Income, Deprivation and Economic Strain: An Analysis of the European Community Household Panel

By C. Whelan, Richard Layte, B. Maître, B. Nolan. 2001

317 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/83aa9b30fb45f90dbd2f2875c0add2528bb2aee7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

1. B. Perry
2. C. Whelan
3. B. Maître
4. Rolf Aaberge
5. B. Nolan
6. A. Brandolini
7. Richard Layte

In Sociology and Political Science

1. C. Whelan
2. B. Perry
3. B. Maître
4. B. Nolan
5. Rolf Aaberge
6. A. Brandolini
7. Gianni Betti
8. Richard Layte

Citations in the corpus

• Welfare regime and social class variation in poverty and economic vulnerability in Europe: an analysis of EU-SILC (2009, background): “…and with a focus on social cohesion, involving social connectedness and communal identification (Friedkin, 2004), is that the evidence relating to the impact of factors such as unemployment and material deprivation on such outcomes is extremely modest (Gallie and Paugam, 2000; Whelan et al., 2002).”
• THE MISMATCH BETWEEN INCOME MEASURES AND DIRECT OUTCOME MEASURES OF POVERTY (2002, methodology): “Notes: The information in Table 3 on the European countries is drawn from Whelan et al. (2001b), who use income and deprivation data from the 1996 wave of the European Community Household Panel.”
• Multidimensional poverty and inequality (2014, background): “Some examples of studies for rich countries are Mayer and Jencks (1989), Federman et al. (1996), Nolan and Whelan (1996a, 1996b, 2007, 2010, 2011), Whelan et al. (2001), Halleröd et al. (2006), Guio (2005), Cappellari and Jenkins (2007), Fusco and Dickes (2008), Fusco et al. (2010) and Figari…”
• Multidimensional and Longitudinal Poverty: an Integrated Fuzzy Approach (2006, background): “Taking into account the manner in which different indicators cluster together adds to the richness of the analysis; ignoring such dimensionality can result in misleading conclusions (Whelan et al. 2001).”
• Multiple deprivation and persistent poverty in the European Union (2002, background): “Whelan et al. (2001) identify 23 items in the ECHP data set that could serve as indicators of deprivation defined in this fashion.”
• Using Non-Monetary Deprivation Indicators to Analyze Poverty and Social Exclusion: Lessons from Europe?. (2010, background): “The ECHP has been the main source for cross-country comparative analysis of different deprivation dimensions to date (see for example Eurostat, 2003, Whelan et al, 2001, Guio, 2005).”
• Multidimensional poverty measurement in Europe: An application of the adjusted headcount approach (2014, background): “Panel Study, involving a somewhat different set of deprivation items, identifies a broadly similar set of dimensions (Whelan et al., 2001).”
• Marital disruption and economic well‐being: a comparative analysis (2007, unknown): “Often 60% of the median net equivalized household income is chosen, but many use alternative poverty thresholds of 50% and 70% (Whelan et al., 2001).”