The Uneven impact of Economic Recession: Bristol
and Liverpool Compared
ESRC Project Reference: RES-062-23-2963
Working Paper 1: An Integrated Analysis of the Bristol-Liverpool
Household Survey
Dr Gerwyn Jones
DRAFT NOT FOR QUOTATION OR CIRCULATION
1
Introduction
This report presents the integrated findings from the MORI household survey exploring the impact of the
economic downturn on households in Bristol and Liverpool. Each section presents the overall findings for the
survey questions followed by a brief analysis of the significant findings under four key sub-groups, namely: City,
ACORN Group, Tenure, Gender and households with and without dependents.
1. Demography
The survey sample included a total of 1,013 households, split evenly between Bristol and Liverpool (figure 1.1
and 1.2).
Figure 1.1: Bristol & Liverpool Survey Sample
There were slightly more female respondents to male respondents, with a 54 per cent to 46 per cent split,
respectively (figure 1.2).
2
Figure 1.2: Male & Female Respondents (QC1)
The age profile of respondents was broadly representative of the national population composition, within a
few percentage points of the 2001 census for Bristol and Liverpool (N.B. could do with more accurate
comparison with 2011 census when this comes out). Figure 1.3.
Figure 1.3: Age (QC2)
3
The survey also sought to gain broad coverage across a ten key ACORN groups (Annex 1). Very near to 10 per
cent of the survey sample was achieved in each of these ten groups. Figure 1.4.
Figure 1.4: ACORN Groups
Over two fifths of those surveyed were married households, while co-habiting households made up just over a
tenth of the sample. Single households made up just over a fifth of the sample, whilst a tenth were widowed.
Fewer than a tenth of households were divorced. Figure 1.5.
Figure 1.5: Marital Status (DE1)
Over two thirds of the households had no dependants. Of those with dependants, most had one child (14%),
followed by just under a tenth (9%) with two children. The ratio of dependant to non dependant households
closely matches the 2001 census averages (N.B. need to match to 2011 census when this comes out at end of
year). Figure 6.
4
Figure 1.6: Number of Dependants (DE2)
The vast majority of the survey cohort came from a white background, with 95% falling into this category
(figure 1.7).
Figure 1.7: Ethnicity (DE4)
100%
90%
95%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
1%
2%
Mixed/multiple
ethnic group
Asian/Asian British
1%
1%
0%
White
Black/African Other ethnic group
Caribbean/Black
British
5
2. Employment Status
Over two-fifths of the respondents were working, either full or part-time. Nearly a quarter of respondents
were not working, while a third were retired (figure 2.1).
Of the 44 per cent that were working, nearly 30 per cent were in full-time employment, with 11.5 per cent
working part-time (between 16 and 29 hours) and just over 3 per cent were working part time under 16 hours
a week.
Of the 24 per cent that were not working, around 7.5 per cent were unemployed (either registered or seeking
work but not registered); 3.5 per cent were at home and not seeking work; just over 4 per cent were long term
sick and/or disabled; 2 per cent were full time carers; just over 5 per cent were in full-time education; while
just over 1 per cent noted ‘other’ (figure 2.2).
Figure 2.1: Employment Status (EM1)
6
Figure 2.2: Employment Status Break Down (EM1)
Findings across sub-groups
By City





A significantly higher proportion of respondents were working in Bristol (48%) compared to Liverpool
(41%), with nearly a half of respondents in the former working, compared to two-fifths in the latter.
Liverpool had a significantly higher share of retired respondents, with 36 per cent falling into this
category, compared to 28 per cent in Bristol.
Of those that were working, Bristol has a significantly higher share of respondents in full-time
employment, with over a third (34%) falling into this category , compared to just over a quarter (26%)
in Liverpool.
Liverpool has a significantly higher share of those that were ‘long term sick/disabled’, with three
times as many than Bristol - 6 per cent in the former and 2 per cent in the latter.
Liverpool also has a significantly higher share of respondents stating they were fully retired, with 36
per cent, compared to 28 per cent in Bristol.
7
By ACORN group



Two ACORN groups had a significantly higher than average percentage of households in work:
Educated Urbanites (Group E) and Starting Out’s (Group G). A further four groups had slightly more
than average percentage of households that were working: Flourishing Families (Group C), Secure
Families (Group H), Post Industrial Families (Group L) and Blue Collar Roots (Group M).
Three ACORN groups had a significantly higher than average proportion of households that were not
working: Starting Outs (Group G), Struggling Families (Group N) and Burdened Singles (Group O). A
further three ACORN groups had a slightly higher than average representation of respondents that
were not working: Educated Urbanites (Group E), Post Indisutrial Families (Group L) and Blue Collar
Roots (Group M).
Affluent Greys (Group B), Flourishing Families (Group C) and Prudent Penioners (Group J) had a
significantly higher than average representation of retired household respondents, while Secure
Families (Group H) also had a slightly above average representation here.
By Tenure



A significantly higher proportion of private tenants (52%) and owner occupiers (46%) were working in
comparison to social tenants (29%).
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (44%) and private tenants (41%) were not working,
in comparison to owner occupiers (13%).
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (41%) were retired, cf. social tenants (27%) and
private tenants (6%). A significantly higher proportion of social tenants were also retired compared to
private tenants.
By Gender





Working full-time: Nearly two-fifths (37%) of male repondents were working full-time, compared with
just under a quarter (24%) of female respondents.
Part-time work (16-29 hours): Just over a sixth (17%) of female respondents were working part-time,
over 16 hours, compared with a twentieth (5%) of males.
Not working: Just overa quarter (26%) of the female cohort were not working, compared with a fifth
(20%) of the male cohort.
At home/not seeking work: Just over a twentieth (6%) of females were at home/not seeking work,
compared with 1 per cent of males.
Full-time carer: 3 per cent of the female cohort were full-time carers, compared with 1 per cent of
males.
By Dependents



A significantly higher proportion of respondents with dependents were working, with 63% falling into
this category, cf. 38% of households without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of respondents with dependents were not working, with 36% falling
into this category, cf. 19% of those without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of respondents with no dependents were retired, with 43% falling
into this category, cf. 2% of those with dependents.
8
2.2 Impacts on jobs over past 3 years
Households were asked to comment on whether any of the following (from figure 2.4) had happened to them
over the past three years.







Just under a third (30%) of respondents noted receiving a pay rise
A sixth (16%) had got a better job or promotion
Just under a tenth (8%) had been made redundant
A tenth had been unemployed for more than 6 weeks at a time
Just over a tenth (11%) had taken a pay cut
Just under a twentieth (19%) had to work longer hours/work overtime
7% had taken on an additional job to meet living costs
9
Figure 2.4: What has happened past 3 years (EM4)
Had a pay rise
Got a better job or
promotion
Been made redundant
Been unemployed for 6
weeks or more at a time
30%
31%
Been asked by your
employer to take time off
without pay or take unpaid
leave
Taken a pay cut
Been asked to reduce your
working hours slightly
7%
16%
Been asked to reduce your
working hours significantly
Been asked to work parttime
rather than fulltime
19%
8%
3%
2%
10%
6%
Had to work overtime or
longer hours
Taken on an additional job to
meet living costs
11%
2%
None of these
10
Key sub-group findings
By City

There were no significant differences between Bristol and Liverpool in relation to impacts on jobs
over the past three years.
By ACORN group



A significantly higher proportion than average of Educated Urbanites (E) and Blue Collar Roots (M)
had got a better job/promotion over the past three years, with 33% and 25% stating this, respectively.
The proportion of Educated Urbanites in this category was twice the overall average of 16%.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Blue Collar Roots (M) had been asked to work parttime rather than full-time, with 8% of this group stating this, over twice as much as the overall
average of 3%.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Secure Families (H) had been asked to reduce their
hours significantly, with 7% of this group falling into this category, over three times higher than the
overall average of 2%.
By Tenure




A significantly higher proportion of private tenants, with 27%, had got a better job/promotion in the
past 3 years, cf. 12% of owner occupiers and 13% of social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of private tenants, with 15%, had been unemployed for 6 weeks or
more at a time, cf. 7% of owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants, at 13%, had been asked by their employers to
reduce their working hours slightly, cf. 4% of owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of private tenants, at 31%, had to work overtime or longer hours, cf.
16% of owner occupiers.
By Gender


