The Dynamics of Poverty, Family and Employment: Findings from a Longitudinal Panel Study Conducted in Switzerland

In recent years, empirical evidence on poverty dynamics has grown. Consolidated panel data and research techniques have facilitated a better understanding of the phenomenon and its evolution over time. In a previous study... [ view full abstract ]

In recent years, empirical evidence on poverty dynamics has grown. Consolidated panel data and research techniques have facilitated a better understanding of the phenomenon and its evolution over time.
In a previous study conducted in Switzerland, we directed our research focus on individual poverty trajectories and associated risk and protective factors. Major findings were, first, that individual trajectories merge to a few specific and contrasting patterns which are rather stable over time. Second, trajectory patterns were found to be strongly associated with indicators of social inequalities, such as gender, age, education and employment status. Building on this previous investigation, the present communication presents findings of further analysis designed to explore how these poverty patterns interrelate with family and employment trajectories.
Data came from the Swiss Household Panel (SHP), a national longitudinal survey of the general population. Besides prospective socio-demographic and poverty data collected every year since 1999, the SHP comprises also retrospective biographical data compiled in 2001 and 2002 in order to gather additional information about the respondent’s life course prior to the panel study. By means of optimal matching and cluster analysis, patterns of cohabitation and employment trajectories were identified first. Second, the association between these trajectories and various subsequent poverty outcomes between 1999 and 2008 has been explored.
Results suggest that poverty may, to a large extent, be explained retrospectively by cohabitational and occupational trajectories. Stable employment and cohabitation patterns clearly appear as protective factors, whereas frequent changes, interruptions or atypical trajectories are risk factors. Thus, our study provides new evidence that poverty is closely related to specific life events and life styles. Implications for social policy and social work are discussed.