lithuania: mother’s employment and children’s poverty · lithuanian household: standard of...

UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre Piazza SS. Annunziata, 12, 50122 Florence, Italy websi te: www.unicef .org/ i rc www.unicef- i rc .org Tel: +39 05520330 Fax: +39 055 2033 220

LITHUANIA: MOTHER’S EMPLOYMENT AND CHILDREN’S POVERTY

Co-ordinator: Vida Stoskute Department of Statistics Lithuania, Vilnius

MONEE Country Analytical Report 2003

The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of UNICEF

2

MOTHER’S EMPLOYMENT AND CHILDREN’S POVERTY

Prepared by:

Aiva Jonkaryte (Institute for Social Research, Demographic Research Centre) Vlada Stankuniene (Institute for Social Research, Demographic Research Centre)

Statistical data used in the report were provided by Statistics Lithuania.

Vilnius 2003

3

CONTENTS

1. Overall situation of employment in Lithuania. Women in labour market…………3 Employment……………………………………………………………………………………………....3 Employment of women by marital status……………………………………………………....5 Unemployment…………………………………………………………………….…………………….6

Earnings……………………………………………………………………………………...……………8

Employee earnings and self-employment income of women by marital status…...9

Factors predetermining differences between male and female employment…….10

Problem of combining employment with family……………………………………..……..10

2. Policies to support mothers in employment and family welfare……………………….11 General trends in the development of the support to families raising children...11 Current tools of the support for families raising children.……………..………………14

Pre-school education in Lithuania…………………………………………….………………..15 3. Lithuanian household: standard of living and poverty. Children’s poverty…..…17

Household income…………………………………………………………………….………………17 Consumption expenditure………………………………………………………………………….18

Poverty level…………………………………………………………………………………………….19 4. Reduction of poverty of families and children……….………………………………………..22 References……………………………………………………………………………………………..…………..24

Annexes……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..25

4

1. Overall situation of employment in Lithuania. Women in labour market In this chapter a short presentation of the general employment and unemployment trends of the population will be made with an emphasis on the problems encountered by women in the labour market. Also the available data on the employment and income differences of women aged 15 – 59, depending on marital status and the number of children are provided. Employment

From the beginning of the last decade of the 20th century owing to intensive restructuring of the Lithuanian economy essential changes in the employment of the population and different negative trends have occurred: unemployment, decreased guarantees of employment, unofficial labour, etc. In the second half of the 1990s it was considered that the situation in the labour market started to stabilise and the prerequisites for an increase in employment were provided, however, in 1999 the number of unemployed considerably increased again (table 1). This was brought about by the economic crisis in Russia, which triggered a recession of Lithuanian economy. However, future development of employment will be mostly conditioned by internal structural changes in employment, which are significantly affected by the need to orientate to the western market and by the increasing competition.

Table 1. Absolute number of employed and unemployed population

in Lithuania, 1997-2002 (thous.)1

Labour force survey data Labour exchange data

Employed Unemployed Unemployed Year

Total Males Females Total Males Females Total Males Females

1997 -- -- -- -- -- -- 104.5 48.9 55.6

1998 -- -- -- -- -- -- 113.7 55.6 58.1

1999 -- -- -- -- -- -- 148.7 76.8 71.9

2000 1397.8 686.5 711.3 273.7 158.5 115.2 204.9 111.6 93.3

2001 1351.8 664.5 687.3 284.0 165.6 118.4 223.5 119.2 104.3

2002 1405.9 707.8 698.1 224.4 121.1 103.3 198.4 99.8 98.6 Source: Data of labour force surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania and of the Lithuanian Labour Exchange.

After the population census in 2001, Statistics Lithuania has started recalculating

socio-demographic indicators of the intercensal period 1989-2001 on the basis of the new data on the population of Lithuania. As far as the economic activity of the population is considered, only indicators of the years 2000-2002 will be provided in the report – Statistics Lithuania have not re-estimated all indicators yet and data of the years before 2000 are incomparable. However, this does not concern data of the Lithuanian Labour Exchange.

According to the labour force survey data of Statistics Lithuania overall employment (of the population aged 15-64) in Lithuania was rather stable in 2000-2002.

1 Owing to differences in the definition of "unemployed" the data of the labour force survey of Statistics Lithuania and of the Lithuanian Labour Exchange do not coincide. The Lithuanian Labour Exchange gives out information on the unemployed registered with the labour exchange, while Statistics Lithuania supplies information on non-working persons seeking employment in different ways.

5

In 2000-2001 it slightly decreased from 58.7% to 57.2%. However, it rose again in 2002 constituting 59.6% (figure 1).

Economic activity and employment of males and females was pursuing similar trends in 2000-2002, though female employment level remained lower in comparison to that of males. In 2000-2001 employment of both men and women experienced a slight drop, but in 2002 a positive change became apparent - among males employment level stood at 62.3%, among females - at 57.1% in 2002 (figure 1).

Labour force activity of women remains lower than that of men. In 2002, labour force activity among women aged 15-64 was 65.7%, among men - 73.2% (Women, 2003).

In terms of age groups employment rate grows the fastest before the age of 30. At the medium age the rate becomes stable and starts declining at pre-retirement. In nearly all the age groups female employment rate is lower than male. The two employment rates become the closest in the medium-age groups (table 2). Older females are poorly employed: in 2002 employment level of women aged 50-64 years was 47%, while of the same-age group men it reached about 58%. It must be noted that at the present moment employment at an older age is very difficult both for men and women.

Figure 1. Employment rate, 2000-2002 (%)2

58.7

57.2

59.660.1

58.5

62.3

57.5

55.9

57.1

52

54

56

58

60

62

64

2000 2001 2002

Total Males Females

Source: Data of labour force surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania. A significant difference between male and female employment is seen in different spheres of economic activity. According to the 2002 labour force survey data of Statistics Lithuania in 2002 65% of all employed women were occupied in service sector (health care, social work, education, etc.), 19.5% - in industry, and 14.2% - in agriculture, forestry. Males were distributed by economic sector more evenly. In 2002 44.5% men were employed in service sector, 34.1% - in industry (processing industry, electricity, gas and water supply, etc.) and construction, 21.4% - in agriculture, forestry, etc. In all the spheres, more men than women work in management. For example, women comprise 86% of the teaching staff in secondary schools, while the majority of school principals (62%) are men. Women comprise 52% of all employees, and only 38% of employers and self-employed. Women make the major proportion of the staff of the public sector – 64%, whereas men dominate in the private sector by 58%. However

2 Employment rate of the population aged 15-64 years.

6

the data of small and medium business surveys show that the number of female managers of private business is increasing. At present female managers of small and medium businesses make about 40% (Women, 2003). The proportion of women is much lower in the Seimas (Parliament) (women make 11%), Government (women ministers and vice ministers, secretary ministers and advisors to the minister - 28%), local government (21%) (Women, 2003).

