Measuring Child Poverty Research Articles

How can deprivation indicators help us to understand poverty?

This article challenges the growing orthodoxy among analysts and makers of social policy that an index of material deprivation should be preferred to low income as a measure of poverty. Such scales are nevertheless invaluable as indicators of living standards, and can be used to improve our understanding of social exclusion, and the role of low income in that process. Income and deprivation data from seven waves of the British Household Panel Survey are used to show that poverty may be less common, but also more severe, more stable and more intransigent, than standard annual income tables indicate. These lessons are applied to a discussion of the government’s plan to introduce a deprivation index into its suite of child poverty measures.

Principles and Practicalities for Measuring Child Poverty

This paper has three objectives. The first is to discuss the major issues involved in defining and measuring child poverty. The choices that must be made are clarified, and a set of six principles to serve as a guide for public policy are stated. The second objective is to take stock of child poverty and changes in child poverty in the majority of OECD countries since about 1990 when the Convention on the Rights of the Child came into force. Finally, the third objective is to formulate a number of suggestions for the setting of credible targets for the elimination of child poverty in the rich countries. This involves a method for embodying the ideal of children having priority on social resources into a particular set of child poverty reduction targets, it involves the development of appropriate and timely information sources, and finally it involves the clarification of feasible targets that may vary across the OECD.

Developing a child-focused and multidimensional model of child poverty for South Africa

This paper presents a new method of measuring child poverty in South Africa, based on a theoretically sound distinction between the conceptualization, definition, measurement, and enumeration of poverty. Conceptual frameworks, definitions, and measurements of poverty are briefly reviewed in the international and South African contexts. This paper presents a child-centered, multidimensional model of child poverty with both absolute and relative poverty components. The absolute core of this model follows the Copenhagen Declaration and includes basic needs such as food and shelter. This is complemented by a relative component, using a multidimensional conceptualization of poverty, and based on a child's ability to participate fully in South African society. The dimensions, or domains of deprivation, for both absolute core and relative aspects can be the same; eight exemplar domains are presented here. Located between the model's relative and absolute components and equally relevant to both components is foun...

