Towards a policy relevant European database

on forms of social exclusion

‘European Yearbooks’

Pre-final report

Jan Vranken & Femke De Keulenaer (OASeS, University of Antwerp)

With the collaboration of:Jordi Estivill (GES, Barcelona)

Joaquim Aiguabella (GES, Barcelona)Wilhelm Breuer (ISG, Cologne)Christine Sellin (ISG, Cologne)

Contents

INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................4

CHAPTER 1: A DESCRIPTION OF EUROPEAN INITIATIVES..............................71.1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................7

CHAPTER 2: A DESCRIPTION OF NATIONAL INITIATIVES...............................81.1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................81.2 NATIONAL INITIATIVES.............................................................................................81.3 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE A REGULAR OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL SITUATION REGARDING POVERTY MATTERS AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION?....................................................15

CHAPTER 3: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK...................................................173.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................173.2 POVERTY.............................................................................................................173.3 SOCIAL EXCLUSION AND SOCIAL INCLUSION...............................................................203.4 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK.....................................................................................21

CHAPTER 4: DATABASES.........................................................................284.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................284.2 SOCIAL SURVEYS...................................................................................................294.3 ADMINISTRATIVE DATA...........................................................................................304.4 OTHER STUDIES....................................................................................................304.5 INDICATOR SYSTEMS, STATISTICAL REPORTS................................................................30

CHAPTER 5: INDICATORS.........................................................................325.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................325.2 INDICATORS OF INCOME POVERTY.............................................................................325.3 INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC RESOURCES......................................................................345.4 INDICATORS OF LIVING CONDITIONS..........................................................................345.6 COMBINING INDICATORS OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND LIFE-STYLE DEPRIVATION.................365.5 INDICATORS FOR MONITORING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF POLICIES TO COMBAT POVERTY........37

CHAPTER 6:. THE RELATION BETWEEN THE NATIONAL REPORTS AND POLICY-MAKING AND ACTION..............................................................................39

6.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................396.2 THE IMPACT OF NATIONAL REPORTS ON POLICY MAKING................................................396.3 THE IMPACT OF POLICY-MAKING ON NATIONAL REPORTS................................................40

CHAPTER 7: STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES.............................................42

2

CHAPTER 8: A MODEL..............................................................................438.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................43

CHAPTER 9: A EUROPEAN YEARBOOK.......................................................44

9.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................44

APPENDIX A...........................................................................................45

APPENDIX B...........................................................................................47

3

Introduction

At several moments in the past, European reports on poverty or social exclusion have been published. However, these initiatives were closely tied to specific programmes and never did survive their duration.

The most long-living initiative were the four annual reports of the ‘European Observatory on Policies to Combat Social Exclusion’ from 1990 to 1994, two of which were in the form of ‘consolidated reports’. These annual states of affairs were accompanied by a number of thematic reports. All these reports were based on national reports and the synthesis was discussed in meetings of the national correspondents with a DG-V (now DG-ESA) team and the editor of the report, first Graham Room and later Diana Robbins.

Already earlier – during the first European poverty programme – a series of national reports was published (from the six original member states, later joined by Greece). The material collected at national level was used in the production of the ‘Final report from the commission to the Council on the First Programme of Pilot Schemes and the Studies to Combat Poverty’. Also during the second poverty programme an attempt was made to write a sort of national reports.

We are wondering why there is such a discontinuity in the publication of national and European reports on a subject matter that has not disappeared from the European political agenda since it first was put on it? In other, often-related matters, annual reports have been published regularly (e.g. on Homelessness). And why did these European initiatives have so little impact at the national level, in terms of being a stimulus for national reports?

What do we aim to achieve? The main goal of this project is to develop a model that could be used as a benchmark and stimulate the production of yearbooks in the member states. Our purpose is not to prepare the publication of a European Yearbook on Social Exclusion and Social Inclusion, although this indirect effect would be welcomed. In order to reach that goal, we intend to describe and to analyse attempts that are being made at the national level and to specify the factors that explain the introduction of such an initiative or its lack.

A second aim is to further develop one important instrument to evaluate best practices for effective policies in order to combat social exclusion and to promote social inclusion. Instruments not only include benchmarking and effect reporting, but also better information and a yearbook could provide us with a means that will also enhance the efficacy of both other instruments.

A third aim is to integrate different fields and multiple partners, as a way to handle the growing complexity of the problem and its rapid changes. This implies the creation of a prospective network. Not only research tasks would be the theme for debate in this network, but also the methods used to improve policy relevance and prospective thinking.

4

The objectives of this project will be realised through a number of distinct tasks. First, we will identify initiatives in different countries that work on the promotion of a continuous and cumulative knowledge of problems of social exclusion and policies of social inclusion. Secondly, we will further develop the theoretical and conceptual framework; the focus will be on further operationalisation of concepts into indicators. The idea is to evaluate the existing initiatives on a number of criteria that are the core of this preparatory action: multidimensionality, integration, participation, sensitivity to measuring discrimination (e.g. on basis of gender), inclusiveness. We will also give an overview of the data used in the national reports and the type of studies. Thirdly, the analysis and evaluation of policies and of some large programmes will constitute an important part. On basis of a cross-evaluation by the project team and other experts, the effects of these policies and programmes on situations of social exclusion, their strengths and weaknesses will be assessed. The participants in this proposal will act as ‘independent international experts’. Using cross-evaluation will result in mutual checks and cross-fertilisation of ideas.

We would like to conclude this introduction with a list of items we would need to reach an acceptable level of knowledge and understanding of social exclusion. We presented this list at the take-off meeting for the first series of preparatory actions (Brussels, XX), hoping that Santa Claus would fulfil some of our wishes.

1. A coherent set of standardised concepts with definitions about which a basic agreement exists among researchers, policy-makers, fieldworkers and target groups.

2. A set of widely accepted indicators, which reflect the state of art regarding social exclusion and social inclusion. The indicators therefore should fit in the multidimensional, integrated, … conceptual and theoretical framework developed

3. A database on all important matters relating to social exclusion (and poverty, discrimination,…). This database would contain relevant knowledge from the past (e.g. from the first three European Poverty programmes) and be updated at least once a week.

4. A research agenda that has a long-term perspective is progressive and cumulative - in the sense that it builds upon existing knowledge and that each new initiative increases that knowledge.

5. A research programme that is an intelligent combination and integration of different approaches:

Qualitative and quantitative research Fundamental, policy-oriented and action-research Descriptive and analytical research

6. Research that provides us with more information than the level of subsistence or the number of the poor, but informs us on the three main questions:

How is social exclusion produced and reproduced? How does it affect the lives of the persons affected? How can social exclusion be prevented and should social inclusion be promoted?

7. A structured network of actors, which means that it includes people & institutions with different kinds of expertise and groups them in flexible ways so that it is possible to react quickly to needs and demands in matters of research, policy making, local action,

5

8. A better inclusion of the excluded in all kinds of actions, not as passive participants but as active actors.

9. A continuous process of informing people on the state of affairs regarding social exclusion.

10. The presence of relevant methods and techniques to evaluate pro-actively the effects of policy measures on the state of social exclusion and the situation of the socially excluded. A useful tool could be the effect report.

(To complete by yourself)

We do realise that this list belongs very much to the realm of our dreams and yet it is far from complete. A number of items will be lacking, the size, the colour and content of most of the items must be specified. Most of all, however, we must know whether the items on this list really would improve our knowledge and understanding of social exclusion. We must know whether it would help us to arrive at sound judgements on what initiatives - policies, programmes and projects alike – would really contribute to combating the harmful effects of social exclusion without introducing perverse effects of social inclusion initiatives.

6

CHAPTER 1:A description of European initiatives

1.1 Introduction

A review of national reporting on poverty and related issues at the European level during the 3 EC poverty programmes, EC reports on related issues and their relevance for our subject (homelessness,

the aged) General EC reports and their reporting on our subject Reports from other European organisations

7

CHAPTER 2A description of national initiatives

1.1 Introduction

The aim of this first chapter is to give an overview of national reports on forms of social exclusion and policies to promote social inclusion. We have identified contact persons in each member state. Together they form a network (see annex A). These experts have been asked to describe initiatives, institutions or people in their country that work on the promotion of a systematic and continuous collection of data on social exclusion and social inclusion. We also asked the experts to specify the factors explaining the introduction of such an initiative or its lack. Questions asked are specified in a questionnaire in annex (see annex B).

1.2 National initiatives

In this chapter our main focus are national reports on poverty, social exclusion and related issues, which are published on a regular base. Not all EU countries have published this kind of reports. Beside these national reports, we will mention other initiatives in the country that have dealt with poverty and social exclusion on a more regular base and with a certain degree of accumulation. The bibliographical information is brought together in annex (see annex C).

Spain

In Spain there is no annual report on poverty and social exclusion. However, the annual reports of a number of bodies contain a chapter summarising the situation of poverty and social exclusion and the measures implemented to face them (minimum income, social services, etc.). We mention some examples of this type. The Economic and Social Council includes a chapter featuring the situation of poverty and social exclusion and a picture of the actions taken to combat them in their annual report. Other examples are the reports concerning the social situation in Spain of the FOESSA foundation. In these reports the results of surveys on poverty are presented and in particular each sector is analysed (labour, education, health, etc.). Since 1986,

8

Caritas has been promoting research into relative and extreme poverty. They have carried out studies in 1986, 1996 and 1998.

Beside these chapters, there are some regional studies in Spain, which have dealt with poverty on a more regular basis and with a certain degree of accumulation. At the end of the eighties and the beginning of the nineties, some Autonomous Governments promoted Poverty Overviews and Comprehensive Plans in the framework of the implementation of minimum income schemes. This was the case of the Basque Country (1988), Catalonia (1989-90, 1994), Galicia (1995), Aragón, Castilla-León, Madrid and more recently Navarra (1999) and Andalusia (2000). Some of these studies have been regularly updated. The evaluation of minimum income schemes has also been an opportunity to analyse the evolution of poverty through their recipients and their personal circumstances: The Basque Country (1988, 1996), Catalonia (1989-1994), Aragón (1989, 1994-2000). As for Galicia, GES conducted a two-wave panel (1992-1994).

Belgium

In 1995, the King Baudouin Foundation published the General report on Poverty. The publication of this report was commissioned by the government in 1992. Following the general report on poverty a unit was set up within the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism with the specific aim to fight poverty, economic insecurity and social exclusion. This poverty unit organises structural consultation with the poor, with the government and with the authorities and associations. At the moment they are preparing together with the anti-poverty NGO’s their first biannual report, presenting an evaluation of the situation of poverty and an evaluation of the Belgian policy in combating poverty.

Also following the general report on the poverty of 1995, the Interdepartmental Direction of Social Integration of the Ministry of the Walloon region decided to publish in the future the Report on Social Cohesion in Wallonia. The first report will be presented in January 2001. This report will consist of three parts. The first part is a statistical part. This statistical analysis will serve as the basis for the other parts of the report. The second part lists the measurements taken by the Federal government, the French Community and the provinces and the communes having an direct or indirect impact on social cohesion. A last part is an analytical part and sums up a list of recommendations.

The previous two initiatives deal with poverty and social exclusion in Belgian, but they aren’t published on a regular base up to now. In the Flemish part of the country there is a clear example of a report on poverty published on e regular base. Since 1991, the Research Unit on Poverty, Social Exclusion & the City (OASeS, formerly CASUM) of the University of Antwerp has produced a Yearbook on Poverty and Social exclusion. This project, which was initially realised with the group’s own means as a spin-off from OASeS’s co-operation on the European Observatory on Policies to Combat Social Exclusion, has been continued since 1994 at the request of the Flemish government. The assignment of the research group is to compile and make accessible as broad as possible a database on poverty. This database contains dozens of types of data, ranging from unemployment figures to statistics on social benefits, trends in housing indicators, data on education and refugees. In part, these data have been processed in tables and figures published in the yearbook. In addition, it contains more analytical contributions and results of quantitative research. The Yearbook on Poverty and Social Exclusion has appeared for the 8th

9

time in 1999. The 1999-edition contains a series of contributions on the ethical principles of the fight against poverty. The 2000-edition is recently presented.

We can also find an example of regular reporting on poverty for the third region of Belgium, the region of Brussels-capital. In 1991, it was decided that a report on the poverty situation in the region of Brussels-capital should be published yearly. In the beginning of 2001 the report for 2000 will be presented. These annual reports are based on the annual reports of the Public Centres for Social Help of Brussels.

United Kingdom

We identified three initiatives in the UK working on a cumulative knowledge of poverty and social exclusion. The child poverty action group publishes at regular intervals the Poverty: the facts. The first edition was published in 1990. This publication was updated and revised in 1993 and 1996. These reports examine the growth of poverty in recent years, changing patterns of regional inequality, the increased vulnerability of children to poverty, and compare the UK with other EU countries. Other subjects are: minority ethnic groups, the sexual politics of poverty, health homelessness, definition of poverty, universal benefits versus means-testing, future trends and the existence of an underclass.

Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion is another interesting British publication. In 1998, the New Social Policy institute published Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion: Labour’s Inheritance, which presents the key features of poverty and social exclusion in Great Britain up to 1997. The successor of this report, Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion 1999, provides updated statistics for 50 indicators. Whilst income is the focus of many of the indicators, they also cover a wide range of other subjects including health, education, work, end engaging in community activities. The New social Policy Institute has planned to produce a new edition every year. The 2000 edition is currently being prepared.

The Government also publishes a annual report on poverty and social exclusion, Opportunity for all. It was first published in 1999 by the Department of Social Security. These reports set out the scale of the problem and the strategy of the government to eradicate poverty. Attention goes to child poverty and evaluation of the progress in meeting the objectives set by the government.

Germany

The Federal government of Germany is at the moment preparing their first official national report on poverty, Report on Poverty and Welfare. This report will be published in 2001 and a sequel is planned every four years. The Federal Ministry for Labour and Social Affairs is responsible for its publication. At present, a first draft of the national report has been presented. This preliminary report was initiated by a conceptualisation study, which relied on expert interviews and is based on several studies of independent scientists.

Beside this new initiative, regular reports on individual fields of social issues that deal with the aspects of social exclusion exist since a long time on governmental level. Examples are Report on Disabled Persons, Family Report and Health Report. Below

10

governmental level, the welfare associations and trade unions presented several reports on poverty and social exclusion especially in the 90s.

Sweden

Social Report is a series of national reports on social conditions, which have been commissioned by the Swedish government. The National Board of Health and Welfare is responsible for its publication. Social Report is published every third or forth year. Reports are available for 1994 and 1997. The third edition will be published in 2001. Its purpose is to provide a clear description and analysis of trends in social conditions for various segments of the Swedish population. Among other things the report addresses questions like employment and unemployment, personal finances and housing, but also questions on poverty, marginalisation and social exclusion.

Italy

An important actor in Italy is the Commission on Social Exclusion (formerly the Commission on Poverty). The commission is a part of the department of Social Affairs of the Italian government and provides information on poverty and social discrimination through documents called Fax povertá. This commission comprises experts as well as representatives of volunteer and third sector associations. In 1982, the Commission on Social Exclusion published the first report on poverty in Italy. This study is based on the data of the Household Consumption Survey and was a part of the first European Programme Against Poverty. The second report refers to 1988. There are also reports available for 1995 and 1997. In the 1997 report the commission presents two seperate analyses of poverty in Italy. The first refers to a measure of relative poverty and the second part presents the results based on an absolute measure of poverty. The most recent report is published in 1999. In 1999 the National Statistical Office (ISTAT) was made responsible for the publication of the data concerning poverty, while the commission prepares the part of the report on the state policies.

The Netherlands

The Poverty Monitor is compiled by the Social and Cultural Planning Office (SCP) in collaboration with Statistics Netherlands (CBS). The 1999 Poverty Monitor is the third edition. It aims to give a comprehensive overview of poverty in the Netherlands and to improve the quality of information provision on the subject. The report is based on SCP and CSB data and covers a wide range of subjects including poverty and health, poverty and housing, poverty and leisure. It addresses also questions on geographic concentration of poverty and persistent poverty.

Another Dutch report on poverty, social exclusion and related issues, which is published on a regular base, is the series Year Report Poverty and Social Exclusion. This report was published for the first time in 1996 and is published yearly since then. The 2000-version is recently presented. These publications are realised with support of the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment and contain publications of different researchers on a wide range of subjects concerning poverty. Examples are articles on poverty and the elderly, social participation and health.

11

Finland

In 1996, an expert group worked on a broad project focusing on the extent of poverty and social exclusion, and the necessary remedial measures. The expert group has continued its work since 1996. Poverty and Social Exclusion in Finland in the 1990s, new edition is based mainly on the work of this expert group. It summarises the various dimensions of poverty and social exclusion concentrating on the situation in Finland. This report is an updated version of the corresponding report, published in 1998. This report was compiled by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health and the National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health.

The state of poverty and social exclusion in Finland is also reported in many separate reports. The National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES) publishes on a regular base reports on social exclusion. These reports highlight different aspect of the situation regarding poverty and social exclusion.

Austria

There is no annual national poverty report in Austria. Yet in 1997, the introduction of a chapter on poverty and poverty alleviation in the national Welfare Report of the Ministry of Social Affairs marks the beginning a kind of poverty reporting. These chapters on poverty highlight each year different aspect of the poverty problem. The chapter in the report of 1997 is concerned with poverty risks. The chapter of the 1998 edition presents the results of Austrian part the European Community Household Panel. The chapter of the 1999 report will look at the situation regarding income poverty and social exclusion.

Another national initiative in Austria that deals with poverty and social exclusion on a more regular base are the summary reports of the Austrian conference on poverty organised by the Austrian Network against poverty and social exclusion. Following each conference a report is published with the main results and papers presented during the conference.

In 1994, the first comprehensive regional poverty report was presented by the green party Linz. The third edition of Prevent Poverty, Fairly Distribute Welfare was published in 2000. Although this report is concentrated on only one region, its first part deals with the situation of the whole country and shows the various aspects of poverty. This report contains contributions on poverty and unemployment, poverty and women, poverty and housing, poverty and the disabled.

