Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and
main factors behind
International benchmarking and key challenges for Member States
András GábosTARKI Social Research Institute
Child poverty and child well-being: better monitoring for better policies
Brussels, 26 November 2009
International benchmarking and key challenges for each Member State
To assess the performance of countries in the field of child poverty (and well-being) relative to The national average/adult population The EU-average
Following the EU Task Force (2008) methodology
Four dimesions: 1 on outcome side and 3 on determinant side Child poverty risk outcomes Joblessness In-work poverty Impact of social transfers
Other aspects (material deprivarion, housing, non-material well-being) are also dealt with in the Study
Poverty among children, in general, is higher than that of the overall population
Every fifth child is at-risk-of-poverty in the EU-27Child poverty is specifically high in the two newest MSs: BG and ROMuch higher than the population average: CZ, HULower than the population average in: DK, DE, EE, CY, SI, FI
-----------------------------------------The severity of poverty is more similar to the population as a wholeRelatively high in: BG, RO, Baltic StatesRelatively low in: FR, CY, FI, SEPositive correlation between extent and severity, and also between extent and persistence
At-risk-of-poverty rates: overall population and children, EU-27, 2007
Source: EUROSTAT
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
DK FI SI SE CY NL DE AT FR CZ BE SK EE HU MT IE LU LV PT LT UK EL PL ES IT BG RO
At-risk-of-poverty rate for children At-risk-of-poverty rate for overall population
EU-27 average for children
High persistence: LT, PT, ES, PL, IT, but not in the UK
Almost 1 children in 10 in the EU lives in jobless households
Reasons for joblessness can be found on both the supply and demand side
Lack of or inedaquate human capital of parents
Counter-incentives of income supports
Shortage of childcare Regional and/or ethnic
segregation
The risk of poverty among children is inevitably linked to the underlying structure of the households in which they liveChildren in jobless households are likely to live in lone parent families: BE, EE, IE and the UKChildren in large families are affected in HU
Share of children (0-17) and adults (18-59 – not students) living in jobless households, EU-27*, 2007 (%)
Source: EU LFS*No data avalaible for Sweden
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
SI LU EL CY FI DK PT ES AT IT NL EE CZ LV LT FR MT EU-27
PL DE RO SK BG IE BE HU UK
Children (0-17) Adults (18-59 - not students)
Sensitivity of risk of poverty rate to alternative measures of low work intensity (based on EU-SILC)
Source: own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007.Note. BG, MT and RO are not included.
64
53
6668
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
WI=0 WI<0.25 WI<0.33 WI<0.50
At-
risk
-of-
po
ver
ty r
ate
of c
hild
ren
(%)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Sh
are a
mo
ng
all ch
ildre
n (%
)
At-risk-of-poverty rate (%) Share among all children (%)
Most of children live in households where at least one person is in full-time employment
Similar share of children in in-work (WI>=0.50) households across countries
Large variation in the risk of poverty
High in Southern countries, Baltic States, LU, PL
Reasons behind Low wages Insufficient labour
supply of parents (shortage of childcare, social norms, etc.)
