Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5959bf8d4d-c2ftz Total loading time: 0.322 Render date: 2022-12-09T13:47:14.865Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Ageing, income and living standards: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2009

RICHARD BERTHOUD
Affiliation:
Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
MORTEN BLEKESAUNE
Affiliation:
Norwegian Social Research (NOVA), Oslo, Norway.
RUTH HANCOCK*
Affiliation:
Health Economics Group, Faculty of Health, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
*
Address for correspondence: Ruth Hancock, School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice, University of East Anglia Norwich, NorfolkNR4 7TJ, UK. E-mail: R.Hancock@uea.ac.uk

Abstract

In Britain, older people have lower average incomes and a higher risk of income poverty than the general population. Older pensioners are more likely to be in poverty than younger ones. Yet certain indicators of their living standards suggest that older people experience less hardship than expected, given their incomes. A possible explanation is that older people convert income into basic living standards at a higher rate than younger people, implying that as people age they need less income to achieve a given standard of living. Much existing evidence has been based on cross-sectional data and therefore may not be a good guide to the consequences of ageing. We use longitudinal data on people aged at least 50 years from the British Household Panel Survey to investigate the effects of ageing on the relationship between standard of living, as measured by various deprivation indices, and income. We find that for most indices, ageing increases deprivation when controlling for income and other factors. The exception is a subjective index of ‘financial strain’, which appears to fall as people age. We also find evidence of cohort effects. At any given age and income, more-recently-born older people in general experience more deprivation than those born longer ago. To some extent these ageing and cohort effects balance out, which suggests that pensions do not need to change with age.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Atkinson, A., Cantillon, B., Marlier, E. and Nolan, B. 2002. Social Indicators: The EU and Social Exclusion. Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banks, J., Blundell, R. and Tanner, S. 1998. Is there a retirement-savings puzzle? American Economic Review, 88, 4, 769–88.Google Scholar
Berthoud, R. and Ford, R. 1996. Relative Needs: Variations in Living Standards of Different Types of Household. Policy Studies Institute, London.Google Scholar
Berthoud, R., Bryan, M. and Bardasi, E. 2004. The Dynamics of Deprivation: The Relationship between Income and Material Deprivation over Time. Research Report 219, Department for Work and Pensions, Corporate Document Services, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK.Google Scholar
Berthoud, R., Blekesaune, M. and Hancock, R. 2006. Are ‘Poor’ Pensioners ‘Deprived’? Research Report 364, Department for Work and Pensions, Corporate Document Services, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK.Google Scholar
Clark, A., Fritjers, P. and Shields, M. 2008. Relative income, happiness, and utility: an exploration of the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic Literature, 46, 1, 95–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) 2008. Households Below Average Income 1994/95 to 2006/7. DWP, London. Available online at http://www.dwp.gov.uk/asd/hbai/hbai2007/contents.asp [Accessed 18 July 2008].Google Scholar
Finch, N. and Kemp, P. 2006. Which Pensioners Don't Spend Their Income and Why? Research Report 384, Department for Work and Pensions, Corporate Document Services, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK.Google Scholar
Gordon, D., Adelman, L., Ashworth, K., Bradshaw, J., Levitas, R., Middleton, S., Pantazis, C., Patsios, D., Payne, S., Townsend, P. and Williams, J. 2000. Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.Google Scholar
Guio, A.-C. 2005. Material deprivation in the EU. Statistics in Focus, 21 (Eurostat, Luxembourg).Google Scholar
Halleröd, B. 1995. The truly poor: direct and indirect consensual measurement of poverty in Sweden. Journal of European Social Policy, 5, 2, 111–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaRochelle-Côté, S., Myles, J and Picot, G. 2008. Income Security and Stability During Retirement in Canada. Research Paper 11F0019M, Statistics Canada, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Mack, J. M. and Lansley, S. 1985. Poor Britain. Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Mayer, S. and Jencks, C. 1989. Poverty and the distribution of material hardship'. Journal of Human Resources, 24, 1, 88–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, S. 2004. Poverty or preference: what do ‘consensual deprivation indicators’ really measure? Fiscal Studies, 25, 2, 201–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, S. and Collard, S. 2004. Developing Deprivation Questions for the Family Resources Survey. Working Paper 13, Department for Work and Pensions, London.Google Scholar
Miniaci, R., Monfordini, C., Weber, G. 2003. Is There a Retirement-consumption Puzzle in Italy? Working Paper WP03/14, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London.Google Scholar
Pantazis, C., Gordon, D. and Levitas, R. (eds) 2006. Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain: The Millennium Survey. Policy Press, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Patsios, D. 2000. Poverty and Social Exclusion among the Elderly. Poverty and Social Exclusion Working Paper 20, Townsend Centre for International Poverty Research, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Pensions Policy Institute 2004. State Pension Reform: The Consultation Process. Pensions Policy Institute, London.Google Scholar
Portrait, F., Deeg, D. and Alessi, R. 2004. Examining the Dutch Disability Trends in the Nineteen-nineties: Age, Period and Cohort Effects. Discussion Paper 04-20, Tjalling C. Koopmans Research Institute, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Available on-line at http://www.koopmansinstitute.uu.nl [Accessed 20 November 2008].Google Scholar
Prus, S. G. 2002. Changes in income within a cohort over the later life course: evidence for income status convergence. Canadian Journal of Ageing, 21, 4, 495504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romeri, E., Baker, A., and Griffiths, C. 2006. Mortality by deprivation and cause of death in England and Wales 1999–2003. Health Statistics Quarterly, 32, Winter, 1934.Google Scholar
Smith, S. 2006. The retirement-consumption puzzle and involuntary early retirement: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey. Economic Journal, 116, 510, 130–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, M. (ed.) with Brice, J., Buck, N. and Prentice-Lane, E. 2006. British Household Panel User Manual. University of Essex, Colchester, Essex, UK.Google Scholar
Townsend, P. 1979. Poverty in the United Kingdom. Penguin, Harmondsworth, UK.Google Scholar
Whelan, C. T., Layte, R., Maitre, B. and Nolan, N. 2001. Income, deprivation and economic strain: an analysis of the European Community Household Panel. European Sociological Review, 17, 4, 357–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, J. M. and Smeeding, T. M. 2004. Sliding into Poverty? Cross-National Patterns of Income Source Change and Income Decay in Old Age. Centre for Retirement Research, Boston College, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J. M. 2002. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Zaidi, A. and Burchardt, T. 2005. Comparing incomes when needs differ: equivalization for the extra costs of disability. Review of Income and Wealth, 51, 1, 89–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zigante, V. 2008. Ever rising expectations: the determinants of subjective welfare in Croatia. Financial Theory and Practice, 32, 2, 115–37.Google Scholar
25
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Ageing, income and living standards: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Ageing, income and living standards: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Ageing, income and living standards: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *