IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ver/wpaper/26-2015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Il Nuovo Indicatore della Situazione Economica Equivalente: È Una Vera Riforma?

Author

Listed:
  • Martina Menon

    (Department of Economics (University of Verona))

  • Federico Perali

    (Department of Economics (University of Verona))

  • Veronica Polin

    (Department of Economics (University of Verona))

Abstract

Questo lavoro presenta un’analisi comparativa dell’indicatore della situazione economica equivalente (ISEE). Per ogni nucleo familiare presente nei dati IT-SILC 2008, l’ISEE è calcolato seguendo i criteri stabiliti sia dalla recente sia dalla precedente normativa. Dal confronto delle due distribuzioni dell’ISEE emerge che in generale l’attuale normativa non ha apportato significativi cambiamenti rispetto alla precedente normativa. Dall’analisi comparativa sono emerse però alcune eccezioni. I cambiamenti a favore delle famiglie con figli minori e le famiglie numerose, introdotti dall’attuale normativa, hanno portato a una reale riduzione dell’ISEE per queste famiglie. Un’altra importante eccezione riscontrata in questo lavoro riguarda i nuclei con persone invalide o non-autosufficienti. Per questi nuclei familiari sembra che la riforma abbia determinato un rilevante aumento dell’ISEE con una potenziale esclusione dalle prestazioni sociali e sociosanitarie di chi potrebbe invece essere in stato di bisogno. Alla luce della nostra analisi, la quale mostra che la riforma non ha apportato cambiamenti sostanziali, le considerazioni finali suggeriscono alcuni nuovi aspetti che potrebbero essere considerati in un futuro riesame dello strumento di verifica dei mezzi.

Suggested Citation

  • Martina Menon & Federico Perali & Veronica Polin, 2015. "Il Nuovo Indicatore della Situazione Economica Equivalente: È Una Vera Riforma?," Working Papers 26/2015, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ver:wpaper:26/2015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dse.univr.it/home/workingpapers/wp2015n26.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrea Brandolini & Silvia Magri & Timothy M. Smeeding, 2010. "Asset-based measurement of poverty," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 267-284.
    2. Castaneda, Tarsicio & Lindert, Kathy & de la Briere, Benedicte & Fernandez, Luisa & Hubert, Celia & Larranaya, Oswaldo & Orozco, Monica & Viquez, Roxana, 2005. "Designing and implementing household targeting systems : lessons from Latin American and The United States," Social Protection Discussion Papers and Notes 32756, The World Bank.
    3. Martina Menon & Federico Perali & Eva Sierminska, 2016. "An asset-based indicator of wellbeing for a unified means testing tool: Money metric or counting approach?," Working Papers 421, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    4. Lindert, Kathy, 2005. "Implementing means-tested welfare systems in the United States," Social Protection Discussion Papers and Notes 32762, The World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martina Menon & Federico Perali & Eva Sierminska, 2017. "An Efficiency Comparison of Means Testing Tools: Money Metric or Counting Approach?," CHILD Working Papers Series 57 JEL Classification: D1, Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic Economics (CHILD) - CCA.

    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. Martina Menon & Federico Perali & Eva Sierminska, 2016. "An asset-based indicator of wellbeing for a unified means testing tool: Money metric or counting approach?," Working Papers 421, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    2. Martina Menon & Federico Perali & Eva Sierminska, 2017. "An Efficiency Comparison of Means Testing Tools: Money Metric or Counting Approach?," CHILD Working Papers Series 57 JEL Classification: D1, Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic Economics (CHILD) - CCA.
    3. Yang, Lin, 2017. "The relationship between poverty and inequality: concepts and measurement," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103491, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Tatiana Britto, 2008. "Los Desafíos del Programa de Transferencias Monetarias Condicionadas en El Salvador, Red Solidaria," Research Report Spanish (Country Study) 9, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    5. Porro, Roberto & Lopez-Feldman, Alejandro & Vela-Alvarado, Jorge W., 2015. "Forest use and agriculture in Ucayali, Peru: Livelihood strategies, poverty and wealth in an Amazon frontier," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 47-56.
    6. Celidoni, Martina, 2011. "Vulnerability to poverty: An empirical comparison of alternative measures," MPRA Paper 33002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Giarda, Elena, 2013. "Persistency of financial distress amongst Italian households: Evidence from dynamic models for binary panel data," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3425-3434.
    8. Luis Carvalho & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2011. "Where are the poor in International Economics?," FEP Working Papers 425, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    9. Andrea Brandolini, 2013. "Poverty," Chapters, in: Luigino Bruni & Stefano Zamagni (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity and Social Enterprise, chapter 26, pages 261-270, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Figari, Francesco & Kuypers, Sarah & Verbist, Gerlinde, 2018. "Redistribution in a joint income-wealth perspective: a cross-country comparison," EUROMOD Working Papers EM3/18, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    11. Faguet, Jean-Paul & Shami, Mahvish, 2008. "Fiscal policy and spatial inequality in Latin America and beyond," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27162, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Chiara Elena Dalla & Menon Martina & Perali Federico, 2019. "An Integrated Database to Measure Living Standards," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 35(3), pages 531-576, September.
    13. Precious Mncayi & Steven Henry Dunga, 2019. "Analysis of poverty among the elderly in South Africa using the 2018 GHS data," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 9912239, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    14. Müller, Philip & Schmidt, Tobias, 2015. "Identifying income and wealth-poor households in the euro area," Discussion Papers 35/2015, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    15. Bruno Cheli & Achille Lemmi & Nicoletta Pannuzi & Andrea Regoli, 2019. "From the TFR to the IFR approach for the multidimensional analysis of poverty and living conditions," Discussion Papers 2019/252, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    16. Joan R. Rodgers, 2012. "Living Arrangements and Income Poverty," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 15(3), pages 217-234.
    17. David Gallusser & Matthias Krapf, 2022. "Joint Income-Wealth Inequality: Evidence from Lucerne Tax Data," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 251-295, August.
    18. Charlier, Dorothée & Risch, Anna & Salmon, Claire, 2018. "Energy Burden Alleviation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction: Can We Reach Two Objectives With One Policy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 294-313.
    19. Kuypers, Sarah & Marx, Ive, 2016. "Estimation of Joint Income? Wealth Poverty: A Sensitivity Analysis," IZA Discussion Papers 10391, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Salvatore Morelli & Timothy Smeeding & Jeffrey Thompson, 2014. "Post-1970 Trends in Within-Country Inequality and Poverty: Rich and Middle Income Countries," CSEF Working Papers 356, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Verifica dei mezzi; Indicatore della situazione economica equivalente; Disabilità; Scala di equivalenza; Franchigie;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • H53 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Welfare Programs

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ver:wpaper:26/2015. 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: Michael Reiter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isverit.html .

    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.