Statistics Explained

Archive:Risk of poverty, labour and income – changes over time

Longitudinal analysis

This article has been archived. For other articles on risk of poverty, see here.

Some indicators used in the article were calculated on the basis of EU-SILC micro-data and are not available in Eurobase.

Table 1: Persistent-at-risk-of-poverty rate, 2008-2013
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_li21)
Figure 1: Persistent-at-risk-of-poverty rate by age, education and household type, EU-28, 2013 (estimate)
(% of specified population)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_li21), (ilc_li24) and (ilc_li23)
Table 2: Distribution of population by number of years spent in poverty within a four-year period, 2013
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_li51)
Figure 2: Persistent material deprivation rate by degree of deprivation, 2013
(%)
Source: Eurostat
Table 3: Distribution of population by number of years spent in severe material deprivation within a four-year period, 2013
(%)
Source: Eurostat
Figure 3 : Labour transitions (2012-2013) for employed persons by sex, EU-28, (estimates)
(% of specified population)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvhl30)
Figure 4 : Labour transitions (2012-2013) for employed persons working part-time by sex, EU-28, (estimates)
(% of specified population)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvhl30)
Figure 5 : Labour transitions (2012-2013) for unemployed persons by sex, EU-28, (estimates)
(% of specified population)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvhl30)
Figure 6 : Labour transitions (2012-2013) , EU-28, (estimate)
(% of specified population)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvhl32)
Table 4: Income transitions by decile over different time periods, EU-28 (estimates)
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di30a), (ilc_di30b) and (ilc_di30c)
Table 5: Income transitions by decile over three year period (2010-2013) for the total population and the population at risk of poverty, 2013
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di30c),

This article provides an overview of the indicators of risk of poverty and material deprivation from the longitudinal perspective as well as labour and income transitions. EU-Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) is the European Union (EU) reference source for comparative statistics on income distribution and social inclusion at European level. It provides two types of annual data – cross-sectional and longitudinal. EU-SILC cross-sectional data pertain to a given time or a certain time period while longitudinal data, i.e. data covering the same persons and households over more years, refer to changes over time, observed periodically over a four year period..

Main statistical findings

At-risk-of-poverty

The persistent at-risk-of-poverty rate increased in 11 EU Member States and decreased in 14 between 2012 and 2013

Due to the longitudinal component of EU-SILC, it is possible to analyse the situation of people who are at risk of poverty not only at a given point in time but also the situation of those whose income is below the poverty threshold over several years. In 2013, 9.1 % of the EU-28 population was assessed to be at persistent risk of poverty, meaning they were below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold for the current year and at least two out of the preceding three years. When looking back, the proportion of the EU-28 population that was at persistent risk of poverty slightly rose from 8.6 % in 2008 to 10.8 % in 2012. In 2013, this indicator fell for the first time since 2008. In 2013, across the EU Member States, the results varied from around 5 % in Denmark and the Czech Republic to around 13 % in Bulgaria, Croatia and Italy. In Iceland only 2.4 % of the population was at persistent risk of poverty. The comparison between 2012 and 2013 shows that the share of the population at persistent risk of poverty increased in eleven Member States and decreased in fourteen. The changes were not very large - increases higher than 1 percentage point (pp) were observed in Slovenia (1.4 pp), France (1.5 pp), Cyprus (1.7 pp) and Luxembourg (2.1 pp), while a decrease of 1 pp or more was observed in Malta, Spain, Belgium (1.2 pp each), Greece (1.4 pp), Slovakia (1.5 pp), Poland (1.7 pp), Lithuania (2.1 pp) and Estonia (2.7 pp) (see Table 1).

The most vulnerable to persistent poverty are young people aged below 18

In 2013, the risk of being at persistent poverty varied between different groups in society. At EU-28 level, the most vulnerable to persistent poverty were young people aged less than 18 (11.8 %), followed by the working age population aged 18-64 (8.6 %), while the least vulnerable were elderly people of 65 years and over (8.1 %). Wider differences were observed for the group of people with different levels of education. The values of the indicator ranged from 14.2 % for people with pre-primary, primary and lower secondary education to 4.0 % for people with first and second stage of tertiary education. When looking at the household composition, people living in households composed of two or more adults with dependent children were at higher risk of being at persistent poverty than those living in households composed of two or more adults without dependent children rates of 9.1 % and 4.7 % respectively. The most vulnerable were people living in single person households with dependent children: at EU-28 level 22.3 % of people in this group were at persistent risk of poverty (see Figure 1).