Parental Death and Children’s Schooling in Burkina Faso

Previous articleNext article No AccessParental Death and Children’s Schooling in Burkina FasoJean‐François Kobiané, Anne‐Emmanuèle Calvès, and Richard MarcouxJean‐François Kobiané Search for more articles by this author , Anne‐Emmanuèle Calvès Search for more articles by this author , and Richard Marcoux Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Comparative Education Review Volume 49, Number 4November 2005Special Issue on Education and Public Health: Mutual Challenges WorldwideGuest Editor: David E. Bloom Sponsored by the Comparative and International Education Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/491592 Views: 84Total views on this site Citations: 27Citations are reported from Crossref © 2005 by the Comparative and International Education Society. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Sung Soo Lim Parental chronic illness and child education: Evidence from children in Indonesia, International Journal of Educational Development 73 (Mar 2020): 102099.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2019.102099Bilampoa Gnoumou-Thiombiano, Idrissa Kaboré Inégalités dans l’éducation au post-primaire au Burkina Faso, Autrepart N° 83, no.33 (Jun 2019): 25–49.https://doi.org/10.3917/autr.083.0025Cyprian Misinde Child Living Conditions and Orphanhood Status in Uganda: an Extension of the Application of the Intrinsic Value Approach to Child Poverty Measurement, Child Indicators Research 12, no.11 (Feb 2018): 277–298.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9539-2Philippe De Vreyer, Björn Nilsson When solidarity fails: Heterogeneous effects on children from adult deaths in Senegalese households, World Development 114 (Feb 2019): 73–94.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.09.018Georges Danhoundo, Nazilla Khanlou Family Ties and Mental Health of Orphans in Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso). Does the Gender of the Dead Parent Matter?, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction 15, no.44 (Nov 2016): 753–765.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-016-9717-8Idrissa Ouili Armed Conflicts, Children’s Education and Mortality: New Evidence from Ivory Coast, Journal of Family and Economic Issues 38, no.22 (Jul 2016): 163–183.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-016-9499-yAramide Kazeem, Leif Jensen Orphan status, school attendance, and relationship to household head in Nigeria, Demographic Research 36 (Feb 2017): 659–690.https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2017.36.22Jini L. Roby, Lance Erickson, Chanel Nagaishi Education for children in sub-Saharan Africa: Predictors impacting school attendance, Children and Youth Services Review 64 (May 2016): 110–116.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.03.002J. M. Mitchell, T. J. Rochat, B. Houle, A. Stein, M. L. Newell, R. M. Bland The effect of maternal and child early life factors on grade repetition among HIV exposed and unexposed children in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease 7, no.22 (Oct 2015): 185–196.https://doi.org/10.1017/S2040174415007230Idrissa Ouili Armed Conflicts, Children's Education and Mortality: New Evidence from Ivory Coast, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2015).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2660879Mark Orkin, Mark E. Boyes, Lucie D. Cluver, Yuning Zhang Pathways to poor educational outcomes for HIV/AIDS-affected youth in South Africa, AIDS Care 26, no.33 (Aug 2013): 343–350.https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2013.824533Eddy J. Walakira, Ismael Ddumba-Nyanzi, David Kaawa-Mafigiri HIV and AIDS and Its Impact on Child Well-Being, (Jan 2014): 2355–2377.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9063-8_91Valérie Delaunay, Bénédicte Gastineau, Frédérique Andriamaro Statut familial et inégalités face à la scolarisation à Madagascar, International Review of Education 59, no.66 (Dec 2013): 669–692.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-013-9388-7Bilampoa Gnoumou Thiombiano, Thomas K. LeGrand, Jean-François Kobiané Effects of Parental Union Dissolution on Child Mortality and Child Schooling in Burkina Faso, Demographic Research 29 (Oct 2013): 797–816.https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2013.29.29Yode Miangotar, Thomas Legrand Environnement familial au Burkina Faso : typologie et cohabitation parents-enfants, Cahiers québécois de démographie 42, no.11 (Jul 2013): 133–165.https://doi.org/10.7202/1017100arKevin J. A. Thomas Migration, Household Configurations, and the Well-Being of Adolescent Orphans in Rwanda, Population Research and Policy Review 31, no.44 (Jun 2012): 587–607.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-012-9244-7Yan Guo, Xiaoming Li, Lorraine Sherr The impact of HIV/AIDS on children's educational outcome: A critical review of global literature, AIDS Care 24, no.88 (Apr 2012): 993–1012.https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2012.668170Michael Kevane Gendered production and consumption in rural Africa, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, no.3131 (May 2011): 12350–12355.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1003162108Joseph Nkurunziza, Annelet Broekhuis, Pieter Hooimeijer Free Education in Rwanda: Just One Step towards Reducing Gender and Sibling Inequalities, Education Research International 2012 (Jan 2012): 1–11.https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/396019Marie-Christine Deleigne, Marc Pilon Migrations dans l’enfance et scolarisation en Afrique subsaharienne : apports et limites des approches quantitatives, Journal des Africanistes , no.81-281-2 (Dec 2011): 87–117.https://doi.org/10.4000/africanistes.4070Nolwen Henaff, Marie-France Lange Inégalités scolaires au Sud : transformation et reproduction, Autrepart N° 59, no.33 (Sep 2011): 3–18.https://doi.org/10.3917/autr.059.0003Kevin J. A. Thomas Family Contexts and Schooling Disruption among Orphans in Post-Genocide Rwanda, Population Research and Policy Review 29, no.66 (Nov 2009): 819–842.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-009-9167-0Olivier Drouin, Jody Heymann Scaling up and sustaining community-based care for preschool and school-age children – successes and challenges in Malawi, Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies 5, no.sup1sup1 (Jul 2010): 31–39.https://doi.org/10.1080/17450121003758854Bjorn Harald Nordtveit Schools as Agencies of Protection in Namibia and Swaziland: Can They Prevent Dropout and Child Labor in the Context of HIV/AIDS and Poverty? Nordtveit, Comparative Education Review 54, no.22 (Jul 2015): 223–242.https://doi.org/10.1086/651261J. Pagnier, M. L. Kürzinger, J. G. Kahn, A. Kone, R. Hampshire, T. D. V. Dye Education among orphans and non-orphans in an urban area of Burkina Faso, Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies 3, no.11 (May 2008): 31–36.https://doi.org/10.1080/17450120701593688Emily Hannum, Bruce Fuller Overview: Children's Lives and Schooling across Societies, (): 1–13.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3539(06)15001-6C.C. Wolhuter Education for All in Sub-Saharan Africa: Prospects and Challenges, (): 337–362.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3679(06)08012-1

