Migrant integration statistics - at risk of poverty and social exclusion


Data extracted in January 2019.

Planned article update: January 2020.

Highlights

22% of nationals, 28% of foreign EU citizens and 50% of non-EU citizens in the EU faced the risk of being in poverty or socially excluded in 2017.

The risk of monetary poverty in the EU was approximately twice as high for foreign citizens (33%) as it was for nationals (15%), and was particularly concentrated among non-EU citizens in 2017 (41%).

Severe material deprivation in the EU was more than twice as high among non-EU citizens (17%) as it was among foreign EU citizens (6%) or nationals (7%) in 2017.

Across the EU, a lower share of foreign EU citizens (8%) lived in households with very low work intensity than the share observed for nationals (10%) in 2017.

People aged 20-64 at risk of poverty or social exclusion, by citizenship, EU-28, 2010-2017

This article presents European Union (EU) statistics on the risk of poverty and/or social exclusion among working-age communities in the EU. The information presented generally refers to people aged 20-64 years according to their country of citizenship, although there is a section on child poverty and the age class 18-59 years is used for information related to the share of people living in households with very low work intensity. Even though they are not used in this article, Eurostat also collects information on migrants according to their country of birth — as opposed to their citizenship — and these data may be found on Eurostat’s website.

The fight against poverty and social exclusion are considered as important elements for the well-being of individuals and more generally society at large. Indeed, the Europe 2020 strategy — which provides the EU’s agenda for growth and jobs — laid down a target to reduce by at least 20 million the number of people experiencing poverty or social exclusion between 2008 and 2020. This article explores an existing set of Zaragoza indicators [1], together with additional information; it presents information for the risk of poverty and social exclusion, median incomes, material deprivation and the share of people living in households with very low work intensity; it forms part of an online publication on migrant integration statistics.

It should be noted that some of the data analysed in this article are affected by low reliability due to small sample size or high non-response rates; these values are noted in the commentary that follows and they are also identified in the tables and figures (see specific footnotes).

Full article

People at risk of poverty or social exclusion

In 2017, there were 113 million people at risk of poverty or social exclusion across the whole of the EU-28; this equated to 22.4 % of the population. Three fifths of these people at risk of poverty or social exclusion, some 68 million, were of working-age (20-64 years).

There are three statuses that are combined in order to calculate the share of the population that is at risk of poverty or social exclusion, namely: persons who are at risk of poverty, those facing severe material deprivation, and those living in households with very low work intensity. The Europe 2020 headline indicator is based on the share of the population affected by at least one of these three different situations.

Figure 1 indicates that the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU-28 was lower among nationals than it was among migrants. In 2017, just over one fifth (21.8 %) of all nationals faced such a risk, while the share for foreign EU citizens was somewhat higher at just over a quarter (27.8 %; note this value is of low reliability). However, by far the highest risk was experienced by migrants who were non-EU citizens, as half (50.1 %; note this value is of low reliability) of this subpopulation were at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2017.

During the period 2010-2017, the share of the EU-28 population that was at risk of poverty or social exclusion rose from 23.8 % to a peak of 24.8 % in 2012 before declining to 22.4 % by 2017. For nationals, it started at a level of 22.5 % in 2010, reached an intermediate peak of 24.2 % in 2012 and 2013, before falling for four consecutive years. For foreign EU citizens, the risk of poverty or social exclusion had a somewhat larger variation, starting from a low of 27.5 % in 2010 and peaking at 30.5 % in 2014 before falling in the next three years (all of this time series is of low reliability). For non-EU citizens, a low of 46.1 % was recorded in 2012, after which there was a rebound with the share increasing to 49.1 % in 2014, followed by a modest decline in 2015, almost no change in 2016 and another increase in 2017 (the 2017 value being of low reliability).

Figure 1: People aged 20-64 years at risk of poverty or social exclusion, by citizenship, EU-28, 2010-2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_peps05)

An analysis across the EU Member States between nationals and foreign citizens reveals that a higher share of foreign citizens were generally at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2017; the only exception among the 26 Member States for which data are available (no information for Romania) was Ireland, where a slightly higher share of nationals were at risk of poverty or social exclusion. At the other end of the range, foreign citizens living in Sweden were 3.4 times as likely as nationals to to be at the risk of poverty or social exclusion, while the risk of poverty or social exclusion was 2.6 times as high for foreign citizens in Austria and France, 2.5 times as high in Slovenia and 2.2 times as high in Belgium and Denmark.

A comparison between the sexes for the EU-28 reveals that in 2017 the share of foreign citizens that were at risk of poverty or social exclusion was slightly higher (based on data of low reliability) among women (41.6 %) than among men (39.9 %). This gender gap was relatively small across most of the EU Member States. Nevertheless, the risk of poverty or social exclusion reached 46.6 % for female foreign citizens living in Croatia, compared with 35.2 % for men (both values are of low reliability), while the gender gap in Portugal also reached double figures in percentage point terms, as the risk of poverty or social exclusion was 41.8 % for female foreign citizens compared with 31.8 % for men; none of the remaining Member States recorded a double-digit gender gap with higher rates for women, although in Hungary it was only slightly lower, at 9.8 percentage points (low reliability). By contrast, the share of male foreign citizens at risk of poverty or social exclusion and living in Denmark was 5.7 percentage points higher than the corresponding ratio for women; there were three other Member States — Finland, Greece and Italy — that reported a gender gap with higher rates for men. Note that data are not available for this comparison for Bulgaria, Poland, Romania or Slovakia.

A more detailed analysis of the results for 2017 for the two subpopulations of foreign citizens reveals that across the EU-28 a higher share of women (rather than men) were at risk of poverty or social exclusion when considering foreign EU citizens, whereas among non-EU citizens the shares recorded for men and women were almost the same.

Table 1: People aged 20-64 years at risk of poverty or social exclusion, by citizenship and by sex, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_peps05)

In 2017, the risk of poverty or social exclusion was 1.8 times as high for non-EU citizens living in the EU-28 as it was for foreign EU citizens living in the EU-28 (50.1 % compared with 27.8 %; low reliability). This pattern was repeated in the vast majority of the 23 EU Member States for which data are available (see Table 1 for coverage), as Hungary (low reliability) was the only exception recording a lower risk of poverty or social exclusion for non-EU citizens. By contrast, close to one third (32.5 %) of non-EU citizens living in Latvia were at risk of poverty or social exclusion, which was 4.7 times as high as the corresponding share recorded for foreign EU citizens (6.9 %; low reliability). In Portugal, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Ireland and Luxembourg, the risk of poverty or social exclusion experienced by non-EU citizens was also at least twice as high as that experienced by foreign EU citizens.

In 2017, the share of the population at risk of poverty or social exclusion was higher for nationals than it was for foreign EU citizens living in Latvia, Portugal, Estonia, Ireland and Germany (low reliability for Latvia and Estonia).

Figure 2: People aged 20-64 years at risk of poverty or social exclusion, by citizenship, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_peps05)

Table 2 provides similar information, but with an analysis by age, for three age groups: 20-64, 25-54 and 55 and over. In 2017, there was no clear pattern apparent as to the impact of age on the risk of poverty or social exclusion. Among the 25 EU Member States for which data are available for all three age categories, there were 10 where the risk of poverty or social exclusion among foreign citizens was highest for people aged 55 years and over, whereas there were 11 where the risk of poverty or social exclusion among foreign citizens was highest for those aged 20-64 years, and there were three where the highest risk of poverty or social exclusion was recorded for foreign citizens aged 25-54 years. In Croatia the same share was recorded for the age groups 20-64 years and 25-54 years.

Table 2: People at risk of poverty or social exclusion, by citizenship and by age, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_peps05)

Income distribution and monetary poverty

Median income

The information presented in this section concerns median equivalised incomes. In 2017, the median income of EU-28 nationals was EUR 17 555 (see Figure 3). This could be contrasted with a median income for foreign EU citizens of EUR 19 029, while that for non-EU citizens was EUR 12 514.