Significantly more males (13%) than females (7%) stated they had been unemployed for more than 6
weeks at a time
Significantly more males (14%) than females (8%) stated they had taken a pay cut.
By Dependents

There were no significant differences between households with and without dependents to this
question.
11
2.3 Job Security
Employed respondents were asked how secure they felt in their current job. While over two thirds of
respondents felt secure in their current employment, nearly a quarter felt insecure, with just under a tenth
stating they felt ‘very insecure’ (figure 2.5).
Figure 2.5: Job Security (EM7)
Findings by sub-group
City

There were no significant findings relating to job security by city of residence
ACORN group

There were no significant findings by ACORN group as the sample for this question was too small
across many groups for reliable significance testing.
Tenure

There were no significant findings as the sample for this question was too small across some tenure
groups for reliable comparative significance testing.
Gender

There were no significant findings relating to job security and gender
12
By Dependents

There were no significant differences between households with and without dependents to this
question.
3. Tenure
3.1 Tenure Type
Just over three-fifths of households in the survey were owner occupiers, while a fifth were private tenants and
approximately a sixth were social tenants (figure 3.1).
Figure 3.1: Tenure Type (TH2)
13
Findings by sub group
City

There were no significant differences between Bristol and Liverpool relating to these three broad
occupancy types (N.B. There were differences within some of these three occupancy types, in
particular: significantly more owner occupiers in Bristol owned their property with a mortgage or loan;
and significantly more social tenants in Liverpool rented from a housing association.)
ACORN group



A significantly higher proportion than average of Affluent Greys (B) (94%), Secure Families (C) (91%)
and Flourishing Families (H) (86%) were owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of Struggling Families (N) (46%) and Burdened Singles (O) (72%) were
social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of Educated Urbanites (E) (55%) were private tenants cf. all other
ACORN groups, while significantly more Staring Outs (G) (39%) were also private tenants cf. most
other ACORN groups.
Gender

Female respondents were significantly more likely to be social tenants, with nearly a fifth (18%) of
females falling into this category, compared with 14 per cent of males
Dependents


A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents were social tenants (24%) and
private tenants (25%), cf. households with dependents, in which 13% were social tenants and 18%
private tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of household without dependents were owner occupiers (67%), cf.
51% of households with dependents that fell into this category.
3.2 Housing Equity
Of the households that were owner occupiers, the vast majority, 74 per cent, believed that their house was
worth more than they owed on it. Nevertheless, just over a tenth (12%) of households stated that their house
was worth less than they owed on it, and a further tenth believed that the house was worth about the same as
they owed on it (figure 3.2).
14
Figure 3.2: Household Equity (TH4)
Findings by sub group
City


Significantly more Bristol respondents stated that their house was worth more than they owed on it
(i.e. those who stated it was worth ‘much more’ and a ‘little more’ combined), with nearly four-fifths
(78%) of Bristol households noting this, compared to just over two-thirds (68%) of those in Liverpool.
Although not a statistically significant majority, 15 per cent of Liverpool households believed their
house was worth less (i.e. those who stated a ‘little less’ and ‘much less’ combined) than they owed
on it, compared to 9 per cent in Bristol.
ACORN Groups

The numbers of respondents to this question was not large enough across all ACORN groups to make
reliable comparative significance testing.
Tenure

The numbers of respondents to this question was not large enough across all tenure groups to make
reliable comparative significance testing.
15
Gender

There were no significant differences between males and females relating to this question.
Dependents

A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents stated their house was worth less
than they owed on it (18%), cf. 7% of households without dependents who stated this.
3.3 Renting
Private renters were asked how easy or difficult it would be for them to find somewhere suitable to rent in
they needed to move from their present accommodation. Nearly three-fifths (58%) believed it would be
difficult to find somewhere else to live, with nearly a third stating it would be ‘very difficult’. Around a third of
private renters believed it would be easy for them to find somewhere suitable to rent if they were required to
move (figure 3.3).
Figure 3.3: Availability of Suitable Rented Accommodation (TH6)
Findings by sub-group
City


A significantly higher proportion of Liverpool renters believed it would be ‘easy’ for them to find
suitable accommodation if they were required to move, with two-fifths (41%) noting this, compared
to just over a quarter (27%) in Bristol.
Most renters in both cities believed it would be difficult to find somewhere suitable to rent if they
were required to move, with 55 per cent noting this in Liverpool, and 61 per cent in Bristol.
16
ACORN group

The numbers of respondents to this question was not large enough across all ACORN groups to make
reliable comparative significance testing.
Gender

There was a significantly higher proportion of female respondents who were in rented
accommodation that stated it would be ‘very difficult’ for them to find suitable accommodation if
they had to move, with just over two-fifths (41%) stating this, compared with just over a fifth (21%) of
males.
Dependents


A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents stated it would be ‘difficult’ for them
to find somewhere suitable to live if they needed to move, with 70% stating this, cf. 52% of those
without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of those without dependents stated it would be ‘easy’ for them to
find somewhere suitable to live, with 39% stating this, cf. 23% of those with dependents.
4. Household Views on State of Economy
4.1 Views on state of UK, City and Local Economy
Households were generally more pessimistic about the state of the UK economy over that of their city or local
area in which they lived. Over four-fifths (83%) of households stated that they felt that the UK economy was
‘on the way down’ or ‘struggling’. This ratio was closer to half when talking about their own city and local area.
Only 3 per cent of respondents felt the UK economy was on the way up/thriving. This figure stood at 14 per
cent when talking about their city and 9 per cent when commenting on their local area (figures 4.1, 4.2 and
4.3.)
17
Figure 4.1: State of UK Economy (EC1c)
Figure 4.2: State of City Economy (EC1b)
18
Figure 4.3: State of Local Economy (EC1a)
Findings by sub-group
City





Local area: Significantly more Bristol respondents thought their local area was ‘really thriving/on the
way’ up with 11% noting this, cf. 7% in Liverpool.
Local area: Significantly more Liverpool respondents thought their local area was ‘on the way
down/struggling’, with 54% noting this, cf. 42% in Bristol.
City: Significantly more Liverpool respondents thought their city economy was ‘really thriving/on the
way up’, with 20% noting this, cf. 9% in Bristol.
City: Significantly more Bristol respondents noted their city economy was ‘much the same as always’,
with 30% stating this, cf. 23% in Liverpool.
UK: Significantly more Liverpool respondents stated the UK economy was ‘much the same as always’,
with 13% stating this, against 9% in Bristol. There were no other significant differences between the
two cities, when commenting on the state of the UK economy.
ACORN group





Local Area: Significantly more Educated Urbanites (E) than average stated their local area was ‘on the
way up’, with 14% stating this.
City: Significantly more Educated Urbanites (E) than average stated their City economy ‘was much the
same as always’, with 35% stating this.
City: Significantly more Flourishing Families (C) than average stated their city economy was ‘on the
way down’, with 40% stating this.
UK: Significantly more Flourishing Families (C) than average stated it was ‘on the way up’, with 7%
stating this.
UK: Significantly more Educated Urbanites (E) than average stated that the UK economy was ‘on the
way down’, with 58% stating this.
19

UK: Significantly more Affluent Greys (B) and Prudent Pensioners (J) than average stated that the UK
economy was ‘struggling’, with 47% from both groups stating this.
Gender

Females were significantly more pessimistic about the state of their local economy, with over a half
(51%) stating it was ‘on the way down/struggling’, compared with just over two-fifths (44%) of males.
Tenure


A significantly higher proportion of private tenants (12%) thought their local economy was really
thriving/on the way up, cf. 6% of social tenants
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (86%) thought the UK economy as a whole was
on the way down/struggling, cf. 74% of social tenants and 82% of private tenants.
Dependents



Local Economy: Significantly more households with dependents said their local economy was ‘on the
way down/struggling’, with 56% stating this, cf. 45% of those without dependents.
City Economy: There were no significant differences between the two cohorts.
UK Economy: There were no significant differences between the two cohorts.
4.2 How the Cities of Bristol & Liverpool have been affected compared to other UK cities
Most household respondents felt that their city had been affected much the same as other cities in the UK,
with just over two-fifths of the sample stating this. Around a quarter of households felt their city had been
affected more than other cities, while a similar amount felt it had been affected less (figure 4.4).
20
Figure 4.4: How much Bristol/Liverpool affected compared to other cities? (EC2)
Findings by sub-group
City


