3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

16
Changing Family Structures and Intergenerational Transfers of Time and Money within Families Helen Feist PhD | Deputy Director Australian Population and Migration Research Centre, University of Adelaide [email protected] www.adelaide.edu.au/apmrc

Upload: ifa20122

Post on 02-Nov-2014

333 views

Category:

Education


3 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 2: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Intergenerational Family Transfers • Intergenerational familial support as social

insurance

• Assistance can take many forms

• Changing societies, changing families and ageing populations are influencing the nature of family support between generations

• Growing number of seniors now and into the future often seen as an economic and service burden…but what is the reality?

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 3: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Changing Population and Family Structures

Proportion of Australian Population Aged Under 15 years and 65 years +, from 1901 to 2006

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1901 1921 1931 1971 1991 1996 2001 2006

Pe

rce

nt

< 15 years 65+ years

• Declining Fertility rate + increasing life expectancy means more older people, fewer younger people

• The rise in the proportion of the older population is also indicative of a rise in lone person households in coming years

• Smaller families mean fewer sources of support for older people, particularly those living alone

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 4: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Outline of the Research • How much time is given to, and received from, different

generations by older people and what is the economic value of this?

• What demographic and socio-economic attributes influence the transfers of time and money between generations?

• How much money is given to, and received from, different generations by older people?

• What motivates the older generation to make time and/or money transfers?

• What are transfers used for by the younger generation?

• Are time and money substituted for each other and what influences the substitution?

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 5: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Respondent Family Typologies

PANKS: Parents and No Kids

KANPS: Kids and No Parents

NoKPS: No Kids or Parents

PAKS: Parents and Kids, or the ‘sandwich generation’

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

PAKS 44%

PANKS 5%

KANPS 47%

NoKPS 4%

Page 6: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Age/Gender of actual sample and weighted sample

0

5

10

15

20

25

50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85+

Pe

rce

nt

Age

Males

W Males

Females

W Females

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 7: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Respondent Household Structures

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Children living with

parents

A step or blended family

A sole parent family

Shared care parenting

Adult living alone

Adult living with partner

and no children

Related adults living

together

Unrelated adults living

together

50-54

65-79

80+

Page 8: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Giving and receiving practical help

• 61% provide practical help to family members

Median amount given,

5 hours/week/household

• 30% receive practical help from family members

Median amount received,

5 hours/week/household

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 9: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Giving or Receiving Time Transfers by Age

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85+

Per

cen

t

Age

Provide practical help

Receive practical help

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 10: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

How Much Time is Given

50 - 64 65 - 74 75+

No amount stated

3.6 9.9 10.0

Up to 5 hours 44.0 42.0 60.1

5 hours or more 52.7 48.6 30.1

Number of hours of practical help given per week by respondent age

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 11: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

69% of males said they give practical help compared to 60% of females

Amount of Time Given by Gender

BUT females who do help give more time than males

How much they give per week...

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

None Up to 5 hours

5 hours or more

Males

Females

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 12: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Who Gives Time by Income

Time given by respondent income

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Up to $40,000

$40,000 - $80,000

$80,000+

5 hours or more

< 5 hours

0

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 13: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Other Factors Influencing Time Transfers

• Children: respondents with no children were the least likely to both give and receive both practical and financial help

• Siblings: a smaller proportion of people with no living siblings provide help to family members compared to other groups but...

• Marital status: Respondents who were separated divorced were more likely to give practical help to other family members but....

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Page 14: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

Summary of Time Given and Received

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Gave Practical Help

Received Practical Help

Proportion of individuals

60.7% 29.2%

Average number of hours/week/person*

7.1 8.0

Annual value/person** $9,658 $10,882

Total value for Australian 50+ population

36.3 Billion 19.4 Billion

* Only those respondents who gave or received ** Based on Australian Average Weekly Earnings hourly rate, $26.16

Page 15: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

The Value of Giving for the Australian Economy

Approximately 36 Billion per annum is given in practical help to other family members by people aged 50 years and over in Australia, this compares to:

• A national government annual expenditure on health in 2010 of $21 billion;

• The national government annual expenditure on education in 2010 of $8.5 billion, or the

• National government annual expenditure on defence in 2010 of $19.4 billion.

It can also be compared to:

• Value of production in the mining industry: $25 billion

• Value of retail industry: $14.6 billion

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide (ABS Cat No. 5206 Table 6)

Page 16: 3 feist ifa feist- 477_intergenerational transfers

For more information regarding this project please contact:

Dr Lisel O’Dwyer

[email protected]

Life Impact | The University of Adelaide

Project Researchers:

Lisel O’Dwyer PhD

Helen Feist PhD

Kelly Parker PhD

Jennifer Buckley PhD

George Tan PhD