An analysis of developments during the period 2010-2017 reveals that the gap in income levels between foreign EU citizens (much of this time series is of low reliability) and nationals grew each year until 2016, while it narrowed somewhat in 2017. In 2010, there had been almost no difference (EUR 83) in median levels of income between these two groups, however, by 2016 the gap had increased to EUR 1 679 in favour of foreign EU citizens before falling back to EUR 1 474 in 2017.

Median incomes of foreign EU citizens rose, on average, by 2.4 % per annum (low reliability) during the period 2010-2017, while the median income of non-EU citizens rose by 1.3 % per annum (low reliability) and that for nationals also by 1.3 % per annum.

Figure 3: Median equivalised income of the population aged 20-64 years, by citizenship, EU-28, 2010-2017
(EUR)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di15)

Figure 4 presents some information for the EU Member States: it shows that the median income of nationals was higher than the median income of foreign citizens in nearly all Member States. In 2017, the biggest gaps in favour of nationals were recorded in Sweden (EUR 11 357), Luxembourg (EUR 9 835) and Austria (EUR 9 298). By contrast, the median income of foreign citizens living in Bulgaria and Poland was higher than the median income of nationals.

In relative terms, the largest differences were observed in Spain and Sweden, where the median income of nationals was around two thirds more than the median for foreign citizens. In Greece, Italy, and Austria, the median income of nationals was also at least 50.0 % more than that of foreign citizens. Aside from Poland and Bulgaria which, as noted above, had a higher median income for foreign citizens than for nationals, the smallest relative differences were observed in Czechia, the United Kingdom and Hungary, where the median income of nationals was less than 10 % more than that of foreign citizens.

Figure 4: Difference in the median equivalised income of the population aged 20-64 years according to citizenship, 2017
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di15)

Based on a comparison between median income levels for nationals and foreign EU citizens in 2017, there were five EU Member States (see Figure 5 for coverage) where foreign EU citizens recorded higher levels of income: Croatia, Latvia (both low reliability), Czechia, Portugal and Malta.

Figure 5: Median equivalised income of the population aged 20-64 years, by citizenship, 2017
(EUR)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di15)

Figure 6 provides an analysis of median income by age. Across the EU-28, the income of nationals aged 25-54 years was 7.0 % higher than that recorded for nationals aged 55 years and over. Among foreign EU citizens, the median income of people aged 25-54 years was 10.9 % higher than that recorded for people aged 55 years and over (low reliability), while a similar comparison for non-EU citizens reveals that the median income of people aged 25-54 years was 10.3 % higher than that recorded for people aged 55 years and over (also low reliability).

Figure 6: Median equivalised income, by citizenship and by age, EU-28, 2017
(EUR)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di15)

At-risk-of-poverty rate

The at-risk-of-poverty rate is defined as the proportion of people that have an equivalised disposable income (after social transfers) below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold, which is set at 60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers). It should be noted that this indicator does not measure absolute poverty: rather, it shows the share of people who have low incomes in comparison with other residents.

In 2017, almost one sixth (15.3 %) of nationals living in the EU-28 were at risk of poverty. At 33.2 %, the risk of poverty was approximately twice as high for migrants living in the EU-28. A closer analysis reveals that the risk of poverty was particularly concentrated among non-EU citizens (41.2 %; low reliability) when compared with the risk for foreign EU citizens (21.9 %; also low reliability).

Looking in more detail at the situation in each of the EU Member States, the share of foreign citizens who were at risk of poverty was usually higher than the share of nationals facing a similar risk. In 2017, Bulgaria was the only exception to this rule, recording a lower share of foreign citizens at risk of poverty. By contrast, in Sweden, foreign citizens were 3.6 times as likely as nationals to be at risk of poverty, while there were also relatively large differences recorded in Austria (where foreign citizens were 3.4 times as likely to be at the risk of poverty) and France (3.2 times as likely).

Figure 7: People aged 20-64 years at risk of poverty, by citizenship, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_li31)

In 2017, the risk of poverty across the EU-28 was higher (14.9 %) among nationals aged 55 years and over than it was (14.3 %) for nationals of prime working age (25-54 years). This pattern was the same for foreign citizens. Among foreign EU citizens the gap was the largest (6.1 percentage points), as 27.1 % (low reliability) of those aged 55 years and over were at risk of poverty compared with 21.0 % (low reliability) of people of prime working age.

