Material deprivation statistics - early results
- Data extracted in April 2017. Most recent data available in Eurostat Database: Further Eurostat information, Main tables and Database. Planned article update: April 2018.
Increased timeliness of the EU-SILC data
Since 2014 Eurostat disseminates early results for severe material deprivation rates so that trends in poverty levels can be tracked more closely. The coverage and the timeliness has increased over the years. 18 European Union (EU) Member States and Norway submitted already the 2016 EU-SILC data, and this is the second year when the coverage makes it possible to estimate and disseminate earlier the EU-28 aggregates. Latvia, Hungary, Austria, Romania and Finland have provided final data for the early results, while Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany, Estonia, France, Croatia, Italy, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, and Norway have transmitted provisional data.
In 2016, of the countries that sent data to Eurostat, early severe material deprivation rate increased for Romania (+1.1 percentage points). The rates fell significantly in Malta (-3.7 pp), Latvia (-3.6 pp), Hungary (-3.2 pp), and Croatia and Portugal (both -1.2 pp). No large variations were seen in the other countries for which data is available.
This article is based on data sent to Eurostat by mid April 2017. Final EU-SILC cross sectional data for 2016 are already available for five Member States and 13 Member States and Norway have provided provisional material deprivation and ‘economic strain’ data. In Eurostat’s online database, provisional indicators are flagged ‘p’ (provisional) to distinguish them from final data. The difference between provisional data and final data is explained below in the section on ‘Data sources and availability’. For the countries for which only provisional data is available, the analysis is merely indicative: in some cases, there may be discrepancies between provisional and final data. Although we refer to the severe material deprivation indicators for the 19 countries as early indicators, for Latvia, Hungary, Austria, Romania and Finland the values are already final.
Material deprivation rates gauge the proportion of people whose living conditions are severely affected by a lack of resources. The severe material deprivation rate represents the proportion of people living in households that cannot afford at least four of the following nine items:
- mortgage or rent payments, utility bills, hire purchase instalments or other loan payments;
- one week’s holiday away from home;
- a meal with meat, chicken, fish or vegetarian equivalent every second day;
- unexpected financial expenses;
- a telephone (including mobile telephone);
- a colour TV;
- a washing machine;
- a car; and
- heating to keep the home adequately warm.
The severe material deprivation rate, broken down by sex, age group and household type, is the main indicator for material poverty in this article.
- 1 Main statistical findings
- 2 Data sources and availability
- 3 Context
- 4 See also
- 5 Further Eurostat information
- 6 External links
- 7 Notes
Main statistical findings
Since 2012, the rate of severe material deprivation in the EU-28 decreased from 9.9 % to 7.8 %, i.e. by 2.1 pp. The rate varies significantly from country to country (see Table 1): the lowest levels among the EU and EFTA countries were 0.7 % in Switzerland in 2013 and in Sweden in 2014 and 2015. The highest values were in 2012 in Bulgaria (44.1 %), Romania (31.1 %) and Hungary (26.3 %). Since then the proportion of the materially deprived population decreased in almost all the countries, and for the other countries limited or no change can be observed. The largest decreases in the proportion of persons lacking resources were in Latvia (12.8 pp between 2012 and 2016), Hungary (-10.1 pp between 2012 and 2016) and Bulgaria (-9.9pp between 2012 and 2015), reflecting the improving material living conditions in those countries.
Comparing the final 2015 data with the early data for 2016 shows that at EU-28 level the severe material deprivation decreased by 0.3 pp to 7.8 %. There is an important increase in severe material deprivation in Romania (+1.1 percentage points). On the other hand, rates fell markedly in Malta (-3.7 pp), Latvia (-3.6 pp), Hungary (-3.2 pp), and Croatia and Portugal (both -1.2 pp). Limited or no change was registered in other countries that provided early data.
Severe material deprivation by household type
With some exceptions, the early severe material deprivation rates available for 2016 confirm the tendency, seen in previous years, of higher incidence among:
- people living in single person households with dependent children;
- single person households; and
- households with two adults and three or more children (see Table 2).
