The East Midlands has made the reduction of inequalities (and the tackling of social exclusion) one of its top five priorities for the region set out in the Integrated Regional Strategy. That the goal holds this pride of place makes the East Midlands one of few regions for which the reduction of inequality is a guiding principle cutting across all areas of regional policy development. This has in turn been reflected in the Regional Economic Strategy which has equality as one of its three themes.

In light of the findings of the State of the Region reports that inequalities still remain in the region, a study was undertaken for the Regional Assembly in 2007 by the Centre for Economic & Social Inclusion, ‘Inequalities in the East Midlands’.

It found that disadvantage is concentrated geographically within the East Midlands in the urban areas, the former North Nottinghamshire and North Derbyshire coalfields, and the coastal areas of Lincolnshire.

The range and extent of inequality between and among groups can be differentiated by gender, ethnicity, disability and age (no information is available on inequities experienced due to sexual orientation).

Gender: Women in the East Midlands are particularly disadvantaged in terms of pay, both in comparison with men in the region and also other women across the UK. Women in the East Midlands report greater levels of long-term illness than men, a trend not reflected in the national average. They are economically disadvantaged in the housing market due to higher rates of unemployment, lower rates of pay and the tendency to work part-time.

Ethnicity: There are still gaps between the regional employment rate and the employment rate for Black and minority ethnic groups. Ethnic minority groups in the region are over-represented in several occupations with relatively low skills requirements. However, some minority groups are over-represented in professional occupations. There is a significant skills gap between the majority and minority populations in the East Midlands. Black and minority ethnic groups in the region are disproportionately affected by ill health, are more likely to live in the social rented sector and experience poor living conditions. Housing tenure varies significantly between groups in the region.

Disability: In 2004, the regional employment rate for those with a disability was 34.5% compared to 81% for those without a disability. Only 14% of those with long-term ill health or disability reported having been involved in some form of learning in the last three years, compared to 42% of the non-disabled population. People with a disability in the East Midlands are more likely to be in rented accommodation and to be local authority tenants than the non-disabled population. There is limited regional information available on the levels of crime experienced by people with a disability but they are thought to be more vulnerable.

Age: 20% of the elderly population in the East Midlands reports facing the threat of redundancy in the last five years and a further 14% felt they had experienced age discrimination at work. In the East Midlands those aged 16 - 24 have noticeably lower employment rates than the national average across all age groups. Those aged 16-19 and those over 50 are the most likely working age groups with no qualifications. The rates of ill health rise significantly with age. According to statistics from 2003, 16.2% of the population of the East Midlands are over the age of 65. Based on current population trends, the percentage of the population over 65 will increase significantly in the future. Those aged 65 and over are the most likely group to own their own homes outright and those aged between 16 and 24 are most likely to rent accommodation from a private landlord. Those over 65s are also highly represented in local authority or housing association properties. Although older people are less likely to experience crime they often have a higher fear of crime than other age groups. There are a range of issues, such as income inequality and the quality and choice of affordable health care options available to the elderly. Certainly with regards to social and health care provision, the needs of minority ethnic elderly is an understudied and under resourced area.

Child poverty

The government has chosen to measure child poverty by using relative poverty as an indicator. This approach sets the poverty line at 60% of median income level after direct taxes and benefits. This allows the poverty line to move flexibly as national median incomes change. In recognition of the fact that housing costs vary greatly and do not necessarily change in line with incomes, the government analyses levels of poverty both before and after housing costs.

A child is therefore considered to live in poverty if he or she lives in a household where the family income is less than 60% of the national median. In 2007 this means that a single person is considered poor if he or she earns less than £145 a week, while a couple with two children are considered poor if their income is less than £332 a week.

The influential social factors involved in determining the risk of child poverty include age, gender, ethnicity and disability. Child poverty is more likely to be experienced if:

• your mother is under 25
• you are from a lone parent household (of which the vast majority are headed by women)
• you are of Pakistani/Bangladeshi Black or Black British ethnicity
• you live in a household with one or more disabled adult

The East Midlands has performed less well than the UK as a whole and less well than most of the other regions individually in reducing child poverty. Regional income analysis, based on the DWP poverty measure of households earning below 60% of median income, indicates that the child poverty rate in the East Midlands (26%) is higher than the UK average (21%). Over the last decade, the rate of child poverty in the UK has been in slow decline but started to rise again in 2006. The current trends indicate that the UK will miss the 2020 target for ending child poverty. Child poverty rates in the UK are higher that in most European countries and only Italy, Slovakia and Portugal have higher rates.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has put together local data using another measure – the percentage of children living in families claiming out of work benefits. This is not an exact measure of which children are in poverty, but allows us to compare the severity of the problem in different wards across the East Midlands.

