Poverty risk and consumption smoothing abilities in Russia

This paper investigates to what extent Russian households have been able to protect their consumption against income shocks during the transition and in what manner the ability to smooth consumption is related to poverty risk. We use data from the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (1994-2004). Empirical analyses of such panels have often been based on differenced data in order to eliminate individual household effects. An innovative aspect of this study is that we model households smoothing behaviour by means of an Error Correction Mechanism (ECM); this model explicitly distinguishes between short and long run dynamics of consumption and income and thus better exploits the information in the level data. We find that households are only partially able to protect their consumption from income shocks and that income shocks have a smaller impact on food consumption than on non-food consumption. The results also suggest that the population is not homogeneous in terms of consumption smoothing abilities; partial estimations show that consumption smoothing ability improve as the living standard increases. However, below average consumption smoothing abilities are not always associated with higher poverty risk; rural households, who have a high poverty risk, manage to smooth food expenditures quite well, most likely because they have more opportunities to produce their own food. These exploratory results suggest that development and social protection policies should not only play a role in terms of poverty reduction but also influence households' abilities to manage risks.poverty; consumption smoothing; error correction model; Russia

Relative or absolute poverty in the US and EU? The battle of the rates

US poverty is much higher than poverty in Europe when a relative poverty measure is used. Using an absolute poverty measurement method, the picture looks different: poverty in some European countries is higher. This paper estimates poverty rates for all the countries of the (old) EU and the USA applying the official measurement methods of the United States (absolute) and the European Union (relative) to all the countries. The differences in poverty levels, both in time and between the 16 countries are analysed, identifying the various sources for the variance in the figures. Using annual data of the EU and the US from 1994 to 2001, we illustrate how some differences in poverty levels are inherent to the choice for an absolute or a relative approach, while other differences are related to aspects common to both absolute and relative poverty measurement but working out differently depending on the estimation method used. The results of our analysis point out that using a single figure is often misleading.poverty; absolute; relative; United States; European Union

The policy relevance of absolute and relative poverty headcounts: What's in a number?

Financial poverty indicators still play an important role in policymaking and evaluation. Countries such as the USA and the EU member states use one or several ‘official’ poverty indicators on which success of poverty reduction policy is regularly monitored. Whereas the US poverty indicator is based on an absolute concept of poverty, the EU Laeken indicator is based on a relative concept. But the consequences of such a decision are considerable. As absolute and relative poverty indicators reflect related but conceptually distinct approaches to determining insufficient levels of well-being; they can yield very different poverty statistics, particularly over time. In this paper, we use the official EU and US poverty indicators to study the policy relevance of using either an absolute or a relative indicator. We find significant differences between the poverty estimates in poverty rates as well as in the poverty profiles. Benefit incidence- and adequacy rates are equally estimated and compared. The paper concludes that the differences between the two poverty concepts is more than important enough to support monitoring poverty and the related social and economic policies, using both relative and absolute poverty indicators.poverty; absolute; relative; social policy; United States; European Union

Poverty in Europe and the USA: Exchanging official measurement methods

Official poverty methodologies differ from other poverty measurement methods in the sense that the official ones are more often used as a benchmark to develop new policies as well as to evaluate the performance of existing programs. Europe has the tradition and the practice to use relative poverty as “official” poverty estimates (Common Laeken indicators); the USA use an objective method to estimate official poverty (Orshansky indicator). Although related, each approach portrays different dimensions of poverty. In this study we compare the official poverty methodologies of the USA and EU by applying them on datasets of both countries. Using the harmonized European Community Household Panel (ECHP) for the EU and the Panel Study on Income Dynamics (PSID) for the USA, we compare poverty trends in the USA and EU in relative and absolute terms on a national level as well as for various subgroups of the populations. Additionally, we use the panel dimension of the data to analyze individual poverty dynamics. We find considerable differences between the estimates based on Laeken indicators and the estimates based on an Orshansky type of technology. It was expected that in general Orshansky generates lower poverty estimates than the Laeken indicators. However, it is puzzling to find that a.) these differences are less systematic than expected and b.) these differences are not constant over time and in some cases even have the reverse sign. These findings point to the desirability of involving both poverty concepts into (official) poverty assessments.poverty; absolute; relative; social policy; United States; European Union

Managing risks: what Russian households do to smooth consumption?

The increasing availability of rich (panel) data provides many opportunities to test theories on consumption smoothing behaviour. At the same time, the informational requirements in terms of data and modelling are high and very context specific, thus requiring a filtering of essential explanatory ingredients. In this paper we show how conceptual and exploratory empirical analysis can contribute to this filtering process. We develop a conceptual framework to analyze possible smoothing arrangements of households distinguishing between various smoothing mechanisms, institutional smoothing partners and required assets. Subsequently, we apply this framework to Russian survey data to explore how Russian households may smooth consumption. We select and analyze a broad set of indicators from household survey data to study what actions Russian households take and how these actions reflect the existence and prevalence of particular smoothing channels. The results can be used to formulate hypotheses on household smoothing behaviour and to delineate the features of a more rigorous analysis. The picture that emerges is one in which financial markets play a limited role as a smoothing channel in Russia, regardless of the smoothing mechanism used (saving, lending, insurance). Instead, households seem to use internal strategies, their family, social networks and the state to smooth consumption through capital accumulation, gift giving, the provision of loans and (pension) benefits. Furthermore, we find some evidence that old age pensions may be used for intergenerational risk-sharing within families while other findings point towards the use of household food production as an income smoothing strategy as opposed to a shock-response strategy.Keywords: consumption smoothing; poverty; social risk management; Russia

