Poverty Measurement in Ukraine:
Criteria, Challenges, Perspectives
State Statistics Service of Ukraine
Household Survey Department
Inna Ossipova, Director of Department
Xenia Plisko, Deputy Director of Department
Definition of poverty and social exclusions adopted by the Council of
Europe in 1984:
“…poor are those persons, families and groups of persons whose
resources (material, cultural and social) are so limited as to exclude them
from the minimum acceptable way of life in the state to which they
belong…”
Definition of poverty adopted in Ukraine in 2001:
“Poverty is an impossibility due to a lack of funds to
keep up to the living style inherent in a specific society
in a specific period of time”
Approaches to defining poverty criteria
monetary
non-monetary
relative
absolute
income-based
consumption-based
objective
subjective
Most researchers recognize that a combined use of several
different approaches is the most effective way to measure
such a complex and multifaceted phenomenon as poverty.
Approaches to defining a poverty line for international
comparisons
monetary – minimum funds
required for survival, per
day
relative criteria
deprivations
consumption-based – minimum
dietary energy intake or quantity of
microelements in daily food
consumption
structural – maximum percentage
of household expenditures for
food in the total household
expenditures
Sample household survey of living conditions as a source of
poverty measurement
Household living
conditions survey
launched on 1 Jan 1999
Sample of 13,000 households,
Response rate – 83%,
Annual complete rotation
of households,
Rotation of territories
every 5 years.
Support
from
World Bank
USAID
SIDA
DFID
TACIS
Consistent with internationally accepted principles:
•Sampling is probabilistic, multistage, territorial providing equal
chances to any household to be selected;
•Rotation of respondents and territories;
•Voluntary respondent’s agreement to participate;
•Non-balancing income and expenditures;
•Consumption review during a short period;
•Valid data quality evaluation;
•Extrapolation of survey results to the population.
Household living conditions survey meets major requirements of
European household surveys:
Household budget survey (HBS) – in full
Survey of living conditions (SILC) – partially
Health interview survey (HIS) – partially
ICT usage survey – partially
Information potential of a survey
- social-demographic characteristics of household members
- expenditures and consumption
- income and other resources, including those coming from subsidiary
farming
- housing conditions
- availability of durable goods
- evaluation of health conditions and access to medical goods and services
- evaluation of well-being level and economic expectations
- access to certain goods and services
- access to information and communication technologies
The information potential of the survey, the availability of microdata and the
inclusion of additional modules with sociology oriented questions help to
measure poverty using all above criteria.
Poverty levels estimated based on different criteria,
2001-2012
%
90
82.7
86.1
83.3
80
70
77.5
76.2
67.4 61.4
61.6
79.6
68,0
65.6
60
59.3
50
55.3
58.7
49.7 59.2
51.6
56.9
42.7
13,0
60.2
40
62.4
41.2
40.8
Expenditures below
relative poverty line
41.5
Subjectivity poverty level
35.8
40.9
30
20
25.5
27.2
27.2
26.6
27.3
11.0
10
27.1
9.0
3.0
4.0
28.1
2002
2003
27
7.1
6.0
2.0
0
2001
27.3
12.7
2004
2005
2006
6.6
3.8
2007
2008
26.4
5.8
3.5
2009
Income below a
subsistence minimum
level
24.1
8.8
24.3
7.8
Expenditures for food
above 60% of total
expenditures
9.1
2.5
1,9
2.3
2010
2011
2012
Expenditures below USD
5 a day
Poverty measurement in Ukraine
In accordance with the National Social Poverty Reduction and Prevention
Programme until 2015 the following criteria are used:
- poverty line based on a relative threshold of 75% median equivalized total
expenditures per capita;
- extreme poverty line based on a relative threshold of 60% median equivalized total
expenditures per capita;
- absolute poverty line at the level of statutory subsistence minimum;
- absolute poverty line for international comparisons determined by daily consumption
value of USD 5 (PPP) per capita.
