A Multidimensional Approach to the Analysis of Individual
Deprivation: the Model and the Results of an Empirical
Investigation
by
Matteo D’Emilione, Giovanna Giuliano, Paolo Raciti, Simona Tenaglia
Department of Social Policies and Gender Equality
ISFOL
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Aim and results of the work
•
•
Objective: to measure the level of deprivation of the
population living in a given territory (multidimensional
perspective)
Theoretical framework: Capability Approach (Sen,
Nussbaum), multidimensional indicators theory (Bossert,
Chakravarty and D'Ambrosio (2009))
• Results: representation of individual level of deprivation,
ex-ante evaluation tool, instrument for policy makers
accountability and democratic debate
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
What is ‘functioning’?
Functioning is a "state of being and doing“ and can be defined in
greater detail as:
• A physical, cognitive and mental state of individuals;
• placing individuals in a position to perceive a problem or to
set objectives and desires;
• to attribute a value to the problem or objective;
• to express the aim to act, to choose to act and to act
consistently in view of the management of the problem or
achieving the objective.
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
What is ‘capability’?
• A capability is defined as the real power of choice that a
person has with respect to a fixed system of states of being and
doing (functionings) actually available and alternative among
them. Capabilities reflect the real degree of freedom that is
internal to personal choice of living one kind of life rather
than another.
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Capabilities
Material goods
Conversion factors
Functionings
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Choice
List of individual dimensions
1. Living in a house in our approach means to be able to manage the house (to be able
to sustain expenditures, to clean it and keep it in order);
2. Generating income means to be able to manage and improve income source (to
find a new job, to increase professional skills, investing savings etc.);
3. Living in the community (Community environment) means to be able to live in
the environment (to maintain relationships with friends, neighbors, to attend
churches, cinema, sporting clubs, etc.);
4. Developing skills, improving education means to be able to improve educational
level, to attend courses etc;
5. Being healthy means to be able to improve health conditions (to be able to take
care of oneself and of the other members of the family and not having dangerous or
risk behaviors);
6. Thinking about the future means to be able to plan for the future, (to have a clear
idea of how would you like the life to be);
7. Expressing emotions and talents means to be able to express feelings of love,
anger, gratitude in all the dimensions of life, to be able to use imagination,
rationality and creativity, to be able to use skills and talents in the workplace.
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
The multidimensional indicator
The indicator presented here is intended precisely to highlight
the several dimensions of poverty. It is based on the counting
approach" (Atkinson 2003), developed among others by
Alkire and Foster (2007) and Bossert, Chakravarty and
D'Ambrosio (2009).
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
The multidimensional indicator
Defined “n” as the
population size and “r”
as the parameter that
makes the indicator
sensitive
to
the
distribution of poverty
(Bossert, Chakravarty
and
D'Ambrosio
2009), the index is
represented as follows
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
1
nr
r
i
i