A significantly higher proportion of Liverpool households felt that Liverpool had been affected ‘more’
(i.e. a combination of those who stated it had been affected ‘slightly’ and ‘much more’) than other
cities, with 41% stating this, cf. 11% in Bristol.
Significantly more Bristol households felt their city had been affected less (i.e. a combination of those
who stated it had been affected ‘slightly’ and ‘much less’) than others in the UK, with 33% stating this,
cf. 18% in Liverpool.
Acorn Group

A significantly higher proportion of Affluent Greys (B) and Educated Urbanites (E) stated that their city
had been affected less than others in the UK, with 34% and 36% stating this, respectively. This
compared to 26% for the sample as a whole.
Tenure


A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (32%) thought their city economy had been affected
more than other cities in the UK over the past 3 years, cf. 23% of owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (27%) and private tenants (27%) thought their
city economy had been affected less than other UK cities, cf. 18% of social tenants.
21
Gender


A significantly higher proportion of males felt that their city had been affected ‘less’ than other cities
in the UK, with 31% noting this, cf. 21% of females.
A significantly higher proportion of females felt that their city had been affected ‘much the same as
other cities’, with 45% stating this, cf. 38% of males.
Dependents

Significantly more households without dependents stated their city economy had been affected ‘less’
than others in the UK, with 27% stating this, cf. 21% of those with dependents.
5. Government Responses to Economic Downturn
5.1 Organisations that have helped local economy
Respondents were asked which, if any, from a list of organisations, had helped their local economy deal with
the economic downturn over the past three years. Most respondents (29%) stated ‘none of these’. Although
a fifth stated their local government (city, county, district, parish councils) and a sixth felt that local charities
had also helped during the downturn. Just over a tenth of respondents (12%) felt local business had helped;
and just over a twentieth (6%) stated ‘regional government’. Less than a twentieth (4%) stated that Central
Government had helped their local area during the economic downturn.
Figure 5.1: Organisations that have helped local area deal with economic downturn (GR1)
22
Findings by sub-group
City

A significantly higher proportion of Liverpool respondents felt their local council had helped their local
area during the economic downturn, with 27% choosing this, cf. 21% in Bristol. There were no other
significant differences between the two cities.
ACORN Group






A significantly higher proportion than average of Flourishing Families (C) felt that the national
government had helped their local area, with 10% of this cohort stating this.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Educated Urbanites (E) felt that regional government
had helped, with 13% from this group stating this.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Educated Urbanites (E) felt that local government
had helped, with 33% stating this.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Affluent Greys (B) (22%), Starting Out’s (G) (23%)
and Prudent Pensioners (J) (22%) felt that local businesses had helped.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Blue Collar Roots (M) felt that local charities had
helped their local area during the downturn, with 28% of this cohort stating this.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Burdened Singles (O) stated ‘none of these’ in
response to this question, with 55% choosing this as their answer.
Tenure



Significantly more private tenants than average, and compared to social tenants, stated that local
government had helped their local area, with 31% stating this, cf. 16% of social tenants. Significantly
more owner occupiers (24%), cf. social tenants, also stated this.
Significantly more owner occupiers than average, and compared to social tenants, stated that local
businesses had helped, with 17% stating this, cf. 5% of social tenants. Significantly more private
tenants (16%), cf. social tenants also stated this.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants than average, and compared to owner occupiers
and private tenants, stated ‘none of these’ to this question, with 48% of this cohort choosing this as
their answer, cf. 33% of owner occupiers and 29% of private tenants.
Gender



A significantly higher proportion of males (6%) than females (3%) thought the national government
had helped their local area during the economic downturn.
Significantly more males also thought that regional government had helped, with 9% stating this, cf. 5%
of females.
Significantly more males thought that local business had helped their local area during the downturn,
with 17% stating this, cf. 12% of females.
Dependents

A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents stated that local businesses had
helped their local economy during the downturn, with 16% saying this, cf. 11% of households with
dependents.
23
5.2 Decisions made by the local council
There was an even divide between those who felt their local council had made the right decisions in managing
their local economy during the economic downturn and those who felt it had made the wrong decisions, with
just under two-fifths in each camp (figure 5.2).
Figure 5.2: Decisions made by local council on managing local economy (GR2)
Findings by sub-group
City

There were no significant differences in the responses of the two cities to this question.
ACORN group



Significantly more secure families (H) than average stated that their council had made the ‘right
decisions’, with 50% of this cohort stating this.
Significantly more Struggling Families (N) and Burdened Singles (O) than average stated their council
had made the ‘wrong decisions’, with 51% of both cohorts stating this.
Significantly more Educated Urbanites (E) and Blue Collar Roots (M) stated they ‘didn’t know’ in
response to this question, with 33% and 34% stating this, respectively.
24
Tenure


Significantly more owner occupiers than average, and compared to social tenants, stated that their
council had made the ‘right decisions’, with 41% of this cohort stating this, cf. 26% of social tenants.
Significantly more private tenants than social tenants also stated this, with 39% saying their council
had made the ‘right decisions’.
Significantly more social tenants than average, and compared to owner occupiers and private tenants,
stated their council had made the ‘wrong decisions’, with 48% of this cohort stating this, cf. 38% of
owner occupiers and 31% of private tenants.
Gender


A significantly higher proportion of males stated their local council had made the ‘right decisions’,
with 42% noting this, cf. 34% of females.
A significantly higher proportion of females were unsure, with 28% stating ‘don’t know’, cf. 20% of
males.
Dependents

A higher proportion of those without dependents stated that their local council had made the ‘right’
decisions on managing their local economy, with 41% of this cohort stating this, cf. 31% of those with
dependents.
6. Impact of the Recession
6.1 Impact of the economic downturn on households
Asked how the economic downturn had impacted upon their household over the past three years, there was a
relatively even divide between households that reported a big impact and those that reported a smaller
impact, with approximately two fifths reporting a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ impact and a similar amount reporting
a ‘fairly small’ impact. 15 per cent of households reported feeling no impact at all from the downturn (figure
6.1).
25
Figure 6.1: Impact of Recession on Households (IM1)
Findings by sub-group
City

There were no significant differences between the two cities in relation to the impact of the
downturn on the way households lived, with just over two-fifths, in both cities, stating it had had a
very/fairly big impact, and just under three-fifths stating it had a fairly small or no impact
ACORN Group



A significantly higher percentage of Struggling Families (Group N) and Burdened Singles (Group O),
compared to the overall average, stated that the economic downturn had a ‘very big’ impact of the
way their household lived over the past three years, with 26% and 22% falling into this category,
respectively.
A higher proportion than average of Educated Urbanites (Group E) stated it had a ‘fairly big’ impact,
with nearly two-fifths of this group stating this.
By contrast, significantly more Flourishing Families (Group C), compared to other households, stated
that the impact of the downturn had been ‘fairly small’, with over half of this cohort noting this.
Affluent Greys (Group B) and Prudent Pensioners (Group J) also had an above average representation
of households who fell into this category, again with approximately half of the cohort stating this.
Tenure

A significantly higher proportion of social tenants than average, and compared to owner occupiers,
stated that the downturn had a ‘very/fairly big impact’ on their household, with 53% of the cohort
falling into these two categories cf. 40% of owner occupiers, and 43% for the overall survey sample.
26

A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers, at 60%, noted a ‘fairly small/no impact at all’, cf.
46% of social tenants.
Gender


Significantly more females stated the downturn had a ‘very/fairly big impact’, with 46% falling into
these two categories cf. 38% of males.
By contrast, a significantly higher proportion of males noted a ‘fairly small impact/no impact’, with 61%
in these two categories, cf. 53% of females.
Dependents


