A recent report form the city of Buenos Aires measuring multi-dimensional poverty, using the consensual method, has found that in 2019,15.3% of households were multi-dimensionally poor, rising to 25.7% for households with children under 18 years of age. The method established will be used to measure nu,ti-dimensional poverty on an ongoing basis.
We are now delighted to offer you the presentation slides and video recordings of sessions across the three days, featuring formal presentations, interactive Q&As, networking opportunities and much more.
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Steering Group on Measuring Poverty and Inequality has been tasked with producing a guide on Measuring Social Exclusion which references a lot of our PSE work.
Households going without in 2012 and 1999: Britain
This table shows the percentage of households, or for those marked with a (1) the percentage of adults, who cannot afford each of the items and activities seen as necessities for adults. All items and activities were seen as necessities in both 2012 and 1999 apart from those with an asterisk * which were seen as necessities in 1999 but not in 2012. Items and activities with n/a in the 1999 column were not included in that survey.
The items and activities are initially ranked in descending order of the percentage seeing it as a necessity in 2012 (see UK 2012: attitudes to adult necessities). You can rank by the percentage who cannot afford the items and activities in 2012 and in 1999 and by the change in percentage points between 1999 and 2012 by clicking on the up/down arrow at the top of the column. To return to it ordered by the percentage seeing the item as a necessity in 2012 click the reset button.
(1) These items and activities give percentage of adults not households
(2) Percentage of working age adults: taken as men aged 18-65, women aged 18-60
(3) For households with children only
(4) In 1999 this question was 'Regular savings (of at least £10 a month) for rainy days or retirement
* These items and activities were seen as necessities in 1999 but not in 2012
n/a - not asked in 1999
Overview
The extent of deprivation across Britain increased between 1999 and 2012. For 18 out of the 24 items and activities covered in both the 1999 and 2012 surveys, the percentages who could not afford that items or activity rose while for five items and activities it stayed the same and for just one (a washing machine) it dropped. The greatest increase – as measured by the percentage point increase – was for those who cannot afford to replace or repair broken electrical goods – up by 14 percentage points. That is out of every 100 adults, 14 more could not afford this item in 2012 compared to 1999.
All the top three items and activities as seen by the percentage who see that item or activity as a necessity, showed significant increases. Those who could not afford to keep their home adequately warm trebled from 3% to 9% - up by 6 percentage points. Those who could not afford a damp-free home was up by 3 percentage points – from 7% to 10% while those who could not afford two meals a day also trebled up from 1% to 3%.
There was a methodological change in 2012 compared to 1999 in the choice of options relating to activites (as opposed to items) to enable respondents who would like to take part in an activity but couldn't (as opposed to those who did or those who didn't want to) to distinguish between the reason being lack of money or some other cause (such as lack of time or caring responsibilities). In previous surveys there was only the choice of 'can't afford' and not one offering 'any other reason'. The 2012 percentage for those who cannot afford an activity is likely therefore be an underestimate compared to 1999 as respondents in 2012 were provided with this additional choice.
The 2012 figures come from the PSE UK 2012 Living Standards survey and the 1999 figures come from the PSE Britain 1999 Living Standards survey. See PSE survey details for the sample size and sampling frames of both surveys.
PSE:UK is a major collaboration between the University of Bristol, Heriot-Watt University, The Open University, Queen's University Belfast, University of Glasgow and the University of York working with the National Centre for Social Research and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. ESRC Grant RES-060-25-0052.
