Cart 0


EU-MODA CROSS-COUNTRY COMPARISON

The key results of the multidimensional overlapping deprivation analysis provide the possibility of comparing the countries included in the EU-MODA study by the following key ratios: (1) the deprivation headcount (H), (2) the average deprivation intensity among the deprived (A), (3) the adjusted deprivation headcount (M0), and (4) the overlapping deprivation headcounts.

Based on the total number of dimensions available in each country, the comparison can be performed using either 5 or 6 dimensions. "Comparison by 5 dimensions" is applicable to all countries within the EU-MODA scope and is carried out based on the following 5 dimensions for the different stages of a child's life-cycle: nutrition, health, water, sanitation, and housing for children who are 0-4 years old; and education, information, water, sanitation, and housing for children who are 5-17 years old.
"Comparison by 6 dimensions" is available for a smaller number of countries as it is applicable to only those countries for which the sixth dimension - protection from violence - is also available.

For a detailed explanation concerning the choice of dimensions and calculations, see the "EU-MODA Technical Note".

Select the number of dimensions you want the country comparison to be based on, and select one of the age-groups representing the different stages of a child's life-cycle. You can then choose any of the listed countries to see the results.

Select countries
Belgium France Finland Romania
Iceland Bulgaria United Kingdom Italy
Greece Poland Germany Austria
Czech Republic Norway Portugal

Comparison by deprivation headcount (H)

Description

The multidimensional deprivation headcount (H) represents the children who have deprivations above a specified cut-off, as a percentage of the total child population of the selected age-group.

For example: assume that in Country A, the deprivation headcount (H) is 50% when using 2 dimensions as the cut-off. This means that half of the children in country A are deprived in two or more of all the dimensions studied.

  • Note:
  • 1. A compilation of deprivation thresholds for each country can be found in 'Standard definition of indicators and country-specific application'.
  • 2. Within the EU-MODA methodology missing values are considered to be "non-deprived" in the multiple deprivation analysis. It is acknowledged that the deprivation ratios for countries with higher proportions of missing values are underestimated. See 'Data availability' for more information on the missing values per country, and 'Sensitivity analysis' for the robustness of cross-country comparison, when using alternative approaches to deal with missing values.
  • 3. If a country is missing one indicator that is part of a dimension consisting of two indicators, the dimension is still used in the analysis. It is, however, acknowledged that for such countries, the probability to be deprived within a dimension lacking an indicator is lower compared to other countries, thus its multidimensional deprivation ratios will also be underestimated. See 'Standard definition of indicators and country-specific application' for indicator availability per country.
  • 4. The education dimension may affect the deprivation ratios due to the differences among countries concerning the compulsory school starting age. Since compulsory education starts at different ages across countries, the probability to be deprived in the education dimension in the age-group 5-17 differs per country.
  • 5. The aforementioned notes apply also to comparison by average intensity among the deprived (A), adjusted deprivation headcount (M0), and the overlapping deprivation headcounts.

Description

Please select countries and generate chart.

Comparison by average deprivation intensity among the deprived (A)

Description

The average deprivation intensity among the deprived measures the breadth of multidimensional deprivation, showing the average number of deprivations that the multidimensionally deprived children encounter, presented as a percentage of the total number of dimensions considered (5 or 6 in total, depending on the number of dimensions chosen for the comparison).

For example: assume that in Country A, the average deprivation intensity is 50% when looking at "comparison by 6 dimensions" and using 2 dimensions as the cut-off. The ratio reveals that the children deprived in two or more dimensions on average experience 50% of the maximum 6 deprivations. This means that they are deprived in three dimensions on average.

Description

Please select countries and generate chart.

Comparison by adjusted deprivation headcount (M0)

Description

Although a good indication of deprivation incidence, the headcount ratio (H) is not sensitive to the breadth of multidimensional deprivation, as it remains unchanged if children who are already deprived become deprived in an additional dimension. For this reason, the adjusted deprivation headcount (M0) is used, as it is comprised of both the incidence and breadth of multidimensional deprivation, and is calculated by multiplying the deprivation headcount (H) with the average deprivation intensity of those deprived (A). The comparison of countries by the adjusted deprivation headcount (M0) thus gives an indication of the incidence as well as breadth of deprivation.

Note: the numerical value of the adjusted deprivation headcount (M0) is derived from a multiplication of the deprivation incidence and deprivation intensity, and cannot be ranked on a relative scale. The adjusted deprivation headcount is useful with regards to ordering countries. However, the numerical differences between the adjusted headcount of countries should not be interpreted as the relative difference of the deprivation situation of countries.

Description

Please select countries and generate chart.