Abstract
This paper reviews the literature in three key areas covered by an Australian
Research Council grant, ‘Social Inclusion and Exclusion among Australia’s Children:
A Spatial Perspective’ (DP 560192). These are the evidence on the position of children
in society, more particularly estimates of child poverty in Australia and how these
compare with the level of child poverty in other developed countries; the
methodological issues of measuring the broader concept of social exclusion and the
results from applying this framework in Australia and other developed countries;
and finally the Australian and international evidence on the relationship between
area of residence and social exclusion. A risk of social exclusion arises when children
suffer from multiple disadvantages that make it difficult for them to actively
participate in society.
The international evidence shows Australia in the middle of the league table on child
poverty and that child poverty increased in many OECD countries over the 1990s.
While the causes are complex, research suggests that demographic factors such as
the age of the parents and family structure, labour market factors including the
unemployment rate, and the tax and transfer system are important determinants of
the level of child poverty. Children in jobless households, sole parent families and
members of minority groups faced the greatest risk of living in poverty.
The social exclusion framework examines a broader range of indicators than the
more limited focus on household income as a measure of poverty. These include
indicators of labour market status, educational attainment, housing status, health
and social interaction. The argument for combining this into one summary measure
of wellbeing must be traded off against the benefits of presenting more detailed
results on individual indicators. The evidence shows that while income is correlated
with many of the other indicators of risk of social exclusion, it is far from being
perfectly correlated and additional insight can be gained from using a wider range of
indicators.
The final research area of interest was the relationship between area of residence and
social exclusion. While there is some evidence of a neighbourhood effect on
outcomes, it appears to be less important than individual and family factors in
determining disadvantage. The literature on the position of children in Australia in
the social exclusion framework is limited and this paper provides a basis for our
further exploration of this area.
Research Council grant, ‘Social Inclusion and Exclusion among Australia’s Children:
A Spatial Perspective’ (DP 560192). These are the evidence on the position of children
in society, more particularly estimates of child poverty in Australia and how these
compare with the level of child poverty in other developed countries; the
methodological issues of measuring the broader concept of social exclusion and the
results from applying this framework in Australia and other developed countries;
and finally the Australian and international evidence on the relationship between
area of residence and social exclusion. A risk of social exclusion arises when children
suffer from multiple disadvantages that make it difficult for them to actively
participate in society.
The international evidence shows Australia in the middle of the league table on child
poverty and that child poverty increased in many OECD countries over the 1990s.
While the causes are complex, research suggests that demographic factors such as
the age of the parents and family structure, labour market factors including the
unemployment rate, and the tax and transfer system are important determinants of
the level of child poverty. Children in jobless households, sole parent families and
members of minority groups faced the greatest risk of living in poverty.
The social exclusion framework examines a broader range of indicators than the
more limited focus on household income as a measure of poverty. These include
indicators of labour market status, educational attainment, housing status, health
and social interaction. The argument for combining this into one summary measure
of wellbeing must be traded off against the benefits of presenting more detailed
results on individual indicators. The evidence shows that while income is correlated
with many of the other indicators of risk of social exclusion, it is far from being
perfectly correlated and additional insight can be gained from using a wider range of
indicators.
The final research area of interest was the relationship between area of residence and
social exclusion. While there is some evidence of a neighbourhood effect on
outcomes, it appears to be less important than individual and family factors in
determining disadvantage. The literature on the position of children in Australia in
the social exclusion framework is limited and this paper provides a basis for our
further exploration of this area.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Place of Publication | Canberra |
Publisher | NATSEM |
Pages | 1-43 |
Number of pages | 43 |
Volume | 62 |
ISBN (Print) | 1740882628 |
Publication status | Published - 2006 |