The effects of persistent poverty on children’s outcomes Dr Jung-Sook Lee University of New South Wales

Purpose of study  To examine the effects of persistent poverty on Australian children’s physical, socio-emotional, and learning development  To examine whether the effects of persistent poverty on children’s development differ by cohort (baby & kindergartner)

Backgrounds  According to a recent OECD study, the rate of child poverty in Australia is about 11.6% in 2000s (Whiteford & Adema, 2007)  Persistent poverty has a significant effect on children’s outcomes  The timing of poverty is also important  The effect of poverty differs by outcomes  The evidence in Australia has been limited until recently due to the lack of longitudinal datasets available

Data  The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC): Growing Up in Australia  The first ever comprehensive, national Australian data on children  Over 10,000 children and their families were first interviewed in 2004 and will be biannually interviewed until 2010  Two cohorts  Baby cohort: 0-1years at Wave 1  Kindergartner cohort: 4-5 years at Wave 1  For this study, used B-cohort & K-cohort and Wave 1 & 2

Measures  Outcomes  Physical, socio-emotional, & learning domains at Wave 2  Poverty status through two waves  Persistently poor  Out of poverty  Fell into poverty  Never been poor  Covariates  Age, sex, indigenous status, language at home, parental education, mother’s age, & mother’s marital status

Analysis  Multiple regression  Separate regression model for each cohort

Sample 1 B-cohort (n=5,107) K-cohort (n=4,983) Child's age at wave10.73 (0.21)4.74 (0.22) Child’s sex Female Male Indigenous status Non-Indigenous Indigenous Language at home Other English

Sample 2 BK Poverty status Never been poor Persistently poor Out of poverty Fell into poverty Unknown Marital status Married Single Other BK Mother's age30.97 (5.48) (5.34) Parental education Degree Advanced degree Certificate Year No Year

Results: B–cohort (selected) Physical Socio- emotional Learning Poverty status Persistently poor ** ** Out of poverty-1.49 * Fell into poverty-1.28 * * Unknown Note: Reference group: Never been poor. * <.05, ** <.01, *** <.001

Results: K–cohort (selected) Physical Socio- emotional Learning Poverty status Persistently poor *** *** Out of poverty * Fell into poverty Unknown Note: Reference group: Never been poor. * <.05, ** <.01, *** <.001

Discussions  Significantly negative effects of persistent poverty on socio- emotional and learning outcomes exist for both cohorts  The effects of persistent poverty are greater for k-cohort  The effect of current poverty on socio-emotional outcome for b-cohort  The effect of early poverty on learning outcome for k-cohort  Mixed results for the physical outcome

Limitations  Attrition  The distribution of physical domain score  Missing on income  Relative poverty measure  Only two waves

Implications  Supports for the most vulnerable populations (persistently poor) are needed  Actions to relieve poverty in early childhood may enhance outcomes of children, especially learning outcome  In researching the effects of poverty on children’s outcomes, the timing, duration, & depth of poverty need to be considered  Studies investigating longitudinal trajectories would provide clearer pictures

References  Australian Institute of Family Studies (2008). Longitudinal Study of Australian Children Data User Guide. May 2008, Melbourne.  Bradbury, B. (2007). Child outcomes and family socio- economic characteristics. Social Policy Research Centre.  Brooks-Gunn, J., & Duncan, G. J. (1997). The effects of poverty on children. Future of Children, 7,  Whiteford, P., & Adema, W. (2007). What works best in reducing child poverty: A benefit of work strategy? (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 51). Paris: OECD.