Scottish Social Attitudes Survey 2019: intra-household distribution of resources

Chapter 4 – Restrictions on everyday living due to a lack of money or resources 

This chapter discusses the findings from a series of questions which examined what restrictions exist on people's everyday living due to a lack of money or resources. SSA 2019 explored two different potential areas of impact: first, the ability to buy essential items, food and shoes; and second, whether people are not able to participate in regular leisure activities, such as going for a night out or having a regular hobby, due to a lack of money or resources.   

The questions were asked of all respondents to SSA, regardless of whether they were living with a partner or not. The five specific questions were:

• Imagine you need to buy a pair of everyday shoes. Do you feel you would be able to buy a new pair right away, or would you need to save up for them?
• During the past 12 months, was there a time when you ate less than you thought you should because of a lack of money or other resources?
• Have you had a day or a night out in the past fortnight that cost money?
• How often do you stay in and not go out because you can't afford it?
• Do you have a regular hobby or leisure activity? If no:
• Is this because you cannot afford to have a regular hobby or leisure activity, or for some other reason?

Ability to buy a new pair of everyday shoes

Nearly four-fifths (78%) of people in Scotland said that they would be able to buy a new pair of everyday shoes right away, with a fifth (20%) saying that they would have to save up first.^[16]

There were a wide range of differences between the subgroups who would have to save up first to buy a new pair of everyday shoes. Younger people were significantly more likely than older people to say they would have to save up for a new pair of everyday shoes. Among those aged 16-34, a third (33%) said they would have to save up for them compared with around one in ten (11%) of those aged 65 and over. There were no significant differences by gender, with almost the same proportion of men (21%) and women (20%) saying they would have to save up rather than being able to buy a new pair of shoes right away. Educational attainment was also a significant determinant of people's ability to buy a pair of everyday shoes without saving. As shown in Table 4.1 below, around three in ten (29%) of both those with no formal educational qualifications and those with Standard Grade level education said they would have to save up for a pair of shoes compared with 16% of those with Higher level education and 15% of those with a degree level education. 

Table 4.1: Whether people are able to buy a pair of everyday shoes right away or would need to save up for them by gender and education

	Buy a new pair right away (%)	Save up for them  (%)	Unweighted bases	Weighted bases
Gender
Men	77	21	474	493
Women	78	20	548	529
Education level
Degree/HE	84	15	440	467
Highers/A-levels	82	16	149	160
Standard Grade/GCSE	70	29	233	230
None	70	29	187	155

Base: all respondents

People with lower household incomes were significantly more likely to have to save up for a pair of shoes than people on higher incomes (38% of those in the lowest income group compared with 5% of those in the highest income group), as were those living in more deprived areas (39% living in the most deprived areas compared with 11% of those in the least deprived areas).^[17] Around three-fifths (59%) of those who said they were struggling or really struggling on their present income said they would have to save up for a pair of shoes compared with fewer than one in ten (8%) of those who were either living comfortably or really comfortably on their present income. Those who were unemployed were more than three times as likely as those in work to have to save up to buy a pair of everyday shoes (49% compared with 14% respectively).

People who are renting (either social or private) were more likely than those who own their home to have to save up for a pair of shoes. Just under half of those renting from a local authority (47%) and over a third of those in other social rented accommodation (37%) or private renters (37%) compared with only one in ten (10%) of those who own their home said they would have to save up for a pair of everyday shoes. Those who are living with a long-term illness or disability were significantly more likely to have to save for a pair of shoes than those living without (26% compared with 17% respectively), as were people who were not living with a partner and married (37%) compared with those who were living with a partner (10%).

Having to go with less food because a lack of income

SSA 2019 asked people whether there was a time in the past 12 months when 'you ate less than they felt you should because of a lack of money or other resources'. 

Although more than eight in ten people (82%) did not have this experience, almost a fifth of people (18%) said they had gone without as much food as they needed because of a lack of money or other resources.^[18]

There were no significant differences between men and women, but younger people were significantly more likely than older people to say they had eaten less than they needed because of a lack of money or other resources. As shown in Table 4.2 below, around three in ten (29%) of those aged 16-34 said they had eaten less because of a lack of money or other resources compared with 7% of those aged 65 and over. 

Table 4.2: During the past 12 months, was there a time when you ate less than you thought you should because of a lack of money or other resources by gender and age?

	Yes (%)	No (%)	Unweighted bases	Weighted bases
Gender
Men	19	81	440	468
Women	18	82	519	504
Age
16-34	29	71	179	296
35-44	17	83	125	146
45-54	16	84	176	167
55-64	16	84	175	155
65+	7	92	302	206

Base: all respondents

Other subgroups who were significantly more likely to say they had eaten less than they thought they should in the previous 12 months because of a lack of money or other resources were:

• People from more deprived areas (34% of people living in the most deprived areas compared with 6% in the least deprived)
• People from low income households (40% of people in the lowest income group compared with 7% on the highest income group)
• Those who were unemployed (48% compared with 15% of those in work)
• People living in rented accommodation (37% of those renting in the social or private sector compared with 8% of those owning their home)
• People who were not living with a partner (30% compared with 11% of people living with a partner)
• People living with a long-term illness or disability (27% compared with 13% among those not living with a long-term illness or disability)

Having a day or night out in the past fortnight

SSA 2019 asked people whether they had been on a day or night out in the past fortnight that cost money. Around two thirds of adults in Scotland had been on a night out in the past fortnight that cost money (65%) compared with just over a third who had not (35%). There was no statistically significant difference by gender, with two-thirds of men (66%) and just under two-thirds of women (64%) saying they had been on a night out in the past fortnight that cost money. 