Figure 8: People at risk of poverty, by citizenship and by age, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_li31)

Child poverty

While the vast majority of this article is based on information for people aged 20-64 years, this next section covers child poverty, as defined in relation to people aged 0-17 years. The analysis that follows compares child poverty rates between children whose parents are nationals and children who have at least one parent who is a foreign citizen; no distinction is made between parents who are citizens of other EU Member States and parents who are non-EU citizens.

Across the EU-28, more than one in six (17.4 %) children whose parents were nationals were at risk of poverty in 2017, while this share was more than twice as high for children who had at least one parent who was a foreign citizen, at 40.7 %. This pattern — of a higher share among children with at least one parent who was a foreign citizen — was repeated in all but one of the EU Member States for which data are available (see Figure 9 for coverage); the exception was Lithuania (low reliability). By contrast, in Sweden children with at least one parent who was a foreign citizen were 4.8 times as likely to be at risk of poverty as children whose parents were nationals; there were also relatively large differences recorded in Slovenia (4.1 times as likely), Austria, France (both 3.7 times), Poland and Hungary (both 3.6 times).

The highest risk of child poverty for children with at least one parent who was a foreign citizen was recorded in Croatia (63.2 %), while Spain (57.3 %), Sweden (51.8 %) and France (51.6 %) also reported that more than half of this subpopulation of children were at risk of poverty in 2017. The lowest risks of poverty for children with at least one parent who was a foreign citizen were recorded in Latvia and Czechia, with shares of 18.3 % and 15.1 %; they were the only EU Member States to record shares below 20 % for this subpopulation.

Figure 9: Children aged 0-17 years at risk of poverty, by citizenship of their parents, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_li33)

In-work at-risk-of-poverty rate

In 2017, 8.5 % of EU-28 nationals were at risk of in-work poverty, while the share among migrants was higher, at 21.6 %.

There were five EU Member States where the share of the national population at risk of in-work poverty was in double-digits, most — Hungary, Portugal, Spain and Greece — with shares in the range of 10-12 %, although the share peaked at 17.0 % in Romania. By contrast, in a majority (18 out of the 26) of the Member States for which data are available (no information for Romania or Slovakia) the risk of in-work poverty among foreign citizens reached double-digits, with nine of these recording shares that were above 20.0 %. The highest risk of in-work poverty among foreign citizens was recorded in Spain (36.4 %), while Italy, Greece and Poland (low reliability) all recorded shares within the range of 25-33 %. Croatia, Hungary and Lithuania were the only Member States where the risk of in-work poverty was higher for nationals than it was for foreign citizens (low reliability for all three countries), whereas in Latvia the shares were the same (9.0 %). By contrast, the risk of in-work poverty was around four times as high for foreign citizens as it was for nationals in Slovenia, Denmark and Sweden, reaching five times as high in Cyprus.

Figure 10: People aged 20-64 years at risk of in-work poverty, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_iw15)

A comparison between foreign EU citizens and non-EU citizens reveals that the latter faced a higher risk of in-work poverty. There was in fact a gap of 14.8 percentage points between these migrant subpopulations in the EU-28 in 2017: the risk of in-work poverty affected 14.3 % of foreign EU citizens (low reliability) compared with 29.1 % for non-EU citizens (also low reliability). Among the 19 EU Member States for which data are available, the only exceptions to this pattern in 2017 were Malta, Denmark and Slovenia which observed a higher risk of poverty for foreign EU citizens and the United Kingdom where the shares were the same for both subpopulations. By contrast, non-EU citizens living in Finland were 4.2 times as likely to be at risk of in-work poverty as foreign EU citizens while this difference was also high in Belgium (4.0 times as likely) and Portugal (3.4 times as high) (see Figure 11).

Figure 11 confirms that in 2017 it was commonplace to find the lowest risk of in-work poverty among nationals. Across the EU Member States (excluding incomplete information for seven Member States), there were three where nationals did not have the lowest (or joint lowest in the case of Finland) risk of in-work poverty: in Malta the risk was lowest among non-EU citizens while in Portugal the risk was lowest among foreign EU citizens.

