Search

Concerns about the quality of housing feature prominently in academic and policy discussion on housing, yet there is little agreement about how housing deprivation should be measured or monitored. In empirical studies, measures of housing deprivation are typically examined for one of two purposes—either to compare incidences of housing quality problems for different groups, which typically leads to an examination of performance of different measures of housing deprivation, or as dependent variables to examine competing theories about what explains cross-national variation in such problems, which typically ignores these measurement considerations. Our paper seeks to analyse measurement and theory jointly, focussing in particular on the EU's severe housing deprivation measure, and its subcomponents—overcrowding and housing conditions problems. In descriptive analysis, we show that the two components of the severe housing deprivation measure are weakly related and pattern differently across nations and that the aggregation rule of the main measure has a substantial influence on observed incidences of this problem. We subsequently construct multi-level regression-based models and demonstrate that the two components have quite different determinants. Our paper has implications for the measurement of severe housing deprivation in Europe, for theories that seek to account for differences in housing outcomes, and for policy that seeks to tackle housing deprivation problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we evaluate income distributions in four European countries (Austria, Italy, Spain and Hungary) using two complementary approaches: a standard approach based on reported incomes in survey data, and a microsimulation approach, where taxes and benefits are simulated. These two approaches may be expected to generate slightly different results, particularly in respect of individuals on lower incomes, because benefit receipts tend to be under-reported in survey data, and over-estimated in microsimulation procedures. However, we find that the two approaches do in fact produce reasonably consistent results, in terms of both inequality measures and poverty rates. To the extent that the results differ, we explore the reasons why these differences arise, and suggest directions for future research, in which each approach may inform improvements in the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we seek to put Irish poverty rates in a comparative European context. We do so in a context whereby the Irish economic boom and EU enlargement have led to increasing reservations being expressed regarding rates deriving from the EU ‘at risk of poverty’ indicator. Our comparative analysis reports findings for both overall levels of poverty and variation by household reference person characteristics for this indicator and a consistent poverty measure for Ireland, the UK and five smaller European countries spanning a range of welfare regimes. Our findings demonstrate that the distinctiveness of Ireland’s situation lies not in the overall levels of poverty per se but in the very high penalties associated with being in a household where the household reference person is a lone parent or excluded from the labour market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People's explanations for why some individuals are poor are of great importance to a comprehensive study of poverty. This cross-cultural study aims to profile differences and similarities in perceptions of the causes of poverty within and between 28 European Union countries. Multilevel models were estimated to allow two levels of analysis to be studied simultaneously, namely the individual and the country, and a multilevel latent class model was selected with six classes of countries and seven classes of individuals. Despite the generalization of the social explanations of poverty at the individual level, some groups also blame the poor for their situation. Individuals in greater economic difficulty attributed more social causes to poverty than those who were better off financially and socially. At the country level, the most developed countries believe poverty has individualistic and fatalistic causes, whereas the least developed countries explain poverty based on the injustices of society. We found that this methodology permits a deeper and richer analysis than traditional clustering methods as it accounts for different nested levels of analysis simultaneously. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current poverty rate and the persistent poverty rate are both included in the European Union's (EU's) portfolio of primary indicators of social inclusion. We show that there is a near-linear relationship between these two indicators across EU countries drawing on empirical analysis of EU-SILC and ECHP data. Using a prototypical model of poverty dynamics, we explain how the near-linear relationship arises and show how the model can be used to predict persistent poverty rates from current poverty information. In the light of the results, we discuss whether the EU's persistent poverty measure and the design of EU-SILC longitudinal data collection require modification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]