NIESR Living Standards Evaluation Project
Lead Research Organisation:
National Institute of Economic and Social Research
Department Name: National Institute of Economic & Soc Res
Abstract
We propose a interdisciplinary research project into the key drivers of Living Standards, in pro-bono partnership with the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF).
Context and challenges
Based on our extensive experience across both NIESR and JRF in analysing the key drivers of living standards , our collective judgment is that 1) the freeze to the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) and 2) the uplift to Universal Credit in line with inflation in 2022 will have had the most meaningful impact on living standards across the country. Our proposed project will comprehensively evaluate both.
The impact of these policies is made all the more important given the importance of welfare generosity during a time of stagnant real income growth ?(ONS, 2023)? and through the context of the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis.
We know that the multiple changes to the LHA have resulted in falls in the housing benefit, and that the LHA freeze significantly reduced the availability of homes for people in receipt of the housing benefit component of Universal Credit. Today, just 5 per cent of asking rents are affordable on housing benefit (IFS 2023). Similarly, we know that the £20 per week Covid-19 uplift to Universal Credit led to a meaningful reduction in poverty (JRF 2021, Scottish Government 2022 & IFS 2023). However, a number of households in receipt of Universal Credit are still in destitution (JRF, 2023). Clearly, these policy changes are likely damaging to living standards, or at least not sufficient in alleviating hardship.
Aims and objectives
We do not have sufficient information to answer key questions. What impact did these changes have on poverty? Did this contribute to the challenges during the cost-of-living crisis? Is the regional value of LHA accurate and fair? Was the impact the same across all regions?
In order to answer these questions, we will conduct 1) quasi-experimental microsimulation exercises to estimate the impact on objective measures of living standards (poverty, wealth, etc.), 2) work with peer researchers to understand the impact on subjective measures (how it felt), and 3) estimate what would have happened under alternative policy designs using a combination of both along with economic models to generate actionable evidence.
Potential Application and Benefits
First, both policy changes will have had a meaningful impact on living standards given, for example, the freeze to the LHA significantly reduced the availability of homes for people in receipt of the housing benefit component of Universal Credit. This would likely have forced many households into more expensive homes in the private rental sector.
Secondly, a crucial part of evaluating policies with the intention of using the insight to inform policymakers is selecting interventions that have a potential application for new or improved policies. For example, understanding how Universal Credit uplifts impact living standards will enable us to attribute to ongoing discussions around rising welfare to guarantee it coves essentials put forward by the JRF.
Lastly, the chosen policies have a strong place-based component: for example, a falling value in housing benefit would have likely pushed many into different places across the UK, changing the make-up of towns and communities. Similarly, raising Universal Credit may have affected communities with a stronger claimant count in different ways to other places with a lower proportion of households in receipt of welfare.
Context and challenges
Based on our extensive experience across both NIESR and JRF in analysing the key drivers of living standards , our collective judgment is that 1) the freeze to the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) and 2) the uplift to Universal Credit in line with inflation in 2022 will have had the most meaningful impact on living standards across the country. Our proposed project will comprehensively evaluate both.
The impact of these policies is made all the more important given the importance of welfare generosity during a time of stagnant real income growth ?(ONS, 2023)? and through the context of the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis.
We know that the multiple changes to the LHA have resulted in falls in the housing benefit, and that the LHA freeze significantly reduced the availability of homes for people in receipt of the housing benefit component of Universal Credit. Today, just 5 per cent of asking rents are affordable on housing benefit (IFS 2023). Similarly, we know that the £20 per week Covid-19 uplift to Universal Credit led to a meaningful reduction in poverty (JRF 2021, Scottish Government 2022 & IFS 2023). However, a number of households in receipt of Universal Credit are still in destitution (JRF, 2023). Clearly, these policy changes are likely damaging to living standards, or at least not sufficient in alleviating hardship.
Aims and objectives
We do not have sufficient information to answer key questions. What impact did these changes have on poverty? Did this contribute to the challenges during the cost-of-living crisis? Is the regional value of LHA accurate and fair? Was the impact the same across all regions?
In order to answer these questions, we will conduct 1) quasi-experimental microsimulation exercises to estimate the impact on objective measures of living standards (poverty, wealth, etc.), 2) work with peer researchers to understand the impact on subjective measures (how it felt), and 3) estimate what would have happened under alternative policy designs using a combination of both along with economic models to generate actionable evidence.