Table 2. Rate of male and female labour force activity, employment and unemployment

by age group, 2002 (%)

Labour force activity rate

Employment rate

Unemployment rate Year

Males Females Males Females Males Females 15-19 8.6 4.9 5.0 3.3 41.8 32.2 20-24 64.5 51.7 51.4 40.4 20.2 21.9 25-29 90.4 82.8 77.0 72.9 14.9 11.9 30-34 92.2 86.0 80.6 76.5 12.6 11.1 35-39 93.1 88.1 81.1 76.1 12.9 13.6 40-44 92.2 90.7 79.1 80.2 14.1 11.5 45-49 88.3 87.8 77.3 76.1 12.5 13.3 50-54 83.9 83.3 70.1 71.2 16.5 14.5 55-59 78.4 57.3 67.1 51.2 14.4 10.8 60-64 40.3 17.5 34.9 17.4 13.4 0.4 65+ 7.3 3.0 7.3 2.9 -- 0.5

Source: Data of labour force survey conducted by Statistics Lithuania. Employment of women by marital status

Information on the marital status of employed population is scarce in Lithuania. The present analysis of the workforce resources in the labour market in terms of marital status will be based on the 2001 population census data. The 2001 population census registered 65.4 thous. households in Lithuania including lone parent and children under 18. Of these, 61 thous. (93%) were lone mother and children households (Household, 2003). 158.3 thous. children aged under 18 live in single-parent families (148.1 thous. – only with mother, 10.2 thous. – only with father). 660.7 thous. children live with both parents (615.7 thous. children live with married parents and 45 thous. – with parents in consensual union).

Table 3. Absolute number of men and women aged 15-59 by marital status and age of youngest child, 2001

Single women Married/cohabiting

women Total

women Total men

No children 322319 124577 446896 559378 Youngest child aged 0-2 years 16618 77695 94313 77118 Youngest child aged 3-6 years 21184 88062 109246 87300 Youngest child aged 7-14 years 50458 177085 227543 171582 Any child aged 0-14 years 88260 342842 431102 336000 Total 410579 467419 877998 895378

Source: The 2001 population census data (information of Statistics Lithuania).

The census shows that in 2001 single women made 47% of the 15-59–age female group (table 3). In splitting this age group into smaller groups it is seen that up to

7

the age of 40 the proportion of single women decreases with every younger age group, after 40 it starts increasing. The lowest proportion of single women is seen in the age group of 30-39 (29%) (Annex 1).

Among all the single women aged 15-59, only 21% have children under 15 years. Naturally, there are clear differences between different age groups. Most single childless females are found at the beginning and end of childbearing age, i.e. in the age groups of 15-19 and 50-59 years (correspondingly 99% and 95%). Fewest women (44%) without children aged 14 years and under are among the single women of 30-39 years (Annex 1).

Naturally, the age of the children changes together with that of the woman. In the 19-29 year age group of single women the youngest child is usually under 6 years, and among older women - 7-14 years (Annex 1).

Most women (94%) with children under 15 years are among married or cohabiting women aged 30-39 (Annex 1).

Among married or cohabiting women of 15-19 years the age of the youngest child most frequently is 0-2 years, of 20-29 years - 0-6 years, and from 30 years - 7-14 years (Annex 1). According to the 2001 census data, employment of 15-59 aged married or cohabiting women is more than one and a half times higher than of single women (correspondingly 62% and 38.7%) and remains so independent of the age of youngest child (Table 4). Employment of women with children under 3 is lower independent of the marital status3. Women with older children, both married or cohabiting and single, are more active on the labour market. (Table 4).

Table 4. Men and women (aged 15–59) in paid employment or self-employment by marital status and age of youngest child, 2001 (%)

Single women Married women Total women Total men

No children 29.4 54.6 36.4 34.8 Youngest child aged 0-2 years 31.8 48.8 45.8 70.5 Youngest child aged 3-6 years 53.7 62.9 61.1 72.7 Youngest child aged 7-14 years 66.4 69.9 69.1 72.4 Any child aged 0-14 years 56.9 63.3 62.0 72.0 Total 38.7 62.0 51.9 51.3

Source: The 2001 population census data (information of Statistics Lithuania). Employment rate among married and cohabiting women is higher in comparison to single women in all the age groups (Annex 2). Married and cohabiting women are, evidently, more inclined to enter labour market, especially if they have children. Unemployment The economic crisis, which started in Russia at the end of 1998 had a considerable impact by slowing down development of Lithuanian economy and even predetermining a recession. Rise of unemployment began in 1999, too. In 2001 unemployment reached the peak of the independence period – according to the data of labour exchange, unemployment rate was 13.2%. In 2002 unemployment dropped by nearly 2% and made 11.4% (Figure 2). Labour force survey conducted by Statistics

3 Parental leave is granted to parents until the child is one year of age. Where before the childbirth mother had a permanent job she is listed as employed.

8

Lithuania in 2002 as usually showed a higher unemployment rate than registered by the Lithuanian Labour Exchange – 14.6% (Figure 3). In recent years, increasingly more unemployed people apply to the labour exchange in search of a job, thus the data on unemployment rates supplied by labour force surveys and labour exchange are getting closer (Motiekaitiene, 2001). According to the labour exchange, female unemployment rate has been lower than male for several years now, but the difference is not large. In recent years, however, the gap between male and female unemployment has been gradually closing. In 2002 male unemployment was 11.4%, female – 11.3% (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Unemployment rate in Lithuania according to labour exchange, 1997-2002 (%)

5.96.4

8.4

11.512.5

11.312.3

8.5

6.25.6

13.211.4

6.3 6.6

8.2

10.811.9

11.3

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Total Males Females

Figure 3. Unemployment rate according to labour force surveys of Statistics Lithuania,

2000-2002 (%) 4

16.4 17.4

13.8

18.819.9

14.613.914.7

12.9

0

5

10

15

20

25

2000 2001 2002

Total Males Females

Labour force survey data showed that in 2002, 224 thous. persons were seeking

a job; of these 46% were women (Table 1). In 2002 198.4 thous. unemployed were registered with labour exchange; of these nearly a half were women (49.7%). However, in comparison to 2001, the number of registered unemployed was lower by 25.1 thous. (11%) (Table 1).

4 Unemployment rate is applied on the population aged 15 and over.

9

Earnings In terms of education women are more advantaged on the labour market. The 2001 population survey shows that 34% women (15-59 year age group - 45%) and 29% men had university and college education (Population, 2002). The proportion of university-educated women among employed women was much higher than among women in general – correspondingly 23% and 14% (Labour, 2003). This shows that better educated women are more active economically and have more opportunities to realise their intention to work. Men, however, have more opportunities to engage in sectors and positions that are better paid although their education is lower. Men are more numerous in legislative bodies, senior officials and managers, among qualified industry workers, while more women are engaged as professionals and office workers (Women, 2003).

For an illustration of differences between male and female earnings in different sectors of economy several examples could be provided. For example, in health and social work women constituted 83% of all the staff in 2002, and the average monthly gross earnings of women was 857 LTL, while in construction where male workforce made about 88%, the average monthly gross earnings of women was 996 LTL (Statistical, 2003). The differences between male and female wages were the most pronounced in the spheres that bring in the highest income. For example, in 2002 in financial intermediation average monthly gross earnings of women was 2043 LTL, and of men – 3323 LTL, i.e. higher by one and a half times. By the way, women make the majority of the staff in financial intermediation (65%) (Statistical, 2003).

