Dr Carolyn Snell Water poverty in England and Wales: Findings from 2 research projects Dr Carolyn Snell Professor Jonathan Bradshaw Gill Main Sarah Wilson
Transcript
Slide 1
Dr Carolyn Snell Water poverty in England and Wales: Findings
from 2 research projects Dr Carolyn Snell Professor Jonathan
Bradshaw Gill Main Sarah Wilson
Slide 2
Dr Carolyn Snell Background to the research Two research
projects: 1)Quantitative study funded by CC Water (May 2008-April
2009) Investigated the characteristics of households in water
poverty Investigated whether a passport benefit could be
indentified 2)Qualitative pilot study funded through an internal
University of York grant (May August 2009) Aimed to add a
qualitative dimension to the first project
Slide 3
Dr Carolyn Snell Defining water poverty The accepted definition
is: Where a household spends more than 3% of its net income on
water and sewerage
Slide 4
Dr Carolyn Snell Background: why study water poverty in England
and Wales? Cost Water poverty is a growing problem as a result of
increasing water prices Increases in the level of water prices
coincide with increasing fuel charges and food prices Water charges
are relatively low compared to other bills, but are inelastic
Variation Regional variation in water bills - water companies hold
regional monopolies Regional variation in bills creates a unique
difficulty in arriving at a national policy solution Dr Carolyn
Snell
Slide 5
Social Support WaterSure the only social tariff - has a very
low take-up and its eligibility criteria mean that it is limited to
a small sub-section of the customer base. Policy Before 1999 it was
not illegal to disconnect water supplies, linked to an increase in
dysentery and hepatitis in the early 1990s The nature of water
poverty as a policy problem has changed significantly since 1999,
when it became illegal to disconnect household properties. Since
1999 the number of households falling into arrears has increased Dr
Carolyn Snell Background: why study water poverty in England and
Wales?
Slide 6
Dr Carolyn Snell Project 1: quantitative analysis of water
poverty in England and Wales Data from the Family Resources Survey
(FRS) has been used to analyse the socio-economic characteristics
of those at risk of water poverty in England and Wales. Analysis of
the most recent data (2006-7) found that 14.6 per cent of the
population were in water poverty. Proposed increases over the next
five years could double this in some regions
Slide 7
Dr Carolyn Snell The water poverty rate is double the average
for: single pensioners households on means tested benefits workless
households the bottom income quintile Headline figures
Slide 8
Dr Carolyn Snell Income Of all those in water poverty, 71.3 per
cent are in the lowest income quintile, and of those in the lowest
income quintile, 54.9 per cent are in water poverty. Amongst all
those defined as water poor, 71.6 per cent are households with no
workers Household Makeup Of the water poor, 54.4 per cent are
single occupancy households. Of households in water poverty, 30.7
per cent are single pensioners. Age Of the water poor, 30.7 per
cent are single pensioners. Region Regional variation: at regional
level the highest proportion of water poor households is Wales,
with 20.2 per cent of households living in water poverty. This is
closely followed by the South West with 19.9 per cent of households
living in water poverty. BUT these regions DO NOT map onto current
water company regions Findings
Slide 9
Dr Carolyn Snell Findings: benefits and tax credits % spending
over 3% of on water % of total 2006-07 water poor Pensioner single
on PC 73.07.8 Pensioner couple on PC 67.22.0 Single not working 16
hours, on IS/JSA, 16-24 95.51.2 Single not working 16 hours, on
IS/JSA, 25-64 97.66.6 Couple neither working 16 hours, on IS/JSA
97.01.0 Lone parent + 1, not working 16 hours, on IS/JSA 85.32.8
Lone parent + 2, not working 16 hours, on IS/JSA 81.01.5 Lone
parent + 3, not working 16 hours, on IS/JSA 52.60.4 Lone parent +
4, not working 16 hours, on IS/JSA 44.40.1 Couple +1, neither
working 16 hours, on IS/JSA 75.40.4 Couple +2, neither working 16
hours, on IS/JSA 70.60.4 Couple +3, neither working 16 hours, on
IS/JSA 42.70.2 Couple +4, neither working 16 hours, on IS/JSA
7.90.0 Total 78.124.2
Slide 10
Dr Carolyn Snell Project One: Conclusions Water poverty is
suffered by a range of households in very different circumstances A
benefits focused policy response is problematic because of the
relatively small proportions of the water poor that would be helped
The regional variation in charges creates a unique difficulty in
arriving at a national policy solution This is a difficult policy
problem because:
Slide 11
Dr Carolyn Snell Further research questions Our second project
set out answer the following research questions: What are the
effects of being in water poverty? How do households prioritise
bills and expenses? Do households take up current support
mechanisms that are available?
Slide 12
Dr Carolyn Snell Findings: how do households prioritise bills
and expenses? Bills are prioritised over debts Fuel is prioritised
over water Water is a mid to low level priority Priorities tend to
revolve around the ability to function e.g. Eating, heating,
children's well being TV licence is often deprioritised/unpaid
Slide 13
Dr Carolyn Snell Findings : What are the effects of struggling
to pay? Sacrifices in other areas Wellbeing Not being able to
socialise Limited activities for children Impact on family
relationships E.g. cant buy Xmas gifts Impact on other
relationships Toping up mobile Buying a round Going out for a
coffee Health Inadequate food Inadequate heating Mental health Debt
Wellbeing Stress, depression etc. Sense of helplessness Fear Where
families help out there is guilt/resentment/ irritation/control
Impact of debt recovery methods Bailiffs Disconnection of other
utilities Payment plans
Slide 14
Dr Carolyn Snell Findings: do households take up current
support mechanisms that are available? Government policy V
Experiences Fuel poverty strategy: Warm front Switching tariff Cold
weather payments Broader social exclusion initiatives Fuel direct
Water poverty : Water sure Water direct Limited knowledge of
schemes available Limited ability to take up schemes Unpopularity
of switching tariff Lack of advice by companies Lack of advice by
agencies about options Confusion over eligibility
Slide 15
Dr Carolyn Snell Project One: Conclusions Water poverty tends
to affect those already struggling financially Water debts are
de-prioritised compared to other debts that are associated with a
direct consequence There is a mismatch between policy and
experience