The
distribution of households based on the scores of indices in the four
fields reveals the presence of certain features that do not correspond
to those characterizing the distribution of households by degrees of
satisfaction according to the Living Conditions Index. Such disparities
can be expected, given the variation in the needs to be satisfied, which
are influenced by different factors over different time horizons.
Income and related indicators are more sensitive to short-term
fluctuations, whereas housing specifications and ownership of durable
goods are more stable over time. Improvements in education indicators
for households and individuals depend on the availability of education
services, on the one hand, and the efforts made by the people
themselves, on the other, and their cumulative effects take a number of
years to be felt. In contrast, the indicator relating to water and
sewerage is considered to be virtually the responsibility of the public
sector, with its effects felt immediately following the completion of
the rehabilitation of the infrastructure.
Analysis of the results of the Population and Housing Survey indicates
that the mean score differs as between the four fields examined (Table
11). The same is true of the standard deviation, which expresses the
degree of dispersion (or concentration) of household scores around the
mean; the more disparate the living conditions in the field are, the
higher would be the value of the standard deviation.
The arithmetic mean is highest for the housing index (1.20), followed by
the indices for water and sewerage and for education (1.10 each), with
the lowest index (1.02) belonging to the income-related indicators. The
standard deviation is highest in the case of the education index (0.45)
- reflecting a higher degree of dispersion in the level of education
among households - followed by the income-related indicators (0.36) and
housing (0.34). The standard deviation is lowest (0.25) in the field of
water and sewerage, indicating that the satisfaction of needs takes
place at closer levels.
|
| Table
11. Living Conditions Index: arithmetic mean score and standard |
| Field |
Mean score
|
Standard
deviation |
| Housing |
1.20 |
0.34 |
| Water and sewerage |
1.10 |
0.25 |
| Education |
1.10 |
0.45 |
| Income-related indicators
|
1.02 |
0.36 |
| Living Conditions Index |
1.10 |
0.23 |
|
1.
Distribution characteristics according to the housing index
|
According to the housing index,
households enjoying a high degree of satisfaction constitute the largest
share (47.6 percent), compared to 26.5 percent for households with
intermediate satisfaction, and 25.9 percent for those having a low
degree of satisfaction. This implies that the satisfaction of the need
for housing takes place at a higher level compared to the satisfaction
of other needs (Chart 3).
|
| Chart
3. Distribution of households according to the degree of satisfaction of
basic needs in the field of housing (Percent) |
|
| 2.
Distribution characteristics according to the water and sewerage index |
Regarding the satisfaction of the
need for water and sewerage, the study shows that 65.9 percent of
households have an intermediate degree of satisfaction, compared to 15.5
percent and 18.6 percent, respectively, for the low and high degrees of
satisfaction. This concentration in the intermediate category reflects
the similarity in the situation of the majority of Lebanese households
with respect to being connected to the water and sewerage network. These
services are mainly provided by the public sector and are, therefore,
less likely to be influenced by differences in economic means and
socio-economic standing. It is also worth noting in this connection that
households with higher satisfaction outnumber those having a low degree
of satisfaction.
The main difference between the distribution based on the index for
water and sewerage and that for housing is manifested in the high
category being the most important grouping according to the housing
index, while the main concentration with respect to water and sewerage
is in the intermediate category (Chart 4). The mean score for the water
and sewerage index is 1.10, and the standard deviation is 0.25; which
means that households cluster around the mean.
|
| Chart
4. Distribution of households according to the degree of satisfaction of
basic needs in the water and sewerage field (Percent) |
|
| 3.
Distribution characteristics according to the education index |
With respect to the education
index, 32.8 percent of Lebanese households are considered to have a low
degree of satisfaction, compared to 31.3 percent for intermediate
satisfaction and 35.9 percent for the high degree; the three categories
being close in terms of their relative importance. It is also to be
noted that the percentage of households that fall below the threshold
with respect to education is twice that based on the index for water and
sewerage, and exceeds by 7 percentage points the corresponding share
according to the housing index.