Portugal

There is also no national annual poverty report in Portugal. But this situation is changing. The Department of Studies, Forecast and Planning of the Ministry of Labour and Solidarity is currently preparing the first Portuguese national report on poverty, social exclusion and related issues, Situation of Work and Solidarity in Portugal. This report will be published yearly. The first edition will be published in March 2001 and

12

will contain a chapter on income distribution, poverty and living conditions in Portugal and a chapter on specific groups vulnerable to social exclusion.

Ireland

An overview of the situation of poverty and social exclusion in Ireland can be found in Monitoring Poverty Trends. This report is the second edition of a series presenting an updated picture of trends in poverty since 1994. Monitoring Poverty Trends was published in 1999 and presents the results of a study based on the Living in Ireland Survey of 1997, making comparisons with the 1994 results. This research and the publications are undertaken by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), and sponsored by the Combat Poverty Agency and the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs.

A second complex of reporting is currently being set up as a consequence and a part of the National Anti-Poverty Strategy (NAPS). The NAPS is a major policy initiative by the Government designed to place the needs of the poor and the socially excluded at the top of the national agenda in terms of Government policy development and action. The NAPS report, Sharing in Progress, was published in 1997. The Combat Poverty Agency has the responsibility of overseeing an evaluation of the NAPS process. In their evaluation report they present the recent developments relevant to NAPS and set out a series of policy recommendations to enhance its further impact. Another report on the progress of the NAPS will be published in 2002.

Greece

As far as we know there is no national poverty report in Greece. The Research Centre of Equal Opportunities of the Ministry of Interior Public Administration publishes yearly the National Report of Greece. This national report contains a chapter summarising the situation of poverty and social exclusion.

13

Denmark

The Centre for Alternative Social Analysis (CASA) is an independent and interdisciplinary centre for social policy research. CASA participates in a wide range of programs and projects aiming at studying processes of marginalisation and exclusion from the labour market with special emphasis on vulnerable groups. They have published some reports on social exclusion in Denmark. In one of these reports they paid attention to urban and rural aspects of social exclusion.

Luxembourg

There is no annual report on social exclusion or related issues in Luxembourg. However, there are other initiatives that produce a continuous and cumulative knowledge of social exclusion and poverty. An important actor is the Centre for Population Studies, Poverty and Political Social-Economics and the International Networks for Studies in Technology, environment Alternatives and Development (CEPS/Instead). They publish regularly reports on monetary poverty on the basis of the Luxembourgish Household Panel (PSELL). The CEPS/Instead, as national correspondent of FEANTSA, also publishes yearly a report on homelessness in Luxembourg.

France

In 1998, the French minister of employment and solidarity decided to create a national observatory on poverty and social exclusion. This observatory organises the synthesis of information on poverty and social exclusion, develops knowledge on poverty and social exclusion and collects information on the policies followed at the local level and international level. The observatory consists of independent experts and scientific experts. The members of the observatory have to publish a report every year. The report for the year 2000 has just been published. Poverty and exclusion of the youth and access to legal services of the excluded are the principal research themes of this last report.

14

1.3 What are the requirements to have a regular overview of the national situation regarding poverty matters and social exclusion?

This chapter gave an overview of initiatives in the countries of the European Union that have dealt with poverty and social exclusion on a more regular base and with a certain degree of accumulation. Our main focus went to national reports on poverty, social exclusion and related issues, which are published on a regular base.

It became clear that all countries of the EU have some sort of national poverty reporting. Not all countries have a national report on poverty and social exclusion in the way we defined it, but a lot of new initiatives were started during the last two years or will start this or next year. We see that more and more countries publish a report on poverty or have planned its publication. We think of the preparation of the first German and Portuguese reports on poverty.

It is true that some countries already have established regulate national reporting on poverty, but even in these countries new initiatives are set up in the past two years. In the United Kingdom, the Child poverty Action Group already published a first report in 1990, while the government started with the publication of their own report on poverty, Opportunity for All, only in 1999.

We are wondering what explains these new initiatives. What are the requirements to have a regular overview of the national situation regarding poverty matters and social exclusion? What are possible incentives? On the basis of the answers on the questionnaire, we are able to assess some requirements to have a regular overview of the national situation regarding matters of poverty, social exclusion, and social inclusion. The conditions to establish a regular, systematic and accumulative overview of social exclusion are not easy to outline, but would nevertheless include the following requirements.

A first group of requirements concerns the concept and the definition of the concepts used in the national context. First of all, it is clear that one of the requirements to have a national report is that the notion of poverty or social exclusion is accepted in the country. All countries report on poverty, but not all countries also report on social exclusion or social inclusion. Social exclusion, and even more social inclusion, are new concepts and aren’t yet used by researchers and policy makers in all EU countries.

A second requirement is a theoretical definition broadly accepted and agreed on. To analyse the extent and the characteristics of poverty and social exclusion in a country or in the European Union researchers need a clear theoretical definition. Up to now a wide variety of definitions have been suggested for the concepts of poverty and social exclusion.

Another requirement is a clear declaration of intention by the actors involved in the poverty debate. There are a variety of actors in the different countries of the European Union. Important are the political parties, the local and regional governments, the trade unions, the churches, the private welfare organisations, the poverty lobby and the media. There must be a willingness to do something about

15

poverty, the subject must be placed on the political agenda and it must be a part of the public opinion. These situations do not necessarily lead to the publication of a report, but they are important. In most countries, the publication of reports on poverty or social exclusion is commissioned by the government.

The first national report is an important step. However, in order to establish a regulate reporting a proof of the importance and utility of the national report with a view of taking institutional and political decisions has to be given.

A forth requirement is access to statistics of high quality and close operation between researchers within this field. It is necessary that the statistical reporting routines are revised so that regular reporting becomes more sensitive to the issues of poverty and social exclusion and opens up further representative explorations of this topic by independent researchers.

Most experts mention that the discussion and research on poverty and social exclusion were considerably spurred by the European debate on poverty, social exclusion and measures for poverty alleviation. The accelerating interest in poverty research has, to as considerable extent, been a direct result of the recent European commission’s interest in poverty and of the funds which it has made available.

16

CHAPTER 3Conceptual framework

3.1 Introduction

In this chapter we will describe and analyse the different concepts used in the member states. This information is collected through the same questionnaire (see for the questions annex B).

Our point of departure is the following. The central concepts in this project are poverty, social exclusion, and social inclusion. Some attention will be paid to a concept that has re-emerged recently, social cohesion. Neither of these concepts has a definite and generally accepted meaning. We also know that other concepts are being used.

In a second part we will try to integrate the ideas brought forward in the questionnaires into a coherent framework. It is important that we clarify the relationship between poverty, social exclusion, and social inclusion. But as told before, most experts don’t have a developed framework. A useful basis is provided by the report on ‘actions and policies of social inclusion’ (Vranken & Gotzen, 2000).

3.2 Poverty

It is useful to highlight the most common and uncommon theoretical definitions of poverty that may be observed in the context of the European Union. We asked the experts to define the concept of poverty, social exclusion and social inclusion. Most of the experts gave an empirical definition and not a conceptual definition. They explained how poverty is measured and not what they refer to when they speak about poverty. It seems that the debate on poverty is concentrated on the measurement of poverty and not on defining and conceptualising poverty theoretically. The following statements are based on the answers to the questionnaire and additional literature.

Almost none of the experts use a definition of poverty based on the concept of subsistence. When people do not have the physical necessities of life such as food, housing or clothing to survive in the world they are said to live in absolute poverty.

17

There are a few alternative established or professionally supported conceptions of poverty in Europe. We have labelled these the financial definition, the resources-based definition, and the exclusion-based definition. We will discuss these three conceptions in the remainder of this part.

We have labelled the first definition the financial definition of poverty. In this case poverty is seen as a financial problem. Poverty is about having not enough money or financial resources. We found an example of this conceptualisation in the Swedish Social Report. In this report it is stated that poverty is primarily a question of the ability to manage economic resources effectively. We find this kind of definition also in other reports, but as a definition of financial or income poverty and thus differentiated from poverty in general. Examples can be found in the Belgian reports of OASeS. A more popular definition is the by now classical definition of Townsend. Almost all experts state that poverty is more than just about money. It is about not having the resources to participate fully in society. Almost any expert refers directly or indirectly to the definition of Townsend:

“Individuals, families and groups in the population can be said to be in poverty when they lack the resources to obtain the types of diet, participate in the activities and have the living conditions and amenities that are customary, or at least widely encouraged or approved, in the societies to which they belong. They are, in effect, excluded from ordinary living patterns, customs and activities” (Townsend 1979:31).

Two aspects of this definition deserve being underscored. Firstly, the fact that poverty is directly associated with the lack of resources. Resources of various kinds can de regarded as inputs that are to be converted into actual living conditions by the activities of individuals and the households themselves (Kohl, 19XX:253-254). Secondly, poverty is understood in the context of the general way of life that is accepted as the norm of the society. Individuals or households living in poverty are excluded on different domains of a person’s life. In other words, the second part of the definition of Townsend refers to the actual living conditions of individuals and households. This part is absent in the financial definition of poverty. The definition is relative, because the situation of those at the bottom of the social or economic ladder can not be understood without reference to those at the top.

