Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania

Abstract

This paper reviews the articles of Lithuanian authors on social policy topic and assesses if the asset-based policy topic was ever explored. It briefly analyses the efficiency of current social security policy in Lithuania and social-economical state of inhabitants. It states that in order to reduce poverty and inequality, current social policy should be reformed, and the current income support (or income security) policy should be replaced by the asset-based policy which stresses the development of skills, knowledge and capabilities, promotes savings, investments and building of assets and gives everyone a possibility to become a capital owner. The paper presents results of a representative survey which was aimed to explore Lithuanian inhabitants’ opinion towards the new form of social policy: asset-based policy. It uncovers that vast majority of Lithuania's inhabitants would agree to the implementation of the asset-based policy, based on children's savings accounts.

Full text

This article was downloaded by: [Algimantas Laurinavičius]
On: 19 June 2013, At: 22:50
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Technological and Economic
Development of Economy
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tted21
Asset-based approach to poverty
reduction in Lithuania
Algimantas Laurinavičius a & Birutė Galinienė a
a Vilnius University , Saulėtekio al. 9, LT-10222 , Vilnius ,
Lithuania
To cite this article: Algimantas Laurinavičius & Birutė Galinienė (2013): Asset-based approach
to poverty reduction in Lithuania, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19:2,
203-223
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2013.796609
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-
conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The
accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently
verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,
claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused
arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this
material.

ASSETBASED APPROACH TO POVERTY REDUCTION IN LITHUANIA
Algimantas LAURINAVIČIUS, Birutė GALINIENĖ
Vilnius University, Saulėtekio al. 9, LT-10222 Vilnius, Lithuania
Received 30 December 2010; accepted 30 November 2012
Abstract. is paper reviews the articles of Lithuanian authors on social policy topic and assesses
if the asset-based policy topic was ever explored. It briey analyses the eciency of current social
security policy in Lithuania and social-economical state of inhabitants. It states that in order to
reduce poverty and inequality, current social policy should be reformed, and the current income
support (or income security) policy should be replaced by the asset-based policy which stresses
the development of skills, knowledge and capabilities, promotes savings, investments and building
of assets and gives everyone a possibility to become a capital owner. e paper presents results of a
representative survey which was aimed to explore Lithuanian inhabitants’ opinion towards the new
form of social policy: asset-based policy. It uncovers that vast majority of Lithuania’s inhabitants
would agree to the implementation of the asset-based policy, based on children’s savings accounts.
Keywords: social policy, asset-based policy, inequality of incomes, poverty rate, poverty reduction,
children’s savings accounts, child development accounts, building of assets.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Laurinavičius, A.; Galinienė, B. 2013. Asset-based
approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania, Technological and Economic Development of Economy
19(2): 203–223.
JEL classication: D63, I38.
Introduction
Income inequality and high poverty rate stem the evolution of society and state; they have
a signicant impact on health and education of residents, conditions of housing and delin-
quency rate. Income inequality and wealth disparity cause political discontent that may lead
to serious social upheaval.
Traditional methods that deal with poverty and social inequality focus on issues of income
and consumption, with particular importance given to the idea of progressive taxation and
increase of various benets to the poor. ese actions, called income security or income support
Corresponding author Algimantas Laurinavičius:
E-mail: algimantas.laurinavicius@ef.vu.lt
Copyright © 2013 Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU) Press
http://www.tandfonline.com/TTED
2013 Volume 19(2): 203–223
doi:10.3846/20294913.2013.796609
TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF ECONOMY
ISSN 20294913 print/ISSN 2029-4921 online
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

policy, have to support individuals when they have insucient income, face diculties, whether
temporary or constant ones, including unemployment, health problems, accidents or old age.
Income security policy however is a passive one: it supports individuals in distress; however, it
is not intended to develop their possibilities (Sherraden 2002, 2003). Research works suggest
that transfer of benets to the poor does not reduce a pre-transfer poverty rate.
Modern, post-industrial economy needs active social policy, based on savings, investments
and wealth accumulation, encouraging personal development and providing motivation for
development of one’s knowledge, skills and abilities. Such a new kind of social policy, which
emphasizes long-term possibilities based on accumulated wealth, is called asset-based policy
(Sherraden 1991). It should be noted that asset-based policy does not envisage replacing
current income security policy, which is a core idea of a welfare state. Both policies can
mutually contribute, seeking their goals: benets received maintain consumption, while the
accumulated assets may encourage personal nancial freedom and recovery from poverty.
Various authors have come up with several dierent methods to implement asset-based
policy:
– one-time grant to all individuals reaching majority (Nissan, Le Grand 2000; Ackerman,
Alstott 1998);
– regular monthly benets for all citizens of a country, aer reaching majority (Van
Parijs 2005);
– benets to new-borns: one-time transfer by the government to the child development
account (hereinaer CDA) opened to all new-borns. Withdrawals from this type of
account can be made only when the beneciary reaches majority (Sherraden 1991;
Kelly, Lissauer 2000);
– matched savings accounts for the poor and transfers by the government, that match at
a certain ratio and to a certain limit the personal savings, transferred to these accounts
(Sherraden 1991).
All these policies are characterized by the fact that there is accumulation of funds in an
investment account for a certain period of time (in case an account is opened to a new-born,
the funds are mostly accumulated until he/she reaches majority; if an account is opened to
a low-income individual, funds are mostly accumulated for 2–4 years), using support of the
Government (one-time benets or matching funds); later on, these funds can be used for a
predetermined purpose: mostly for education, housing or starting a small business. Although
these proposals envisage fairly dierent implementation of asset-based policy, all of them
focus on the same goal, i.e. to accumulate a certain amount of asset, escape from regular cycle
of benets, consumption and poverty, encourage development of personal capabilities and
as a result, a better development of entire society and national economy.
It should be noted that the above presented policy has not only supporters but opponents
as well. is policy is oen criticized on these grounds:
–stake-blowing or stake-losing. Some critics say that a one-time lump sum paid to all
individuals reaching majority (should it be paid directly by the Government to young
adult or accumulated in a CDA during 18 years) may be squandered or lost because
of bad investments. is critique can be countered applying some restrictions to the
use of accumulated funds and better nancial education at school;
204 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

