Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

ORDINARY PEOPLE IN PUBLIC POLICY PROFESSOR RICHARD ROSE FBA Director, Centre for the Study of Public Policy CESES Charles University PRAGUE.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "ORDINARY PEOPLE IN PUBLIC POLICY PROFESSOR RICHARD ROSE FBA Director, Centre for the Study of Public Policy CESES Charles University PRAGUE."— Presentation transcript:

1 ORDINARY PEOPLE IN PUBLIC POLICY PROFESSOR RICHARD ROSE FBA Director, Centre for the Study of Public Policy CESES Charles University PRAGUE

2 Figure A1 INDEX OF INFORMAL SOCIAL RELATIONS Source: Eurobarometer Social Capital Survey, Interviews with 25,978 people in 27 countries, aggregated and weighted according to national population. Informal sociability index: average frequency of meeting friends, workmates, and neighbours scored from a maximum of 5 (several times a week) to zero (never) (% of respondents)

3 Figure A2 INDEX OF VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION Individual membership in organizations Source: European Social Capital Survey, Interviews with 25,978 people in 27 countries aggregated and weighted according to national population.

4 Figure A3 INDEX OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION (percent respondents) Source: European Foundation for Quality of Life Survey, Interviews with 26,257 people in 28 countries, aggregated and weighted according to national population. (Three forms: voting; attending meeting; contacting official)

5 Figure A4 MAJOR INFLUENCES ON POLITICAL PARTICIPATION Impact on political participation as calculated by multilevel hierarchical model Variance accounted for (Pseudo R 2 ): 9.1% Age.38 Education.23 Church attendance Employed -.14 Anomie Source: European Foundation for Quality of Life Survey, Interviews with 26,257 people in 28 countries, aggregated and weighted equally.

6 B1 PARTICIPATION IN POLICY OUTPUTS Households benefiting from: Source: Percentages based on replies to 2003 European Quality of Life Survey (Dublin: European Foundation for Living and Working Conditions; number of respondents 26,257) with national results weighted to each country's share of the total population of 28 countries. Health care calculated as those with poor or not very good health or having a disability.

7 Figure B2 NUMBER OF CURRENT BENEFITS PER HOUSEHOLD Source: European Foundation for Quality of Life Survey, Interviews with 26,257 people in 28 countries, aggregated and weighted according to national population. (% with benefits)

8 B3 NUMBER OF CURRENT BENEFITS BY COUNTRY Mean number of benefits per household Source: European Foundation for Quality of Life Survey, Interviews with 26,257 people in 28 countries, aggregated and weighted according to national population

9 Figure B4 MAJOR INFLUENCES ON RECEIVING POLICY BENEFITS Impact on receiving policy benefits as calculated by multilevel hierarchical model Variance accounted for (Pseudo R 2 ): 7.8% Destitution.33 High income Quartile -.46 Gender Employed Source: European Foundation for Quality of Life Survey, Interviews with 26,257 people in 28 countries, aggregated and weighted equally.

10 C1 Total Welfare in the Family = Total welfare=State + Market + Household inputs

11 C2 ECONOMIC RESOURCES OF OLDER PEOPLE Percent of those age 60 + Incomes Pension(s): self 71 :partner 43 Employed: self11 :partner11 Employed and pension(s): self 2 :partner 1 Savings, investment 18* Cash transfers from children 14 Social benefits 2 Assets Home ownership 80 Receive care from children 25 Savings of more than 15,000 35** Age-related benefits Medical treatment past year88 Concessions on travel, etc.n.a. Contingent safety nets Could rely on unpaid help from73 outside household Could borrow money for emergency 33 *Savings in cash, shares, property, as reported by European Quality of Life Survey (2003). **Projection of results of British Family Resources Survey (2004). Source: Older respondents (N: 6,057) in the European Social Survey in 24 countries: Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, Finland, France, Great Britain, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Ukraine. For details, see

12 C3 DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES IN OLDER HOUSEHOLDS Source: Older respondents (N: 6,057) in European Social Survey, of 45,681 individuals in 24 European countries: Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, Finland, France, Great Britain, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Ukraine. For details, see (Percent of households with a given resource) (Streams of resources: As in Table 1, except savings assets and income omitted because not included in European Social Survey.)

13 C4 DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES BY COUNTRY Mean number of resources Source: Older respondents (N: 6,057) in European Social Survey, of 45,681 individuals in 24 European countries. For details, see

14 C5 ADEQUACY OF INCOME BY AGE Q. Which of the descriptions on this card comes closest to how you feel about your households income nowadays? Living comfortably on present income; Coping on present income; Finding it difficult on present income; Finding it very difficult on present income; (Dont know) Source: European Social Survey, ; pooled data set of 24 countries, each country weighted equally. Comfortable Adequate With difficulty Very difficult


Download ppt "ORDINARY PEOPLE IN PUBLIC POLICY PROFESSOR RICHARD ROSE FBA Director, Centre for the Study of Public Policy CESES Charles University PRAGUE."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google