In Estonia, Croatia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, and Romania, households with two adults and one dependent child were least affected by severe material deprivation. In Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany, France, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria, Finland and the United Kingdom, the least affected were households with two adults, at least one of whom was aged 65 or more. In Malta and Portugal the households with two adults and one dependent child and the households with two adults, at least one of whom was aged 65 or more were affected at the same level by material deprivation. In Slovenia the least affected households had two adults with three or more dependent children in 2016.
Severe material deprivation by age
In general, over the years the severe material deprivation is worst among under 18 year olds, while elderly persons (aged 65 and over) are less affected than the working age adults (aged 18 to 64). Since 2013, the rates by age decreased in most of the Member States for which early data is available (see Table 3). The only significant increase is +1.4 pp in Belgium for the youngest age group between 2013 and 2016.
For the under 18 year olds the severe material deprivation rate between 2015 and 2016 rose in Norway (+1.1 pp), but fell considerably in Latvia (-5.6 pp), Malta (-4.1 pp), Hungary (-3.8 pp), the United Kingdom (-2.1 pp), Lithuania (-1.9 pp), Croatia (-1.8 pp), Portugal (-1.4 pp) and Romania (-1.0 pp).
The rates for working age adults (aged 18 to 64) decreased from 2015 in Malta (-4.3 pp), Latvia and Hungary (both -2.7 pp) Croatia (-1.5 pp) and Portugal (-1.0 pp).
In 2016 the most significant increase for elderly persons (aged 65 and over) were recorded in Italy (+2.5 pp). On the other hand, major decreases were observed in Hungary (-4.4 pp), Lithuania (-3.9 pp), Portugal (-1.8 pp), Latvia (-1.5 pp), Malta (-1.2 pp), Romania (-1.1 pp) and the Czech Republic (-1.0 pp). Year on year changes for other countries are less significant.
Factors of material deprivation
As in previous years, the early data for 2016 show that severe material deprivation rates are determined mainly by changes in the ability to afford:
- unexpected financial expenses;
- a meal with meat, chicken or fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day; and
- one week’s holiday away from home.
These items, for which deprivation rates are highest, are also those that are not durable (investment) items but are covered largely (or not) by monetary income available for household expenditure. Rates for these items thus provide an early indication of changes in monetary income.
The percentage of people who said they were unable to face unexpected expenses fell, compared with the 2013 data, in most of the countries for which early data are available (see Figure 1), in particular Hungary (-24.1 pp), Estonia (-10.0 pp), the Czech Republic (-9.6 pp), Latvia(-9.5 pp), Croatia (-7.3 pp), Slovenia and Portugal (both -4.9 pp), Lithuania (-3.7 pp), the United Kingdom (-3.2 pp), France (-2.2 pp), Germany (-1.9 pp) and Malta (-1.4 pp). On the other hand, the early data show a worsening situation in this respect in Norway (+6.9 pp), Finland (+1.9 pp), Belgium (+1.7 pp) and Romania (+1.5 pp).
The early data for 2016 show that the percentage of the population that cannot afford to go on a week’s annual holiday decreased in all countries for which early data are available compared with 2013. The largest changes were in Malta (-18.7 pp), Estonia (-18.1 pp), Hungary (-16.5 pp), Latvia (-15.0 pp), Portugal (-12.6) and the Czech Republic (-10.6) (see Figure 2).
Finally, since 2013 the percentage of people who said they could not afford a meal with meat, fish, chicken or a vegetarian equivalent every second day decreased substantially in Hungary (-14.9 pp), Latvia (-7.7 pp) and Malta (-7.6 pp), and increased in Belgium (+1.5 pp) (see Figure 3).
In 2016, the percentage of people who said they were unable to face unexpected expenses fell, compared with 2015 final data, in most of the countries for which early data are available (see Figure 1). The largest decreases were in Hungary (-21.4 pp), Estonia (-4.8 pp) and the Czech Republic (-3.8 pp). On the other hand, the early data show a notably worsening situation in this respect in Norway (+3.5 pp) and Romania (+3,1 pp).