Minimum Income Standards: How Might Budget Standards be set for the UK?

Britain's New Labour government will spend some 133 billion this year on social protection for vulnerable groups with low incomes such as pensioners, disabled people, and working families with and without children. It also regularly reviews the National Minimum Wage for workers. Although its intentions are laudable, the government can be criticised for setting income floors with little or no grounded assessment of individual welfare requirements. Budget standards, originating in Rowntree's work on poverty at the close of the nineteenth century, offers an alternative for setting minimum incomes. Used by Beveridge in 1942 to rationalise the proposal for social security levels, they have largely been neglected by successive governments and were recently rejected by New Labour in its review of child poverty measures. Academic research, however, continues to identify non-arbitrary income thresholds. The transparency of evidence to maintain a defined standard of living along with the minimal personal costs involved are key attractions. The challenge remains to find a generally acceptable standard. How much emphasis should be given to scientific prescriptions for health compared to popular cultural practices captured by national surveys of poverty and social exclusion or agreed by the consensus of ordinary citizens in focus groups? This article considers the current debate within UK social policy.

Principles and Practicalities for Measuring Child Poverty in the Rich Countries

This paper has three objectives. The first is to discuss the major issues involved in defining and measuring child poverty. The choices that must be made are clarified and a set of six principles to serve as a guide for public policy is proposed. The second objective is to take stock of child poverty and changes in child poverty in the majority of OECD countries since about 1990 when the Convention on the Rights of the Child came into force. Finally, the third objective is to formulate a number of suggestions for setting credible targets for the elimination of child poverty in the rich countries. This involves the development of appropriate and timely information sources as well as the clarification of feasible targets that may vary across the OECD.