Chart 5 displays a significant concentration of observations at both
ends of the distribution. The first indicates a high percentage of
households that include a large number of illiterate and individuals
having below elementary education (16.6 percent), while the second
concentration reflects the fact that an important proportion of
households have a secondary or university education (19.1 percent). The
mean score for the education index is 1.10, i.e. equivalent to the mean
for the water and sewerage index. However, the standard deviation for
the education index is higher, reflecting a concentration of households
at both ends of the distribution.
|
| Chart
5. Distribution of households according to the degree of satisfaction of
basic needs in the field of education (Percent) |
|
4.
Distribution characteristics according to the index of income-related
indicators
|
The income-related indicators
index consists of three components with the only link between them being
that they indirectly express the level of household income and, hence,
its ability to satisfy basic needs. According to this index, 42.8
percent of resident households fall within the low satisfaction
category, i.e. below the threshold, compared to 32.4 percent in the
intermediate category, and 24.8 percent within the high satisfaction
category. This ordering is the opposite of that based on the housing
index where the low category is the largest, followed by the
intermediate and the high categories, respectively. This means that
deprivation, expressed in terms of income-related indicators, is more
acute than that which is expressed by criteria related to the
satisfaction of the needs for housing, education, and water and sewerage
services (Chart 6). The mean score for the index of income-related
indicators is the lowest (1.02) and the standard deviation is 0.36,
which is close to the standard deviation for the housing index. However,
the mean score of the latter is higher (1.20), indicating a
concentration of households below the mean.
|
| Chart
6. Distribution of households according to the degree of satisfaction of
basic needs in the field of "income-related indicators"
(Percent) |
|
5.
General conclusions regarding the interrelationship between the
components of the Living Conditions Index
|
It can be concluded from the
above review that Lebanese households are better able to satisfy their
needs for housing and for water and sewerage than for education. Those
needs that depend on household income appear to exert less influence on
living conditions than other elements such as housing specifications and
the availability of basic services. Income is subject to variation in
the short run, being directly sensitive and quick to react to political
and economic factors that adversely impact on economic performance and
social conditions (the war and inflation and their implications for the
collapse of incomes; the slowdown of the rate of economic growth as a
result of the Israeli aggression in April 1996; regional tensions; and
the implications of the persistent budget deficit and the policy of
monetary stabilization on the level of wages and social expenditure). In
contrast, the other elements are subject to longer-term influences, and
reflect assets and resources accumulated by households, or services
provided by the public sector.
The second conclusion concerns the field of education, where it appears
that the level of satisfaction is lower than in the case of housing, and
water and sewerage . This implies that the negative consequences of the
war on past accumulation in this field, the continuing escalation in the
cost of education and the diminishing role of public education, have
rendered the satisfaction of the need for education in Lebanon less than
socially envisioned and desirable; and less than what is required for
reconstruction and economic growth. This is in contrast to the situation
in housing (where the extension of the law on rent has provided certain
protection to old tenants), and to the situation in the field of water
and sewerage (where the deterioration affected the number of hours of
supply and the quality of the service provided, without entailing their
complete interruption). It is also worth noting that the minimum level
of education demanded is constantly and rapidly evolving in response to
scientific and technological changes, and the needs of the labor market;
which means a constant tendency for the threshold to rise.
It is worth noting here the positive connection between government
intervention and the lowering of disparities in the degree of
satisfaction of basic needs in the fields of housing and of water and
sewerage, whether the intervention is of a legal nature (extension of
the rent law), or in the form of direct provision of services (water and
sewerage networks). Similarly, it is possible to link the acute
disparities in the field of education to the diminishing role of public
education, and the growing involvement of the private sector. The
relation between government intervention and the income-related
indicators, however, is more complicated and its analysis requires more
accurate and comprehensive data than could be obtained from the
Population and Housing Survey . In general, then, it can be concluded
that government intervention, through legislation or direct provision of
services, has had a positive impact on reducing disparities and in
meeting the basic needs of Lebanese citizens.