A significantly higher proportion of households with children stated that the downturn had had a
‘very/fairly big impact’ on the way their household lived, with 56% stating this, cf. 38% of those with
no dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents stated the downturn had a ‘fairly
small/no impact’ on their household, with 62% stating this, cf. 44% of those with children.
6.2 Household actions in response to the economic downturn
Households were asked whether they had taken any specific actions in response to the economic downturn
over the past three years. They could select more than one response. The most popular included: spending
less and being more careful about their spending (50%); changing shopping habits (40%), through for example
shopping in cheaper supermarkets, or shopping more locally; cutting back on luxury items (39%); cutting back
on eating out (32%); and cutting back on utilities (30%). Many households also stated they were saving less
(36%) and a quarter of households stated they had cut back on everything. Around ten per cent of households
stated they actually spent more during the past three years (figure 6.2).
27
Figure 6.2: Household Responses to Economic Downturn
Spent More
Spent Less
9
8
12
36
Cut back luxury items
50
Cut back eating out
5
Cut back on travelling
8
Cut back on utilities
Cut back on everything
19
39
Changed shopping habits
21
Postponded major
expenditure
Used car less
32
Bought more on credit
40
30
Paid off mortgage
early/made additional
repayments
Saved less
25
30
Saved more
None of these
Findings by sub-group
City
A more significant proportion of Bristol households stated the following:


Cut back on travelling: a third of Bristol households, cf. just over a quarter of Liverpool households
Paid off mortgage early/made additional payments: 7 per cent of Bristol households, cf. 4 per cent of
Liverpool households
A more significant proportion of Liverpool households had made the following changes:

Cut back on utilities: Over a third of Liverpool households, cf. just over a quarter of Bristol households
28
ACORN group








Cut back on eating out: significantly higher than average prevalence amongst Starting Outs (Group G)
(41%).
Cut back on travelling: Significantly above average for Educated Urbanites (Group E) (38%) and
Secure Families (Group H) (40%).
Cut back on utilities: Significantly higher than average for Secure Families (Group H) (39%) and
Struggling Families (Group N) (44%).
Cut back on everything: Significantly above average for Struggling Families (Group N) (34%) and
Burdened Singles (Group O) (38%).
Changed shopping habits: Significantly above average for Starting Outs (Group G) (51%). Slightly
above average for Secure Families (Group H) (48%), Post-Industrial Families (Group L) (44%) and
Struggling Families (Group N) (49%).
Postponed Major expenditure: Significantly above average for Secure Families (Group H) (31%).
Bought more on credit: Significantly above average for Educated Urbanites (Group E) (14%).
Saved More: Significantly above average for Educated Urbanites (Group E) (21%).
Tenure




A significantly higher proportion of social tenants, at 40%, stated they had ‘cut back on everything’, cf.
20% of owner occupiers and 27% of private tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers, at 24%, stated they had postponed a major
expenditure, cf. 13% of social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of private tenants, at 38%, stated they had ‘cut back on eating out’,
cf. 27% of social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of private tenants, at 11%, stated they had ‘bought more on credit’,
cf. 6% of owner occupiers.
Gender
Significantly more females than males stated they had taken the following actions over the past three years:







Spent less/more budgeting: 53 per cent of females cf. 47 per cent of males.
Cut back on luxury items: 43 per cent of females cf. 34 per cent of males.
Cut back on eating out: 35 per cent of females cf. 26 per cent of males.
Cut back on travelling: 33 per cent of females cf. 26 per cent of males.
Cut back on everything: 30 per cent of females cf. 19 per cent of males.
Changed shopping habits: 46 per cent of females cf. 32 per cent of males.
Bought more on credit: 9 per cent of females cf. 6 per cent of males
Significantly more Males stated the following:


Used car less: 22 per cent of males cf. 16 per cent of females
Saved more: 12 per cent of males cf. 6 per cent of females.
29
Dependents

Households with dependents were significantly more likely to have made the following changes over
the past 3 years:
 Spent less/more careful about their spending: 59% households with dependents, cf. 47%
households without dependents.
 Cut back on luxury items: 52% households with dependents, cf. 34% households without
dependents.
 Cut back on eating out: 44% households with dependents, cf. 27% households without
dependents.
 Cut back on travelling: 41% households with dependents, cf. 26% households without
dependents.
 Cut back on everything: 34% households with dependents, cf. 22% households without
dependents.
 Changed shopping habits: 54% households with dependents, cf. 35% households without
dependents.
 Postponed major expenditure: 26% households with dependents, cf. 19% households
without dependents.
 Bought more on credit: 15% households with dependents, cf. 5% households without
dependents.

Households without dependents were more likely to state ‘none of these’ to this question, with 10%
of this cohort saying this, cf. 3% of households with dependents.
30
7. Household Finances
7.1 Household’s current financial situation
Most households (two-fifths) noted they had enough money to meet their basic expenses with a little left over
for extras, and a quarter stated they had enough money to live on comfortably. Nevertheless, over a quarter
of households stated they had ‘just enough money to meet basic expenses’, whilst over a twentieth (6%) of
households did not have enough money to meet their basic living expenses (figure 7.1).
Figure 7.1: Paying for Basic Living Expenses (FS1)
Findings by sub-group
City


A significant proportion of Liverpool households stated that they ‘didn’t have enough money to meet
basic expenses’, with nearly a tenth of households saying this, compared to a twentieth in Bristol.
More Bristol households noted they ‘had enough money to live on comfortably’, at 28 per cent,
compared to 23 per cent in Liverpool, although this was not a statistically significant difference.
31
ACORN group



Three groups had a significantly higher percentage than average of households that stated they had
enough income to live on comfortably, namely: Affluent Greys (Group B) (38%), Flourishing Families
(Group C) (36%) and Prudent Pensioners (Group J) (38%).
By contrast, Struggling Families (Goup N) (40%) and Burdened Singles (O) (47%) had a significatly
higher percentage, than average, of households who stated they ‘had enough income just to meet
basic expenses’.
A significantly higher percentage of Struggling Families (Group N) stated they ‘did not have enough to
meet basic expenses’, with nearly three time the proportion of these households falling into this
category, at 17%, compared to the overall average of 6% who stated this.
Tenure




A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers stated they ‘had enough to live on comfortably’,
at 30% cf. 9% of social tenants and 23% of private tenants. A significantly higher proportion of private
tenants cf. social tenants also noted this.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers stated they had ‘enough to meet basic expenses
with a little left over for extras’, at 43% cf. 31% of social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants stated they had ‘enough just to meet basic
expenses’, at 46% cf. 22% of owner occupiers and 32% of private tenants. A higher proportion of
private tenants cf. owner occupiers also fell into this category.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (12%) and private tenants (8%), cf. owner occupiers
(4%) stated they ‘didn’t have enough to meet basic expenses.’ The proportion of social tenants in this
category was also twice as high as the overall average for the survey sample, of 6%.
Gender
There was a significant difference between males and females across two categories relating to household
finances:


Nearly a third (31%) of males reported they had ‘enough to live on comfortably’, compared with just a
fifth (21%) of females.
A third (33%) of females reported having ‘just enough to meet basic expenses’, compared with just
over a fifth (22%) of males.
Dependents


A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents noted they had ‘enough to live
comfortably’, with 30% of this cohort noting this, cf. 13% of those with dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents noted they had enough ‘just to meet
basic expenses’, with 37% of this cohort noting this, cf. 24% of households with dependents.
32
7.2 Finances compared to 3 years ago
Most households had seen their finances squeezed over the past three years. Over half of the households
surveyed believed their financial situation had deteriorated over the past three years, whilst a third stated
they had remained the same. Only a tenth of households stated that their finances had improved (figure7.2).
Figure 7.2: Household Finances 2011 compared to 2008 (FS2)
Findings by sub-group
City


A significantly higher proportion of Bristol households noted their finances had improved, at 12 per
cent, cf. 7% in Liverpool.
A significantly higher proportion of Liverpool households noted their financial situation had ‘stayed
the same’, with nearly two-fifths (38%) noting this, compared to just under a third (31%) in Bristol.
ACORN group

Educated Urbanites (Group E) were sigtnificantly more likely than average to state that their
household finances had improved over the past three years, with just over a fifth of these households
reporting an improvement in their income. Two other ACORN groups had a slightly above average
percentage of households reporting an increase in income, namely: Staring Outs (Group G) and
Prudent Pensioners (Group J), both with just over a tenth of households falling into this category.
33

