IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v131y2017i2d10.1007_s11205-016-1276-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Operationalizing De-commodification and De-familization Outcomes via the Relative Poverty Approach: An Application to Western European Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Federico Podestà

    (Research Institute for the Evaluation of Public Policies)

  • Sonia Marzadro

    (Research Institute for the Evaluation of Public Policies)

Abstract

This article develops an approach with which to operationalise the outcomes of de-commodification and de-familisation processes. Since the de-commodification and de-familisation concepts share an emphasis on ‘a socially acceptable standard of living for individuals’ with the notion of relative poverty, the income-poverty indicator has been adopted to develop pertinent national rates. In particular, since de-commodification outcomes concern people with a socially acceptable standard of living independently of sale of their labour power, the national proportions of individuals with an equivalised disposable income above the poverty threshold who have stopped working have been accounted for. On the other hand, given that de-familisation outcomes regard individuals with a socially acceptable standard of living aside from family relationships, the national percentages of persons who actually live alone, or simulated as living alone, with an equivalised disposable income above the poverty threshold have been considered. Moreover, exploiting the equivalised disposable income computation, pertinent micro-simulations are developed to capture the role of the state and the family in de-commodification outcomes, and the contribution of the market and the state to de-familisation outcomes. On the basis of the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions, an empirical application of this approach is then provided. Specifically, data for 16 European countries were used to compute the above-mentioned national rates. Furthermore, we checked whether our outcome figures exhibited any correspondence with the country-groups deriving from the classic welfare regime typologies or more in general with the measures resulting from the social policy structure.

Suggested Citation

  • Federico Podestà & Sonia Marzadro, 2017. "Operationalizing De-commodification and De-familization Outcomes via the Relative Poverty Approach: An Application to Western European Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 701-726, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:131:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11205-016-1276-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-016-1276-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-016-1276-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-016-1276-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. François Bourguignon & Amedeo Spadaro, 2006. "Microsimulation as a tool for evaluating redistribution policies," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 4(1), pages 77-106, April.
    2. David K. Jesuit & Vincent A. Mahler, 2010. "Comparing Government Redistribution Across Countries: The Problem of Second-Order Effects," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(s1), pages 1390-1404.
    3. Shorrocks, A F, 1982. "Inequality Decomposition by Factor Components," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 193-211, January.
    4. Vincent Mahler & David Jesuit, 2010. "Comparing Government Redistribution across Countries: The Problem of Second-order Effects," LIS Working papers 546, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    5. Esping-Andersen, Gosta, 1999. "Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198742005.
    6. Arnstein Aassve & Maria Iacovou & Letizia Mencarini, 2006. "Youth poverty and transition to adulthood in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 15(2), pages 21-50.
    7. David K. Jesuit & Vincent A. Mahler, 2010. "Comparing Government Redistribution Across Countries: The Problem of Second‐Order Effects," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1390-1404, December.
    8. Joakim Palme & Walter Korpi, 1998. "The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality and Poverty in the Western Countries," LIS Working papers 174, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    9. Tim Goedemé, 2013. "How much Confidence can we have in EU-SILC? Complex Sample Designs and the Standard Error of the Europe 2020 Poverty Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 89-110, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernhard Hammer & Michael Christl & Silvia De Poli, 2020. "Redistribution across Europe: How much and to whom?," Working Papers 593, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    2. Malte Luebker, 2014. "Income Inequality, Redistribution, and Poverty: Contrasting Rational Choice and Behavioral Perspectives," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 133-154, March.
    3. Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard & Chen Wang & Jinxian Wang, 2019. "Income Inequality and Fiscal Redistribution in 31 Countries After the Crisis," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 61(1), pages 119-148, March.
    4. Orsetta Causa & Mikkel Hermansen, 2017. "Income redistribution through taxes and transfers across OECD countries," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1453, OECD Publishing.
    5. Hammer, Bernhard & Christl, Michael & De Poli, Silvia, 2023. "Public redistribution in Europe: Between generations or income groups?," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    6. Elvire Guillaud & Matthew Olckers & Michaël Zemmour, 2020. "Four Levers of Redistribution: The Impact of Tax and Transfer Systems on Inequality Reduction," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 66(2), pages 444-466, June.
    7. Schaffrin, André & Reibling, Nadine, 2015. "Household energy and climate mitigation policies: Investigating energy practices in the housing sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-10.
    8. Gerlinde Verbist & Ron Diris & Frank Vandenbroucke, 2018. "Solidarity between generations in extended families. Direction, size and intensity," Working Papers 1816, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    9. Malte Luebker, 2014. "Income Inequality, Redistribution, and Poverty: Contrasting Rational Choice and Behavioral Perspectives," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 133-154, March.
    10. Solt, Frederick, 2019. "Measuring Income Inequality Across Countries and Over Time: The Standardized World Income Inequality Database," SocArXiv mwnje, Center for Open Science.
    11. Orsetta Causa & Mikkel Hermansen, 2018. "Income Redistribution Through Taxes and Transfers across OECD Countries," LIS Working papers 729, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    12. repec:ilo:ilowps:471001 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Frederick Solt, 2020. "Measuring Income Inequality Across Countries and Over Time: The Standardized World Income Inequality Database," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(3), pages 1183-1199, May.
    14. Cem Baslevent, 2016. "Social Transfers and Income Inequality in Turkey: How Important is the Gender Dimension?," Working Papers 1013, Economic Research Forum, revised Jun 2016.
    15. Ben Spies-Butcher & Ben Phillips & Troy Henderson, 2020. "Between universalism and targeting: Exploring policy pathways for an Australian Basic Income," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(4), pages 502-523, December.
    16. Daoud, Adel & Johansson, Fredrik, 2019. "Estimating Treatment Heterogeneity of International Monetary Fund Programs on Child Poverty with Generalized Random Forest," SocArXiv awfjt, Center for Open Science.
    17. Maria Chiuri & Daniela Del Boca, 2010. "Home-leaving decisions of daughters and sons," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 393-408, September.
    18. Laura Cavalli & Alessandro Bucciol & Paolo Pertile & Veronica Polin & Nicola Sartor & Alessandro Sommacal, 2012. "Modelling life-course decisions for the analysis of interpersonal and intrapersonal redistribution," Working Papers 25/2012, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    19. Kemmerling, Achim, 2001. "Die Messung des Sozialstaates: Beschäftigungspolitische Unterschiede zwischen Brutto- und Nettosozialleistungsquote," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Labor Market Policy and Employment FS I 01-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    20. Popova, Daria & Navicke, Jekaterina, 2019. "The probability of poverty for mothers after childbirth and divorce in Europe: the role of social stratification and tax-benefit policies," EUROMOD Working Papers EM11/19, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    21. SOLOGON Denisa & ALMEIDA Vanda & VAN KERM Philippe, 2019. "Accounting for the distributional effects of the 2007-2008 crisis and the Economic Adjustment Program in Portugal," LISER Working Paper Series 2019-05, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:131:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11205-016-1276-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.