Abstract
Recent years have witnessed growing interest in the applications of mixed methods research strategies and specifically in the integration of qualitative and quantitative perspectives within social research. As a result, advocacy of mixed methods strategies has become increasingly accepted in research on the international analysis of poverty and vulnerability. However, despite its growing appeal in global poverty research within the United Kingdom, poverty research mixed methods designs remain rare with limited dialogue between proponents of qualitative and quantitative approaches. This partly reflects the persistence of longstanding methodological controversies in the applications of mixed methods approaches in poverty research. Combining data derived from multiple sources and generated using different data collection methods therefore continues to raise important conceptual, epistemological and methodological challenges in poverty measurement. In this chapter we illustrate some of these issues by drawing on qualitative development work undertaken as part of the 2012 UK Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey (PSE-UK) comprising a series of 14 focus group discussions in different locations in the UK. In doing so, we seek to illustrate the potential applications of qualitative evidence on poverty in assessing the credibility of evidence derived using large-scale survey methods.
This work was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (Ref: RES-060-25-0052). The research materials described in this article have been deposited with the UK Data Service (SN 851404).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abe, A. (2010). Social Exclusion and Earlier Disadvantages: An Empirical Study of Poverty and Social Exclusion in Japan. Social Science Japan Journal 13 (1): 5–30.
Ahmed, M. (2007). Consensual Poverty in Britain, Sweden and Bangladesh: A Comparative Study. Bangladesh ejournal of Sociology 4 (2): 56–77.
Beresford, P., Green, D., Lister, R., and Woodard, K. (1999). Poverty First Hand: Poor People Speak for Themselves. London: Child Poverty Action Group.
Bradshaw, J., Middleton, S., Davis, A., Oldfield, N., Smith, N., Cusworth, L., and Williams, J. (2008). A Minimum Income Standard for Britain: What People Think. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Brannen, J. (1992). Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches: An Overview. In J. Brannen (ed.), Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research, 3–38. Aldershot: Avebury.
Brannen, J. (2005). Mixed Methods Research: A Discussion Paper. ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Discussion Paper, December 2005, ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Review Paper, Southampton.
Brewer, J., and Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bryman, A. (1988). Quality and Quantity. In Social Research. London: Unwin Hyman.
Bryman, A. (1992). Qualitative and Quantitative Research: Further Reflections on Their Integration. In J. Brannen (ed.), Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research, 3–37. Aldershot: Avebury.
Burchardt, T., and Vizard, P. (2009). Developing an Equality Measurement Framework: A List of Substantive Freedoms for Adults and Children. EHRC Research Report 18. Manchester: Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Burchardt, T., and Vizard, P. (2011). ‘Operationalizing’ the Capability Approach as a Basis for Equality and Human Rights Monitoring in Twenty-First-Century Britain. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 12(1): 91–119.
Clery, E., Lee, L., and Kunz, S. (2013). Public Attitudes to Poverty and Welfare, 1983–2011. London: NatCen/Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Crowley, A., and Vulliamy, C. (2007). Listen Up! Children and Young People Talk About Poverty. London: Save the Children.
Davis, A., Hirsch, D., and Smith, N. (2010). A Minimum Income Standard for Britain in 2010. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Davies, R., and Smith, W. (1998). The Basic Necessities Survey: The Experience of Action Aid Vietnam. London: Action Aid.
Denzin, N. (1970). The Research Act. Chicago: Aldine.
Denzin, N. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 6 (2): 80–88.
Dominy, N., and Kempson, E. (2006). Understanding Older People’s Experiences of Poverty and Material Deprivation. Norwich: Department for Work and Pensions.
Fielding, N., and Fielding, J. (1986). Linking Data: The Articulation of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Social Science. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Flaherty, J. (2008). Getting By, Getting Heard: Poverty and Social Exclusion in the Borders. Glasgow: Report for the Scottish Borders Commission.
Giddens, A. (1976). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. London: Hutchinson.
Giddens, A. (1987). Social Theory and Modern Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gordon, D. (2006). The Definition and Measurement of Poverty. In C. Pantazis, D. Gordon, and R. Levitas (eds), Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain: The Millennium Survey. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Gordon, D., Adelman, L., Ashworth, K., Bradshaw, J., Levitas, R., Middleton, S., Pantazis, C., Patsios, D., Payne, S., Townsend, P., and Williams, J. (2001). Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain. Bristol: Policy Press/JRF.
Gordon, D., and Pantazis, C. (1997). Breadline Britain in the 1990s. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Guio, A.-C., Gordon, D., and Marlier, E. (2012). Measuring Material Deprivation in the EU. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Hallerod, B. (1995). The Truly Poor: Indirect and Direct Measurement of Consensual Poverty in Sweden. Journal of European Social Policy 5 (2): 111–129.
Hallerod, B. (1998). Poor Swedes, Poor Britons: A Comparative Analysis of Relative Deprivation. In H. Andreß (ed.), Empirical Poverty Research in a Comparative Perspective, 283–312. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Hammersley, M. (1992). Deconstructing the Qualitative — Quantitative Divide. In J. Brannen (ed.), Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Aldershot: Avebury.
