IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hdl/improv/1605.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can reference budgets be used as a poverty line?

Author

Listed:
  • Tess Penne
  • Irene Cussó Parcerisas
  • Lauri Mäkinen
  • Bérénice Storms
  • Tim Goedemé

Abstract

The most common indicator to measure and compare the extent of poverty within and across European countries is the well-known at-risk-of-poverty indicator. Although the relative income-based measure is widely used, over time it has been the target of considerable criticism. In this paper, reference budgets are introduced as a valuable complementary indicator, since they illustrate the cost of baskets of goods and services that are essential to participate adequately in society. When constructed in a comparable way, they show which standard of living can be achieved at the level of the at-risk-of-poverty threshold in different countries, taking account of out-of-pocket costs of public goods and services. In this paper, we draw on data from cross-nationally comparable reference budgets in three reference cities (Antwerp, Barcelona and Helsinki) to illustrate how RBs can be used to evaluate other poverty indicators and to construct complementary poverty thresholds. At the same time, we explain that there are important challenges to address, including (1) the limited number of specific household types for which reference budgets are developed, (2) problems of robustness and comparability, and (3) the lack of important information in the EU-SILC microdata for our purposes. Acknowledging these limitations, this paper provides a first illustrative attempt to estimate of the number of people with a disposable income below the RB threshold for densely populated areas in Belgium, Finland and Spain.The results show how the at-risk-of-poverty threshold does not represent the same level of living standard across EU Member States, and probably underestimates the out-of-pocket cost of an adequate living standard in Spain. First estimates indicate that families renting on the private market, families with children and young people are relatively worse off when poverty is measured with the reference budget indicator as compared to the at-risk-of-poverty indicator. If these results are confirmed in future research, this may have important implications for anti-poverty policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Tess Penne & Irene Cussó Parcerisas & Lauri Mäkinen & Bérénice Storms & Tim Goedemé, 2016. "Can reference budgets be used as a poverty line?," ImPRovE Working Papers 16/05, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
  • Handle: RePEc:hdl:improv:1605
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.centrumvoorsociaalbeleid.be/ImPRovE/Working%20Papers/ImPRovE%20WP%201605_2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aaberge, Rolf & Langørgen, Audun & Mogstad, Magne & Østensen, Marit, 2008. "The Impact of Local Public Services and Geographical Cost of Living Differences on Poverty Estimates," IZA Discussion Papers 3686, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    2. Bruce D. Meyer & James X. Sullivan, 2003. "Measuring the Well-Being of the Poor Using Income and Consumption," NBER Working Papers 9760, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Mithen, Johanna & Aitken, Zoe & Ziersch, Anne & Kavanagh, Anne M., 2015. "Inequalities in social capital and health between people with and without disabilities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 26-35.
    4. Atkinson, A B, 1992. "Measuring Poverty and Differences in Family Composition," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 59(233), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Bruce D. Meyer & Nikolas Mittag, 2015. "Using Linked Survey and Administrative Data to Better Measure Income: Implications for Poverty, Program Effectiveness and Holes in the Safety Net," Upjohn Working Papers and Journal Articles 15-242, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    6. Irwin Garfinkel & Lee Rainwater & Timothy M. Smeeding, 2006. "A re-examination of welfare states and inequality in rich nations: How in-kind transfers and indirect taxes change the story," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 897-919.
    7. repec:aia:ginidp:dp53 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Callan, Tim & Keane, Claire, 2009. "Non-cash Benefits and the Distribution of Economic Welfare," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 40(1), pages 49-71.
    9. Martin Ravallion & Shaohua Chen, 2011. "Weakly Relative Poverty," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1251-1261, November.
    10. Eddy van Doorslaer & Xander Koolman & Andrew M. Jones, 2004. "Explaining income-related inequalities in doctor utilisation in Europe," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(7), pages 629-647.
    11. Aaberge, Rolf & Bhuller, Manudeep & Langørgen, Audun & Mogstad, Magne, 2010. "The distributional impact of public services when needs differ," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(9-10), pages 549-562, October.