Nationally, 21% (2005) of children are on families on benefits. In some areas of our large cities, it is over twice this level, with over four in ten children having parents out of work. This evident in the cities, North Nottinghamshire and North Derbyshire coalfields and part of the Lincolnshire coast.

Within the East Midlands region there are 15 local wards where the percentage of children on benefits is at least twice the national average. Of these wards 4 are within Nottingham and 3 wards are within Leicester. Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Boston, Derby, Erewash, Gedling, High Peak and Mansfield each contain one ward where the percentage of children on benefits is at least twice the national average.

Further information on child poverty can be found at End Child Poverty and statistics on poverty and social exclusion can be found at The Poverty Site.

One of the recommendations of the resulting ‘Inequalities in the East Midlands’ report was to improve the knowledge base on inequality at regional and sub-regional levels. EMRA has comissioned Regeneration East Midlands to undertake a project to contribute towards developing the evidence base on inequality, in particular in the areas highlighted by ‘Inequalities in the East Midlands’ for the year 2008/09.

The objectives of this project are to;

• Identify relevant research and data on an aspect of inequalities
• Improve access to this information
• Facilitate better links between those producing intelligence on inequalities and those who need to use it
• Improve the use of evidence for practical applications.

Index of Multiple Deprivation

Spatial disadvantage is measured through the Index of Multiple Deprivation. It is one of the most detailed spatial breakdowns of disadvantage national statistics in the European Union.

The most deprived districts in the region include the major urban centres (Derby, Leicester and Nottingham), districts in the North Nottinghamshire and North Derbyshire coalfields area (Mansfield, Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Chesterfield and Bolsover) and coastal districts such as East Lindsey. There is a north-south divide in the region with lower levels of deprivation in the south.

Concentrations of deprivation are most severe in Nottingham where nearly 60% of the population are among the most deprived 10% of SOAs nationally. Mansfield, Leicester, Bolsover and Leicester all have 30% or more of their populations that are among the most deprived 10% of SOAs nationally.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 1 – Housing

Affordable Housing

The population in the East Midlands is growing and is projected to grow further, particularly in Southern and Eastern areas of the region. In the South, planned growth is above these trends, reflecting the ‘step change’ in housing provision in the Milton Keynes and South Midlands (MKSM) sub-regional strategy. Elsewhere the review of the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) will need to consider what level is appropriate, and where housing provision is best located.

The number of households has increased from 1,582,000 in 1990 to 1,841,000 in 2006. There has been a significant increase in the number of single households (96,000) from 452,000 in 1997, to 548,000 in 2006.

Between 2001 and 2016 we can expect the number of ‘households’ requiring accommodation to rise from 1.7 million to just over 2 million. About half this projected growth is the result of changes in the existing population - in particular people living longer, living alone or in smaller family units. However the rest results from in-migration: some from abroad, but the vast majority from other parts of England - particularly London and the wider south east.

Affordable housing figures have increased in the East Midlands from 2,079 in 2005/06 to 2,513 in 2006/07 but the target figures in the Regional Spatial Strategy for affordable housing in the Housing Market Areas (HMA) are not currently being achieved, although progress is being made. Around 11% of additions to the housing stock in 2006/07 were affordable housing, although the percentage across the East Midlands HMAs varies from 3.4% in Central Lincolnshire to 23.1% in West Northamptonshire.

Although significant progress is being made, it is clear that affordable housing is not being delivered to the extent that the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) requires. The current and planned action to address this issue includes Strategic Housing Market Assessments which are completed or well advanced in most Housing Market Areas (HMAs), the current review of the Regional Housing Strategy, working with the new National Planning and Housing Advisory Unit and responding to initiatives in the Housing Green Paper and increased expenditure in the Comprehensive Spending Review.

Average house prices have continued to increase across the region in 2007, following a number of years that saw significant price rises, although it is not certain given changing market conditions whether this will continue. Comparing average house prices and average income levels at county and unitary authority level for the East Midlands (a measure of affordability) shows a range of outcomes for the region. Whilst the pattern for 2007 is similar to that in 2006, Lincolnshire and Rutland have seen a marked increase in the ratio of house prices to incomes.

Fuel Poverty

A household is said to be in fuel poverty if it needs to spend more than 10% of its income on fuel to maintain a satisfactory heating regime (usually 21 degrees for the main living area, and 18 degrees for other occupied rooms). Fuel poverty is caused by the interaction of a number of factors, but three specifically stand out. These are:

• The energy efficiency status of the property
• The cost of energy
• Household income

There has been an increase in households living in fuel poverty from 6.3% in 2003 to 8.1% 2005 which is above the national figure of 7.2%.

The BRE Housing Stock Modeling Service provides estimates for key private sector housing and energy variables at authority, ward and census output area level. The estimates are calculated from statistical models which look at the relationship between key variables which are only available from the English House Condition Survey (EHCS) 2001 and the characteristics of small area data from the 2001 census and other national databases.