How people felt about their household income was also related to whether they had been on a day or night out that had cost money in the last fortnight. As shown below in Table 4.3, those who felt they are struggling or really struggling on their present income were around twice as likely to not have been on a day or night out in the past two weeks that cost money than those who felt they are living really comfortably or comfortably on their present income (61% compared with 29% respectively).

Table 4.3: Have you had a day or a night out in the last fortnight that cost money by gender and feelings about household income

	Yes (%)	No (%)	Unweighted bases	Weighted bases
Gender
Men	66	33	474	493
Women	64	36	548	529
Feelings about your household income
Living really comfortably or comfortably on present income	71	29	618	595
Neither	62	37	279	302
Struggling or really struggling on present income	39	61	115	118

Base: all respondents

Those groups who were more likely to have been on a night out in the past fortnight that cost money were:

• Young people (73% of those aged 16-34 compared with 57% of those aged 65 and over)
• Those with higher levels of education (71% of those educated to degree level compared with 47% of those with no formal qualifications)
• People from higher income households (77% of those in the highest income group compared with 43% of those in the lowest income group)
• People living in less deprived areas (80% of those in the least deprived areas compared with 52% of those living in the most deprived areas)
• People in work (74% compared with 39% who are unemployed)
• People who own their home (71% compared with 50% of those renting from a local authority)
• People in a higher socio-economic class^[19] (74% in managerial and professional occupations compared with 53% in routine or semi-routine occupations)
• People not living with a long-term illness or disability (72% compared with 55% living with a long-term illness or disability)

Having to stay at home because of a lack of income 

As well as asking whether people had been on a day or night out in the past fortnight, SSA 2019 asked how often people stay at home and do not go out because they are not able to not afford it, measuring whether staying at home was a choice. 

One in ten people said that they had to stay at home and not go out 'very often' because they could not afford it (10%) whilst a fifth had to do so 'fairly often' (20%). Conversely, around two-fifths of people said they never had to stay in because they could not afford it (39%), with around a third saying they had to stay in 'not very often' (31%). There was no difference between the proportion of men and women responding 'very' or 'fairly often' (30% for both men and women), though men were slightly more likely (43%) than women (36%) to say they never stay at home because they cannot afford it.^[20]

Household income was a significant determinant of a person not going out because they could not afford it. As can be seen in Table 4.4 below, around half (52%) of those in the lowest income group said they 'very often' or 'fairly often' had to stay in because they could not afford it compared with only 16% of people in the highest income group. Conversely, people in the highest income group were significantly more likely to have never had to stay in because of a lack of income compared with those in the lowest income group (48% compared with 26% respectively). Similarly, those in routine or semi-routine occupations were more likely than those in managerial or professional occupations to say they 'very often' or 'fairly often' had to stay in because they could not afford it (46% compared with 17% respectively).

Table 4.4 How often, if at all, do you stay at home and not go out because you can't afford it by gender and household income?

	Very often (%)	Fairly often (%)	Not very often (%)	Not at all (%)	Unweighted bases	Weighted bases
Gender
Men	10	20	27	43	440	468
Women	11	19	34	36	519	504
Household Income
Up to £14,300	29	23	21	26	168	130
Over £14,300 up to £26,000	12	23	31	34	193	166
Over £26,000 up to £44,200	8	22	32	38	175	188
Over £44,200	3	13	37	48	227	282

Base: all respondents

How a person felt about their present income was found to have a significant relationship with their ability to afford to go out. Among those who felt they were struggling or really struggling on their present income over four-fifths (84%) said they had to stay in 'very often' or 'fairly often' because they could not afford it compared with only around one in ten (12%) of those who felt they were living comfortably. By contrast, over half (56%) of the latter group said they never had to stay in because they could not afford it compared with only 2% of those who felt they were struggling or really struggling. Similarly, those living in the most deprived areas were more likely than those in the least deprived areas to state that they had to stay in and not go out 'very often' or 'fairly often' (50% compared with 16% respectively).

Additional groups who were more likely to have had to stay in and not go out because they could not afford it 'very often' or 'fairly often' were:

• Those who were not living with a partner (41% compared with 23% of those who were living with a partner)
• Those with children aged 0 to 17 in the household (37% compared with 26% of those with no children living in the household)
• Those living with a long-term illness or disability (37% compared with 26% of those not living with a long-term illness or disability)
• Those who were either social or private renting (50% compared with 19% of those who owned their home)
• Those who were unemployed (71% compared with 29% who were in work)

Not being able to afford a hobby

SSA 2019 asked whether people took part in a regular hobby or leisure activity. Those who said they did not were then asked whether this was because of a lack of income or for some other reason. 

One in ten people (10%) said they were unable to have a regular hobby or leisure activity because of a lack of income. Men were slightly more likely (13%) than women (8%) to say they could not afford to have a regular hobby, though the difference was not statistically significant. As shown in Figure 4.1 below, differences were seen by whether someone was living with a partner (19% of those not living with a partner compared with 4% of those who were) and whether a person was living with a long-term illness or disability (15% compared with 5% without).  

Base: all respondents

Weighted bases: Long-term illness: Yes=127, No= 129; Living with partner: Yes=158, No=99: Unweighted bases: Long-term illness: Yes=143, No=130; Living with partner: Yes=139, No=135.

In addition, those who are struggling on their present income were significantly more likely than those who are living comfortably on their present income to say that they could not afford to have a regular hobby or leisure activity (30% compared with 1% respectively). And around a fifth (21%) of those in the lowest income group said that they do not have a regular hobby or leisure activity because they are not able to afford it compared with only 2% of those in the highest income group.