned by respondents and various stakeholders to all functionings dimensions considered

  10. Index variables… a few examples AM 4 - Problems you can find in your neighbourhood/ community (if ‘yes’ 1 ; if ‘no’ 0): AM 1-How accessible are the following services in your neighborhood? (very much/enough/very little/absent)

  11. Index variables…a few examples

  12. Index variables (2)

  13. Correlation of domains: a status index Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  14. Correlation of domains: a functioning index Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  15. Index MACaD applied to the whole set of domains D 14,2% C 38,8% A 36,9% B 10,1% Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  16. MACaD index applied to the “being part of a community” domain C 31,84% D 20,41% A 26,94% B 20,82% Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  17. Comparison of % of sample distribution Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  18. A different sample distribution (1) The distribution is defined by dividing the axes in the average value expressed by the status and functioning indeces in a target group. The target group was selected in relation to 11 variables related to a condition which was called "a decent life“. For "decent" we mean a life that will respond to: - basic needs (nutrition, housing, health, employment and income) - major relational needs (friendship and family networks) - minimum level of education

  19. A different sample distribution (2) The variables considered are the following: 1. being employed 2. be above the threshold of relative poverty 3. have a home or rental property with a mortgage or rent less than 30% of the income 4. have a good quality of family relationships 5. have a normal frequency in relationship activities (family, friends, leisure, etc) 6. absence of specific problems in the place of residence 7. being able to get to the end of the month with disposable income 8. perceived adequacy of income with respect to family needs 9. perception of an adequate quality of life 10. being healthy 11. higher qualification

  20. The new sample distribution D 5,96% C 57,57% A 18,12% B 18,35% Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  21. Comparison between % of sample distribution according to the two axis division a. Average values for the sample as a whole b. Average values for the selected target group Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  22. Weights’ average assigned by respondents to each life domain Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  23. MACaD Weighted Index applied to the whole set of life domains D 14,68% C 30,19% B 13,85% A 41,27% Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  24. Cause-effect association (1) Objective comparing the results with what was obtained from the MACaD model Connects the cause of exposure (to belong to a particular target) to the effect (position in the quadrant). The frequency of exposure is calculated in "cases" with respect to "controls" where case and control are represented by their position in quadrants C and A.

  25. Cause-effect association (2) Odds= 2,55 p= 0,0015* Odds= 1,817 p= 0,024* Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011 Chi square test with p = 0,025

  26. Cause-effect association (3) Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011 Chi square test with p = 0,025

  27. MACaD Index by target "Civil Status" Source: Based on Isfol data, MACaD Survey 2011

  28. Future development of the survey • longitudinal analysis: application of the MACaD model to a panel of social services users in the Municipality of Rome 13 and other local administrations • introducing a set of questions within the survey ISFOL-PLUS (Participation Labour Unemployment Survey: 50,000 interviews) for the application of the MACaD model in collaboration with the PLUS research team

  29. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

More Related