Fuel poverty is greatest for parts of Lincolnshire coast and the Derbyshrie Dales and lowest in parts of Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Nottinghamshire.

The Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) for energy rating of dwellings is a calculation of a building’s energy efficiency. Houses are rated from 0 – 100 with 0 being very inefficient and 100 being highly efficient. SAP ratings are the Government's standard methodology for home energy rating. SAP uses SEDBUK (Seasonal Efficiency of Domestic Boilers in the UK) figures to calculate the energy needed for heating and hot water systems.

In the more rural districts in the region have a greater proportion of energy inefficent housing.

Further information on fuel poverty including the UK Fuel Poverty Strategy and annual progress reports can be found at Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Report.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 2 – Health

Life Expectancy

Some indicators of the health of the East Midlands population show marked improvement – premature death rates from coronary heart disease, circulatory disease and cancer are falling and life expectancy is increasing. These improving trends are apparent in areas of the region with relatively poor health as well as in areas with relatively good health. However, there are few signs, at least from these indicators at county/unitary authority level that inequalities in health in the region decreased between the mid-1990s and the early 2000s.

There is 6.3 years difference in male life expectancy between the local authorities with the lowest in Nottingham at 74.3 years and the highest in Rutland at 80.6 years. For females the difference is 4.6 years with the lowest in Leicester at 79.4 years and the highest in Rutland at 84.0 years. Life expectancy tends to be lower in the cities and the North Nottinghamshire and North Derbyshire coalfields area.

Further information on health inequalities can be found in East Midlands: The health of the region 2007. Report of the Regional Director of Public Health for the East Midlands.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 4 – Crime and Community Safety

Crime

Overall crime compares poorly with the UK as a whole but the figures for level of worry about crime have shown an improvement in the East Midlands since 2002/03 reflecting the decline in crime committed. The level of crime varies across the region and is higher in urban areas. This pattern is clear at the local authority level as can be seen below.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 6 – Diversity of Environment

Access to Green Space

70.08% of sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) in the East Midlands are in favourable or unfavourable recovering condition in 2007, which is an increase of 17.95% since 2005 but is below the rate for England at 75.55% and is well below the 2010 target of 95%. There is much variation in the percentage of SSSIs in a favourable or unfavourable recovering condition across the region.

The map below highlights the areas of least ‘non-built’ open space (i.e. greenspace, water or gardens) across the region. The pattern of deficit follows the major areas of urban settlement. Open spaces in these areas show high potential to deliver public benefits across a number of themes (e.g. health, education etc.).

Given the high existing population catchment and likely future growth of these areas, the limited open space resources may have increasing quality and management implications and this suggests that Green Infrastructure investments now will provide greatest public good and sustainability in the future. It should be noted that public perception of the quality of parks and open space in these areas is often lower than the regional average.

The Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards (ANGSt) model outlined in Planning Policy Guidance 17 (PPG17) requires that there should be one accessible 500ha site within 10km of every household – so-called “strategic greenspace”.

The map below illustrates the potential population catchment within 10km of any point in the region; suggesting where strategic greenspace may be located to serve greatest numbers of the public. In addition to the major urban areas within and around the region, a range of more rural areas appear to have much potential for benefit.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 11 – Employment, Learning and Skills

Employment

The Regional Economic Strategy (RES) evidence base produced in 2005, as part of the consultation process for the new RES, provides a more detailed examination of some of the economic issues facing the East Midlands. The evidence base can be found on the Intelligence East Midlands website.

Levels of economic activity and employment rates in the East Midlands are above the national average and unemployment rates below the national average.

Employment rates have increased from 75.4% in 2004 to 79.3% in 2006 exceeding the 2009 target of 76% and remaining above the national average. However, there are still substantial sub-regional variations with employment being lower in the cities and higher in rural areas. Substantial pockets of employment deprivation remain in the major urban areas, former North Nottinghamshire and North Derbyshire coalfields areas and remote rural areas. Economic activity levels for those of working age are highest in the cities and lowest in the south of the region.

There are a number of groups who do not participate fully in the labour market. Economic activity and employment rates tend to be lower among those with a disability, those from ethnic minority groups and women. Levels of unemployment are generally low in the East Midlands but tend to be higher among those with a disability and those from an ethnic minority. Women make up a slightly larger proportion of employment in the East Midlands than England and this is forecast to remain the case to 2014.

Median earnings for people working in the East Midlands were 6.6% less than the UK median in 2005, at £17,713 a year compared to £18,961.

The difference between male and female earnings at 45.8% was greater in the East Midlands than any other English region in 2005.

There are sizeable wage gaps between UK-born and migrant workers in the East Midlands; UK-born workers earn £8.51 per hour (at spring 2006 levels) compared to £7.31 for post-1991 migrants and £6.21 for post-2001 migrants.