Only one parent in employment
Part-time workSource: own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007*No data available for analysis for BG, MT and RO
In-work poverty (WI>=0.50) in the European Union*
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
BE DK FI CZ SI IE DE SE FR CY NL AT HU SK UK EU-25*
EE LT PT LV LU PL IT EL ES
At-
ris
k-o
f-p
ov
ert
y r
ate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Sh
are
of c
hild
ren
in in
-wo
rk (W
I>=
0.50) h
ou
se
ho
lds
At-risk-of-poverty Share of children in in-work (WI>=0.50) households
Children in one-earner households are at four times higher risk than those in two-earner households in the EU
High share, high risk: EL, ES, ITLow share, high risk: LV, LT, PL, PTIn general, having both parents employed, is the best way of avoiding the risk of povertyTwo-earner model: Nordic countries, CY, SI1+1/2 earner model: NL and at some extent in DE (also SE, AT)Where the incidence of part-time employment of mothers is high, their children face comparably low risk of poverty as their peers in two-earner households do
Children in one-earner households (WI=0.50) in the European Union*
Source: own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007*No data available for analysis for BG, MT and RO
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
DE IE FI CZ HU SE BE AT DK FR SK EE NL LU EU-25*
CY SI UK EL PL LV LT IT ES PT
At-
risk
-of-
po
vert
y ra
te o
f ch
ildre
n in
WI=
0.50
ho
sueh
old
s (%
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Sh
are of ch
ildren
in W
I=0.50 ho
useh
old
s (%)
At-risk-of-poverty Share of children in WI=0.50 households
Social transfers reduce the proportion of children at risk of poverty by 42% in the EU as a whole
The effectiveness of transfers reflects both the scale of expenditure level and the extent of targetingHighest impact in: DK, FI, SE, as well as in DE, FR, HU, AT, SILowest: EL, ES, ITSerious limitations of the EU-SILC
No behavioural responses are considered
No full account of taxes and social contributions
No account of transfers via the tax system
Hard to identify child-contingent payments
Effects are likely to be over-estimated
Source: own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007*No data available for analysis for BG, MT and RO
Distribution towards children at-risk-of-poverty and the effectiveness of social transfers (excl. pensions), EU*
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
IT LV ES EE LT EL HU AT LU SE EU-25*
PT SK PL CY IE FR SI DE UK FI BE NL CZ DK
Sha
re o
f soc
ial t
rans
fers
rec
eive
d by
chi
ldre
n at
-ris
k-of
-pov
erty
re
lativ
e to
thei
r sh
are
amon
g al
l chi
ldre
n
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70 The difference between at-risk-of-poverty rate of children before
and after social transfers (percentage points)
Distribution Effectiveness
Relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants
Group A: good performers in all dimensions
Child poverty risk outcomes Joblessness
In-work poverty
Impact of social
transfers
Group A FI + + + + + + + + + + +
CY + + + + + + + –
DK + + + + + + + + +
SI + + + + + + + + +
SE + + + + + + + + + +
FR + + + + + + +
NL + + + +
AT + + + + + +
Relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants
Child poverty risk
outcomes JoblessnessIn-work
poverty
Impact of social
transfers
Group B
DE + + – + + + + +
BE + – + + + +
SK – – + –
EE – – + –
CZ – – + + +
IE – – – + + +
HU – – – + + +
UK – – – – + +
Group B: joblessness is key challenge
Relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants
Child poverty risk
outcomes JoblessnessIn-work
poverty
Impact of social
transfers
Group C
LV – – – –
LT – – – – – –
Group D
PT – + – – –
LU – + + + – – –
EL – – + + + – – – – –
PL – – – + – – –
ES – – + – – – – – –
IT – – – + + – – – – –
Group C: relatively bad performance in all dimensions Group D: in-work poverty is key challenge
Thank you for your attention!
www.tarki.hu
Sensitivity of risk of poverty rate to alternative measures of low work intensity (based on EU-SILC)
32.951.860.267.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
WI=0 WI=0.01-0.24 WI=0.25-0.32 WI=0.33-0.49
At-
ris
k-o
f-p
ov
ert
y r
ate
of
ch
ildre
n (
%)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Sh
are
am
on
g a
ll ch
ildre
n (%
)
At-risk-of-poverty rate (%) Share amongf all children (%)
Probit estimates on marginal effects for child poverty
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
DK SE BE FR FI NL CZ EE AT SI DE IE CY UK LT ES EL IT PT HU SK LV PL LU
Education of parents: low WI <0.5
The risk of poverty living with a mother in part-time emplyoment relative to those with full-time employed mothers
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Share of children with mother in part-time employment
Re
lati
ve
ris
k o
f p
ov
ert
y o
f c
hil
dre
n w
ith
mo
the
r in
pa
rt-i
tme
e
mp
loy
me
nt
SI
HU LT
LV
CYFI
PTEL
SKPL
EE
CZ
ES
IT
DK
AT
IEFR
EU-25*BE
SELU
DE
UK
NL