The definition of Townsend underlies the resources-based definition and the exclusion-based definition. In the resources-based definition the first part of Townsend’s definition is stressed, while in the exclusion-based definition the living conditions part is stressed.

In the resources-based definition of poverty it is stressed that poverty is attributable to lack of resources. It is stated that a different way of life which is the result of different preferences and free choice is not a result of lack of resources and is not included in poverty. Only if their state of deprivation is caused by insufficient resources should it be considered as poverty.

In most cases, the main focus is on material resources. People living in poverty have too weak economic resources to take part in the generally accepted patterns of life. In this sense poverty is equal to a lack of material resources. People who are unable to participate in various customary activities, due to factors such as poor health or poor education are not categorised as poor. Poverty has consequences for all aspects of life. This means that bad housing, unemployment, bad health and few social contacts are consequences of this lack of resources.

18

Not only income is an important resource, other resources may influence how we live, for example, education, knowledge, and information (Ringen 1987: 160). The Irish government decided in its National Anti-Poverty Strategy to include cultural and social resources in their definition:

“People are living in poverty, if their income and resources (material, cultural and social) are so inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living which is acceptable by Irish society generally. As a result of inadequate income and resources, people may be excluded and marginalised from participating in activities which are considered the norm for other people in society” (Sharing in Progress, 1997)

This version of poverty as lack of resources is challenged by a broader multidimensional approach, the exclusion approach. Recently discussions were extended to broadening the approaches to poverty. Poverty is more and more seen as an accumulation of problems, not specifying the cause of these problems. In this broad conceptualisation poverty is not necessarily a consequence of a lack of material resources. Poverty has to do with a limited participation in various social commodities such as income, labour, education, health, administration of justice, collective provisions and culture. A person is categorised as poor on the basis of an accumulation of situations of exclusion on different domains as such and not on the basis of the cause of this limited participation. The clearest example of this approach is the definition used by the Belgian government of Vranken (1977, 1983, 1992, 1999):

“Poverty can be defined as a network of instances of social exclusion that stretches across several areas of individual and collective existence. It separates the poor from society’s generally accepted patterns of life. They are unable to bridge this gap on their own. The Belgian government refers to this definition when they talk about poverty.” (Vranken, 1992)

19

3.3 Social exclusion and social inclusion

Social exclusion

In recent years, the literature, particularly in the EU, has drawn a distinction between social exclusion and poverty. Also in the poverty reports we noticed this change in concepts.

The concept of social exclusion is widely accepted but most experts were not able to give a clear definition. Nevertheless, certain key issues stand out in the questionnaires. Firstly, social exclusion is seen as a multidimensional phenomenon: economic, social, cultural and political aspects are all identified. Secondly, these aspects may well be interrelated. Thirdly, that social exclusion is not static but dynamic.

Social exclusion is discussed with regard to several situations. Persons can be excluded from several domains of life, like restrictions on the housing market, restrictions on the participation in cultural life or voting. A person can be excluded from the workforce or excluded from the school and professional education.

Exclusion on one domain can accelerate other types of exclusion. For example: health problems may reduce the possibilities of getting a job, and the resulting status as unemployed may increase exclusion on domains like social contacts.

The use of certain concepts has to do with the social situation of the countries. The use of the concept of social exclusion in the public debate has arisen in the 1990s. Conditions such as labour market problems, cutbacks in the general welfare system, reduced purchasing power, a large influx of refugees, and other problems have all influenced economic and social conditions during the 1990s. The group of researchers and policy-makers that define poverty as a lack of material resources, needed a new concept to take into account this ‘new’ nature of poverty. The introduction of social exclusion may be regarded as an effort to broaden the concept of poverty.

The broad notion of exclusion allows the extension of the concept of poverty to groups that suffer from non-material forms of deprivation and that not can rightly be considered as poor. In this sense, the notion of social exclusion is wider than the one of poverty. This means that there are other forms of social exclusion that do not result from lack of resources and, therefore. This way of distinguishing the two concepts is compatible with what the Commission has been stating.

We find an example of this shift in Sweden. The use of the concept of social marginalisation in the public debate in Sweden has arisen in the 1990s. In the report we read that the issue of marginalisation has become all the more urgent as a result of long-term unemployment and its consequences, the reduced employment opportunities for refugees and the functionally disabled, an increase in the number of individuals excluded from the social insurance system, and not least, a growing dependence of on social assistance benefits. In the Swedish Social Report the following definition of social marginalisation is given:

Marginalisation refers to individuals’ or households’ experience of an accumulation of problems, which persist over time. Most distressing are problems related to work,

20

finances and housing. But other material and social conditions are also significant in this context.

This definition of social marginalisation is very similar to the exclusion-based definition of poverty from Vranken. What is missing is the condition of a separation by clearly discernible fault lines. The way of distinguishing poverty and social exclusion of these researchers and policy-makers is different. They argue that social exclusion refers to various situations and processes, such as poverty, illiteracy and institutional confinement. According to this view, the process of social exclusion manifests itself in many areas, resulting in multifarious situations.

Social inclusion

The concept of social inclusion is even newer than the one of social exclusion. Only vague ideas exist around the concept. Social exclusion is mostly defined as the opposite of social exclusion. The term refers to those processes through which the most needy populations are able to reintegrate into the society. Not only the term of social inclusion is used to refer to these processes, other concepts are social insertion and social integration.

3.4 Conceptual framework

It is clear that better conceptual clarity is required when one speaks of poverty and social exclusion. This is necessary to ensure validity and reliability and to allow an adequate interpretation of the findings. A comprehensive analysis of poverty and social exclusion requires a coherent framework. The questionnaires made clear that in most countries a coherent framework is missing. This is especially the case for the concepts of social exclusion and social inclusion. These old and new aspects require the analytical and conceptual frameworks to be revised in order to analyse the development of poverty and social exclusion. To develop this framework we will built further on previous work of Jan Vranken and his team.

Social exclusion

The introduction of the term 'social exclusion’ does bring with it certain problems, especially with regard to demarcation. In our approach we use ‘social exclusion’ as a generic concept that refers to various situations and processes such as polarisation, discrimination, poverty, and inaccessibility. Social exclusion implies two conditions: a hierarchical relationship between individuals, positions or groups and a separation by clearly discernible fault lines. Exclusion is not just about common ruptures in the fabric of society; the concept refers to real gaps that lead to a division between 'in'

21

and 'out'. In order to arrive at such a situation, society must possess certain characteristics. It must, for instance, be structured according to a centre/periphery relationship, and society's economic, social and cultural capital must be distributed unevenly. Of crucial importance in this respect is of course the fault line, which may manifest itself as a gap, a wall, or a barrier.

Table 1 - A typology in terms of hierarchy and fault lines

HierarchyFault lines no yesno social differentiation social inequalityyes social fragmentation social exclusion

The notion that fault lines are significant is not new. With regard to poverty, Townsend (1979, p. 57) has perhaps formulated this most aptly. However, fault lines are not restricted to poverty; they also occur in other cases of so-called 'sudden decline in participation' or, in more contemporary terms, of social exclusion. They refer to both processes (consecutive phases) and situations. While Townsend primarily focuses on fault lines resulting from individuals’ and households’ behaviour, we shall concentrate on socially constructed or structural fault lines. Indeed, certain fault lines are the result of collective intervention (e.g. subsistence income or institutional isolation), while others arise without any explicit and deliberate intervention on the part of social actors (segmented labour markets).

A second question that needs to be asked is: social exclusion from what? According to authors such as Saraceno & Negri (1997), social exclusion is a wide-ranging concept that may refer to different sectors. As a matter of fact, a distinction can be made between exclusion from economic life, from an appropriate residential context, from the health system, from education, and from social life. We distinguish between different types of fault lines: relational, spatial and societal fault lines (Vranken, 1997). They are the rather tangible answer to what is probably the most crucial question with regard to social exclusion, namely exclusion from what? (Silver, 1995: 60). What is required is the identification of reference points with regard to which social exclusion occurs. It concerns the 'dominant institutions’, the 'centres' of society; that is, the places where Bourdieu's economic, social and cultural capital are stored. The reference points of social exclusion are situated at micro-level (of individuals and their networks), at meso-level (of groups or neighbourhoods) and at macro-level (of society).

The first reference point is that of the individual and, more in particular, that of social exchanges between individuals. These individuals may be regarded as selfish monads maximising their personal advantage, as is the case in classical economic theory. Or they may be conceived as 'social' beings, who exchange social commodities and thus become part of social networks. Social exclusion may then be seen as the result of exclusion from these exchange relations and so from social networks. That is what relational fault lines are referring to. 'Gatekeepers', persons or institutions that occupy strategic positions at a junction within a social network, have the power to decide whether or not to allow through the flow of social commodities. By depriving certain people or groups (the lowly qualified, immigrants, the homeless) from certain social commodities (employment, housing, education, income, status, power) they can create social exclusion (see also Vranken and al., 1996, p. 57). Thus,

22

the networks of the poor provide no or very limited access to important social commodities, that is to economic, social and cultural capital.

