The goods considered are vehicles, washing machines and refrigerators. The indigence indicator was preferred as a cut-off partly because the indicator of total monetary poverty could increase the possibility of double counting, given that part of the income poverty measurement that does not correspond to indigence is a proxy for the ability of households to satisfy non-food needs, including some which are already covered by the set of UBN indicators. Moreover, although the fungible nature of income means that revenue cannot be equated with food consumption, the indigence line represents a minimum amount of resources necessary for people to satisfy their basic requirements for daily sustenance, an aspect not captured by the other indicators considered by ECLAC (2013). The reason for this is twofold: first, the indicator of extreme poverty covers a very small percentage of the population in Latin America, and is thus unable to capture income insecurity.