Figure 11: People aged 20-64 years at risk of in-work poverty, by citizenship, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_iw15)

Figures 12 and 13 show the differences by age for two subpopulations: nationals and foreign citizens. Among nationals (see Figure 12) a small majority — 16 from 28 — of EU Member States observed a higher share of in-work poverty among older people aged 55 years and over than among the core working age group (25-54), with the largest gaps in Romania and Portugal. Among foreign citizens (see Figure 13) the differences by age were particularly apparent in Austria and Estonia where the risk of in-work poverty was 3.4 times and 2.8 times as high for migrants of core working age as it was for migrants aged 55 years and over. By contrast, there were seven EU Member States where the risk of in-work poverty was higher for the elderly subpopulation. This was particularly notable in Slovenia and the United Kingdom, where the risk of in-work poverty among migrants aged 55 years and over was 1.6 times and 1.5 times as high as for migrants aged 25-54 years (both low reliability).

Figure 12: Nationals at risk of in-work poverty, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_iw16)
Figure 13: Foreign citizens at risk of in-work poverty, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_iw16)

Material deprivation

Material deprivation is the second of the three different statuses that together contribute to define the group of people who are considered to be at risk of poverty or social exclusion (one of the key policy targets for the Europe 2020 strategy). The material deprivation rate is defined as the share of the population unable to afford at least three out of nine specified items, while persons who are unable to afford at least four items are considered to be severely materially deprived (see Data sources for a list of the specific items). In contrast to the risk of poverty — which details monetary poverty in relative terms — the information presented in this section concerns non-monetary components and provides an analysis of poverty in absolute terms, detailing the share of the population who are unable to access/afford a selection of goods and services that are considered to be necessary or desirable to have an acceptable standard of living.

Figure 14 shows the development of the severe material deprivation rate in the EU-28 by citizenship. Across the EU-28, some 16.7 % of non-EU citizens were affected by severe material deprivation in 2017 compared with 6.1 % of foreign EU citizens and 6.6 % of national citizens.

An analysis over time shows that severe material deprivation rates tended to rise in the aftermath of the global financial and economic crisis, peaking in either 2012 or 2013, before they started to decline. The fall in the EU-28 severe material deprivation rate for nationals started a year earlier than for foreign EU citizens (all of this time series is of low reliability) and was at a faster pace, such that the difference between these two rates was at its lowest level in 2016 and 2017. The EU-28 severe material deprivation rate for non-EU citizens, which was at a higher level, fell in both absolute and relative terms at a faster pace than for either of the other two subpopulations until 2016; in 2017 there was an increase in the severe material deprivation rate for non-EU citizens, as it rose by 1.2 percentage points compared with the year before.

Figure 14: Severe material deprivation rate among people aged 20-64 years, by citizenship, EU-28, 2010-2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_mddd15)

In 2017, among the EU Member States the highest share of foreign citizens facing severe material deprivation was recorded in Greece, with half (49.9 %) of all foreign citizens affected. This rate was noticeably higher than in any of the other EU Member States, as the next highest shares were recorded in Italy (24.4 %), Hungary and Lithuania (both 19.0 %; low reliability for Lithuania). At the other end of the range, the lowest severe material deprivation rates for foreign citizens were recorded in Luxembourg (1.9 %) and Slovakia (2.0 %; low reliability), while Ireland was the only other Member State to record a rate for this subpopulation that was below 5.0 %.

Figure 15: Severe material deprivation rate among people aged 20-64 years, by citizenship, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_mddd15)

As noted above, across the whole of the EU-28, 6.1 % (low reliability) of foreign EU citizens and 6.6 % of national citizens were affected by severe material deprivation in 2017. An analysis for 23 of the EU Member States (see Figure 16 for coverage) reveals that in 15 of these it was more common for foreign EU citizens to experience severe material deprivation than nationals, while the reverse was true in eight Member States. Foreign EU citizens living in Sweden were 4.3 times as likely as nationals to be severely materially deprived, while in Italy and Finland they were more than twice as likely to face severe material deprivation. By contrast, the severe material deprivation rate for nationals was 2.5 times as high as that for foreign EU citizens in Portugal and 1.9 times as high in Ireland.

