Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Socioeconomic status and the allocation of government resources in Australia How well do geographic measures perform?

Socioeconomic status and the allocation of government resources in Australia How well do... Purpose – The aim of this paper is to compare the performance of area‐based vs individual‐level measures of socioeconomic status (SES). Design/methodology/approach – Using data from the longitudinal surveys of Australian youth (LSAY), a multidimensional measure of individual SES is created. This individual measure is used to benchmark the relative usefulness of socio‐economic indexes for areas (SEIFA), a geographic set of measures often used in Australia to assess the SES of individuals. Both measures are compared in terms of classification bias. The effects of using the different SES measures on participation in post‐compulsory education are examined. Findings – SEIFA measures perform satisfactorily with regard to the aggregate measurement of SES. However, they perform poorly when their use is aimed at channelling resources toward disadvantaged individuals. It is at the individual level that the analysis reveals the shortcomings of area‐based SES measures. Research limitations/implications – While region based measures are relatively easy to collect and utilise, we suggest that they hide significant SES heterogeneity within regional districts. Hence, the misclassification resulting from the use of regional measures to direct support for low SES groups creates a risk for resource misallocations. Originality/value – The finding that region‐based measures are subject to significant misclassification has important research and policy implications. Given the increasing availability of individual‐level administrative data, the paper suggests that such data be used as a substitute for geographic SES measures in categorising the SES of individuals. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Education + Training Emerald Publishing

Socioeconomic status and the allocation of government resources in Australia How well do geographic measures perform?

Patrick Lim; Sinan Gemici; John Rice; Tom Karmel
Education + Training , Volume 53 (7): 17 – Sep 13, 2011
Download PDF
17 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/socioeconomic-status-and-the-allocation-of-government-resources-in-WgcrH6PYds

References (36)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0040-0912
DOI
10.1108/00400911111171977
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to compare the performance of area‐based vs individual‐level measures of socioeconomic status (SES). Design/methodology/approach – Using data from the longitudinal surveys of Australian youth (LSAY), a multidimensional measure of individual SES is created. This individual measure is used to benchmark the relative usefulness of socio‐economic indexes for areas (SEIFA), a geographic set of measures often used in Australia to assess the SES of individuals. Both measures are compared in terms of classification bias. The effects of using the different SES measures on participation in post‐compulsory education are examined. Findings – SEIFA measures perform satisfactorily with regard to the aggregate measurement of SES. However, they perform poorly when their use is aimed at channelling resources toward disadvantaged individuals. It is at the individual level that the analysis reveals the shortcomings of area‐based SES measures. Research limitations/implications – While region based measures are relatively easy to collect and utilise, we suggest that they hide significant SES heterogeneity within regional districts. Hence, the misclassification resulting from the use of regional measures to direct support for low SES groups creates a risk for resource misallocations. Originality/value – The finding that region‐based measures are subject to significant misclassification has important research and policy implications. Given the increasing availability of individual‐level administrative data, the paper suggests that such data be used as a substitute for geographic SES measures in categorising the SES of individuals.

Journal

Education + Training – Emerald Publishing

Published: Sep 13, 2011

Keywords: Socio‐economic status; Young people; Tertiary education; Australia; Young adults; Social groups; Australia

There are no references for this article.