Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:37:57.164Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparing the Implications of Expanded Income-Based Measures of Living Standards with an Application to Older Australians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2018

YUVISTHI NAIDOO Open the ORCID record for YUVISTHI NAIDOO [Opens in a new window]
YUVISTHI NAIDOO*
Affiliation:
Social Policy Research Centre, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The standard of living of older people is a critical policy matter, given Australia's ageing population. Conventional living standard assessments continue to rely on disposable income as a defining indicator, despite it not encompassing the full range of potential consumption possibilities that affect an individual's economic living standard. This article proposes a series of three economic resource metrics that sequentially append the disposable income metric with the value of non-cash benefits and services arising from the receipt of public goods and/or services from home ownership in the form of a ‘full’ income metric, and then the inclusion of wealth in the form of two derived ‘potential consumption’ metrics. Using data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey, the findings demonstrate that augmenting disposable income with income streams from non-cash services and annuitised wealth substantially improves the relative economic position of older Australians. It also highlights the heterogeneity in economic living standard outcomes for different demographic sub-groups of older people that would otherwise be drawn using a disposable income analytic lens. The article argues that an expanded economic resource perspective is necessary for informing ageing and social policy.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 83 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ABS (1995), A Provisional Framework for Household Income, Consumption, Saving and Wealth, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2001), Measuring Wellbeing. Frameworks for Australian Social Statistics Catalogue No. 4160.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2008), Experimental Estimates of Imputed Rent, 2003–04 and 2005–06, Catalogue No. 6525.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2011a), Life Tables, Australia, 2008 - 2010, Catalogue No. 3302.0.55.001, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2011b), Australian System of National Accounts, 2010 - 11, Catalogue No. 5204.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2011c), Government Finance Statistics, Australia, 2009 - 10, Catalogue No. 5512.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2011d), Household Wealth and Distribution, Catalogue No. 6554.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2012a), Household Expenditure Survey and Survey of Income and Housing, User Guide, Australia 2009 - 10, Catalogue No. 6503.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
ABS (2012b), Government Benefits, Taxes and Household Income 2009–10, Catalogue No. 6537.0, Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
Ando, A. and Modigliani, F. (2005), ‘The “Life-Cycle” Hypothesis of Savings: Aggregate Implications and Tests’, in Franco, F. (ed.), The collected papers of Franco Modigliani., Cambridge.: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, A.B. and Marlier, E. (2010), 'Income and living conditions in Europe, Eurostat Statistical books, Luxembourg Eurostat European Commission.Google Scholar
Australian Government (2015), 2015 Intergenerational Report - Australia in 2055, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
Australian Treasury (2009), Australia's future tax system. Report to the Treasurer, Canberra: Australian Treasury.Google Scholar
Billing, J., Kindermann, B., McColl, B. and Rolfe, N. (2010), Improving our Understanding and Measures of Economic Hardship: Australia's Development of a Low Consumption Possibilities Framework, The 31st General Conference of The International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, St Gallen.Google Scholar
Boarini, R. and d'Ercole, M.M. (2006), Measures of Material Deprivation in OECD Countries, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 37, Paris: Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs, OECD.Google Scholar
Bradbury, B. (2013), ‘The fourth retirement pillar in rich nations’, in Gornick, J. C. and Jäntti, M. (eds.), Economic Disparities and the Middle Class in Affluent Countries, Stanford.Google Scholar
Brandolini, A., Magri, S. and Smeeding, T.M. (2009), Asset-Based Measurement of Poverty, Discussion Paper No. 1372 - 10, Madison: Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Browning, M. and Crossley, T.F. (2001), ‘The Life-Cycle Model of Consumption and Saving’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15: 3, 3–22.Google Scholar
Callan, T. and Keane, C. (2009), ‘Non-cash Benefits and the Distribution of Economic Welfare’, The Economic and Social Review, 40: 1, 49–71.Google Scholar
Canberra Group (2001), Expert Group on Household Income Statistics - Final Report and Recommendations, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Colic-Peisker, V., Johnson, G. and Smith, S.J. (2010), ‘“Pots of Gold”: Housing Wealth and Economic Wellbeing in Australia’, in Smith, S. J. and Searle, B. A. (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to the Economics of Housing: The Housing Wealth of Nations, West- Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Creedy, J. and Tan, L. (2007), ‘The relationship between personal income and net worth in Australia’, Australian Economic Review, 40: 2, 165–181.Google Scholar
Crystal, S. and Shea, D. (1990), ‘The Economic Well-Being of the Elderly’, Review of Income and Wealth, 36: 3, 227–247.Google Scholar
