1. ________________________________________ Session 21: Definition, Measurement and Development of Social Statistics Update on progress on the work of the Task Force on Emerging Families and Households Cristina Freguja ISTAT (Italian National Statistical Institute) IAOS Conference on Reshaping Official Statistics Shanghai, 14-16 October 2008

2. Relevant and authoritative statistics about family structures, dynamics and support patterns are crucial to understand the changes and the impacts of policies and services on families and individuals. Same-sex couples living apart together commuters between households reconstituted families persons living apart but within a network I will discuss the results of the work carried out so far The Task Force has not yet been reached a final stance on all the aspects under debate. This presentation mainly reflects my personal point of view. Of course, any mistake is my only responsibility. The New Challenge of the Task Force on Families and Households need to be clearly defined at international and regional levels

3. I wish to express my gratitude to the members of the Task Force for their valuable scientific contributions: Karine Kuyumjyan (National Statistical Service, Republic of Armenia), Bob McColl (Australian Bureau of Statistics), Anne Milan (Statistics Canada), Timo Nikander (Statistics Finland), Laurent Toulemon (Institut National d’études démographiques - France), Hannah McConnell (Statistics New Zealand), Nico Keilman (University of Oslo – Norway), Steve Smallwood (Office for National Statistics - United Kingdom), Martin O’Connell (US Census Bureau), Angela Me (UNECE), Paolo Valente (UNECE), Giampaolo Lanzieri (Eurostat), Gregor Kyi (Eurostat), Mikhail Korolev (Interstate Statistical Committee of the Commonwealth of Independent State). A special thank to Anne Milan (Living apart together); Nico Keilman (Reconstituted families); Steve Smallwood (Same-sex couple); Laurent Toulemon (Commuters between households). This presentation draws large part from the papers they prepared for the Task Force Credits

4. Same-sex couples are not a new type of family. But they are becoming more and more visible, because more people feel free to adopt this living arrangement. Policy makers are interested in information on same-sex couples in order to… (i)develop new legal arrangements to guarantee same-sex couples rights and responsibilities; (ii) define groups possibly at risk of discrimination; (iii) understand the people’s need and family formation dynamics. 1. Same-sex couples: policy concerns

5. A starting position is to mirror heterosexual partnership information: legally recognised same-sex partnerships (legally defined) same-sex partnership equivalent to an opposite-sex de facto partnership Key points for definition of a de facto same-sex partnership: Both partners in the relationship share the same household → are of the same-sex → recognise themselves as couple → are not in a registered partnership 2. Same-sex couples: definition

6. In principle, a sample survey might not be an adequate tool for counting small population (minorities). Census has also constraints (it cannot be very detailed and flexible) Recent experience of a few Western countries → supports explicit response items to enumerate same-sex couples → underlines the need to conduct to reform census procedures in close collaboration with the most concerned groups of actors Especially in countries where same-sex couples are not still completely accepted and legally recognized, the census might not achieve reliable estimations of the phenomenon. To use ad hoc sets of questions, in proper surveys or in ad hoc surveys, that focusing on sexuality (identity, orientation, etc.) could facilitate disclosure of same-sex couples. 3. Same-sex couples: measurement

7. In the past: the family composition was generally redesigned by the premature death of an individual Nowadays: separations and divorces determine the change of the families’ life and make them more complex. The attention of policy makers has been concentrated mainly on the families with a single parent (for many aspects the most vulnerable living arrangements) The processes of reconstituting families and affective lives after a separation/divorce or widowhood have an important psychological, economical and social impact on the life of the individual and on the society as a whole. Information on the propensity of people in reconstituting families and affective lives may be of interest to policy makers because to live in couple affects life satisfaction, health, and, for elderly, the chances of institutionalization. 1. Reconstituted families and couples: policy concerns

8. The definition of reconstituted family given in the CES Census Recommendations: → includes only families with children from previous relationships → no consideration is given to persons who have re-entered in a new consensual union or a new marriage with no non-common children living in the family. An extended definition → reconstituted couples where at least one of the two partners has had a previous marriage or registered partnership (with common children or without children) reconstituted families and couples coming from a marriage or registered partnership that dissolved due to the death of the previous partner In particular for elderly persons, the possibility to reconstitute family and affective lives reduces the number of years they may expect to live in loneliness and may also have social policy implications for aspects such as poverty and housing needs 2. Reconstituted families and couples: definitions

9. Reconstituted families and couples Indirect measurement compares birth date of all natural children ever-born to each adult households member with the birth date of all children in the household Directs measurement 1. Relationship of each household member with respondent (one of the two partners) 2. Household relationship matrix combine with appropriate questions: 1.Is (child) (i) the biological child of both you and your partner? (ii) your own (=biological) child but not partner’s? etc. 2. Compared with person A, person B is - his/her biological child; - his/her adopted child, etc. 3. Is (person)…(i) your marriage partner?, (ii) your registered partner? Etc. Have you had a previous marriage/registered partnership before the current one with someone else than your current partner? For married or registered reconstituted families and couples, previous marital status of the respondent might be collected in order to distinguish partners who were widows/widowers. As second option: a question on the reasons why the previous marriage/registered partnership was dissolved (death, divorce). 3. Reconstituted families and couples: measurements

10. Communication, exchange and support relations within social networks help to maintain adequate levels of well-being. They indeed (i) support family members who have troubles in their daily life or who have to deal with sudden events, (ii) help them gain wider perspectives and opportunities, (iii) reduce uncertainties and find solidarity and companionship. Despite the structural simplification of the families, in today’s society, families still live inside thick networks of relations and exchanges between relatives. The situation significantly differs across countries due to… different attitudes and cultural background (cultural norms and values) differences in the policy environments across the countries (availability, cost and quality of public service provision offered by social and family policies) 1. Living apart but within a network: policy concerns