Number of years at risk of poverty varies between EU Member States

EU-SILC longitudinal data allow an analysis of how many years people experience income poverty over a four year period of time. In 2013 in the EU-28 as a whole, three quarters of the population had not been at risk of poverty, 9.0 % once, 5.3 % twice, 4.9 % three times and 5.4 % were at risk of poverty all four surveyed years. The share of persons who had never been at risk of poverty over the four year period was highest among the EU Member States in the Czech Republic (85.9 %), the Netherlands (82.5 %), Slovenia (82.3 %), Finland (82.1 %) and Sweden (80.8 %). Iceland and Norway also reported quite high values for this indicator (85.7 % and 85.2 % respectively). When looking at the precise number of years, in the majority of EU Member States the highest values were observed for those who were at risk of poverty one year only. The shares ranged from 5.5 % in Slovenia to 15.1 % in Greece. When comparing being at risk of poverty for two and three years, the values were quite similar for the majority of EU Member States. In Poland, Lithuania, Slovakia, Estonia and the United Kingdom the share of being at risk of poverty for two years was significantly higher than for three years. In fifteen out of twenty six EU Member States for which data is available, the share of those who experienced poverty for all four years was higher than the share of those who experienced poverty for two or three years. In Slovenia and Bulgaria this share was even higher than for those who experienced poverty for one year only. As for being at risk of poverty the whole surveyed period i.e. four years, the figures ranged from 2.9 % in the Czech Republic to around 10 % in Bulgaria and Croatia (10.2 % and 9.7 % respectively) (see Table 2).

Material deprivation and severe material deprivation

In 2013, 7.9 % of the EU-28 population were experiencing persistent severe material deprivation

Material deprivation covers issues related to economic strain, durables and housing conditions. It is defined as the percentage of persons who cannot afford to pay for at least three out of the nine deprivation items, while those who are unable to afford four or more items are considered to be severely materially deprived. In general, the analysis of material deprivation is performed based on the cross-sectional component of EU-SILC (in other words at a given point in time), although through longitudinal data the persistence of material deprivation can be analysed. In 2013, 7.9 % of the EU-28 population was assessed to be persistently materially deprived, while 2.8 % of the EU-28 population were considered as experiencing persistent severe material deprivation. The levels of persistent material deprivation and severe material deprivation differed widely across EU Member States. In four out of twenty three EU Member States, the proportion of people who were in persistent material deprivation exceeded 20 %, reaching almost 50 % in Bulgaria (49.4 %). On the other hand, values lower than 5 % were observed in Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Luxembourg; this was also the case in Norway and Iceland. In Bulgaria, Hungary and Luxembourg more than half of persistently materially deprived persons also experienced persistent severe material deprivation. It should be noted, however, that in the case of Luxembourg the values for both indicators were very low as opposed to Bulgaria and Hungary. As for persistent severe material deprivation in the majority of EU Member States, as well as in Iceland, the figures were very low; in seventeen EU Member States 5 % or less of the population was persistently severely deprived, while in Norway no one was in such a situation. In Bulgaria, on the contrary, more than one quarter of the population experienced persistent severe material deprivation. Figures exceeding 10 % were also observed in Hungary, Latvia and Lithuania (15.9 %, 14.1 % and 10.5 % respectively).

In 18 EU Member States three quarters of the population or more did not experience severe material deprivation in the period 2010 to 2013

When analysing the number of years spent in severe material deprivation, only around one in ten people at EU-level experienced it at least once over the four year period; 5.7 % of the population was severely materially deprived once, 2.6 % twice, 1.9 % three times and 1.5 % were severely materially deprived all four surveyed years. In seventeen out of twenty three EU Member States, three quarters of the population or more have never experienced severe material deprivation over a four year period. On the other hand only half of the population (54.9 %) was in a such situation in Latvia and 40.2 % in Bulgaria. When looking at those who were severely materially deprived one year only, the values ranged from around 15 % in Latvia, Bulgaria and Cyprus (16.3 %, 16.2 % and 15.1 % respectively) to 0.5 % in Denmark. In all EU Member States, except Latvia and Bulgaria, less than one tenth of the population experienced severe material deprivation for two or three years. In the majority of EU Member States less than 5 % of the population spent all four years in severe material deprivation. In Hungary almost the same share of the population was severely materially deprived for one year (9.8 %) and for four years (10.2 %), while in Bulgaria a larger share of people were severely deprived all four surveyed years (23.5 %) than once (16.2 %), twice (8.6 %) or three times (11.6 %) (see Table 3).

Labour transitions

In the EU-28 more than 90 % of the employed remained in employment between 2012 and 2013

Thanks to the longitudinal component of EU-SILC, different types of labour transitions from one year to another can be analysed. In the EU as a whole more than 90 % of employed persons in 2012 remained employed in 2013. Slightly more employed women than men changed their status into inactivity (5.2 % and 2.6 % respectively). However, fewer employed women than men became unemployed (3.5 % and 4.2 % respectively) (see Figure 3).

As regards persons working part-time, almost three quarters of the EU-28 population did not change their status between 2012 and 2013; 75.5 % of women working part-time and 57.7 % of men remained as part-time workers. Twice as many men as women working part-time changed their job to full-time (24.9 % and 12.9 % respectively). It was also the case that twice as many men as women working part-time became unemployed (8.7 % and 3.9 % respectively). As for the change to inactivity, 7.9 % of persons working part-time became inactive with no big differences reported between men and women (see Figure 4).