–too expensive. Some critics say that the implementation of a universal asset-based
policy providing one time lump sum to all individuals reaching majority is too ex-
pensive to put it into reality. is critique can be countered applying a CDA policy
which is far less expensive;
–it may increase inequality. Some critics say that the implementation of the asset-based
policy may increase (and not decrease) inequality as the accumulated funds in the
accounts which are supplemented by personal savings at the end of the day will be
much bigger than the funds in the accounts which are not supplemented at all. is
critique can be countered applying a progressive asset-based policy (bigger payments
to new-borns who live below poverty rate and matched savings by the Government
to their accounts);
–it is not equitable. Some critics say that the asset-based policy is not equitable: on one
hand, it gives additional resources to the rich and on the other hand, it gives resources
to the persons who do not work. is critique can be countered by saying that univer-
salism is a main feature of the asset-based policy, which makes it dierent from the
current social policy. It’s worth saying that some benets of current social policy are
universal as well (i.e. one-time payment to the parents of a new-born or a one-time
payment to the relatives of a deceased person).
Interest in asset-based welfare became increasingly popular throughout the world in the
last decade of 20th century. Eorts have shied from scientic research to practical implement-
ation of ideas: asset-based policy is tested and implemented in Anglo-Saxon countries (Great
Britain, USA, Canada) and English-speaking countries of Southeast Asia, which historically
inherited or simply try to imitate the model of society and social security of Anglo-Saxon
countries (Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea). However, there is no countries
from Central or Eastern Europe in that list.
is paper seeks to review the articles of Lithuanian authors on social policy topic and
to check if the asset-based policy topic was ever explored. It briey analyses the eciency of
current social security policy in Lithuania and social-economical state of inhabitants. Finally,
this paper seeks to identify the attitude of Lithuanian residents to the new social policy form
so called asset-based policy.
Research object is the possibility to implement the asset-based policy in Lithuania.
Methods of the research are: the analysis of scientic literature, representative survey of
Lithuanian residents, comparative and logical analysis of statistical data, and graphical data
representation.
1. Social policy topic in the articles of Lithuanian authors
e topic of Social Policy is widely analysed in the works of Lithuanian authors: the
works of Lithuanian Social Research Center, Institute of Labor and Social Research
(authors J.Aidukaitė, B. Gruževskis, A. Šileika, R. Zabarauskaitė, D. Skučienė, R. Lazutka,
V.Stankūnienė, I.Blažienėetc.) are of great importance. Aidukaite (2003, 2006a, b, 2009, 2010,
2011) analyses Lithuanian social welfare system, reforms and formation of social security
institutions in a historical (post-Soviet) perspective; Guogis (2000, 2002, 2004a, b, 2005a, b,
205
Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

2006, 2008, 2011, 2012), Guogis and Gruževskis (2010), Skuodis (2009) focus on the models of
Lithuanian social policy and welfare, examines social services and social security; Jasilionienė
(2005), Stankūnienė etal. (2001, 2003, 2005), Šileika and Tamašauskienė (2003) explore the
family policy and benets to families; Lazutka (2003, 2007), Lazutka etal. (2008), Žalimienė
and Lazutka (2009), Žalimienė (2011), Skučienė (2008, 2010), Blažienė (2002), Blažienė and
Zabarauskaitė (2011), Zabarauskaitė and Blažienė (2012) focus on the questions of social
maintenance and social support in Lithuania, analyse welfare of inhabitants and inequality
of income; Pajuodienė and Šileika (2001), Zabarauskaitė (2004, 2005, 2007), Šileika and
Zabarauskaitė (2006, 2009), Šileika etal. (2009) analyse questions of poverty methodology,
measurement, poverty rate, factors of poverty, various social layers and life standards.
Aidukaitė (2010, 2011) analyses social security systems of Central and Eastern European
(hereinaer CEE) countries, and notices some similarities between them, what makes it
possible to distinguish a model of post-communistic social security. e classication of
European social models proposed by Guogis (2011), and typology of social policy models
in the EU countries proposed by Skuodis (2009) also conrm the existence of the individual
social model in the post-Soviet states. Small minimum wages, small expenses for social
security, a large proportion of shadow economy, weak scal state, and higher poverty rate
in comparison to other EU countries are the main similarities of social security systems in
CEE countries. While describing this social policy model, not only its corporative and liberal
elements are mentioned, but also a clientelism, when some privileged groups of residents get
special, additional rights to the benets and services (Guogis 2012). However, Aidukaitė
(2010, 2011) pays attention to the fact that in some CEE countries (e.g. Czech Republic,
Slovenia, Slovakia, and Hungary) the poverty rates and Gini coecients are similar, or even
better than in old Member States of the EU. Research of Skuodis (2009) also proves that Czech
Republic, Slovenia, and Hungary have more similarities with a conservative–corporative
model of continental Europe than with Central and Eastern European social policy model.
ree Baltic States can also be distinguished from the rest of Central and Eastern European
welfare regime. ose countries have the fastest growth of economy and smallest expenses for
social security in the EU (Skuodis 2009). e social indicators of these countries (especially,
indicators of Lithuania and Latvia) are far below the European average.
Many analysed authors noted the growth of income inequality in Lithuania from 1996
till 2011. Income inequality and poverty rate are among the highest in the EU (Lisauskaitė
2010). e growth of income inequality in the last decade was faster than in other EU coun-
tries (Skučienė 2008). Some articles show that the growth of inequality among various social
groups (according to the age, education, etc.), was remarkable even if the general growth of
inequality in Lithuania was not noticed by Eurostat (Šileika etal. 2009).
Aidukaitė (2010, 2011) emphasizes the growth of poverty and inequality in CEE countries
during 18 years period and the fact that it did not stimulate radical reforms in the social
security system in the region. Author suggests that current social security system is unable
to ensure satisfactory prosperity to its citizens when certain social risks occur.
Ineciency of economic policy, unequal distribution of recourses, unequal conditions for
business and other discriminating circumstances are emphasized by some Lithuanian authors
(Lisauskaitė 2010). e research, which was recently made by Zabarauskaitė and Blažienė
206 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

(2012), shows that the income inequality trend is more inuenced by the economic and social
policy than by cycle of economy. As a result, the present social policy and its measures can
be treated as badly selected, when the inequality grows.
Other authors also mention inadequacy of current social policy. From their point of view,
inability of our country to identify the focus of poverty (large families, pensioners, small
farms, etc.) and to liquidate it properly using a correct social policy only strengthens the
growth of income dierences. Not all the payments are distributed in a socially accurate way,
and sometimes it may even inuence the growth of poverty (Misiūnas, Bratčikovienė 2007).
Guogis (2011, 2012) claims that the social insertion, social equality, decrease of poverty
and active social policy (and not the passive one) are the signicant elements of progressive
normative social-policy model, which should be a target for European countries, including
Lithuania. According to the author, the task of social insertion is poorly resolved in Eastern
European Countries, and rstly in Baltic Countries. e author asks if the countries that do
not manage to solve social insertion and social cohesion problems can be treated as welfare
countries, or the ones that try to become such? According to the author, the welfare models can
be attributed with three main models of public administration: traditional – hierarchic, New
Public Management, and New Governance1. e very signicant element of New Governance
is the empowerment, which stresses the importance of active social policy (Guogis, Bitinas
2009). According to Guogis, New Public Management emphasized failure of passive social
policy, when huge social benets did not solve any problems but stigmatized individual groups
of inhabitants. For this reason the New Public Management raised the empowerment as the
main measure of active social policy, which should not be based on benets (or at least for
a long time) and should seek the inclusion and reintegration of excluded groups. But only
New Governance nally solves the task of social reintegration, because this is the main aim
of New Governance (Guogis 2012).
To conclude, the inecient redistributing policy, which is oriented more to the various
payments to the poor, than to the development of their long-term capabilities, can be treated
as one of the most signicant reasons of income inequality and high poverty rate. at is
why, in order to reduce inequality, current social policy should be reformed, and the current
income support (or income security) policy should be replaced by the asset-based policy,
which stresses higher savings, investments and building of assets. Only the new social policy,
based on saving, investments and wealth accumulation may be an appropriate measure against
poverty and social inequality.
e project called Social Problems Monitoring. Implementation of the International Program
of Social Survey, which was carried out starting October 2010, should be mentioned as one of
the empirical researches of social policy application. e attitudes of Lithuania inhabitants to
the social policy, their experience, behaviour, and provisions towards social inequality are the
main research objects of this project. Two inhabitant surveys were conducted in the period
from December 2010 till January 2011 and from November 2011 till December 2011. e
empirical data showed the existence of strong expectations towards public social support in
1 Traditional-hierarchic model is more characteristic to the countries of conservative corporative social welfare
model of Continental Europe, while the New Public Management is typical for Anglo-Saxon countries, which are
close to the ideal model of liberal marginal welfare (Guogis 2012).
207Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

