Misplaced Pages

#115884

40-445: (Redirected from IMD2000 ) Redirect page Redirect to: Deprivation index#Indices of Multiple Deprivation Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Index_of_Multiple_Deprivation_2000&oldid=1260582544 " Hidden category: Redirects connected to a Wikidata item Deprivation index#Indices of Multiple Deprivation In 1983, Brian Jarman published

80-462: A combined UK IMD with only small sacrifices in data quality. Decisions within the UK that are taken nationally would be usefully informed by a UK index of multiple deprivation and this work has been proven possible and performed. The most recent whole-UK index of multiple deprivation was compiled by MySociety in 2021. There are also examples of IMDs being created for smaller geographies within nations. This

120-775: A country or territory's gross household disposable income per capita (including social transfers in kind). According to the OECD , 'household disposable income is income available to households such as wages and salaries, income from self-employment and unincorporated enterprises, income from pensions and other social benefits, and income from financial investments (less any payments of tax, social insurance contributions and interest on financial liabilities). 'Gross' means that depreciation costs are not subtracted.' This indicator also takes account of social transfers in kind 'such as health or education provided for free or at reduced prices by governments and not-for-profit organisations.' The data shown below

160-444: A greater degree of deprivation. Areas may be “ranked” according to their Townsend score as a means of expressing relative deprivation. A Townsend score can be calculated for any area where information is available for the four index variables. Commonly, census data are used and scores are calculated at the level of census output areas. Scores for these areas may be linked or mapped to other geographical areas, such as postcodes, to make

200-430: A mixed community with a mix of very low income families in poor health and very high income families in good health can return a middling IMD score that represents neither group well and fails to provide useful insight to users of analysis based on IMD data. Other groups not well represented by IMDs are mobile communities and people experiencing homelessness, some of the most deprived members of society. Responsibility for

240-578: A result levels of deprivation cannot be easily compared between nations. The geography at which IMDs are produced varies across the nations of the UK and has varied over time. Currently the smallest geography for which IMDs are published is LSOA level in both England and Wales, data zone level for Scotland, and Super Output Area (SOA) for Northern Ireland. Early versions of the English IMDs were published at electoral ward and English local authority level. The use of IMDs in social analysis aims to balance

280-688: A single overall measure. The Index is made up of seven distinct dimensions of deprivation called Domain Indices. Whilst it is known as the ID2004, most of the data actually dates from 2001. The Indices of deprivation 2004 are measured at the Lower Layer Super Output Area level. Super Output Areas were developed by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) from the Census 2001 Output Areas. There are two levels,

320-412: A wide area of relative affluence around it - these can appear to be a greater problem than many smaller completely residential SOAs in which higher concentrations of deprived people live but mixed with more affluent neighbours. The Indices of Deprivation 2007 ( ID 2007 ) is a deprivation index at the small area level was released on 12 June 2007. It follows the ID2004 and because much of the datasets are

360-411: Is a measure of material deprivation within a population. It was first described by sociologist Peter Townsend in 1988. The measure incorporates four variables: These variables can be measured for the population of a given area and combined (via a series of calculations involving log transformations and standardisations) to give a “Townsend score” for that area. A greater Townsend index score implies

400-604: Is of higher resolution than the highest resolution ward index data of the IMD2000 and therefore better at identifying "pockets" of deprivation within wards the 2004 system has its problems. Some areas of deprivation can still be hidden because of the size of SOAs. Examples of this can be found by comparing central areas of Keighley using the Bradford District Deprivation Index (developed by Bradford Council produced at 1991 Census Enumeration District level) with

440-556: Is particularly important in places with very high deprivation in almost all areas. For example, using English IMDs in Manchester is not useful for targeting local interventions since over half of the city is classed as being in England's most deprived decile. By using raw deprivation scores before they are ranked, a local IMD can be calculated showing relative deprivation within a place instead of its relative deprivation within England. IMDs are

SECTION 10

#1733092820116

480-450: Is published by the OECD and is presented in purchasing power parity (PPP) in order to adjust for price differences between countries. *Figures have been rounded to the nearest hundred; if data is unavailable for 2022, figures for 2021, 2020 or 2019 are shown. The median equivalised disposable income is the median of the disposable income which is equivalised by dividing income by

520-508: Is standardised to have a population-weighted mean of zero, and a variance of one, using the z-score method. The Carstairs index for each area is the sum of the standardised values of the components. Indices may be positive or negative, with negative scores indicating that the area has a lower level of deprivation, and positive scores suggesting the area has a relatively higher level of deprivation. The indices are typically ordered from lowest to highest, and grouped into population quintiles. In