By contrast, Struggling Families (Group N) were significantly more likely than average to have seen
their household finances deteriorate, with over two thirds (69%) of these households being in this
position. Three other ACORN groups were slightly above average in terms of reporting falls in income:
Flourishing Families (Group C) (62%), Secure Families (Group C) (58%) and Blue-Collar Roots (Group M)
(58%), all with approximately three-fifths of households reporting a fall in income.
Tenure



A significantly higher proportion of private tenants, with 15%, stated their financial situation had
improved over the past 3 years, cf. 9% of owner occupiers and 7% of social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers, with 38%, stated their financial position had
‘stayed the same’ cf. 30% of social tenants and 30% of private tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants, with 62%, stated their financial situation had ‘got
worse’, cf. 51% of private tenants.
Gender

There were no significant differences between males and females when stating how the household’s
financial position had changed over the past three years.
Dependents


A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents stated their finances had ‘got worse’
over the past 3 years, with 65% of this cohort stating this, cf. 51% of those without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents noted their finances had ‘stayed
the same’ over the past 3 years, with 39% of this cohort stating this, cf. 24% of those with dependents.
34
7.3 Financial difficulties
A tenth of those surveyed noted that they had faced difficulty in paying for their rent or a mortgage over the
past three years, whilst approximately a twentieth of households had received a county court judgement for
debt or non repayment of a loan. However, most of the sample (84%), did not report major financial
difficulties (figure 7.3).
Figure 7.3: Household Financial Difficulties (FS5)
11%
Had trouble paying the rent
or mortgage
1%
5%
2%
Had to move because the
landlord has sold the
property you lived in
Received a County Court
Judgement for
debt/nonpayment of loan
Other
None of these
84%
Findings by sub-group
City

There were no significant differences between Bristol and Liverpool households in response to this
question.
ACORN group



Both Struggling Families (Group N) and Burdened Singles (Group O) had a significantly higher
proportion of households that had received a county court judgement for debt or non payment of a
loan, over the past three years. Over a sixth of Burdened Singles (17%) households fell into this
category, over three times the overall average of 5%. Just over a tenth of Struggling Families fell into
this category, twice the survey average.
A significantly higher percentage of Burdened Singles than average stated having trouble paying their
rent or mortgage; these were closely followed by Struggling Families, with 18% and 17% from each
group falling into this category, respectively.
A significantly higher than average proportion of Affluent Greys (B) (96%), Flourishing Families (C)
(90%) and Prudent Pensioners (J) (93%), reported ‘none of these’ financial difficulties.
35
Tenure



A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (18%) and private tenants (21%) stated they had
‘trouble paying the rent or mortgage’ over the past 3 years, cf. 6% of owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (18%) stated they had received a County Court
judgement for debt/non payment of a loan, cf. 6% of private tenants and 2% of owner occupiers.
Significantly more private tenants than owner occupiers also fell into this category.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (92%) were not affected by any notable financial
problems, cf. 69% of social tenants and 69% of private tenants.
Gender


A higher proportion of females stated they had faced trouble paying their rent/mortgage, with 13%
falling in this category, cf. 9% of males.
A higher than average proportion of males stated they had not faced any of these problems, with 87%
in this category, cf. 81% of females.
Dependents


A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents noted the following:
 21% had trouble paying rent/mortgage, cf. 7% households without dependents
 1% had home repossessed/evicted for non-payment of rent, cf. zero households without
dependents.
 12% received county court judgement for debt/non payment of loan, cf. 3% of households
without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents stated ‘none of these’ to this
question (88%) cf. 71% of those with dependents.
7.4 Paying for bills
Over a third of households noted that they had used money from their savings over the past three years to pay
for bills, whilst a fifth noted they had borrowed money from a family member or friend to pay for a bill. Nearly
a quarter of households stated they had lent money to a family member or friend to help them pay for bills.
Households could choose more than one response to this question.
36
Figure 17: Actions Taken by Households (FS6)
Borrowed money from a
family member or friend to
help pay the bills
20%
Lent money to family
members or friends to help
them pay the bills
42%
Had your children move
back in to the family home
to save money
23%
Used money from your
savings to meet expenses
or pay your bills
Remortgaged your home
Postponed getting married
or having a baby
1%
4%
Other
3%
2%
None of these
33%
Findings by sub group
City

There was only one significant difference between the responses of Bristol and Liverpool households
to this question, with more households in Bristol stating they had postponed getting married/having a
baby (5%), cf. 1% in Liverpool.
ACORN Group


Three ACORN groups had a significantly higher percentage of households, than the average, who had
borrowed money from a family member or friend to help pay their bills over the past three years,
namely: Educated Urbanites (Group E) (38%), Starting Outs (Group G) (29%) and Burdened Singles
(Group O) (32%).
A higher proportion than average of Struggling Families (N) (9%) had seen children move back into the
family home to save money; while significantly more Blue Collar Roots (M) (8%) than the average had
postponed getting married or having a baby.
Tenure

A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (38%) and private tenants (40%), had borrowed
money from family/friends to help pay bills, cf. 9% of owner occupiers.
Gender

A significantly higher proportion of females (24%) had borrowed money from a family member or
friend to help pay bills, cf. 15% of males.
37
Dependents

A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents noted the following:
 34% had borrowed money from a family member/friend to help pay their bills, cf. 15% of
households without dependents.
 39% had used money from their savings to meet their expenses/help pay their bills, cf. 31%
of households without dependents.
 5% had postponed getting married/having a baby, cf. 2% of households without dependents.

A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents stated ‘none of these’ to this
question, with 45% noting this cf. 33% of households with dependents.
7.4 Household Income
Most household income brackets between £5,000 and £45,000 were represented by around a tenth of
households in the survey (figure 7.4). The highest representation was seen in the £10,000-£14,999 category,
with 13% of households. The lowest income bracket (under £5,000) and two of the highest, £45,000-£54,999
and £55,000-£99,000, were represented by just over a twentieth of households, while only 1% of households
earned over £100,000. A further sixth of households did not or could not reveal their household income.
Figure 7…: Household Gross Income (FS7)
10%
5%
Under £5,000
£5,000 - £9,999
11%
6%
1%
£10,000 - £14,999
£15,000 - £19,999
7%
£20,000 - £24,999
13%
£25,000 - £34,999
£35,000 - £44,999
6%
£45,000 - £54,999
11%
9%
£55,000 - £99,999
£100,000 or more
Don't know
12%
9%
Prefer not to answer
38
Findings by sub-group
City


£5,000-£9,999: Significantly more Liverpool households (13%) cf. Bristol households (9%)
£35,000-£44,999: Significantly more Bristol households (12%) cf. Liverpool (7%).
ACORN Group


Households on the lowest annual incomes (under £5,000) were significatly more likely than average
to come from two ACORN groups: Burdened Singles (Group O) and Struggling Families (Group N), with
10% and 16% of households in this income bracket, respectively.
By contrast, three ACORN groups had significantly more households than average at the higher end
of the income scale (between £55,000-£99,000): Flourishing Families (Group C), Educated Urbanites
(Group E) and Starting Outs (Group G).
Tenure



A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (13%) and private tenants (7%) earned under £5,000
per annum, cf. 3% of owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants earned between £5,000-£10,000, with 22% in this
income band, cf. 12% of private tenants and 8% of owner occupiers. A significantly higher proportion
of private tenants cf. owner occupiers also fell into this category.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers and private tenants cf. social tenants were
present in four income bands: £25,000-£34,999; £35,000-£44,999; £45,000-£54,999; £55,000£99,999.
Gender


There was a significantly higher proportion of males within two of the higher income bands:
 £35,000-£44,999: 12% males, cf. 7% females;
 £55,000-£99,999: 9% males, cf. 5% of females.
There was a higher proportion of females to males in all of the income bands below £20,000, with a
significant difference present in one of these, namely the £10,000-£14,999 category, which had 15%
females, cf. 10% males.
Dependents

There were no significant differences between households with and without dependents to this
question.
39
7.5 Impact of downturn on household gross income
Nearly two-fifths of households noted that their gross annual income had decreased over the past three years,
whilst just over a third stated it had stayed the same. A fifth of households noted a small increase in their
household income since 2008 (figure 7.5).
Figure 7.5: Change in Household Gross Income Since 2008 (FS8)
Findings by sub-group
City


