two worlds of ageing: spatial microsimulation estimates of small area advantage and disadvantage...
TRANSCRIPT
Two Worlds of Ageing: Spatial Microsimulation Estimates of Small Area Advantage and Disadvantage Among Older Australians
JUSTINE MCNAMARA, CATHY GONG, RIYANA MIRANTI, YOGI VIDYATTAMA,
ROBERT TANTON, ANN HARDING AND HAL KENDIG
PRESENTED AT THE 2ND GENERAL CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL
MICROSIMULATION ASSOCIATION, OTTAWA, CANADA, JUNE 8 – 10, 2009
3
Acknowledgements
● This paper was funded by a Discovery Grant from the Australian Research Council (DP664429: Opportunity and Disadvantage: Differences in Wellbeing Among Australia's Adults and Children at a Small Area Level).
● The authors would like to thank our fellow Chief Investigators on this grant, Professor Fiona Stanley, Professor Bob Stimson, Dr Sharon Goldfeld, and the Australian Bureau of Statistics for their input to the broader project being undertaken through this grant.
4
Why we chose this topic ?
● Among 23 OECD countries in 2000, Australia ranked the lowest in terms of ratio of equivalised disposable income of people aged 65 + to 18-64 (59.3 per cent)
● Very large differences among older Australians in the distribution of income, wealth and home ownership
● Research and policy focuses on geographic differences represent a dimension of inequality – small area analysis
● Little research on small areas and older people
5
What we are going to do● Geographic dimensions of deeply economically
disadvantaged older people and advantaged
● Social exclusion-multiple sources of disadvantage (economic aspects)
● Little focusing on social exclusion of older people in Australia
● Combine variables measuring (i) income, (ii) welfare dependence or not and (iii) housing costs
● Older people often income poor but asset rich (home owners)
● Spatial microsimulation, direct data not available explain later
6
Coverage and definition
● Age cut-off, those aged 65 and above
● Two groups (the most vs the least disadvantaged)● relative economic advantage (top two quintiles of equivalised
national household disposable income, paying no rent or mortgage, and relying mainly on private household income)
● deep economic disadvantage (bottom income quintile, paying private rent, and relying mainly on government income benefits)
● Unit of analysis – statistical local area (SLA)
7
Data source
● Reweighting process uses three sources of data :● 2006 Census ● Survey - SIH 2003-04 and 2005-06
8
Spatial methodology
● Spatial microsimulation-SpatialMSM/09C
● Synthetic household weights for every SLA
● Benchmark variables
● Complex process of spatial microsimulation
● Aggregate SLAs in Canberra and Brisbane (MAUP)
● Caution re Northern Territory results
● Further exclusions – at the end we use 816 small areas
9
Spatial Methodology : Reweighting Method
turning the national household weights in the SIH 03-04 and 05-06 file into …
… household weightsof small-areas
Unit record
Household ID
Weekly income
Weekly rent
Other variables
Household weight
1 1 7 3 . 10292 2 11 4 . 1573 2 11 4 . 1574 2 11 4 . 1575 3 11 0 . 10036 3 11 0 . 10037 4 10 4 . 708 4 12 4 . 709 6 12 0 . 703
10 6 12 0 . 703. . . . . .. . . . . .
53220 15374 . . . .
15,374,000Num of households in Aust
NSW SLA1
NSW SLA2
NSW SLA3
Other SLAs
0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .
2.45 13.54 16.38 .2.45 13.54 16.38 .
0 0 0 .0 0 0 .
3.27 0 0 .3.27 0 0 .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
12465 25853 27940 .
Num of households in small areas
10
Validation
● To see if our estimates make sense
● Small area validation, see next slides● 65 +, bottom gross income quintile, paying rent in the private
market
● 65 +, top two gross income quintiles, paying neither private rent nor mortgage.
● Aggregate data validation, at state/territory level,
11
Small area validation : disadvantage
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
% of aged 65+ paying private rent and in bottom quintile, synthetic estimates
% o
f age
d 65
+ pa
ying
pri
vate
ren
t and
in
bott
om q
uint
ile (s
tate
d), C
ensu
s
12
Small area validation : advantage
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 10 20 30
% of aged 65+ not paying rent/mortgage and in top two quintiles, synthetic estimates
% o
f age
d 65
+ no
t pay
ing
rent
/m
ortg
age
at to
p tw
o qu
intil
es (s
tate
d),
Cen
sus
13
National characteristics of older Australians
'Deeply disadvantaged'
Bottom equivalised
income quintile
Paying mortgage
Paying private
rent
Main source of household
income government
benefits'Relatively
advantaged'
Top two income
quintiles
Not paying rent or
mortgage
Main source of
household income private
Characteristic % % % % % % % % %All persons 65+ 3.8 47.1 5.3 6.6 64.8 10.4 12.7 79.8 35.2
Disadvantage Advantage
14
National characteristics of older Australians
'Deeply disadvantaged'
'Relatively advantaged'
Characteristic % %All persons 65+ 3.8 10.4Females 65+ 4.1 8.7Males 65+ 3.3 12.3Persons 75+ 2.7 10.665+ living in hh with at least one person <65 2.0 16.165+ living in hh with at least one person >=75 5.0 10.565+ living alone 8.5 6.565+ living in hh where anyone working 0.4 24.665+ living in a capital city 3.4 12.165+ not living in a capital city 4.5 7.3
17
Estimates of the distribution of the 65+ deep disadvantage and relative economic advantage, Sydney
18
Discussion and further work● Substantial heterogeneity among older people
● Complex patterns geographically
● Although private renting affects small proportion now, it may rise in the future (marriage breakdown + lower rates of home ownership)
● Further work :● Further refinement of modelling and validation
● Analyse characteristics of the areas with the most concentrated economic disadvantage and advantage (unemployment, industry structure, education levels, age distribution, household composition and poverty rates)
● Examine the regional effects of policy changes on older people