1. Main facts and figures

  • in 2012/13, people from ethnic minority groups (except the Indian group) were more likely than White British people to live in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods in England
  • Pakistani and Bangladeshi people were over 3 times more likely than White British people to live in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods in England
  • Pakistani and Bangladeshi people were over 3 times more likely than White British people to live in the most income-deprived neighbourhoods
  • Pakistani people were more than twice as likely as White British people to live in the most employment-deprived areas
  • Indian people were least likely to be living in both the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods in England and the most employment-deprived neighbourhoods
  • White British people were least likely to be living in the most income-deprived neighbourhoods of England
Things you need to know

This data describes the percentage of people from different ethnic groups living in England’s most deprived neighbourhoods. It does not tell us whether these people were themselves deprived.

Not everyone living in a deprived neighbourhood will be deprived, and many deprived people live in non-deprived areas. However, a concentration of deprived people in a particular neighbourhood means that area is more likely to be deprived.

In this data, England is divided into neighbourhoods by population size (roughly, 1,500 people in each of the 32,844 areas). That means that overall, 10% of the total population of England lives in the bottom decile (10%) of most deprived neighbourhoods.

If 10% of each individual ethnic group also lived in the most deprived decile, it would suggest an even distribution of people living in deprived areas across all ethnic groups. In fact, the data shows that some ethnic groups are disproportionately represented in the bottom decile.

The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) describes relative, not absolute, deprivation: that is, neighbourhoods are compared with each other and placed on a scale from ‘least’ to ‘most’ deprived. Although data using the IMD commonly describes neighbourhoods as falling within ‘the most deprived 10%, 20% or 30%’ of neighbourhoods in England, on the scale from ‘least’ to ‘most’ deprived, there is no definitive cut-off point at which an area becomes ‘deprived’. For this reason, the decision, in this data, to show information for the most deprived 10% of areas is somewhat arbitrary – the data could also have shown information for the most deprived 5%, or some other percentile.

Less deprived areas are not necessarily the most affluent. This is because the IMD is designed to identify aspects of deprivation, not affluence. For example, income deprivation relates to people on low incomes who receive benefits and tax credits. An area with a relatively small proportion of people (or indeed no people) on low incomes may also have relatively few or no people on high incomes. Such an area may be ranked among the least deprived in the country, but it is not necessarily among the most affluent.

The most deprived areas are concentrated in big cities; in areas that have historically had important heavy industry, manufacturing and/or mining sectors; in coastal towns; and in much of east London. This pattern of deprivation has persisted over time.

What the data measures

This data measures the percentage of people from each ethnic group who live in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods in England.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) divides England into small areas known as Lower-layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs). Each LSOA typically contains about 1,500 people and there are 32,844 of them in England. They’re referred to as ‘neighbourhoods’ in the commentary here.

The data uses the English Index of Multiple Deprivation 2015 (IMD) to compare these 32,844 neighbourhoods with each other and place them on a scale from ‘least’ to ‘most’ deprived. For this reason, the IMD is a relative, not an absolute, measure of deprivation.

The IMD is made up of 7 different types of deprivation (also known as ‘indices’ or ‘domains’):

  • income deprivation
  • employment deprivation
  • education, skills and training deprivation
  • health deprivation and disability
  • crime
  • barriers to housing and services
  • living environment deprivation

Map showing the location of the most and least deprived areas of England

The IMD is the most commonly used measure of deprivation. This data uses the IMD to divide England’s 32,844 neighbourhoods into 10 equally sized groups known as ‘deciles’. These deciles range from the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods in England to the least deprived 10%.

The data presented here shows the percentage of people from each ethnic group living in England’s bottom decile of deprivation – that is, the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods.

The data also shows what percentage of each ethnic group lived in:

  • the most income-deprived neighbourhoods in England
  • the most employment-deprived neighbourhoods in England
  • the neighbourhoods which were most deprived in terms of education, skills and training; health and disability; crime; barriers to housing and services; and the living environment
The ethnic categories used in this data

This data uses the standardised ethnic groups based on the 2011 Census.