Hillyard, P., Kelly, G., McLaughlin, E., Patsios, D., and Tomlinson, M. (2003). Bare Necessities: Poverty and Social Exclusion in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Democratic Dialogue.
Hirsch, D., Davis, A., and Smith, N. (2009). A Minimum Income Standard for Britain in 2009. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Hirsch, D., and Smith, N. (2010). Family Values — Parents’ Views on Necessities for Families with Children. Department for Work and Pensions Research Report No. 641.
Kanbur, R. (ed.) (2005). Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal: Complementarities, Tensions and the Way Forward. Q-Squared Working Paper 1. University of Toronto, October 2005.
Kangas, O., and Ritakallio, V. (1998). Different Methods — Different Results? Approaches to Multidimensional Poverty Measurement. In H. Andreß (ed.), Empirical Poverty Research in a Comparative Perspective, 167–203. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Layte, R., Nolan, B., and Whelan, C. (1999). Targeting Poverty: Lessons from Monitoring Ireland’s National Anti-poverty Strategy. Journal of Social Policy 29 (4): 553–575.
Mack, J., and Lansley, S. (1985). Poor Britain. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Mack, J., Lansley, S., Nandy, S., and Pantazis, P. (2013). Attitudes to Necessities in the PSE 2012 Survey: Are Minimum Standards Becoming Less Generous?. PSE-UK Working Paper Analysis Series #4.
McKay, S. (2004). Poverty or Preference: What do ‘Consensual Deprivation Indicators’ Really Measure?. Fiscal Studies 25 (2): 201–223.
Middleton, S. (1998). Revising the Breadline Britain Questions: Relevant Findings from the Group. In J. Bradshaw, D. Gordon, R. Levitas, S. Middleton, C. Pantazis, S. Payne, and P. Townsend (eds), Perceptions of Poverty & Social Exclusion, 1998: Report on Preparatory Research, pp. 43–64. Bristol: University of Bristol.
Muffels, R. (1993). Deprivation Standards and Style of Living Standards. In J. Berghman and B. Cantillon (eds), The European Face of Social Security, 43–59. Aldershot: Avebury.
Nolan, B., and Whelan, C. (1996). Resources, Deprivation and Poverty. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Pantazis, C., Gordon, D., and Townsend, P. (2006). The Necessities of Life. In C. Pantazis, D. Gordon, and R. Levitas (eds), Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain: The Millennium Survey, pp. 89–122. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Park, A., Phillips, M., and Robinson, C. (2007). Attitudes to Poverty: Findings from the British Social Attitudes Survey. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Perry, B. (2009). Non-income Measures of Material Wellbeing and Hardship: First Results from the 2008 New Zealand Living Standards Survey. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Social Development.
Ravallion, M. (2005). Can Qualitative Methods Help Quantitative Poverty Measurement?. In R. Kanbur (ed.), ‘Qualitative and Quantitative Poverty Appraisal: Complementarities, Tensions and the Way Forward’. Q-Squared Working Paper 1. University of Toronto.
Saunders, P. (2011). Down and Out: Poverty and Exclusion in Australia. Bristol: Policy Press.
Saunders, P., and Wong, M., (2011). Using Deprivation Indicators to Assess the Adequacy of Australian Social Security Payments. Journal of Poverty and Social Justice 19 (2): 91–101.
Shaffer, P. (2013). Ten Years of ‘Q-Squared’: Implications for Understanding and Explaining Poverty. World Development 45: 269–285.
Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed Methodologies: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. London: Sage.
Tchernina, N. (1996). Economic Transition and Social Exclusion in Russia. Research Series No. 108. Geneva: International Institute for Labour Studies.
Teddlie, C., and Tashakkori, A. (2006). A General Typology of Research Designs Featuring Mixed Methods. Research in the Schools 13 (1): 12–28.
Townsend, P. (1979). Poverty in the UK. London: Penguin.
Townsend, P. (1987). Deprivation. Journal of Social Policy 16 (2): 125–146.
van den Bosch, K. (1998). Perceptions of the Minimum Standard of Living in Belgium: Is There Consensus?. In H. Andreß (ed.), Empirical Poverty Research in a Comparative Perspective, 135–166. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Walker, R. (1987). Consensual Approaches to the Definition of Poverty: Towards an Alternative Methodology. Journal of Social Policy 16 (2): 213–226.
Women’s Budget Group. (2008). Women and Poverty: Experiences, Empowerment and Engagement. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Wright, G. (2011). Socially Perceived Necessities in South Africa: Patterns of Possession. CASASP Working Paper No. 10. Centre for the Analysis of South African Social Policy, University of Oxford.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Eldin Fahmy, Eileen Sutton and Simon Pemberton
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fahmy, E., Sutton, E., Pemberton, S. (2015). Mixed Methods in Poverty Measurement: Qualitative Perspectives on the ‘Necessities of Life’ in the 2012 PSE-UK Survey. In: Roelen, K., Camfield, L. (eds) Mixed Methods Research in Poverty and Vulnerability. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137452511_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137452511_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-68681-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-45251-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Intern. Relations & Development CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)