{"title":"计算一个家庭的生活水平:一个或几个等效尺度?","authors":"H. Martin","doi":"10.24187/ECOSTAT.2017.491D.1907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"[eng] Equivalence scales, used to compare the standard of living of households of different size and composition, take into account the economies of scale resulting from pooling income and expenditure within households. Two approaches can be used to estimate these scales: an “objective” approach based on modelling household consumption expenditure, or a \"subjective” approach based on how households perceive their standard of living. This article focuses on the latter. Using data from the 1995 to 2011 editions of the French Household Expenditure survey (Budget de famille) by Insee, estimations of equivalence scales highlight the sensitivity of results to the model specification, estimation coverage, the choice of subjective living standard indicators and the conventions used to calculate the cost of dependent children. . The subjective approach does not give a robust identification of a single equivalence scale. It does, however, provide a set of possible equivalence scales; for instance, the adult equivalent for a child under 14 ranges from 0.15 to 0.8, while standard equivalence scales are based on a convention, such as 0.3 for the OECD-modified equivalence scale. Thus, for studies using these instruments, or for public policy, it may be preferable to consider a set of equivalence scales rather than just a single scale.","PeriodicalId":38830,"journal":{"name":"Economie et Statistique","volume":"7 1","pages":"93-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Calculating the standard of living of a household: one or several equivalence scales?\",\"authors\":\"H. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.24187/ECOSTAT.2017.491D.1907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"[eng] Equivalence scales, used to compare the standard of living of households of different size and composition, take into account the economies of scale resulting from pooling income and expenditure within households. Two approaches can be used to estimate these scales: an “objective” approach based on modelling household consumption expenditure, or a \\\"subjective” approach based on how households perceive their standard of living. This article focuses on the latter. Using data from the 1995 to 2011 editions of the French Household Expenditure survey (Budget de famille) by Insee, estimations of equivalence scales highlight the sensitivity of results to the model specification, estimation coverage, the choice of subjective living standard indicators and the conventions used to calculate the cost of dependent children. . The subjective approach does not give a robust identification of a single equivalence scale. It does, however, provide a set of possible equivalence scales; for instance, the adult equivalent for a child under 14 ranges from 0.15 to 0.8, while standard equivalence scales are based on a convention, such as 0.3 for the OECD-modified equivalence scale. Thus, for studies using these instruments, or for public policy, it may be preferable to consider a set of equivalence scales rather than just a single scale.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economie et Statistique\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"93-108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economie et Statistique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24187/ECOSTAT.2017.491D.1907\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economie et Statistique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24187/ECOSTAT.2017.491D.1907","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
摘要
相等比额表是用来比较不同规模和组成的家庭的生活水平的,它考虑到在家庭内汇集收入和支出所产生的规模经济。可以使用两种方法来估计这些尺度:一种基于家庭消费支出模型的“客观”方法,或一种基于家庭如何看待其生活水平的“主观”方法。本文主要关注后者。使用法国国家统计局1995年至2011年版的法国家庭支出调查(Budget de famille)的数据,对等效尺度的估计突出了结果对模型规范、估计范围、主观生活水平指标的选择以及用于计算受抚养子女成本的惯例的敏感性。主观的方法不能给出一个单一的等效尺度的可靠的识别。然而,它确实提供了一套可能的等效尺度;例如,14岁以下儿童的成人当量在0.15至0.8之间,而标准等效量表是基于惯例的,例如经合组织修订的等效量表为0.3。因此,对于使用这些工具的研究或公共政策,最好考虑一套等效比额表,而不只是单一比额表。
Calculating the standard of living of a household: one or several equivalence scales?
[eng] Equivalence scales, used to compare the standard of living of households of different size and composition, take into account the economies of scale resulting from pooling income and expenditure within households. Two approaches can be used to estimate these scales: an “objective” approach based on modelling household consumption expenditure, or a "subjective” approach based on how households perceive their standard of living. This article focuses on the latter. Using data from the 1995 to 2011 editions of the French Household Expenditure survey (Budget de famille) by Insee, estimations of equivalence scales highlight the sensitivity of results to the model specification, estimation coverage, the choice of subjective living standard indicators and the conventions used to calculate the cost of dependent children. . The subjective approach does not give a robust identification of a single equivalence scale. It does, however, provide a set of possible equivalence scales; for instance, the adult equivalent for a child under 14 ranges from 0.15 to 0.8, while standard equivalence scales are based on a convention, such as 0.3 for the OECD-modified equivalence scale. Thus, for studies using these instruments, or for public policy, it may be preferable to consider a set of equivalence scales rather than just a single scale.