Table 5. Average monthly gross earnings by economic sector and sex, 1994–19995

Average monthly gross earnings, LTL

Total Public sector Private sector

Total Males Females Total Males Females Total Males Females 1994

April 332.4 391.7 285.7 320.9 381.1 281.6 366.1 412.8 303.0

July 374.1 449.7 313.3 360.2 437.6 309.0 374.2 449.9 313.3 October 400.9 479.0 338.0 390.2 471.4 337.0 428.9 492.4 341.7

1995 January 416.8 494.2 355.9 413.0 499.5 356.7 427.8 483.5 352.8 July 518.1 619.8 436.0 511.5 628.4 437.7 533.1 606.8 430.1

1996 April 611.5 708.9 534.1 628.7 756.5 545.9 564.0 619.5 487.1 October 680.0 800.4 581.4 671.2 813.2 580.8 702.4 779.6 583.7

1997 April 798.7 920.0 684.6 807.9 969.7 679.8 784.3 857.1 694.2 October 923.4 1067.2 787.8 928.4 1119.4 781.7 915.4 1002.5 800.6

1998 April 1014.2 1152.2 886.2 1047.0 1234.1 908.9 963.3 1058.3 841.7 October 1078.1 1223.1 943.9 1095.1 1280.1 961.3 1053.4 1162.1 910.0

1999 April 1071.3 1181.6 968.0 1142.2 1321.5 1020.4 988.0 1066.2 881.3

Source: Data were calculated on the basis of the survey of wages and salaries of manual and non-manual workers by qualification groups, conducted by Statistics Lithuania.

In evaluating the general trends of changes in earnings it could be noted that average monthly earnings have been gradually rising in recent years. A comparison of

5 1994–1996, excluding industry, agricultural enterprises, electric power production and distribution. 1997–1999, excluding agricultural enterprises. Individual (personal) enterprises were not included in the survey.

10

average monthly wages of April 1994 and 1999 shows that both male and female gross earnings rose about three times. In 2000-2002 average male gross earnings rose by 6.3%, female – by 5.6% and in 2002 it made correspondingly 1243.8 LTL and 1009.5 LTL. As it can be seen average monthly gross earnings of women make only 81% of average earnings of men in 2002. Male and female wages differences in public sector are more pronounced than in private sector. In 2002 average monthly gross earnings of men in public sector was 34% higher than of women, in private sector this difference made 18% (tables 5 and 6).

Table 6. Average monthly gross earnings by economic sector and sex, 2000-2002 6

Average monthly gross earnings, LTL

2000 2001 2002 Economy sector Total Males Females Total Males Females Total Males Females

Total 1056.1 1170.4 955.8 1065.7 1181.0 961.8 1118.9 1243.8 1009.5 Public sector 1094.6 1272.2 979.8 1103.5 1287.5 988.7 1142.7 1360.0 1018.1 Private sector 1011.4 1086.6 917.9 1028.5 1109.3 924.5 1096.8 1173.8 997.9

Source: Data are calculated on the basis of the quarterly sample survey on wages and salaries, conducted by Statistics Lithuania. Employee earnings and self-employment income of women by marital status The results of labour force survey show that marital status has an effect on wages. In the 15-59 year group of single women average monthly wages of women in 2002 was much higher than of married and cohabiting women (correspondingly 636.4 LTL and 607.8 LTL). Differences to the disadvantage of married and cohabiting women persist even when an analysis of women with no children is made (Table 7).

Table 7. Average earnings of men and women (aged 15-59) in paid employment by marital status and age of youngest child, 2002 (LTL)7

Single women Married women Total women Total men

No children 654.7 623.5 635.2 729.8 Youngest child aged 0-2 years

562.5 629.0 619.3 686.9

Youngest child aged 3-6 years

581.5 606.4 601.7 723.4

Youngest child aged 7-14 years

584.4 572.4 574.7 735.0

Any child aged 0-14 years 581.4 589.8 588.2 720.7 Total 636.4 607.8 616.4 726.1

Source: Data of labour force survey conducted by Statistics Lithuania. The largest differences of average earnings among the women of different marital status are seen in the youngest 15-19 and 20-29 year age groups and in the pre-retirement group of 50-59 years. In terms of earnings single women are in an advantageous position (Annex 3).

6 In 2000 the survey pattern was changed, therefore the data from 1994-1999 and from 2000-2002 are not comparable. Individual (personal) enterprises were not included in the survey. 7 For the survey a random selection of respondents from the population register is made. Selection covers all cities and districts, also, some rural areas. In 2002, 50891 persons were surveyed. In previous years children were not included in the survey therefore this kind of information is unavailable.

11

Differences of earnings by the number of children in the groups of the best childbearing age - 20-29 and 30-39 years – also present some interest. According to the data of labour force survey 20-29 year married or cohabiting women with children under 15 of age earn less than single mothers. Most likely, strenuous living conditions and a necessity to take care of child single-handed make single women seek a better-paid job or even several sources of income. But in the age group of 30-39 years the situation of married or cohabiting mothers is better than of single mothers, and their average earnings are higher (Annex 3). It is not easy to explain such a shift of circumstances. Maybe, younger-aged single mothers receive more support from their parents therefore they may become more actively involved in professional activity and earn more money? Factors predetermining differences between male and female employment

In Lithuania the legal basis required to ensure sex equality has been essentially provided. Article 29 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania establishing that "a person may not have his rights restricted in any way, or be granted any privileges, on the basis of his or her sex, race, nationality, language, origin, social status, religion, convictions, or opinions" provides a basis prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of sex. The provision of the Constitution, which defines the contents, procedure and conditions of implementation of human rights, has been specified by a Law on Equal Opportunities adopted in 1998, which ensures implementation of equal rights of women and men.

Although the Lithuanian legislation provides equal rights and opportunities both for men and women, in actual life the principles of gender equality are quite frequently abused.

Employment and career opportunities for women are held back by a rather viable stereotyped attitude on social roles of males and females. Notwithstanding the rapidly spreading liberal attitudes that stress egalitarian sex relations in family and society, the behavior of men and women themselves as well as the behavior towards them is infrequently based on patriarchal attitudes. The society still lacks an adequate perception for the need of gender equality.

Situation of women and a secondary role on the labour market is significantly predetermined by the behaviour of employers based on the traditional attitude to male and female roles (Kanopien÷, 1999). Men can find a job easier for it is considered that the man must provide for the family, while childcare and household work are traditionally considered to be primary responsibilities of the woman. Since childcare and domestic chores usually are the task of the woman, family becomes an obstacle for her in looking for a job or pursuing a career. Economic considerations of the employers and concern about increasing competition govern their decision not to employ or renew the contract with a woman who has or may have children. Meanwhile for the man family serves as an indicator of his maturity and dedication. Professional capabilities of women and men are also given stereotyped evaluation. Men are considered as more competent, precise, able to make fast and rational decisions. Consequently, women are mostly hired for lower qualification tasks in low prestige and poorly paid economic sectors, and their skills and qualification are not adequately made use of. Problem of combining employment with family

In more advanced social welfare states, providing favourable conditions for parents (mother and father) to combine childcare with professional activity becomes one of the key trends in the family policy (Avramov, Cliquet, 2003; Stankūnien÷ et al.,

12

2001). In Lithuania, part-time work, flexible working hours and other measures providing opportunities to combine parenthood with economic activity are still underdeveloped.

