1 / 22

I ndicators of child poverty and child well - being in the EU

The use of child and youth well-being indicators in child and youth policy First Benelux-Nordic expert meeting on child and youth policy Amsterdam , 13-15 Dec ember 2009 – The Netherlands Youth Institute. I ndicators of child poverty and child well - being in the EU

licia
Download Presentation

I ndicators of child poverty and child well - being in the EU

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The use of child and youth well-being indicators in child and youth policy First Benelux-Nordic expert meeting on child and youth policy Amsterdam, 13-15December 2009– The Netherlands Youth Institute Indicators of child poverty and child well-being in the EU to assist evidence-based policies in the Member States István György Tóth – András Gábos TARKI Social Research Institute

  2. Outline • The project and its context • Domains of child poverty and well-being • Methods of exploring and selecting indicators • Suggestions • Conclusions

  3. The „Study on child poverty” project Commissioned by: DG Employment of the European Commission, Unit E2 Consortium: Tárki Social Research Institute, Budapest Applica sprl, Brussels Steering Committe: Terry Ward (chair) Applica Michael F. Förster OECD Hugh Frazer National Univ. of Ireland Petra Hoelscher UNICEF Eric Marlier CEPS/INSTEAD Holly Sutherland University of Essex István György Tóth TÁRKI

  4. Main tasks carried out within the project Task 1. „An in-depthempirical analysis of child povertyand the related key challenges for each Member State, starting from the analytical framework developed up by the EU Task-Force report.” Task 2. „Anassessment of the effectiveness of policiesfor combating child poverty and promoting social inclusion among children and the identification of policy mixes that seem to be most effective in tackling the specific factors underlying child poverty.” Task 3. „The formulation ofrecommendations for a limited set of indicatorsand breakdowns that are most relevant from a child perspective and best reflect the multidimensional nature of child poverty and well-being in the European Union.”

  5. The EU policy context of the project • 2005: MarchEU Presidency Conclusions and Luxembourg Presidency initiative on “Taking forward the EU Social Inclusion Process” • 2006: Commission’s Communication ‘Towards an EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child, Communication from the Commission’ • Since 2006: streamlining of Social OMC, more systematic attention to children and reports and recommendations on tackling child poverty and social exclusion produced under PROGRESS by independent experts and anti-poverty networks • 2007: EU Task-Force on Child poverty and Child Well-Being • 2008: formal adoptionof the report and their incorporation into the EU acquis, National Strategy Reports of child poverty • 2009: „Study on child poverty and child well-being” • 2010: planned publication of a Commission staff working paper on child poverty.

  6. How does this project add to the process? • Contributes to developing tools to regularlymonitorchild poverty and child well-being in the Member States • It aims at filling in the Social OMC „reserved slot”for child well being indicator(s) • Provides recommendations forimproving data infrastructure Starting point: Related projects:

  7. Domains of child poverty and well-being(according to the EU Task-Force report) • A. Material well-being:factors relating to the materialresourcesof the household that the child has access to or lacks during his/her development, which include indicators of • (A1) income, • (A2) material deprivation, • (A3) housing, • (A4) labour market attachment. • B. Non-material dimensions of child well-being, which may reflect on both the resources a child has access or lacks during his/her development and outcomesin different stages of this development: • (B1) education, • (B2) health, • (B3) exposure to risk and risk behaviour, • (B4) social participation and relationships, family environment, • (B5) local environment.

  8. Supporting multi-dimensional and multi-sectoral policy mixes • Distinctions betweenresource basedmeasures of the risk of child poverty (likeincome poverty and material or housing deprivation) and forward-looking indicators of child outcomes(like education and health status) • To reflect the policy need of breaking theintergenerational transmissionof poverty, life cycle and poverty persistence are important aspects • Children: 0-17 (broad) age group. However,internal age breakdownsare necessitated by mixture of theoretical (developmental, child psychology) and practical considerations (related to institutional arrangements or to data availability) • Special attention to be paid tomigrant statusor belonging to an ethnic minority

  9. In search of additional indicators: tasks completed within the project • a broad basedcollection of potentially relevant indicatorsin each dimension • work onindicator development(customising the selection criteria) • suggestions forbreakdownswherever possible • to fill out an indicator fichefor each and every indicators (example) • statistical validationof all material indicators (where data allows) • identifying data gaps • formulatingsuggestions

  10. Surveyed datasets • The EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions(EU-SILC) • The Labour Force Survey (LFS) • The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) • Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) • Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) • Health Behaviour in School-aged Children survey (HBSC) • European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD)

  11. Selecting child well-being indicators (a)  Tocapture the essence of the problem, we need indicators reflecting - well-being, predicting future prospects - attention to life cycle elements and intergenerational aspects - the level anddistributionof well-being (social gapbetween the poorer and the more well-off) (b)  be robust and statistically validated - assessment of the statistical reliability (level of mesurement error) - cross country variance (c)  provide a sufficient level of cross countries comparability, - with use of internationally applied definitions and data collection standards (d)  be built on available underlying data, be timelyand susceptible to revision (e)  should be responsive to policy interventionsbut not subject to manipulation

  12. Overview of child well-being indicators of OMC and suggested new breakdowns

  13. Overview of child well-being indicators of OMC and suggested new breakdowns (cont’d)

  14. Potential new indicators for monitoring child well-being within social OMC

  15. Potential new indicators for monitoring child well-being within Social OMC (cont’d)

  16. Conclusions (1) Various phases of childhood need to be reflected

  17. … therefore … filling in the “reserved slot” for child well-being is neither feasible nor desirable with only one or two well-being indicators …

  18. Conclusions (2) A slot for one or a set of child well-being indicators (S1-P11) can be filled with an unbalanced set to cover currently inadequately covered in the social OMC …

  19. Conclusions (3) There is a need fora comprehensive set of indicators to monitor child poverty and well-being • The new set could: • reflect most of thechild well-being dimensionsas set out in the EU Task-Force report • incorporate OMC indicators already having a0-17 age breakdown • include a few new material well-being indicators(educational deprivation and childcare) • include new breakdownsfor the already existing indicators • a whole range of non-material indicators • This suggestion • could be well basedon the existing indicator development work • would betimely in 2010(European year against social exclusion)

  20. Conclusions (4-6) There is a need to develop data infrastructure • Context information is neededon child and family related social expenditures, within the OMC reporting routines • Further work on statistical validation necessitates opening up microdata accessto some core datasets on non-material dimensions • Incentives to support substitute or alternative datasets in national contexts is needed

  21. Conclusions (7-11): Further attempts to improve data situation are needed … • … to monitor the social situation of the children of • - migrants • Roma • … to further investigate the potential for utilising nationaladministrative datasets • … to invest inpanel surveys (national or EU level) to facilitate exploring causal relationships • … toinvolve researchersin questionnaire development

  22. Final report will be available at: www.tarki.hu

More Related