IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sus/susewp/09316.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Poor and the Poorest, fifty years on: Evidence from British Household Expenditure Surveys of the 1950s and 1960s

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Gazeley

    (Department of History, University of Sussex)

  • Hector Gutierrez Rufrancos

    (Department of Economics, University of Sussex)

  • Andrew Newell

    (Department of Economics, University of Sussex and IZA, Bonn)

  • Kevin Reynolds

    (Department of History, University of Sussex)

  • Rebecca Searle

    (Department of History, University of Sussex)

Abstract

We re-explore Abel-Smith and Townsend’s landmark study of poverty in early post WW2 Britain. They found a large increase in poverty between 1953-4 and 1960, a period of relatively strong economic growth. Our re-examination is a first exploitation of the data extracted from the recent digitisation of the Ministry of Labour’s Enquiry into Household Expenditure in 1953-4. First we closely replicate their results. We find that Abel-Smith and Townsend’s method generated a greater rise in poverty than other reasonable methods. Using contemporary standard poverty lines, we find that the relative poverty rate grew only a little at most, and the absolute poverty rate fell, between 1953-4 and 1961, as might be expected in a period of rising real incomes and steady inequality. We also extend the poverty rate time series of Goodman and Webb (1995) back to 1953-4.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Gazeley & Hector Gutierrez Rufrancos & Andrew Newell & Kevin Reynolds & Rebecca Searle, 2016. "The Poor and the Poorest, fifty years on: Evidence from British Household Expenditure Surveys of the 1950s and 1960s," Working Paper Series 09316, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
  • Handle: RePEc:sus:susewp:09316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/economics/documents/wps-93-2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alissa Goodman & Steven Webb, 1995. "The distribution of UK household expenditure, 1979-92," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 16(3), pages 55-80, August.
    2. Peter Scott, 2008. "Did owner‐occupation lead to smaller families for interwar working‐class households?1," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 61(1), pages 99-124, February.
    3. Bruce D. Meyer & James X. Sullivan, 2012. "Identifying the Disadvantaged: Official Poverty, Consumption Poverty, and the New Supplemental Poverty Measure," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 111-136, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gazeley, Ian & Newell, Andrew T. & Reynolds, Kevin & Rufrancos, Hector Gutierrez, 2017. "What Really Happened to British Inequality in the Early 20th Century? Evidence from National Household Expenditure Surveys 1890–1961," IZA Discussion Papers 11071, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:sus:susedp:9316 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Ian Gazeley & Hector Gutierrez Rufrancos & Andrew Newell & Kevin Reynolds & Rebecca Searle, 2017. "The poor and the poorest, 50 years on: evidence from British Household Expenditure Surveys of the 1950s and 1960s," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 455-474, February.
    3. Ian Gazeley & Hector Gutierrez Rufrancos & Andrew Newell & Kevin Reynolds & Rebecca Searle, 2016. "The Poor and the Poorest, fifty years on: Evidence from British Household Expenditure Surveys of the 1950s and 1960s," Working Paper Series 9316, Department of Economics, University of Sussex.
    4. Kang, Ji Young & Park, Sojung & Ahn, Seoyeon, 2022. "The effect of social pension on consumption among older adults in Korea," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 22(C).
    5. Peter Scott, 2009. "Mr Drage, Mr Everyman, and the creation of a mass market for domestic furniture in interwar Britain1," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 62(4), pages 802-827, November.
    6. Marianne Bitler & Hilary Hoynes & Elira Kuka, 2017. "Child Poverty, the Great Recession, and the Social Safety Net in the United States," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(2), pages 358-389, March.
    7. Pinaki Das & Bibek Paria & Shama Firdaush, 2021. "Juxtaposing Consumption Poverty and Multidimensional Poverty: A Study in Indian Context," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 469-501, January.
    8. Felkner, John S. & Lee, Hyun & Shaikh, Sabina & Kolata, Alan & Binford, Michael, 2022. "The interrelated impacts of credit access, market access and forest proximity on livelihood strategies in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    9. Jonathan Fisher & Bradley L. Hardy, 2023. "Money matters: consumption variability across the income distribution," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(3), pages 275-298, September.
    10. Henderson, Heath & Follett, Lendie, 2022. "Targeting social safety net programs on human capabilities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    11. Filandri, Marianna & Pasqua, Silvia & Struffolino, Emanuela, 2020. "Being Working Poor or Feeling Working Poor? The Role of Work Intensity and Job Stability for Subjective Poverty," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 147(3), pages 781-803.
    12. Marianne Bitler & Hilary Hoynes, 2016. "The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same? The Safety Net and Poverty in the Great Recession," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(S1), pages 403-444.
    13. Burkhauser, Richard V. & Corinth, Kevin & Elwell, James & Larrimore, Jeff, 2019. "Evaluating the Success of President Johnson's War on Poverty: Revisiting the Historical Record Using a Full-Income Poverty Measure," IZA Discussion Papers 12855, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Nicolai Suppa, 2016. "Comparing Monetary and Multidimensional Poverty in Germany," OPHI Working Papers ophiwp103_1.pdf, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    15. François Maniquet & Dirk Neumann, 2021. "Well-Being, Poverty, and Labor Income Taxation: Theory and Application to Europe and the United States," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 276-310, May.
    16. Stefanie Huber, 2022. "SHE canÕt afford it and HE doesnÕt want it: The gender gap in the COVID-19 consumption response," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-029/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    17. Debra L. Brucker & Sophie Mitra & Navena Chaitoo & Joseph Mauro, 2015. "More Likely to Be Poor Whatever the Measure: Working-Age Persons with Disabilities in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(1), pages 273-296, March.
    18. Ingvild Almås & Timothy K.M. Beatty & Thomas F. Crossley, 2018. "Lost in Translation: What do Engel Curves Tell us about the Cost of Living?," CESifo Working Paper Series 6886, CESifo.
    19. J. Trent Alexander & Robert Andersen & Peter W. Cookson Jr. & Kathryn Edin & Jonathan Fisher & David B. Grusky & Marybeth Mattingly & Charles Varner, 2017. "A Qualitative Census of Rural and Urban Poverty," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 672(1), pages 143-161, July.
    20. Debra L. Brucker & Sophie Mitra & Navena Chaitoo & Joseph Mauro, 2014. "More likely to be poor whatever the measure: persons with disabilities in the U.S," Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series dp2014-01, Fordham University, Department of Economics.
    21. Achille Lemmi & Donatella Grassi & Alessandra Masi & Nicoletta Pannuzi & Andrea Regoli, 2019. "Methodological Choices and Data Quality Issues for Official Poverty Measures: Evidences from Italy," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 299-330, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    poverty; inequality; 1950s; Britain;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • N14 - Economic History - - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics; Industrial Structure; Growth; Fluctuations - - - Europe: 1913-
    • N34 - Economic History - - Labor and Consumers, Demography, Education, Health, Welfare, Income, Wealth, Religion, and Philanthropy - - - Europe: 1913-
    • O15 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Economic Development: Human Resources; Human Development; Income Distribution; Migration

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sus:susewp:09316. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsusuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.