According to the data of the labour force survey carried out by the Statistics Lithuania, in 2002 only 12.3% women were working part-time (men – 9.4%). In their majority (62%) they were women aged 25-49 years (Women, 2003).

However rapid socio-economic reforms of the recent years and impressive demographic changes of the Lithuanian family, the increasing variety of family structure and living patterns undoubtedly call for the improvement of family support system and provision of favourable work-family arrangements that meet the changing needs of the family.

Today participation in professional activity and pursuance of career become more and more important for young women. As the Acceptance of Population-Related Policies Survey8 has shown, only an insignificant proportion of women would prefer staying at home with children.

The respondents of the Acceptance of Population-Related Policies Survey were asked to indicate one of the proposed ways of combining work and procreational behavior, which, in their opinion would be ideal for themselves and their spouses (partners). The answers of the respondents revealed not only the attitudes towards the number of children in the family, but also the most acceptable mode of work for father and mother in families with children. The most frequently mentioned number of wanted children in the family is two children. Most men consider that with children to take care of working full-time is an ideal pattern, while women would frequently prefer not working but staying at home with children while they are small. However, in each younger cohort, the proportion of women who prefer to stay with children while they are small is lower. Second in popularity among women is the version of working part-time. This option was particularly supported by the working (part- or full-time) women of the youngest generation (18-34 years).

Thus after a certain period of staying at home with children a significant proportion of the women would like to have an opportunity of part-time employment. This way they would be gradually involved in professional activity and would have more time to spare for their children than working full-time.

Provision of conditions for working part-time is not only important as one of the ways of preserving a job for mothers with children, but also as a means of improving life quality of women and placating a conflict of between daily commitments to work and family. 2. Policies to support mothers in employment and family welfare

General trends in the development of the support to families raising children

The system of support to mothers who combine child rearing with employment is an integral part of family policy. In Lithuania, elaboration of family policy started at the end of 1980s – beginning of 1990s, when the country entered a new stage of its historical development, i.e. a national rebirth started, the country regained independence and stepped on the way towards market economy and democratic society. During the Soviet time, only a few of the tools of family-related policy were used, and they were aimed at specific goals, too. One of these was to ensure full employment of women in 8 In Lithuania, the Acceptance of Population-Related Policies Survey (as part of the second round of the European Comparative Survey on the Acceptance of Population-Related Policies (PPA2)) was carried out in 2001. 1400 respondents (613 males and 787 females), representing 18-75 year age groups, were surveyed.

13

the public sector. Thus already during the national rebirth of the late 1980s, development of family policy was initiated, with a development of its conceptual basics.

As early as 1989, the length of paid childcare leave was extended. Simultaneously, conceptual basics of family policy were prepared. The basic ideas of the developed two sub-programmes Fertility and Family and Occupational and Home Conditions of Women to the “Programme of the Lithuanian Population” were to assist families with children (with an objective of extending the possibilities for parents to combine parental duties with professional activities) and to provide the opportunity of choice between different types of care for small children (at home or in pre-school institutions). The development of the system of family benefits and improvement of family planning services was also foreseen. Although the developed Programme provided the conceptual basics of the policy to support family with children, however, the Programme was never implemented. Among other things this was also conditioned by the attitude towards the family and woman’s place in the society of the Conservative Party, which assumed power at the beginning of the 1990s. At that time, the Government actions in developing family policy were governed by the ideology of preserving a traditional patriarchal family. In pursuing the ideology, the policy of granting different benefits to families with a view to encourage mothers to stay at home with the children, was launched. In parallel to that, pre-school institutions were closed down. In the years 1990-1992, a lot of different benefits were provided and received by numerous families, with considerable funds allocated for the purpose (Stankuniene, 2001). In accordance with the predominant patriarchal ideology of the time, women were supposed to go back home and become “nurturers of the family hearth”, while men had the obligation to work and serve as breadwinners for the family. But the ideas of such a family policy had few prospects in a society engulfed by a deep economic crisis, and they were at variance with the pattern of a two-salary-family and of a high employment rate of women, the practices consolidated already during the Soviet time. Meanwhile, setting up small benefits was, all in all, a “morsel” policy, which had no perceptible effect upon family welfare. The realities of life also proved the importance of day care institutions in the general system of support to families with children.

In 1993-1994, a reorganisation of family policy began. The attitudes towards pre-school establishments started changing and the renaissance of those institutions began (for more see chapter “Pre-school education in Lithuania” ). In 1994, new legislation on support to family was adopted. The benefit system for families was considerably rationalised; multiple small benefits were forsaken. In 1994, after passing the Law on the Amendment of the Law on Social Insurance of the Republic of Lithuania, the paid maternal leaves9 were extended; a paid parental leave until the child reaches one year of age and benefits for families while the child is aged from 1 to 3 years were introduced. In 1994 the Law on State Benefits for the Family of the Republic of Lithuania was passed. The law establishes that the following state benefits for families rearing children will be paid: pregnancy benefit for student women (not insured by state social insurance); family benefits for parents not covered by insurance until the child gets three years of age; childbirth benefit; orphan's stipend; the benefit to a child whose father is in compulsory military service; settlement benefit for orphans and children without parental care. The majority of the above benefits are still valid until now.

9 The terms for granting the allowances below and the amounts thereof are discussed in chapter “Current tools of the support for families raising children”.

14

In 1994, national and international initiatives (International Year of the Family, the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development, Cairo, etc.) gave rise to a new stage in the development of Lithuanian family policy. The elaboration of the Concept of Family Policy in Lithuania began and was later approved by the Government in 1996 (Family, 1996). The main ideas and patterns of the Concept were close to the family policy of the social democratic welfare states.

The Concept stressed that an improvement of conditions for parental occupation, for housing acquisition, and for benefits formed the priority trends of the policy. The family policy also envisaged actions towards the consolidation of equal rights for men and women, family planning, maternal and infant health, the development of care facilities for young children, the protection of children, etc. (Family, 1996; Children, 1998).

The main objectives articulated in the Concept of Family Policy in the first place answered social demands for family welfare and were only slightly coloured by demographic goals.

The main objectives of the Concept of Family Policy in Lithuania were: - to promote the establishment of a democratic and autonomous family based

on mutual care and responsibility of family members and ensuring the replacement of generations;

- to assist families in the fulfilment of their functions, to provide conditions which strengthen families, and to assure their comprehensive functioning;

- to stimulate families to perform the functions which are required for the smooth functioning of family and society (Family, 1996).

But in autumn 1996 the Conservative Party came to power and formed a new government; therefore, the Concept of Family Policy that was closer to social democratic ideas, did no longer serve as the basis for the subsequent decisions on family policy. No new strategy of the support to families raising children was adopted either. In 1996-1999 corrections with respect to certain benefits in use were made and several new benefits were introduced: in 1997 a benefit for large families (with three or more children); in 1998 a benefit for families fostering children.