A second reference point are groups or grouplike phenomenons. Weber's concept of 'social closure' is of importance here. Social closure is the process whereby social groups attempt to acquire, increase or maintain rewards by restricting access to sources or opportunities to a small circle. The purpose is to monopolise opportunities in life which others too find desirable, i.e. the closure of such opportunities to outsiders. The groups thus excluded often respond by imposing boundaries on even weaker groups, which results in so-called 'dual closure' (Parkin, 1974). The consequence is twofold: the creation of an uneven distribution of opportunities in life and of closed social relations and communities. Though Weber only used the term 'opportunities in life' explicitly to construct his notion of classes, it is also implicitly present in other forms of inequality which he defines, i.e. those of social status (position) and power (political party).

The third point of reference, regarding societal fault lines, concerns societal structures and processes. The economic production process remains at the core of contemporary welfare states of the industrial capitalist type. We can identify one important fault line with respect to this point of reference, that between those who possess a production factor (capital, labour, land) and those who do not (Vranken, 1977). On one side of this dividing line is everybody whose production factor is employed, on the other side those whose production factor is unemployed (the unemployed strictly spoken, unoccupied farmers and self-employed) or those who fail to optimally implement a production factor.

It is clear that the central question in this respect is whether society as a whole or some important parts are developing into subsocieties. Such developments have been analysed with respect to the labour market (dual labour market) or to income acquisition ('earned' income versus ‘welfare’ income). It is not hard to find other examples, such as lack of access to political rights. Here we are at the level of the constitutional state; an external moral order which grants rights to individual participants. In much the same way that persons or groups are excluded from the economic production process, they may be excluded from equal rights. If it concerns social rights, we have completed our circle and have arrived back at Room's definition of social exclusion.

Poverty

Now it only rest us to ask: what about poverty, then? How exactly do poverty and social exclusion relate? Poverty, too, is characterised by the ‘unbridgeable gap’ that is so typical of social exclusion. So are the two concepts identical after all? What sets poverty apart from social exclusion, conceptually speaking? And, last but not least, how can poverty be distinguished from other types of social?

Poverty is a special case of social exclusion: it is an accumulation of interrelated forms of exclusion. These instances of exclusion concern various areas of social and

23

individual life, and they can manifest themselves in specific ways in each of these areas. Poverty has to do with non-participation or a very limited participation in various social commodities such as income, labour, education, housing, health, and administration of justice, public services, and culture. These areas are interrelated. This is the essence of poverty. The incapacity of the poor to bridge this complex fault line on their own underlines how powerful a form of exclusion poverty really is. So poverty possesses both crucial characteristics of social exclusion - inequality and fault lines. What makes poverty special is that it concerns a multi-faceted phenomenon.

The fact that poverty must by its very nature concern a network of exclusions distinguishes it from other instances of social exclusion, such as homelessness, discrimination, inaccessibility, institutional confinement. Of course, these other forms of exclusion may be characterised by exclusion in various areas, but this need not necessarily be the case: discrimination is a form of exclusion even when it merely concerns one facet of social life (e.g. political rights, physical inaccessibility of public space). It is also evident that specific forms of exclusion (illiteracy, long-term unemployment, and homelessness) may constitute phases in a sequence that ultimately leads to poverty.

This interrelation between different forms of exclusion also finds expression in the floating character of their boundaries. The recent discussion about ‘precarisation’ or ‘marginalisation’ (Goodin, Kronauer) illustrates this problem. Kronauer asks ‘how sharp is the division between ‘inside’ and ‘outside’? (Kronauer: 19xx)’. People can be drawn ‘just over’ the exclusion line, but does that make their situation much better? Is an ‘underclass’ included or not?

Social inclusion

The redefinition from ‘combating social exclusion’ towards ‘promoting social inclusion’ implies more than a change from a ‘negative’ to a ‘positive’ formulation; it is a shift in paradigm.

However, if social inclusion is defined as the opposite of social exclusion, it also carries with it the latter concept’s reference to heterogeneous processes. Inclusion then should imply more than just more equality, but should also refer to the closing of structural gaps. Moreover, processes leading from a situation of exclusion to one of social inclusion could raise different questions than the opposite trajectory.

Consequently, social inclusion includes a promise of perverse effects, if not managed carefully. We should address questions like the following. Does social inclusion imply reciprocal adaptation? ‘Reciprocal adaptation’ means that different communities living within the same political boundaries take over part of the cultural pattern of each other, in the end arriving at a shared system of values and norms (though not necessarily of life styles). The degree of reciprocity naturally depends on the power relations between the different parties. In this sense, 'social inclusion’ holds the middle between 'adaptation' and 'pluralism’. The latter concept refers to multiple forms of the co-existence, peacefully or otherwise, of different societies (or cultures)

24

within a formal political structure (a city, a state). It covers the whole range from separate development – e.g. ‘self-organisation’ - to ghettoization.

At which levels does inclusion take place? A first level is that of the individual, the ‘lowest’ analytical level. Here, inclusion takes place through different sets of roles: that of producer (labour market), consumer (access to goods and services), ‘signifier’ (life-style), citizen (political rights), and social networks’ member (private and public networks).

The first set refers to a person’s role as a producer. “It is commonly accepted that overall social integration is fundamentally rooted in labour market integration (or economic integration in a larger sense) and this is very well grounded in empirical findings’ (Vranken: 1995)”. The second set of roles is related to one’s position as a consumer, that is her/his access to private and public goods and services. The third set refers to a person’s roles as a ‘signifier’, that is to the ways identities are created through this consumption. The fourth set of roles is connected to the position as citizen. The classical version of the citizenship approach considers citizenship as a cluster of rights and duties that follow membership of the nation-state. The modern version puts the emphasis on what is called ‘social citizenship’, referring to obligations of the state to the individual. The last cluster of roles is related to positions in social networks. Networks are either public - membership of diverse associations – or private – a person’s role as a family member, a friend, a neighbour.

These different roles ensure participation at the different levels of society: the micro-level, the meso-level, and the macro-level. Social networks are situated on the micro-level of society. The meso-level is the one of groups, associations, and institutions, also called “civil society”. A person’s actions as a citizen are often localised here. The roles of producer and consumer ensure inclusion in the macro-level of society. Obviously, these different levels overlap and interact. Being a producer - or in other that is, being included in the labour market – usually leads to inclusion in the macro-level of society. Being a union member in the context of one’s job facilitates inclusion in the meso-level. Developing friendships with colleagues in the context of one’s job is part of inclusion into social networks, which is society’s micro-level. It is important, however, to keep in mind that inclusion at one level does not necessarily imply inclusion at other levels.

Neither is inclusion always a spontaneous process. When social exclusion this occurs or is imminent, social inclusion has to be organised. The promotion of a context for social inclusion should be a major task for policies. This means, first and foremost, the reduction or disappearing of structural fault lines or of the so-called 'sudden decline in participation' (Townsend, 1978), which is the essence of social exclusion. Whereas many fault lines are characteristics of any society or of a specific type of society, certain fault lines, however, result from policy making or other forms of collective intervention. The introduction of a subsistence income or institutionalised forms of isolation (prisons, psychiatric institutions), are but two illustrations of such perverse effects.

Which are some of the important factors that play a role in the production of fault lines and in the development of appropriate policies at the three aforementioned levels?

25

Where relational fault lines are at stake, social inclusion may be seen as the result of participation in the exchange of social commodities and, by extension, in social networks. 'Gatekeepers' - and policy-makers or administrators are important ones - play an important role in this respect. Because they occupy strategic positions in the networks, they have the power to decide whether or not to allow the flow of social commodities to go through. Through providing certain people or groups (the lowly qualified, immigrants, the homeless) with social commodities (such as employment, housing, education, income, status, power) they can promote social inclusion.

Spatial fault lines, which are most prominent at the meso-level as in an urban context, refer to the process whereby social groups or collectives attempt to acquire, increase or maintain rewards by restricting access to sources or opportunities to an in-group or to a given neighbourhood. The purpose is to monopolise opportunities in life which others too find desirable, i.e. the closure of such opportunities to outsiders. Social groups who fail to realise any monopoly at all must compete with each other on the open market and are subjected to its levelling effects. However, these groups often respond by imposing boundaries on even weaker groups, which then results in so-called 'dual closure'. The mutual relations between the autochthonous poor and allochtonous newcomers in deprived neighbourhoods are a very striking example.

The central question in case of societal fault lines is whether society as a whole or important areas of it are developing into sub-societies that are in relations of subordination. This is the case for the labour market (dual labour market), regarding income acquisition ('earned' income versus 'allowances') or with respect to access to political rights (citizens versus denizens).

Processes and situations of social inclusion and the assessment of their effects can take different forms. Each of these forms and its effects depends on the specific context in which they have been developed. This context can be defined in general terms, such as the type of welfare state or the cultural patterns of a given society. This context can also be assessed in terms of the premises that are underlying welfare policies and that perhaps need some questioning.

Indeed, when considering inclusion, it is important to take account of the cultural dimension. Social inclusion will have fundamentally different implications in culturally homogenous or heterogeneous societies. In heterogeneous societies, exclusion from one sub-society still can be counterbalanced by inclusion into another. In a homogenous society this is, by definition, impossible. However, inclusion in all domains does not follow automatically from inclusion in one domain, such as is illustrated by the fact that naturalised migrants therefor do not – substantially - improve their opportunities to obtain a decent dwelling or job.