Lithuania. e respondents stressed the importance of state to take care of the sick or disabled
person, in a case of unemployment or retirement (Butkevičienė 2012); 94.8% of inhabitants
claimed the state should be responsible to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.
e evaluation of Social Security is negative; according to the respondents, the majority of
beneciaries abuse the support (49%), the current system does not promote searching for a job
(36%), the system does not promote taking care of yourself (36%), and the beneciaries feel as
second-rate persons (46%). e state actions in the eld of family policy and social security
are evaluated as very weak: 95% of respondents in 2010, and 93% in 2011 did not agree with
the statement that the poverty is under way to reduction, and 93% of respondents in 2010 with
91% respondents in 2011 did not agree with an idea of successful reduction of gap between
the rich and the poor.
To conclude, aer evaluating the theoretical and practical level of analysis of the above
mentioned problem in Lithuania, it could be stated that majority of Lithuanian authors ana-
lyse living standards and poverty indicators, income inequality, its dynamics, reasons and
certain ways to solve these problems. However, the possibility to implement the asset-based
policy in Lithuania and the possible impact of such a policy to inequality and poverty rate
are not yet explored.
2. e social-economic situation in Lithuania
In the period of 2005–2010, the social situation of Lithuanians did not improve: nevertheless
the decline of income inequality and poverty rate was remarkable in 2005–2007, the period
of crisis and post-crisis in 2008–2010 reversed these achievements (Fig. 1).
National economy and residents’ income have strongly increased in 2000–2010: nominal
GDP increased by 107%, average monthly net salary (not adjusted to ination) increased
by 124%. However, not all types of income increased at the same rate: incomes from the
investment in stock market, even taking in consideration a deep recession in 2008–2009,
18.5
19
19.5
20
20.5
21
33.0
33.5
34.0
34.5
35.0
35.5
36.0
36.5
37.0
37.5
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Gini coecient (le axis)Poverty rate, % (right axis)
Fig. 1. Changes of Gini coecient and poverty rate in Lithuania in 2005–2010
(Source: Statistics of Lithuania and authorial calculation)
208 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

increased much more, even 310%2. So if the human capital (our experience, knowledge,
talent, etc.) was treated as an asset generating work-related incomes, we would say that its
value increased 2–3 times in the last decade, when the value of nancial assets invested in
Lithuanian stock market increased more than 4 times in the same period (Laurinavičius
2012a, b, c).
Similar tendencies can be seen analysing dynamics of corporate prot and workers’ salaries
in 2002–2011: Figure 2 illustrates that the prot of Lithuanian companies, despite the deep
recession in 2008–2010, increased by 203%, while the wages increased by only 119%.
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
–5.000
–10.000
2005 20072006 2008 2009 2010
8.144
corporate prot (loss) before taxation, mln. Lt
average monthly net salary, Lt
1.592
2.691
728
200420032002 2011
–6.009
20.236
Fig. 2. Changes of corporate prot before taxation (mln. LT) and average net salary
in Lithuania in 2002–2011 (Source: Statistics of Lithuania and authorial calculations)
is disproportional growth of corporate prot and salaries does not solve the poverty
problems in the country. It increases social tensions and economic dierentiation even more,
because the income of capital owners are rapidly increasing while the lower and the average
layers of population still live in poverty.
e comparison between the changes of the average net salary and stock prices and
between the changes of corporate prot and the average net salary show that it is not the
persons who need support the most that take advantage of national economy growth.
It could be stated, that even though Lithuania’s economy and inhabitants’ income were
increasing rapidly in the last decade, what should have ensured the increase of living standards
for everyone, the change of Gini coecient and poverty rate were not signicant and the gap
between the rich and the poor has not decreased.
One of the main reasons of high income inequality and poverty is that the main livelihood
of the Lithuanian residents comes from work-related incomes (i.e. wages and salaries). As
it was mentioned previously, the growth rate of these incomes was much slower than the
growth of stock market or corporate prot. In addition to that, the proportion of work-related
incomes is relatively small in national incomes (only 40%), if compared to other members
of the EU, e.g. Germany, France or even Finland and Estonia (Fig. 3).
2 Change of OMX Vilnius index in 2000–2010, not adjusted to ination ant paid dividends
209Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

56%
54%
52%
50%
48%
46%
44%
42%
40%
38%
2004 20062005 2007 2008 2010
France
Germany
2009 2011
Finland
Estonia
Lithuania
Fig. 3. Part of GDP consisting of compensations for employees in 2004–2011, %
(Source: Statistics of Lithuania, OECD (2012) and authorial calculations)
us capital owners get the largest piece of country’s economic “pie”: those who benet
from corporate prot, who are able to invest, purchase shares, bonds, mutual funds, may be-
net more from the growth of national economy, while those, who receive only work-related
income (or not receive at all) cannot do this.
at is why, in order to reduce poverty and inequality, current social policy should be
reformed, and the current income support (or income security) policy should be replaced
by the asset-based policy which promotes savings, investments and building of assets and
gives everyone a possibility to become a capital owner. In this way, a wider range of residents
would have the opportunity to take advantage of country’s economic growth.
3. Results of inhabitants’ survey
In order to nd out Lithuania’s inhabitants’ opinion towards the new form of social policy
(asset-based policy) a representative survey was carried out3. 500 respondents from various
regions of the country, of age varying between 16 and 50 years, participated in this survey.
During the survey, the following questions were asked:
1. Would Lithuanians approve the implementation of the asset-based policy which pre-
sumes that an investment accounts (further – child development account, children’s
savings account or CDA) would be opened for all newborns of the country and the
initial deposit would be placed by the Government?
2. What should be the initial deposit of the Government for this policy to be appealing?
3. What sum should be accumulated in CDA, when a child becomes 18 years old, to give
him better opportunities?
4. Should the accumulated funds be used for several pre-established purposes, or should
it be without any restrictions?
3 e survey of inhabitants was carried out on 21–29 January, 2013 by market research company „Eurotela“
210 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