Indicators measured quarterly:
Poverty level
Poverty depth
Aggregate income deficit of the poor
Average income deficit of the poor
Stratification indicators of the poor population (proportion of extremely poor among
the poor, inequality index)
Sociodemographic groups for which poverty indicators are estimated:
employed
children under 18
persons of retirement age
persons aged 75 and older
men
women
By location:
Urban
cities (above 100,000)
towns
Rural
Types of households for which poverty indicators are estimated:
•households with children
- by number of children
- with children under 3
- where adults are employed
- with both employed and unemployed adults
•households with no children
- where all members are of working age
- where all members are of retirement age
- consist of persons aged 75 and older
- with at least one unemployed
Poverty by deprivations: list of attributes
Limited economic opportunities (no funds):
1) to buy basic inexpensive foods;
2) to buy, when necessary, new outerwear and footwear for cold seasons, once in
5 years for adults;
3) to buy, when necessary, new clothes and footwear for children;
4) to buy a a TV set;
5) to buy a refrigerator;
6) for major repairs of housing which is damp, slum, or old);
7) for timely and full payment of bills for housing and necessary maintenance
services or payment for gas used for cooking;
8) to improve housing (available housing floorspace does not exceed 5 sq.
meters per person);
9) to pay for required health services (excluding dentists) in a health care facility
(in case of no or difficult access to free services), tests, examinations and procedures
prescribed by a doctor;
10) to pay for required drugs and medical supplies prescribed by a doctor;
List of attributes (cont.)
11) to pay for in-patient services without surgery (if such services are not
provided for free) or vital surgery (excluding cosmetic surgery) and relevant inpatient treatment (if such services are not provided for free);
12) to get any professional education;
- limited possibilities related to infrastructural development as a criterion
of geographical accessibility of services and non-geographical barriers:
13) lack of retail points of sale in the neighbourhood;
14) lack of personal service providers in a settlement;
15) lack of a health care facility, pharmacies in the neighbourhood;
16) lack of emergency ambulance services in a settlement;
17) lack of child facilities in the neighbourhood;
18) lack of regular daily transport links with another settlement with better
infrastructure.
Poverty level by deprivations represents a proportion of households in the
distribution by the concentration of deprivation attributes; most closely it can be
associated with the relative monetary poverty level. The category of the poor
includes households that experience 4 or more attributes out of 18 deprivations.
Poverty indicators in main population groups, 20072012 (based on relative threshold)
Households with children
70
with 1 child
60
with 3 or more chilren
50
with children under 3
40
Households with no children
30
all members of working age
20
10
all members of retirement
age
0
all members aged 75 and
older
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
with at least 1 unemployed
Poverty indicators by location, 2007–2012 (based on
relative threshold)
40
35
30
Urban
25
cities
20
towns
Rural
15
Ukraine
10
5
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Poverty indicators in main population groups,
2010–2012 (based on absolute threshold)
Households w ith children
40
w ith 1 child
35
w ith 3 or more children
30
w ith children under 3
25
Househholds w ith no children
all members of w orking age
20
all members of retirement age
15
all members aged 75 and older
10
w ith at least 1 unemployed
Urban
5
cities
0
2010
2011
2012
tow ns
Rural
Ukraine
Poverty indicators
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Poverty line based on relative
threshold
526
778
835
944
1,062
1,125
Extreme poverty line based on relative
threshold
420
622
668
755
850
900
Poverty level based on relative
threshold, %
27.3
27.0
26.4
24.1
24.3
25.5
Extreme poverty level based on
relative threshold, %
13.8
13.6
13.0
11.2
10.7
11.2
Poverty depth based on relative
threshold, %
23.1
23.4
22.3
20.9
20.5
20.5
Subsistence minimum level, Hryvnia
518.5
607.5
638.5
843.2
914.1
1,042.4
Poverty level based on absolute
threshold, %
12.7
7.1
5.8
8.8
7.8
9.1
Poverty level based on daily
consumption of USD 5
6.6
3.8
3.5
2.5
1.9
2.3
Subjective poverty level
59.2
56.9
58.7
60.2
62.4
68.0
Poverty level by deprivations
28.6
Х
25.4
Х
25.5
Х
Expenditures for food exceeding 60%
of total expenditures
42.7
40.8
40.9
41.2
41.5
35.8
Daily calorie intake below 2100 kcal
14.3
13.2
13.1
13.7
16.2
15.6
Poverty levels based on different criteria, 2011
Poor based on absolute threshold
0.8%
0.4%
3.4%
3/2%
Poor by deprivation
15.9%
6,0%
Poor based on relative threshold
11.7%
Poverty level based on the relative threshold is shown in yellow (24.3%).