An elaborated analysis of social inclusion also should take account of the impact of structural changes. Particular emphasis must be put on the effects of demographic changes (immigration and emigration), policy deregulation (governance), and changes in living patterns (promoting new forms of social inclusion). It also should examine the various types of exclusion mechanisms and of inclusion policies, their priorities and capabilities for adjustment, and the impact of the welfare state

26

changes; this not only from a comparative but also from a European (transnational) perspective. It should develop policy-relevant proposals on how these challenges may be addressed in order to preserve the societal goals widely supported in Europe. It should not leave out the extent to which the goals of promoting social inclusion, the avoidance of excessive inequalities such as social exclusion, and improved quality of life contributes to the dynamism of national and European society. The role of social policies and social investments as a productive factor in a changing environment therefor are essential.

27

CHAPTER 4Databases

4.1 Introduction

If one of our wishes is a science-based European reporting on poverty and social exclusion, we have to deal with the question which databases are used in Europe in the fields of poverty and social exclusion. Given the scope of the problem, data will cover a large array of different domains, of different types and also at different levels. If one looks at the number of actors, the set of produced data and the implemented surveys, it is obvious that on the whole coherence between these activities is missing. It is not clear which data are available, which data are comparable. It is therefore necessary to compile a register of databases available for poverty research. We will use the following criteria to make an overview.

Regarding type of data we expect a combination of administrative data, survey data, information on urban development programmes, documentary studies, interviews with key actors, and evaluation data. We will also pay attention to indicator systems.

Domains of data will include work (labour market and other), income, social protection and other social security schemes, education, housing, social networks (associational life, social work, justice and social rights, culture).

With respect to levels, the database will be limited to data on the European and national level. It is useful to differentiate between reporting on poverty and social exclusion at the level of the European Union and national reporting on poverty and social exclusion. Differences generated by national welfare states and urban governance types will not be regarded as an obstacle, but approached positively – as a contribution to the European dimension. Studying poverty in Europe creates the need for comparable statistics. We will evaluate the data on their comparability.

Special attention will be paid to situations of extreme exclusion (such as long-term unemployment, low skill, illiteracy, homelessness, forms of ‘ghettoisation’, social isolation, or institutionalisation)

All data and estimates presented in reports on poverty and social exclusion come from databases and surveys which are not directly concerned with poverty or social exclusion. As far as we know there are no databases that are only concerned with poverty or social exclusion and specific surveys on poverty and social exclusion are missing.

28

4.2 Social surveys

International social surveys

The ‘European Community Household Panel’ (ECHP) is a survey based on a standardised questionnaire that involves annual interviewing of a representative panel of individuals in each EU Member State (except Sweden). It covers a wide range of topics such as income, housing, health, education, and employment. The longitudinal structure of the ECHP makes it possible to follow up the same individuals over several years. The first wave was conducted in 1994 in twelve Member States of the EU. Since then, Austria and Finland have joined the project. Sweden does not take part. The survey is, at the moment, planned to run until the end of 2002.

The ‘Household Budget Surveys’ are cross-national surveys, which are harmonised a posteriori at Eurostat where the data are stored in a micro database. These surveys provide information on consumption expenditures, socio-economic characteristics, and several other variables. Information is available from 1980, 1988, and 1994. Households from all over Europe are surveyed.

The ‘Labour Force Surveys’ are the principle source of reference for data on the labour force within the European Union. They are conducted in all European Member States on an annual basis. EUROSTAT again stores the micro-data. Data are available since 1960, although not on an annual basis.

The ‘Luxembourg Income Study’ collects data from national surveys and stores them in a central micro database. This database contains also information on non-European countries such as the USA and some Eastern European countries.

The ‘Eurobarometer’ is a tool for conducting opinion polls at EU-level. Over the years, some questions have been related to what broadly could be understood as poverty and social exclusion.

National social surveys

Comprehensive social surveys have been carried out in all EU member states. However, some countries have a longer tradition of survey research. Further, most countries of the European Union conduct not only surveys on income and consumption, but also surveys of the living conditions.

The national institutes for statistics of the EU-countries conduct several surveys. We already mentioned the labour force surveys and the household consumption surveys. Most statistical institutes also conduct surveys on areas such as health and education.

Not only the statistical offices produce data, the experts also mentioned other actors. In Italy the bank of Italy conducts yearly a survey on income and consumption. The surveys of the European Union Household panel are undertaken by research institutes of the participating countries. For example, in Ireland the Living in Ireland Survey is undertaken by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).

29

Most of these national surveys are not standardised and have their focuses on different aspects such as subjective evaluation of living conditions, socio-economic indicators, objective indicators level of living, etc. It is difficult to assess their comparability across different countries.

4.3 Administrative data

The use of administrative data is seldom mentioned by the contacted experts. Of course each country has separate registers, examples are registers on the use of health services, registers of the unemployed, registers on social assistance. These registers are not used in poverty research. This may be explained by the specific focus of these registers. The use of registers to analyse poverty is only possible when the separate registers are linked. Only a few EU countries have some experience in linking administrative data, we think of the Nordic countries and the Netherlands.

4.4 Other studies

Yet too little information is available for persons living in extreme poverty. An important weakness of social surveys is that the poorest people are badly represented due to difficulties in establishing and maintaining contact with them. The surveys do also not cover people who do not live in traditional households such as; traveller families, the homeless, or women and children who seek refuge for violent partners, children in care and other institutions. Most experts agree that qualitative and other studies constitute an alternative.

4.5 Indicator systems, statistical reports

International indicator systems, statistical yearbooks

An important example at the international level is the ‘European System of Social Indicators’ (EUSI) of the Mannheim Centre for European Social Research (MZES). This project is developing a theoretically as well as methodologically sound selection of social indicators, which can be used as an instrument to continuously observe and analyse the development of welfare and quality of life. This system will cover social exclusion and will use the best available databases. Special attention will also go to cross-national comparability. This information is useful for gaining concrete

30

information on important trends and national variations in Europe. However, certain domains are missing in the data collection.

National indicator systems, statistical yearbooks

The national institutes for statistics of the EU countries collect, analyse, tabulate and disseminate national statistics. Almost all national institutes publish yearly a statistical report. However, they are shaped and structured differently in nearly every country.

Important for research on poverty and social exclusion is the part on social statistics in these reports. Social statistics are concerned with the population and their living conditions. The basic data for these statistics is provided by the classic demographic statistics: total population by age, sex, and geographic area, supplemented by vital statistics showing the trends (births, deaths, migrations, etc.). These basic statistics are mostly expanded to include income distribution and consumption, education, employment, unemployment and labour market policy schemes, wages and labour costs, health, use of public services and receipt of social benefits.

31

CHAPTER 5Indicators

5.1 Introduction

In this chapter attention is paid to the measurement of poverty and social exclusion in the member states of the European Union. Poverty and social exclusion are complex social phenomena and their measurement has given rise to much controversy. Poverty and social exclusion cannot be measured directly because of the lack of an obvious and generally accepted yardstick. Measurement of poverty and social exclusion consists of finding some observable indicators, which could be taken to represent poverty or social exclusion. A wide variety of empirical approaches have been suggested but none has found universal acceptance.

5.2 Indicators of income poverty

The most commonly applied technique for measuring poverty is probably still that of the income based poverty line. The poverty rate is calculated as the percentage of the total population comprising people in households below the selected poverty line. Poverty lines can be set by different methods: official standards, the food-ratio method, the relative method, the subjective method, and the budget standards (Van Den Bosch, 1999). It should be emphasised that the choice of the poverty line has an effect on the assessment of the extent of poverty.

Most studies of poverty use the relative method. In this case, the poverty threshold is set at a certain percentage of average or median disposable income or equivalent income. At present, three relative poverty lines are used in the EU context. The EC-standard is fixed at 50% of family income and uses the more traditional average income. An example of this poverty line can be found in Monitoring poverty and social exclusion of the British New Policy Institute.

The EU-standard uses the median income. Until 1998 this poverty line was fixed at 50% of family income. Since December 1998, EUROSTAT defines the official poverty line of the EU as 60% of the median income. This is the reason why we found both the 50% and the 60% poverty lines in the studied reports.

Moreover, these poverty lines are based on different equivalence scales. Household income is adjusted for size and composition using an equivalence scale. The EC-poverty line uses a steeper scale than the EU-poverty line, in attributing more weight to the adult members of the household; 1:0.7:0.5 for the first adult, each additional

32

adult and each child respectively in the first case, 1:0.5:0.3 in the second case (Vranken, 1999: 72).

In the report on poverty of Italy we found an example of a budget standard. Italy uses a budget standard complementary to the relative poverty lines. In the first part of their report the results of a relative measure of poverty are presented. Such measure is correlated to the distribution of expenditure on consumption that, in its turn, depends on the economic cycle. In order to better comprehend the phenomenon it seemed suitable to add further indicators. The new indicators imply the definition of a minimum basket of goods and services. Their money value represents the poverty reference threshold for a stated year. Over time the value of the basket is updated taking into account the variations in prices of goods and services. The basket represents the goods and services considered essential for a household and is made up of a food and drink component, a housing component and a component related to the depreciation quotas for the main durable goods.