A more significant percentage of Bristol households stated that their gross household income had
‘decreased a little’ over the past three years, with a quarter stating this, compared to less than a fifth
in Liverpool.
More Liverpool households noted that their gross income had stayed the same, at two-fifths,
compared to a third in Bristol
ACORN group


One ACORN group had a significantly higher than average proportion of respondents who noted their
gross income had ‘increased a lot’ over the past three years, these were the Educated Urbanites (E),
with 13% of this cohort stating this.
Burdened Singles (O) had a significantly higher than average proportion of respondents who noted
their income had stayed the same, with just under half of this cohort noting this.
40
Tenure

A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (25%) and private tenants (27%) noted their
incomes had increased over the past 3 years, cf. 17% of social tenants.
Gender


A significantly higher proportion of males stated their income had increased, with 28% falling into this
category, cf. 21% of females.
A significantly higher proportion of females noted their income had stayed the same, with 40% stating
this, cf. 31% of males.
Dependents

There were no significant differences between households with and without dependents to this
question.
7.6 Benefits & Allowances
The most popular benefits and allowances amongst respondents included the following: state retirement
pension (32%); Child Benefit (23%); Child Tax Credits (14%); and Council Tax Benefit (14%). Between and
twentieth and a tenth of respondents also claimed the following: Working Tax Credit (8%); Disability Living
Allowance (7%); Incapacity Benefit (6%); Income Support (5%) and Job Seekers Allowance (4%) (figure 7.6).
41
Figure 7.6: Benefits & Allowances (FS9)
Income support
Jobseeker's Allowance (formerly
unemployment benefit or income
support for unemployed people)
Employment and Support Allowance
State Retirement Pension
Incapacity Benefit or Severe Disablement
Allowance
5% 4%
1%
Some other benefit for people with
disabilities (e.g. Industrial Injuries
Benefit)
Working Tax Credit
31%
32%
2%
Child Tax Credit
2%
Child Benefit
7%
Council Tax Benefit
3%
6%
3%
Free school meals
3%
8%
14%
14%
23%
1%
Pension Credit (previously Minimum
Income Guarantee)
Carer's Allowance (formerly Invalid Care
Allowance)
Disability Living Allowance (mobility or
care components)
Attendance Allowance
Some other state benefit
None of these
Findings by sub-group
City



A significantly higher proportion of Liverpool respondents were claiming the following benefits:
 Income Support: 7% in Liverpool cf. 3% in Bristol
 Employment & Support Allowance: 3% in Liverpool; cf. none in Bristol.
 Incapacity Benefit: 8% in Liverpool cf. 4% in Bristol.
 Carer’s Allowance: 4% in Liverpool cf. 2% in Bristol.
A significantly higher proportion of Bristol respondents were claiming the following benefits:
 Child Benefit: 27% cf. 20% in Bristol.
A significantly higher proportion of Bristol respondents were also not claiming any benefits, with 34%
falling into this category, cf. 27% in Liverpool.
42
ACORN Group








Struggling Families (N) had a significantly higher than average proportion of households claiming the
following benefits: Income Support (13%); Jobseekers Allowance (13%); Incapacity Benefit (11%);
Child Tax Credit (24%); Child Benefit (35%); Council Tax Benefit (25%); Free School Meals (9%); Carer’s
Allowance (7%); Disability Living Allowance (13%).
Burdened Singles (O) had a significantly higher than average proportion of households claiming the
following: Income Support (11%); Incapacity Benefit (14%); Working Tax Credit (15%); Council Tax
Benefit (34%); Free School Meals (8%); Disability Living Allowance (12%).
Blue Collar Roots (M) had a significantly higher than average proportion of households claiming the
following: Child Tax Credit (24%).
Post Industrial Families (L) had a significantly higher than average proportion of households claiming
the following: Incapacity Benefit (11%).
Prudent Pensioners (J) had a significantly higher than average proportion of households claiming the
following: State Retirement Pension (61%); Pensions Credit (10%); Attendance Allowance (7%).
Starting Out’s (G) had a significantly higher than average proportion of households claiming Child
Benefit (32%). This group also had a significantly higher than average proportion claiming no benefits
(41%).
Educated Urbanites (E) had a significantly higher than average proportion claiming no benefits (66%).
Affluent Greys (B) had a significantly higher than average proportion of households claiming State
Retirement Pension (59%).
Tenure



A significantly higher proportion of social tenants, cf. owner occupiers and private tenants were
claiming the following benefits: Income support – 16% social tenants, cf. 2% of owner occupiers and 5% of private tenants.
 Incapacity benefit – 16% social tenants, cf. 4% of owner occupiers and 5% of private tenants.
 Council Tax Benefit – 35% social tenants, cf. 8% of Owner Occupiers and 17% of private
tenants.
 Pensions Credit – 9% social tenants, cf. 3% owner occupiers and 2% private tenants.
 Carer’s Allowance – 8% social tenants, cf. 2% owner occupiers and 1% private tenants.
 Disability Living Allowance – 13% social tenants, cf. 5% owner occupiers and 5% private
tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (41%) were claiming state retirement pension, cf.
24% of social tenants and 9% of private renters.
A significantly higher proportion of private tenants (50%) were not claiming any benefits, cf. 12%
social tenants and 29% of owner occupiers. A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers, cf.
social tenants also fell into this category.
Gender

Females were significantly more likely than males to be receiving the following benefits:
 Income support: 6 per cent of females males cf. 3 per cent of males
 Working Tax Credit: 10 per cent of females cf. 5 per cent of males
 Child Tax Credit: 20 per cent of females cf. 8 per cent of males
 Child Benefit: 31 per cent of females cf. 15 per cent of males
 Council Tax Benefit: 18 per cent of females cf. 10 per cent of males
 Free School Meals: 5 per cent of females cf. 2 per cent of males
43

Males were significantly more likely to state they were not receiving any benefits, with 35 per cent of
the male cohort noting this, compared with27 per cent of females
Dependents

A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents were claiming the following benefits:
 11% claiming income support, cf. 2% households without dependents;
 7% claiming JSA, cf. 3% households without dependents;
 22% claiming working tax credits cf. 3% households without dependents;
 50% claiming child tax credits, cf. 1% households without dependents;
 80% claiming child benefit, cf. 2% households without dependents;
 18% claiming council tax benefit, cf. 13% households without dependents;
 12% claiming free school meals, cf. no families without dependents.

A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents were claiming the following
benefits:
 42% claiming state retirement pension, cf. 3% households with dependents;
 5% claiming pension credit, cf. no households with dependents.

A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents also noted ‘none of these’ to this
question (39%), cf. 7% of households with dependents.
7.7 How are households coping?
7.7.1 Compared to other households in their local area?
The majority of respondents (56%) stated they were coping ‘about the same’ as others in their local area, while
around a quarter felt they were coping ‘better’. Just over a tenth stated they were coping ‘worse’ than other
households in their local area (figure 7.7)
44
Figure 7.7: How households are coping relative to others in local area (FS12a)
Findings by sub-group
City

There were no significant differences between Bristol and Liverpool households when asked how they
were coping compared to other households in their local area.
ACORN group


Struggling Families (Group N) and Burdened Singles (Group O) had a significantly higher percentage of
households that stated they were coping worse that other people in their local area, with 22% and 21%
falling into this category, respectively.
Educated Urbanites (E) and Blue Collar Roots (M) had a significantly higher percentage of households
that stated they were coping better than other people in their local area, with 32% and 34% falling
into this category, respectively.
Tenure


A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (26%) and private tenants (24%) felt they were
coping better than others in their local area, cf. 14% of social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (21%) felt they were coping worse than others in
their local area, cf. 9% of owner occupiers and 13% of private tenants.
45
Gender

There were no significant differences between males and females when responding to how their
finances compared to others in their local area.
Dependents


A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents stated they were coping ‘about the
same’ as others in their local area, with 62% of this cohort noting this, cf. 54% of households without
dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents noted they were coping ‘better’
than others in their local area (26%) cf. 19% of households with dependents.
7.7.2 Compared to others in their city?
Two-fifths of respondents felt they were coping ‘about the same’ as other households in their city, while a
third felt they were coping ‘better’. A tenth felt they were coping ‘worse’ than other households in their city
(figure 7.8).
Figure7.8: How households coping relative to others in Bristol/Liverpool (FS12b)
46
Findings by sub-group
City