Monitoring Child Well-being in the European Union: Measuring cumulative deprivation

This paper describes and empirically tests a number of candidate measures of cumulative deprivation to monitor child well-being in the EU.The authors posit that the ideal measure should be sensitive to changes in the depth of cumulative deprivation and, given its broad use in the policy community, has an intuitive interpretation. Using the 2007 wave of the EU-SILC data, the authors constructed several measures of cumulative deprivation from a set of 13 deprivation indicators for Germany, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.child poverty; poverty reduction;

Poverty in Europe and the USA: Exchanging official measurement methods

Official poverty methodologies differ from other poverty measurement methods in the sense that the official ones are more often used as a benchmark to develop new policies as well as to evaluate the performance of existing programs. Europe has the tradition and the practice to use relative poverty as “official” poverty estimates (Common Laeken indicators); the USA use an objective method to estimate official poverty (Orshansky indicator). Although related, each approach portrays different dimensions of poverty. In this study we compare the official poverty methodologies of the USA and EU by applying them on datasets of both countries. Using the harmonized European Community Household Panel (ECHP) for the EU and the Panel Study on Income Dynamics (PSID) for the USA, we compare poverty trends in the USA and EU in relative and absolute terms on a national level as well as for various subgroups of the populations. Additionally, we use the panel dimension of the data to analyze individual poverty dynamics. We find considerable differences between the estimates based on Laeken indicators and the estimates based on an Orshansky type of technology. It was expected that in general Orshansky generates lower poverty estimates than the Laeken indicators. However, it is puzzling to find that a.) these differences are less systematic than expected and b.) these differences are not constant over time and in some cases even have the reverse sign. These findings point to the desirability of involving both poverty concepts into (official) poverty assessments

Poverty in Europe and the USA: Exchanging official measurement methods

Official poverty methodologies differ from other poverty measurement methods in the sense that the official ones are more often used as a benchmark to develop new policies as well as to evaluate the performance of existing programs. Europe has the tradition and the practice to use relative poverty as “official” poverty estimates (Common Laeken indicators); the USA use an objective method to estimate official poverty (Orshansky indicator). Although related, each approach portrays different dimensions of poverty. In this study we compare the official poverty methodologies of the USA and EU by applying them on datasets of both countries. Using the harmonized European Community Household Panel (ECHP) for the EU and the Panel Study on Income Dynamics (PSID) for the USA, we compare poverty trends in the USA and EU in relative and absolute terms on a national level as well as for various subgroups of the populations. Additionally, we use the panel dimension of the data to analyze individual poverty dynamics. We find considerable differences between the estimates based on Laeken indicators and the estimates based on an Orshansky type of technology. It was expected that in general Orshansky generates lower poverty estimates than the Laeken indicators. However, it is puzzling to find that a.) these differences are less systematic than expected and b.) these differences are not constant over time and in some cases even have the reverse sign. These findings point to the desirability of involving both poverty concepts into (official) poverty assessments

Managing risks: what Russian households do to smooth consumption?

The increasing availability of rich (panel) data provides many opportunities to test theories on consumption smoothing behaviour. At the same time, the informational requirements in terms of data and modelling are high and very context specific, thus requiring a filtering of essential explanatory ingredients. In this paper we show how conceptual and exploratory empirical analysis can contribute to this filtering process. We develop a conceptual framework to analyze possible smoothing arrangements of households distinguishing between various smoothing mechanisms, institutional smoothing partners and required assets. Subsequently, we apply this framework to Russian survey data to explore how Russian households may smooth consumption. We select and analyze a broad set of indicators from household survey data to study what actions Russian households take and how these actions reflect the existence and prevalence of particular smoothing channels. The results can be used to formulate hypotheses on household smoothing behaviour and to delineate the features of a more rigorous analysis. The picture that emerges is one in which financial markets play a limited role as a smoothing channel in Russia, regardless of the smoothing mechanism used (saving, lending, insurance). Instead, households seem to use internal strategies, their family, social networks and the state to smooth consumption through capital accumulation, gift giving, the provision of loans and (pension) benefits. Furthermore, we find some evidence that old age pensions may be used for intergenerational risk-sharing within families while other findings point towards the use of household food production as an income smoothing strategy as opposed to a shock-response strategy

Poverty risk and consumption smoothing abilities in Russia

This paper investigates to what extent Russian households have been able to protect their consumption against income shocks during the transition and in what manner the ability to smooth consumption is related to poverty risk. We use data from the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (1994-2004). Empirical analyses of such panels have often been based on differenced data in order to eliminate individual household effects. An innovative aspect of this study is that we model households smoothing behaviour by means of an Error Correction Mechanism (ECM); this model explicitly distinguishes between short and long run dynamics of consumption and income and thus better exploits the information in the level data. We find that households are only partially able to protect their consumption from income shocks and that income shocks have a smaller impact on food consumption than on non-food consumption. The results also suggest that the population is not homogeneous in terms of consumption smoothing abilities; partial estimations show that consumption smoothing ability improve as the living standard increases. However, below average consumption smoothing abilities are not always associated with higher poverty risk; rural households, who have a high poverty risk, manage to smooth food expenditures quite well, most likely because they have more opportunities to produce their own food. These exploratory results suggest that development and social protection policies should not only play a role in terms of poverty reduction but also influence households' abilities to manage risks