Tohoku Forum for Creativity(TFC) at Tohoku University,Sendai, Japan, July 22, 2014

The Labor Market, Family andPoverty in S. Korea and Japan

Kwang-Yeong Shin ∙ Ju Kong
Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea

Background* Neo-liberal globalization* The expansion of precarious employment
 The rise of working poor
* The Precariat  New class (Guy Standing,2011; Mike Savage and Fiona Devine,2011)?
Non-regular workers  Precarious lifeIssues Are there sociological understandings ofpoverty in social stratification research?
 The highest proportion of non-regularemployment in South Korea and Japan Reconfiguration of family and the labor market
shape poverty at the societal level.
* Family as a social institution tapping socialchanges such as family dissolution , aging, andcasualization of work

Precarious Work and Poverty* New forms of precarious employment:
Non-regular employment- part-time jobs
- fixed term, temporary jobs
- agency jobs with low wage and poor social protection* The rise of the new poverty
1) Old poverty – the elderly, the disabled,
the unemployed, etc.
2) New poverty – the working poor* However, an understanding of the transformation of the labormarket is not enough to understand poverty at the societal
level.

A Sociological Approach to Poverty* The labor market-based approach (thesociology of labor market, social stratification)* The family-based approach- One of key social institutions mediating theimpact of the labor market.
☞ The synthesis of the labor market and family
approach is needed.
* Missing Link - Familylabor market – family – redistribution ofresources (inequality, poverty)< Bring the Family Back In >

Social Change and Family Income in S. Korea
Labor Market
ChangeFamily Change

Population
AgingFamily
IncomeDistribution

Data and Methods* Korea: The Korea Welfare Panel Study(KWPS, 2006 - )Japan: The Keio Household Panel Survey
Data (KHPS, 2004 - )* Targets: Adult households,
The two waves of 2006 and 2012
* Definition of poverty: the income status with lessthan 50% of median income

Distribution and Trends of Family* Korea- The male breadwinner model is still the dominant
type of family.

- Family with non-regular employment: decrease
from 29% in 2006 to 24% in 2012
* Japan- The dual earner model is more prevalent thanthe male breadwinner model.
- Family with non-regular employment: increase
from 30% in 2006 to 33% in 2012

Diversity of Family TypeSouth Korea

JapanFamily Type／YearModel2006

2012

2006

2012

1h(R)w(R)

Dual

8.14%

13.89%

13.39%

11.30%

2h(R)w(IR)

Dual

5.35%

7.31%

17.16%

18.67%

3h(R)w(N)M-B

31.27%

25.53%

27.24%

24.84%

4h(IR)w(R)

Dual

1.81%

1.93%

1.23%

1.26%

5h(IR)w(IR)

Dual

3.44%

2.72%

1.77%

2.32%

6h(IR)w(N)

M-B

8.73%

3.78%

3.08%

3.13%

7h(N)w(R)

F-B

1.95%

2.46%

1.46%

1.66%

8h(N)w(IR)

F-B

2.07%

1.88%

1.89%

2.29%

9h(N)w(N)DNE

10.44%

8.09%

9.77%

10.98%

10h(R)w(X)Single

4.17%

6.13%

6.62%

6.68%

11h(IR)w(X)Single

3.15%

2.46%

2.04%

1.75%

12h(N)w(X)Single

2.25%

3.32%

2.04%

2.27%

13h(X)w(R)Single

3.81%

6.09%

5.35%

5.45%

14h(X)w(IR)Single

4.62%

4.18%

3.81%

3.61%

15h(X)w(N)Single8.79%

10.24%

3.16%

3.79%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Total

[Note] R: Regular, IR: Non-regular, N: No income, No Job, X: No spouse; DNE: Dual Non-Earners;
M-B: Male-Breadwinner, F-B: Female-BreadwinnerFamily Type and Poverty Rate

* In Common between Korea and Japan:- High differences of poverty rate depending onfamily types- Couples with both non-regular jobs shows thevery low level of poverty rate, less than 50% ofaverage poverty rate.
* Differences between Korea and Japan:- The differences of poverty rate: Korea > Japan- Female head’s penalty: Korea > Japan- Single head’s penalty: Korea < Japan

Poverty Rate in 2012
80.00%

70.00%

60.00%

50.00%

40.00%

JapanKorea

30.00%

20.00%

10.00%

0.00%[Note] R: Regular, IR: Non-regular, N: No income, No Job, X: No spousePoverty Rates of Family types and of labor market, 2012
South Korea

JapanFamily Type

Total

Husband

Wife

Total

HusbandWife

1h(R)w(R)

1.02%

5.83%

20.55%

2.03%

15.67%

14.36%

2h(R)w(IR)

1.35%

8.93%

45.49%

3.23%

28.69%

25.64%

3h(R)w(N)

6.47%

8.88%

-

5.20%

43.27%-

4h(IR)w(R)

0.87%

14.36%

28.22%

6.82%

22.22%

24.44%

5h(IR)w(IR)

