How can we explain the high Muslim levels of poverty? Anthony Heath Centre for Social Investigation Nuffield College, Oxford

Poverty rates among different religious groups

Documenting the problem Our evidence from the UKLHS is unequivocal: poverty is a much more common experience among Muslims than among other religious groups Long known that ethnic groups with Pakistani or Bangladeshi origins have high rates of poverty, so is this an ethnic rather than a religious phenomenon?

Poverty by ethnicity and religious affiliation

Possible explanations Transitory coincidental factors reflecting migration history and recent arrival in Britain. Might be expected to disappear in time Factors which might be intrinsic to particular religious traditions and might persist over time Factors which reflect prejudice towards Muslims on the part of British employers and co-workers

Transitory factors Recent arrival – lack of fluency in English a major barrier to employment LDC origins – lower levels of educational attainment restrict people to disadvantaged jobs Foreign qualifications mean lower returns to education Lack of knowledge about the UK labour market History of migration to declining Northern industrial areas

Possible intrinsic factors Family values – caring responsibilities might lead to lower female rates of economic activity, higher family size Religious involvement might lead to bonding rather than bridging social capital Mismatch between available work arrangements and religious preferences Mismatch between available childcare arrangements and religious preferences

Prejudice, discrimination and other barriers Discrimination by employers both in taking on Muslim workers and promoting them Cold reception from non-Muslim co-workers – the chill factor Pre-labour market discrimination, eg in elite higher education institutions

Practical difficulties in researching these potential explanations Ideally one would use a range of research methods, eg field experiments to detect discrimination, in-depth interviews to explore the chill factor, social network analysis on bridging and bonding social capital, Attitude or ethnographic research to explore family values

A first approximation using statistical analysis of the UKLHS Restricted to available measures in the UKLHS, which are largely proxies rather than direct measures of the explanatory concepts. We distinguish Confounding factors such as age Transitory factors such as generational status, fluency in English, educational qualifications Possible intrinsic/religion-related factors such as religiosity, attendance at place of worship, number of children Possible indicators of labour market barriers Measures are undoubtedly sub-optimal

Transitory factors

Religion-related factors

Labour market factors

In summary Muslims share many of the transitory disadvantages with Hindus and Sikhs, so these factors unlikely to explain their higher poverty rates Muslims do stand out with respect to religiosity, number of children and women’s economic activity – NB religiosity seems to persist across generations, the other variables less so Muslims do stand out with respect to unemployment rate and earnings, though surprisingly not with self-reported discrimination or occupational level

Statistical analysis of the risks of poverty We use standard statistical techniques to attempt to see how far these sorts of factor account for excess Muslim rates of poverty 1.We first take account of confounding factors and ethnicity 2.Then the transitional factors – generation, education and language difficulties 3.Next number of children, household size and economic activity 4.Separate model for attendance, religiosity (NS) and civic engagement 5.Final model adds social class, earnings, discrimination (NS) and unemployment

Results of the regression analysis: average marginal effects

The key findings After taking account of confounding factors, the Muslim poverty rate is 20 percentage points higher than that of Anglicans Each block of factors (especially the second) explains part of this excess poverty rate In the case of the other religions, the predictors successfully explain their initial excess poverty rates, but for Muslims a 7 point gap remains

Do the mechanisms work differently for Muslims? In general processes operate similarly for all the religious groups Muslims are distinctive in the size of the effects of generational status But this largely re-states the problem

So how might we explain Muslim exceptionalism? Geographical segregation and concentration? But also applies to Sikhs so cannot explain the difference Replenishment of Muslim communities? Largely specific to replenishment from Pakistan, which the measure of ethnic origins will have taken into account Islamophobia and the ‘chill factor’? The most plausible speculation – supported by our current research on attitudes to Muslim migrants

Some grounds for optimism Transitional factors mean that we expect some convergence over time and generations in poverty rates Also generational change in family size and women’s economic activity – not actually all that intrinsic to Islam Considerable educational progress, with Muslim women in particular catching up rapidly Religiosity itself not a cause of poverty (either generally or among Muslims)

But important unanswered questions Not clear why Muslims have such low levels of civic engagement (also shown in other data sources) Not clear why Muslim earnings are so low (again shown in other data sources) Not clear how to test whether the chill factor really is a major part of the explanation

Policy responses? Tackling discrimination in universities and employment Tackling poor economic environment, especially in Northern England Tackling barriers to women’s employment (eg mismatch with respect to childcare or employment conditions) Countering Islamophobia in the media