TGTim Goedemé

Tim Goedemé

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article

Previous Organizations / Institutes

The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years


Tim Goedemé has a total of 66 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Inequality and Climate Change

    by Milena Büchs, Tim Goedemé, Desta Mebratu, Josefine Vanhille, Gerlinde Verbist


  • Open Access

    A new poverty indicator for Europe: The extended headcount ratio

    by Tim Goedemé, Benoit Decerf, Karel Van Den Bosch

    The methodology currently used to measure poverty in the European Union faces some important limitations. Capturing key aspects of poverty is done using a dashboard of indicators, which often tell conflicting stories. We propose a new income-based measure of poverty for Europe that captures in a consistent way in a single indicator the level of relative poverty, the intensity of poverty, poverty with a threshold anchored in time and a pan-European perspective on poverty. To do so, we work with a recently developed poverty index, the extended headcount ratio (EHC) and derive the relevant poverty lines to apply the index to poverty in Europe. We show empirically that our measure consistently captures the aspects typically monitored using a variety of indicators and yields rankings that seem more aligned with intuitions than those obtained by these individual indicators. According to our measure, Eastern Europe has a much higher level of poverty than Southern Europe, which, in turn, has a considerably higher level of poverty than North-Western Europe. In North-Western Europe, the evolution of our measure over time correlates most strongly with the at-risk-of-poverty rate, while in Southern and Eastern Europe, it correlates most strongly with at-risk-of-poverty with the threshold anchored in time.


  • Open Access

    Improving Take-Up by Reaching Out to Potential Beneficiaries. Insights from a Large-Scale Field Experiment in Belgium

    by Raf VAN Gestel, Tim Goedemé, Julie Janssens, Eva Lefevere, Rik Lemkens

    Non-take-up of means-tested benefits is a widespread phenomenon which undermines the effectiveness and fairness of social policies. The digitalisation of the welfare state creates new opportunities for proactively contacting people who are potentially entitled to benefits, but do not take up their social rights. In this study, we report on how new data flows were used to reach out to potential beneficiaries of the Increased Reimbursement of health care, a programme targeted at low-income households in Belgium. By randomizing the period in which potential beneficiaries were contacted, we were able to identify a three- to four-fold increase in take-up among those contacted as a result of the outreaching activities. Households that did not respond to the intervention, the never takers, have lower pre-intervention healthcare expenditures. This suggests that non-take-up was reduced primarily among those who would expect to benefit most from receiving the Increased Reimbursement. Exploiting the combination of rich administrative data with experimental evidence, we also find that early responders are mostly older and have higher historic health expenditures than late responders. Furthermore, results point to the need for balancing well the inclusiveness of the intervention with an increased number of applications by ineligible people.


  • Open Access

    Between-Class Earnings Inequality in 30 European Countries

    by Tim Goedemé, Marii Paskov, David Weisstanner, Brian Nolan

    This article studies earnings inequality between social classes across 30 European countries. Class inequality in earnings is found across the board although there are some exceptions. However, the degree of class inequality varies strongly across countries being larger in Western and Southern European countries and smaller in Eastern and Northern European countries. Furthermore, we find that differences in class composition in terms of observed characteristics associated with earnings account for a substantial proportion of these between-class differences. Differences between classes in the returns to education and other characteristics play less of a role. In all these respects there is a sizeable cross-national variation. This points to important differences between countries in how earnings are structured by social class.


  • Open Access

    The Claiming Costs Scale: A new instrument for measuring the costs potential beneficiaries face when claiming social benefits

    by Julie Janssens, Tim Goedemé, Koen Ponnet

    It is a well-known feature of social protection systems that not all persons who are entitled to social benefits also claim these benefits. The costs people face when claiming benefits is considered an important cause of this phenomenon of non-take-up. In this paper, we developed and examined the psychometric properties of a new scale, the Claiming Cost Scale (CCS), which measures three dimensions of costs associated with claiming benefits. A multi-phase instrument development method was performed to develop the instrument. The item pool was generated based on a literature review, and presented to academic experts (n = 9) and experts by experience (n = 5) to assess content and face validity. In a second stage, centrality and dispersion, construct validity, convergent and divergent validity, and internal reliability of the instrument were tested. These analyses were based on two samples (n = 141 and n = 1265) of individuals living in low-income households in Belgium. Nine items were retained, which represent three factors (Information costs, Process costs and Stigma). The confirmatory factor analysis proved adequate model fitness. Both convergent and divergent validity were good, and internal consistency was adequate, with Cronbach’s alpha ranging between .73 and .87. The findings showed that the CCS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the costs potential beneficiaries face when claiming benefits. Consisting of only nine items, the scale can be easily implemented in large-scale survey research or used in day-to-day work of service providers who are interested in understanding non-take-up of their service.


