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 ........................... 7
1.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 2: A DESCRIPTION OF NATIONAL INITIATIVES ............................ 8
1.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 8
1.2 NATIONAL INITIATIVES................................................................................. 8
1.3 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE A REGULAR OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL SITUATION
REGARDING POVERTY MATTERS AND SOCIAL EXCLUSION?.............................................. 15
CHAPTER 3: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ......................................................17
3.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 17
3.2 POVERTY ................................................................................................ 17
3.3 SOCIAL EXCLUSION AND SOCIAL INCLUSION....................................................... 20
3.4 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................................... 21
CHAPTER 4: DATABASES .............................................................................28
4.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 28
4.2 SOCIAL SURVEYS ....................................................................................... 29
4.3 ADMINISTRATIVE DATA ................................................................................ 30
4.4 OTHER STUDIES ........................................................................................ 30
4.5 INDICATOR SYSTEMS, STATISTICAL REPORTS ...................................................... 30
CHAPTER 5: INDICATORS ............................................................................32
5.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 32
5.2 INDICATORS OF INCOME POVERTY ................................................................... 32
5.3 INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC RESOURCES ............................................................ 34
5.4 INDICATORS OF LIVING CONDITIONS ................................................................ 34
5.6 COMBINING INDICATORS OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND LIFE-STYLE DEPRIVATION ............. 36
5.5 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 ......................................................................................... 39
6.2 THE IMPACT OF NATIONAL REPORTS ON POLICY MAKING .......................................... 39
6.3 THE IMPACT OF POLICY-MAKING ON NATIONAL REPORTS.......................................... 40
CHAPTER 7: STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES ...............................................42
2
CHAPTER 8: A MODEL ..................................................................................43
8.1 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
5
possible to react quickly to needs and demands in matters of research, policy
making, local action,
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 2
A 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
8
and in particular each sector is analysed (labour, education, health, etc.). Since
1986, 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
9
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
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
10
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
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.
11
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.
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
12
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 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
15
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
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 3
Conceptual 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.
17
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.
There are a few alternative established or professionally supported conceptions of
poverty in Europe. We have labelled these the financial definition, the resourcesbased 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.
18
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.
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:
20
Marginalisation refers to individuals’ or households’ experience of an accumulation of
problems, which persist over time. Most distressing are problems related to work,
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
21
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'
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
Fault lines
no
yes
Hierarchy
no
yes
social differentiation
social inequality
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
22
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, 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?
23
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
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
24
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)
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 microlevel, 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 macrolevel 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.
25
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?
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
26
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
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 4
Databases
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 nonEuropean 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
29
institutes of the participating countries. For example, in Ireland the Living in Ireland
Survey is undertaken by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
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
30
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
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 5
Indicators
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 ECstandard 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.
32
Moreover, these poverty lines are based on different equivalence scales. Household
income is adjusted for size and composition using an equivalence scale. The ECpoverty 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
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.
34
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,
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 indicators
Indicator
Critical points
Housing

Number of room in the house
Less than one room per member of
the household

Heating facilities
No adequate heating facilities

Equipment of the house
No bath or shower
No indoor toilet
No basic services
Education

Educational level
Incomplete primary education
Illiteracy
Without a basic qualification
Work

Unemployment
Long-term unemployment
Households without work for more
than two years
Health

Subjective health status
Bad or very bad perception of health

Illnes or disability
Limiting long-standing illness or
disability
Social contacts

Participation in civic organisations
Non-participation

Frequency of contact with friends or
family
Less than once a week
38
CHAPTER 6:
The relation between the
national reports and policymaking 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:
39

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
now working together with all sectors of society. The British government
established a wider administrative co-operation for the relevant ministries to coordinate 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
40
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,
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 A
The 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 Kingdom
Herrmann, P.
The Netherlands:
Engbersen, G.
Snel, E.
Germany:
Leibfried, S.
Buhr, P.
Hauser, R.
Strengmann, W.
Becker, I.
45
France:
Paugam, S.
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?
47
(Actors include government, researchers, NGO’s, labour unions, mass media,…)
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?
48


A single indicator (income?)
Is any multiple poverty-index used in your country?
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