Parental Death and Children's Schooling in Burkina Faso

Previous articleNext article No AccessParental Death and Children’s Schooling in Burkina FasoJean‐François Kobiané, Anne‐Emmanuèle Calvès, and Richard MarcouxJean‐François Kobiané Search for more articles by this author , Anne‐Emmanuèle Calvès Search for more articles by this author , and Richard Marcoux Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Comparative Education Review Volume 49, Number 4November 2005Special Issue on Education and Public Health: Mutual Challenges WorldwideGuest Editor: David E. Bloom Sponsored by the Comparative and International Education Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/491592 Views: 85Total views on this site Citations: 27Citations are reported from Crossref © 2005 by the Comparative and International Education Society. All rights reserved.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Sung Soo Lim Parental chronic illness and child education: Evidence from children in Indonesia, International Journal of Educational Development 73 (Mar 2020): 102099.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2019.102099Bilampoa Gnoumou-Thiombiano, Idrissa Kaboré Inégalités dans l’éducation au post-primaire au Burkina Faso, Autrepart N° 83, no.33 (Jun 2019): 25–49.https://doi.org/10.3917/autr.083.0025Cyprian Misinde Child Living Conditions and Orphanhood Status in Uganda: an Extension of the Application of the Intrinsic Value Approach to Child Poverty Measurement, Child Indicators Research 12, no.11 (Feb 2018): 277–298.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-018-9539-2Philippe De Vreyer, Björn Nilsson When solidarity fails: Heterogeneous effects on children from adult deaths in Senegalese households, World Development 114 (Feb 2019): 73–94.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.09.018Georges Danhoundo, Nazilla Khanlou Family Ties and Mental Health of Orphans in Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso). Does the Gender of the Dead Parent Matter?, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction 15, no.44 (Nov 2016): 753–765.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-016-9717-8Idrissa Ouili Armed Conflicts, Children’s Education and Mortality: New Evidence from Ivory Coast, Journal of Family and Economic Issues 38, no.22 (Jul 2016): 163–183.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-016-9499-yAramide Kazeem, Leif Jensen Orphan status, school attendance, and relationship to household head in Nigeria, Demographic Research 36 (Feb 2017): 659–690.https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2017.36.22Jini L. Roby, Lance Erickson, Chanel Nagaishi Education for children in sub-Saharan Africa: Predictors impacting school attendance, Children and Youth Services Review 64 (May 2016): 110–116.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.03.002J. M. Mitchell, T. J. Rochat, B. Houle, A. Stein, M. L. Newell, R. M. Bland The effect of maternal and child early life factors on grade repetition among HIV exposed and unexposed children in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease 7, no.22 (Oct 2015): 185–196.https://doi.org/10.1017/S2040174415007230Idrissa Ouili Armed Conflicts, Children's Education and Mortality: New Evidence from Ivory Coast, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2015).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2660879Mark Orkin, Mark E. Boyes, Lucie D. Cluver, Yuning Zhang Pathways to poor educational outcomes for HIV/AIDS-affected youth in South Africa, AIDS Care 26, no.33 (Aug 2013): 343–350.https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2013.824533Eddy J. Walakira, Ismael Ddumba-Nyanzi, David Kaawa-Mafigiri HIV and AIDS and Its Impact on Child Well-Being, (Jan 2014): 2355–2377.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9063-8_91Valérie Delaunay, Bénédicte Gastineau, Frédérique Andriamaro Statut familial et inégalités face à la scolarisation à Madagascar, International Review of Education 59, no.66 (Dec 2013): 669–692.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-013-9388-7Bilampoa Gnoumou Thiombiano, Thomas K. LeGrand, Jean-François Kobiané Effects of Parental Union Dissolution on Child Mortality and Child Schooling in Burkina Faso, Demographic Research 29 (Oct 2013): 797–816.https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2013.29.29Yode Miangotar, Thomas Legrand Environnement familial au Burkina Faso : typologie et cohabitation parents-enfants, Cahiers québécois de démographie 42, no.11 (Jul 2013): 133–165.https://doi.org/10.7202/1017100arKevin J. A. Thomas Migration, Household Configurations, and the Well-Being of Adolescent Orphans in Rwanda, Population Research and Policy Review 31, no.44 (Jun 2012): 587–607.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-012-9244-7Yan Guo, Xiaoming Li, Lorraine Sherr The impact of HIV/AIDS on children's educational outcome: A critical review of global literature, AIDS Care 24, no.88 (Apr 2012): 993–1012.https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2012.668170Michael Kevane Gendered production and consumption in rural Africa, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, no.3131 (May 2011): 12350–12355.https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1003162108Joseph Nkurunziza, Annelet Broekhuis, Pieter Hooimeijer Free Education in Rwanda: Just One Step towards Reducing Gender and Sibling Inequalities, Education Research International 2012 (Jan 2012): 1–11.https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/396019Marie-Christine Deleigne, Marc Pilon Migrations dans l’enfance et scolarisation en Afrique subsaharienne : apports et limites des approches quantitatives, Journal des Africanistes , no.81-281-2 (Dec 2011): 87–117.https://doi.org/10.4000/africanistes.4070Nolwen Henaff, Marie-France Lange Inégalités scolaires au Sud : transformation et reproduction, Autrepart N° 59, no.33 (Sep 2011): 3–18.https://doi.org/10.3917/autr.059.0003Kevin J. A. Thomas Family Contexts and Schooling Disruption among Orphans in Post-Genocide Rwanda, Population Research and Policy Review 29, no.66 (Nov 2009): 819–842.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-009-9167-0Olivier Drouin, Jody Heymann Scaling up and sustaining community-based care for preschool and school-age children – successes and challenges in Malawi, Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies 5, no.sup1sup1 (Jul 2010): 31–39.https://doi.org/10.1080/17450121003758854Bjorn Harald Nordtveit Schools as Agencies of Protection in Namibia and Swaziland: Can They Prevent Dropout and Child Labor in the Context of HIV/AIDS and Poverty? Nordtveit, Comparative Education Review 54, no.22 (Jul 2015): 223–242.https://doi.org/10.1086/651261J. Pagnier, M. L. Kürzinger, J. G. Kahn, A. Kone, R. Hampshire, T. D. V. Dye Education among orphans and non-orphans in an urban area of Burkina Faso, Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies 3, no.11 (May 2008): 31–36.https://doi.org/10.1080/17450120701593688Emily Hannum, Bruce Fuller Overview: Children's Lives and Schooling across Societies, (): 1–13.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3539(06)15001-6C.C. Wolhuter Education for All in Sub-Saharan Africa: Prospects and Challenges, (): 337–362.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-3679(06)08012-1