5. Would nancial literacy courses or nancial planning and management lessons be
necessary?
6. Would survey participants agree to regularly supplement their CDAs with a certain
amount of money?
7. Would such policy help to increase the birth rate?
8. How would participants assess various nancing sources of such policy?
e chosen method of survey is Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI)4.
e target population is all inhabitants of Lithuania, under 50 years of age. It was decided
to limit the age of target population to 50 years, because the advantages of presented policy
(accumulation of funds in CDA) is more relevant for those, who are planning and/or are
able to have children. Obviously, older people would only pay to maintain such policy and
the benets could be used by their grandchildren.
Respondents were chosen by randomly generating telephone numbers. All inhabitants
of Lithuania were able to participate in the survey, however, questionnaires of respondents,
older than 50 years, were removed and the survey was processed until 500 questionnaires
of respondents under 50 years of age were collected. us, the selection of respondents was
representative, probabilistic, random and unstratied.
Standardized interview method was used during the survey. e interviewer submitted
standardized closed-ended questions, which were prepared by the authors, and checked
one of the possible answers. Using this method, possibility of quantitative data analysis was
ensured. e period of survey was 21–29 January, 2013.
Statistical error rate of survey answers can be estimated in Figure 4. Since the sample was
composed of 500 elements, error of the answers (depending on the division of answers) may
range between 1.9%–4.4%. I.e. if the average of positive answers to a specic question is 40%,
then it means that it can be stated with the probability of 95%, that the range of real (whole
population’s) answers value is 40% ± 4.3%.
For data analysis, Microso Excel program was used.
Respondents’ characteristics, providing a detailed description of a sample, that is later
used for more precise and more comprehensive analysis of respondent’s opinion, is presented
below (Fig. 5).
4 In the process of CATI research, the received answers are immediately recorded to the computer and the survey
itself is administered by using specic soware, which checks the registered answers. Inappropriate answers cannot
be xed, this way avoiding violations of questionnaire logic and structure integrity.
Fig. 4. Possible statistical error of survey answers
(Source: JSC ”Eurotela“ and authorial computation)
Division of answers 50/50 45/55 40/60 35/65 30/70 25/75 20/80 15/85 10/90 5/95
Sample size
400 4.9% 4.9% 4.8% 4.7% 4.5% 4.2% 3.9% 3.5% 2.9% 2.1%
500 4.4% 4.4% 4.3% 4.2% 4.0% 3.8% 3.5% 3.1% 2.8% 1.9%
600 4.0% 4.0% 3.9% 3.8% 3.7% 3.5% 3.2% 2.9% 2.4% 1.7%
211Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

As it is presented, almost half of the respondents had higher education (for comparison,
in 2011 59% of inhabitants had higher education in the country) and one third had advanced
vocational education or training. 71% of respondents were employees and 9% were business
owners. 73% had a family, 16% were still unmarried. 67% of surveyed persons had 1 or 2chil-
dren, 10% had 3 or more children and 23% did not have any children.
Distribution of respondents, according to their incomes (Fig. 6), was similar to the coun-
try’s average: 21.5% of respondents earned less than 1,000 Lt per month (aer paying taxes),
37% of respondents earned 1,000–2,000 Lt, 20% of respondents earned 2,000–3,000 Lt, and
21% of respondents earned over 3,000 Lt.
Further, a brief analysis of respondents’ answers to the questionnaire is presented.
According to the survey data, it can be stated that more than 76% of Lithuania’s inhabitants
would agree to the implementation of the asset-based policy, based on child development
accounts (Fig. 7)5. It should be noted that this question was given at the end of the survey,
in order to clarify the main features of the policy by prior questions and thus decrease the
number of undecided persons. Apparently, it worked: although the policy, presented in the
questionnaire, is new and specic (what makes it harder to comprehend for people without
economic education), only 15% of respondents have indicated that they needed more in-
formation to make a decision.
5 In the questionnaire, the question was: “Would you approve the implementation of new social policy based on the
new-borns’ investment accounts, in which the initial deposit is made by the Government?”
Fig. 5. Demographic and socio-economic indicators of respondents
(authorial computation, according to the survey data)
2%
22%
31%
45%
Your education?
secondary unnished
secondary
advanced vocational
education
university
Your occupation?
1%
2%
71%
9%
17%
schoolchild
student
employee
businessman
other
Your marital status?
16%
5%
68%
10%
Unmarried
Living together
Married
Divorced
Widower
1%
Do you have any children?
23%
29%
38%
10%
don’t have
1
2
3 or more
212 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

e survey sought to nd out respondents’ attitudes towards the main parameters of
asset-based policy, i.e. how big the initial Governments deposit should be, for this policy
to be attractive and what sum should be accumulated in a CDA aer 18 years, to provide
a child with better opportunities. According to the answers, it can be concluded that large
initial deposits are not necessary for the implementation of asset-based policy: 27.5% of
inhabitants noted that such deposit should account for 3,000–5,000 Lt, 19% of inhabitants
declared for 2,000–3,000 Lt and 14% - for 1,000–2,000 Lt deposit. us, 71% of inhabitants
stated that the idea of child development accounts would be attractive if the initial deposit
reached 5,000 Lt (Fig.8).
Respondents stated that when a child becomes 18 years old, there should be
10,000– 20,000Lt (27%) or 20,000–50,000 Lt (37%) accumulated in a CDA, to provide him
better opportunities (to study, to start a business, to make a down payment for an apartment,
to feel independent, etc.) (Fig. 8).
Collected data enabled to test the hypothesis that the level of inhabitant’s incomes af-
fects their opinion towards the initial Government’s deposit and the sum that should be
Fig. 6. Distribution of respondents according
to their incomes (aer paying taxes) (authorial
computation, according to the survey data)
Fig. 7. Respondents’ attitude towards the
implementation of the asset-based policy (authorial
computation, according to the survey data)
Your monthly income?
21,5%
37%
20%
9%
3%
2%7,5% up to 1,000 Lt
1,000–2,000 Lt
2,000–3,000 Lt
3,000–5,000 Lt
more than 5,000 Lt
don’t have any
refused to provide
Would you agree to the implementation of
the asset-based policy?
76%
5%
15%
4% YES
NO
Not enough information
Don’t have opinion
Fig. 8. Respondents’ opinion towards amount of Government’s initial deposit and the accumulated
sum aer 18 years (authorial computation, according to the survey data)
How much should the Government
deposit to CDA?
10,5%
14%
19%
27,5%
12%
5%
12%
up to 1,000 Lt
1,000–2,000 Lt
2,000–3,000 Lt
3,000–5,000 Lt
5,000–10,000 Lt
more than 10,000 Lt
don’t have opinion
What sum should be accumulated in CDA
so that a child could have better
opportunities?
up to 5,000 Lt
5,000–10,000 Lt
10,000–20,000 Lt
20,000–50,000 Lt
50,000–100,000 Lt
more than 100,000 Lt
don’t have opinion
14,5%
1,5%
5% 13%
27%
2%
37%
213Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

