Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Using the FRS to measure material deprivation
in families with children
Stephen McKay
University of Birmingham
FRS User Group
10 June 2010
Measuring deprivation
• Indirect, Income-based measures– HBAI, poverty series
• Direct measures, including indicators of material deprivation– Included on FRS since 2004/05
Recent policy focus => interest in non-financial measures, and the situation of the very poorest?
Change in child deprivation (HBAI)
Deprivation indicators
• Townsend (1979), survey in 1968-69– Critique by Piachaud (1981)
• Breadline Britain surveys, and related studies– 1983; 1990; 1999; & 2002-3 in NI– Have this OR don’t have & don’t want OR
don’t have and cannot afford it
• Incorporation as a DWP measure for child poverty (e.g. in Child Poverty Act 2010).
Week’s holiday away from home: trends over time
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Townsend1968-69
PSE -1999 PSE -NI,2002-3
DWP 04-05 DWP 07-08
Adult
Child
Selection of questions for FRS
• 1999 PSE Study provided information on a very wide range of indicators (Gordon et al 2000)
• Study in 2003 identified a shorter set that could do most (~92%) of the same job – Set of 11 adult/family questions– Set of 10 child-focused questions
• Both sets included in DWP material deprivation measure
– Question on arrears on various commitments• Not part of the DWP measure
• Questions recently being revised (5 year time horizon)
DWP approach
• Merging of adult and child data into a single index
• Summed according to prevalence (more weight to items that more people have) rather than actual number lacked– Weights now change each year, originally
fixed at baseline year
• A threshold set as indicating deprivation (score of 25 on a 0-100 scale)
FRS data structure – deprivation questions are at ‘benunit’ level
Household [SERNUM]
‘Family’ [SERNUM. BENUNIT]
‘Family’ [SERNUM. BENUNIT]
‘Adult’ [SERNUM. BENUNIT, PERSON]
‘Child’ [SERNUM. BENUNIT, PERSON]
‘Job’ [SERNUM. BENUNIT, PERSON, JOBTYPE]
So, results can be for households, families or individuals (or adults or children). Many other files for pensions, housing: N=26 files.
+
Number of items cannot afford
42
128 8 7 6 5
8
59
21
105 2 1 1 1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
None 1 2 3 4 5 6 7+
Adults
Children
Adults deprived ‘before’ children (number of family units)
Children not deprived
Children lacking 2+
things
Adults not deprived
4.4m 0.14m
Adults lacking 3+ things
1.46m 1.36m
Deepening definition of material deprivation among families – lone parenthood
7
14.2
24.9
38.2
44.5
53.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 1,2 3,4 5,6 7,8,9 10+
N items cannot afford
Lone parent families
Deepening definition of material deprivation among families – DDA disability
9.8
15.217.2
23.1
29.2
34.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 1,2 3,4 5,6 7,8,9 10+
N items cannot afford
Has a DDA disability
Deepening deprivation – number of children
33 34 33 34 31 29
48 46 43 38 37 35
15 16 1720 21
21
4 5 9 12 13 18
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
0 1,2 3,4 5,6 7,8,9 10+
N items cannot afford
4+
3
2
1
Other significant differences
• High risks of deprivatoin– Workless or unemployed– Child with a health problem (maybe partly
reflecting larger families)– Living in London, West Midlands, North-West– Not married
• Strong link to arrears on household commitments
Logits on most deprived – selected coefficients (odds ratios), all p<0.01
Worst 30% Worst 20% Worst 10%4+ child (cf 2) 2.8 2.6 2.3Workless (cf FT emp)
3.4 3.9 5.0
Unemployed 6.5 6.7 8.5
Pa, Ba 4.1 3.5 4.2
DDA 2.2 2.1 1.9
Pseudo-R2 0.32 0.30 0.26
Some conclusions
• Excellent source for tracking material deprivation among families– Time series since 2004-05, other studies tend
to be ad hoc, or fewer indicators (BHPS)– Limited exploitation of child vs adult
measures, and of the arrears indicators– Good starting sample sizes
• Possible to focus in on the most deprived, or look at a wider group, and to combine with income