560-443: Is that the choice of components and the weighting of those components in the construction of the overall multiple deprivation score is unavoidably subjective. IMDs are calculated separately for England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland and are not comparable across them. While the geographies, the input measures, and the weights assigned to each input measure are different in all four countries, they are similar enough to calculate

600-603: The Jarman Index , also known as the Underprivileged Area Score , to identify underprivileged areas. Since then, many other indices have been developed. "Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA)" . Australian Bureau of Statistics. 27 March 2018. Statistics Canada publishes the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation . China's county-level area deprivation index (CADI) The European Deprivation Index

640-503: The household sector. It includes every form of cash income, e.g., salaries and wages , retirement income, investment income and cash transfers from the government. It may include near-cash government transfers like food stamps , and it may be adjusted to include social transfers in-kind, such as the value of publicly provided health care and education. Household income can be measured on various bases, such as per household, per capita , per earner, or on an equivalised basis. Because

680-529: The 1981, 1991 and 2001 indices, quintile 1 represented the least deprived areas, and quintile 5 represented the most deprived. In 2011, the order was reversed, in line with the ordering of the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. The low social class component of the 1981 and 1991 Carstairs index was created using the Registrar General's Social Class (later Social Class for Occupation). In 2001, this

720-627: The Census to calculate the relative deprivation of an area, therefore there have been four versions: 1981, 1991, 2001 and 2011. The Carstairs indices are routinely produced and published by the MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit at the University of Glasgow. The components of the Carstairs score are unweighted, and so to ensure that they all have equal influence over the final score, each variable

760-450: The ID 2004 using more up-to-date data. The new IMD 2007 contains seven domains which relate to income deprivation, employment deprivation, health deprivation and disability, education skills and training deprivation, barriers to housing and services, living environment deprivation, and crime. Disposable household and per capita income Household income is a measure of income received by

800-466: The ID2004. Additionally SOAs were tasked with providing complete coverage of England and Wales - this combined with the minimum population and household counts within each SOA means that large areas of agricultural, commercial and industrial land have to be included within a residential area that borders them - thus when some very deprived residential areas are mapped, a large area of supposed deprivation emerges, however most of it may not be so but rather has

840-448: The IMD 2007 are presented at local authority district level and county council level. The LSOA level Domain Indices and IMD 2007, together with the local authority district and county summaries are referred to as the Indices of Deprivation 2007 (ID 2007).(Rusty 2009) The ID 2007 are based on the approach, structure and methodology that were used to create the previous ID 2004. The ID 2007 updates

SECTION 20

#1733092820116

880-1115: The Social Disadvantage Research Group at the University of Oxford . The most recent IMDs for the four nations of the UK are, The Scottish index of multiple deprivation (SIMD) is used by local authorities , the Scottish government , the NHS and other government bodies in Scotland to support policy and decision making. It won the Royal Statistical Society 's Excellence in Official Statistics Awards in 2017. The SIMD measures across seven domains: current income, employment, health, education, skills and training, housing, geographic access and crime. These seven domains are calculated and weighted for 6,976 small areas, called ‘data zones’, with roughly equal population. With

920-494: The UK to classify the relative deprivation (a measure of poverty ) of small areas. Multiple components of deprivation are weighted with different strengths and compiled into a single score of deprivation. They are created by the British Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). The principle behind the index is to target government action in the areas which need it most. The calculation and publication of

960-507: The UK) to create an index to identify 'underprivileged areas' where there were high numbers of patients and hence pressure on general practitioner services. Its creation involved the random distribution of a questionnaire among general practitioners throughout the UK. This was then used to obtain statistical weights for a calculation of a composite index of underprivileged areas based on GPs' perceptions of workload and patient need. The Townsend index

1000-564: The coordination of European social policies at country level based on a set of common goals. Laeken indicators include the following. Most of these indicators are discriminated by various criteria (gender, age group, household type, etc.). "Indice de défavorisation social" [The FDEP, The French DEPrivation index]. AtlaSanté (in French). The German Index of Multiple Deprivation (GIMD) The Italian deprivation index Indices of multiple deprivation (IMD) are datasets used within

1040-834: The counties of England at a ward level, the first national study of its kind. Deprivation across the 8414 wards in the country was assessed, using the criteria of income, employment, health, education, housing, access, and child poverty. Wards ranking in the most deprived 10 per cent in the country were earmarked for additional funding and assistance. The most deprived wards in England were found to be Benchill in Manchester , Speke in Liverpool , Thorntree in Middlesbrough , Everton in Liverpool, and Pallister in Middlesbrough. IMD2000

1080-434: The desire for a single number describing the concept of deprivation in a place and the recognition that deprivation has many interacting components. IMDs may be an improvement over simpler measures of deprivation such as low average household disposable income because they capture variables such as the advantage of access to a good school and the disadvantage of exposure to high levels of air pollution. A potential disadvantage

