Merril Silverstein Andrus Gerontology Center University of Southern California, USA

1. Out-migration of Young Adults and Living Arrangements of the Elderly in Rural China: The Case of Chaohu Li Shuzhuo & Zhang Wenjuan Institute for Population and Development Studies Xi'an Jiaotong University, China Merril Silverstein Andrus Gerontology Center University of Southern California, USA

2. Background • Perspectives on Chinese rural elderly • Family support for old age • Rural-urban migration • Changing family structure and living arrangement

3. Factors affecting living arrangements • Preference for living alone or with others • Economic resources to maintain an independent household • Health status for living independently • Availability of kin, especially children, with whom coresidence is possible • Western elderly and urban Chinese elderly

4. Perspectives on living arrangements of rural Chinese elderly • Network-households and traditional marriage form • Son preference • House ownership and independent income • Reliance on children for financial and instrumental support

5. Research questions • Does out-migration of young adults affect their elderly parents’ living arrangements in rural China? Family support for old age • Do gender, children’s status, parents’ economic resources and health status affect parents’ living arrangements, especially in the context of increasing out-migration of young adults in rural China?

6. Data & Methods • Data Source • Longitudinal Study of the Well-being of the Elderly in Anhui Province, China. • Random sampling of 1,800 people aged 60 and over living in rural townships within Chaohu city, using a stratified multistage sampling method. • Baseline survey conducted in April 2001 and follow-up survey in Oct. 2003, by the Institute for Population and Development Studies, Xi’an Jiaotong University, with technical support from USC.

7. Anhui Province, China Chaohu

8. Samples • Our interest is the living arrangements between parents and children, the sample consists of 1,627 elderly with at least one living child from the 2001 baseline survey. • Method • Multinomial logistic regression

9. Dependent variable living arrangements of the elderly • Empty-nest family (living alone or with spouse) • Stem family (living with children or spouses of children, with/without grandchildren) • Skip-generation family (living with grandchildren but not children)

10. Independent variables • Living preference: Gender of parents and children • Status of children : Gender, whether within the village, marital status, and age of children’s offspring • Economic resources of the elderly: Occupation, educationalattainment, independent income, and house ownership • Physical health status of the elderly : ADL, age • Control variable: Marital status of the elderly

11. Descriptive Information • Living arrangements of the elderly 60 50 40 30 20 Males Percent 10 Females stem-family skip-generational alone or with spouse

12. Variables Elderly in stem household % Elderly in skip- generation household % Elderly in empty-nest household % Sons in the village (sons living with them excluded): None 64.1 60.8 35.8 One son 23.8 24.1 32.1 At least two sons 12.1 15.0 32.0 Daughters in the village (daughters living with them excluded):None 71.8 74.8 71.9 One daughter 22.6 21.3 22.2 At least two daughters 5.6 3.8 5.8 • Children’s status • The elderly living alone or with spouse are more likely to have sons in the same village than those in other groups.

13. Variables Elderly in stem household % Elderly in skip- generation household % Elderly in empty-nest household % Sons outside and not separated for job-related reason: None 65.2 16.1 42.9 One son 24.7 41.6 35.7 At least two sons 10.1 42.3 21.3 Daughters outside and not separated for job-related reason:None 32.9 20.6 22.2 One daughter 33.2 35.0 34.6 At least two daughters 33.9 44.4 43.2 Sons outside and separated for job-related reason:None 80.5 75.5 81.4 At least one 19.5 24.5 18.6 Daughters outside and separated for job-related reason: None 83.0 83.2 84.1 At least one 17.0 16.8 15.9 • The elderly in skip-generation household are more likely to have children outside the village than others

14. Variables Elderly in stem household % Elderly in skip- generation household % Elderly in empty-nest household % Sons outside with children 18 or younger:None 67.9 15.7 49.7 At least one 32.1 84.3 50.3 Daughters outside with children 18 or younger: None 52.9 24.8 35.1 At least one 47.1 75.2 64.9 Sons divorced, widowed or never married: None 71.7 77.6 83.5 At least one 28.3 22.4 16.5 Daughters divorced, widowed or never married: None 88.4 92.0 89.7 At least one 11.6 8.0 10.3 • Percentage of elderly with juvenile grandchildren whose parents are outside the village is highest among the elderly in skip-generation households