In summing up a short overview of the development of the Lithuanian family policy, a conclusion could be made that the development of family policy, which was only started in the late 1980s, has been rather controversial, variable and has had no definite strategy. The ideas and motives dominating in the formation of a scheme of support to families in Lithuania have changed frequently. Depending on the ruling party (and the governments changed often) the motives of family policy varied from strictly conservative with an emphasis on patriarchal attitudes concerning family life and role of women in the society to social democratic ones propagating the ideas of equal gender rights and opportunities. But notwithstanding the ideas prevalent in the government, policymakers have been voicing the ideas of the liberal social policy more and more explicitly, at the same time pushing the decision of the problems to the sphere of the market. This is even true of the government formed by parties with a social democratic orientation. Such an inconsistency in the development of support for family is in fact typical for post-communist countries.

15

Current tools of the support for families raising children Framework of assistance measures for families with children. Family policy is

still being developed in Lithuania. Although a system of measures is already in place, they are insufficiently integrated. The range of assistance offered to families raising children includes:

1. Benefits. 2. The family dimension in the fiscal system (e.g.: tax relief on income, rebates

on childcare expenses, compensation for expenses on lodgings and utilities). 3. Family and labour market policy (e.g.: protection of pregnant women,

maternity leave, parental leave, child care leave, day care, etc.). 4. Preferential health care services. 5. Preferential terms to buy or rent housing. 6. Discounts to use public transport (for children, schoolchildren, students, etc.). Benefits and leaves for parents raising children. Benefits and leaves schemes

for families raising children are visible elements of the family policy in Lithuania. The benefits and leaves include: 1) Pregnancy and maternity leaves and benefits:

▪ Mothers covered by state social insurance are granted a 126 day (in case of complicated delivery – 140) maternity leave (70 days before delivery and 56, and with complicated delivery 70 days after the delivery). When on maternity leave, mothers covered by social insurance receive a benefit equal to their wages.

▪ Mothers not covered by state social insurance and student mothers are paid pregnancy benefit (70 before delivery, at 75 percent of minimum subsistence level (MSL) per month);

2) Parental leave and parental benefit: ▪ Mother or father covered by state social insurance that stays at home with the

child are granted parental leave until the child gets one year of age. A parent on leave is paid a parental benefit at 60% of his/her wages;

3) Family (children) benefits: ▪ Families raising children and when the parents are entitled (are socially insured)

to a parental leave until the child gets 1 year of age, receive a benefit at 75 per cent of MSL while the child is from 1 to 3 years. Besides, if during this period the mother does not work and stays at home with the child, she may not be dismissed from work on the initiative of the employer.

▪ Where the parents are not covered by state social insurance, a family benefit is paid from the moment of child’s birth up to the age of 3 years (75 percent of MSL per month);

4) Benefit for large families: ▪ A benefit for large families (with three or more children) is paid for the third

child up to 16 years of age (for students, until they finish secondary school) at 100 percent of the MSL, for the fourth – 130%, for the fifth – 160% (i.e. with every subsequent child the benefit is increased 30%). The benefit for three children is paid if income for one family member is less than three sizes of state-supported incomes. The benefit for the fourth and every other child is paid independent of the family's income.

5) Childbirth benefit: ▪ Childbirth benefit for the family is equal to 6 times the MSL. It is paid for each

child born.

16

6) Foster child benefit:

▪ Foster child benefit is equal to 4 times the MSL, payable to foster parents until the child reaches 16 years of age (for students, 18 years of age).

7) Benefit for the children of men in compulsory military service:

▪ The benefit to a child whose father is on compulsory military service is 1.5 times the MSL.

8) Orphan's stipends:

▪ Orphan's stipend is paid at 4 MSL per month and is granted to children who are in vocational training for the first time.

9) Settlement benefit orphans and children left without parental care:

▪ Settlement grants for orphans and children left without parental care is paid at 50 times the MSL. The money is used for the acquisition of a dwelling or for settlement.

Pre-school education in Lithuania

After WWII, during the soviet period, the main trend of pre-school education development in Lithuania and also in other socialist was an expansion of the network of nurseries and kindergartens. Lithuania was one of the countries that sent most of its young children to the nurseries and kindergartens in the 1980 already. However the soviet-period development of pre-school care facilities was mainly aimed at quantity aspects only.

As is seen from Figure 4, the number of children in pre-school care facilities was constantly growing throughout the soviet period. Immediately before the national rebirth the nursery and kindergarten attendance had reached the peak in Lithuania. In 1987, 64 per cent of pre-school age children were attending nurseries and kindergartens: kindergartens were attended by over 71 per cent of all the children aged 3-6 years, and nurseries by about half (46 per cent) of 1-2 year age infants.

. Figure 4. Proportion of children attending nurseries-kindergartens from all children of

respective age (%)

2002

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

3 and older

under 3

Sources: Lietuvos, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994; Svietimas, 1999; Svietimas, 2003.

17

In 1990 when Lithuania regained independence and economic transformation was started, a deep economic crisis struck the country, unemployment started rising and the collective farm system collapsed, most of the nurseries and kindergartens were closed down, especially in rural areas. Closing of nurseries was also conditioned by social rejection of the children upbringing system promoted during the soviet period.

In 1989-1993, (figure 4) the proportion of children aged 1-6 years that attended pre-school care dropped from 64 per cent to 21 per cent (city - from 74 to 29 per cent, village - from 34 to as low as 6 per cent), in the group under 3 years – from 44 per cent to only 6 per cent (city from 54 to 9 per cent, village from 26 to 1 per cent), in the age group of over 3 years - from 71 to 30 per cent (city from 82 to 41 per cent, village from 38 to 8 per cent). Closing of nurseries-kindergartens, especially in the villages (in 1990-1991 more than 500 nurseries-kindergartens were closed), put considerable restrictions on the behaviour of families in choosing children upbringing forms. Mothers were made to stay at home with the child.

Later, from the mid-1990s, reorganisation of the pre-school care system started. The role of nurseries and kindergartens in the upbringing of children was changing. The patriarchal attitude that had been very popular at the end of 1980 – beginning of 1990s and had propagated the ideal of woman-mother and an exceptional obligation of woman to raise the children at home, was heard less and less frequently. The restructuring of day care services started, the work style of the institutions was changed: a strictly scheduled operation style of nurseries and kindergartens was forsaken, the children were free to stay a wanted number of days and hours at the facilities, the programs of individual upbringing were introduced. Market relations started stimulating a diversity of pre-school institutions. Private day care institutions were established. All this made day care services more attractive, and fought a negative attitude towards the institutions shaped during the soviet period, increasing a need for their services. The day care system acquired not only new contents, but has been expanding since the mid-1990s, too. In 2002 the institutions were already attended by 45 per cent of 1-6 year age children (16.5 per cent at 1-2 years and 58.5 per cent at 3 years and over) (Svietimas, 2003). In cities, correspondingly by age, pre-school institutions were attended by 61.5 per cent, 24.0 per cent and 78.6 per cent of children (Svietimas, 2003). Overpopulation of these institutions and lack of vacancies is becoming a problem again. At the present moment, several strategies on the upbringing and development attitudes of children, strongly dependent on the age of children, are vigorously promoted. The youngest children – infants under one year, are actually taken care of by the parents only (mother, mostly), children aged 1-2 are frequently taken care of by mother, but in this group over one tenth attend nurseries, especially two year-olds. Of late, hiring a nanny for this age children is becoming more common. And a considerable proportion of 3-5 year-olds and a majority of 6 year-olds attend different types of pre-school institutions (in 2002 55.3 per cent of this age children were attending pre-school establishments, 17.4 per cent – preparatory classes to schooling in general schools and 14.6 per cent – the first grade of primary education; Svietimas, 2003). Pre-school education reform which expresses a definite position on the important role of kindergartens in preparing children for school and a rather high employment rate of women result in the present situation where the majority of pre-school age children are reared in day care institutions. This is in fact a universal trend, which, disregarding the development of upbringing forms and the inconsistency of attitudes, becomes consolidated in Lithuania and shapes a need for the development of pre-school upbringing services.

