TÜRKİYE İŞGÜCÜ PİYASASI ARAŞTIRMA AĞI KONFERANSI,2015 İstanbul Bengi YANIK İLHAN Esra ÖZTÜRK

 Do local elderly care facilities have an impact on elderly home care? NO  Is there a gender bias? YES  Are there regional differences? YES/NO  Does human capital have an impact on elderly home care? YES

 High inactivity ratios in Turkey (especially for urban females) (Individuals who are not in labor force and not in school)  Reasons of inactivity for females (house works, elderly care and child care, etc.)  Increasing proportion of the country’s population entering old age  In the near future, more and more people will be in the Sandwich generation (The Sandwich generation is a generation of people who not only care for their aging parents but also for their own children).  The sandwich generation is named so because they are effectively "sandwiched" between the obligation to care for their aging parents - who may be ill, unable to perform various tasks or in need of financial support - and children, who require financial, physical and emotional support  Increasing capacity of senior houses and communities

High inactivity ratios for FEMALES

Source: HLFS,

High inactivity ratios for URBAN FEMALES

Source: HLFS,

Highest for SOUTH EAST ANATOLIAN Lowest for EAST BLACKSEA

Source: HLFS,

Highest elderly population East BlackSea, West BlackSea, West Marmara Lowest eldery population South East Anatolia

Source: ABPRS

Highest Capacity of Senior Houses Istanbul, Aegean, West Anatolian

Source: General Directorate of Services for Disabled Persons and Elderly,

 Becoming a part of the sandwich generation can affect your financial status, your personal time, health, and career development. Although this can affect both men and women, women are typically seen by the society as the primary supporter; in other words, women are the ones who are primarily affected: Bowen, C., and Riley, L. (2005), Brody (1985) and Wolf and Soldo (1994)  Children require more money and “capital-intensive” care, while aging adults require more time and labor-intensive care (Pierret, C. R. (2006).  Informal and formal care: Bolin et al (2008) and Bonsang (2009)  Training unemployed women for adult day care: Hussein and Oğlak (2013)  In most Turkish regions Adult Daily Care is very scarce therefore, families have social and financial difficulties to substitute this care gap: Oğlak (2007)  Low income families in rural areas and investigates the depressive symptomatology among Turkish older adults: Nahcivan and Demirezen (2005)  Impact of Eldery Parents on Female Labor Force Participation: Kıral and Şengül (2013)

 Household Labor Force Surveys  Elderly care facilities macro data from the General Directorate of Services for Disabled Persons and Elderly Elderly care facilities in provincial level, we grouped them and generate NUTS1 level data

 Logit Regression

 Logit model  For whole population: aged between 15 and 49  For young population: aged between 15 and 34  For older population: aged between 35 and 49 Dependent variable: Giving elderly care at home (Generated by using the reasons for being ınactive-not searching for a job) Independent variables: Individual characteristics: age, age2, education, marital status Household characteristics: having a help-mate ( non-employed non relative individual in the household), an eldery in the household (60+) Regional dummies, capacity of local elderly care facilities Year dummies Marginal effects are calculated at means and dummies 0

Inactivity Reasons / Female Found a job0,00080,00070,00050,00070,0005 Back to previous job0,0008 0,00760,00470,00390,0038 Searched but not found0,01430,01590,00480,00410,00340,0030 Not believe to find a job for her/him0,00130,01490,01400,01500,01290,0100 In school0,08060,08610,09490,10210,10770,0112 House work0,66970,65650,64400,62600,62730,6311 Retired0,03330,03320,03660,03810,04210,0455 Taking care of kids in family0,03280,03530,03990,04280,04140,0379 Taking care of elderly in family0,00210,00240,00350,00410,00420,0045 Taking care of kids and elderly in family0,00070,00080,00290,00270,0035 Family or personal reasons0,02300,02130,02470,02460,02090,0018 Disabled, illness0,04260,05250,07040,07400,07340,0074 Oldness(65+)0,06470,06270,00520,05430,05320,0513 Other0,00220,01690,00460,00680,00550,0049 Total Observation Number

Inactivity Reasons / Male Found a job0,00520,00440,00330,00270,02590,0027 Back to previous job0,00370,00460,01840,01240,11570,0115 Searched but not found0,02520,02360,03600,02940,27380,0324 Not believe to find a job for her/him0,05720,05480,03040,03050,27430,0246 In school0,26060,25870,02720,28492,86760,2797 Retired0,41530,04130,40950,41384,25660,4362 Taking care of kids in family0,00010,0002 0,00170,0002 Taking care of elderly in family0,00050,00080,00070,00110,01280,0012 Taking care of kids and elderly in family0,0002 0,00040,00290,0002 Family or personal reasons0,01820,01500,02400,02260,25020,0024 Disabled, illness0,10650,12020,13410,12941,26900,1252 Oldness(65+)0,06910,06970,05420,05090,45320,0414 Other0,03820,03540,01730,02170,01960,0205 Total Observation Number

 Marital Status among Individuals who give Elderly Care at home

 Education Level among Individuals who give Elderly Care at home

Aged Between 15-49Aged Between 15-34Aged Between INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS age *** ( )( )( ) age2-2.32e-06** e-06 ( )( )( ) female (d) *** * * ( )( )( ) married (d) *** * * ( )( )( ) widowed (d) * ( )(0.0023)( ) divorced (d) ( )(0.0013)( ) primary school (d) *** * ( )( )( ) secondary school (d) ** * ( )( )( ) high school (d) * ( )( )( ) vocational high school (d) * * ( )( )( ) university and higher (d) * (0.0002)( )( )

Aged Between Aged Between 15-34Aged Between HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS Eldery Individual *** * ** ( )( )( ) helper omitted ( ) ( ) TIME DUMMIES yr2008 (d) ( )( )( ) yr2009 (d) ** * ( )( )( ) yr2010 (d) ** ** ( )( )(0.0004) yr2011 (d) ** * ( )( )( ) yr2012 (d) ** * ( )( )( )

Aged Between 15-49Aged Between 15-34Aged Between REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS capacity-6.77e e e-08* ( ) South East Anatolia (d) ** (0.0004)( )( ) Central East Anatolia (d) ( )(0.0028)( ) Nourt East Anatolia (d) ** * (0.0004)( )( ) East Black Sea (d) ** ( )( )( ) West Black Sea (d) ( )(0.0028)(0.0005) Central Anatolia (d) ** (0.0004)( )( ) Mediterrenean (d) * *** (0.0005)( )( ) West Anatolia (d) (0.0003)( )( ) East Marmara (d) * ( )( )( ) Aegean (d) * ( )( )( ) West Marmara (d) (0.0005)( )( ) Urban (d) ** ( )( )( ) Number of Observations Loglikelihood

 Do local elderly care facilities have an impact on elderly home care?  A: Local elderly care facilities have No impact on eldery home care  Is there gender bias?  A: Gender bias via providing care to parents: Females are more likely to give elderly care for each population; this is line with the literature

 Is there regional differences ?  A: Regional differences are more obvious for whole population. It disappears for year-old individuals and year-old individuals  Does human capital have an impact on elderly home care?  A: For year-olds: human capital does not have an impact  For year-olds: As human capital increases, they are more likely to give elderly care at home. This is not suprising since we are working at a selected sample.

 Heckman’s Selection  Capacity as an explanatory variable can be regenerated by using capacity/elder population in that region.

THANK YOU