Ann Berrington, University of Southampton
Acknowledgements to Juliet Stone, Peter Tammes & Steve Roberts
Economic Precariousness and Young Adults’ Housing Transitions in the UK
Deconstructing Generation Rent: Young People’s Housing Options and Future Welfare, 13th February 2015, University of Sheffield
Overview
1. Changing socio-economic and policy context
2. With whom do young adults live?
3. Economic precariousness and leaving home
4. Economic precariousness and returning home
5. Young non-resident fathers
6. Discussion
1. Changing socio-economic and policy context
Changing context within which UK young adults making their transitions to adulthood
• Increased enrolment in HE.– Increased student debt.
• Increased youth unemployment and economic insecurity for those in work.– Part time, temporary & short hours contracts.
• Declining affordability of housing.– Residualisation of social housing sector.– Increased house prices, lack of mortgage credit.– Increased rental prices, deposits.
• Welfare retrenchment.– Restrictions in housing benefit
4
Unemployment rate 1992-2013 according to graduate status, UK
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Q2 19
92
Q2 19
93
Q21
994
Q2 19
95
Q2 19
96
Q2 19
97
Q2 19
98
Q2 19
99
Q2 20
00
Q2 20
01
Q2 20
02
Q2 20
03
Q2 20
04
Q2 20
05
Q2 20
06
Q2 20
07
Q2 20
08
Q2 20
09
Q2 20
10
Q2 20
11
Q2 20
12
Q2 20
13
Une
mploymen
t Rate
Recent graduates Non recent graduatesNon graduates aged 21‐30 Non graduates aged over 30
Source: ONS, 2014
2. With whom do young adults live?
Household Type by Economic Activity Status. Women aged 25-29. UK 2009/10
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
econ active econinactive
unemployed FT student family care
% in
each living arrangem
ent
sharing with others
living alone
lone parent
with partner
with parents
employed
Source: UKHLS, w 1
Household Type by Economic Activity Status. Men aged 25-29. UK 2009/10
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
econ active econinactive
unemployed FT student
% in
each living arrangem
ent
sharing with othersliving alonelone parentwith partnerwith parents
employed
Source: UKHLS, w 1
Tenure distribution of young women living outside parental home according to age and household type, UK 2012.
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
With partner
Lone parent
Alone
Sharing
With partner
Lone parent
Alone
Sharing
With partner
Lone parent
Alone
Sharing
20‐24 25‐29 30‐34
WOMEN
Owner Occupier Private Rent Social Rent
Source: UK LFS. Berrington & Stone (2014)
An existing trend towards more co-residence with parents accelerated in period 2008-2012
% males and females 20‐34 living with a parent, 2008 and 2012, UKMales Females
Source: UK LFS. Berrington & Stone (2014) Young adults’ transitions to residential independence in Britain: The role of social and housing policy. In Hamilton, Antonucci & Roberts (Eds.) Young People and Social Policy in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.
01020304050607080
20‐21 22‐24 25‐29 30‐34
20082012
Age group
01020304050607080
20‐21 22‐24 25‐29 30‐34
20082012
Age group
10
3. What is the impact of economic precariousness on chances of leaving parental home?
Dimensions Types Indicators1‐Precarious labour market A‐labour insecurity i‐(Un)employed
ii‐Occupational class & mobility
B‐income insecurity i‐Earnings, wages2‐Precarious employment relations
A‐Employment insecurity i‐Part‐time contractii‐Temporary contractiii‐Other: seasonal, shifts
B‐Skill reproduction insecurity
i‐Training & development
C‐Work insecurity i‐Protection against accidents, illness, inferior treatment
3‐Precarious social and political relations
A‐Representation insecurity i‐Trade union representation
ii‐Right to strikeB‐Social insecurity i‐Social benefits & social policies
ii‐Role of partner, parents or other relatives
Table 1: Dimensions and indicators of economic precarity (See CPC Working paper #55 / CPC Briefing paper # 22)
Adapted from Kalleberg (2009), Standing (2011), and Wilson and Ebert (2013).
Modelling Transition Out of Parental Home
• Analysis of paired waves of Understanding Society (UKHLS) data waves 1‐3
• Sample: men and women aged 16‐29 living at home at t0• Logistic hazards model of leaving home between t0 and t1• Parental background and individual level explanatory
variables
• I will show findings for employed young men Secure (i.e. permanent full time work)
vs Insecure work (i.e. part time or temporary work)
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
Highest quartileof HH income
2nd highestquartile HHincome
3rd highestquartile HHincome
Lowest quartileHH income
Permanent full time job Insecure job
Predicted annual probabilities of leaving parental home by job security and parental household income. UK employed males, 16‐22, 2009‐2012.
Other variables held at reference category: white, higher educated, living in London, high maternal education, living with two natural parents
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
Two natural parents Two ‐ other parents Lone parent
Permanent full time job Insecure job
Predicted annual probabilities of leaving parental home by job security and parental family structure. UK employed males, 16‐22, 2009‐2012.
Other variables held at reference category: white, higher educated, living in London, high maternal education, highest quartile of HH income
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
White Indian Pakistani &Bangladeshi
Other and mixed
Full time permanent job Insecure job
Predicted annual probabilities of leaving parental home by job security and ethnicity. UK employed males, 23‐29, 2009‐2012.
