slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind International benchmarking and key challenges for Member S PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind International benchmarking and key challenges for Member S

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 16

Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind International benchmarking and key challenges for Member S - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 121 Views
  • Uploaded on

Child poverty and child well-being: better monitoring for better policies Brussels, 26 November 2009. Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind International benchmarking and key challenges for Member States András Gábos TARKI Social Research Institute.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind International benchmarking and key challenges for Member S' - noel


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Child poverty and child well-being:

better monitoring for better policies

Brussels, 26 November 2009

Session 1:

Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind

International benchmarking and key challenges

for Member States

András Gábos

TARKISocial Research Institute

international benchmarking and key challenges for each member state
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
Poverty among children, in general, is higher than that of the overall population
  • Every fifth child is at-risk-of-poverty in the EU-27
  • Child poverty is specifically high in the two newest MSs: BG and RO
  • Much higher than the population average: CZ, HU
  • Lower than the population average in: DK, DE, EE, CY, SI, FI

-----------------------------------------

  • The severity of poverty is more similar to the population as a whole
  • Relatively high in: BG, RO, Baltic States
  • Relatively low in: FR, CY, FI, SE
  • Positive 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

High persistence: LT, PT, ES, PL, IT, but not in the UK

almost 1 children in 10 in the eu lives in jobless households
Almost 1 children in 10 in the EU lives in jobless households

Share of children (0-17) and adults (18-59 – not students) living in jobless households, EU-27*, 2007 (%)

  • 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 live
  • Children in jobless households are likely to live in lone parent families: BE, EE, IE and the UK
  • Children in large families are affected in HU

Source: EU LFS

*No data avalaible for Sweden

sensitivity of risk of poverty rate to alternative measures of low work intensity based on eu silc
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.

most of children live in households where at least one person is in full time employment
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 work

In-work poverty (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

slide7
Children in one-earner households are at four times higher risk than those in two-earner households in the EU

Children in one-earner households (WI=0.50) in the European Union*

  • High share, high risk: EL, ES, IT
  • Low share, high risk: LV, LT, PL, PT
  • In general, having both parents employed, is the best way of avoiding the risk of poverty
  • Two-earner model: Nordic countries, CY, SI
  • 1+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

Source: own calculations based on EU-SILC 2007

*No data available for analysis for BG, MT and RO

social transfers reduce the proportion of children at risk of poverty by 42 in the eu as a whole
Social transfers reduce the proportion of children at risk of poverty by 42% in the EU as a whole

Distribution towards children at-risk-of-poverty and the effectiveness of social transfers (excl. pensions), EU*

  • The effectiveness of transfers reflects both the scale of expenditure level and the extent of targeting
  • Highest impact in: DK, FI, SE, as well as in DE, FR, HU, AT, SI
  • Lowest: EL, ES, IT
  • Serious 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

relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants
Relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants

Group A: good performers in all dimensions

relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants1
Relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants

Group B: joblessness is key challenge

relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants2
Relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants

Group C: relatively bad performance in all dimensions

Group D: in-work poverty is key challenge

sensitivity of risk of poverty rate to alternative measures of low work intensity based on eu silc1
Sensitivity of risk of poverty rate to alternative measures of low work intensity (based on EU-SILC)
slide16
The risk of poverty living with a mother in part-time emplyoment relative to those with full-time employed mothers