A whole range of other indicators of income poverty are used to supplement the income poverty line. We think of indicators on persistent low income and indicators of income inequality. An example of an indicator on income inequality is an indicator of the gap between low and median income. This indicator measures ‘how poor the poor are’. The indicator is used in Monitoring poverty and social exclusion of the British New Policy Institute. The researcher compare the incomes of someone at the lower part of the income distribution with income of someone half-way up, demonstrating the extent to which the poorest are keeping up or falling behind society’s norm. In the same report we find an indicator of income dynamics, the persistence of poverty is measured by the number of individuals who have spells on low income in at least two years in three.

Why are income measures used so often? When it is admitted that poverty and lack of income are the same, then income is a good indicator. However, we noticed that income indicators are even used when it is admitted that poverty and lack of income are not the same thing. It is often argued that their respective magnitudes are very closely related and that, lacking better yardsticks it is acceptable to measure poverty in terms of disposable income.

But this is certainly not the opinion of everybody. From the former discussion it should be clear that such measurement would not lead to correct results, due to many good reasons. This is the case when we define poverty as a lack of monetary or material resources. And even more when we define poverty in a broad sense as a network of situations of social exclusion. Some elements that are placed under the heading of poverty have no counterpart in monetary terms. Examples are leisure and social contacts. Other measures are suggested.

33

5.3 Indicators of economic resources

The composition of incomes below the poverty line has more than once been analysed and the conclusion is univocal that it is not certain that low disposable income can be equated with poor economic standard. A low income does not automatically mean that a household or individual is poor in the everyday sense of the word. Factors as accumulated wealth, life style and consumption patterns vary among those with low incomes. Data on income are also unreliable because they are in general derived from tax returns. Due to the unofficial economy the consumption expenditures exceed reported income. In rural areas incomes in kind are often of considerable significance. Information on cash income may give a very inaccurate picture of the resources at the disposable of an individual or a household. Therefore it is stated that poverty is not primarily a question of income level, but rather of the ability to manage economic resources effectively.

In the Swedish Social Report, individuals or households that aren’t able to manage economic resources effectively are identified by looking at the receipt of social assistance. Social assistance recipients often have difficulty following a budget or meeting basic expenses, they also may have debt and have little cash reserve. This means that individuals and households that aren’t able to manage economic resources effectively can be identified more directly by looking at cash reserve, debts and difficulties in meeting basic expenses. The lack of cash reserve for unexpected expenses limits the household’s possibilities. The inability to meet basic expenses for food, housing, current bills is also an indication of a situation of poverty. In this case households and individuals must resort to temporary solutions such as loans, social assistance or postponement of payment.

Marginal economic resources also result in limiting purchasing power. In the Swedish Social Report, the condition of poverty is alternatively measured by analysing the household economy in terms of how much purchasing power remains after basic expenses are met. Included in basic expenses are those for food, housing, child care and health care. This analysis is based on the assumption that consumption is based on social norms.

5.4 Indicators of living conditions

As long as we define poverty as lack of economic resources the above measures are acceptable. But when we try to measure social exclusion or poverty as a network of different forms of exclusion we need other, non-monetary indicators. In the past few years we noticed a growing interest in the measurement of poverty by collecting data on the extent to which households possess certain commodities, can engage in certain activities and are subjected to financial pressures of different kinds.

The core of this class of measures is constituted by the multidimensional nature of the definition of poverty. Poverty is not only defined in terms of income but also in terms of consumption and non-material life resources (educational attainments,

34

housing, health, leisure, social participation etc.). Poverty and social exclusion consist of several components or domains. This became clear in most of the given definitions. The components are still aggregates and not directly measurable. However, their more restricted scope makes the measurement problem feasible. Indirect measurement of these domains consists of finding some observable indicators, which could be taken to represent each of the domains of poverty or social exclusion. It holds that even this kind of measurement possesses a lot of variants.

The biggest problem is which aspects of possession of goods, use of services, and participation in certain activities have to be taken into account in a multidimensional set of indicators. It seems difficult to reach consensus about the dimensions to be included and about their relative importance. The domains of housing, health, finances, work and education are identified in most of the reports, because exclusion on these domains is most distressing.

From a methodological point of view two main issues are of relevance: firstly, the selection of the items, secondly, the identification of critical points. If one chooses to integrate the selected indicators in a poverty-index, then there is a third point of relevance: the calculation of a poverty threshold.

Selection of indicators

The number of possible indicators is very high and including them all in the measurement of poverty or of forms of social exclusion is unmanageable. A selection will have to be made, choosing the indicators that would serve the purpose of measuring poverty or social exclusion best.

There is no theoretical model to determine the selection of indicators, rather normative decisions determine the selection and definition of social indicators. The decisive criteria are the following:1. Are the selected items culturally independent, in the sense of being valid across

populations of different countries and different sub-populations of a country?2. Are the selected items time-independent?3. Does it concern subjective or objective indicators? 4. Do the indicators discriminate well between the poor and non-poor?

Given the multitude of concepts and indicators used in the EU countries, it is impossible to reduce the complexity of the subject by supplying a simple list of indicators. The major difficulty is to properly separate poverty and social exclusion, since often indicators for both concepts overlap. Therefore, the list of indicators presented in table 1 is fragmentary.

35

Level of fault lines

Researchers using non-monetary indicators also have to face the problem of where to draw the line between the poor and the non-poor. Which standards of living and well-being are fixed and embodied in the indicator? This is an important question, because these decisions carry political implications. In table 1 presents some examples of thresholds that were mentioned by the experts.

Index of poverty or social exclusion

Social exclusion and poverty are complex phenomena. The analysis can therefore only occur using lots of indicators. The political demand is unmistakable and presses for an as simple as possible measurement. Nevertheless, only few examples are know of indexes of poverty and social exclusion.

In the Irish reports a basic index of 8 deprivation indicators, developed by the ESRI to assess basic deprivation levels. Deprivation refers to the extent to which someone is denied the opportunity to have or do something that is considered the norm in society. The index includes indicators such as having adequate heating, a day without a substantial meal, arrears o. mortgage, rent electricity or gas, and lack of a warm winter coat.

Another example is the multiple poverty-index used by the Social Impulse Fund (SIF) in Belgium. A composite index is used to identify poor communities. The index is composed of nine poverty-indicators of different dimensions of poverty as number of immigrants, number of people living on social welfare, number of children living with a single parent and the number of dwellings without basic comfort.

5.6 Combining indicators of household income and life-style deprivation

To measure poverty in terms of exclusion from the life of society because of a lack of resources a combination of indicators of income and social exclusion is needed. This approach of measuring poverty is best know from the work of Whelan (1995) and others. In Ireland, recent research on poverty measured two aspects of poverty, those who are excluded from their society due to lack of resources are identified using both income and deprivation criteria.

This approach is illustrated in Monitoring Poverty Trends, people are poor when they fell below either the 50 percent or 60 percent income poverty lines and experienced an enforced lack of at least one of the items of the basic deprivation index. Using deprivation indicators in conjunction with income lines provides a more adequate measure of poverty as exclusion due to lack of resources.

36

5.5 Indicators for monitoring the effectiveness of policies to combat poverty

There is no single measure of poverty or social exclusion which captures the complex problems which need to be overcome. This means that there can also be no single measure of the effectiveness of policies to combat poverty and social exclusion. In the British report, Opportunity for all, a whole range of success indicators are set out against which progress is monitored.

37

Table 1: Thresholds for non-monetary indicatorsIndicator Critical pointsHousing

Number of room in the house

Heating facilities

Equipment of the house

Less than one room per member of the household

No adequate heating facilities

No bath or showerNo indoor toiletNo basic services

Education

Educational level Incomplete primary educationIlliteracyWithout a basic qualification

Work Unemployment Long-term unemployment

Households without work for more than two years

Health

Subjective health status

Illnes or disability

Bad or very bad perception of health

Limiting long-standing illness or disability

Social contacts

Participation in civic organisations

Frequency of contact with friends or family

Non-participation

Less than once a week

38

CHAPTER 6:The relation between the national reports and policy-making and action

6.1 Introduction

The publication of national report on poverty and social exclusion is not enough. These reports are intended to be relevant for actual policies to combat and to prevent social exclusion. We are wondering if the publication of national reports has influenced policy-making in the country.

Of course this is not a one-way interaction. Policy-making can as well influence the production of national reports. In this chapter we give an overview of the answers to the questions in our questionnaire concerning the relationship between policy-making and national reports.

6.2 The impact of national reports on policy making

The aim of reports on poverty is to contribute to policy formation. The reports ideally should provide a fuller understanding of how to develop structural, preventive, and long-term policies, which we expect to be more effective. Policy makers should use this information when developing their policies.

Certain experts are optimistic about the policy relevance of research on poverty and social exclusion. However, others are rather pessimistic and state that the information gathered in the reports on poverty is not used in policy-making. That research is feeding back in policy-making.