1120-418: The indices is devolved and indices of multiple deprivation for Wales, Scotland, England, and Northern Ireland are calculated separately. While the components of deprivation that make up the overall deprivation score are similar in all four nations of the UK the weights assigned to each component, the size of the geographies for which deprivation scores are calculated, and the years of calculation are different. As

1160-509: The lowest (which the Index is based upon) being smaller than wards and containing a minimum of 1,000 people and 400 households. The middle layer contains a minimum of 5,000 people and 2,000 households. Earlier proposals to introduce Upper Layer Super Output Areas were dropped due to lack of demand. In addition to Super Output Areas, Summaries of the ID 2004 are presented at District level, County level and Primary Care Trust (PCT) level. While each SOA

1200-406: The number of people or earners per household can vary significantly between regions and over time, the choice of measurement basis can impact household income rankings and trends. When taxes and mandatory contributions are subtracted from household income, the result is called net or disposable household income. A region's mean or median net household income can be used as an indicator of

1240-482: The population total at 5.3 million that comes to an average population of 760 people per data zone. In 1983, Brian Jarman published the Underprivileged Area Score , which became known as the Jarman Index . This measured socio-economic variation across small geographical areas. The score is an outcome of the need identified in the Acheson Committee Report (into General Practitioner (GP) services in

Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000 - Misplaced Pages Continue

1280-405: The production of publication of IMDs varies by the nation that they cover. Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) publishes IMDs for Northern Ireland. StatsWales publishes IMDs for Wales. The Scottish Government publishes IMDs for Scotland. The UK Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities ( DLUHC ) publishes IMDs for England. Early version of English IMDs were produced by

1320-423: The property of an area and of the average characteristics of the people living in that area. They are not the property of any single person living within the area. Failure by researchers to consider this can lead to misleading features in analysis based on IMDs. This is a particularly large risk in areas which are very diverse due to social housing and mixed community policies such as central London. In these settings,

1360-436: The purchasing power or material well-being of its residents. Mean income ( average ) is the amount obtained by dividing the total aggregate income of a group by the number of units in that group. Median income is the amount that divides the income distribution into two equal groups, half having income above that amount, and half having income below that amount. The list below represents a national accounts-derived indicator for

1400-640: The same or similar between indices, it allows for a comparison of 'relative deprivation' of an area between the two indices. While it is known as the ID2007, most of the data actually dates from 2005, and most of the data for the ID2004 was from 2001. The new Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 (IMD 2007) is a Lower layer Super Output Area (LSOA) level measure of multiple deprivation, and is made up of seven LSOA level domain indices. There are also two supplementary indices (Income Deprivation Affecting Children and Income Deprivation Affecting Older People). Summary measures of

1440-473: The scores more applicable in practice. The Townsend index has been the favoured deprivation measure among UK health authorities. Researchers at the University of Bristol's eponymous “Townsend Centre for International Poverty Research” continue to work on “meaningful measures of poverty”. The Carstairs index was developed by Vera Carstairs and Russell Morris , and published in 1991 as Deprivation and Health in Scotland . The work focuses on Scotland, and

1480-562: Was an alternative to the Townsend Index to avoid the use of households as denominators. The Carstairs index is based on four Census variables: low social class, lack of car ownership, overcrowding and male unemployment and the overall index reflects the material deprivation of an area, in relation to the rest of Scotland. Carstairs indices are calculated at the postcode sector level, with average population sizes of approximately 5,000 persons. The Carstairs index makes use of data collected at

1520-570: Was published by Launoy et al in 2018 with a goal of addressing social inequalities in health. The Laeken indicators is a set of common European statistical indicators on poverty and social exclusion , established at the European Council of December 2001 in the Brussels quarter of Laeken , Belgium . They were developed as part of the Lisbon Strategy , of the previous year, which envisioned

1560-579: Was superseded by the National Statistics Socio-economic Classification (NS-SEC). This meant that the definition of low social class had to be amended to reflect the approximate operational categories. The definition of overcrowding was amended between 1981 and 1991, due to the inclusion of kitchens of at least 2 metres wide into the room count in the census. The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000 (IMD 2000) showed relative levels of social and economic deprivation across all

1600-556: Was the subject of some controversy, and was succeeded by the Indices of Deprivation 2004 ( ID 2004 ) which abandoned ward-level data and sampled much smaller geographical areas. It is unusual in its inclusion of a measure of geographical access as an element of deprivation and in its direct measure of poverty (through data on benefit receipts). The ID 2004 is based on the idea of distinct dimensions of deprivation which can be recognised and measured separately. These are then combined into

#115884