1. Slide 1 Summary of responses on vulnerability measurement Vania Etropolska, UNECE 4 May 2015

2. Slide 2 Survey on vulnerability to poverty  10 replies  Tajikistan – no reply Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Republic of Moldova Mongolia Ukraine Uzbekistan

3. Slide 3 Estimates on vulnerable-to-poverty population MOLDOVAComputes data on population at risk of falling below poverty line according to Eurostat methodology GEORGIACollects information but does not produce statistics BELARUS AZERBAIJAN KYRGYSTAN UZBEKISTAN Provided definitions ARMENIA KAZAKHSTAN MONGOLIA UKRAINE NO

4. Slide 4 Vulnerable to poverty population or population sub-groups - definitions  Various definitions provided: - AZERBAIJAN: “Population below national poverty line” - BELARUS: “Population with income per capita below the subsistence minimum threshold” - KYRGYSTAN: “Socially vulnerable part of the population / Социальноуязвимая часть населения” - UZBEKISTAN: “Food consumption of 2100 calories per day per person / Продовольственное потребление, обеспечывающие 2100 калорий на человека в сутки”

5. Slide 5 Sources of collection of vulnerable-to-poverty statistics Household sample survey on living standards / Выборочное обследование домашних хозяйств по уровню жизни. BELARUS Integrated household survey, which consists of households' incomes and expenditures + labour force module GEORGIA Income and living conditions surveyUZBEKISTAN Household budget surveyMOLDOVA Household socio-economic surveyMONGOLIA

6. Slide 6 Vulnerable to poverty statistics - population sub-groups Ethnic groups Religious minorities Age-specific groupsAZERBAIJAN, BELARUS, KYRGYSTAN, UZBEKISTAN Men and womenAZERBAIJAN, BELARUS, UZBEKISTAN OthersUrban and rural population Household with/without children Households with/without migrants

7. Slide 7 Main difficulties in collection of statistics related vulnerable to poverty  No definition of vulnerable-to-poverty population at national level (Georgia, Mongolia); No approved concept of vulnerability at national level (Moldova)  Non-monetary aspects (health, living conditions, occupational status, education, etc.) not captured (Moldova)  Huge burden on respondents/high non-response rate (Belarus, Moldova)  Measuring poverty and vulnerability to poverty based on total household income rather than based on individual income (Belarus)  Challenge to provide reliable data for different vulnerable population sub-groups based on one survey (Moldova)

8. Slide 8 How to improve statistics on vulnerable to poverty GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:  Adoption of a definition on vulnerable to poverty at national level  Develop international guidelines for identifying and reviewing vulnerable-to-poverty population and population sub-groups  Develop an internationally comparable set of indicators and the corresponding methodological guidance  Capacity-building/ exchange of best practices CONCRETE SUGGESTIONS: Measure the effects of external shocks on vulnerable to poverty (Armenia) Conduct a specially designed survey where respondents would be the poor population (Belarus)