Material Deprivation, Economic Stress, and Reference Groups in Europe: An Analysis of EU-SILC 2009

In this article, we take advantage of the recent availability of data from the special module on material deprivation in the 2009 European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between material deprivation and economic stress, the mediating and moderating roles played by cross-national differences in levels of income and income inequality, and the implications for competing perspectives on the nature of reference groups in Europe. The article establishes the critical role of basic deprivation, relating to inability to enjoy customary standards of living, in influencing economic stress levels. National income levels and inequality had no direct influence on economic stress. However, the impact of basic deprivation was stronger in countries with higher levels of income, indicating the crucial role of national reference groups. An interaction between basic deprivation and income inequality was also observed. However, contrary to the expectation that experiencing basic deprivation in a national context of high income inequality is likely to be particularly stressful, the consequences of such deprivation were most negative in low inequality countries. Experiencing basic deprivation where high income levels and lower inequality would lead to the expectation that such deprivation is eminently avoidable exacerbates its impact. © The Author 2013.

Understanding material deprivation: A comparative European analysis

In this paper, taking advantage of the inclusion of a special module on material deprivation in EU-SILC 2009. we provide a comparative analysis of patterns of deprivation. Our analysis identifies six relatively distinct dimensions of deprivation with generally satisfactory overall levels of reliability and mean levels of reliability across countries. Multi-level analysis based on 28 European countries reveals systematic variation in the importance of within and between country variation for a range of deprivation dimensions. The basic deprivation dimension is the sole dimension to display a graduated pattern of variation across countries. It also reveals the highest correlations with national and household income, the remaining deprivation dimensions and economic stress. It comes closest to capturing an underlying dimension of generalized deprivation that can provide the basis for a comparative European analysis of exclusion from customary standards of living. A multilevel analysis revealed that a range of household characteristics and household reference person socio-economic factors were related to basic deprivation and controlling for contextual differences in such factors allowed us to account for substantial proportions of both within and between country variance. The addition of macro-economic factors relating to average levels of disposable income and income inequality contributed relatively little further in the way of explanatory power. Further analysis revealed the existence of a set of significant interactions between micro socioeconomic attributes and country level gross national disposable income per capita. The impact of socio-economic differentiation was significantly greater where average income levels were lower. Or, in other words, the impact of the latter was greater for more disadvantaged socio-economic groups. Our analysis supports the suggestion that an emphasis on the primary role of income inequality to the neglect of differences in absolute levels of income may be misleading in important respects. (C) 2012 International Sociological Association Research Committee 28 on Social Stratification and Mobility. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Understanding the socio-economic distribution of multiple deprivation: An application of self-organising maps

In this paper we seek to contribute to recent efforts to develop and implement multi-dimensional approaches to social exclusion by applying self-organising maps (SOMs) to a set of material deprivation indicators from the Irish component of EU-SILC. The first stage of our analysis involves the identification of sixteen clusters that confirm the multi-dimensional nature of deprivation in contemporary Ireland and the limitations of focusing solely on income. In going beyond this mapping stage, we consider both patterns of socio-economic differentiation in relation to cluster membership and the extent to which such membership contributes to our understanding of economic stress. Our analysis makes clear the continuing importance of traditional forms of stratification relating to factors such as income, social class and housing tenure in accounting for patterns of multiple deprivation. However, it also confirms the role of acute life events and life cycle and location influences. Most importantly, it demonstrates that conclusions relating to the relative impact of different kinds of socio-economic influences are highly dependent on the form of deprivation being considered. Our analysis suggests that debates relating to the extent to which poverty and social exclusion have become individualized should take particular care to distinguish between different kinds of outcomes. Further analysis demonstrates that the SOM approach is considerably more successful than a comparable latent class analysis in identifying those exposed to subjective economic stress. (C) 2010 International Sociological Association Research Committee 28 on Social Stratification and Mobility. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mapping patterns of multiple deprivation using self-organising maps: An application to EU-SILC data for Ireland

The development of conceptual frameworks for the analysis of social exclusion has somewhat out-stripped related methodological developments. This paper seeks to contribute to filling this gap through the application of self-organising maps (SOMs) to the analysis of a detailed set of material deprivation indicators relating to the Irish case. The SOM approach allows us to offer a differentiated and interpretable picture of the structure of multiple deprivation in contemporary Ireland. Employing this approach, we identify 16 clusters characterised by distinct profiles across 42 deprivation indicators. Exploratory analyses demonstrate that, controlling for equivalised household income, SOM cluster membership adds substantially to our ability to predict subjective economic stress. Moreover, in comparison with an analogous latent class approach, the SOM analysis offers considerable additional discriminatory power in relation to individuals' experience of their economic circumstances. The results suggest that the SOM approach could prove a valuable addition to a 'methodological platform' for analysing the shape and form of social exclusion. (c) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Using Non-Monetary Deprivation Indicators to Analyze Poverty and Social Exclusion: Lessons from Europe?

