Comparing Material and Social Deprivation Indicators: Identification of Deprived Populations

Abstract

The new indicator for material and social deprivation validated in 2014 by the European Commission enlarged the scope of measuring social exclusion, which entails both material hardship of individuals and households, and a relevant social dimension. Using EU-SILC data, this paper compares the standard measure of material deprivation and the new indicator in terms of the sub-population they identify as suffering deprivation across Europe. In 2019, only 57% of the deprived individuals according at least one of the two indicators were so according to both, while 23% was deprived only according to the new measure and 20% was deprived only under the old indicator. We compare the micro-level determinants of inclusion into these different deprived populations, both at the aggregated level and separately for each of the 21 countries included in our sample.

Socioeconomic Deprivation Is Associated with Worse Outcomes after Adult Liver Transplantation

“…However, SED is a multidimensional construct in constant evolution, and no universal definition or measurement is available. According to widespread consensus, SED is the lack of social and economic resources necessary for a good quality of life (39), which highlights the ability of household resources to match the needs of its members beyond financial insufficiency (40). This ability is determined by the adequacy of income and the additional assets available to the household, such as savings and services, which can be used to achieve the desired standard of living (41).…”

Education and the Economic Situation of Households in the Subcarpathian Voivodeship

“…Moreover, education determines individual happiness, and the impact of education on happiness can also be mediated by income as an intermediary mechanism [Yang et al 2022]. Higher education significantly reduces the risk of material and social deprivation [Fabrizi et al 2023], and better education reduces poverty [Spada et al 2023]. In addition, it has been observed that it is not only the economic situation, but also social participation, values, lifestyle and quality of life that change with the level of educational attainment [Piekutowski 2020].…”

The impact of socioeconomic deprivation on liver transplantation

“…SED, or poverty in a broader sense, is the lack of social and economic resources necessary for a good quality of life ( 10 , 11 ). SED is a complex measure that considers various factors such as individual, family, community, geographical, and national variables, and it depends heavily on the country, ethnicity, and culture (as illustrated in Table 1 ).…”

“…There are four essential components in SED ( 11 ): (1) Socioeconomic status—which includes individual and household income, employment status, and type of occupation; (2) Housing—which refers to living in rental or owned properties and the number of people living together; (3) Family disposition—whether an individual lives alone or with a partner, and the presence of children; and (4) Type of neighborhood—which refers to the availability of community and social resources (i.e., transportation, social services, health facilities, public schools, recreation areas, and activities, etc…). Some authors list additional social factors affecting transplant health outcomes, including racism, discrimination, violence, limited medical knowledge (i.e., medical illiteracy), unstable housing, transportation, childcare, and food insecurity ( 9 ).…”