1. Economic Conditions of Female- headed Households in Taiwan in Comparison to the United States and Sweden Some reflections on the measurement of social quality Ozawa, Lee and Wang

2. Source of data 1) The wave 5 of Luxemburg Income Study (LIS) 2) The data was collected around the year of 2000

3. Source of data 3) 3,544 female-headed households with children under the age of 18 4) U.S.: 2,817 Sweden: 406 Taiwan: 321

4. Conceptual Framework 1) Poverty rates under different definitions of income  Private income  Disposable income=private income – taxes + public transfers + private transfers

5.  Poverty line: 50% of the median adjusted household income

6. Conceptual Framework 2) Effects of public transfers & private transfers on poverty reduction 3) Income inequality  Private income  Disposable income

7. Conceptual Framework 4) Factors related to poverty status in each country 5) The odds of female-headed households being in poverty among three countries

8. Conceptual Framework 6) The effect of number of children on the odds of female-headed households being in poverty 7) Implications for the measurement of social quality

9. Findings 1) Poverty rates under the definition of private income  U.S.: 50% Taiwan: 27% Sweden: 51%

10. Findings  Poverty rates under the definition of disposable income  U.S.: 41% Taiwan: 22% Sweden: 9.7%

11. Findings 2) Effects of public transfers & private transfers on poverty reduction  U.S.: 25% decline in the poverty rate (mainly due to means-tested benefits)

12. Findings  Taiwan: 37% decline in the poverty rate (mainly due to private transfers)  Sweden:86% decline in the poverty rate (mainly due to social insurance programs)

13. Findings 3) Income inequality (Gini)  Private income U.S.: 0.491 Taiwan: 0.307 Sweden: 0.494

14. Findings  Disposable income U.S.: 0.363 Taiwan: 0.280 Sweden: 0.160

15. Findings 4) Factors related to poverty status in each country  U.S.: number of children under 18, age of youngest child, age, education, marital status, work status

16. Findings  Taiwan: education, work status  Sweden: age of the youngest child, marital status, work status

17. Findings 5) The odds of female-headed households being in poverty among three countries  Compared to Taiwan, female-headed households in Sweden were less likely to be poor.

18. Findings  Compared to Taiwan, female- headed households in the U.S. were more likely to be poor.

19. Findings 6)The effect of the number of children on the odds of female-headed households being in poverty  In Taiwan, the number of children under 18 did not affect.

20. Findings  In Sweden, when the number of children increased by one, the odds of female-headed household being in poverty decreased by 23%.

21. Findings  In the U.S., when the number of children increased by one, the odds of female-headed household being in poverty increased by 41.6%.

22. Discussions 1) Before receiving public & private transfers, female- headed households in Taiwan had the lowest poverty rate.  the role of market

23. Discussions 2) After receiving public & private transfers, female- headed households in Sweden had the lowest poverty rate.  The role of state, especially social insurance programs

24. Discussions 3) The different effects of public & private transfers on poverty reduction existed in three countries.

25. Discussions  U.S.: means-tested programs  Taiwan: family transfers  Sweden: social insurance programs

26. Discussions 4) The level of poverty rate was related to the level of income inequality.  The country with the lower poverty rate had a more equal income distribution.

27. Discussions 5) The impacts of life events & human capital on poverty status were different in each country.  U.S.: life events (marriage, raising children), human capital (education, work status)

28. Discussions  Taiwan: human capital (education, work status)  Sweden: life events (marriage, raising children), human capital (work status)

29. Discussions 6) Adding on more children resulted in a smaller odds of being in poverty in Sweden.

30. Discussions  Sweden solved the problem stemming from the existence of children by means of comprehensive systems of income transfers that favors households with children.

31. Implications for the measurement of social quality  The conditional factor of socio-economic security: Financial resources Income sufficiency Income security

32. Implications for the measurement of social quality Work Employment security Working conditions Education Security of education Quality of education

33. Implications for the measurement of social quality 1) Income sufficiency: income-to-needs ratio= household income / poverty line  Suitable for international comparisons

34. Implications for the measurement of social quality 2) Income security:  poverty rates,  income inequality (ex.Gini): ---the level of economic homogeneity among households

35. Implications for the measurement of social quality 3) The protection of income security:  Considering other components of the welfare mix, besides state  Taiwan: market, family

36. Implications for the measurement of social quality 4) The protection of income security:  Considering different types of pubic transfers: means- tested or social insurance programs

37. Implications for the measurement of social quality 5) Exploring the relationship among the domains:  work, education, financial resources

38. Implications for the measurement of social quality 6) From a gender perspective, several factors affecting women ’ s income security need to be considered.

39. Implications for the measurement of social quality  marital status, age of the youngest child, the number of children (variations among countries)

40. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!