In 2017, severe material deprivation in the EU-28 was more widespread among non-EU citizens (16.7 %;low reliability) than it was among foreign EU citizens (6.1 %; low reliability). Among EU Member States, it was relatively common to find more than twice as high a share of non-EU citizens as foreign EU citizens facing severe material deprivation. In Portugal, non-EU citizens were 5.4 times as likely to face severe material deprivation as foreign EU citizens.

Figure 16: Severe material deprivation rate among people aged 20-64 years, by citizenship, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_mddd15)

Figure 17 indicates that the severe material deprivation rate was lower for older people, although this was not true for all subpopulations of citizenship. In 2017, some 6.3 % of nationals aged 55 years and over in the EU-28 experienced severe material deprivation, almost the same as the 6.4 % share recorded for the core working-age population (25-54 years). For foreign EU citizens the gap was larger, as 3.4 % (low reliability) of those aged 55 years and over were severely materially deprived compared with 6.4 % of the working-age population. A different situation was observed for non-EU citizens, as a larger share (18.5 %; low reliability) of those aged 55 years and over faced severe material deprivation than the average for those of working-age (16.2 %; low reliability).

Figure 17: Severe material deprivation rate, by citizenship and by age, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_mddd15)

People living in households with very low work intensity

The final status that contributes towards defining people as being at risk of poverty or social exclusion is the share of people living in households with very low work intensity; note that the age coverage of this indicator — persons aged 18-59 years — differs from that used in the remainder of the article. People living in households with very low work intensity are defined as those living in households where the adults worked less than 20 % of their total work potential during the previous year.

In 2017, 10.1 % of all working-age nationals in the EU-28 were living in households with very low work intensity; this share was higher than the corresponding share for foreign EU citizens, which stood at 8.4 % (low reliability). By contrast, the highest share of people living in households with very low work intensity was recorded among non-EU citizens, at 15.2 % (low reliability).

Figure 18: People aged 18-59 years living in households with very low work intensity, by citizenship, EU-28, 2010-2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvhl15)

In 2017, Greece recorded the highest share of foreign EU citizens living in households with very low work intensity, at 22.1 %; it was followed by Belgium (14.8 %) and Denmark (14.1 %). At the other end of the range, the share of foreign EU citizens living in households with very low work intensity was 1.1 % in Hungary (low reliability) and 3.8 % in Czechia, while shares below 5.0 % were also recorded in Slovenia and Latvia (low reliability).

The highest shares of non-EU citizens living in households with very low work intensity were recorded in Belgium, Sweden and Finland — each of these recorded a share within the range of 31-36 % in 2017. The next highest shares were recorded in Croatia (27.8 %; low reliability) and Bulgaria (25.4 %; low reliability), while the share of non-EU citizens living in households with very low work intensity was between one quarter and one fifth in the Netherlands, Austria, France and Ireland. By contrast, there were five EU Member States where fewer than 1 in 10 non-EU citizens lived in households with very low work intensity, they were: Luxembourg, Czechia, the United Kingdom (low reliability), Italy and Slovenia (which had the lowest share, at 5.7 %).

As already noted, across the EU-28 a lower share of foreign EU citizens (than nationals) lived in households with very low work intensity in 2017. This pattern was repeated in 13 out of the 22 EU Member States for which data are available (see Figure 19 for coverage). Nowhere was this more apparent than in Hungary, where nationals were 5.6 times as likely to live in a household with very low work intensity as foreign EU citizens (low reliability). Equally, the share of nationals living in households with very low work intensity was 2.1 times as high as that for foreign EU citizens in Luxembourg and Italy. By contrast, the share of foreign EU citizens living in households with very low work intensity was 1.9 times as high as the share recorded among nationals in Estonia (low reliability) and Malta, while the next highest ratio was recorded in France where the share of foreign EU citizens living in households with very low work intensity was 1.4 times as high as for nationals.