11. Living apart, but within a network is a different way of looking at a family and its functioning. It means: to go beyond the co-residence bond and extend the concept of household structure and household relationships including kinship, friendship and neighbourhood to focus on the nature and degree of solidarity between family members structural solidarity: factors such as geographic distance that constrain or enhance interactions between family members; associative solidarity: frequency of social contact and shared activities affectual solidarity: feelings of emotional closeness, affirmation, and intimacy between family members; functional solidarity: exchange of instrumental and financial assistance and support; consensual solidarity: actual o perceived agreement in opinions, values and lifestyle between family members; normative solidarity: strength of obligation felt towards other family members. 2. Living apart but within a network: definition

12. Proposal focuses on a set of variables concerning: i) the exchange of instrumental and financial assistance and in-kind support between members of different households (modalities with which the networks provide their support, the kind of persons and families actively involved in the networks, the different strategies that people design in order to support people in need); ii) people with which the respondents feel a certain level of affinity (emotional closeness / who are the ones a person can count on) ; iii) social contacts (visits, telephone, internet/e-mail, etc.). The family and friend relationship alternately shift between latency (latent form of cohesion; i.e. the potential for support) and activity (exchanges of assistance). Even if cross-sectional level functional exchange are absent, affinity and frequency of contacts put in evidence the closeness among the network’s members, and their potential capability of support. 3. Living apart but within a network: measurement

13. A LAT relationship may be a permanent living arrangement by individuals who do not share a home for a number of different reasons. LAT relationships may become more common in the future with longer life expectancies, more persons never-married, divorced, and/or living alone. They may become a more common way to deal with a difficult marriage or cohabitation. The increase of spatial mobility and the related opportunity of work could promote this kind of situation. This living arrangement could have social policy implications for aspects such as housing needs. 1. Living Apart Together: policy concerns

14. Criteria for defining who is included among the “Living Apart Together”: i) two separate addresses (which may or may not contain other people); ii)no shared household (i.e., different concept than a commuting relationship). iii)not currently in a cohabiting relationship. iv) persons involved in LAT relationship may be opposite-sex as well as same-sex; iv) an implied relationship as couple (sibling relationships, friendships excluded). A sexual relationship may not be necessary. v)no restriction based on distances which could allow for more frequent contact vi)no minimum duration of the LAT relationship vii)a lower age limit in conjunction with not being a child living in the parental home would eliminate a large proportion of the temporary LAT arrangements. 2. Living Apart Together: definition

15. Do you have a …relationship with someone you consider a partner …. steady and who lives in intimate a separate household? couple regular romantic on-going consensual Possible reasons for living in separate households Frequency of contact with the partner Distance between households (or time required to travel between households) Duration of current relationship Characteristics of the other partner How many of the closest family and friends know about partner Future intentions Date would like to live common-law with or marry the partner 4. Living Apart Together: measurement

16. People who regularly live in a place that is different from their place of usual residence for a limited time (for instance two or more days a week, or throughout the university term, etc.) Factors related to the family life cycle, and the educational and professional history of individuals have produced an increased number of persons who commute between households. This new type of living arrangement, which involves both individuals and families, deeply affects people life and can not be ignored by official statistics, which should provide policy makers with information on new social facts, trends and needs This phenomenon refers to a wide and heterogeneous range of situations that contributes to make the private household, where the commuter lives part of the year, a “mobile” household or a variable structured household. 1. Commuters between households: definition

17. Most often, commuters between households may consider one of their usual places of residence as their main household, and the other as their secondary household. Three questions may nevertheless arise, making the situation much less simple than that. 1.objective definitions (for instance: the number of nights spent in each dwelling), may not be considered as relevant for the individuals, and people may be tempted to use their “own” definition; 2.some situations may be ambiguous and persons may have different views on the situation of a particular person (young adults who consider that they have left the parental nest, while their parents consider that their child is still living with them); 3.many situations of commuting between households are linked to complex family situations, which may be transitory and ill-defined. Union formation and dissolution are processes which now take time: during that time people may not know what their precise housing and family situation is. 2. Commuters between households: definition

18. The first step is to get some information on the existence of another “usual dwelling”. In some countries a secondary dwelling is identified, in relation to work or study. The question must be more general and include all cases where the persons have more than one “usual residence”. Reasons for commuting (work, family reasons, health reasons, etc.) Type of the other usual residence (private household, collective accommodation, etc.) Who are the persons living there (partner, parents, stepparent, friends etc.) How the respondent shares his/her time between both residences 3. Commuters between households: measurement

19. Question 2. Is that dwelling…. a private household a hotel, a boarding house hospital or hospice collective accommodation (please, specify) Then whether the individual is sharing the dwelling with other persons is of interest: (for commuters between private households) Question 3: Is that dwelling a main residence for some other persons? No, you are the only inhabitant Yes, for other persons who are not living here Yes, only for persons who are living here 4. Commuters between households: measurement

20. Question 4: In that other dwelling, does [the person] live with (multiple answers are possible)… A partner Both Parents A parent A stepparent Brothers, sisters, including half brothers and sisters Children or stepchildren Friends A further relevant issue is to know how the person shares his/her time between both “usual residences”. Question 5: Does [the person] live in this dwelling… 1. (Almost) all year 2. During the weekend or holidays=> How many days per year? 3. During the working days => How many days per week? 4. Some months in the year => How many months since last year? 5. Commuters between households: measurement

21. Thank you for your attention!