accumulated in a CDA aer 18 years, to make this policy attractive. Since the number of
sample members is large, it is not dicult to reject null hypothesis (with probability of 99%)
that there is no connection between the level of income and opinion towards the initial
payment, and that there is no connection between the level of income and opinion towards
the accumulated sum.6 Even though both connections exist, they are not particularly strong:
in the rst case, the value of Spearman rank correlation coecient is 0.18, and in second
case it is 0.20.7 Although values of correlation coecient are low, they are positive in both
cases, meaning that those inhabitants, who receive lower income, declared for lower initial
Government’s payment to children’s savings account and also lower sums, accumulated in
those accounts aer 18 years.
Vast majority of the respondents (81%) agree that the accumulated funds in children’s
savings account should be used only for several specic, pre-dened purposes (Fig. 9). When
asked to name (without priority) the main purposes8, 98% of surveyed persons specied that
the accumulated funds should be used for studies, also followed by payments for housing,
starting business and healthcare expenses (52%, 41% and 32% accordingly)9.
Respondents were almost unanimous, considering the need of nancial education. An-
swering the question about the need of courses on nancial literacy, or the lessons of nance
planning and management in schools, so that children could gain comprehension about proper
usage of accumulated funds in CDA (when they reach majority and gain access to these funds),
90% of the inhabitants responded positively (Fig. 10). Majority of respondents(60%) believe
6 Testing the connection between level of incomes and opinion towards the initial Government’s payment, critical
value of t statistics with 99% of condence level is 2.63 and calculated value of t statistics is 3.70. Testing the con-
nection between level of incomes and opinion towards the sum, that should be accumulated in CDA aer 18years,
critical value of t statistics is 2.63 and calculated value of t statistics is 4.20.
7 Here and hereinaer, calculating the strength of connection, Spearman’s rank correlation coecients were calcu-
lated (and not Pearson’s correlation coecients), because the survey’s data is accumulated in a rank scale (not in
an interval or ratio scale).
8 Answers to this question were taken from those respondents, whose answer to previous question was “accumulated
funds could be used only for several specic, pre-dened purposes”.
9 Respondents were allowed to name several purposes.
Fig. 9. Respondents’ opinion towards the usage of funds, accumulated in CDA (authorial computation,
according to the survey data)
Should the funds, accumulated in CDA,
be used for pre-dened purposes or without
any restrictions?
81%
17%
2%
For pre-dened
purposes
Without any
restrictions
don’t have opinion
For pre-dened purposes...
98% 52% 41%32% 8% 5% 1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
for studies
payments for housing
starting business
healthcare expenses
for pension
for a car
for holidays
214 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

that nancial education should be organized in secondary schools in a form of compulsory
lessons on nance planning and management. For 30% of surveyed persons, limited range
(e.g. 10 hours or 20 hours) courses on nancial literacy would seem to be enough.
A signicant aspect of CDA policy is parents’ (caretakers) participation in funding the
CDA with their own resources. It is important to note that the majority of Lithuania’s inhab-
itants (81%) would agree to supplement their children’s savings accounts, if the assed-based
policy was implemented (Fig. 11). Only 13% of inhabitants were “against”. Reasons of those
who were “against”: 34% of them would not have enough resources, 23% do not agree10 with
this policy, for 18% of discrepant inhabitants this policy is not relevant, because they have
no children and for the remaining 25% this policy is not relevant, because their children are
already grown-up. Analysis of respondents, who would agree to nance their child devel-
opment accounts with their own resources, has shown that more than half of them (58%)
would be able to contribute 100 Lt or more per month, 28% would fund 50 Lt, and the rest
14% of surveyed persons would be able to contribute 10–25 Lt per month.
10 It should be noted that not all respondents, who answered to this question that they would not nance their
children’s savings account because they do not agree with this policy, had a consistent position. 33% of these re-
spondents answered positively to the question “Would you agree to the new asset-based policy?”, provided at the
end of questionnaire.
Need of nancial education
30%
60%
7% 3% courses on nancial
literacy
lessons of nance
planning and
management in schools
there is no need of
courses and lessons
don’t have opinion
Fig. 10. Respondents’ opinion towards the need of nancial
education (authorial computation, according to the survey data)
81%
6%
34%
23%
18%
25%
13%
YES, I would
contribute regulary
Don’t have opinion
I don’t have enough
resources
I do not agree with
this policy
not relevant, because
I have no chidren
not relevant, because
my children are
already grwn-up
5%
9%
28%
40%
18%
50 Lt/month10 Lt/month
100 Lt/month
25 Lt/month
>100 Lt/month
No, I would not contribute
Would you contribute regulary to your child’s development account?
Fig. 11. Respondents’ opinion towards personal contributions to the CDA (authorial computation,
according to the survey data)
215Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

It is necessary to nd out if higher inhabitants’ income has an impact on their determina-
tion to invest more into to children’s savings account. Since the number of sample members is
large, it is not dicult to reject null hypothesis that there is no connection between the level
of incomes and determination to invest more into children’s savings account, with probability
of 99%11. e value of Spearman rank correlation coecient is 0.38, so it can be stated than
together with increasing income, determination to invest more money to children’s savings
account increases as well.
One of the aims of the survey was to determine if Lithuania’s inhabitants would change
their opinion towards personal contributions to the CDA, if the matched deposits from the
Government were provided (at a ratio 1:1) (hereinaer – Government’s co-investment).
Figure 12 shows that such aspect of policy would not make a signicant change in inhabitants’
behaviour. However, it should be noted that the number of inhabitants, who were intended
to invest smallest sums into their CDA, i.e. 10 Lt/month and 25 Lt/month, would sharply
decrease (3 ppt and 2.2 ppt, respectively), while the number of inhabitants, who were intended
to invest the largest sums into their CDA, i.e. 100 Lt/month, would increase (5.8 ppt). So, it
is probable that the fact, based on empiric analysis in other countries, that persons consider
the limit of Government’s co-investment as a signal of what personal savings level is expected
(and tries to implement it), would arm in Lithuania as well.
Another relevant question – would Government’s co-investment have any signicant
impact on the determination to invest larger sums to CDA for those, who get the smallest
incomes. Chi-squared test shows, that the determination of those inhabitants, who get the
smallest incomes, to invest a certain amount of money to CDA, with or without existence of
Government’s co-investment, are two independent variables12 (the same result was received,
analysing the choices of those, whose salary is 1,000 Lt per month and whose salary is 2,000Lt
per month). So, it is not possible to distinguish the signicant impact of Government’s co-in-
vestment for only those, who get the smallest incomes.
11 A critical value of t statistics with 99% of condence level is 2.63 and a calculated value of t statistics is 7.99.
12 Critical value of χ2 statistics with 95% of condence level is 341 and a calculated value of χ2 statistics is 67.
82%
5%
32%
24%
20%
24%
13%
YES, I would
contribute regulary
Don’t have opinion
I don’t have enough
resources
I do not agree with
this policy
not relevant, because
I have no chidren
not relevant, because
my children are
already grwn-up
2%
6%
27%
41%
24%
50 Lt/month10 Lt/month
100 Lt/month
25 Lt/month
>100 Lt/month
No, I would not contribute
Would you contribute regulary to your child’s development account
with existence of Government’s co-investment (matched deposits)?
Fig. 12. Respondents’ opinion towards personal contributions to the CDA with existence of
Government’s co-investment (authorial computation, according to the survey data)
216 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