White:

  • English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British
  • Irish
  • Gypsy, Traveller or Irish Traveller
  • Any other White background

Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups:

  • White and Black Caribbean
  • White and Black African
  • White and Asian
  • Any other Mixed/Multiple ethnic background

Asian/Asian British:

  • Indian
  • Pakistani
  • Bangladeshi
  • Chinese
  • Any other Asian background

Black/African/Caribbean/Black British:

  • African
  • Caribbean
  • Any other Black/African/Caribbean background

Other ethnic group:

  • Arab
  • Any other ethnic group

2. People living in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by ethnicity

Percentage and number of people living in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by ethnicity
Ethnicity % Number
All 10.0 5,278,819
Asian 17.1 710,536
Bangladeshi 27.9 121,811
Chinese 9.7 36,801
Indian 8.3 116,462
Pakistani 30.9 343,535
Asian other 11.2 91,927
Black 19.6 362,280
Black African 20.0 195,782
Black Caribbean 18.1 106,988
Black other 21.4 59,510
Mixed 14.6 173,735
Mixed White/Asian 10.8 36,072
Mixed White/Black African 16.0 25,834
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 18.7 77,640
Mixed other 12.1 34,189
White 8.7 3,940,359
White British 8.6 3,648,558
White Irish 8.9 46,219
White Gypsy/Traveller 12.4 6,819
White other 9.8 238,763
Other 16.8 91,909
Arab 19.0 42,011
Any other 15.2 49,898

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary

This data shows that:

  • among the broad ethnic groups, Black people were most likely to live in the most deprived neighbourhoods, followed by Asian people – 19.6% and 17.1% of these groups lived in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

  • White people were least likely to live in the most deprived neighbourhoods – 8.7% lived in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

  • among the specific ethnic groups, Pakistani and Bangladeshi people were most likely to live in the most deprived neighbourhoods – 30.9% of Pakistani people and 27.9% of Bangladeshi people lived in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

  • Indian and White British people were the least likely to live in the most deprived neighbourhoods – 8.3% and 8.6% respectively lived in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

3. People living in the most income-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by ethnicity

Percentage and number of people living in the most income-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by ethnicity
Ethnicity % Number
All 10.0 5,297,320
Asian 17.3 716,728
Bangladeshi 32.2 140,552
Chinese 9.5 35,986
Indian 9.3 129,336
Pakistani 28.0 311,080
Asian other 12.2 99,774
Black 23.3 429,814
Black African 24.1 235,448
Black Caribbean 21.1 124,702
Black other 25.1 69,664
Mixed 15.4 184,117
Mixed White/Asian 11.0 36,501
Mixed White/Black African 17.4 28,119
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 19.8 82,291
Mixed other 13.1 37,206
White 8.5 3,868,311
White British 8.4 3,571,473
White Irish 9.3 47,905
White Gypsy/Traveller 12.7 6,964
White other 10.0 241,969
Other 17.9 98,350
Arab 19.7 43,440
Any other 16.8 54,910

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary

This data shows that:

  • among the broad ethnic groups, Black people were most likely to live in the most income-deprived neighbourhoods (23.3% lived in the most income-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods) and White people were least likely to (8.5% did so)

  • among the specific ethnic groups, Bangladeshi and Pakistani people were most likely to live in the most income-deprived neighbourhoods – 32.2% and 28.0% respectively lived in the most income-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

  • White British people were least likely to live in the most income-deprived neighbourhoods – 8.4% lived in the most income-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

