Poverty In Britain In 1904: An Early Social Survey Rediscovered
Until now there have been no national estimates of the extent of poverty in Britain at the turn of the 20th century. This paper introduces a newly-discovered household budget data set for the early 1900s that is more representative of urban working households in Britain in the period than any other existing record, although not without deficiencies. We use these data to estimate urban poverty among working families in the British Isles in 1904. Applying Bowley’s poverty line we find that about fifteen percent of people in urban working class households had income insufficient to meet minimum needs. This is close to Rowntree’s estimate of primary poverty for York 1899 and in the range that Bowley found in Northern towns in 1912-3. This average masks a heavy concentration of poverty among the unskilled and those with large families.
|Date of creation:||Jul 2007|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Jubilee Building G08, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9SL|
Phone: +44 (0) 1273 678889
Fax: +44 (0)1273 873715
Web page: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/economics
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Lancaster, Geoffrey & Ray, Ranjan, 2002.
"International Poverty Comparisons on Unit Record Data of Developing and Developed Countries,"
Australian Economic Papers,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 129-139, June.
- Lancaster, G. & Ray, R., 2000. "International Poverty Comparisons on Unit Record Data of Developing and Developed Countries," Papers 2000-1, Tasmania - Department of Economics.
- Ian Gazeley, 1989. "The cost of living for urban workers in late Victorian and Edwardian Britain," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 42(2), pages 207-221, 05.
- Timothy J. Hatton & Roy >. Bailey, 2000. "Seebohm Rowntree and the postwar poverty puzzle," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 53(3), pages 517-543, 08.