Child Poverty in the Developing World by David Gordon

Children, Youth and Environments Vol. 14 No. 1 (2004) ISSN: 1546-2250 Child Poverty in the Developing World Gordon, David (2003). Bristol, UK: The Policy Press; ISBN 1861345593. This brief report is a summary of a large UNICEF-funded research project undertaken by the London School of Economics and the University of Bristol, which focused on determining the extent and severity of child poverty in the low-income countries. Most of the data used in this study were drawn from existing Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) for 46 countries (including China, which had its own survey). Based on detailed face-to-face interviews, the data covered a sample of nearly 1.2 million children (0-18 years) from 380,000 households– according to the authors, probably the largest, most accurate survey sample of children ever assembled. This report serves as a useful complement to the paper by Rainwater and Smeeding in the last issue of this journal, which compared child poverty in the U.S. to that in 14 other rich nations. However, the two projects have important differences in the approaches they take in measuring child poverty. Both projects reject the notion that absolute income is an adequate measure of poverty (the assumption on which the World Bank’s $1 per day poverty line is based.) Rainwater and Smeeding use the widely accepted approach of defining poverty in terms of the median household income within a given country- an approach that views poverty as relative, reflected in the incapacity of those below a certain income level to act and participate as full members of a particular society. The research described in the report reviewed here takes a different tack. It focuses on absolute rather than relative poverty, but it also rejects the notion that income is an adequate yardstick. It questions the assumption that 386 household poverty is an accurate proxy for the poverty of the children within that household. According to this approach, income is a critical indicator of poverty, but it is by no means the only factor affecting people’s standard of living or their capacity to participate as part of the social mainstream. The cost of food, water and decent shelter, for instance, can vary widely not only from country to country, but also within countries, especially between rural and urban areas. Access to information, education, health care and other basic services, the strength of social networks and the potential for involvement in local political processes all make a difference in the burden of poverty, and these factors are neither wholly dependent on income, nor reliably predicted by income. Nor, according to this project, is it reasonable to assume that the resources of a given household are an adequate predictor of the well-being of the children in that household. This would imply that resources are equally shared within households. In fact, as this report points out, many households make enormous sacrifices to meet children’s needs; in others, few of the benefits of what is earned or produced actually trickle down to reach children. The research reported here starts instead from a view of poverty as characterized by a range of deprivations which can affect people independent of income, and which can affect children independent of the level of household poverty. Deprivation for children is defined here in terms of the circumstances most likely to have serious consequences for their health, well-being and development. Eight criteria are used in developing a taxonomy of deprivation for children: food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, shelter, health, education, access to information and access to health and education services. (A child’s contact with health services and actual exposure to education may not relate solely to the availability of these services– hence, I assume, the added category of access.) The definition of absolute poverty in children, which draws on this taxonomy, is very strict. Children are considered to be living in absolute poverty only if they experience “severe” deprivation in at least two of these areas– 387 and the definitions for severe deprivation go beyond what would generally be considered threatening to children’s wellbeing . For instance, severe deprivation in the area of food means serious malnutrition...

