United Kingdom
Concentrations of low income
Key points
- Claimant numbers in the areas with the most claimants of out-of-work benefits have been falling at a similar rate as those in the areas with the least claimants. So, for example, the number of working-age claimants in the 10% of small areas with the highest levels of recipiency has fallen from 1.4 million in 1999 to 1.2 million in 2007 whilst the number in the 50% of small areas with the lowest levels of recipiency has also fallen from 1.4 million in 1999 to 1.2 million in 2007. In other words, the overall level of geographical concentration of working-age people in receipt of out-of-work benefits has remained the same over the period between 1999 and 2007. In this sense at least, the policies of the last decade have not in general succeeded in reducing the gap between the most deprived areas of the country and the rest.
- 30% of working-age people receive out-of-work benefits in the areas with the highest concentrations. This compares with 10% in areas with average concentrations.
- Around 40% of working-age recipients of out-of-work benefits live in a fifth of small areas, whilst the other 60% live outside of these areas. In other words, a majority of people receiving these benefits live outside of the high concentration areas.
- In 2007, there were sixteen local authority areas where a
majority of the small areas were in the fifth of small areas in Great
Britain with the highest concentrations of out-of-work benefit recipients. These were:
- Five local authorities in the Welsh Valleys, namely Blaenau Gwent, Merthyr Tydfil, Neath Port Talbot, Rhondda Cynon Taff and Caerphilly.
- Two local authorities in the central belt of Scotland, namely Glasgow City and Inverclyde.
- Two local authorities in London, namely Tower Hamlets and Hackney.
- Three urban local authorities in the North West of England, namely Liverpool, Knowsley and Manchester.
- Four urban local authorities in the North East of England, namely Easington, Hartlepool, South Tyneside and Middlesbrough.
Graph 1: Over time
View Graph as PDF Right click to save large version of Graph as PNG
Graph 2: Rates
View Graph as PDF Right click to save large version of Graph as PNG
Graph 3: Shares
View Graph as PDF Right click to save large version of Graph as PNG
Why this indicator was originally chosen
The extent to which poverty is concentrated in particular geographic areas is an important consideration in the development of anti-poverty policies and the importance or otherwise of area-based initiatives.
Definitions and data sources
This indicator examines how the pattern of recipiency of key out-of-work benefits by working-age people varies at a small area level and how these patterns have changed over time. It does so by placing the 40,000 small areas ('super output areas') in Great Britain into a number of equal groups according to the proportion of their working-age population who are in receipt of such benefits. The benefits included are Jobseeker's Allowance, Income Support, Incapacity Benefit, Severe Disablement Allowance, and Carer's Allowance and, if someone is receiving more than one of these benefits, they are only counted once.
The first graph shows how the levels of concentration have changed over time, comparing the number of recipients in the tenth of small areas with the highest levels of recipiency with the half of small areas with the lowest levels of recipiency (where high/low levels of recipiency are defined in terms of the proportion of the working-age population who are recipients).
The second graph shows, for the latest year, the extent to which rates of recipiency vary between small areas and the third graph shows the share of the total recipients who are in each group of small areas.
The data source for all the graphs is the DWP Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study and relates to Great Britain. Note that August 1999 is the earliest date for which this data is available.
Overall adequacy of the indicator: medium. The underlying data is a full count and is considered to be very reliable. But the data is a count of people in receipt of key out-of-work benefits rather than a count of people in low income. So, for example, it excludes all people in low pay and includes all recipients of out-of-work benefits even if they have some private income.
External links
- See the Joseph Rowntree Foundation 2007 report entitled Respect and renewal: a study of neighbourhood social regeneration. Note that the graphs in chapter 10 of this report are similar to those in this indicator except that they are for England only (rather than Great Britain) and use wards (rather than super output areas) as their geographic definition of a small area. One of the problems with using wards is that, unlike super output areas, wards vary a lot in population size, with inner city wards typically having much larger populations than rural wards.
- See the Joseph Rowntree Foundation 2007 report entitled Poverty and wealth across Britain 1968 to 2005.
- See the DWP Employment Zones site and the DCLG Neighbourhood Renewal site.
Relevant 2007 Public Service Agreements
None directly relevant.
Relevant government policies
- Single regeneration budget / regional development agencies single programme
- Employment zones
- New deal for communities
- National strategy for neighbourhood renewal
- Sustainable communities plan
The numbers
Graph 1
| Millions | ||
|---|---|---|
| The 10% of super output areas with the most claimants | The 50% of super output areas with the least claimants | |
| August 1999 | 1.35M | 1.40M |
| February 2000 | 1.34M | 1.39M |
| February 2001 | 1.31M | 1.35M |
| February 2002 | 1.29M | 1.33M |
| February 2003 | 1.26M | 1.26M |
| February 2004 | 1.23M | 1.24M |
| February 2005 | 1.20M | 1.21M |
| February 2006 | 1.22M | 1.22M |
| February 2007 | 1.21M | 1.19M |
Graphs 2 and 3
| Proportion in receipt of benefits | Share of recipients | |
|---|---|---|
| In the fifth of super output areas with the highest concentrations | 30% | 42% |
| Next fifth | 17% | 25% |
| Middle fifth | 11% | 16% |
| Fourth fifth | 8% | 11% |
| In the fifth of super output areas with the lowest concentrations | 4% | 6% |