During the survey, the possible pronatalist eect of the asset-based policy was tested.
Figure 13 shows that the major part of Lithuania’s inhabitants (58%) believe this policy would
increase country’s birth rate. 28% of respondents believe that determination on number of
children is independent of any social policy. It should be noted that pronatalist eect of this
policy is more assessed by the inhabitants of younger age and women, while among older
people and men, this tendency is lesser. Assessing the fact, that stratum of younger inhab-
itant’s and women determine the country’s population growth rate, the pronatalist eect of
the asset-based policy could be especially important.
During the survey, inhabitants’ opinion towards nancing sources of the new policy was
tested. Before presenting their opinion, some gures about policy’s nancing needs should
be presented. Authorial computation shows, that the implementation of the asset-based
policy - when there is a one-time payment of 3,000 LTL to every new-born in the country
and additional payments of 1,000 LTL when a child reaches 6 years old and 12 years old (and
twice as much to those who live below poverty rate) - would cost 126 million LTL13 the rst
year and would increase to 232 million LTL the last year (Fig. 14). Financing needs would
13 Taking into consideration that there is some 35,000 newborns in Lithuania every year
0
50
100
150
200
250
Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9 Y10Y11 Y12Y13 Y14Y15 Y16Y17 Y18
Benets to new-borns (3,000 LTL)
Benets to twelve-year-olds (1,000 LTL)Benets to six-year-olds (1,000 LTL)
Fig. 14. Financing needs of the asset-based policy, in million LTL (authorial computation)
Could this policy increase a country’s
birth rate ?
58%
28%
9% 5% YES
NO. Determination
on number of children
is indepe ndent of
any social policy
NO. Too small benets
Don’t have opinio n
58%64% 64%57%49% 54%62%
28%23% 25%
26%39% 30%27%
9% 8% 7% 10%9% 10%8%
5% 5% 4% 7% 3% 6% 3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
all16–25
years
26–35
years
36–45
years
46–50
years
menwomen
Fig. 13. Respondents’ opinion towards the eect of CDA for birth rate
(authorial computation, according to the survey data)
217Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

increase because of increase in birth rate (pronatalist eect of the policy) additional payments
to six-year-olds and twelve-year-olds.
us the aim of the last question of the survey was to nd out if the inhabitants would
agree that the Government would nance the asset-based policy:
a) by imposing the real estate tax, obligatory for all Lithuania’s inhabitants;
b) by raising personal income tax by 1 ppt (from 15 to 16 percent);
c) by additional tax revenue, introducing progressive rates of personal income tax;
d) by reducing the present lump-sum payment for a new-born from 1,430 Lt to 1,000 Lt.
According to the survey, inhabitants did not approve any of the nancing sources, how-
ever, the disapproval of the rst three sources was not as great as of the last one (Fig. 15). To
conclude, resistance towards the new taxes would not be as strong as towards a decrease of
certain existing benets. It is worth noting, that the issue of reduction of the present payment
for new-borns was involved to the survey, in order to nd out the reaction of inhabitants to-
wards the refusal of certain benet today, for receiving more in future. In fact, such nancing
source would not satisfy the criterion of adequacy as its incomes would be only 14 mil.Lt
per year, satisfying only 10% of asset-based policy’s nancing needs.
Financing sources of the asset-based policy
41% 44% 46%
24%
59% 56% 54%
76%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
real estate taxraise of
personal
income tax
from 15% to
16%
progressive
rates of
personal
income tax
reduction of
newborn’s
benet
I don’t agree
I agree
Fig. 15. Respondents’ opinion towards the nancing sources of the asset-based policy
(authorial computation, according to the survey data)
Fig. 16. Respondents’ separation to sets, regarding approval/disapproval to nancing sources for the
asset-based policy (authorial computation, according to the survey data)
don’t agree with
real estate tax
don’t agree with
raise of personal
income tax from
15% to 16% don’t agree
with progressive
rates of personal
agree with all
taxes
11%
12% 15%
10%
9%
26%
8%
9%
218 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

Analysing disapproval to the rst three suggested policy nancing sources in more detail,
it appears that the set of respondents is heterogeneous (Fig. 16). Only 26% of the surveyed
people did not approve to any of the three suggested taxes, while 74% of respondents agreed
to at least one of the suggested alternatives (it should be noted that only 15% of respondents
have approved to all three alternatives). In conclusion, despite that no suggested tax, separately,
had support of majority, heterogeneity of those who disapprove implies that compromise, in
respect to a certain tax, could be achieved.
Conclusions
1. e majority of Lithuanian authors analyse living standards and poverty indicators, income
inequality, its dynamics, reasons and certain ways to solve these problems. However, the
possibility to implement the asset-based policy in Lithuania and the possible impact of
such a policy to inequality and poverty rate are not yet explored.
2. e disproportional growth of corporate prot and salaries does not solve the poverty
problems in the country. It even more increases social tensions and economic dierenti-
ation, because the income of capital owner’s is rapidly increasing while the lower and the
average layers of population still live in poverty.
3. One of the main reasons of high income inequality and poverty is that the main livelihood
of the Lithuanian residents comes from work-related incomes (i.e. wages and salaries).
e growth rate of these incomes during the period of 2000–2010 was signicantly slower,
compared to the growth rate of country’s stock market and corporate prot. In addition
to that, the proportion of work-related incomes is relatively small in national income, if
compared to other members of the EU.
4. In order to reduce poverty and inequality, current social policy should be reformed,
and the current income support (or income security) policy should be replaced by the
asset-based policy which stresses development of skills, knowledge and capabilities,
promotes savings, investments and building of assets and gives everyone a possibility to
become a capital owner.
5. Generalizing inhabitants’ survey results, it can be stated that vast majority of Lithuania’s
inhabitants would agree to the implementation of the asset-based policy, based on child
development accounts. e survey also showed:
a) 70% of inhabitants would consider the CDA idea attractive, if the initial Government’s
deposit was not smaller than 5,000 Lt;
b) according to 64% of inhabitants, 10,000–50,000 Lt should be accumulated in CDA
when the child reaches majority, in order to provide him with better opportunities;
c) there is a weak connection between inhabitant’s income and their opinion towards
the initial Government’s deposit and the sum that should be accumulated in the CDA
aer 18 years: inhabitants, who receive lower income, declared for lower initial Gov-
ernment’s payment to children’s savings account as well as lower sums, accumulated
in those accounts aer 18 years;
219
Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