18

3. Lithuanian household: standard of living and poverty. Children’s poverty In this chapter, on the basis of household budget surveys carried out by Statistics Lithuania, an overview of changing trends in income and expenditure of the Lithuanian population and the dynamics of relative poverty level will be made. Against the general background of living conditions the circumstances of family and children will be revealed. Household income The results of the household budget surveys carried out by Statistics Lithuania show that from 1996 income trends have been quite positive. Only the years 2000 and 2001 were less favorable in terms of welfare rise. In 2002 average disposable income (in cash and in kind) per household member constituted 422 LTL a month. Income in cash made 360 LTL or 85% of all disposable income, and the remaining portion was income in kind. In comparison with 2001, disposable income rose by 3%. Since consumption prices rose by 0.3%, actual income rose by 2.7% (Deveikyte, 2003). In comparison to 1996, all disposable income rose by 23% (table 8).

Table 8. Average disposable income per household member per month (LTL)

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Total disposable income 326.7 368.9 422.5 428.0 415.4 409.5 422.0

Disposable income in cash 253.0 297.0 350.4 360.4 349.4 345.5 360.0

Disposable income in kind 73.7 71.9 72.1 67.6 66.0 64.0 62.0

Source: Data of household budget surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania. Earned income consisting of income from employment and income from self-employment is the main source of disposable income. According to the household budget survey data earned income made 65% of all disposable income in 2002 (income in cash - 67%, in kind - 54%), different pensions and benefits - 25%, other income (alimony, family support, lottery prizes, etc.) - 10% (Deveikyte, 2003).

Table 9. Average monthly disposable income per household member by type of household, (LTL)

Single person Single person

with children under 18

Couple without children

Couple with children under

18

Other households


Other households

without children

1996 396.4 257.4 384.3 321.6 275.4 350.9 1999 553.6 323.2 542.4 392.3 344.0 460.8 2000 544.4 376.7 507.6 383.8 333.8 442.5 2001 538.2 334.5 523.1 374.5 327.7 432.6 2002 528.8 347.6 555.5 379.3 333.2 448.6

Source: Data of household budget surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania. The level and structure of disposable income are strongly affected by household composition. In 2002, the largest disposable income was enjoyed by single persons (529 LTL) and couples with no children (556 LTL per person). The lowest income was registered in the so-called other households with children (the group covers households

19

with adult and under-age children, households containing several married couples with children, etc.) (333 LTL) and households consisting of one adult person (mother in most cases) and children under 18 years of age (348 LTL) (Table 9). As it can be seen, in the households with children (especially with one parent only) disposable income remains at a much lower level than in households with no children. Besides, in these households, alimony, family support and income like that made one third of all the income (Household, 2003). Household welfare is strongly dependent on the number of children in the household. The more children there are in the household, the lower disposable income is available per household member. In 2002 the households with one child under 18 had the disposable income per person equal to the average of the country, while in the households with three and more children the indicator only reached 57% of average disposable income of the country (241 LTL). Households with different number of children have different income structure by source. In the households with one or two children earned income was the main source of income, while in the households with three and more children the share of earned income was considerably lower and the income from all types of allowances was higher (Household, 2003). Consumption expenditure In 2002 consumption expenditure per household member in Lithuania stood at 416 LTL per month. Expenditure on food made 40.7% of all consumption expenditure. In grouping the members of the surveyed households by the rate of consumption expenditure it was found out that consumption expenditure of the wealthiest 10% was 8.2 times higher than of the poorest 10%. In comparison with the previous year, i.e. 2001, consumption expenditure rose in all deciles. The difference in expenditure for food was 3.4 times, although the lowest income decile set aside for food 64% of all consumption expenses, while the highest income group - 26% (Deveikyte, 2003).

Table 10. Monthly consumption expenditure per household member (LTL)

Households with children under 18 All households with 1

child with 2

children with 3 and more

children

Households without children

1996 348.1 352.8 298.8 221.8 410.3 2000 404.4 400.3 344.1 236.3 478.3 2001 411.4 409.0 336.9 253.0 492.4 2002 416.0 403.4 342.2 239.7 494.6

Source: Data of household budget surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania. Population income is, actually, the decisive factor predetermining personal consumption therefore it is natural for households with lower income to have lower consumption expenses. In households with children under 18 consumption expenditure is considerably lower than the average for the country. The difference becomes pronounced if a comparison of this group with the consumption expenditure of households without children is made. The larger the number of children in the household, the lower average monthly consumption expenditure per person is. Closest to the national average consumption expenditure are the households with one child. The situation in the households with three and more children is the most complicated; they can put aside for consumption the least. Furthermore, in comparison with 2001, consumption expenditure of the group dropped the most - by 5%. For household with one child consumption expenses in 2002 made 97% of the average for the country, with

20

two children - 82%, and three and more children - 58% (Table 10). Whereas households with one child spent 38% on foodstuffs and non-alcoholic beverages, the households with three and more children spent 49% (Household, 2003). Thus income and consumption expenditure plane shows that the households with three and more children and the households composed of lone parent with children under 18 are among the households of the most troubled circumstances of Lithuania. Poverty level Poverty is a many-sided phenomenon manifesting itself not only by the shortage of subsistence means, but also by inability to participate in social, cultural, civic life of the society. Furthermore, it is relative and gradual. The development level of the society and the socio-economic background of the moment set the poverty line to the scale of living conditions (Lazutka, 2001). As in other post-communist countries the definition of poverty is quite new to Lithuania. In the Lithuanian Poverty Reduction Strategy poverty is defined as absence of income and other resources (material, cultural, social) ensuring living standards acceptable to the public in Lithuania (Poverty, 2000).

In analyzing the prevalence of poverty and in modeling measures of socio-economic strategy, relative poverty line is used. Relative poverty line equals 50% of the average consumption expenditure for respective year calculated through use of scale of equivalence, where the first household member is given 1, and each subsequent adult person – 0.7, while each child under 15 years of age - 0.5. For example, a family of four persons with two children equals to 2.7 equivalent consumer (see Note 1). According to the 2002 household survey data, 16.6% (about 575 thous.) of the population had consumption expenditure that made less than 50% of the average consumption expenditure. Inequality that had been decreasing until 1999, since the year 2000 has started increasing again in the country (table 11). The highest relative poverty level was registered in rural areas, and the lowest in major cities.