Potential Application and Benefits
First, both policy changes will have had a meaningful impact on living standards given, for example, the freeze to the LHA significantly reduced the availability of homes for people in receipt of the housing benefit component of Universal Credit. This would likely have forced many households into more expensive homes in the private rental sector.
Secondly, a crucial part of evaluating policies with the intention of using the insight to inform policymakers is selecting interventions that have a potential application for new or improved policies. For example, understanding how Universal Credit uplifts impact living standards will enable us to attribute to ongoing discussions around rising welfare to guarantee it coves essentials put forward by the JRF.
Lastly, the chosen policies have a strong place-based component: for example, a falling value in housing benefit would have likely pushed many into different places across the UK, changing the make-up of towns and communities. Similarly, raising Universal Credit may have affected communities with a stronger claimant count in different ways to other places with a lower proportion of households in receipt of welfare.
| Title | Would You Say the UK is a Rich Country? | UK Living Standards Review |
| Description | Compared to the rest of Europe, would you say that the UK is a rich country? Many would answer that question 'yes'. But, if we take different parts of the UK, we see a different story. This video explains findings from NIESR's "UK Living Standards Review 2025", which shows that stagnation in real income growth in the last 15 years has caused UK living standards to plummet and cost UK workers thousands of pounds per year. Read the full report here: [insert URL] This animation is produced by Econ Films |
| Type Of Art | Film/Video/Animation |
| Year Produced | 2025 |
| Impact | Presented the key findings of our work by animating our charts and explaining them in an engaging/visual way. This has enabled our findings to be shared on social media, promoting our work to non-technical audiences. Also posted on Twitter/X here: https://x.com/NIESRorg/status/1900125505174532437 |
| URL | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0A1cGGpos |
| Description | • The poorest households in Slovenia and Malta are now better off than the poorest in the UK: whereas real incomes would consistently grow before the 2008 financial crisis, the stagnation afterwards has meant that other countries have overtaken the UK standard of living. • Regional income growth is some of the slowest in Europe: real incomes in the majority of European regions have grown at a faster rate than those in UK. • The UK has some of the least generous welfare across the OECD: the UK ranks in the middle of OECD countries for welfare spending (as a per cent of GDP) and third lowest for welfare value (per cent of average wages). • Welfare has only covered the cost of essentials in two out of the last 14 years: only during the pandemic did welfare cover the costs of essentials due to the £20 per week uplift to Universal Credit. • The UK is neither a high wage nor high welfare country: the consequence of weak wage growth and cuts in welfare spending have meant that by comparison to other countries the two main sources of living standards in the UK is limited. • Less than 5 per cent of private rental accommodation across the UK is affordable on housing benefit (down from 20 per cent in 2020): freezing the cash value of housing benefit while private rental costs grew at record rates has led to a substantial fall in the areas of the county affordable on housing benefit. • Weak productivity (TFP) is costing UK workers £4,300 per year: had UK wages grown as they did in the US after the 2008 financial crisis, UK workers would be £4,000 better off today. • Removing the two-child limit is the most cost-effective way to reduce poverty: we estimate this would reduce poverty by 1.7m and cost less than other similar policies that have the same beneficial impact on people's standard of living. |
| Exploitation Route | Our work has identified the key drivers of UK living standards. We have firstly identified the problem (e.g. with our finding real incomes have not meaningfully grown), put the problem into perspective (e.g. with our findings that the poorest households in Slovenia and Malta are now better off than the poorest in the UK) but have estimated primary cause (e.g. with our finding that half of the slowdown in real income growth can be explained by weak productivity growth). Each step of these findings can help wider public understanding of how the UK standard of living compares internationally and what the key drivers are. We intend for this to help shape national debates around welfare, wages and living standards more generally. We expect this work to also aid efforts by policy makers to raise people's standard of living. In particular, we add to this analysis with an assessment of a range of costed policies on their ability to raise the incomes of the poorest/reduce poverty. Not only providing a road-map for policy makers to take forward to achieve a better standard of living, but outlining which are politically and economically feasible. |
| Sectors | Government Democracy and Justice |