Residents in the East Midlands are paid more on average than those who work in the region at £18,210 compared to £17,713, suggesting that many higher paid workers commute to work outside the region.

The earnings of those living in rural areas at £22,070 are substantially higher than those working in rural areas at £19,404, suggesting that higher skilled workers living in rural areas commute to urban areas or outside of the region. Conversely, the earnings of those living in urban areas at £20,301 are below the earnings of those working in urban areas at £20,511.

Skills

In the East Midlands in 2006 10.1% of the economically active working age population have no qualifications compared to 9.4% nationally and 28.1% the economically active working age population in the region is qualified to NVQ level 4 compared to 30.8% nationally.

The Evidence Base for the East Midlands Regional Economic Strategy 2006-2020 reports that the occupational structure of employment in the region is more heavily weighted towards lower tier occupations which require few or no qualifications. The region is forecast to remain comparatively reliant on lower tier occupations than elsewhere in the UK. Although higher tier occupations are projected to grow in the East Midlands, this increase will be less than in the UK for a whole.

Employment in the most knowledge intensive ‘K1’ sectors (employing more than 40% graduates) was 31.4% in 2005 in the East Midlands compared to 32.9% in the UK but employment in the ‘K4’ sectors (employing less than 15% graduates) was 38.1% in 2005 in the East Midlands compared to 31.6% in the UK. Knowledge intensive employment is more concentrated in the public sector than in other regions, whilst private sector demand for higher level skills appears weak when compared to other regions.

Therefore the problem in the east midlands is not so much one of low level skills in the labour force but the low level of demand of skills from employers.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 12 – Enterprise and Innovation

Economy

The Regional Economic Strategy (RES) evidence base produced in 2005, as part of the consultation process for the new RES, provides a more detailed examination of some of the economic issues facing the East Midlands. The evidence base can be found on the Intelligence East Midlands website.

The Evidence Base for the East Midlands Regional Economic Strategy 2006-2020 reports that economic growth in the East Midlands is forecast to reach an average of 2.06% in the period 2004-14 which is in line with the UK average. At he local authority level the forecast growth rate varies significantly from 1.8% in Gedling to 3.8% in South Northamptonshire.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 16 – Waste Minimisation and Recycling

Waste Recycling

The Government has set targets for municipal household waste recycling/composting and recovery, requiring all local authorities to recycle 25% of household waste by 2005 and 30% by 2010, although the regional target is 50% by 2015. Information from the Waste Data Flow data base and Best Value data show that a substantial increase in recycling has occurred and that 35% of waste collected in the East Midlands is both recycled or composted meeting the 2010 target and exceeding the 2005 target of 25%. The year on year increase in the proportion of households waste recycled or composted means that the East Midlands is moving towards the 2015 target of 50%.

There are vast variation in the rates of recycling and composting for local authority districts for 2005/06. The lowest rates are for High Peak and Bolsover at 12.3% and 13.7% respectively. The highest rates are for Melton at 47.1%, Rushcliffe at 49.9% and North Kesteven at 51.5%.

It is clear that whilst the region as a whole is performing well there are large gaps at the local authority level which needs to be addressed.

Indicators: IRS Framework Objective 17 – Accessibility and Traffic

Accessibility

The East Midlands along with the South West had the highest growth in traffic with an increase of 21% on major roads between 1995 and 2006. Across the region traffic growth is highest in Northamptonshire and lowest in the more rural areas.

In every respect those living in rural communities have less access to facilites. Whether this is a problem depends upon the trade off some people have made in choosing to live in what might be seen as more pleasant rural environments. For the less affluent living in rural areas the access issue remains a problem.

The table and graph below use the Countryside Agency definition of rural areas based on sparseness of population to show the percentage of residents within specified distances of certain key services. The figures show that:

• Those living in hamlets and isolated dwellings classified as ‘sparse’ experience the greatest accessibility difficulties. For instance, just 49.2% of residences in these areas are within 2km of a post office, only 37.2% within 4km of a secondary school and just 36.1% within 4km of a supermarket;
• Accessibility for people in settlements classified as ‘village – sparse’ is highly variable, depending on the service concerned. For instance, only 15.9% within 4km of a bank or building society and 19.5% of residences are within 4km of a supermarket, but 76.2% of residences are located less than 4km from a petrol station, and 63.3% are within 2km of a Post Office;
• As would be expected, access to services is much greater for residents of town and fringe areas: generally at least 74% of residences are located within specified distances of all the services included in the table except residences within 8km of a jobcentre.

Source: The South East Regional Research Laboratory (SERRL), ‘Rural Services Series’, 2007

Further information on inequalities at a more local level can be found from the Regional Observatory Intelligence East Midlands, Northamptonshire Observatory, Lincolnshire Research Observatory and NOMAD+.

Summary of East Midlands Performance>>