« Previous | Contents |
Listen
Footnotes
1. See for example: Paul Gregg, Susan Harkness and Stephen Machin (1999) Child development and family income York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation; Blanden, J. and Gibbons, S. (2006) The persistence of poverty across generations: A view from two British cohorts, Bristol: The Policy Press.
These reports used cohort studies to show relationships between childhood poverty and poor outcomes in adulthood even after controlling for other factors.
2. Donald Hirsch (2006) The cost of not ending child poverty- How we can think about it, how it might be measured, and some evidence York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation - www.jrf.org.uk/bookshop/eBooks/9781859355060.pdf. The present paper draws some ideas from this earlier one, but is not simply attempt to translate the same data and analysis into a Scottish context. Rather, it seeks to refine the approach initiated in the UK study.
3. Commission on Families and the Well-being of Children, 2005, Families and the state - two-way support and responsibilities, Bristol: Policy Press page 60, citing especially Corlyon, J, Hunter, S and Katz, I, The relationship between parenting and poverty, Joseph Rowntree Foundation forthcoming.
4. Author calculations based on data prepared for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation - see www.jrf.org.uk/child-poverty/documents/Scotland.xls The calculation is based on the number of children with at least one parent receiving Income Support, Job Seekers Allowance, Incapacity Benefit, Severe Disablement Allowance or Pension Credit. This is not a full measure of poverty as it excludes children with working parents who are nevertheless below the poverty line.
5. 2004-5 figures
6. Mainstream public services and their impact on neighbourhood deprivation, ODPM, 2005.
7. This is confirmed when looking at the per pupil ratios - ie excluding private school children (see below), for primary education, where the extra spent in deprived areas is below 3% for four of the English authorities, and 17% for Brent but 27% for Edinburgh.
8. Data given here for Edinburgh should be interpreted with caution because Edinburgh has a relatively high population of affluent families and of children attending private schools compared with the rest of Scotland. However, the kind of inequalities in spending noted in Edinburgh nevertheless have some indicative value for the rest of Scotland. Note that the comparisons focus on the gap between most deprived and middling areas, which takes the wealthiest neighbourhoods out of the equation. Moreover, as explained in the previous footnote, it is possible to make comparisons among those pupils who attend state schools rather than all children in a neighbourhood, to confirm that the incidence of private education is not distorting the observed effect.
9. Information provided by Scottish Executive
10. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/01/10142605/9
11. Report of Inequalities in Health Working Group, 2003, Annex C
12. Hirsch, op cit, pp 13-14
13. Spreadsheet analysis supplied by Professor Glen Bramley to author, using 1999 and 2000 surveys combined.
14. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/149558/0039817.pdf page 38
15. ODPM op cit p100
16. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/46997/0024932.pdf page 182
17. "Community Budgeting Pilot - Spend on Children and Young People in Tanshall, Glenrothes", report to Fife Council by Herriott Watt University, October 2004
18. Scottish Household Survey analysis supplied to author by Prof Glen Bramley
19. David J Smith , Social Inclusion and Early Desistance from Crime, Centre for Law and Society, University of Edinburgh, 2006
20. This is the emerging picture from a literature review currently being carried out by the Scottish Povety Information Unit for the Drug Action Teams Association for Scotland.
21. Scottish Executive Effective Interventions Unit, 2004 Residential Detoxification And Rehabilitation Services For Drug Users: A Review
22. The Fife Social Justice Analysis System. For details see http://www.fifedirect.org.uk/atoz/index.cfm?fuseaction=advice.display&adviceid=A9CCD1CC-E7FE-C7EA-08E97E5538D4A02F
23. Specifically, the data on primary healthcare costs are based on the number of children registered with GPs, rather than the number of GP consultations. In practice, funding arrangements for GPs are becoming more dependent on treatment rates and prevalence of conditions rather than just on registrations, and high sickness rates will also lead to substantial extra cost to the public purse in filling prescripitions.
24. Note - even though people's incomes are obviously higher before deducting housing costs, the poverty rate is lower because incomes are in each case compared to the equivalent for the median household. Lower income families tend to use a greater percentage of their gross income (which is often supported by housing benefit) to pay for their housing, so their relative poverty is greater when looking at their residual income - what is left to spend after paying the rent/mortgage.
25. The possibilities for poverty measurement involving local areas are constrained by the fact that the UK-wide survey of family income used to measure family income (the Family Resources Survey) does not permit breakdowns below regional level. More local breakdowns depend on administrative data, which show whole populations rather than samples.
26. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/138232/0034411.pdf
27. Scottish Executive 2006: More choices more chances: a strategy to reduce the proportion of young people not in education or training in Scotland
28. Genevieve Knight, Stefan Speckesser, Jeff Smith, Peter Dolton and João Pedro Azevedo (2006) , Lone parents Work Focused Interviews/New Deal for Lone Parents: combined evaluation and further net impact. DWP Research Report No 368 .
29. Martin Evans, Jill Eyre, Jane Millar and Sophie Sarre (2003), New Deal for Lone Parents: Second Synthesis and Evaluation, DWP
30. On average, parents on low incomes have slightly more than two children. Those most likely to participate in back to work programmes are likely to have slightly fewer than average.
31 . Institute of Education 2004 "The Effective Provision Of Pre-School Education
« Previous | Contents |