IZA Discussion Paper No. 259

This Discussion Paper is issued within the framework of IZA's research area /DERUU0DUNHWVVLQQ 7UDQVLWLRQAny opinions expressed here are those of the author(s) and not those of the institute. Research disseminated by IZA may include views on policy, but the institute itself takes no institutional policy positions. The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent, nonprofit limited liability company (Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung) supported by the Deutsche Post AG. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its research networks, research support, and visitors and doctoral programs. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. The current research program deals with (1) mobility and flexibility of labor markets, (2) internationalization of labor markets and European integration, (3) the welfare state and labor markets, (4) labor markets in transition, (5) the future of work, (6) project evaluation and (7) general labor economics. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. $%675$&7 Ã 3RYHUW\\LQWKHH5XVVLDQ)HGHUDWLRQ * This paper is intended to shed light on the extent of poverty in the Russian Federation. We present estimates of poverty lines and poverty ratios derived from subjective questions used in a during data collection for a large household panel (RUSSET). We estimate poverty using a subjective approach, where the level of the poverty line is derived using the opinion of the individual, rich or poor, on poverty. This approach differs from the objective approach to poverty, which defines poverty according to the opinion of experts. Three subjective poverty lines are presented: one the Financial Satisfaction Poverty Line, two the Leyden Poverty Line, and three the Subjective Well-Being Poverty Line. The first two poverty lines are based on VXEMHFWLYH questions regarding income and economic welfare while the last concept focuses on satisfaction with life as a whole. The results obtained are compared with each other and with results derived using REMHFWLYe' measures and official figures.