4. People living in the most employment-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by ethnicity

Percentage and number of people in living in the most employment-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by ethnicity
Ethnicity % Number
All 9.8 5,200,249
Asian 12.9 532,649
Bangladeshi 17.4 76,027
Chinese 7.8 29,478
Indian 6.6 92,159
Pakistani 23.7 263,405
Asian other 8.7 71,580
Black 14.7 271,242
Black African 14.9 145,467
Black Caribbean 13.7 80,967
Black other 16.1 44,808
Mixed 12.5 149,105
Mixed White/Asian 9.3 31,032
Mixed White/Black African 13.2 21,350
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 16.6 69,010
Mixed other 9.8 27,713
White 9.2 4,177,287
White British 9.3 3,944,955
White Irish 7.7 39,714
White Gypsy/Traveller 11.0 6,029
White other 7.7 186,589
Other 12.8 69,966
Arab 15.0 33,123
Any other 11.3 36,843

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary

This data shows that:

  • among the broad ethnic groups, 14.7% of Black people were living in the most employment-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, compared to 12.9% of Asian people, 12.8% of people from the Other ethnic group, 12.5% of people from a Mixed ethnic background and 9.2% of White people

  • among the specific ethnic groups, Pakistani and Bangladeshi people were most likely to live in the most employment-deprived neighbourhoods – 23.7% of Pakistani people and 17.4% of Bangladeshi people lived in the most employment-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

  • Indian people were least likely to live in the most employment-deprived neighbourhoods – 6.6% lived in the most employment-deprived 10% of neighbourhoods

5. People living in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by type of deprivation and ethnicity

Percentage of people living in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods, by type of deprivation and ethnicity
Ethnicity Education, training and skills % Health deprivation and disability % Crime % Barriers to housing & services % Living Environment %
Asian 14% 11% 18% 21% 18%
Bangladeshi 16% 14% 29% 39% 21%
Chinese 7% 11% 17% 17% 22%
Indian 8% 6% 14% 17% 12%
Pakistani 27% 19% 20% 21% 27%
Asian other 8% 8% 17% 19% 15%
Black 10% 11% 27% 30% 16%
Black African 11% 12% 28% 31% 16%
Black Caribbean 8% 9% 25% 28% 16%
Black other 10% 11% 28% 32% 17%
Mixed 11% 11% 18% 15% 15%
Mixed White/Asian 9% 9% 14% 12% 15%
Mixed White/Black African 11% 13% 21% 19% 15%
Mixed White/Black Caribbean 15% 14% 19% 15% 13%
Mixed other 8% 9% 18% 17% 16%
White 9% 10% 8% 9% 9%
White British 10% 10% 8% 8% 9%
White Irish 6% 8% 13% 12% 14%
White Gypsy/Traveller 15% 10% 14% 15% 11%
White other 8% 8% 18% 16% 20%
Other 9% 11% 21% 24% 21%
Arab 10% 14% 20% 26% 25%
Any other 9% 9% 21% 23% 19%

Download table data (CSV) Source data (CSV)

Summary

This data shows that:

  • the Bangladeshi, Black Other, Black African and Black Caribbean ethnic groups were most likely to live in the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods in relation to crime (29%, 28%, 28% and 25% did so respectively)

  • among the broad ethnic groups, Black people were most likely to live in the 10% of neighbourhoods most deprived in relation to crime (27% of this group did so) and barriers to housing and services (30% did so)

  • White people were the least likely to live in the neighbourhoods most deprived in relation to crime (8% of this group did so) and barriers to housing and services (9% did so)

  • among specific ethnic groups, Bangladeshi people were most likely to live in the neighbourhoods most deprived in relation to crime (29% of this group did so) and housing and services (39% did so)

  • among specific ethnic groups, Pakistani people were most likely to live in the 10% of neighbourhoods most deprived in relation to education, skills and training (27% of this group did so), health and disability (19% did so) and the living environment (27% did so)

6. Methodology

The calculation of this measure has been carried out using the English Indices of Deprivation 2015 and the Office of National Statistics’ Census 2011.