Table 11. Lines of relative poverty and dynamics of poverty level, 1996-2002 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Relative poverty line, equal to 50% of average consumption expenditure for an equivalent consumer of the respective year (LTL)

226.2

248.6

276.7

274.6

260.0

264.2

266.2

Relative poverty level (%) 18.0 16.6 16.0 15.8 16.0 16.5 16.6 Relative poverty line, equal to 50% of average consumption expenditure of 1996, indexed by price index for an equivalent consumer (LTL)

226.2

246.4

258.9

261.0

263.6

267.0

267.8

Relative poverty level (%) 18.0 16.3 13.2 13.1 16.6 17.0 16.8 Source: Data of household budget surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania. Consumption expenditure of a significant proportion of the population was ranging close to the poverty line. It means that even slight shifts of the poverty line have a perceptible effect on poverty level. 8% of the country population had consumption expenditure in the interval of 40% and 50% of the average consumption expenditure (from 213 LTL to 266 LTL per equivalent consumer per month), and 10% of the population were in the interval of 50% to 60% of the average consumption expenditure (from 266 LTL to 306 LTL) (Deveikyte, 2003).

21

Poverty gap was 24%, i.e. in the households that were below the relative poverty line the average consumption expenditure per equivalent consumer was 24% lower than the poverty line and made 203 LTL (Deveikyte, 2003). Since the value of relative poverty line depends on the average living standard, relative poverty level changes together with the changing living standard. To eliminate the impact of the changing average living standard, in the analysis of the changing poverty level, the poverty line equaling to 50% of the average consumption expenditure of 1996 indexed by price index of consumer prices are used. After rejection of the general change of consumption level, the proportion of the population living in relative poverty in 2002 decreased by 0.2 percentage point as compared to 2001 (table 11). Nearly half of the households surveyed in the framework of the 2002 household budget survey had females for household heads, however only 36% of these women were living in matrimony. The rest were widows, single, divorced or separated from the spouse, i.e. were living in the households without males eligible for household heads. Relative poverty level in the households headed by women was higher than in the households headed by men (Table 12).

Table 12. Household poverty level by sex of household head (%)

Household head

Male Female 1997 14.6 19.7 1998 13.9 19.0 1999 14.1 18.3 2000 14.0 18.6 2001 14.6 19.2 2002 14.7 19.1

Source: Data of household budget surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania. The differences of relative poverty level were predetermined not only by the sex of household head, but also by the differences in household composition (Table 13). The greatest poverty level was found in the households with under-age children. In these households the level of relative power was higher than the average level for the country (19.5%) (Deveikyte, 2003).

Table 13. Poverty level in different type households (%)

Type of household

Single person

Single adult with children

under 18

Couple with children

Other households


Couple without children

Other households

without children

1997 13.4 21.6 15.0 24.0 11.2 14.2 1998 13.1 22.0 13.9 24.8 8.7 15.3 1999 13.1 25.7 15.5 21.9 8.6 14.7 2000 12.8 14.9 15.3 24.1 9.9 15.2 2001 13.7 16.1 15.1 25.0 8.8 18.2 2002 12.9 23.2 14.9 27.2 8.6 15.6

Source: Data of household budget surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania.

Calculation of relative poverty level in different type households revealed that it was the highest in the so-called other types of households with children and in

22

households inhabited by one adult person with children under 18 years of age (Table 13). (True, a significant increase of the level of relative poverty in single parent families in 2002 could have been brought about by coincidence – households of this type made only 4% of all the surveyed households). Poverty level depends greatly on the number of children in the family. Families with many children are subjected to extreme poverty. One in six of those who are impoverished were living in a household with three and more underage children (8% of all surveyed). In 2002 poverty level of households with only one child under 18 was 15.8%, with two children - 18.6%, meanwhile with three and more children - 34.5% (table 14).

Table 14. Poverty level in households by number of children (%)

Of these:

All households with children under 18 with 1 child with 2 children

with 3 and more children

1997 18.8 14.9 16.0 37.2 1998 18.1 14.1 17.0 34.5 1999 18.2 12.4 18.7 35.4 2000 18.1 12.9 17.7 37.6 2001 18.4 15.2 17.3 33.0 2002 19.5 15.8 18.6 34.5


Among the relatively impoverished the relative proportion of children is higher than in other population groups. Children under 18 years made 24% of all household members and 29% of members in impoverished households (Deveikyte, 2003). A scrutiny of distribution of relative poverty level in different age groups shows that pre-school age children find themselves in poverty more frequently than others (Table 15).

Table 15. Level of relative poverty by age groups and household composition by sex and age of household members (%)

Relative poverty level All households All household members 16.6 100.0 Children under 16 20.1 20.6 Aged under 1 year 15.4 0.8 Aged 1-2 years 23.2 2.1 Aged 3-5 years 22.1 3.3 Aged 6-8 years 19.9 3.3 Aged 9-12 years 17.6 6.3 Aged 13-15 years 21.5 4.8 Males 16.2 36.2 Of them: 16-17 years 21.1 1.6 Females 15.2 43.2 Of them: 16-17 years 20.6 1.6


One of the main causes for poverty is unemployment. Families with at least one non-working parent are destitute, not to mention a single non-working person with children. In 2002 13.3% of children under 18 living with one parent (mother or father)

23

who was employed lived below the relative poverty level, while among those whose parent was unemployed 45.6% were relatively destitute (table 16). Table 16. Children under 18 below the relative poverty level by type of household and

adults' employment (%)

Relative poverty level Single person with children under 18 Father/mother employed 13.3 Father/mother unemployed 45.9 Couple with children under 18 Only father employed 19.5 Only mother employed 18.9 Both parents employed 12.9 No employed adults 35.4

Source: Data of household budget surveys conducted by Statistics Lithuania. In summing up the provided information on the changes in income and

consumption expenditure of the Lithuanian population and the dynamics of poverty level, it could be stated that in our country the problem of poverty in families with children is very sensitive. Among the most poverty-stricken or needy are single-parent families with children under 18 years of age (the risk of poverty is particularly great for single mothers with under-age children) and families with many children. Children under 18 (and notably pre-school age) are more frequently in need than average citizens in the country. 4. Reduction of poverty of families and children

Families very sensitively react to social and economic changes, and it is very important to assist those that occur in disadvantageous living conditions. The main cause for poverty is unemployment and low income. Families in which only one parent is employed and families where both parents are unemployed experience the highest risk of poverty. These usually are one-parent families (mostly headed by a woman) and large families. Small children share the socio-economic conditions and the well-being of their parents and so the deprivation and the risk of social exclusion. In preventing poverty, active policy measures should be applied - training and retraining programs, other measures assisting members of families with children to return into labour market and reducing family dependence upon social assistance In seeking to prevent poverty, it is also necessary to increase the effectiveness of the in-cash social support system as well as the application of tax deductions - to make family composition and actually earned income be the basic criterions for granting support.