d) vast majority of respondents (81%) agree that the accumulated funds in children’s sa-
vings account should be used only for several specic, pre-dened purposes: for studies
(98%), payments for housing (52%), starting business (41%) and healthcare (32%);
e) respondents have stressed the need of nancial education. Vast majority (60%) of re-
spondents consider that nancial education should be organized in secondary schools
in a form of compulsory lessons on nance planning and management;
f ) vast majority of Lithuania’s inhabitants (81%) would agree to supplement their children’s
savings accounts, if asset-based policy was implemented. More than half of them (58%)
would be able to contribute 100 Lt per month or more. In addition, it was established
that together with increasing income, determination to invest more money to the
children’s savings account increases as well;
g) if the matched deposits from the Government were provided (at a ratio 1:1) the
number of inhabitants, who intended to invest the smallest sums into their CDA, i.e.
10Lt/ month and 25 Lt/month, would sharply decrease (3 ppt and 2.2 ppt, respectively),
while the number of inhabitants, who intended to invest the largest sums into their
CDA, i.e. 100 Lt/month, would increase (5.8 ppt);
h) majority of Lithuania’s inhabitants (58%) consider that such policy would increase birth
rate in the country. Pronatalist eect of the policy is more assessed by the inhabitants
of younger age and women - the stratum that determines the country’s population
growth rate;
i) despite that no suggested tax (real estate tax, raise of personal income tax by 1 ppt or
progressive rates of personal income tax), separately, had support of the majority, het-
erogeneity of those who disapprove (only 26% of the surveyed people did not approve
to any of the three suggested taxes) implies that compromise, in respect to a certain
tax, could be achieved.
References
Ackerman, B.; Alstott, A. 1998. e stakeholder society. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Aidukaite, J. 2003. From universal system of social policy to particularistic? e case of the Baltic States,
Communist and Post-Communist Studies 36(4): 405–426.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2003.09.002
Aidukaite, J. 2006a. e formation of social insurance institutions of the Baltic states in the post-socialist
era, Journal of European Social Policy 16(3): 259–270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0958928706065597
Aidukaite, J. 2006b. Reforming family policy in the Baltic States – the views of the elites, Journal of Com-
munist and Pos t-Communist Studie s 39(1): 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2005.09.004
Aidukaite, J. 2009. Old welfare state theories and new welfare regimes in Eastern Europe: challenges or
implications, Journal of Communist and Post-Communist Studies 42(1): 23–39.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2009.02.004
Aidukaite, J. 2010. Welfare reforms in Central and Eastern Europe: a new type of welfare regime?, Eko-
nomika 89(4): 7–24.
Aidukaite, J. 2011. Welfare reforms and socio-economic trends in the 10 new EU member states of Central
and Eastern Europe, Communist and Post-Communist Studies 44(3): 211–219.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2011.07.005
220 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

Blažienė, I. 2002. Gyventojų pajamos ir jų normalizavimas Lietuvoje: PhD esis. Vilnius: Technika (in
Lithuanian).
Blažienė, I.; Zabarauskaitė, R. 2011. Gyventojų pajamos ir jų nelygybė Lietuvoje, iš Aktualūs socialinės
politikos klausimai. Socialinė raida ir politika, 92–123 (in Lithuanian).
Butkevičienė, E. 2012. Premises for the welfare of society. Public attitudes towards social policy: the role of
state, individual and family in social provision and welfare in Lithuania, Socialiniai mokslai 77(3): 7–16.
Guogis, A. 2000. Socialinės politikos modeliai: monography. Vilnius: Eugrimas (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2002. Dėl Lietuvos socialinės politikos modelio, Politologija 28(4): 76–95 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2004a. Globalizacijos poveikis socialinei apsaugai ir socialinei atskirčiai, Politologija 36(4):
78–109 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2004b. Apie kai kurias socialinės nelygybės formavimosi sąlygas Baltijos šalyse, Filosoja.
Sociologija 15(2): 17–21 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2005a. Socialinė apsauga ir Naujosios viešosios vadybos alternatyva, Socialinis darbas 4(2):
13–19 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2005b. Socialinių paslaugų ekonominiai svertai Lietuvos Savivaldybėse, Socialinis darbas 4(1):
66–73 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2006. Socialinės politikos modeliavimas Europos integracijos procese, Viešoji politika ir ad-
ministravimas 17: 29–41 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2008. Dėl Lietuvos socialinės apsaugos sampratos, Socialinis darbas 7(2): 10–20 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2011. Pažangaus Gerovės normatyvinio modelio paieškos Europos ir Lietuvos kontekste,
Filosoja. Sociologija 22(4): 365–372 (in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A. 2012. Palyginamoji gerovės modelių ir socialinio administravimo analizė, Tiltai 58(1): 31–44
(in Lithuanian).
Guogis, A.; Bitinas, A. 2009. e Lithuanian social policy model – on the direction of development and
guarantees of the model, Central European Political Science Review 10: 36–37.
Guogis, A.; Gruževskis, B. 2010. Ar reikia kitokio Lietuvos visuomenės socialinės raidos modelio?, So-
cialinių mokslų studijos 7(3): 19–35 (in Lithuanian).
Jasilionienė, A. 2005. Šeimos politikos modernizavimas Lietuvoje: prioritetų problema: PhD esis. Vilnius:
Vilnius University (in Lithuanian).
Kelly, G.; Lissauer, R. 2000. Ownership for all. London: IPPR.
Laurinavičius, A. 2012a. Asset-based policy: a new direction for social policy in CEE countries?, VISNIK
141: 7–10.
Laurinavičius, A. 2012b. Asset-based policy: a new measure to reduce poverty and inequality in Baltic
States, QUAERE 2012 2: 448–455.
Laurinavičius, A. 2012c. Asset-based policy: a new measure to reduce poverty and inequality in Baltic
States, Ad Alta: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research 02/02: 57–60.
Lazutka, R. 2003. Gyventojų pajamų nelygybė, Filosoja. Sociologija 14(2): 22–29 (in Lithuanian).
Lazutka, R. 2007. Gerovės kapitalizmo raidos problemos Lietuvoje iš Lietuvos ekonominės padėties Europoje
ir globalioje erdvėje analizė. Vilnius: Ekonomikos tyrimų centras. 61–82 (in Lithuanian).
Lazutka, R.; Žalimienė, L.; Skučienė, D.; Ivaškaitė-Tamošiūnė, V.; Šumskaitė, L. 2008. Socialinė parama
Lietuvoje: remiamųjų padėtis ir paramos rezultatai. Vilnius: Socialinių tyrimų institutas, Socialinės
apsaugos ir darbo ministerija (in Lithuanian).
Lisauskaitė, V. 2010. Lietuvos gyventojų pajamų ir vartojimo diferenciacija, Business: eory and Practice /
Verslas: teorija ir praktika 11(3): 266–278 (in Lithuanian).
Misiūnas, A.; Bratčikovienė, N. 2007. Pajamų nelygybė ir jų normalizavimas, Lietuvos statistikos darbai
46: 112–121 (in Lithuanian).
221Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