The Indices of Deprivation 2015 ranks each of the 32,844 small areas in England known as Lower-layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs). The areas are ranked from the most deprived (ranked 1) to the least deprived (ranked 32,844).

Each LSOA contains about 1,500 people, and the 2011 Census gives the number of people from each ethnic group that live in each LSOA of England.

The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2015 combines information from 7 indices, or ‘domains’, to produce an overall relative measure of deprivation. These domains are combined with the following weights, reflecting their influence on the overall IMD:

  • income deprivation (22.5%)
  • employment deprivation (22.5%)
  • education, skills and training deprivation (13.5%)
  • health deprivation and disability (13.5%)
  • crime (9.3%)
  • barriers to housing and services (9.3%)
  • living environment deprivation (9.3%)

Each of these domains is based on a set of indicators; 37 different indicators are used in the domains listed above. In practice, most indicators in the Indices of Deprivation 2015 relate to the tax year 2012/13.

The Income Deprivation Domain and the Employment Deprivation Domain are the two domains which most heavily influence the overall IMD.

The Income Deprivation Domain measures the percentage of the population in each LSOA experiencing deprivation relating to low income. This includes people who are out of work, and people who are in work but are on low earnings (and who satisfy the respective means tests).

The Employment Deprivation Domain measures the percentage of the working age population in an LSOA who are involuntarily excluded from the labour market. This includes people who would like to work, but can’t because of unemployment, sickness or disability, or caring responsibilities.

The Education, Skills and Training Deprivation Domain measures the lack of attainment and skills in the local population and covers children and young people as well as adults.

The Health Deprivation and Disability Domain measures the risk of premature death and the impairment of quality of life through poor physical or mental health.

The Crime Domain measures the risk of personal and material victimisation at local level.

The Barriers to Housing and Services Domain measures the physical and financial accessibility of housing and local services. (This includes barriers related to the physical proximity of local services, or to access to housing such as affordability and homelessness.)

The Living Environment Deprivation Domain measures the quality of the local environment both ‘indoors’, ie the quality of housing, and ‘outdoors’.

The details of the indicators used to compile the English Indices of Deprivaton 2015, and more information on how the Index of Multiple Deprivation is calculated, can be found in the Technical Report (PDF).

The data downloads provide information on the percentage of people in each ethnic group who lived in the most deprived 10% of LSOAs according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation and each of the 7 individual domains of deprivation. Data is also provided in the downloads on the percentages of people in each ethnic group who live in less deprived areas.

Deprivation ‘deciles’ have been calculated by ranking the 32,844 LSOAs in England from the most deprived to the least deprived, and dividing them into 10 equal groups. These range from the most deprived 10% of small areas nationally to the least deprived 10% of small areas nationally.

Rounding

All percentages are rounded to one decimal place.

Quality and methodology information

7. Data sources

Source

Type of data

Administrative and survey data

Type of statistic

National Statistics

Publisher

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government

Publication frequency

Every 3 to 4 years

Purpose of data source

The English Indices of Deprivation 2015 are published by the Department for Communities and Local Government. They are the official measure of relative deprivation for neighbourhoods in England and are also available at local authority level and other geographies.

National and local organisations use the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), sometimes in conjunction with other data, to distribute funding or target resources to areas. It is widely used across central government to focus programmes on the most deprived areas.

Locally, it is often used as evidence in the development of strategies, to target interventions, and in bids for funding. The voluntary and community sector also uses the IMD to identify areas where people may benefit from the services they provide.

Secondary source

Type of data

Survey data

Type of statistic

National Statistics

Publisher

Office for National Statistics

Publication frequency

Every 10 years

Purpose of data source

The government uses Census data to develop policies, plan and run public services, and allocate funding. The Census also helps illustrate differences between various groups of the population.

8. Download the data

IMD and Domains of Deprivation - Spreadsheet (csv) 279 KB

This file contains the following: decile of deprivation, ethnicity, value, numerator, denominator