Child Poverty in the Developing WorldDavid Gordon

Children, Youth and Environments Vol. 14 No. 1 (2004) ISSN: 1546-2250 Child Poverty in the Developing World Gordon, David (2003). Bristol, UK: The Policy Press; ISBN 1861345593. This brief report is a summary of a large UNICEF-funded research project undertaken by the London School of Economics and the University of Bristol, which focused on determining the extent and severity of child poverty in the low-income countries. Most of the data used in this study were drawn from existing Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) for 46 countries (including China, which had its own survey). Based on detailed face-to-face interviews, the data covered a sample of nearly 1.2 million children (0-18 years) from 380,000 households– according to the authors, probably the largest, most accurate survey sample of children ever assembled. This report serves as a useful complement to the paper byRainwater and Smeeding in the last issue of this journal, which compared child poverty in the U.S. to that in 14 other rich nations. However, the two projects have important differences in the approaches they take in measuring child poverty. Both projects reject the notion that absolute income is an adequate measure of poverty (the assumption on which the World Bank’s $1 per day poverty line is based.) Rainwater and Smeeding use the widely accepted approach of defining poverty in terms of the median household income within a given country- an approach that views poverty as relative, reflected in the incapacity of those below a certain income level to act and participate as full members of a particular society. The research described in the report reviewed here takes a different tack. It focuses on absolute rather than relative poverty, but it also rejects the notion that income is an adequate yardstick. It questions the assumption that household poverty is an accurate proxy for the poverty of the children within that household. According to this approach, income is a critical indicator of poverty, but it is by no means the only factor affecting people’s standard of living or their capacity to participate as part of the social mainstream. The cost of 250 food, water and decent shelter, for instance, can vary widely not only from country to country, but also within countries, especially between rural and urban areas. Access to information, education, health care and other basic services, the strength of social networks and the potential for involvement in local political processes all make a difference in the burden of poverty, and these factors are neither wholly dependent on income, nor reliably predicted by income. Nor, according to this project, is it reasonable to assume that the resources of a given household are an adequate predictor of the well-being of the children in that household. This would imply that resources are equally shared within households. In fact, as this report points out, many households make enormous sacrifices to meet children’s needs; in others, few of the benefits of what is earned or produced actually trickle down to reach children. The research reported here starts instead from a view of poverty as characterized by a range of deprivations which can affect people independent of income, and which can affect children independent of the level of household poverty. Deprivation for children is defined here in terms of the circumstances most likely to have serious consequences for their health, well-being and development. Eight criteria are used in developing a taxonomy of deprivation for children: food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, shelter, health, education, access to information and access to health and education services. (A child’s contact with health services and actual exposure to education may not relate solely to the availability of these services– hence, I assume, the added category of access.) The definition of absolute poverty in children, which draws on this taxonomy, is very strict. Children are considered to be living in absolute poverty only if they experience “severe” deprivation in at least two of these areas– and the definitions for severe deprivation go beyond what would generally be considered threatening to children’s well-being. For instance, severe deprivation in the area of food means serious malnutrition– not...

