1. EMPLOYMENT BEHAVIOUR OF THE ELDERLY
IN THAILAND
Thuttai Keeratipongpaiboon
Department of Economics
School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London
The 11th IFA Global Conference on Ageing
28 May – 1 June 2012. Prague, the Czech Republic
International Federation on Ageing (IFA)
A part of the CSEAS Project

2. Structure
1 2 3 4
1 Introduction
2 Old-Age Employment Situation in Thailand
3 Determinant of Employment Decisions of the Elderly
4 Conclusion
2

3. Introduction
1 2 3 4
Significance of the Research
• Increasing longevity: longer period of retirement
• Thai elderly people cannot rely on their own savings and invisible pensions: need family supports
• Urbanisation has deteriorated strength of family relationship: what happen to Thai elderly people?
• Possibility: a number of Thai elderly people have to be economically active for their own survival.
• Research aim: to study dynamic of employment behaviour of the elderly in Thailand
Methodology
• Data
• Socio-Economic Survey (SES) Data, 1990-2007 (National Statistical Office)
• Survey of the Older Persons in Thailand (SOP), 2007 (National Statistical Office)
• Secondary data from reliable sources
• Methodology
• Descriptive Analysis
• Econometric Analysis – using a Probit regression model
3

4. Situation of Population Ageing in Thailand
1 2 3 4
Old-age Dependency Ratio is on an upward trend: Thailand has the highest rate in the SEA region
14,0
Old-Age Dependency Ratio (% 65+/15-64)
12,0
10,0
8,0
6,0
4,0
2,0
0
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Brunei Darussalam Cambodia Indonesia LAOS
Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore
Thailand Timor-Leste Viet Nam
Remark: an old-age dependency ratio is defined as a ratio of population 65+ per 100 population 15-64.
Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2011). World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision, CD-ROM Edition. 4

5. Summary of the Elderly in Thailand
1 2 3 4
Share of the Elderly by Living Arrangements, Thailand, 1990-2007 In 2007, the majority are:
• Attaining primary education or less
(91.78%)
• Female (56.27%)
• Household heads (59.87%)
• Married (60.68%)
• Able to go out without assistance
(healthy, 87.08%)
• Not working (58.09%)
• Not living in a household with pension
incomes (94.60%)
• Living in the Northeast (35.39%)
• Living with their children (60.39%)
Share of the Elderly by employment situation, Thailand, 1990-2007 • Living in three-generational households
(36.92%)
Average age of Thai elderly increased
from 69.15 (1990) to 69.72 years.
Remark: *excluding skipped generation households
Source: author’s own calculation from the 1990-2007 SES data
5

6. Old-Age Employment Situation
1 2 3 4
Labour Force Participation Rates, the World Regions, 2005
Age Group
Region/Country1 25-54 55-64 65+
Men Women Men Women Men Women
World 95.1 66.7 73.5 38.7 30.2 11.3
Developed Countries 91.9 75.3 63.9 44.9 13.4 6.3
Economies in Transition 90.7 81.3 52.6 31.2 14.2 7.8
Africa 96.2 61.0 86.5 48.3 57.4 25.8
Asia 96.3 64.2 77.6 35.4 38.0 13.2
Latin America and the Caribbean 94.3 64.3 76.1 37.2 37.2 13.7
Oceania 87.4 73.3 76.0 60.6 51.4 33.4
Thailand 95.9 82.2 81.8 65.7 41.0 21.7
Source: United Nations (2007, p.61, Table IV.2), Development in an Ageing World; Author’s own calculation from the ILO’s data, http://laborsta.ilo.org/ accessed on 12 march 2012.
• The labour-force participation rates of Thai elderly
persons are quite high; higher than the world
average.
• Almost one-fifth of Thai females aged 65 and over
were found in the workforce in 2005.
• The LFP rates of females are quite high
comparatively to Asia, LAC, Economies in Transition
and the World.
• The share of elderly in Thailand’s labour force is on
an upward trend; increasing from 3.7% to 7.0%
Source: summarised from the Ministry of Labour (2007), The Situation of Old-Age
Employment in Thailand.
during 1986-2006.
6

7. Old-Age Employment Situation
Situations of Old-Age Labour Force, Thailand, 1986-2006 1 2 3 4
•Trends: more females, more older elderly (65+), better educated.
•The majority are self-employed (60.97% in 2006). More elderly people are recently found in the private sector.
Source: summarised from the Ministry of Labour (2007), The Situation of Old-Age Employment in Thailand.