In 2017, Spain, Italy, the United Kingdom (low reliability), Luxembourg and Slovenia recorded a higher share of nationals — than foreign EU citizens or non-EU citizens — living in households with very low work intensity.

Figure 19: People aged 18-59 years living in households with very low work intensity, by citizenship, 2017
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvhl15)

</sesection>

Data sources

The main data source for comparative statistics on income and living conditions, including poverty and social exclusion, is EU statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC). The information presented generally refers to persons of working-age, defined here as people aged 20-64 years; an exception is the section on the share of people living in households with very low work intensity, where the standard age category covers people aged 18-59 years. Note that the age coverage used in this article may not be the same as that used by Eurostat in the area of social inclusion statistics and for this reason results may differ slightly from information that is published elsewhere.

The population that is at risk of poverty or social exclusion refers to people who are at risk of poverty, and/or severely materially deprived and/or living in a household with a very low work intensity: in other words, people in at least one (and possibly two or all three) of these situations. The share of the population at risk of poverty or social exclusion is a headline indicator for monitoring the Europe 2020 strategy.

The at-risk-of-poverty rate is the share of people with an equivalised disposable income (after social transfers) that is below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold, which is set at 60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers).

The material deprivation rate is defined as the share of the population who cannot afford to pay for at least three out of nine specified items (see list below), while people who are unable to afford four or more items are considered to be severely materially deprived. The definition of material deprivation is based on the inability to afford items that are considered to be necessary or desirable, namely:

  • having arrears on mortgage or rent payments, utility bills, hire purchase instalments or other loan payments;
  • not being able to afford one week’s annual holiday away from home;
  • not being able to afford a meal with meat, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day;
  • not being able to face unexpected financial expenses;
  • not being able to buy a telephone (including a mobile phone);
  • not being able to buy a colour television;
  • not being able to buy a washing machine;
  • not being able to buy a car; or
  • not being able to afford the heating to keep a house warm.

The share of people living in households with very low work intensity is defined as the share of people who are living in a household where the members of working-age (defined here as 18-59 years, other than students in the age group 18-24 years) worked less than 20 % of their total potential during the previous 12 months. The work intensity of a household is the ratio of the total number of months that all working-age household members have worked during the income reference year and the total number of months the same household members theoretically could have worked in the same period. Households composed only of children, of students aged less than 25 years and/or of people aged 60 years and over are excluded from the calculation.

For more information on data sources used please consult migrant integration statistics introduced.

Tables in this article use the following notation:

Value in italics    estimate;
Value in bold  value is of low reliability (due to small sample size);
Value is :  not available.

Context

The EU’s active inclusion strategy aims to ensure that every citizen, including the most disadvantaged, may fully participate in society, through the provision of adequate income support, inclusive labour markets and access to quality services. Since the signature of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007, European institutions have the mandate to ‘provide incentives and support for the action of Member States with a view to promoting the integration of third-country nationals.’ In June 2016, the European Commission published an Action plan on the integration of third country nationals (COM(2016) 377 final) which set out a range of goals, providing a comprehensive framework to support EU Member States’ efforts in developing and strengthening their integration policies, for example, in the fields of education, employment and vocational training, access to basic services such as housing and healthcare, as well as active participation and social inclusion. The latter includes initiatives, among others, to promote the use of EU funds for: intercultural dialogue, cultural diversity and common values; active participation of third country nationals in political, social and cultural life; activities dedicated to ensuring the integration of refugees and asylum seekers; preventing and combating discrimination, racism and xenophobia.

Direct access to
Other articles
Tables
Database
Dedicated section
Publications
Methodology
Legislation
Visualisations
External links





Social inclusion (mii_soinc)
Income distribution and monetary poverty (mii_ip)
People at risk of poverty and social exclusion (mii_pe)
Living condition (mii_lc)
Material deprivation (mii_md)

Notes

  1. A set of common indicators agreed by EU Member States in the Zaragoza Declaration in 2010, see: http://ec.europa.eu/migrant-integration/librarydoc/declaration-of-the-european-ministerial-conference-on-integration-zaragoza-15-16-april-2010.