Nissan, D.; Le Grand, J. 2000. A capital idea: start-up grants for young people. London: Fabian Society
(in Lithuanian).
OECD. 2012. National accounts of OECD countries. Vol . 2, OECD Publishing.
Pajuodienė, G.; Šileika, A. 2001. Lietuvos gyventojų socialiniai sluoksniai (Viduriniosios klasės beieškant),
Pinigų studijos 5(3): 59–81 (in Lithuanian).
Sherraden, M. 1991. Assets and the poor: a new American welfare policy. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Sherraden, M. 2002. From a social welfare state to a social investment state, in Kober, C.; Paxton, W.
(Eds.). Asset-based welfare and poverty: Exploring the case for and against asset-based welfare policies.
London: Institute for Public Policy Research, 5–8.
Sherraden, M. 2003. Individual accounts in social security: can they be progressive?, International Journal
of Social Welfare 12: 97–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2397.00248
Skučienė, D. 2008. Pajamų nelygybė Lietuvoje, Filosoja. Sociologija 19(4): 22–33 W.
Skučienė, D. 2010. Population welfare in Lithuania for the period 1996–2007, Tiltai 51(2): 49–63.
Skuodis, M. 2009. Naujųjų Europos sąjungos valstybių gerovės režimų vieta tradicinių Europos socialinių
modelių tipologijoje, Filosoja. Sociologija 20(2): 130–143 (in Lithuanian).
Stankūnienė, V.; Eidukienė, V.; Gruževskis, B.; Jančaitytė, R.; Mikalauskaitė, A.; Paluckienė, J. 2001.
Paramos šeimai politika. Samprata ir patyrimas. Vilnius: Lietuvos losojos ir sociologijos institutas
(in Lithuanian).
Stankūnienė, V.; Jasilionienė, A.; Jančaitytė, R. 2005. Šeima, vaikai, šeimos politika: modernėjimo prieštaros.
Vilnius: Socialinių tyrimų institutas (in Lithuanian).
Stankūnienė, V.; Jonkarytė, A.; Mikulionienė, S.; Mitrikas, A. A.; Maslauskaitė, A. 2003. Šeimos revoliucija:
iššūkiai šeimos politikai. Vilnius: Socialinių tyrimų institutas (in Lithuanian).
Šileika, A.; Tamašauskienė, Z. 2003. Piniginė parama šeimoms, jos efektyvumas ir tobulinimo kryptys,
Tiltai 23(2): 45–54 (in Lithuanian).
Šileika, A.; Tamašauskienė, Z.; Zaleskis, E. 2009. Gyvenimo lygis ir jo lyginamoji analizė Lietuvoje ir
kitose Europos Sąjungos šalyse, Socialiniai tyrimai 17(3): 84–95 (in Lithuanian).
Šileika, A.; Zabarauskaitė, R. 2006. Skurdas, jo matavimas ir tendencijos Lietuvoje, Ekonomika 74: 64–78
(in Lithuanian).
Šileika, A.; Zabarauskaitė, R. 2009. Skurdas: metodologijos klausimai ir lygis Lietuvoje, Socialinis darbas
8(1): 17–27 (in Lithuanian).
Van Parijs, P. 2005. Basic income: a simple and powerful idea for the 21st century in Ackerman, B.;
Alstott,A.; Van Parijs P. (Eds.). Redesigning distribution: basic income and stakeholder grants as
cornerstones for an egalitarian capitalism. London: Verso.
Zabarauskaitė, R. 2004. Socialinių – ekonominių rodiklių panaudojimas skurdo bei jo priežasčių tyrimui
Lietuvos regionuose, Verslas, vadyba ir studijos 2004: 253–264 (in Lithuanian).
Zabarauskaitė, R. 2005. Socialiniai – ekonominiai veiksniai, lemiantys skurdo atsiradimą Lietuvoje:
regioninis aspektas, Lietuvos statistikos darbai 42: 22–28 (in Lithuanian).
Zabarauskaitė, R. 2007. Šalies ekonominio augimo bei gyventojų užimtumo įtaka skurdo mažinimui
Lietuvoje, Verslas, vadyba ir studijos 2006: 105–116 (in Lithuanian).
Zabarauskaitė, R.; Blažienė, I. 2012. Income inequality in the context of economic cycles, Business: eory
and Practice / Verslas: teorija ir praktika 13(2): 107–115.
Žalimienė, L. 2011. „Socialiai remtini“, „socialinės rizikos“, „globotiniai“... Kokią visuomenę konstruoja
Lietuvos socialinės paramos politika?, Kultūra ir visuomenė 2(1): 49–60 (in Lithuanian).
Žalimienė, L.; Lazutka, R. 2009. Socialinės globos paslaugos Lietuvoje: nuo hierarchinio prie mišrios
globos ekonomikos modelio, Pinigų studijos 13(2): 22–36 (in Lithuanian).
222 A. Laurinavičius, B. Galinienė. Asset-based approach to poverty reduction in Lithuania
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013

Algimantas LAURINAVIČIUS. Doctoral student at Vilnius University, Faculty of Economics. Master
in Finance, Orleans University, France (2007). Master in Finance, Vilnius University, Lithuania (2008).
Doctoral studies, Vilnius University, Lithuania. Author of about 10 scientic articles and co-author of
1textbook. Research interests: social inequality, asset-based policy, nancial and real estate investment,
strategic management.
Birutė GALINIENĖ. Professor of Vilnius University, Lithuania and Head of the Department of Economic
Policy. She is a board member of Lithuanian Association of Property Evaluation. A member of the ed-
itorial board of scientic journals of Vilnius University “Ekonomika”, “Transformation in Business and
Economics” and of Vilnius Gediminas Technical University “International Journal of Strategic Property
Management”. Author of about 130 scientic articles. Research interests: the problems related to the
improvement of management and valuation system of real estate and business in Lithuania.
223Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 2013, 19(2): 203–223
Downloaded by [Algimantas Laurinaviius] at 22:50 19 June 2013