Significantly more households in Liverpool than Bristol stated that they felt they were coping better
than other people in their City, with nearly two-fifths saying this in Liverpool, compared to over a
quarter in Bristol.
ACORN Group


Three groups had a significantly higher proportion of households than average that believed their
finances were better than others living in their city, namely: Affluent Greys (Group B) (43%),
Flourishing Families (Group C) (56%) and Prudent Penioners (Group J) (48%).
Struggling Families (Group N) (21%) and Burdened Singles (Group O) (25%) had a significantly higher
percentage than average of households that stated they were coping worse that other people in their
city, with over twice as many stating this compared to the survey average.
Tenure


A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (40%) stated they were coping better than others
in their city, cf. 13% of social tenants and 27% of private tenants. Significantly more private tenants,
cf. social tenants, also fell into this category.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (20%) stated they were coping worse than others in
their city, cf. 7% of owner occupiers and 12% of private tenants.
Gender

Significantly more males (36%) than females (30%) stated they were coping better than other people
in their city.
Dependents



A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents noted they were coping ‘better’
than others in their city, with 37% stating this, cf. 22% of households with dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents noted they were coping ‘about the
same’ as other in their city, with 49% stating this cf. 37% of households without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents noted they were coping ‘worse’ than
others in their city, with 13% stating this, cf. 9% of households without dependents.
47
7.7.3 Compared to the rest of the UK?
There was an even divide between the proportion of households who felt that they were coping ‘better’ (36%)
than others in the UK and those that felt they were coping ‘about the same’ (35%). Just over a tenth of
households felt they were coping ‘worse’ than others in the UK, while a sixth stated they ‘didn’t know’ (figure
7.9).
Figure 7.9: How households coping relative to others in the UK (FS12c)
Findings by sub-group
City



Significantly more Bristol households felt they were ‘coping better’ than other households in the UK,
with 46% stating this, cf. 25% in Liverpool.
Significantly more Liverpool households noted they the were coping ‘about the same’, with two-fifths
stating this compared to under a third in Bristol.
Significantly more Liverpool households stated they were coping ‘worse’ than other households in the
UK, with 15% stating this, cf. 9% in Bristol.
48
ACORN Group



A significantly higher proportion than average of Affluent Greys (B) stated they were coping better
than other households in the UK, with 56% of the cohort noting this.
A significantly higher proportion than average of Post Industrial Families (L) and Burdened Singles (O)
stated they were coping ‘worse’ than other UK households, with 20% and 23% noting this,
respectively.
A significantly higher proportion of Struggling Families (N) and Burdened Singles (O) noted they ‘did
not know’ how they were coping in comparison to others in the UK, with 29% and 27% in each cohort
stating this respectively.
Tenure


A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (43%) stated they were coping better than other
households in the UK, cf. 15% social tenants and 31% of private tenants. . Significantly more private
tenants, cf. social tenants, also fell into this category.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (24%) stated they were coping worse than other
people in the UK, cf. 10% owner occupiers and 10% of private tenants.
Gender


Significantly more males (43%) felt they were coping ‘better’ than people in other parts of the UK, cf.
30% of females who noted this.
Significantly more females (40%) felt they were coping ‘about the same’ as people in other parts of
the UK, cf. 30% of males.
Dependents



A significantly higher proportion of households without dependents noted they were coping ‘better’
than others in the UK, with 39% stating this, cf. 27% of those with dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents noted they were coping ‘about the
same’ with 43% stating this, cf. 33% of those without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents noted they were coping ‘worse’ than
others in the UK, with 17% stating this, cf. 10% of households without dependents.
7.8 Organisations households have sought for financial help
When given a choice of organisation where they may have sought financial assistance over the past three
years the majority of respondents, nearly two-thirds, noted ‘none of these’. The most popular choice was an
individuals bank or building society, with over a fifth of the survey cohort stating this. Just over a tenth (12%)
of households had used the Citizens Advice Bureau, while much smaller proportions had used a Welfare Rights
Advisor (3%), a Debt Counsellor/Advisor (3%), Help the Aged (1%), or stated ‘other’ as a source [do we have a
list of what people said for this???] (figure 7.10)
49
Figure 7.10: Organisations households have sought for financial help (FS13)
12%
1%
Citizens' Advice
Bureau (CAB)
3%
Help the Aged
Debt counsellors/
advisors
22%
Your bank/building
society
Welfare rights advisor
64%
Other
3%
None of these
3%
Findings by sub-group
City



A significantly higher proportion of Liverpool respondents had accessed the Citizens Advice Bureau for
financial advice, with 14% choosing this option, cf. 10% in Bristol.
A significantly higher proportion of Bristol respondents had used a Debt Counsellor, with 4% choosing
this, cf. 2% in Liverpool.
A significantly higher proportion of Bristol respondents had been to a bank/building society for advice,
with 25% opting for this, cf. 18% in Liverpool.
ACORN Group




A higher proportion than average of Struggling Families (N) and Burdened Singles (O) had used the
Citizens Advice Bureau for financial advice, with 21% and 20% noting this, respectively.
A higher proportion than average of Educated Urbanites (E) had used a bank/building society for
financial advice, with 38% of this cohort choosing this option.
A higher proportion than average of Struggling Families (N) and Burdened Singles (O) had used a
Welfare Rights Advisor, with 7% and 9% of these cohorts selecting this category, respectively.
Affluent Greys (B) had a significantly higher proportion than average of respondents who noted ‘none
of these’ to this question, with 79% of this cohort falling into this category.
Tenure



A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (22%) and private tenants (20%) had sought advice
from the citizens advice bureau, cf. 7% owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (5%) and private tenants (4%) had sought advice
from a debt counsellor/advisor, cf. 2% of owner occupiers.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (22%) and private tenants (27%) had sought
advice from a bank/building society, cf. 13% of social tenants.
50


A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (10%) had sought advice from a welfare rights
advisor, cf. 1% of owner occupiers and 2% of private tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (68%) had not sought any formal financial advice
or guidance, cf. 60% of social tenants and 53% of private tenants.
Gender

A significantly higher than average proportion of females had used the following two financial advice
routes:
 Citizens Advice Bureau: 15% females, cf. 8% males
 Welfare rights advisor: 4% females, cf. 1 % males.
Dependents



A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents had used the services of the CAB,
with 24% stating this, cf. 7% of households without dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households with dependents had been to a welfare rights advisor
with 6% saying this, cf. 2% of households with no dependents.
A significantly higher proportion of households with no dependents stated ‘none of these’ to this
question, with 67% noting this, cf. 55% of households with dependents.
51
8. Future Outlook
8.1 Household 12 month financial outlook
Respondents were asked a series of questions relating to the short-term financial outlook for their household.
Most felt their financial situation would stay the same over the next twelve months, although over a quarter
felt that it would deteriorate. Less than a fifth of households thought their financial situation would improve
over the next year (figure 8.1).
Figure 8.1: Household 12 Month Financial Outlook (OU1)
Findings by sub-group
City


Significantly more households in Bristol felt their personal financial circumstances would ‘improve’
over the next 12 months, with over a fifth (21%) stating this, compared to 14% in Liverpool.
Liverpool had significantly more households that felt their circumstances would ‘stay the same’, with
54% noting this, compared to 46% in Bristol.
52
ACORN Group


Three ACORN groups had a significantly higher proportion of households than average that believed
their financial circumstances would improve over the next twelve months: Educated Urbanites (Group
E) (32%), Staring Outs (Group G) (29%) and Blue-Collar Roots (Group M) (30%), with each of these
having close to a third of households falling into this category, compared to just under a fifth (18%)
for the overall sample.
There were no other significant differences by ACORN group, although four groups had a slightly
higher than average proportion of households who believed their financial circumstances would
deteriorate over the next twelve months, namely: Affluent Greys (Group B), Flourishing Families
(Group C), Struggling Families (Group N) and Burdened Singles (Group O); each having approximately
a third of households falling into this category, compared to just over a quarter for the sample as a
whole.
Tenure


