Are We All Agreed? Consensual Methods and the 'Necessities of Life' in the UK Today.

Eldin Fahmy,Simon Pemberton,Eileen Sutton

doi:10.1017/s0047279415000033

Abstract

In recent decades, consensual approaches to poverty measurement have been widely adopted in large-scale survey research both in the UK and internationally. However, while ascertaining the extent of public agreement on the 'necessities of life' has been central to this approach, long-standing critiques have questioned the nature of public consensus on poverty derived using survey methods. By drawing on new primary research preparatory to the 2012 UK Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey, we consider the contribution of qualitative methods in understanding public views on necessities and discuss their implications for survey-based poverty measurement. Our findings raise some important conceptual and measurement issues for consensual poverty measures within large-scale social surveys. Firstly, our research suggests that public understandings of the term 'necessity' are diverse and may not always be consistent with researchers' interpretations or with wider usage of this term within consensual poverty measurement. Secondly, a better understanding of the considerations which inform survey respondents' deliberations is needed. Thirdly, our findings have important implications for how we should interpret the concept of 'consensus' within the context of consensual poverty surveys, and emphasise the need for the application of more deliberative methods in determining public views on the 'necessities of life'.

Highlights

Consensual approaches to poverty measurement reflect widely held concerns about the validity of ‘expert’ judgement as a basis for determining poverty status and have resulted in the development of a range of more participatory approaches to ascertaining minimally adequate household budgets (Bradshaw et al, 2008), incomes (Goedhart et al, 1977; Hagenaars and Van Praag, 1985) and living standards (e.g., Mack and Lansley, 1985; Gordon and Pantazis, 1997; Gordon et al, 2001)
Determining the items and activities viewed by the public as constituting ‘necessities of life’ for all households in contemporary society has been at the core of consensual poverty measurement and is our main focus here
We reflect upon the applications of qualitative methods in advancing consensual approaches to poverty measurement in Britain today in order to begin to address this gap in knowledge

Summary

Introduction

Consensual approaches to poverty measurement reflect widely held concerns about the validity of ‘expert’ judgement as a basis for determining poverty status and have resulted in the development of a range of more participatory approaches to ascertaining minimally adequate household budgets (Bradshaw et al, 2008), incomes (Goedhart et al, 1977; Hagenaars and Van Praag, 1985) and living standards (e.g., Mack and Lansley, 1985; Gordon and Pantazis, 1997; Gordon et al, 2001). In the remainder of this paper, we will consider how qualitative evidence can inform understanding of public views on the nature and extent of consensus on the items and activities which constitute the necessities of life in the UK today.

Results

Conclusion