15. Variables Elderly in stem household % Elderly in skip- generation household % Elderly in empty-nest household % Occupation: Agricultural 97.1 93.7 94.5 Non-agricultural 2.9 6.3 5.5 Education: At least some formal education 19.1 21.0 22.1 No formal education 80.9 79.0 77.9 Economic income: No impendent income 63.4 29.0 37.4 Yes 36.6 71.0 62.6 House ownership: Rent or in other’s house 77.8 60.1 43.3 Owner 13.5 32.5 53.0 Joint ownership 8.7 7.3 3.7 • Economic resources • Economic resources of the elderly living with children are worse than those of other two groups

16. Variables Elderly in stem household % Elderly in skip- generation household % Elderly in empty-nest household% Number of ADL disability: 0 31.4 57.3 49.0 1 13.4 10.8 14.7 2 7.2 8.7 5.6 3 and over 48.0 23.1 30.6 Age: 60-74 48.2 80.4 64.0 75+ 51.8 19.6 36.0 • Health Status • The elderly in skip-generation households have better physical health status than those in other groups

17. Variables Odds ratios Stem-household Skip-generational household Gender:Male Female 0.878 1.000 Sons in the village (sons living with them excluded): None One son 0.241*** 0.466*** At least two sons 0.096*** 0.382*** Daughters in the village (daughters living with them excluded):None One daughter 0.853 1.179 At least two daughters 0.868 0.834 Regression Results • Gender preference • The elderly have significant son preference when choosing children for coresidence. • The elderly show no gender difference when choosing living arrangements

18. Status of children • The elderly with more out-migrating sons are more likely to be in skip-generational households and less likely to live with children. • Additional sons separated for job-related reason increase likelihood of the elderly living with children. • Additional sons in the same village decrease parents’ likelihood in stem and skip-generational households, and increase their likelihood to live alone or with spouses. • The elderly with sons in marriage crisis are more likely to live with children.

19. Variables Odds ratios In stem-household In skip-generation household Sons in the village (sons living with them excluded): None One son 0.241*** 0.466*** At least two sons 0.096*** 0.382*** Daughters in the village (daughters living with them excluded):None One daughter 0.853 1.179 At least two daughters 0.868 0.834 Sons outside and not separated for job-related reason: None One son 0.315*** 1.299 At least two sons 0.122*** 1.541 Daughters outside and not separated for job-related reason:None One daughter 0.688+ .804 At least two daughters 0.614* .832 Sons outside and separated for job-related reason:None At least one 1.176+ 1.015 daughters outside and separated for job-related reason:None At least one 1.009 0.888 Sons outside with children 18 or younger:None At least one 0.885 2.950*** Daughters outside with children 18 or younger:None At least one 0.937 1.423 Sons divorced, widowed or never married: None At least one 4.886*** 1.442+ Daughters divorced, widowed or never married: None At least one 1.090 0.877 Regression results of children’s status

20. Variables Odds ratios Stem-household Skip-generation household Occupation: Agricultural Non-agricultural 0.749 1.444 Education:At least some formal education No formal education 0.907 1.643* House ownership: Rent or in other’s house Owner 0.146*** 0.401*** Joint ownership 1.118 1.136 • Economic resources • The elderly without any formal education are more likely to stay in skip-generational household • The elderly with independent income or house ownership are more likely to live alone or with spouses

21. Variables Odds ratios In stem-household In skip- generation household ADL 0.954*** 1.029 Age 0.990 0.969* • Health status The elderly in relative good health status are more likely to live alone or in skip-generation household.

22. Conclusions • Out-migration of young adults has significant influences on their parents’ living arrangements. • Gender, children’s status, parents’ economic resources and health status significantly affect parents’ living arrangements. • Elderly’s need for support has become the primary cause for their coresidence with adult children, which is different from the Western elderly and the Chinese urban elderly.

23. Need of children (i.e. child-care) also affects the living arrangements of the elderly, when the parents are in good physical health status. • The elderly show strong son preference in selecting coresidence or providing grandchild care in skip-generational household. • The skip-generational household is a special arrangement mostly caused by the out-migration of adult children, in which parents provide daily care for grandchildren.

24. Thank you!