Despite its significance in determining poverty risk, family size has received little focus in recent social policy analysis. This paper provides a correction, focusing squarely on the changing poverty risk of larger families (those with three or more dependent children) in the UK over recent years. It argues that we need to pay much closer attention to how and why poverty risk differs according to family size. Our analysis of Family Resource Survey data reveals how far changes in child poverty rates since 1997 – both falling poverty risk to 2012/13 and increases since then – have been concentrated in larger families. Social security changes are identified as central: these have affected larger families most as they have greater need for support, due to both lower work intensity and higher household needs. By interrogating the way policy change has affected families of different sizes the paper seeks to increase understanding of the effects of different poverty reduction strategies, with implications for policy debates in the UK and beyond. In providing evidence about the socio-demographics of larger families and their changing poverty risk it also aims to inform contested debates about the state’s role in providing financial support for children.

In 2017 the Scottish Government passed the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act with the commitment to significantly reduce the relative child poverty rate from the current prevailing level of around 25% to 10% by 2030/31. In response, the government introduced the Scottish Child Payment (SCP) that provides a direct transfer to households at a fixed rate per eligible child – currently £25 per week. In this paper we explore, using a micro to macro modelling approach, the effectiveness of using the SCP to achieve the Scottish child poverty targets. While we find that the ambitious child poverty targets can technically be met solely using the SCP, the necessary payment of £165 per week amounting to a total government cost of £3 billion per year, makes the political and economy-wide barriers significant. A key issue with only using the SCP is the non-linearity in the response to the payment; as the payment increases, the marginal gain in the reduction of child poverty decreases – this is particularly evident after payments of £80 per week. A ‘policy-mix’ option combining the SCP, targeted cash transfers and other policy levels (such as childcare provision) seems the most promising approach to reaching the child poverty targets.

Previous research has shown a clear link between childhood disability and child poverty. This is related to the fact that parents of disabled children (1) need to provide more care, which impedes their employment participation; and (2) more often belong to disadvantaged social categories. However, the adverse relationship between childhood disability and child poverty can be cushioned by cash support systems. Hitherto, the literature lacks insight into how the receipt of different cash support systems is related to parental employment and social background, and what joint role these three factors play in understanding the poverty risk of these children. To fill this gap, a case study on Belgium is performed using unique and large-scale register data. The results show that disabled children have a lower income poverty risk than non-disabled children, even when parental employment and social background are taken into account. This can be explained by the targeted cash support disabled children receive. However, previous research showed that a substantial group of disabled children does not receive the benefit. Hence, more could be achieved if the non-take-up would be addressed, in particular among the most vulnerable children.

Nearly 1 in 5 children in the United States lives in a household whose income is below the official federal poverty line, and more than 40% of children live in poor or near-poor households. Research on the effects of poverty on children's development has been a focus of study for many decades and is now increasing as we accumulate more evidence about the implications of poverty. The American Academy of Pediatrics recently added “Poverty and Child Health” to its Agenda for Children to recognize what has now been established as broad and enduring effects of poverty on child development. A recent addition to the field has been the application of neuroscience-based methods. Various techniques including neuroimaging, neuroendocrinology, cognitive psychophysiology, and epigenetics are beginning to document ways in which early experiences of living in poverty affect infant brain development. We discuss whether there are truly worthwhile reasons for adding neuroscience and related biological methods to study child poverty, and how might these perspectives help guide developmentally based and targeted interventions and policies for these children and their families.

There has been a general increase in poverty over the last decade in Italy, which has mainly affected the younger generations, with children and youth experiencing the worst economic conditions. This is primarily not due to a lack of available economic resources but to the way in which these resources are allocated: mainly in the form of cash transfers rather than services. The provision of adequate services based on professional work needs to be implemented by overcoming two main obstacles which are highlighted by the results of two studies presented here. The first study concerns the quality of professional care and the systematic use of outcome evaluation, the second concerns the vision of professionals and their ability to integrate the provision of services with economic support aimed at improving children’s growth and parenting skills. The two studies were carried out as part of an international debate on how to effectively fight poverty and social exclusion of children which was promoted by the International Association for Outcome-based Evaluation and Research on Family and Children’s Services (iaOBERfcs).

The Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) uses administrative data to count children living in households in receipt of both in-work and out-of-work means-tested benefits and provides small area ranking as an indicator of child poverty in neighbourhoods. Benefit take-up rates within an area will affect its reliability. We aimed to examine benefit take-up rates and compare area ranking by the IDACI with ranking using individually reported data across areas of varying ethnic composition. Mothers living in areas with high minority ethnic density were less likely to report claiming a benefit than those in majority White or mixed areas, despite reporting lower incomes. The correlation between self-reported material difficulties and worsening IDACI rank was much lower in areas characterised by minority ethnic populations. Further investigation into the performance of area-based deprivation measures in areas with high minority ethnic density is needed.

Living in poverty has lifelong consequences for children. In response to the obvious needs of highly vulnerable, impoverished children and youth in its neighbourhood, Community and Family Services International (CFSI) commenced the Park Avenue Initiative (PAI) which was aimed at addressing the impact of poverty through promoting and testing community-based initiatives in child protection, youth development, and opportunity-creation. Building upon research into the reproductive health (RH) practices of young people in the area, the PAI was expanded to include a new programme addressing RH and the high risk sexual behaviours engaged in by many youth. This article critically examines how poverty is impacting on children. It presents the PAI RH approach as an example of a programme which addresses many of the multiple risks poverty presents for children. The PAI RH programme takes a holistic perspective to address the co-morbidity of poverty risk factors. The programme works with children, their families and the community. The article concludes that programmes need to take an integrated approach to address the multidimensions of poverty and engage with children and their families in actions which are aimed at building individual resilience and strengthening communities.

The previous Labour government pledged to abolish child poverty and introduced a range of welfare reforms that emphasised the role of work as the primary route out of poverty. This culminated in the Child Poverty Act (2010) which commits all future governments to the abolition of child poverty. This paper examines New Labour's record on child poverty and examines the factors responsible for its change. While the welfare reforms of the late 1990s did increase work among families with children, this didn't translate into large falls in child poverty. Those entering work still relied on substantial increases in government benefits to lift them over the poverty line. The current coalition government has reaffirmed its commitment to the Child Poverty Act and is also emphasising the role of work. The lessons of the past decade cast severe doubt on whether the current coalition government strategy of promoting work will be any more successful in reducing child poverty. With planned benefit cuts in the pipeline we could well experience some substantial increases in child poverty over the coming years.