Non-monetary indicators of deprivation are now widely used in studying poverty in Europe. While measuring financial resources remains central, having reliable information about material deprivation adds to the ability to capture poverty and social exclusion. Non-monetary indicators can help improve the identification of those experiencing poverty and understand how it comes about. They are most productively used when multidimensionality is explicitly taken into account, both in framing the question and in empirical application. While serious methodological and measurement issues remain to be addressed, material deprivation indicators allow for new insights in making poverty comparisons across countries and analyzing changes over time. (C) 2010 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Explaining Social Class Inequalities in Smoking: The Role of Education, Self-Efficacy, and Deprivation

Rates of smoking have decreased dramatically in most Northern European countries over the last 50 years or so, but manual working class groups are substantially more likely to smoke daily than are the professional and managerial classes. This article examines three hypotheses about the processes producing these inequalities. The first argues that social class inequalities reflect differences across education groups in knowledge of the risks of smoking. The second suggests that the living conditions of lower social class groups leads to the development of lower self-efficacy and a lower propensity to quit smoking. The third states that smoking has a functional use among poorer individuals. This article draws upon data from the Republic of Ireland to assess these hypotheses. Our analysis provides some support for the first hypothesis in that education independently reduces the odds of a manual class person smoking relative to a non-manual by 12 per cent. The second hypothesis is not supported by the data. The third hypothesis gains the most support: measures of disadvantage and deprivation account for almost one-third of the class differential in smoking. The results suggest that smoking cessation policy should reflect the importance of social and economic context in quitting behaviour.

Measuring material deprivation with EU-SILC: Lessons from the Irish survey

In this paper we consider the consequences for measurement of material deprivation, consistent poverty and economic vulnerability of the shift from the ECHP data set to the EU-SILC instrument. Despite the restricted number of deprivation items available in EU-SILC, we show that there is a substantial overlap between such measures when they are estimated using EU-wide and a set of Irish specific indicators. By placing the EU-wide measures in the context of the full range of Irish indicators, we demonstrate that they allow us to identify clusters of individuals sharply differentiated in terms of their multidimensional deprivation profiles. They also provide an understanding of the socio-economic factors associated with such differentiation that departs in only modest respects from that derived from the more comprehensive set of Irish specific indicators.

Income, deprivation and economic stress in the enlarged European Union

At risk of poverty indicators based on relative income measures suggest that within the enlarged EU societies located at quite different points on a continuum of affluence have similar levels of poverty. Substantial differences in levels of income between societies do not in themselves invalidate this approach. However, the relative income approach fails to capture the fact that, if countries are grouped in terms of level of GDP, between economic cluster differences in life-style deprivation are sharper at lower income levels. Support for the argument relating to restricted reference groups is found in relation to the contrast between the twelve most affluent EU countries and all others. The limitations of relative income poverty lines have little to do with the process of enlargement as such. Instead the major problem involves the weak association between income and deprivation in the more affluent countries. However, as a consequence of such difficulties, such indicators do not provide entirely meaningful comparisons of levels of disadvantage across economic clusters. The current analysis, rather than supporting the alternative of a focus on absolute income or an EU wide poverty line, suggests that we should take the argument for adopting a multidimensional approach to the measurement of poverty more seriously.

Levels and patterns of material deprivation in Ireland: After the 'Celtic tiger'

In this article we use the first full wave of the Irish component of the EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions survey to evaluate conflicting interpretations of levels and patterns of material deprivation in Ireland after the 'Celtic Tiger'. Radical critics of Irish economic policies have seen the Irish case as a particularly good illustration of the tendency for globalization to be accompanied by widespread economic vulnerability and marginalization. Here, employing a multidimensional perspective we identify one fifth of the population as being economically vulnerable and one in 14 as vulnerable to maximal deprivation, in that they exhibit high risks of deprivation across a range of life-style deprivation dimensions. Current levels and depth of material deprivation are a good deal more modest than suggested by radical critics of the Irish experience of economic globalization.