1
1


P

P


r

n



The multidimensional indicator
k-dimensional vector;
1
if
k

j

j
1


k




0
if
k

1
,....,
k
\
j

P (x) individual function
α weights calculated on the
0

i
x

0

basis of the question posed


P
x


i
i
x

0

j
to respondents and policy

j


1
,
K

:
x

1
.
j

makers.
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
The indicator is a symmetric mean of order “r” and changes according to the
level of inequality. For values of “r” approaching unity the index becomes the
arithmetic mean of the individual levels of poverty.
The indicator takes into account binary variables ( if ‘1’
no deprivation’) which belong to two different categories:
deprivation; if ‘0’
Material deprivation and conversion factors variables: describe the
individual material deprivation and conversion factors at present
Functioning variables: explain how, when and why a functioning is active or
not.
The general indicator is composed by 47 material deprivation and conversion
factors variables and 37 functionings variables
The interactions/interplays between these two kinds of variables can be viewed
in a cartesian space representing four possible situations…..
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
The space of capabilities
B
C
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
A
D
Functioning variable (example)….
There are different ways to solve such problems or to prevent
such things from going wrong. During the last 12 months,
have you (or a member of your family) done any of the
following actions ?
• Contacted a politician or local government official (0)
• Worked in a political party or ‘action group’/neighborhood
committee (0)
• Self-organization with friends or neighbors (0)
• I haven't done anything because they are not problems that can
be solved (1)
• I haven't done anything because there are no
organizations/action groups where I/we live (0)
• I haven't done anything because I'm not interested in such
problems (1)
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Material deprivation variable (example)….
Problems
you
can
find
in
your
neighbourhood/community (if ‘yes’ 1 ; if ‘no’ 0):
• Pollution and/or dirtiness;
• Noise caused by traffic, industrial activities etc
• Crime
• Lack of services (ex: postal services, sanitation,
banking etc)
• Lack of transport facilities
• Uneven roads
• Low lighting
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
• On Y axis we measure achieved functionings, not achieved
functionings and PARTIALLY achieved functionings
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
The empirical analysis (some details)
• (Unrepresentative) sample of 523 individuals;
• Two groups: users of social services / non users
• Ad hoc structured questionnaire (divided into seven
sections, one for each dimension selected by the
research team)
• 6 Social Planning Districts/Area;
• 6 focus groups with social workers and policy
makers.
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Application of the indicator
•
26
Scala
Figure1: General index (r=1)
1
1
24
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
20
1
1
1
1
1
2
18
1
2
1
1
1
1
B (12%)
2
1
2
2
1
2
7
2
3
1
3
1
1
12
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
2
5
1
4
7
C (35,4%)
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
2
1
1
1
A
(34,6 %)
2
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
D (18%)
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
1
2
1
1
3
1
2
1
1
2
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
4
2
1
1
5
2
6
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
5
1
5
4
1
1
3
3
4
1
1
2
2
2
6
1
1
2
1
2
8
2
1
4
5
1
3
2
4
4
2
6
3
2
1
3
3
2
1
1
3
5
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
3
2
3
1
3
3
2
2
1
10
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
4
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
16
1
3
2
3
2
1
1
8
1
1
22
14
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
3
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
It is possible to weight each dimension through a value which
is the mean of weights assigned by two groups of people:
• individuals of the sample
• policy makers and social workers.
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Terms of allocation of weights from respondents
Imagine you have 100 points. Shared them among the following dimensions,
according to the relevance you attach to each dimensions in generating
deprivation and poverty:
to be able to manage the house( to be able to sustain expenditures, to clean the house)
 to be able to manage and improve income source (to find a new job etc.)
to be able to live in the environment (to maintain relationships etc.)
to be able to improve educational level
 to be able to improve health conditions
to be able to project the future
to be able to express emotions and talents
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Weights for single dimension (%)
Dimensions
Individuals
Policy makers and social
workers
Living a house
16,4
24,3
Generating income
22,1
23,4
Living in the community
10,5
10,6
13
13,6
10,3
7,4
Being healthy
18
10,3
Thinking about the future
9,8
10,4
Total
100
100
Developing skills / Improving
education
Expressing emotions and talents
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Application of the indicator
Figure 2: Index with interviewed individuals weights (r=1)
Scala
4
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
B
(12,4%)
1
1
2
3
A
(44,8%)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
4
2
1
2
2
4
2
1
1
1
9
2
4
2
3
5
3
2
1
1
7
4
6
2
1
2
8
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
D
(20,6%)
1
1
1
0
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
4
2
2
2
2
2
5
4
3
2
2
5
1
2
1
3
4
6
7
7
2
10
5
7
6
2
1
3
3
4
4
8
2
1
2
9
6
1
1
3
4
4
6
2
C
(22,2%)
12
5
3
9
5
1
2
2
6
5
2
1
1
1
4
2
1
1
4
4
5
3
2
1
2
2
2
3
6
2
1
4
4
1
1
6
3
1
3
1
1
5
1
1
1
3
1
4
6
1
8
Application of the indicator
Figure 3: Index with policy makers and social workers weights (r=1)
Scala
6
5
4
3
2
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
6
2
1
2
1
4
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
4
4
2
2
5
4
3
2
2
3
2
2
1
3
2
3
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
2
2
5
2
1
2
1
3
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
5
4
3
1
1
1
1
5
3
2
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
3
2
3
2
4
1
2
2
3
2
5
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
1
2
3
4
5
6
Strengths of our model
• The ability to display the results of the survey (positioning
individuals in a cartesian space) reinforces the potential of the
model in at least two ways:
1. it allows to share the results with policy makers (improves the
accountability of the administration) and, eventually, with
the population directly affected by the survey (increasing
empowerment of the population;
2. through repetition over time of the survey involving a cohort of
individuals, it will be possible to study any transitions between
quadrants.
• In the latter case, the multidimensionality of the phenomenon
and the large number of variables considered do not allow us to
associate these transitions to the effect of specific policy
interventions. However these movements provide a basis for
evaluating policies aimed at fighting poverty and social exclusion
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
…what can be improved
• To run a multinomial logit/probit analysis
• To balance the number of functioning variables and material
deprivation and conversion factors variables in the
multidimensional indicator
• To use a representative sample
…… what we are going to do…
A survey in a specific metropolitan area
(2000 individuals)
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
Thank you for your attention!
Paris, 6-8 July 2011
The literature
…Full operationalisation of CA…..is it possible?
 See :
• ‘A note on functionings-poverty in affluent societies’ – A. Balestrino
(1996);
• ‘A multi-dimensional assessment of well being in the functioning space’ ,
Chiappero – Martinetti (2003)
• ‘ Children well-being and family characteristics in Italy’, T. Addabbo, M.
Di Tommaso (2007);
• ‘Measuring the interaction between parents and children in Italian
families: a structural equation approach’ – A. Maccagnan (2011);
• ‘Valuing Freedoms: Sen’s Capability Approach and Poverty reduction’ –
S. Alkire (2002)
• ‘Applying Sens Capabilities Framework to Work Family Balance whitin a
European context. Theoretical and Empirical Challenges’ - Hobson and
Faheln (2009)
 CA (Sen, Nussbaum)
 Multidimensional indicators (Atkinson (2003), Alkire and Foster (2007)
and Bossert, Chakravarty and D'Ambrosio (2009)).
Paris, 6-8 July 2011