Dietz, R.D. and Haurin, D.R. (2003), ‘The social and private micro-level consequences of homeownership’, Journal of Urban Economics, 54: 3, 401–450.Google Scholar
Elsinga, M. and Mandič, S. (2010), ‘Housing as a piece in the old-age puzzle’, Teorija in Praksa, 47: 5, 940–958.Google Scholar
Fisher, J.D., Johnson, D.S., Marchand, J.T., Smeeding, T.M. and Torrey, B.B. (2007), ‘No Place Like Home: Older Adults and Their Housing’, Journal of Gerentology, 62B: 2, S120–S128.Google Scholar
Fisher, J.D., Johnson, D.S., Marchand, J., Smeeding, T.M. and Torrey, B.B. (2008), ‘The retirement consumption conundrum: Evidence from a consumption survey’, Economic Letters, 99, 482–485.Google Scholar
Frick, J. and Headey, B. (2009), ‘Living Standards in Retirement: Accepted International Comparisons are Misleading’, Journal of Applied Social Sciences, 129: 2, 309–319.Google Scholar
Haig, R.M. (1921), ‘The Concept of Income - Economic and Legal Aspects’, in Haig, R. M. (ed.), The Federal Income Tax, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, A., Percival, R., Schofield, D. and Walker, A. (2000), The Lifetime Distributional Impact of Government Health Outlays, Discussion Paper No. 47, Canberra: National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling.Google Scholar
Harding, A., King, A. and Kelly, S. (2002), Trends in the Incomes and Assets of Older Australians, Discussion Paper No. 58, Canberra: National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling.Google Scholar
Hedström, P. and Ringen, S. (1988), ‘Age and Income in Contemporary Society: A Research Note*’, Journal of Social Policy, 16: 2, 227–239.Google Scholar
Jefferson, T., Austen, S., Ong, R., Haffner, M.E.A. and Woods, G.A. (2017), ‘Housing Equity Withdrawal: Perceptions of Obstacles among Older Australian Home Owners and associated Service Provider’, Journal of Social Policy, 46: 3, 623–642.Google Scholar
National Commission of Audit (2014), Towards Responsible Government, The Report of the National Commission of Audit - Phase One, Canberra.Google Scholar
OECD (2009), Pensions at a Glance. Retirement-Income Sytems in OECD countries. Preliminary version., Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
Olsberg, D. and Winters, M. (2005), Ageing in place: intergenerational and intrafamilial housing transfers and shifts in later life, Final Report No. 88, Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.Google Scholar
ONS (2016), The effects of taxes and benefits on household income, methodology and coherence: financial year ending 2015, London: United Kingdom Office for National Statistics.Google Scholar
Productivity Commission (2011), Caring for Older Australians: Overview, Report No. 53, Final Inquiry Report, Canberra.Google Scholar
Radner, D.B. (1990), ‘Assessing the Economic Status of the Aged and Non-aged Using Alternatve Income-Wealth Measures’, Social Security Bulletin, 53: 3, 2–14.Google Scholar
Radner, D.B. (1997), ‘Noncash Income, Equivalence Scales, and The Measurement of Economic Wellbeing’, Review of Income and Wealth, 43: 1, 71–88.Google Scholar
Rigg, J. and Sefton, T. (2006), ‘Income Dynamics and the Life Cycle’, Journal of Social Policy, 35: 3, 411–435.Google Scholar
Rodgers, J.R. (2010), ‘Chronic and Temporary Poverty in Australia: Targeting Public Transfers’, Economic Record, 86, 87–100.Google Scholar
Rowlingson, K. (2006), ‘Living Poor to Die Rich’? Or ‘Spending the Kids’ Inheritance?' Attitudes to Assets and Inheritance in Later Life', Journal of Social Policy, 35: 2, 175–192.Google Scholar
Sabelhaus, J. and Schnieder, U. (1997), Measuring the Distribution of Well-being: Why Income and Consumption Give Different Answers, Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Saunders, P. and Siminski, P. (2005), ‘Home Ownership and Inequality: Imputed Rent and Income Distribution in Australia’, Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and policy, 24: 4, 346–367.Google Scholar
Simons, H.C. (1938), Personal Income Taxation: The Definition of Income as a Problem of Fiscal Policy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Slesnick, D.T. (2005), Consumption and Social Welfare. Living standards and their distribution in the United States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smeeding, T.M., Saunders, P., Coder, J., Jenkins, S., Fritzell, J., Hagenaars, A.J.M., Hauser, R. and Wolfson, M. (1993), ‘Poverty, Inequality, and Family Living Standards Impacts Across Seven Nations: The Effect of Noncash Subsidies for Health, Education and Housing’, Review of Income and Wealth, 39: 3, 229–256.Google Scholar
Smeeding, T.M. and Weinberg, D.H. (2001), ‘Toward A Uniform Definition of Household Income’, Review of Income and Wealth, 47: 1, 1–24.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J.E., Sen, A. and Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009), Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.Google Scholar
Travers, P. and Richardson, S. (1993), Living Decently, Material Well-being in Australia, Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Verbist, G. and Matsaganis, M. (2014), ‘The redistributive capacity of services in the European Union’, in Vandenbroucke, B. C. a. F. (ed.), Reconciling Work and Poverty Reduction. How Successful are European Welfare States, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilkins, R. (2013), Families, Incomes and Jobs, Volume 8, A Statistical Report on Waves 1 to 10 of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey, Melbourne: Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Wolff, E.N. and Zacharias, A. (2009), ‘Household wealth and the measurement of economic well-being in the United States’, Journal of Economic Inequality, 7: 2, 83–115.Google Scholar
Yates, J. and Bradbury, B. (2010), ‘Home ownership as a (crumbling) fourth pillar of social insurance in Australia’, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 25, 193–211.Google Scholar