8. Old-Age Employment Situation
1 2 3 4
Old-Age Employment Situations Thailand by Living Arrangements, 2007
Source: author’s own calculation from the 2007 SOP data 8

9. Old-Age Employment Situation
1 2 3 4
The Situation of Old-Age Employment in Thailand, by Living Arrangements and Age Group, 2007
Percentage of Economically Active Elderly Persons
70
61.7
60
55.0
52.1 53.6
in Each Age Group (%)
50 47.3
45.6 45.0
42.6 43.0
39.5
40 33.4
35.6 35.6 35.6
33.0 34.0 32.4
31.1
29.6
30
26.8 25.1
22.4 23.4 21.6 23.3
20.7
20
16.8
13.8 15.1 13.7
14.1
10 6.7
5.1 7.6
6.4
0
Total Elderly (60+) Total Elderly (65+) 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80 and over
Age Groups (Year)
Three-or-More-Generational Households Two-Generational Households (excl. Skipped) Skipped Generation Households
One-Generational Households All Living Arrangements
Source: author’s own calculation from the 2007 SOP data 9

10. Old-Age Employment Situation
1 2 3 4
Reasons for Remaining in the Labour Force of the Elderly, by living arrangements, 2007
100%
80%
51.72 43.86 54.88 57.41
60% 54.83
40%
20% 41.49
36.35 34.83 34.60 33.20
0%
All Living Arrangements Three-or-More- Two-Generational S kipped Generation One-Generational
Generational Households Households (exc S kipped) Households Households
Still Healthy Looking after themselves/family Looking after their children
Noone can replace the job Not retire yet Having debt
Spend time Help child(ren)/ family members Others
Source: author’s own calculation from the 2007 SOP data 10

11. Old-Age Employment Situation
1 2 3 4
Reasons for Leaving the Labour Force of the Elderly, by living arrangements, 2007
100%
80%
60%
61.12
72.61 77.80
71.10 69.94
40%
20%
19.12
9.13 8.59 8.15 7.03
0%
All Living Arrangements Three-or-More-Generational Two-Generational Skipped Generation O ne-Generational
Households Households (exc Skipped) Households Households
Household working/ looking after family members S pouse/Child(ren) do not allow to work Waiting for next season
Too old Incapable for work with disability Illness
Voluntary idle Looking or waiting for a job Pension official
To rest Others
Source: author’s own calculation from the 2007 SOP data 11