Poor Kids in a Rich Country

Children, Youth and Environments Vol. 14 No. 1 (2004) ISSN: 1546-2250 Poor Kids in a Rich Country Rainwater, Lee and Smeeding, Timothy (2004). New York: Russell Sage; 280 pages. $39.95 (hard). ISBN 0871547023. The happy news is that Rainwater and Smeeding have written a book that could hypothetically make a real difference in how informed Americans and their political leaders understand the nature and causes of child poverty and the most effective strategies to combat child poverty. The sad news is that Poor Kids in a Rich Country is unlikely to actually make that difference. First, the happy news. Lee Rainwater, Professor of Sociology Emeritus at Harvard University, and Timothy Smeeding, Maxwell Professor of Public Policy at Syracuse University, transform their 20-yearconceptual and technical obsession with cross-national analyses of child poverty into a small, richin -content if a bit poor-in-accessibility treatise. They make three points exceedingly well. You cannot understand or change child poverty unless you properly define and measure it. Agreed. But this is not a message that will pull a wider readership into this topic, so the authors and the savvy Russell Sage Foundation(publishers of the work), decided to make the entire last third of the book the extended argument on definition and measurement. The authors introduce two key ideas that will be new to most American researchers. First, don’t think of poverty as either absolute lack of cash/income(the official approach of the U.S. government) or as an artifact of deviant subcultures or family structures (the favorite approach among certain conservative scholars and political leaders). Rather think of poverty as “the lack of material resources required to perform– except with the greatest difficulty– roles in the central societal domains of 275 family, work and citizenship as defined by mainstream members of society.” Poverty, in short, excludes certain individuals and groups from normative engagement in their society’s life. Important philosophers and much of official Europe embrace this definition. Americans in general do not. Second, if you accept this conceptual definition of poverty, then it follows that the best way to measure it is a) relatively, comparing individuals’ and families’ positions within communities and societies, and b) objectively/quantitatively, not subjectively/qualitatively. (You cannot change what you cannot measure.) The result is a measure of poverty that amounts to distance from a nation’s or community’s family median income. When you properly define and measure child poverty and compare rates and trends across advanced democracies, the U.S. looks very bad indeed. For most of the last two decades, we have had among the highest rates of child poverty (20-23 percent from the mid-80s to the late 90s). Our nearest “competitors” for last place among advanced democracies over the same time period are Great Britain (10-17 percent) and Italy (10-19percent). In most other Western European countries, child poverty rates fell considerably below our shameful levels (from 3-13 percent). A leading conservative explanation for the comparatively high rates of the U.S. centers on our unique demographic characteristics, especially the percentage of children who live in no-wage earner versus one- or two-wage earner families. Through a variety of simulations (e.g., how would U.S. poverty rates look if we had European population characteristics? How would European poverty rates look if they had U.S. population characteristics?), Rainwater and Smeeding convince me that demography is not destiny. National differences in population characteristics explain only a tiny bit of the cross-national differences in child poverty rates. So what does? The answer is public policy. The major point of Poor Kids in a Rich Country is that “America has a high child poverty rate 276 because we choose it” by virtue of the policies we implement. Other countries’ policies make it easier for working parents to earn a decent living while raising their children, but U.S. policies do not. What could America do? The authors point the readers to better child-related tax policies, parental leave, child care support, income supports for working families and new educational policies designed to really close the achievement gap between low-income and middle/upperincome...

