Multidimensional poverty measurement in Europe:An application of the adjusted headcount approach

As awareness of the limitations of relying solely on income to measure poverty has become more widespread, attention has been increasingly focused on multi-dimensional approaches, to the point where the EU has adopted a multidimensional poverty and social exclusion target for 2020. The rationale advanced is that the computation of a multidimensional poverty index is an effective way of communicating in a political environment, and a necessary tool in order to monitor 27 different national situations. By contrast with the rather ad hoc way in which the EU 2020 poverty target has been framed and rationalised, the adjusted head count ratio applied here has a number of desirable axiomatic properties. It constitutes a significant improvement on union and intersection approaches and allows for the decomposition of multidimensional poverty in terms of dimensions of deprivation and socio-economic attributes. Since understanding poverty as multidimensional does not necessarily require constructing a multidimensional poverty index, on the basis of our analysis we provide a more general consideration of the value of developing a multidimensional index of poverty for the European Union.

Multi-Dimensional Deprivation in Ireland Among 9-Year-Olds in Ireland:An Analysis of the Growing Up in Ireland Survey’

In this paper we make use of the 9-year old wave of the Growing Up in Ireland study to analyse multidimensional deprivation in Ireland. The Alkire and Foster adjusted head count ratio approach (AHCR; 2007, 2011a, 2011b) applied here constitutes a significant improvement on union and intersection approaches and allows for the decomposition of multidimensional poverty in terms of dimensions and sub-groups. The approach involves a censoring of data such that deprivations count only for those above the specified multidimensional threshold leading to a stronger set of interrelationships between deprivation dimensions. Our analysis shows that the composition of the adjusted head ratio is influenced by a range of socio-economic factors. For less-favoured socio-economic groups dimensions relating to material deprivation are disproportionately represented while for the more advantaged groups, those relating to behavioral and emotional issues and social interaction play a greater role. Notwithstanding such variation in composition, our analysis showed that the AHCR varied systematically across categories of household type, and the social class, education and age group of the primary care giver. Furthermore, these variables combined in a cumulative manner. The most systematic variation was in relation to the head count of those above the multidimensional threshold rather than intensity, conditional on being above that cut-off point. Without seeking to arbitrate on the relative value of composite indices versus disaggregated profiles, our analysis demonstrates that there is much to be gained from adopting an approach with clearly understood axiomatic properties. Doing so allows one to evaluate the consequences of the measurement strategy employed for the understanding of levels of multidimensional deprivation, the nature of such deprivation profiles and socio-economic risk patterns. Ultimately it permits an informed assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the particular choices made.

Welfare regime and social class variation in poverty and economic vulnerability in Europe: an analysis of EU-SILC

In this paper we address a set of interrelated issues. These comprise increasing concerns about reliance on nationally based income poverty measures in the context of EU enlargement, the relative merits of one-dimensional versus multidimensional approaches to poverty and social exclusion and the continuing relevance of class-based explanations of life chances. When identifying economically vulnerable groups we find that, contrary to the situation with national income poverty measures, levels of vulnerability vary systematically across welfare regimes. The multidimensional profile of the economically vulnerable sharply differentiates them from the remainder of the population. While they are also characterised by distinctively higher levels of multiple deprivation, a substantial majority of the economically vulnerable are not exposed to such deprivation. Unlike the national relative income approach, the focus on economic vulnerability reveals a pattern of class differentiation that is not dominated by the contrast between the self-employed and all others. In contrast to a European-wide relative income approach, it also simultaneously captures the fact that absolute levels of vulnerability are distinctively higher among the lower social classes in the less comprehensive and generous welfare regimes while class relativities are significantly sharper at the other end of the spectrum.

Analyzing Intergenerational Influences on Income Poverty & Economic Vulnerability with EU-SILC

The European Union Statistics of Income and Living Conditions
(EU-SILC) 2005 wave includes a special module on inter-generational
transmission of poverty. In addition to the standard data relating to income
and material deprivation, information relating to parental background and
childhood circumstances was collected for all household members aged over
24 and less than 66 at the end of the income reference period. In principle,
the module provides an unprecedented opportunity to apply a welfare regime
perspective to a comparative European analysis of the relationship between
poverty and social exclusion and parental characteristics and childhood
economic circumstances. In this paper, we seek to exploit such potential. In
pursuing this objective, it is necessary to take into account some of the
limitations of the data. We do by restricting our attention to a set of
countries where data issues seem less extreme. Finally, we compare findings
from one dimensional and multidimensional approaches to poverty and social
exclusion in order to provide an assessment of the extent to which our
analysis of welfare regime variation provides a coherent account of the
intergenerational transmission of disadvantage.

Identifying childhood deprivation:How well do national indicators of poverty and social exclusion in Ireland Perform?

In the context of the significance that the life-cycle has been afforded in social policy discussion in Ireland, current national measures of poverty and social exclusion have been criticised for failing to capture such phenomena accurately in relation to particular stages of the life-course. In this paper we have taken advantage of the inclusion of a special module on childhood deprivation in EU-SILC 2009 to create reliable measures of both household basic deprivation and childhood deprivation. Overall, our analysis leads us to the conclusion that those exposed to childhood deprivation are generally a sub-set of the children captured by population indicators. Adopting a multidimensional and dynamic perspective on household resources and deprivation enables us to capture the large majority of children exposed to childhood deprivation. Restricting our attention to childhood deprivation would lead us to miss out on a significant number of children living in households experiencing basic deprivation but not exposed to childhood deprivation. It would be unwise to assume that such deprivation has no consequences for children. While there is clearly a value in supplementing existing national measures with child specific indicators, it would not appear sensible to rely solely on the latter.