Some examples of how reports can have a major impact on the future development of policies in the field of poverty and social exclusion:

Poverty and social exclusion are complex. Reports can make policy-makers sensitive to these aspects. In the past, attempts to deal with these issues often focused on short-term, piecemeal solutions. More and more policy-makers are

39

now working together with all sectors of society. The British government established a wider administrative co-operation for the relevant ministries to co-ordinate extensive projects. This is important because relieving the problem of social exclusion requires many-sided co-operation between various sectors.

In Spain, the regional reports were taken into account through the implementation of the Minimum Income Schemes. In 1987 a research had been done in the Basque country which used the concepts of relative poverty, according to the Van Praag method, and accumulative poverty. The results of this research shocked the Basque society and its politicians, which in 1988 debated the measures to introduce to face poverty. This research was one of the factors that convinced the Basque government to start an experimental implementation of the minimum income.

The debate on poverty and social exclusion in Italy had no high visibility and research on poverty and social exclusion tended to be viewed as separate and marginal. Reports by the Poverty Commission gain attention by the media and policy makers just for one day and for the purpose of political conflict. Although in recent years more attention is being developed both for the risks of social exclusion and for policies to combat social exclusion. Now the reports of the Poverty Commission can have an impact on the policy of the Italian government.

The case-studies in the report of the British government illustrated the approaches being taken which have made a real difference to individual’s lives. This led the government to plan for more flexible actions.

The British report, Opportunity for all, also stated the importance to work closely with individuals and communities which experience poverty. The United Kingdom reacted to this by breaking down organisational and institutional barriers to create new approaches to problems. They are now willing to listen to people on the ground, including people who are themselves living in poverty, to make sure that their policies have the right effect.

6.3 The impact of policy-making on national reports

Some examples of how policy-making can lead to the production of national reports on poverty and social exclusion:

In 1997, the Irish government designed the National-Anti-Poverty Strategy to place the needs of the poor and the socially excluded at the top of the national agenda in terms of government policy and action. The Combat Poverty Agency was asked to evaluate the progress of the National Anti-Poverty Strategy and to write on a regular base a report.

Within the European Union poverty and social exclusion belonged under national power of decision. The Treaty of Amsterdam, that came into force in 1999,

40

however expanded the powers of the community in the area of social policy. According to a new article in the Social Charter the Commission has the power to combat social exclusion. At the Lisbon European Council, the Union decided that steps have to be taken to make a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty by setting adequate targets by the end of 2000. The European Council agreed also that policies for combating social exclusion should be based on an open method of co-ordination. The open method of co-ordination means that a framework with appropriate objectives should be defined to evaluate the impact of social policies applied in Member States and that indicators should be defined as common references in the fight against social exclusion and the eradication of poverty. To reach a consensus regarding objectives and indicators, the member states were asked to establish national action plans to be presented by June 2000. These national action plans will be combined with a Commission initiative for co-operation.

The national action plans have to concern concrete policy priorities concerning poverty and the eradication of poverty and have to propose adequate indicators. The question to write national action plans means that the government of a country needs an overview of the situation regarding poverty and social exclusion.

41

CHAPTER 7:Strengths and weaknesses

Some functions of national reports

Keeping the subject of poverty and social exclusion on the political agenda, in the media, in the public opinion, …

The reports are a basic source of information for the administration, social partners, …

Policy makers can compare the current situation with those of previous years. A national report gives a state of affairs.

Giving a voice to the poor. Place the country against other countries of the EU. …

Some dangers and weaknesses of national reports

A possible danger is that a national report financed by one source, e.g. the government, only shows what the government wants to show. For this reason it is important that a report is financed by more than one source and that independent experts are involved in the writing of the report.

…

42

Chapter 8:A Model

8.1 Introduction

One of our aims is to develop a model that could be used as a benchmark and stimulate the production of yearbooks in other member states. We will compare the reports on poverty and social exclusion from the different member states and try to learn from these differences. We will search for the ‘best practice’, but will also identify failures and suggest ways to avoid these.

43

Chapter 9:A European Yearbook 9.1 Introduction

We already stated that it is not the aim of this project to prepare the publication of a European Yearbook on Social Exclusion and Social Inclusion. Nevertheless, we do want to know what the best strategy is to report on poverty at a European level. In this last chapter we compare alternative possibilities to report on poverty, social exclusion and social inclusion at the European level. We will formulate our own proposal.

44

Appendix AThe network

We identified experts in different countries to gather information on initiatives that promote a continuous and cumulative knowledge of problems of social exclusion and policies to combat and prevent social exclusion. We also identified these experts to check our work.

Spain:Casado, D.

Portugal:Henriques, J.M.

Italy:Saraceno, C.

Denmark:Hansen, F.K.

Sweden:Hort, S. Borjesön, M.

Finland:Uusitalo, H. Heikkila, M. Kainulainen, S.

Austria:Schenk, M.Stelzer-Orthofer, C.Förster, M.

Ireland and United KingdomHerrmann, P.

The Netherlands:Engbersen, G. Snel, E.

Germany:Leibfried, S. Buhr, P.Hauser, R. Strengmann, W. Becker, I.

France:Paugam, S.

45

Belgium:Guio, A.Jansen, C.

Luxembourg:Hausman, P. Berger, F.

46

Appendix B

Towards a policy relevant European database on forms of social exclusion

Project nr. VS/1999/0578 of the programme ‘Preparatory measures combating and preventing social exclusion’

Questionnaire:

The existence of national reports on forms of social exclusion

1. Is there or has there been in your country some form of national (bi-)annual report on social exclusion or related issues (poverty)? Would you be so kind as to give us the bibliographical information?

2. If there has never been such a (bi-)annual report, can you identify initiatives in your country that produce a continuous and cumulative knowledge of social exclusion? This could as well refer to regional annual reports, or to single syntheses of the state of affairs, newsletters, … In this case, select the most relevant alternatives (maximum three).

3. Please indicate the core research centres and researchers on social exclusion in your country, including you and your centre. Give a short description of the activities and main publications.

4. Could you give a brief history of the efforts to synthesise knowledge on social exclusion in your country (without going into detail – we need the general picture)?

5. Have European Union and cross-national initiatives contributed to the production of reports on social exclusion at the national level?

6. How important as a topic is social exclusion on the political and public agenda? Which actors are promoting this topic (NGO’s, labour unions, mass media, research)?

7. Could you assess the requirements for your country to establish a regular overview of the situation regarding matters of social exclusion?

Conceptual Frameworks

1. How are the concepts of ‘poverty’, ‘social exclusion’ and ‘social inclusion’ defined in your country? Which actors promote these concepts?

(Actors include government, researchers, NGO’s, labour unions, mass media,…)

47

2. Which other concepts are used in your country to indicate forms of social exclusion? Again, give a definition and the main actors.

(Concepts like: segmentation, fragmentation, marginalisation, dual society and underclass)

3. Has the use of the central concepts changed over time and, if so, why?

Databases

As for well-known cross-national databases such as ECHP or LIS, it is sufficient if you mention their use at the national level.

Which databases are being used in the national reports or in other forms of documentation on social exclusion? Depending on the problem, data will cover different domains, will be of different types, and produced at different levels.

How would you assess the availability of statistical information on social exclusion?

Regarding poverty and social exclusion in general Regarding social exclusion on specific domains, especially on work (labour market

and other), education, health and housing. Regarding social exclusion on other domains (consumption and consumption

patterns, debts and extreme forms of indebtedness, social protection and other social security schemes, non take-up rates, social network, associations, social work, justice and social rights, culture, social and spatial mobility)

Could you indicate for these databases their availability at following levels of analysis:

(aggregate) individual level (administrative or survey data) the group level (target groups) the institutional level (services, programmes, policies) the spatial level (European, national, regional, local)

Which statistical databases provide information on situations of extreme exclusion (such as long-term unemployment, low skill, illiteracy, homelessness, forms of ‘ghettoisation’, social isolation)?

How do you assess the importance of following ‘other’ databases for information on social exclusion?

documentary studies qualitative data (in-depth interviews with target groups, with key actors) network data information on urban development programmes evaluation data …

Indicators

1. Which indicators of social exclusion are used in your country? A single indicator (income?) Is any multiple poverty-index used in your country?

48

2. Which indicators are used for specific domains? Income Work Education Health Housing Other domains

3. At which level(s) are fault lines (thresholds, minimum standards, ‘exclusion lines’, cut-off points, or critical points) fixed for these indicators? Are these relative or absolute lines, dynamic or static lines?

4. Are any other indicators used in your country, such as relating to the group dimension (child poverty), the territorial dimension (regional or neighbourhood indicators), perception (stigmatisation), etc?

Relation between research & information and policy-making & action

The input on the side of policy-making: financing, provision of information, other facilitating provision, obstruction.

Feedback: in what ways have these publications and research actions influenced policy-making regarding our subject matter?

Output: PM (see first questions)

Strengths and weaknesses

We would welcome your own comments on the former issues (type and quality of research, dissemination of knowledge, databases, indicators and poverty-lines used, impact on policy-making, etc.)

(If you know of publications on this topic, you are welcome to mention them in and to send us a copy. All costs will be compensated.)

49