Low Pay, In-Work Poverty and Economic Vulnerability: A Comparative Aanalysis Using EU-SILC

We explore the potential of data from EU-SILC (Statistics on Income and Living Conditions) for the enlarged European Union for the study of low pay and its relationship to household poverty and vulnerability. Limitations of the earnings data currently available mean the analysis covers only 14 of these countries. For employees who are not low paid, income poverty is seen to be rare. The low paid face a much higher risk of being in a household below relative income poverty thresholds, ranging from 7 per cent in Belgium and the Netherlands up to 1718 per cent in Austria, Estonia and Lithuania. The likelihood of their being in a poor household is clearly linked to gender, age and social class. In most of the countries only a minority of low-paid individuals are in vulnerable households.

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.

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.

Identifying Economically Vulnerable Groups as the Economic Crisis Emerged

A frequent refrain during recent debates on welfare cuts and tax increases has related to the need to "protect the vulnerable". However, it is far from clear that a consensus exists on which individuals or groups are to be included under this heading with a consequent lack of clarity for the policy implications of pursuing this goal. In this paper, operating with a conception of social exclusion that incorporates notions of dynamics and multidimensionality, we make use of EU-SILC 2008 data for Ireland to clarify the distinction between income poverty and economic vulnerability. We then proceed to consider the relationship between these outcomes and multiple deprivation, financial pressures and perceptions of recent and future economic prospects. Our analysis is then extended to compare patterns of risk for poverty and vulnerability in relation to key socio-economic groups. Finally, we will consider the relationship between poverty and vulnerability and the distribution of welfare dependence. Our analysis suggests that the vulnerable but non-poor group may need to be a key focus of policy attention in the future.

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.

Poverty in Ireland in Comparative European Perspective

In this paper we seek to put Irish poverty rates in a comparative European context. We do so in a context whereby the Irish economic boom and EU enlargement have led to increasing reservations being expressed regarding rates deriving from the EU 'at risk of poverty' indicator. Our comparative analysis reports findings for both overall levels of poverty and variation by household reference person characteristics for this indicator and a consistent poverty measure for Ireland, the UK and five smaller European countries spanning a range of welfare regimes. Our findings demonstrate that the distinctiveness of Ireland's situation lies not in the overall levels of poverty per se but in the very high penalties associated with being in a household where the household reference person is a lone parent or excluded from the labour market.

The 'Europeanization' of Reference Groups

In this paper we address the question of the relative importance of within and between country differences in income and material deprivation in the European Union in the context of recent suggestions that insufficient attention has been paid to the latter. In particular, we respond to the argument that the 'state bounded' relative income approach obscures the significance of EU-wide reference groups. Making use of EU-SILC 2004, we have sought to quantify the magnitude of relevant within and between country differences and their relative impact. Overall, our analysis supports the view that the predominant frame of reference is a national one. The limited impact of European reference groups observed in our analysis does not require explanation in terms of the emergence of a European social stratification system. Furthermore, the significance of such comparisons depends not only on the expectations of those affected by European inequalities but on the degree of legitimacy afforded to ensuing demands. While an EU-wide income-threshold can provide information regarding progress of the Union towards greater social cohesion, its usage for this purpose does not require a strong sense of European identity. Given the current status of the European Social Model, it would seem unwise to attribute an undue degree of policy relevance to the relatively modest impact of EU-wide reference groups revealed in our analysis.

"New" and "Old" Social Risks: Life Cycle and Social Class Perspectives on Social Exclusion in Ireland

The life cycle concept has come to have considerable prominence in Irish social policy debate. However, this has occurred without any systematic effort to link its usage to the broader literature relating to the concept. Nor has there been any detailed consideration of how we should set about operationalising the concept. In this paper we argue the need for "macro" life cycle perspectives that have been influenced by recent challenges to the welfare state to be combined with "micro" perspectives focusing on the dynamic and multidimensional nature of social exclusion. We make use of Irish EU-SILC 2005 data in developing a life cycle schema and considering its relationship to a range of indicators of social exclusion. At the European level renewed interest in the life cycle concept is associated with the increasing emphasis on the distinction between "new" and "old" social risks and the notion that the former are more "individualised". Inequality and poverty rather than being differentially distributed between social classes are thought to vary between phases in the average work life. Our findings suggest the "death of social class" thesis is greatly overblown. A more accurate appreciation of the importance of new and old social risks requires that we systematically investigate the manner in which factors such as social class and the life cycle interact.

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.

Welfare regimes and household income packaging in the European Union

This paper uses harmonized data for the member states of the European Union to analyse household income packaging from a 'welfare regimes' perspective. Using data from the third wave of the ECHP, it looks at how the role of welfare transfers in the income package varies across countries and welfare regimes, and assesses whether this is consistent with the predictions of welfare regime theory, having first elaborated some specific hypotheses in that regard. It finds that when one focuses on averages across countries categorized into regimes, many of these hypotheses about the role of transfers are in broad terms borne out by the evidence. However, when one focuses on individual countries rather than regime averages the picture is a good deal more complex and consistency with the range of hypotheses more limited. It is essential that this variation across countries is taken into account in interpreting and using welfare regime theory and typologies.

Understanding the mismatch between income poverty and deprivation: A dynamic comparative analysis

In this paper we seek to shed light on the mismatch between income poverty and deprivation through a comparative and dynamic analysis of both forms of disadvantage. By extending analysis over five waves of the ECHP we are able to take into account the key dimensions characterizing poverty profiles overtime. Our conclusions turn out to be remarkably stable across countries. While persistent income poverty measures are systematically related to both cross-sectional and longitudinal measures of deprivation, the scale of mismatch is no less at the latter than at the former level. There is some evidence that although rates of volatility for income and deprivation measures are roughly similar, the processes of change themselves are somewhat different. Further light is shed on the underlying processes by cross-classifying the forms of deprivation. Those exposed to both types of deprivation are differentiated from others in terms of need and resource variables. Conclusions relating to the socio-demographic influences on risk levels are influenced by choice and combination of indicators. The results of our analysis confirm the need to devote considerably more attention than heretofore to the analysis of multi-dimensional poverty dynamics.