| Description | Our work, published on the 13th of March, has achieved substantial coverage in the media and social media: Our work featured in a 6 minute special report on ITV news at 6: https://www.itv.com/news/2025-03-12/uks-poorest-households-now-worse-off-than-poorest-in-slovenia-analysis-shows Also pieces in the FT, Telegraph, Bloomberg, Reuters, Independent (amongst others), here: FT: https://www.ft.com/content/0c5a9cd4-84a8-4588-bbe8-5fe749331503?FTCamp=engage/CAPI/webapp/Channel_Moreover//B2B Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/03/12/britain-no-longer-rich-country-after-living-standard-plunge/ Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-03-12/uk-workers-would-be-4-000-better-off-if-wages-kept-pace-with-us?srnd=homepage-asia Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/britains-poorest-households-worse-off-than-those-slovenia-think-tank-says-2025-03-12/ Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/reeves-starmer-uk-income-benefits-b2713933.html Given the impact generated so far, and our engagement with policy makers through a range of APPG's, we anticipate that this work will be able to contribute to better economic performance by increasing the attention on the importance of productivity, and improving distributional outcomes by highlighting the complex relationship between growth and inequality. Most of all, given we cost a range of policies and estimate their impact on living standards, we intend for our work to provide policy makers with a cost-effective road map for improving societal outcomes. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2025 |
| Sector | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Government, Democracy and Justice |
| Impact Types | Cultural Societal Economic Policy & public services |
| Description | Engagement with the APPG for Poverty and Inequality |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
| Impact | We have successfully disseminated our work to a policy maker who has the ability to influence to other policy makers through the APPG for Poverty and Inequality. We intend to work closely with them after the publication of the report to continue achieving impact. |
| Title | Annual net earnings |
| Description | Used to understanding how UK real wages compare internationally, and whether there is a relationship between the countries that achieved the best wage growth and the ones with the highest productivity growth in Figure 3.4 |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We were able to establish a clear relationship between productivity and real wage growth, introducing the reader (assumed to be non-technical) into the important topic of productivity and how it relates to peoples living standards |
| URL | https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/product/page/EARN_NT_NET |
| Title | Benefits in unemployment, share of previous income |
| Description | This indicator measures the proportion of previous in-work household income maintained after 2, 6, 12, 24 and 60 months of unemployment. Calculations refer to a single person without children whose previous in-work earnings were 67% of the average wage. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this data to highlight the value of welfare in the UK and place it in an international context, underscoring that the standard of living on welfare compared to the rest of the OECD is low. Used in figure 2.4 and 2.5 |
| URL | https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/benefits-in-unemployment-share-of-previous-income.html |
| Title | Consumer price inflation time series - ONS |
| Description | CPIH and CPI estimates for the period 1950 to 1988 (1949 to 1987 for index values) are also available. Please note that these earlier estimates are not National Statistics. They have been modelled and are provided purely for indicative purposes. In December 2018, we published extended series for the components of CPIH covering 1988 to 2004 and CPI covering 1988 to 1995. We have now added historical series for the goods and services analyses. All of the extended series were modelled after the introduction of CPIH and CPI and do not form part of the ongoing National Statistics series at 1 decimal place. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2025 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this data in figure 2.6, to show how welfare entitlements have developed over time. We teamed this with other datasets, so that we could assess the standard allowance pre and post the introduction (phase out of JSA). This gave the reader insight into welfare generosity, and how it compared to the cost of living over time. |
| URL | https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/datasets/consumerpriceindices |
| Title | EU statistics on income and living conditions - EUROSTAT |
| Description | Statistics Norway has carried out living conditions surveys since 1973, and from 1996 surveys have been carried out annually. In 2011, the national living conditions survey was coordinated with the EU-regulated Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) survey. The EU-SILC Level of living survey annually covers a broad living area, and in addition comes topics for the living conditions survey, which rotates with a cycle of three years. During a three-year cycle, the topics of economy, housing, leisure activities, social networking, vulnerability and turmoil for offenses, health, care, education and working conditions are highlighted. The theme of the Living Conditions Survey EU-SILC was in 2019 sporting activities. The data that is collected is supplemented with information from the register: Before the interview, it is linked to information about who resides in the household, residence and place of work. The information is checked during the interview. Information from the previous interview is also retrieved for those who have participated in the survey earlier. In retrospect, it connects to information about income, education etc. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2024 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this data to compare how the poorest households in the UK compared to the poorest households in other countries, and over time. We showed that the poorest in the UK saw a steady increase in their standard of living up to 2008, where a stagnation occurred. This did not happen in other countries, notably we highlight France and Finland who continued to see an increase in the standard of living. We then show that a number of countries have now overtaken the UK given this slowdown, notably Slovenia and Malta This was presented in figure 1.6 |
| Title | Gross Disposable Household Income by UK Region |
| Description | GDHI data by NUTS2/ITL2 region |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2024 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | This dataset was used to create a pseudo-UK measure of incomes at NUTS2 level, allowing us to compare UK regional incomes to their international counterparts. We did this by estimating the average ratio of UK to EU wages (in each year) using the Income and Living Conditions (ILC) data, then and applying it by taking the average wage across the ITL2 regions and uprating it in line with the estimated ratio, then applying the average result to each UK ITL2 regions using the regional distribution of GDHI for each respective year. Other than the UK only EU countries are represented |
| Title | Income and living conditions EUROSTAT |
| Description | Statistics on income, social inclusion and living conditions cover objective and subjective aspects of these themes in both monetary and non-monetary terms for both households and individuals. The following aspects of the topic are covered by the statistics: income poverty social exclusion housing labour education health |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2019 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | This dataset was used to create a pseudo-UK measure of incomes at NUTS2 level, allowing us to compare UK regional incomes to their international counterparts We did this by estimating the average ratio of UK to EU wages (in each year) using this Income and Living Conditions (ILC) data, then and applying it by taking the average wage across the ITL2 regions and uprating it in line with the estimated ratio, then applying the average result to each UK ITL2 regions using the regional distribution of GDHI for each respective year. Other than the UK only EU countries are represented |
| URL | https://b2share.eudat.eu/records/937a85d062194ac6b322c0b112a1b642 |
| Title | Jobseeker's Allowance with rates and proportions |
| Description | Records the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) and National Insurance credits at Jobcentre Plus local offices. This is not an official measure of unemployment, but is the only indicative statistic available for areas smaller than Local Authorities. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2025 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this data in figure 2.6, to show how welfare entitlements have developed over time. We teamed this with other datasets, so that we could assess the standard allowance pre and post the introduction (phase out of JSA). This gave the reader insight into welfare generosity, and how it compared to the cost of living over time. |
| URL | https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/sources/jsa |
| Title | National Institute Global Econometric Model |
| Description | NiGEM is used for forecasting and policy analysis by NIESR and model subscribers, mainly in the policy community, including the ECB, the IMF, the OECD, the FSA, the Bank of England, and the central banks of France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal and the Czech Republic. |
| Type Of Material | Computer model/algorithm |
| Year Produced | 2025 |
| Provided To Others? | No |
| Impact | We used this model to firstly estimate how benefits would compare to wages over time in Figure 2.5 by using the latest forecast for wages We then used the model in Section 3 (wages), to estimate how much better off workers would be had productivity continued to increase in line with its pre-08 average. This was done as scenario analysis, then compared to the actual outturn, which produced the decomposition in Figure 3.5 and 3.6 |
| URL | https://niesr.ac.uk/nigem-macroeconomic-model |
| Title | OECD Social Expenditure Database , OECD SOCX |
| Description | The OECD Social Expenditure Database (SOCX) has been developed in order to serve a growing need for indicators of social policy. It includes reliable and internationally comparable statistics on public and (mandatory and voluntary) private social expenditure at programme level as well as net social spending indicators. SOCX provides a unique tool for monitoring trends in aggregate social expenditure and analysing changes in its composition. It covers 37 OECD countries for the period 1980-2017/18 and estimates for 2018-2019. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2019 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this dataset to compare welfare spending internationally in Figure 2.1, the change since 2010 in Figure 2.2 (highlighting the strong contraction in total welfare spending and placing it in an international context) and Figure 2.3 (similar intention). |
| URL | https://b2share.eudat.eu/records/a48743d643254187bf915eb1c0b237b8 |
| Title | PolicyEngine |
| Description | PolicyEngine UK is an open-source microsimulation model of the UK tax and benefit system. The model estimates tax liabilities and benefit entitlement in the Family Resources Survey dataset from given policy parameters and structures.17 Dec 2024 |
| Type Of Material | Computer model/algorithm |
| Year Produced | 2025 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used PolicyEngine to estimate the impact of a range of policies on a) reducing poverty and b) raising incomes, then estimated the cost of each policy. This enabled us to provide policymakers and the general public with insight into the cost effectiveness of policies on improving peoples standard of living. This was used in Secretion 4 (Policy Recommendations and Conclusion), notably in Figure 4.1 and 4.2 |
| URL | https://policyengine.org/uk |
| Title | Private Housing Rental Prices - ONS |
| Description | An experimental price index tracking the prices paid for renting property from private landlords in the UK. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2025 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this data to show how rental costs have changed over time, highlighting which regions have experienced the fastest growth and underscoring the strong increases after the pandemic. This enabled us to introduce our work assessing how the freeze to LHA would have resulted in a fall in affordability, given it happened at the same time rental costs increased |
| URL | https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/indexofprivatehousingrentalprices/... |
| Title | Real Personal Disposable Income, ONS 2024 |
| Description | Used to introduce the report, to establish how real personal disposable income's has developed over time, highlighting the recent stagnation |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2024 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We were able to highlight not only the recent stagnation since 2008 but underscore that this trend is not typical and is a break from the past. This was intended to motivate the reader to the rest of the report, which aims to answer this question. |
| URL | https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/crxx/ukea |
| Title | Revenus des ménages par région NUTS 2 |
| Description | Dataset that contains incomes (at different levels, although we used net disposable) at the NUTS2 regional level, across europe |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2024 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We were able to combine this with other datasets to compare UK real incomes at the nuts-2 sub-international level to their international counterparts. This was used in Figures 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5 |
| URL | https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/NAMA_10R_2HHINC/default/table?lang=EN |
| Title | UK Wealth and Assets Survey - ONS |
| Description | The Wealth and Assets Survey (WAS) is a longitudinal survey, which aims to address gaps identified in data about the economic well-being of households by gathering information on level of assets, savings and debt; saving for retirement; how wealth is distributed among households or individuals; and factors that affect financial planning. Private households in Great Britain were sampled for the survey (meaning that people in residential institutions, such as retirement homes, nursing homes, prisons, barracks or university halls of residence, and also homeless people were not included). The WAS commenced in July 2006, with a first wave of interviews carried out over two years, to June 2008. Interviews were achieved with 30,595 households at Wave 1. Those households were approached again for a Wave 2 interview between July 2008 and June 2010, and 20,170 households took part. Wave 3 covered July 2010 - June 2012, Wave 4 covered July 2012 - June 2014 and Wave 5 covered July 2014 - June 2016. Revisions to previous waves' data mean that small differences may occur between originally published estimates and estimates from the datasets held by the UK Data Service. Data are revised on a wave by wave basis, as a result of backwards imputation from the current wave's data. These revisions are due to improvements in the imputation methodology. A Secure Access version of the WAS, subject to more stringent access conditions, is available under SN 6709; it contains more detailed geographic variables than the EUL version. Users are advised to download the EUL version first (SN 7215) to see if it is suitable for their needs, before considering making an application for the Secure Access version. Further information and documentation may be found on the ONS Wealth and Assets Survey webpage. Users are advised to the check the page for updates before commencing analysis. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2020 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this dataset in Figure 1.6, as the dataset used to compare incomes of the poorest 10% internationally had missing data for the UK from 2018 onwards. We used WAS to update these figures to make for internationally comparable figures in 2020. |
| Title | Universal Credit statistics |
| Description | These official statistics cover the number of claims, starts, people and households on Universal Credit. This collection contains: monthly updates for people on Universal Credit quarterly updates for claims, starts, households, deductions and childcare on Universal Credit Quarterly data are published in February, May, August and November alongside a statistical bulletin with detailed commentary. The exact publication dates for the monthly and quarterly releases are listed in the statistics release calendar. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2025 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | We used this data in figure 2.6, to show how welfare entitlements have developed over time. We teamed this with other datasets, so that we could assess the standard allowance pre and post the introduction (phase out of JSA). This gave the reader insight into welfare generosity, and how it compared to the cost of living over time. |
| URL | https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/universal-credit-statistics |
| Title | Zoopla live aggregated property data |
| Description | Property Market Insights from Zoopla Live (Aggregated): Discover valuable property market insights with our data product sourced from Zoopla Live, one of the UK's premier aggregators of property listings data. Gain access to a comprehensive dataset containing information on 27,000,000 homes, up to 1,000,000 property listings,. The Urban Big Data Centre (UBDC) systematially collects daily property listings from Zoopla across the entire UK since 2017; and each year, we process and consolidate the collected data into yearly aggregated and harmonized 'analysis-ready' datasets. Researchers can utilize this dataset to unlock meaningful insights into the property market. Please note that additional daily data from Zoopla can be made available upon request if the provided aggregated product does not meet specific research requirements. Additionally, it's essential to be aware that each Zoopla year spans 18 months, from the 1st of Oct of the previous year until the 31st of March of the following year. UBDC's Zoopla data collection is a dataset that covers housing data since 2017, covering the area of Great Britain. UBDC has an agreement with Zoopla and has access to current property listings via Application Programming Interface (API). We have been collecting the listings since August 2016. UBDC can provide Live Collected Aggregated Data: Aggregated (yearly) data made from Live Collected data. The Zoopla year is +/- 3 months for each year(= zoopla year 18 months) The collection requires unique property id in the API request. We have also set up an email discussion list on housing data and related issues that you can join via the JISCMail website: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=UBDC-HOUSING-DATA Note: In accessing this data, you agree that any downloading of content is for non-commercial reference only. No part of these materials may be used for any other purpose or reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior consent of the University of Glasgow. Data is Zoopla Property Group PLC, © 2023, processed by Urban Big Data Centre, University of Glasgow Details of the data available via Zoopla's Application Programming Interface (API) can be found at http://developer.zoopla.com/ |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2023 |
| Provided To Others? | No |
| Impact | We used this data to asses where in the country was affordable on housing benefit. We did this by taking each listing in the microdata, estimating how much of housing benefit would cover this listing (based on its size and location) and comparing it to the price listed. We could then estimate which properties would have been covered by housing benefit over time. This enabled us to produce figure 2.11 and 2.12 |
| URL | https://data.ubdc.ac.uk/datasets/zoopla-property-data |
| Description | Research Support from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation |
| Organisation | Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | We worked with them closely, sharing our knowledge of living standards and the policy changes that have influenced poverty over the past few years. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Research support: - Advice on key issues relating to poverty and its measurement - Sharing expertise on the LHA and how it interacts with poverty - Attempted to help us recruit peer researchers |
| Impact | They attended a number of internal meetings to help guide the work, and also attended a number of external meetings. Such as our Living Standards Forum in 2024 and the launch event of the full report in March 2025 niesr.ac.uk/publications/uk-living-standards-review-2025 |
| Start Year | 2024 |
| Description | Living Standards Forum |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | We held a forum to discuss our UKRI-funded work, and living standards more generally. We had policy makers, third sector organisations and people with lived experience of poverty in attendance. In addition, we also had our research support partners from the JRF attend. The meeting, we presented our key findings and received feedback from the audience. This gave us insight into further research. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |
| URL | https://niesr.ac.uk/event/autumn-2024-living-standards-forum |
| Description | Why Are We Not Better Off? Investigating the Roots of Declining Living Standards in the UK |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | We held a launch of our report on the 13th of March at 18 Smith Square. At the event we provided a presentation which contained the key findings from our work, then showed a video prepared by the peer research participants about their own living standards. After which we had a panel discussion chaired by Joel Hills (economics editor at ITV), Helen Barnard (Director of Policy, Research and Impact at Trussell), Elizabeth Campbell (Leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council), Tim Leunig (Chief Economist at NESTA and Visiting Professor at the LSE SPP) and Max Mosley (Senior Economist at NIESR). After which we had a reception to give people an opportunity to discuss the work with the authors. -- Description of the event online: In this public event we will be sharing findings from our UKRI-funded Living Standards Review, a comprehensive assessment of what the key drivers of living standards are today. Throughout the cost-of-living crisis, research institutions like NIESR and others provided policy-makers and the wider public with detailed analysis that showed the impact of rising inflation on vulnerable households. We were able to establish insight into how this crisis was forcing many to spend more than they had in income resulting in many households drawing down their savings and projected millions to be without any liquidity within a few years due to rising mortgage costs. Despites these contributions, a number of key questions remain. How did we get here? Why were households so vulnerable to rising prices? Did specific policy choices like the freeze to the LHA to the introduction of Universal Credit make things worse? After a brief presentation of the project, a multidisciplinary panel of experts will discuss some of the findings and their policy implications. The panel, which will be chaired by ITV Economics Editor Joel Hills, will comprise: Helen Barnard (Director of Policy, Research and Impact at Trussell) Elizabeth Campbell (Leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council) Tim Leunig (Chief Economist at NESTA and Visiting Professor at the LSE SPP) Max Mosley (Senior Economist at NIESR) The event will be followed by a reception at 18 Smith Square. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2025 |
| URL | https://niesr.ac.uk/event/why-are-we-not-better-investigating-roots-declining-living-standards-uk |