On the other hand, it appears that income and education are the fields
most closely correlated with the living conditions index, and exert the
greatest influence on it. This implies that improving the situation of
households and citizens in these two fields is likely to entail an
improvement in their overall living conditions to a greater extent than
would improvements in the indicators of the other two fields. The linear
correlation coefficient is 0.78 between the education index and the
overall living conditions index, and 0.70 between the index of
income-related indicators and the living conditions index; while it
stands at 0.65 with respect to the housing index, and 0.50 in the case
of the water and sewerage index (Table 12). As for inter-field
correlation, it appears to be strongest between the indices of education
and the income-related indicators, amounting to 0.39, compared with 0.27
and 0.14 between the income-related indicators and the housing index,
and that for water and sewerage, respectively.
|
Table
12. Correlation between the living conditions index and component fields
|
| Field |
Housing
|
Water and
Sewerage |
Education
|
Income-related
indicators |
Living
Conditions Index |
| Housing |
1.00 |
0.21 |
0.27 |
0.27 |
0.65 |
| Water and sewerage |
0.21 |
1.00 |
0.20 |
0.14 |
0.50 |
| Education |
0.27 |
0.20 |
1.00 |
0.39 |
0.78 |
| Income-related indicator |
0.27 |
0.14 |
0.39 |
1.00 |
0.70 |
| Living Conditions Index
|
0.65 |
0.50 |
0.78 |
0.70 |
1.00 |
|
In effect, this means that a
household could belong to a low degree of satisfaction (or any other
degree) in one of the fields, without necessarily belonging to the same
degree with respect to the overall living conditions index. It also
means that the probability of a household falling within a certain
degree of satisfaction with respect to the index of income or education
to belong to the same degree in the living conditions index
classification is higher than it is with respect to the index of housing
or that of water and sewerage. This is true of households living below
the threshold, which constitute 32.1 percent of total households in
Lebanon. Thus, 25.4 percent of households fall below the threshold
according to both the income-related indicators and the general index,
and 23 percent of households are below the threshold according to both
the index of education and the general index. The percentages become
smaller when it comes to cross comparisons involving the housing index
and that of water and sewerage with the living conditions index together
(Tables 13 and 14).
|
| Table
13. Households falling below the threshold according to the living
conditions index and the four field- indices (percent of total
households in Lebanon) |
|
Below
the threshold according to the index of: |
| Below the threshold
according to the Living Condition Index |
Housing
|
Water and
sewerage |
Education
|
Income-related
indicators |
| 32.1 |
17.6 |
9.6 |
23.0 |
25.4 |
|
Table
14. Cross classification of degrees of satisfaction according to the
Living Conditions Index and the four-field indices
|
| (3-level
classification; percent of total households in Lebanon) |
| Degrees of
satisfaction according to the Living |
Degrees
of satisfaction by field |
| Low |
Intermediate |
High
|
Total
|
| Conditions Index |
Housing |
| Low |
17.6 |
8.4 |
6.1 |
32.1 |
| Intermediate |
7.8 |
14.9 |
18.9 |
41.6 |
| High |
0.6 |
3.2 |
22.5 |
26.4 |
| Total |
25.9 |
26.5 |
47.5 |
100 |
|
Water
and sewerage |
| Low |
9.6 |
20.7 |
1.8 |
32.1 |
| Intermediate |
4.6 |
30.5 |
6.4 |
41.6 |
| High |
1.2 |
14.8 |
10.4 |
26.4 |
| Total |
15.5 |
65.9 |
18.6 |
100 |
|
Education |
| Low |
23.0 |
7.8 |
1.3 |
32.1 |
| Intermediate |
9.3 |
19.3 |
13.0 |
41.6 |
| High |
0.6 |
4.2 |
21.6 |
26.4 |
| Total |
32.8 |
31.3 |
35.9 |
100 |
|
Income-related
indicators |
| Low |
25.4 |
5.6 |
1.0 |
32.1 |
| Intermediate |
15.7 |
18.7 |
7.1 |
41.6 |
| High |
1.7 |
8.1 |
16.6 |
26.4 |
| Total |
42.8 |
32.4 |
24.8 |
100 |
|