Vulnerability and multiple deprivation perspectives on economic exclusion in Europe: A latent class analysis

In this paper we address issues relating to vulnerability to economic exclusion and levels of economic exclusion in Europe. We do so by applying latent class models to data from the European Community Household Panel for thirteen countries. This approach allows us to distinguish between vulnerability to economic exclusion and exposure to multiple deprivation at a particular point in time. The results of our analysis confirm that in every country it is possible to distinguish between a vulnerable and a non-vulnerable class. Association between income poverty, life-style deprivation and subjective economic strain is accounted for by allocating individuals to the categories of this latent variable. The size of the vulnerable class varies across countries in line with expectations derived from welfare regime theory. Between class differentiation is weakest in social democratic regimes but otherwise the pattern of differentiation is remarkably similar. The key discriminatory factor is life-style deprivation, followed by income and economic strain. Social class and employment status are powerful predictors of latent class membership in all countries but the strength of these relationships varies across welfare regimes. Individual biography and life events are also related to vulnerability to economic exclusion. However, there is no evidence that they account for any significant part of the socio-economic structuring of vulnerability and no support is found for the hypothesis that social exclusion has come to transcend class boundaries and become a matter of individual biography. However, the extent of socio-economic structuring does vary substantially across welfare regimes. Levels of economic exclusion, in the sense of current exposure to multiple deprivation, also vary systematically by welfare regime and social class. Taking both vulnerability to economic exclusion and levels of exclusion into account suggests that care should be exercised in moving from evidence on the dynamic nature of poverty and economic exclusion to arguments relating to the superiority of selective over universal social policies.

Income, deprivation, and economic strain. An analysis of the European community household panel

This paper is concerned with the relationship between household income and life-style deprivation, and their combined impact on households' perceptions of economic strain. It takes as a point of departure findings from a number of European countries showing that the relationship between income and deprivation is weaker than widely assumed and that relative income poverty lines may perform poorly in terms of identifying the most deprived households. It proceeds to examine how far these conclusions about income and deprivation can be generalized to the countries included in the first wave of the European Community Household Panel. Results show that five distinct dimensions of deprivation emerge from an overall European analysis and that these are consistent across individual countries. While a good deal of similarity is observed in the income-deprivation relationship, countries differ in the strength of relationship between income and what is termed 'current liferstyle deprivation' with the relationship being generally weakest in the richer countries. The implications of these findings for the use of relative income poverty lines are developed. Extending this analysis to an assessment of how income and deprivation combine to influence perceptions of economic strain, we show that within-nation reference group processes operating in a uniform manner across countries can account for the bulk of the variation in strain. Cross-national differences can be accounted for by corresponding variation in income and deprivation levels.

Explaining levels of deprivation in the European Union

In this paper we seek to explain variations in levels of deprivation between EU countries. The starting-point of our analysis is the finding that the relationship between income and life-style deprivation varies across countries. Given our understanding of the manner in which the income-deprivation mismatch may arise from the limitations of current income as a measure of command over resources, the pattern of variation seems to be consistent with our expectations of the variable degree to which welfare-state regimes achieve 'decommodification' and smooth income flows. This line of reasoning suggests that cross-national differences in deprivation might, in significant part, be due not only to variation in household and individual characteristics that are associated with disadvantage but also to the differential impact of such variables across countries and indeed welfare regimes. To test this hypothesis, we have taken advantage of the ECHP (European Community Household Panel) comparative data set in order to pursue a strategy of substituting variable names for country/welfare regime names. We operated with two broad categories of variables, tapping, respectively, needs and resources. Although both sets of factors contribute independently to our ability to predict deprivation, it is the resource factors that are crucial in reducing country effects. The extent of cross-national heterogeneity depends on specifying the social class and situation in relation to long-term unemployment of the household reference person. The impact of the structural socio-economic variables that we label 'resource factors' varies across countries in a manner that is broadly consistent with welfare regime theory and is the key factor in explaining cross-country differences in deprivation. As a consequence, European homogeneity is a great deal more evident among the advantaged than the disadvantaged.