In 2000, the Poverty Reduction Strategy was developed in Lithuania. The children from large families and the children raised by single parent are listed among the groups most vulnerable to poverty in Lithuania, and it is proposed to reduce the poverty level of these groups to at least 13% by 2005. The Strategy stipulates for an improvement of support to large families and underlines that the allowances paid to them should be increased in parallel with the growth of average earnings and consumer prices. Financial support to families should be provided to one of the parents of the families with at least two children. The Strategy also provides that the government should take actions to cover education expenses of children from large families and of

24

children with one parent only, where education is sought in public institutions with tuition fees (Poverty, 2000). Since in the evaluation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy the Government stated that that its provisions had not been given sufficient concern and the level of poverty continued growing in Lithuania, in 2002 the Program on the implementation of the strategy of poverty reduction in 2002-2004 was drawn up. In the Program, the priorities are given to active measures of reducing poverty – training and education consistent with labour market demands, increased opportunities of economic activities and entering labour market (Social, 2002). The stable economic growth of the country is the basis of citizens' well-being and possibilities to reduce poverty. In 2002, the Government of the Republic of Lithuania approved Long-term Economic Development Strategy of Lithuania until 2015, which is part of the long-term development strategy of the country. An integral part of the long-term strategy of the development of Lithuanian economy through the year 2015 is the social sector development and economic factors of employment development strategy, where boosting of employment, reduction of unemployment as well as social support development, overcoming of poverty and social exclusion are among the key strategic trends. The main actions target on pursuance of active labour market policy and strengthening the linkage between employment and social support policies (Long-term, 2003). Note 1: For the calculation of poverty indicators, index of expenditure (i.e. 50% of the average consumption expenditure) and not of income was chosen partly because of a greater reliability and precision of the information on the living standards of population with irregular income gathered during the household budget survey, on the basis of which the poverty indicators are made (Deveikyte, 2003). Besides, relative and not absolute poverty line was taken because the indicator of relative poverty line is used in the international practice. This is important for making international comparisons. However, discussions on the criteria of poverty evaluation between the proponents of definitions of absolute and relative poverty have been continued in Lithuania (Sileika, Blaziene, 2000).

25

References: 1. Avramov, D.,R.Cliquet, (2003). Critical Population Issues in Europe: Implications

For Integrated Population Policies. Results of the Network of Integrated European Population Studies (NIEPS). Brussels: Population and Social Policy Consultants.

2. Children and family: Lithuania ’98, (1998). Vilnius: UNICEF, 102 p. 3. Deveikyte, R. Namu ukiu gyvenimo lygis ir santykinis skurdas 2002. Namu ukiu

biudžetu tyrimo duomenys, (2003). Informacinis pranesimas, Vilnius: Statistikos departamentas.

4. Family policy in Lithuania: principles and actions, (1996). V.Stankuniene (ed.), Vilnius, 29 p.

5. Household income and expenditure 2002, (2003). Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania. 6. Labour force, employment and unemployment (survey data) 2002/ IV, (2003).

Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania. 7. Lazutka, R. (2001). Pajamos, vartojimas ir skurdas. Zmogaus socialine raida,

Vilnius: Homo Liber, p. 101-116. 8. Lietuvos ikimokyklines ir kitos vaiku istaigos, (1992, 1992, 1994). Statistikos

biuletenis, Vilnius. 9. Long-Term Economic Development Strategy of Lithuania until 2015, (2003).

Vilnius: Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Lithuania, Lithuanian Academy of Sciencies.

10. Motiekaitiene, V. (2001). Gyventoju uzimtumas. Zmogaus socialine raida, Vilnius: Homo Liber, p. 81-100.

11. Population by education, mother tongue and command of other languages (data of the population census of 2001), (2002). Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania.

12. Poverty Reduction Strategy. Lithuania, (2000). Vilnius. 13. Sileika, A., I.Blaziene, (2000). Gyventoju pajamu diferenciacija ir skurdas

Lietuvoje. Pinigu studijos (3), Vilnius, p. 32-44. 14. Social Report 2002, (2003). Vilnius: Ministry of Social Security and Labour. 15. Stankuniene, V., V.Eidukiene, B.Gruzevskis, R.Jancaityte, A.Mikalauskaite,

J.Paluckiene, (2001). Paramos seimai politika: samprata ir patyrimas. Vilnius: LFSI. 16. Stankuniene V., 2001, Lithuania, in: Reflections of recent demographic conditions

on family social policies in CEE countries, Bratislava, pp. 23-49. 17. Statistical Yearbook of Lithuania, (2003). Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania. 1. Svietimas 2002, (2003). Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania. 18. Svietimas, (1999). Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania. 19. Women and men in Lithuania 2002, (2003). Vilnius: Statistics Lithuania.

26

Annex 1. Absolute number of men and women aged 15-19 by age groups, marital status and age of youngest child, 2001

Men and women aged 15-19

Single women Married/cohabiting women

Total women Total men


Men and women aged 20-29 Single women Married/cohabiting

women Total women Total men










No children 41990 65333 107323 89872 Youngest child aged 0-2 years 0 3 3 467 Youngest child aged 3-6 years 23 95 118 1087 Youngest child aged 7-14 years 2389 6321 8710 12581 Any child aged 0-14 years 2412 6419 8831 14135 Total 44402 71752 116154 104007 Source: The 2001 population census data (information of Statistics Lithuania).

27

Annex 2. Men and women (aged 15–59) in paid employment or self-employment by age groups, marital status and age of youngest child, 2001 (%)


Single women Married women Total women Total men No children 2.7 20.4 2.9 4.5 Youngest child aged 0-2 years 6.8 13.3 10.7 33.6 Youngest child aged 3-6 years 16.7 24.1 20.2 0.0 Youngest child aged 7-14 years - - - - Any child aged 0-14 years 7.2 13.6 11.0 33.5 Total 2.8 16.3 3.1 4.6

Men and women aged 20-29 Single women Married women Total women Total men







No children 43.4 46.7 45.4 48.3 Youngest child aged 0-2 years - 0.0 0.0 59.7 Youngest child aged 3-6 years 39.1 48.4 46.6 63.9 Youngest child aged 7-14 years 53.6 55.7 55.1 64.0 Any child aged 0-14 years 53.5 55.6 55.0 63.8 Total 46.3 50.8 49.2 55.6 Source: The 2001 population census data (information of Statistics Lithuania).

28

Annex 3. Average earnings of men and women (aged 15-59) in paid employment by age groups, marital status and age of youngest child, 2002 (LTL)


Single women Married women Total women Total men No children 644.3 … 644.3 513.4 Youngest child aged 0-2 years …* … … … Youngest child aged 3-6 years … 400.0 400.0 … Youngest child aged 7-14 years … … … … Any child aged 0-14 years … 400.0 400.0 … Total 644.3 400.0 623.9 513.4








No children 648.9 597.2 610.6 666.0 Youngest child aged 0-2 years … 900.0 900.0 676.7 Youngest child aged 3-6 years … … … … Youngest child aged 7-14 years 360.0 551.3 513.0 712.1 Any child aged 0-14 years 360.0 621.0 577.5 708.3 Total 645.8 597.6 610.0 669.7 Source: Data of labour force survey conducted by Statistics Lithuania. * "..." data unavailable.

lithuania: mother’s employment and children’s poverty · lithuanian household: standard of...

Documents