IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v48y2014i3p1337-1346.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deprived or not deprived? Comparing the measured extent of material deprivation using the UK government’s and the Poverty and Social Exclusion surveys’ method of calculating material deprivation

Author

Listed:
  • Morag Treanor

    ()

Abstract

Poverty can either be measured directly, through standards of living such as material deprivation, or indirectly through resources available, usually income. Research shows that the optimum measure of poverty combines these methods, a fact that the UK government took cognisance of in its tripartite measure of child poverty. For use in a birth cohort study, two methods of calculating material deprivation were tested: the method used by the UK government taken from the Family Resources Survey (FRS), and the methods used in the Poverty and Social Exclusion (PSE) study at Bristol University. Results show that the former measure, compared to the latter measure, underestimates the depth and extent of material deprivation among families with young children in Scotland. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Morag Treanor, 2014. "Deprived or not deprived? Comparing the measured extent of material deprivation using the UK government’s and the Poverty and Social Exclusion surveys’ method of calculating material deprivation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1337-1346, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:3:p:1337-1346
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-013-9838-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-013-9838-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Desai, Meghnad & Shah, Anup, 1988. "An Econometric Approach to the Measurement of Poverty," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(3), pages 505-522, September.
    2. Steve McKay, 2004. "Poverty or preference: what do 'consensual deprivation indicators' really mean?," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 25(2), pages 201-223, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:3:p:1337-1346. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.