Risks of poverty have become further entrenched in Germany (2024)

Press release No. 113 of 10 March 2021

WIESBADEN, BERLIN, BONN – People who have fallen below the poverty line in Germany are more likely to remain poor for a longer time. People permanently at risk of poverty account for 44% of all poor people. That proportion is more than twice as high as it was in 1998. In addition, the coronavirus pandemic threatens to exacerbate the financial situation of disadvantaged groups. Although, during the first lockdown, higher-income earners faced income losses more often, it was – apart from self-employed – in particular low-income earners, low-skilled people, and lone parents who struggled with financial difficulties. The income inequality is also reflected in people's attitudes. Low incomes are widely considered to be unjust. At the same time, just under one in two employees feel that their gross wages are fair. These findings on living conditions are presented in the new Data Report 2021, a social report for the Federal Republic of Germany. In this report, experts from official statistics and social research have compiled figures and facts on important areas of life.

More people are permanently at risk of poverty

In 2018, almost one in six people (15.8%) lived below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold in Germany. In 2018, the threshold stood at 1,040 euros per month for a one-person household, and at roughly 1,352 euros for a one-parent household with one child (under 14 years). As compared with the previous year (17.3%), the proportion decreased slightly, but the risk of poverty is markedly above the level recorded at the end of the 1990s (just under 11%). Also, the risks of poverty have become further entrenched. Those who have fallen below the poverty line remain in this income area for increasingly longer time periods. 88% of the people who were below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold in 2018 had been at risk of poverty at least once during the four preceding years (2014 to 2017). In that period, half of them (44%) were permanently in that low-income bracket for the entire four years. As a result, the proportion of people permanently at risk of poverty, expressed as a percentage of all people in poverty, has more than doubled in the last twenty years. In 1998, it stood at 20%. The risk of living in poverty is especially high for lone parents (41%), people with a secondary general school certificate and no vocational qualification (35%) and people with a migrant background (29%).

Only one in two people feel that their gross wages are fair

The significant extent of social inequality is also reflected in people's opinions and perceptions. Just under half of the population think that their (gross) income is fair. In particular low incomes are considered to be unjust. There is also a high proportion of people who argue that government should engage in reducing income inequalities. At present, nearly three quarters of the people in western Germany support this view (less than half back in 2002), while the proportion in eastern Germany stands at around 80%.

Corona: financial impact mainly on low-skilled people, lone parents, self-employed and immigrants

There are significant differences in the financial consequences of the corona pandemic. For the period from late March to early June 2020, 17% of semi-skilled and unskilled workers and just under 14% of low-level salary earners reported financial difficulties. Among low-income earners, it was almost one in five people. The proportion of skilled workers, master craftsmen or craftswomen, and qualified salary earners was considerably lower at roughly 9%. Lone parents (25%) and self-employed people (20%) were the most affected by financial difficulties because of the pandemic. In addition, 15% of the people who had immigrated to Germany reported financial difficulties; this percentage was nearly double that of people without a migrant background (8%).

Unequal educational opportunities – before and after corona

The social background still has a strong influence on educational opportunities in Germany. Two out of three children attending grammar school have parents who, themselves, have a higher education entrance qualification. But just 8% of the parents of grammar school pupils hold a general school certificate as their highest school-leaving certificate or have no general school certificate at all.

The coronavirus crisis shows once again that material conditions, too, have an influence on educational opportunities. This is particularly obvious in the case of digital teaching formats, which require computers and tablets. On average, high income families own more devices than families with a low income, where, often, not every child has a computer. At the beginning of 2020, an average of four PCs were available in families with a high monthly net household income (5,000 to less than 18,000 euros). Two devices were the average in the lowest income group (less than 2,000 euros).

Equal opportunities in education are also a gender issue. Although women are catching up, they are still under-represented in top positions. In the last ten years, the share of female professors increased from 18% to 26%. But women hold just one in five (21%) of the highest paid positions for professors (C4 and W3). As a result, the proportion remains at the traditionally low level.

Corona: home office is used above all by higher earners

Until a year ago, home office was a marginal phenomenon and just 5% of the people worked mainly from home, whereas the figure was 23% during the first lockdown. When put in relation to those who are still in employment and do not work short time, for instance, the proportion of people working from home was even just under 30%. There is some evidence suggesting that, due to the experience acquired during the corona crisis, working from home will become a new normality for many people.

However, the social differences in home office use are enormous. The reason is that some occupations are not suitable for home office - in contrast to typical office jobs such as marketing or financial services. During the first lockdown, working from home was particularly infrequent among people with an occupation in the lower third of the income distribution. For roughly half of those occupations, the proportion of people working from home was less than 6%. The picture is quite different for occupations in the higher third of the range of incomes. Almost two thirds of those occupational groups had a home office proportion of 20% or over.

Continuing gender inequality

Although parental leave is rather widespread among fathers today, 90% of parental leave months are still taken by mothers. In addition, many mothers work part-time. That work-sharing has an impact on the financial and occupational situation of mothers. For instance, the occupational prestige and, consequently, the career of mothers of two children comes to an almost complete standstill after the birth of their children. In contrast, childless women as well as men and fathers gain an average of about 4 prestige points between entering employment and the age of 45.

The fact that many women and men return to traditional role patterns when they have children is also due to social norms. Almost 60% of people at family age between 24 and 43 years feel that a full-time employed mother with a two year old child is not considered by society as being a “good mother”. But only 17% of the people surveyed agree to that opinion. This means that perceived social norms might show something different than the real opinions in the society.

The Data Report is published by the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis), the Berlin Social Science Center (WZB) and the Federal Institute for Population Research (BiB) in cooperation with the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). It is available as a publication of the Federal Agency for Civic Education (bpb).

For detailed results please refer to the press conference material at www.wzb.eu/presse/pressemitteilungen

The Data Report can be downloaded free of charge from the websites of the Federal Statistical Office (www.destatis.de/datenreport), the Berlin Social Science Center (www.wzb.eu/datenreport) and the Federal Agency for Civic Education (www.bpb.de/datenreport2021).

The book edition can be purchased from the Federal Agency for Civic Education (www.bpb.de/shop) for 4.50 euros.

For further information:

Berlin Social Science Center (WZB),
Press office,
tel: + 49 (0) 30 / 25491 506,
e-mail: kerstin.schneider@wzb.eu,
www.wzb.eu/de/kontakt

Federal Agency for Civic Education/bpb
Daniel Kraft,
tel: +49 (0)228 / 99515 200,
e-mail: presse@bpb.de
www.bpb.de/presse