Poverty level by deprivation is shown in blue (25.5%).
Poverty level based on the absolute threshold is shown in pink (7.8%).
Monitoring and performance evaluation of social assistance
programmes
•
•
Monitoring framework was developed in pursuance of the Government Resolution
Concerning monitoring and performance evaluation of social assistance.
Fundamental methodological approaches were developed under the World Bank Project
“Social Assistance System Modernization”
The objective is to evaluate impact of social assistance programmes on the wellbeing of
specific groups of households and to measure social outcomes
The impact of social assistance programmes on poverty will be assessed through
analyzing changes in poverty levels
Two types of monitoring: ongoing (annual) and periodic (in-depth, once in 5 years)




Various data sources for monitoring:
Administrative data
Statistical monitoring
Sample household living conditions survey
Public opinion poll on effectiveness of social assistance programmes
•
•
•
A new opinion poll on effectiveness of social assistance programmes will be carried out
in January 2014. The analysis of the poll results will be issued at the end of 2014.
Official statistics indicators for ongoing monitoring
Assessment of impact on poverty
Poverty
level after
allowances
Poverty level
before
allowances
Childbirth
allowance
Indicator of
impact on
poverty
Child care
assistance for
children under 3
A proportion of
assistance in
beneficiaries’ income
Child care assistance
to single mothers
Monitoring of changes in the number of
beneficiaries
Number of families
to whom housing and
utilities allowance
was granted
Evaluation of
assistance
effectiveness for its
beneficiaries
Number of families to
whom a cash allowance
was granted to buy
liquefied gas, fuel for
domestics consumption
Evaluation of how well
assistance is targeted
A proportion of total assistance that
gets through to the poor
Proportion of allowance beneficiaries
among the poor
Government
social assistance
to poor families
Allowance for housing
and utilities services,
purchase of liquefied
gas, solid and liquid fuel
for household
consumption
Monitoring of allowance amounts
Total amount of housing
and utilities allowances
granted to families
Total amount of cash
allowances granted to
families to buy liquefied gas,
fuel for domestics
consumption
Official statistics indicators for periodic monitoring
Distribution of households by a degree of social assistance effect on household
well-being
Distribution of assistance beneficiaries by satisfaction with the quality of
relevant government social assistance programme
Distribution of assistance beneficiaries who are not satisfied with the quality
of government social assistance by major reasons of dissatisfaction
Childbirth
allowance
Child care
assistance for
children under 3
Child care
assistance to
single mothers
Government
social assistance
to poor families
Total fertility rate
Number of births during a reference period
Under-five mortality rate
Allowance for housing and
utilities services, purchase of
liquefied gas, solid and liquid
fuel
Household debt for
housing and utilities
services
Social assistance effectiveness indicators
Social assistance targeting evaluation
Proportion of actual assistance beneficiaries in a total number of eligible persons
Distribution of households by reasons due to which potential beneficiaries did not seek
assistance
Proportion of households to whom assistance was not granted in the total number of those
who requested such assistance, by reasons of refusal
Distribution of households by evaluation of changes in the social assistance system over the
last 2 years
Distribution of households by the number of social assistance programmes in which they
participate
Proportion of households who need but are not eligible for any assistance, by types of
assistance
Summary and perspectives
•
•
•
•
•
•
The use of only one poverty measure does not allow adequately evaluating the
incidence and dynamics of this multidimensional phenomenon. The most effective
way to look into poverty issues is to use a combination of various approaches to
poverty measurement.
The EU integration processes in Ukraine increase the need for activities aimed at
the harmonization with the approaches used in the EU countries.
Ukraine plans to enlarge the criteria used for poverty measurement based on living
conditions (by deprivations), including those related to access to goods and
services in health care and education.
An important area in developing poverty statistics is to improve the reliability of
poverty criteria through the use of indirect evaluation methods, including for small
territories.
In the nearest future Ukraine plans to assess the impact of targeted social
assistance system on poverty.
In the context of an increased interest of policy makers, other users and the public
to the information on poverty incidence it is important to elaborate a unified
approach (threshold) usable for international comparisons. Such threshold may
vary for countries with different human development levels (an example is such a
threshold as daily consumption below USD 5 per capita). At the same time, for the
purposes of social and economic policymaking each country may apply national
threshold framework for comprehensive poverty monitoring.