1.23%

16.47%

36.29%

3.70%

28.75%

35%

6h(IR)w(N)12.68%

25.39%-

13.76%

62.39%-

7h(N)w(R)15.27%-

34.82%

10.34%-

63.64%

8h(N)w(IR)26.51%-

52.02%

17.50%-

53.42%

910
11h(N)w(N)h(R)w(X)h(IR)w(X)45.04%
12.93%
37.51%

9.04%
28.58%-

19.58%
17.60%
36.07%

7.14%
16.67%-

12h(N)w(X)76.06%--50.63%--

13h(X)w(R)27.57%-

27.47%

27.37%-

12.37%

14h(X)w(IR)45.46%-

48.16%

44.44%-

36.97%

15h(X)w(N)73.85%--

56.06%--Total22.32%

11.31%

38.75%

13.62%

32.02%[Note] R: Regular, IR: Non-regular, N: No income, No Job, X: No spouseHousehold Income Distributions
by Family type

KR: Korea
JP: Japan

South Korea
Poverty in 2012
h(R)w(R)h(R)w(IR)h(R)w(N)h(IR)w(R)h(IR)w(IR)h(IR)w(N)h(N)w(R)h(N)w(IR)h(N)w(N)h(R)w(X)h(IR)w(X)h(N)w(X)h(X)w(R)h(X)w(IR)h(X)w(N)Young( -34)

0.0762
1.518***-0.594-0.5651.748***
1.861***
2.801***
3.101***
2.485***
3.525***
5.154***
3.043***
3.857***
4.129***-(2) Equivalised
household income
0.11
1.360***
0.02670.596
1.778***
1.490***
2.417***
2.942***
1.589***
2.388***
4.354***
1.788***
2.710***
3.372***-Middle(35-49)-0.301

Old(50-64)
Elderly(65- )Below middle
High school
2 year college
4 year college+
OthersConstant
N
Pseudo R2-0.0205
1.079***-0.895***-1.171***-1.912***-3.505***5732
0.4238(1) Income

Japan

-0.01
0.681*
0.938
0.702
1.529***
0.547
1.194**
1.486***
1.859***
2.458***
3.016***
2.500***
2.766***
3.124***-(4) Equivalised householdincome-0.3390.652*
0.91
0.807
1.441***
0.358
0.839
1.432***
0.877**
1.462***
2.035***
1.641***
2.264***
2.315***-0.913**0.782***

0.905***

0.707*
1.533***-0.976***-1.025***-1.883***-4.034***5732
0.34350.992***
0.486*-0.734***-0.878***-1.283***-0.625*-3.173***
3348
0.157

0.686**-0.175-0.753***-0.877***-1.257***-0.883**-2.870***
3348
0.092

(3) Income

Results of Logistic Regression* The forms of family play an important role in therisk of poverty of family.
* The elderly in Japan shows much lower possibilityof poverty than in Korea.
- The Japanese elderly are enjoying benefits of economic
growth and prosperity when they were young.

* The effect of education on lowering the risk ofpoverty is much larger in Korea than in Japan.
- Stronger educational stratification in Korea than inJapan

Poverty in 2012
h(R)w(R)h(R)w(IR)h(R)w(N)h(IR)w(R)h(IR)w(IR)h(IR)w(N)h(N)w(R)h(N)w(IR)h(N)w(N)h(R)w(X)h(IR)w(X)h(N)w(X)h(X)w(R)h(X)w(IR)h(X)w(N)Young( -34)
Middle(35-49)
Old(50-64)
Elderly(65- )Below middle
High school
2 year college
4 year college+
otherPoverty in 2006
Constant
N
Pseudo R2

South Korea
(1)
0.586
1.078**
0.529
0.871
1.461***
1.380**
1.877***
1.946***
2.137***
2.675***
3.588***
2.556***
2.813***
2.861***
0.680**
1.133***
2.474***-0.980***-1.261***-1.612***

(2)
0.665
0.928*
0.518
0.934*
1.410***
1.249**
1.421***
1.605***
1.944***
2.448***
2.464***
2.117***
2.397***
2.057***
0.676**
1.068***
2.147***-0.749***-0.894**-1.232***-3.589***
5731
0.333

1.717***-3.884***
5731
0.388

Japan
(1)
0.309
0.340
(empty)-0.295
0.878
0.386
1.128
0.492
1.376***
1.974***
1.692**
1.986***
2.609***
2.681***
0.475
0.942***
0.787*-0.607**-0.747*-1.210***-0.400-2.728***
1558
0.131

(2)
0.251
0.264
(empty)-0.2330.607-0.1590.675-0.294
0.520
0.940
0.618
1.344**
1.388**
1.516**
0.387
0.797**
0.667-0.365-0.582-0.778*-0.0372.249***-2.980***
1558
0.230

Conclusion* In sociology, there has been a few theoretical andempirical attempts to explain poverty at thesocietal level, focusing on work at an individuallevel too much.
* The role of family, in particular family type or family
composition, in income distribution should bereaddressed for a sociological understanding ofinequality and poverty at the societal level.
* In conclusion, poverty is an outcome of complexsocial dynamics with regard to work and familysystem under the institutional configuration.