ABSTRACT Although the availability of social support and psychological attachment to work have been shown to influence mental well-being in unemployment, the main determinant suggested in research is economic strain. Yet, though the level of state support in unemployment is the most crucial determinant of economic strain, there has been little research on the impact of welfare benefit regime on mental well-being among the unemployed. In this paper we compare the impact of benefit regime by comparing the unemployed in Britain, Ireland and Sweden. We find that the type of benefit received is an important determinant of mental distress with income replacement benefits being more beneficial than flat rate benefits. Results also show that different systems differentially impact on different groups with income replacement benefits tending to maintain pre-unemployment differences in distress and flat rate benefits equalising these differences.

Although many of the debates around social exclusion and cumulative disadvantage relate to processes that occur across time, there has been relatively little research into poverty dynamics except in a few notable countries such as Britain, the USA and Germany. This neglect is almost entirely because of the absence of comparative longitudinal data on income for other countries, but it is regrettable given the central importance of this area. By studying poverty dynamics we not only get a better insight into the processes leading to patterns of disadvantage and inequality, but we can also understand better the influence of different welfare state regimes on the social risks experienced by different types of individuals and households. The extent to which different national contexts protect their citizens from poverty persistence, or vary in the factors leading to poverty persistence, tells us a great deal about the workings of their socioeconomic systems and welfare regimes. In this article we use the recent availability of five waves of the European Community Household Panel Survey to outline the nature of poverty persistence and poverty dynamics across a large number of countries. In doing so we ask three important questions. First, is poverty a more common experience when viewed longitudinally rather than cross-sectionally, and how is this affected by the income poverty line used? Second, can we identify a tendency toward poverty persistence, and does this vary in its extent across countries? Third and lastly, what types of events are more likely to lead to entry into and exit from poverty, and does the importance of these events differ between countries? The article shows that the experience of poverty is far wider than is appreciated from cross-sectional data, and also tends to be more concentrated on a particular population than would be expected from cross-sectional rates. Moreover, the pattern of poverty persistence is congruent with welfare regime theory. The importance of country institutions and welfare regimes is also underlined by the finding that social welfare and market incomes play different roles in poverty transitions across countries, and that Southern European, or residualist, welfare regimes focus poverty risks on the experience of the household's primary earner to a far greater extent than Northern European welfare states do.

In this paper we seek to clarify and examine empirically two related perspectives on poverty processes that have emerged in recent years - those of cumulative disadvantage and of individualisation . The cumulative disadvantage perspective defines the key cleavage as between a comfortable majority and a multiply disadvantaged minority excluded from the mainstream. The individualisation perspective on the other hand views poverty as a relatively transient phenomenon, which is largely independent of traditional stratification factors. Our analyses support neither the over-determination of poverty risk through cumulative disadvantage, nor the under-determination through individualisation. Instead we argue that traditional risk factors are important, but combine in complicated ways to put a larger proportion of the population at risk of poverty rather than impacting solely on a multiply disadvantaged minority. A crucial implication of this paper is that highly targeted policies aimed at multiply deprived groups will be less successful at combating poverty than more generalised responses directed at groups who are not necessarily currently poor, but whose vulnerability to such exposure means that a range of factors may precipitate such an outcome.

Recent poverty research based on analyses of panel data have highlighted the importance of income dynamics. In this paper we study mobility into and out of relative income poverty from one year to the next using data for twelve countries from the European Community Household Panel Survey (ECHP). The ECHP has unique potential as a harmonized data set to serve as the basis for comparisons of income and poverty dynamics across EU countries, and here we begin exploiting this potential by analysing income poverty transitions from Wave 1 to Wave 2. As well as describing the extent of these transitions, we analyse the pattern by fitting log-linear and linear by linear models commonly employed in the analysis of social mobility. Moving from general to specific models we show the relative impact of hierarchy, immobility and affinity effects. Our analysis shows that cross-national variation in short-term poverty dynamics is predominantly a consequence of ‘shift’ rather then ‘association effects’. Variation across countries in patterns of poverty persistence is extremely modest. Models that assume that the processes underlying poverty dynamics are constant across countries perform almost as well as those that allow for cross-national variability.