Conclusion Part IV

  • Julia Henke
Part of the Life Course Research and Social Policies book series (LCRS, volume 11)


The objective of Part IV was to respond to three overarching questions: firstly, we sought to determine whether and how the two population groups defined as vulnerable by an objective monetary poverty line and by the self-assessed difficulties of making ends meet are significantly different from each other, with regard to socio-demographic characteristics, economic resources and in terms of individual characteristics that are expected to increase the need for financial resources. Our main hypothesis was that the Self-Assessed Measure of economic vulnerability provides a more accurate proxy for the overall financial situation than the income-based Objective Measure. Secondly, we wanted to examine if an increase in ‘Financial Needs and Expectations’ as operationalized by self-assessed health status and items of social participation mediates the effect of Economic Resources on the Self-Assessed Measure. Thirdly, the Vulnerability Typology was examined as a way of combining the insights from both, self-assessed and objective measures.


  1. Marks, G. N. (2007). Social Policy Research Paper No. 29. Income poverty, subjective poverty and financial stress. Australian Government. Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.Google Scholar
  2. Skopek, N., Kolb, K., Buchholz, S., & Blossfeld, H.-P. (2012). Einkommensreich – vermögensarm? Die Zusammensetzung von Vermögen und die Bedeutung einzelner Vermögenskomponenten im europäischen Vergleich. Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 22(2), 163–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julia Henke
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GenevaGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations