Consumption dynamics and the insurance value of benefits
Lead Research Organisation:
Institute for Fiscal Studies
Abstract
Context
A central role of the welfare benefits system is to protect families from hardship when they experience an unexpected shock. For instance, someone who loses their job will often become eligible for a benefit payment. This means that they still have some income - thereby partially mitigating the reduction they have to make to their expenditure and living standards.
How successful the benefit system is in insuring people against hardship depends on a number of factors, beyond simply the overall level of support provided. First, how easily adjustable is people's spending after they experience an unexpected fall in income, and over what time frame do inflexible items remain hard to adjust? For instance, if rent or mortgage payments are large fractions of people's budgets and hard to adjust, any adjustment to spending will have to be more lopsided, and concentrated on things which may lead to particular hardship (e.g. food). Second, are the payments received in a timely way? The period immediately after a loss in earnings may be a time of particular difficulty, in part due to spending commitments being at their most inflexible. A significant wait period prior to receiving the first benefit payment therefore can lead to a large fall in living standards. Third, to what extent are people able to make other adjustments - e.g., drawing down on their savings or borrowing - to maintain living standards following a drop in earnings?
These issues connect to central live policy debates. The 'five week wait' for the first payment of Universal Credit has proven highly controversial, and the pandemic has brought renewed attention to the relatively thin safety net, by international standards, that we have in the UK.
Aims and objectives
Our work will directly speak to these questions with rigorous evidence using bank account data. We will study how people change their spending when they lose their job and begin claiming benefits, showing how their total spending changes and the extent to which hard-to-adjust costs lead to lopsided reductions in spending across people's budgets; whether spending falls are largest during the wait period for benefits (indicating particular hardship); and to what extent changes differ across groups. In addition, we will measure the extent to which families show signs of financial distress, such as missing bill payments and the use of payday loans, as well as which groups can rely on a buffer of savings to help them over the period.
Our work will provide new evidence on for whom and at which point after an income shock economic hardship is most severe. This in turn will enable us to learn about how the benefit system could be improved. We will estimate the impacts of potential reforms, such as reducing the wait period before the first payment, and of providing greater levels of support at the beginning of a claim (including for specific spending commitments - in particular housing costs).
Applications and benefits
From a scientific point of view, our approach will build on and extend existing applied microeconomics research on the design of social insurance programmes. Moreover, the research questions are central to the operation of welfare policy and hence to poverty and inequality, and so the findings will be relevant to a broad range of social scientists including those from economics, social policy and sociology. Our impact plan includes a focus on engaging with all these fields.
We will provide policymakers with rigorous empirical evidence to feed into central decisions around welfare policy, including by explicitly analysing alternative policy options. We will exploit our close relationships with key policymakers (a number of whom are already aware of and supportive of our proposal - see for example the enclosed letters of support) to ensure we produce the most useful policy guidance with maximum impact.
A central role of the welfare benefits system is to protect families from hardship when they experience an unexpected shock. For instance, someone who loses their job will often become eligible for a benefit payment. This means that they still have some income - thereby partially mitigating the reduction they have to make to their expenditure and living standards.
How successful the benefit system is in insuring people against hardship depends on a number of factors, beyond simply the overall level of support provided. First, how easily adjustable is people's spending after they experience an unexpected fall in income, and over what time frame do inflexible items remain hard to adjust? For instance, if rent or mortgage payments are large fractions of people's budgets and hard to adjust, any adjustment to spending will have to be more lopsided, and concentrated on things which may lead to particular hardship (e.g. food). Second, are the payments received in a timely way? The period immediately after a loss in earnings may be a time of particular difficulty, in part due to spending commitments being at their most inflexible. A significant wait period prior to receiving the first benefit payment therefore can lead to a large fall in living standards. Third, to what extent are people able to make other adjustments - e.g., drawing down on their savings or borrowing - to maintain living standards following a drop in earnings?
These issues connect to central live policy debates. The 'five week wait' for the first payment of Universal Credit has proven highly controversial, and the pandemic has brought renewed attention to the relatively thin safety net, by international standards, that we have in the UK.
Aims and objectives
Our work will directly speak to these questions with rigorous evidence using bank account data. We will study how people change their spending when they lose their job and begin claiming benefits, showing how their total spending changes and the extent to which hard-to-adjust costs lead to lopsided reductions in spending across people's budgets; whether spending falls are largest during the wait period for benefits (indicating particular hardship); and to what extent changes differ across groups. In addition, we will measure the extent to which families show signs of financial distress, such as missing bill payments and the use of payday loans, as well as which groups can rely on a buffer of savings to help them over the period.
Our work will provide new evidence on for whom and at which point after an income shock economic hardship is most severe. This in turn will enable us to learn about how the benefit system could be improved. We will estimate the impacts of potential reforms, such as reducing the wait period before the first payment, and of providing greater levels of support at the beginning of a claim (including for specific spending commitments - in particular housing costs).
Applications and benefits
From a scientific point of view, our approach will build on and extend existing applied microeconomics research on the design of social insurance programmes. Moreover, the research questions are central to the operation of welfare policy and hence to poverty and inequality, and so the findings will be relevant to a broad range of social scientists including those from economics, social policy and sociology. Our impact plan includes a focus on engaging with all these fields.
We will provide policymakers with rigorous empirical evidence to feed into central decisions around welfare policy, including by explicitly analysing alternative policy options. We will exploit our close relationships with key policymakers (a number of whom are already aware of and supportive of our proposal - see for example the enclosed letters of support) to ensure we produce the most useful policy guidance with maximum impact.
People |
ORCID iD |
| Robert Joyce (Principal Investigator) | |
| Tom Waters (Co-Investigator) |
Publications
Ray-Chaudhuri S
(2023)
Living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK: 2023
Levell P
(2025)
How should governments help households during an energy crisis?
| Description | This research sheds light on how people respond to government support during periods of rising living costs, especially during the recent cost of living crisis. The first part of the research studied what happened when low-income households in the UK received a government payment of £326 in July 2022. It showed that the payment led to a noticeable boost in spending - about £33 more per week, on average. People spent more on groceries, entertainment, and took out more cash. This suggests that many families were struggling to make ends meet and wanted to spend more, but simply didn't have the money until the payment arrived. The fact that the money was spent on both essential items like food and more discretionary items like entertainment shows that households had a range of needs. The second part of the research looked at the broader question of how governments should respond when essential prices, like energy bills, suddenly rise. During the 2022-2023 energy crisis, people in the UK cut back their energy use when prices went up. But even so, many still suffered financially, and the hardest-hit households weren't always the poorest. Government policies - including a subsidy to keep energy prices lower and a one-off payment to all households - helped ease the pressure, reducing energy poverty. However, these policies also came with costs: because government support shielded households from price rises, they did not reduce their energy use as much as they otherwise might have. The research suggests that better-targeted support - based on people's incomes and energy needs - could be fairer and more effective. |
| Exploitation Route | These findings can help policymakers design better support schemes during future cost of living crises. The evidence shows how people respond to different types of payments and which groups benefit most, which can inform decisions about when and how to provide financial help. For example, governments can use this research to: · Target support more effectively, using information about income levels and spending behaviour to reach those most in need. · Balance fairness and efficiency, by combining universal support with tailored payments that better reflect household needs. · Understand the wider impact of cash payments, including how they affect not just essentials like food and energy, but also other areas of household spending. · Improve future crisis responses, particularly by preparing in advance so they can provide better targeted support. Ongoing work by the PI and Co-Is supported by the funding explores how households are affected by longer or shorter wait times for benefits upon job loss. |
| Sectors | Financial Services and Management Consultancy Government Democracy and Justice |
| Description | The chapter of our report that included the analysis of the cost of living payments received a substantial amount of media coverage (over 450). This includes write ups in The Economist, Mail, Daily Express, The Scotsman and The National and hundreds of write ups for local press via the Press Association. The authors did interviews for LBC News and Bloomberg. Ongoing work by the PI and Co-Is supported by the funding explores how households are affected by longer or shorter wait times for benefits upon job loss. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2023 |
| Sector | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Government, Democracy and Justice,Other |
| Impact Types | Societal Economic Policy & public services |
| Description | Living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK: 2023 |
| 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 | IFS organised an event to present their key findings from the latest flagship annual report on living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK. The was online and attended by 138 individuals. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
| URL | https://ifs.org.uk/events/living-standards-poverty-and-inequality-uk-2023 |