Other variables held at reference category: higher educated, living in London, high maternal education, highest quartile of HH income, living with two natural parents
4. Economic precariousness and returning to parental home
PARENTAL CIRCUMSTANCESParental socio‐demographics
INDIVIDUAL ATTRIBUTESAgeSex
Parenthood statusIncome
RETURN TO PARENTAL HOME
TURNING POINTSUnemployment End of education
Partnership dissolution
SOCIO‐ECONOMIC & POLICY CONTEXT 1991‐2008
Conceptual Framework
18
Source: Stone, J. et al. (2014) Gender, turning‐points and boomerangs: returning home in the UK. Demography, 51, (1), 257‐276.
Modelling the Transition Back to Parental HomeStone, Berrington and Falkingham (2014)
• Analysis of paired waves from British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) 1991‐2008
• Sample: men and women aged 20‐34 living away from home at t0
• Model: logistic regression hazards model of returning to live with parent(s) between t0 and t1
• Covariates: Parental / individual attributes and turning point variables – e.g. change in employment status, partnership status
19
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
New student
Student to unemployed
Student to employed
Employed to unemployed
Unemployed to employed
Stable student
Stable unemployed
Stable employed
Predicted probability
MEN WOMEN
Annual predicted probability of returning home according to change in economic activity, by sex. Men and women aged 20‐24.
Note other variables held constant at their baseline value
Source: Stone, J. et al. (2014) Gender, turning-points and boomerangs: returning home in the UK. Demography, 51, (1), 257-276.
Partnership dissolution and returning home
21
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Parent
Non-parent
Predicted probability
MEN WOMEN
Predicted probability of returning to the parental home after union dissolution by gender and parenthood status. Men and women aged 20‐24
Source: Stone, J. et al. (2014) Gender, turning-points and boomerangs: returning home in the UK. Demography, 51, (1), 257-276.
Note other variables held constant at their baseline value
5. Young non resident fathers
Young Non‐resident Fathers• UK distinctive in high proportion of children not living with
both natural parents.
• Rules for social housing entitlement & housing benefit assume one parent has primary care of child.
• But shared parenting takes place and is encouraged.
• Non‐resident parent will be classed as not having children and hence not qualify for e.g. access to social housing, will be affected by SAR & ‘bedroom tax’.
How many young men are reported to be non‐resident with at least one of their children?
Age group Non‐resident fathers
% of all men % of fathers
20‐24 3.1% 37.2%
25‐29 7.7% 26.3%
30‐34 9.5% 19.5%
Total (20‐34) 5.4% 24.2%
Reported prevalence of non‐resident fathers in the UK by age group, UKHLS, 2009‐2010
Source: UK LFS. Berrington & Stone (2014) Young adults’ transitions to residential independence in Britain: The role of social and housing policy. In Hamilton, Antonucci & Roberts (Eds.) Young People and Social Policy in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.
With whom are young non‐resident fathers living?
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
20‐24 25‐29 30‐34
Percen
tage (w
eighted)
Age group
With parents With partner Living alone Sharing
Distribution of living arrangements among UK non‐resident fathers by age group, 2009‐2010. UKHLS.
Source: UK LFS. Berrington & Stone (2014) Young adults’ transitions to residential independence in Britain: The role of social and housing policy. In Hamilton, Antonucci & Roberts (Eds.) Young People and Social Policy in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.
6. Discussion
Discussion • Are these trends result of short term crisis or part of a longer term change in nature of transitions to adulthood?
• At what age should young adults be seen as no longer reliant upon parental support?
• Lack of ability of some vulnerable groups to return home.
• Need supported pathways for early, non student leavers.
• Importance of policy to recognise gender and ethnic differences in housing pathways.
Discussion cont. • At what age should we expect young people to live in shared housing?
• Need to increase availability of stable, good quality rented accommodation for increasing numbers of young families.
• Regulation of PRS – new life course phases.• Current housing policy supports main carer of dependent children but ignores non‐resident parent.
• Welfare cuts e.g. SAR and Bedroom tax compound this.
References
Berrington, A. and Stone, J. (2013) Outlining a future research agenda for studies of young adults’ transitions to residential independence. ESRC Centre for Population Change Working Paper # 38. http://www.cpc.ac.uk/publications/cpc_working_papers.phpBerrington, A. and Stone, J. (2014) Young adults’ transitions to residential independence in Britain: The role of social and housing policy. In Hamilton, M., Antonucci, L. & Roberts, S. (Eds.) Young People and Social Policy in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.Berrington, A. et al. (2014) Economic Precariousness and Young Adults’ Living Arrangements., ESRC Centre for Population Change Working Paper. http://www.cpc.ac.uk/publications/cpc_working_papers.phpStone,J.,et al. (2011) Demographic Research, 25(20):629‐66. The changing determinants of UK young adults' living arrangements. http://www.demographic‐research.org/volumes/vol25/20/25‐20.pdfStone, J. et al. (2014) Gender, turning‐points and boomerangs: returning home in the UK. Demography, 51, (1), 257‐276.
29
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by ESRC Grant numbers RES-625-28-0001 and ES/K003453/1. The Centre for Population Change is a joint initiative between the University of Southampton and a consortium of Scottish Universities in partnership with ONS and NRS. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to ONS or NRS.
Understanding Society is carried out by the Institute for Social and Economic Research at the University of Essex. The UK Labour Force Survey is carried out by the Office for National Statistics. Access to these data is provided by the UK Data Archive. The original data creators, depositors or copyright holders, the funders of the Data Collections (if different) and the UK Data Archive bear no responsibility for their further analysis or interpretation.
30
