1. Threatened by Aging Population?
Support Ratios:
Threatened by Aging Population?

2. Presenter Carole J. Makela, PhD, CFCS
Colorado State University (Fort Collins)

3. Purpose Explore support ratios and their change over time
Understand related ratios and their definitions
Question the role they play in influencing public policy
Understand if the media messages are ‘the sky is falling’, perspectives and policy lagging reality?

4. Ratios and Definitions
Total support ratio: number of youth and aging per 100 persons in productive years (15 to 64 years)
Productive years: persons economically active (employed or unemployed)
Age-adjusted elderly dependency burden: factors recognizing that the oldest old may have multiple dependency needs
Elderly dependency ratio: number of persons over 65 per 100 in productive age range
Youth dependency ratio: number of persons birth to 20 years per 100 in productive years (20-64 years)
Child dependency ratio: number of persons birth to 14 years per 100 in productive years (15-64 years)

5. Realities of the Support Ratio
How is a changing birth rate impacting the number of youth under 15 years of age?
How are we experiencing (defining) dependency for teens and young adults?
To what extent are a portion of those in the productive years, dependent?
How is the increasing life expectancy impacting the number of seniors (65 and over)?
With the increasing life expectancy, delayed retirement, and volunteer contributions of seniors, does ‘productive years’ need to be redefined?
How does a consistent definition of the support ratio clarify or confuse international comparisons?

6. Assumptions for the Current Support Ratio
Social and economic dependence can be captured by age (under 15 or over 64).
Macro-level data has a place in influencing policy—whether existing or new.
Youth and senior dependencies are additive, which further assumes nature of dependencies are similar.
Productivity does not vary, as all persons are deemed productive—again socially and economically.
Dependence and productivity do not distinguish varying levels of need, within a country homogenous populations are assumed.
This as other ratios/measures persist for decades without examination of current relevance and validity.

7. Uses of Ratios
Marco indicator of dependencies—Is the productive segment greater than or lessor than the 2 dependent sectors?
Basis of comparison of the 3 sectors of population—What are the trends for the sectors and overall?
Exploration of the dependency needs of the youth sector to the senior sector—What are the implications for intergenerational support? Inequities?
Implications for policy—What do changing trends suggest for policy? Its revision? Including but not limited to safety nets, access, equity, social justice, public and private costs.
Global/regional assessment—How are countries making progress in meeting the needs of their populations? What is suggested for international support?

8. U.S. Picture 1960 to 2015
Overall ratio: >>> >>> 48.57
Ratio (seniors) >>> >>>
Ratio (youth) >>> >>>

9. Considerations for the Youth Segment
Private dependency during this period—meet needs, unmet needs
Public dependency during this period—policy driven, unmet private needs
Poverty rates in families and communities
Education for literacy, life skills, productivity
Their productivity in family, school, community
Cross generational dependencies and support

10. Considerations for Productive Segment
Educational attainment and life long learning
Personal factors that limit productivity beyond ‘usual’ level of dependency
Engagement in productivity—public and private spheres
Economic cycles and natural disasters--impact on employment, savings/investment, debt
Gender inequities per paid and non-paid productivity
Changing expectations/demands for work/occupation
Efficacy of financial management

11. Considerations for the Senior Segment
Choices of and made when to ‘retire’
Accumulated resources
Impact of economy and policies on resources and expenses
Debt load
Universal (or almost) retirement (social security)
Productivity per volunteer efforts/hours
Cross (inter- and multi-) generational transfers of dependency and support
Intent to bequeath—family, non-family

12. Take-Aways
Change in half a century—greater senior segment, smaller youth segment
Need to match ratio to purpose and use
Persistence of policy, lags trends in ratio and realities of support
Ratios (most metrics) can be used to make the case whether the ‘sky is falling’ or the picture ‘is rosy’

13. Applications
Consider and understand the impact of practice and policy— family, community, state, and national—WHY?? --consistent with the mission of Family and Consumer Sciences --personal resource use, risk taking/avoidance, one’s family support/dependency ratios over time --balance public and private support, both are needed --understand role/purpose/use of taxes, fair and just --advocate for effective, just policy --illuminate the international perspective for public and private support

14. Comments/Questions ??