The early data for 2016 show that the percentage of the population that cannot afford to go on a week’s annual holiday decreased considerably compared with 2015 in Malta (-7.5 pp), Croatia (-4.8 pp) and Hungary (-4.6 pp), but increased in Norway (+1.8 pp). (see Figure 2).
Finally, the percentage of people who said in 2016 they could not afford a meal with meat, fish, chicken or a vegetarian equivalent every second day decreased year on year the most in Malta (-5.8 pp), Hungary (-4.7 pp) and the Czech Republic and Croatia (both -1.9 pp), but increased in Italy (+2.4 pp), Romania (+2.1 pp) and Lithuania (+1.4 pp) (see Figure 3).
Making ends meet
The economic strain variable ‘making ends meet’ was included in the early transmission of data. This is linked to current income and enables the timely detection of trends in poverty.
The 2016 data are broadly consistent with the situation in the previous years (see Table 4) ; in other words:
- in most countries, the highest proportions of people said they either had ‘some difficulties’ or it was ‘fairly easy’ for them to make ends meet ('Medium' ability to make ends meet) ;
- Croatia, Hungary and Romania were the countries with the highest proportions of people who had ‘difficulties’ or ‘great difficulties’ in making ends meet ('Low' ability to make ends meet); and
- the highest proportion of people who could make ends meet ‘easily’ or ‘fairly easily’ ('High' ability to make ends meet) were in the Netherlands, followed by Norway, Germany and Finland.
Significant changes in 2016 compared to 2015:
- major decreases in the proportion of people who had ‘difficulty’ or ‘great difficulty’ in making ends meet ('Low' ability) in Italy (-4.9 pp), Hungary (-3.8 pp), Portugal (-3.7 pp), the Czech Republic (-3.6 pp), Latvia (-3.5 pp) and Slovenia (-3.4 pp); and
- in the proportion of people who could make ends meet ‘easily’ or ‘very easily‘ ('High' ability) substantial decrease in the Netherlands (-5.8 pp), and significant increases in Slovenia (+3.1 pp), Austria (+3.0 pp), Finland (+2.1 pp), the Czech Republic (+2.0 pp), Malta (+1.9 pp), Norway (+1.7 pp), Belgium and Germany (both +1.5 pp), the United Kingdom (+1.3 pp), and Estonia and Hungary (both +1.2 pp) .
Data sources and availability
EU-SILC, established under ‘framework’ Regulation (EC) No 1177/2003, is the reference source for statistics and indicators on income and living conditions. It is a multi-purpose instrument that focuses mainly on income, collecting detailed income components at household and individual level, but also gathers information on social exclusion, material deprivation, housing conditions, labour market participation, education and health.
Currently, by the time it has been processed and indicators have been released, EU-SILC final data have a lag of almost two years in the case of monetary income data and one to one and a half years in the case of non-monetary information. This has profound implications for EU-SILC’s usefulness for policy purposes, especially in times of rapid economic change.
Monetary income is one of the most relevant factors for assessing poverty and inequality, but wealth and consumption levels are also relevant, linked as they are to material deprivation, i.e. the inability to afford goods and services and/or engage in activities seen by society as ‘ordinary’ or ‘necessities’.
Since the March 2000 Lisbon Summit, Member States and the Commission have cooperated in the field of social policy on the basis of the ‘open method of coordination’ (OMC). To monitor the social OMC, the EU and its Member States have adopted commonly agreed indicators, including in the area of material deprivation. In particular, the severe material deprivation rate is a component of the Europe 2020 ‘at risk of poverty or social exclusion’ headline indicator, calculated as the total number of persons at risk of poverty, severely materially deprived or living in households with very low work intensity.
More recently, the need for early estimates of material deprivation was highlighted in the Commission Communication Towards Social Investment for Growth and Cohesion — including implementing the European Social Fund 2014-20 (COM (2013) 83 final). Nine Member States sent Eurostat the first provisional material deprivation and economic strain data for 2012, so that it could carry out a feasibility study on calculating relevant variables and indicators. Its main conclusions were that the computation of provisional material deprivation indicators was feasible and that preliminary indicators were close to final material deprivation values. It found that there were two main reasons for discrepancies between early and final values:
- the application of preliminary cross sectional EU-SILC weightings, as not all information needed to work out final weightings is available at the end of the data collection year; and
- for some Member States, data editing could be finalised only partially by the early data submission date.