  • To what extent do welfare states compensate for the cost of children? The joint impact of taxes, benefits and public goods and services

    by Tess Penne, Tine Hufkens, Tim Goedemé, Bérénice Storms

    In order to alleviate child poverty, contemporary European welfare states have shifted their focus increasingly towards child-centred investment strategies. However, studies examining the generosity of welfare states to families with children focus mainly on cash benefit packages, or on government expenditure, while not taking into account the actual out-of-pocket costs families have to make to fulfil their needs. This article aims at contributing to existing studies by: (1) empirically assessing the needs and costs of children across welfare states by making use of cross-nationally comparable reference budgets, while taking into account publicly provided or subsidised services; (2) simulating the cash benefits and taxes that affect households with children through the tax–benefit system, by making use of the new Hypothetical Household Tool (HHoT) in EUROMOD; and (3) combining both types of information in order to compare the essential out-of-pocket costs for children between 6 and 18 years old with the simulated cash benefit packages. We propose a new indicator that can be used to assess welfare state generosity to families with children: the child cost compensation indicator. The use of the indicator is empirically illustrated by comparing six European welfare states: Belgium, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy and Spain. The article shows that, even though with important cross-national variation, cash transfers generally amount to less than 60 percent of the cost of children. Although in five out of six countries support for families is higher at the lower end of the income distribution, for households living on a low gross wage, the income of a family with children is less adequate compared to a similar childless family and is in many cases insufficient to participate adequately in society.


  • A comparison of European countries FBDG in the light of their contribution to tackle diet-related health inequalities

    by Elena Carrillo-Álvarez, Hilde Boeckx, Tess Penne, Imma Palma Linares, Berénice Storms, Tim Goedemé

    Background: The purpose of this article is to report on a comparative analysis of the official food-based dietary guidelines (FBDG) that were applicable in 2015 in 25 EU Member States. We assess FBDG in relation to the main guidelines established by the FAO/WHO, the EURODIET project and the EFSA, with a particular focus on identifying strengths and limitations of current FBDG in Europe towards addressing diet-related health inequalities. Methods: This is a review research, in which a mixed-methods sequenced procedure was utilized. In each EU country key informants, including sociologists, economists, dietitians and nutritionists were asked to provide data regarding: (i) current dietary guidelines and national health priorities, (ii) model of health promotion currently available, (iii) results of the latest food consumption survey. All documents were reviewed by the coordinating team. Full data were analysed by two nutritionists, using a tabulated sheet to organize and compare the results. Results: While all countries have national FBDG, the level of detail and quality varies substantially with regard to: time of last update; availability of recommendations for specific target groups; specification of frequency and portion size; the graphical representation; recommended amounts and limits of foods consumed; and recommendations regarding physical activity. Conclusions: European countries have great opportunities to improve FBDG to better serve Public Health policy through a more consistent foundation of how these guidelines are developed, the inclusion of different population subgroups as a target for recommendations and the implementation of monitoring systems.


  • The End of Cheap Talk About Poverty Reduction

    by Diego Collado, Bea Cantillon, Karel Van Den Bosch, Tim Goedemé, Dieter Vandelannoote

    Available evidence suggests that social investment and employment strategies are important but not sufficient for poverty reduction. Thus, European Union countries must not only develop effective employment policies but also ensure adequate social protection. This would require increasing social transfers for working and nonworking households, while protecting work incentives. In this chapter, we show that this is not an inexpensive option. We calculate the hypothetical cost of closing the poverty gap while maintaining the existing average labor-market participation incentives at the bottom of the income distribution. We do so in three types of welfare regimes, namely those of Belgium, Denmark, and the United Kingdom. Results show that this would require around two times the budget needed just to lift all disposable household incomes to the poverty threshold. The cost would obviously be lower in countries with smaller poverty gaps and with weaker participation incentives.