Looking at the unemployed and their labour transitions from 2012 to 2013, significant differences can be seen between men and women. 66.5 % of unemployed men compared with 58.9 % of unemployed women did not change their status. More unemployed men than women found full-time jobs (18.9 % and 13.7 % respectively), while more unemployed women started a part-time job (9.3 % and 4.4 % respectively). A larger share of unemployed women than men moved to inactivity (18.1 % and 10.2 % respectively) (see Figure 5).

Persons with temporary job contracts were more subject to changes related to their job than those with permanent job contracts. Comparing the transitions between 2012 and 2013 in the EU-28 only 8.8 % of those with permanent job contracts changed their status, while for temporary job holders, only 57.5 % remained with the same job contract. 22.8 % of persons with temporary job contracts found a permanent job, 13.0 % became unemployed, 5.4 % moved to inactivity and only 1.3 % became other than employee.

Income transitions

Almost half of the EU-28 population remained in the same group of income between 2012 and 2013

Similarly to labour transitions, income transitions over different time periods can be observed due to the longitudinal component of EU-SILC. Comparing the situation between 2012 and 2013 in the EU-28, almost half of the population (44.9 %) remained in the same group of income. When the period considered was extended to two and three years, income mobility increased and fewer EU-28 citizens remained in the same income group (transition 2011-2013 - 37.8 % and 2010-2013 – 35.4 %). As regards having more or less income over different time periods, there were no differences observed – almost the same share had increasing income as decreasing in each transition period (see Table 4).

Looking at the total population and income transitions over the three-year period (2010-2013), a similar share of people stayed in the same income group as those who moved either to lower or to higher groups. This was the case both at EU-28 level and in the majority of the Member States. A completely different pattern was observed for the population at risk of poverty. In the EU-28, on average, 62.1 % of the population at risk of poverty remained in the same income group over the three-year period, 28.1 % moved to a lower group and only 9.8 % moved to a higher one. In four EU Member States - Slovakia, Finland, Slovenia and the Czech Republic as well as in Iceland and Norway - more than three quarters of the population being at risk of poverty remained in the same income group, compared with only 45.2 % in Lithuania. In Austria, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Slovenia less than 20 % of those at risk of poverty moved to a lower income group. The highest values, exceeding 40 %, of those who moved to a lower income group were reported in the United Kingdom, Lithuania and Denmark. Not more than 20 % of the population in all countries moved to a higher income group. In the Czech Republic, Finland, the Netherlands, Denmark as well as in Iceland and Norway nobody who was at risk of poverty in 2013 moved to a higher income group over the preceding three-year period.

Data sources and availability

The data used in this section are derived from the EU statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC) longitudinal component. The longitudinal component is based on a rotational sample design with four rotational groups in most of the countries. In consequence sample individuals are followed for four years. The reference population is all private households and their current members residing in the territory of an EU Member State at the time of data collection; persons living in collective households and in institutions are generally excluded from the target population. The EU-28 aggregate is a population-weighted average of individual national figures.

Context

EU-SILC is the reference source for EU statistics on income and living conditions and, in particular, for indicators concerning social inclusion. Its cross-sectional data pertain to a given time or a certain time period while longitudinal data, i.e. data covering the same persons and households over more years, refer to changes over time, observed periodically over at least four year period. Persistent-at-risk-of poverty rate is, from the policy perspective, the most recognised indicator based on the EU-SILC longitudinal data. It is included in the social inclusion portfolio of the EU social indicators developed under the Open Method of Coordination. In addition to the persistent-at-risk-of poverty rate, several other indicators have been developed based on the longitudinal component of EU-SILC. They focus mainly on income and labour transitions. The latter ones, i.e. indicators measuring labour transitions, are included in the Joint Assessment Framework (JAF) which is the analytical tool to monitor the Employment part of the Europe 2020 strategy.

See also

Further Eurostat information

Publications

Main tables

Income and living conditions (t_ilc), see:

Income distribution and monetary poverty (t_ilc_ip)
Monetary poverty (t_ilc_li)

Database

Income distribution and monetary poverty (ilc_ip)
Monetary poverty (ilc_li)
Distribution of income (ilc_di)
Living conditions (ilc_lv)
Health and labour conditions (ilc_lvhl)

Dedicated section

Methodology / Metadata

Source data for tables, figures and maps (MS Excel)

Other information

  • Regulation (EC) No 1553/2005 of 7 September 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 1177/2003 concerning Community statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC)
  • Regulation (EC) No 1791/2006 of 20 November 2006 adapting certain Regulations and Decisions in the fields of ... statistics, ..., by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania

External links

Retrieved from "https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Archive:Risk_of_poverty,_labour_and_income_–_changes_over_time&oldid=404356"