All EU-SILC microdata transmitted to Eurostat must contain individual and household weightings. In all household surveys, mainly because of non-response, some groups are over-represented and others under-represented in the raw data. These imbalances are usually dealt with by attaching a compensatory weighting to members of sub-groups thought to be over- or under-represented in the survey data.
All survey estimates are calculated using these weightings. Data are calibrated to align totals from the survey to known totals from reliable external sources such as recent population statistics, including information on age, gender, regional breakdowns, the labour force, etc. All these variables might not be fully available to national statistical institutes at the time the early material deprivation variables have to be transmitted, i.e. at the beginning of the year after data collection. The information used to construct the cross sectional household and individual weightings is specific to each Member State and decided at national level . Several procedures are applied to construct the provisional weightings, which might (as the study showed) come very close to the final weightings.
The recent economic and financial crisis has thrown up a number of challenges for official statistics and social statistics in particular, where the timeliness of data and indicators has become a key issue in the debate.
Eurostat (together with the Member States) initiated the experimental transmission of early data on material deprivation and economic strain variables collected through the EU-SILC survey in response to the urgent needs of social policymaking. Although monetary poverty is one of the most relevant factors when assessing poverty and social inclusion, material deprivation is also an important descriptor of the difficulties households face in achieving the living standards considered by society to be normal.
Material deprivation data and indicators are absolute measures that can be used to analyse and compare aspects of poverty in and across Member States. Currently, data are made available in March of the year following the survey year and cover three quarters of the Member States. The aim is to disseminate early non income data, eventually for all Member States, at the end of the survey collection (reference) year or at the very beginning of the next year. It is not possible to bring forward the provision of comprehensive monetary income data in the same way, as this takes more time to make them available in a majority of countries.
- Children at risk of poverty or social exclusion
- Employment statistics
- Income distribution statistics
- People at risk of poverty or social exclusion
- Social inclusion statistics
Further Eurostat information
- 23 % of EU citizens were at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2010 - Statistics in Focus 9/2012
- Combating poverty and social exlusion. A statistical portrait of the European Union 2010 - Statistical books
- Children were the age group at the highest risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2011 - Statistics in Focus 4/2013
- European social statistics (2013) - Statistical books
- Income and living conditions in Europe (2010) - Statistical books
- Living conditions in Europe (2002 – 2005) – Statistical pocketbooks
- Living standards falling in most Member States - Statistics in Focus 8/2013
- The Social Situation in the European Union 2009 - Statistical books
- Income and living conditions (t_ilc)
- Material deprivation (t_ilc_md)
- Income and living conditions (ilc)
- Material deprivation (ilc_md) (Implementation of changes in variables)
- Material deprivation by dimension (ilc_mddd)
- Economic strain (ilc_mdes)
- Material deprivation (ilc_md) (Implementation of changes in variables)
Methodology / Metadata
- Income and living conditions (ESMS metadata file — ilc_esms)
- What can be learned from deprivation indicators in Europe?
- Measuring material deprivation in the EU
- Regulation (EC) No 1177/2003 of 16 June 2003 concerning Community statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC)
- 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
- Communication COM (2013) 083 final of 20 February 2013 towards Social Investment for Growth and Cohesion – including implementing the European Social Fund 2014-2020
- Comparison of UK and EU at-risk-of-poverty rates 2005-2010
- Employment and Social Developments in Europe (2012)
- OECD statistics on measuring economic performance and social progress
- The social dimension of the EUROPE 2020 strategy - A report of the social protection committee (2011)
- EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions.
- Latvia, Hungary, Austria, Romania and Finland
- Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany, Estonia, France, Italy, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia and the United Kingdom.
- More information can be found in the national quality reports