    12. François Marical & Marco Mira d’Ercole & Maria Vaalavuo & Gerlinde Verbist, 2008. "Publicly provided services and the distribution of households' economic resources," OECD Journal: Economic Studies, OECD Publishing, vol. 2008(1), pages 1-38.
    13. Atkinson, Tony & Cantillon, Bea & Marlier, Eric & Nolan, Brian, 2002. "Social Indicators: The EU and Social Inclusion," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199253494.
    14. Peter Saunders, 1998. "Using Budget Standards to Assess the Well-Being of Families," Discussion Papers 0093, University of New South Wales, Social Policy Research Centre.
    15. Brewer, Mike & O'Dea, Cormac, 2012. "Measuring living standards with income and consumption: evidence from the UK," ISER Working Paper Series 2012-05, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    16. Joachim R. Frick & Markus M. Grabka, 2003. "Imputed Rent and Income Inequality: A Decomposition Analysis for Great Britain, West Germany and the U.S," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 49(4), pages 513-537, December.
    17. Virginia Hernanz & Franck Malherbet & Michele Pellizzari, 2004. "Take-Up of Welfare Benefits in OECD Countries: A Review of the Evidence," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 17, OECD Publishing.
    18. Hernández-Quevedo, Cristina & Jones, Andrew M. & López-Nicolás, Angel & Rice, Nigel, 2006. "Socioeconomic inequalities in health: A comparative longitudinal analysis using the European Community Household Panel," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(5), pages 1246-1261, September.
    19. Alari Paulus & Holly Sutherland & Panos Tsakloglou, 2010. "The distributional impact of in-kind public benefits in European countries," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 243-266.
    20. Joris Ghysels & Wim Van Lancker, 2010. "The unequal benefits of family activation: an analysis of the social distribution of family policy among families with young children," Working Papers 1008, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    21. Frick, Joachim R. & Grabka, Markus M. & Smeeding, Timothy M. & Tsakloglou, Panos, 2010. "Distributional Effects of Imputed Rents in Five European Countries," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - German National Library of Economics, pages 167-179.
    22. Morris, Stephen & Sutton, Matthew & Gravelle, Hugh, 2005. "Inequity and inequality in the use of health care in England: an empirical investigation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 1251-1266, March.
    23. Verbist, G. (Gerlinde) & Matsaganis, M. (Manos), 2012. "GINI DP 53: The Redistributive Capacity of Services in the EU," GINI Discussion Papers 53, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    24. Tom Sefton, 2002. "Recent Changes in the Distribution of the Social Wage," CASE Papers case62, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    25. Wim Van Lancker, 2013. "Putting the child-centred investment strategy to the test: Evidence for the EU27," Working Papers 1301, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    26. Andrea Brandolini, 2006. "Measurement of Income Distribution in Supranational Entities: The Case of the European Union," LIS Working papers 452, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    27. Mike Brewer & Cormac O'Dea, 2012. "Measuring living standards with income and consumption: evidence from the UK," IFS Working Papers W12/12, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    28. Coulter, Fiona A E & Cowell, Frank A & Jenkins, Stephen P, 1992. "Equivalence Scale Relativities and the Extent of Inequality and Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(414), pages 1067-1082, September.
    29. Asghar Zaidi & Tania Burchardt, 2005. "Comparing Incomes When Needs Differ: Equivalization For The Extra Costs Of Disability In The U.K," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 51(1), pages 89-114, March.
    30. Bargain, Olivier & Donni, Olivier, 2012. "Expenditure on children: A Rothbarth-type method consistent with scale economies and parents' bargaining," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 792-813.
    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. repec:spr:chinre:v:11:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s12187-016-9429-4 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. András Gábos & Tim Goedemé, 2016. "The Europe 2020 social inclusion indicators: main conclusions of the ImPRovE project on validity, methodological robustness and interrelationships," ImPRovE Working Papers 16/13, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    reference budgets; at-risk-of-poverty indicator; poverty; social participation; social inclusion;

    JEL classification:

    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

    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:hdl:improv:1605. 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: (Tim Goedemé). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/csbuabe.html .

    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.