Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Paris, 6-8 July 2011 A Multidimensional Approach to the Analysis of Individual Deprivation: the Model and the Results of an Empirical Investigation by.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Paris, 6-8 July 2011 A Multidimensional Approach to the Analysis of Individual Deprivation: the Model and the Results of an Empirical Investigation by."— Presentation transcript:

1 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 A Multidimensional Approach to the Analysis of Individual Deprivation: the Model and the Results of an Empirical Investigation by Matteo D’Emilione, Giovanna Giuliano, Paolo Raciti, Simona Tenaglia Department of Social Policies and Gender Equality ISFOL

2 Aim and results of the work Objective: to measure the level of deprivation of the population living in a given territory (multidimensional perspective) Theoretical framework: Capability Approach (Sen, Nussbaum), multidimensional indicators theory (Bossert, Chakravarty and D'Ambrosio (2009)) Results: representation of individual level of deprivation, ex-ante evaluation tool, instrument for policy makers accountability and democratic debate Paris, 6-8 July 2011

3 What is ‘functioning’? Functioning is a "state of being and doing“ and can be defined in greater detail as: A physical, cognitive and mental state of individuals; placing individuals in a position to perceive a problem or to set objectives and desires; to attribute a value to the problem or objective; to express the aim to act, to choose to act and to act consistently in view of the management of the problem or achieving the objective.

4 What is ‘capability’? A capability is defined as the real power of choice that a person has with respect to a fixed system of states of being and doing (functionings) actually available and alternative among them. Capabilities reflect the real degree of freedom that is internal to personal choice of living one kind of life rather than another. Agency is the ability to act on behalf of what you value and have reason to value Paris, 6-8 July 2011

5 Material goods Conversion factors Functionings Capabilities Choice

6 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 List of individual dimensions 1.Living in a house in our approach means to be able to manage the house (to be able to sustain expenditures, to clean it and keep it in order); 2.Generating income means to be able to manage and improve income source (to find a new job, to increase professional skills, investing savings etc.); 3.Living in the community (Community environment) means to be able to live in the environment (to maintain relationships with friends, neighbors, to attend churches, cinema, sporting clubs, etc.); 4.Developing skills, improving education means to be able to improve educational level, to attend courses etc; 5.Being healthy means to be able to improve health conditions (to be able to take care of oneself and of the other members of the family and not having dangerous or risk behaviors); 6.Thinking about the future means to be able to plan for the future, (to have a clear idea of how would you like the life to be); 7.Expressing emotions and talents means to be able to express feelings of love, anger, gratitude in all the dimensions of life, to be able to use imagination, rationality and creativity, to be able to use skills and talents in the workplace.

7 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 The multidimensional indicator The indicator presented here is intended precisely to highlight the several dimensions of poverty. It is based on the counting approach" (Atkinson 2003), developed among others by Alkire and Foster (2007) and Bossert, Chakravarty and D'Ambrosio (2009).

8 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 The multidimensional indicator Defined “n” as the population size and “r” as the parameter that makes the indicator sensitive to the distribution of poverty (Bossert, Chakravarty and D'Ambrosio 2009), the index is represented as follows

9 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 The multidimensional indicator k-dimensional vector; P (x) individual function α weights calculated on the basis of the question posed to respondents and policy makers.

10 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 The indicator is a symmetric mean of order “r” and changes according to the level of inequality. For values of “r” approaching unity the index becomes the arithmetic mean of the individual levels of poverty. The indicator takes into account binary variables ( if ‘1’ deprivation; if ‘0’ no deprivation’) which belong to two different categories: Material deprivation and conversion factors variables: describe the individual material deprivation at present Functioning variables: explain how, when and why a functioning is active or not. The general indicator is composed by 47 status variables and 37 functionings variables The interactions/interplays between these two kinds of variables can be viewed in a cartesian space representing four possible situations…..

11 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Material deprivation variable (example)…. Problems you can find in your neighbourhood/community (if ‘yes’ 1 ; if ‘no’ 0): Pollution and/or dirtiness; Noise caused by traffic, industrial activities etc Crime Lack of services (ex: postal services, sanitation, banking etc) Lack of transport facilities Uneven roads Low lighting

12 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Functioning variable (example)…. There are different ways to solve such problems or to prevent such things from going wrong. During the last 12 months, have you (or a member of your family) done any of the following actions ? Contacted a politician or local government official (0) Worked in a political party or ‘action group’/neighborhood committee (0) Self-organization with friends or neighbors (0) I haven't done anything because they are not problems that can be solved (1) I haven't done anything because there are no organizations/action groups where I/we live (0) I haven't done anything because I'm not interested in such problems (1)

13 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 The space of capabilities A D B C

14 On Y axis we measure achieved functionings, not achieved functionings and PARTIALLY achieved functionings Empowerment is a subset of Agency (Alkire ….), and following this definition we are not measuring empowerment Paris, 6-8 July 2011

15 The empirical analysis (some details) (Unrepresentative) sample of 523 individuals; Two groups: users of social services / non users Ad hoc structured questionnaire (divided into seven sections, one for each dimension selected by the research team) 6 Social Planning Districts/Area; 6 focus groups with social workers and policy makers.

16 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Application of the indicator Figure1: General index (r=1) B (12%) C (35,4%) D (18%) A (34,6 %)

17 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 It is possible to weight each dimension through a value which is the mean of weights assigned by two groups of people: individuals of the sample policy makers and social workers.

18 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Terms of allocation of weights from respondents Imagine you have 100 points. Shared them among the following dimensions, according to the relevance you attach to each dimensions in generating deprivation and poverty:  to be able to mange the house( to be able to sustain expenditures, to clean the house)  to be able to manage and improve income source (to find a new job etc.)  to be able to live in the environment (to maintain relationships etc.)  to be able to improve educational level  to be able to improve health conditions  to be able to project the future  to be able to express emotions and talents

19 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Weights for single dimension (%) DimensionsIndividualsPolicy makers and social workers Living a house16,424,3 Generating income22,123,4 Living in the community10,510,6 Developing skills / Improving education 1313,6 Expressing emotions and talents10,37,4 Being healthy1810,3 Thinking about the future9,810,4 Total100

20 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Application of the indicator Figure 2: Index with interviewed individuals weights (r=1) A (44,8%) B (12,4%) D (20,6%) C (22,2%)

21 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Application of the indicator Figure 3: Index with policy makers and social workers weights (r=1)

22 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Strengths of our model The ability to display the results of the survey (positioning individuals in a cartesian space) reinforces the potential of the model in at least two ways: 1.it allows to share the results with policy makers (improves the accountability of the administration) and, eventually, with the population directly affected by the survey (increasing empowerment of the population; 2.through repetition over time of the survey involving a cohort of individuals, it will be possible to study any transitions between quadrants. In the latter case, the multidimensionality of the phenomenon and the large number of variables considered do not allow us to associate these transitions to the effect of specific policy interventions. However these movements provide a basis for evaluating policies aimed at fighting poverty and social exclusion

23 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 What we wanted to do/have but we could not … More funds Panel Representative sample (at national / regional level) Assure a follow up of the survey.

24 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 ……and what we are going to do… A survey in a specific metropolitan area (2000 individuals)

25 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 Thank you for your attention!

26 Paris, 6-8 July 2011 The literature …Full operationalisation of CA…..is it possible?  See : ‘A note on functionings-poverty in affluent societies’ – A. Balestrino (1996); ‘A multi-dimensional assessment of well being in the functioning space’, Chiappero – Martinetti (2003) ‘ Children well-being and family characteristics in Italy’, T. Addabbo, M. Di Tommaso (2007); ‘Measuring the interaction between parents and children in Italian families: a structural equation approach’ – A. Maccagnan (2011); ‘Valuing Freedoms: Sen’s Capability Approach and Poverty reduction’ – S. Alkire (2002) ‘Applying Sens Capabilities Framework to Work Family Balance whitin a European context. Theoretical and Empirical Challenges’ - Hobson and Faheln (2009)  CA (Sen, Nussbaum)  Multidimensional indicators (Atkinson (2003), Alkire and Foster (2007) and Bossert, Chakravarty and D'Ambrosio (2009)).


Download ppt "Paris, 6-8 July 2011 A Multidimensional Approach to the Analysis of Individual Deprivation: the Model and the Results of an Empirical Investigation by."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google