A significantly higher proportion of private tenants (34%) believed their financial circumstances would
improve over the next 12 months, cf. 14% of owner occupiers and 13% of social tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (34%) and social tenants (34%) believed their
financial position would get worse over the next 12 months, cf. 18% of private tenants.
Gender


Significantly more males (22%) than females (14%) stated that they thought their household’s
financial situation would ‘improve’ over the next 12 months.
Females were significantly more likely to say their finances would ‘stay the same’, with 55% of the
cohort saying this, compared with 44% of males.
Dependents

There were no significant differences between the two cohorts in relation to their outlook on their
personal financial circumstances over the next 12 months.
8.2 Having enough money for retirement
Retired households were more confident than working households of having sufficient funds to live on for
retirement. Over half of working households (56%) were not confident of having sufficient money to live on in
retirement; this compared to just under a fifth of retired households. While two fifths of working households
were confident of having sufficient money in retirement, over two thirds of retired households felt they had
enough money to live on (figures 8.2 and 8.3).
53
Figure 8.2: Confidence of Having Enough Money in Retirement (Working Households) (OU2)
Figure 8.3: Confidence of Having Enough Money in Retirement (Retired Households) (OU3)
54
Findings by sub-group
City


There were no significant differences between employed respondents in Liverpool and Bristol when
asked how confident they were of having enough money for their retirement, with approximately
two-fifths of respondents in both cities noting they were ‘very/fairly confident’ of having enough
money, and 55% in Liverpool and 56% in Bristol stating they were either ‘not very/not at all confident’.
Similarly, there were no significant differences between retired households in both cities when asked
how confident they were of having enough money for their retirement. Over two-thirds of retired
households in both cities stated they were either ‘very or fairly confident’ of having enough money,
with 28%, in both cities, stating they were either ‘not very’ or ‘not at all’ confident of having enough
money for retirement
ACORN group
Employed households:


Of those that were employed Affluent Greys (Group B) had the highest proportion of households that
were ‘very confident’ of having enough money to live on; over a quarter of this group falling into this
category, compared to just over a twentieth for the sample as a whole.
Prudent Pensioners (Group J) had a significantly higher proportion of households who were ‘fairly’
confident of having enough money to live on for retirement, with nearly half (47%) of this group
stating this.
Post Industrial Families (Group L) had a significantly higher percentage of households who noted they
were ‘not very confident’ of having enough money for retirement, with half the cohort falling into this
category, compared to a third of the sample as a whole. Struggling Families (Group N) had a much
higher proportion, than average, of households that were ‘not at all confident’, with two-fifths of this
groups stating this, compared to a fifth for the sample as a whole.
Retired households:

Of the already retired households, there was a significantly higher proportion of Flourishing Families
(Group C) that were ‘very confident’ of having enough money to live on for retirement, with a third of
households from this group falling into this category, compared to a fifth for the sample as a whole.
Significantly more Prudent Pensioners (Group J) were ‘fairly confident’ of having enough money for
retirement, with 65% from this group stating this, compared to 50% for the overall sample.
By contrast, a significantly higher percentage of Burdened Singles (Group O) stated they were ‘not
very confident’ of having enough money for retirement; with close to two-fifths (37%) falling into this
category compared to a fifth for the sample as a whole.
Tenure
Employed households:

Amongst those that were employed, a significantly higher proportion of owner occupiers (45%) stated
they were very/fairly confident of having enough to live on for retirement, cf. 19% of social tenants
(N.B. this was from a small base of 48 respondents) and 34% of private tenants.
A significantly higher proportion of social tenants (75%) stated they were not very/not at all confident
of having enough to live on for retirement, cf. 51% of owner occupiers and 59% of private tenants.
55
Retired households:
The sample was not large enough across all groups to make reliable significance testing for this
question.
Gender
Employed Households:Of those that were employed, male respondents were significantly more confident of having enough money to
live on for retirement, while females were significantly less confident:


Just under half of the male cohort (46%) were either fairly or very confident of having enough money
to live on for retirement, compared with a third (33%) of females.
Just over three-fifths (62%) of females were either not very or not at all confident of having enough
money to live on for retirement, compared with just under a half (48%) of males.
Retired Households:
There were no significant differences between retired males and female respondents about having
enough money to live on for retirement
Dependents
Employed Households:

Amongst employed respondents, a higher proportion of those without dependents stated they were
either ‘very/fairly confident’ of having enough money for retirement, with 45% of this group stating
this, cf. 30% of those with dependents.
A higher proportion of those with dependents stated they were either ‘not very/not at all confident’
of having enough money to live on for retirement, with 63% stating this, cf. 51% of those without
dependents.
Retired Households:
There were insufficient households with dependents to undertake significance testing for this
question.
56
8.3 The impact of the downturn on having enough money for retirement
All respondents currently in employment were asked whether the economic downturn had made them more
or less confident of having enough to live on in retirement. A large majority stated they were ‘less confident’,
with close to two-thirds of the entire cohort stating this. Just over a quarter stated it had made ‘no difference’,
while 2% stated it had made them ‘more confident’, and 7% stated they ‘didn’t know’ (figure 8.4).
Figure 8.4: Impact of downturn on confidence of having enough for retirement (OU4)
Findings by sub-group
City

There were no significant differences between the respondents of the two cities to this question.
ACORN group


Significantly more flourishing families (C) than average stated that the downturn had made them ‘less
confident’ of having enough money for retirement, with 78% of this group stating this.
Significantly more burdened singles (O) stated they ‘didn’t know’ to this question, with a fifth of this
group saying this.
Tenure

There were no significant differences by tenure to this question.
57
Gender

There were no significant differences by gender to this question.
Dependents

There were no significant differences by households with/without dependents to this question.
8.4 Impact of downturn on retirement plans
Employed respondents were asked whether the downturn had changed their retirement plans in any way. A
clear majority answered ‘no’ to this question, with just over two-thirds of the entire cohort stating this. Just
over a quarter stated that the downturn had impacted upon their retirement plans, while 4% stated they
‘didn’t know’ (figure 8.5).
Figure 8.5: Has economic downturn changed plans for retirement (OU5)
Findings by sub-group
City

A significantly higher proportion of Bristol respondents noted the downturn had not made them
change their plans for retirement, with 74% stating this, compared to 62% in Liverpool. Significantly
more Liverpool respondents stated that they ‘did not know’.
58
ACORN group (N.B. the answers to this question came from a small base so should be treated with caution)

Significantly more Affluent Greys (B) stated that the downturn had changed their retirement plans,
with 43% of this group stating this.
Tenure

There were no significant differences to this question by tenure.
Gender

There were no significant differences to this question by gender.
Dependents

A higher proportion of respondents without dependents stated that the economic downturn had
changed their retirement plans, with 31% of this cohort stating this, cf. 22% of those without
dependents.
59
Annex 1
ACORN Group Surveyed
B
C
E
G
H
J
L
M
N
O
General Description of Group Characteristics
Affluent Greys: older empty nesters & retired couples; owner occupiers
with high percentage also owning home outright.
Flourishing Families: wealthy families with mortgages living in suburbs 7
commuter towns.
Educated Urbanities: young, highly qualified, people. Many live in flats in
cities, & most with professional or managerial jobs.
Starting Out: younger adults starting out on their careers (many in 20s and
early 30s), including newly graduated students, young singles in first job
and young families with children under 5.
Secure Families: home owning families living in suburban and semi rural
locations, including those with young children, teenagers and young adults
not yet left home.
Prudent Pensioners: comfortably off retired people. Include many over 75
and the younger retired.
Post-Industrial Families: the traditional blue collar families of twenty years
ago. Now made up of people in office or clerical jobs and shop workers.
Most are traditional families with school aged children living in terraced
housing at cheaper end of housing market. Most are owner occupiers, but
also includes social renters.
Blue Collar Roots: communities where employment is in traditional blue
collar occupations. Predominated by families and retired people, with
some young people and single parents.
Struggling Families: low income families living on traditional low rise
estates. Most living in socially rented accommodation, while some have
bought.
Burdened Singles: characterised by high numbers of single adults,
including single pensioners, young singles and lone parents, living in
socially rented accommodation. Household income is low.
Source: Taken from CACI 2010
60