Poor Kids in a Rich Country

Children, Youth and Environments Vol. 14 No. 1 (2004) ISSN: 1546-2250 Poor Kids in a Rich Country Rainwater, Lee and Smeeding, Timothy (2004). New York: Russell Sage; 280 pages. $39.95 (hard). ISBN 0871547023. The happy news is that Rainwater and Smeeding have written a book that could hypothetically make a real difference in how informed Americans and their political leaders understand the nature and causes of child poverty and the most effective strategies to combat child poverty. The sad news is that Poor Kids in a Rich Country is unlikely to actually make that difference. First, the happy news. Lee Rainwater, Professor of Sociology Emeritusat Harvard University, and Timothy Smeeding, Maxwell Professor of Public Policy at Syracuse University, transform their 20yearconceptual and technical obsession with cross-national analyses ofchild poverty into a small, rich-in-content if a bit poor-inaccessibility treatise. They make three points exceedingly well. You cannot understand or change child poverty unless you properly define and measure it. Agreed. But this is not a message that will pull a wider readership into this topic, so the authors and the savvy Russell Sage Foundation(publishers of the work), decided to make the entire last third of the book the extended argument on definition and measurement. The authors introduce two key ideas that will be new to most American researchers. First, don’t think of poverty as either absolute lack of cash/income(the official approach of the U.S. government) or as an artifact of deviant subcultures or family structures (the favorite approach among certain conservative scholars and political leaders). Rather think of poverty as “the lack of material resources required to perform– except with the greatest difficulty– roles in the central societal domains of family, work and citizenship as defined by mainstream members of society.” Poverty, in short, excludes certain individuals and groups from normative engagement in their 309 society’s life. Important philosophers and much of official Europe embrace this definition. Americans in general do not. Second, if you accept this conceptual definition of poverty, then it follows that the best way to measure it is a) relatively, comparing individuals’ and families’ positions within communities and societies, and b) objectively/quantitatively, not subjectively/qualitatively. (You cannot change what you cannot measure.) The result is a measure of poverty that amounts to distance from a nation’s or community’s family median income. When you properly define and measure child poverty and compare rates and trends across advanced democracies, the U.S. looks very bad indeed. For most of the last two decades, we have had among the highest rates of child poverty (20-23 percent from the mid-80s to the late 90s). Our nearest “competitors” for last place among advanced democracies over the same time period are Great Britain (10-17 percent) and Italy (10-19percent). In most other Western European countries, child poverty rates fell considerably below our shameful levels (from 3-13 percent). A leading conservative explanation for the comparatively high rates of the U.S. centers on our unique demographic characteristics, especially the percentage of children who live in no-wage earner versus one- or two-wage earner families. Through a variety of simulations(e.g., how would U.S. poverty rates look if we had European population characteristics? How would European poverty rates look if they had U.S. population characteristics?), Rainwater and Smeeding convince me that demography is not destiny. National differences in population characteristics explain only a tiny bit of the cross-national differences in child poverty rates. So what does? The answer is public policy. The major point of Poor Kids in a Rich Country is that “America has a high child poverty rate because we choose it” by virtue of the policies we implement. Other countries’ policies make it easier for working parents to earn a decent living while raising their children, but U.S. policies do not. What could America do? The authors point the readers to better child-related tax policies, parental leave, child care support, income supports for 310 working families and new educational policies designed to really close the achievement gap between low-income and middle/upperincome children. As they...

ECONOMIC DEPRIVATION AND CHANGES IN HOMICIDE ARREST RATES FOR WHITE AND BLACK YOUTHS, 1967–1998: A NATIONAL TIME‐SERIES ANALYSIS*

Using time‐series techniques with national data for 1967–98, we model the effects on changes in age‐race‐specific arrest rates of changes in indicators of economic deprivation. A measure of child poverty is positively related to juvenile arrest rates for both races, whereas changing unemployment (lagged) yields a surprising negative effect on youth offending. Measures of intraracial income inequality are also associated with changes in juvenile arrest rates, but the effects differ by race. Between‐race inequality is unrelated to changes in arrest rates for both races. Our general conclusion is that fluctuations in juvenile homicide offending over recent decades can be understood, at least in part, with reference to the macro‐economic environment confronting young people and their families.

Female-Headed Households and Female-Maintained Families: Are They Worth Targeting to Reduce Poverty in Developing Countries?

Controversy exists over whether to target public- and private-sector programs to female-headed households in developing countries in the attempt to combat poverty and social disadvantage. The issues related to the definition and measurement of female headship and the importance of the concept for development policy are discussed. A systematic review is then presented of the empirical evidence on the relation between female headship and poverty. If female-headed households tend to be poorer on average than other households headship should seriously be considered as a potentially useful criterion for targeting antipoverty interventions especially in developing countries where means testing is not feasible. The authors examine the potential costs and benefits of targeting female headship and review the experience of Chile one of the few countries which has targeted female headship through government intervention and the only one which has evaluation data available. The analysis of the project experience is used along with a review of the empirical evidence to answer the question of the desirability and efficiency of targeting female headship in order to reduce poverty in developing countries.