12. Determinant of Old-Age Employment
Year Year 1 2 3 4
Variables Variables
1990 1994 1998 2004 2007 1990 1994 1998 2004 2007
I. Demographic Factors III. Household Characteristics
- Age -0.027*** -0.028*** -0.029*** -0.029*** -0.028*** - Central 0.049 0.050 0.073 0.048 0.126***
(-11.14) (-14.41) (-18.38) (-17.17) (-22.15) (0.61) (0.84) (1.19) (1.40) (3.78)
- Secondary Education -0.207*** -0.018 -0.012 -0.014 -0.037 - North 0.032 -0.022 0.050 0.040 0.122***
(-3.31) (-0.30) (-0.19) (-0.35) (-1.21) (0.39) (-0.38) (0.81) (1.14) (3.53)
- Bachelor’s Degree 0.011 -0.107 0.050 -0.038 -0.117*** - Northeast -0.013 0.055 -0.020 0.058 0.112***
(0.10) (-1.16) (0.43) (-0.73) (-2.64) (-0.16) (0.90) (-0.36) (1.62) (3.25)
- Master’s Degree or Higher 0.187 -0.024 -0.204** - South 0.170* 0.081 0.125** 0.127*** 0.187***
(1.40) (-0.16) (-2.45) (1.84) (1.25) (1.97) (3.21) (4.91)
- Male 0.118*** 0.056* 0.113*** 0.075*** 0.165*** - Rural -0.073* 0.000 0.013 -0.060*** -0.035**
(2.67) (1.72) (4.19) (3.32) (8.83) (-1.65) (0.02) (0.39) (-3.72) (-2.46)
- Household Head 0.177*** 0.262*** 0.188*** 0.273*** 0.228*** - Live in Three-or-More- -0.040 -0.017 -0.125*** -0.056*
(3.37) (6.90) (7.11) (12.40) (12.23) Generational Household (-0.69) (-0.41) (-3.07) (-1.84)
- Married 0.191*** 0.220*** 0.173*** 0.177*** 0.156*** - Live in Two-Generational -0.085 -0.208*** -0.154*** -0.230*** -0.198***
(4.81) (6.87) (7.13) (7.73) (8.42) Household (-1.65) (-5.72) (-5.51) (-9.10) (-9.35)
- Able to go out by Themselves 0.269*** - Live in Skipped Generation 0.288*** 0.280*** 0.309*** 0.254*** 0.295***
without Assistance (10.98) Household (4.39) (5.92) (7.46) (7.63) (10.00)
- Access to Medical Welfare -0.014 0.004 - Household Size -0.210*** -0.205*** -0.186*** -0.213*** -0.256***
(-0.40) (0.11) (-10.76) (-9.73) (-13.61) (-15.37) (-22.38)
II. Economic Factors - Household In the Agricultural 0.086** 0.114*** 0.102*** 0.430*** 0.386***
- Pensions (Yes) -0.086 -0.145** -0.066 -0.145*** -0.114*** Sector (2.25) (3.57) (4.15) (20.47) (20.59)
(-1.23) (-1.99) (-1.27) (-3.05) (-3.09) - Number of Recipients in -0.119*** -0.133*** -0.129*** 0.001
- Transfer Payments (Yes) 0.024 -0.026 0.012 -0.026 Household (-4.96) (-7.05) (-7.50) (0.12)
(0.61) (-0.88) (0.58) (-1.31) - Number of Earners in Household 0.431*** 0.493*** 0.465*** 0.438*** 0.494***
- Poverty (Yes) 0.055 0.093** 0.036 0.080*** 0.024 (15.17) (19.82) (23.57) (27.01) (34.02)
(1.27) (2.50) (1.01) (2.67) (0.90) Number of Observations 2,279 5,861 6,913 15,478 20,120
- Savings (Yes) 0.007 -0.017 0.014 -0.003 -0.012 Wald Chi-Squared 474.66 894.06 1085.73 1883.94 2785.62
(0.22) (-0.67) (0.60) (-0.21) (-0.73) Probability > Chi-Squared 0.0000*** 0.0000*** 0.0000*** 0.0000*** 0.0000***
Pseudo R-Squared 0.4974 0.5670 0.5660 0.6041 0.6240
Log Pseudo-Likelihood -796.59 -1724.72 -1986.62 -4175.35 -5144.71
Source: author’s own calculation from the 1990-2007 SES data
12

13. Determinant of Old-Age Employment
1 2 3 4
Significant Factors:
•Demographic Factors: age(-), male(+), household head(+), married(+), healthy(+)
•Economic Factors: pensions(-), poverty(+)
•Household Characteristics: rural(-), agricultural(+), household size(-),
one-generational households(+)
Key Findings:
•The elderly living in one-generational households are more likely to be economically
active than those staying in other living arrangements.
•Implying: the presence of adult children is one of the key factors in the older persons’
decision to continue or to quit working.
13

14. Conclusions
1 2 3 4
Conclusions
• The labour-force participation rates of the elderly have been increasing over these two decades.
• The majority of employed older persons are male, aged between 60-69, low-educated, married and
self-employed.
• Elderly persons living in one-generational households are more likely to be economically active than
those staying in other living arrangements.
• The main reason for remaining in the workforce is financial i.e. poverty and low family support.
Another reason is that they are too healthy to retire.
• The key factor of labour-force withdrawal is health problems; they are too old to work.
Policy Implications
• Although working could contribute to the country’s economic development, elderly employment
should be also considered in its social aspects.
• Ideally, older persons should continue working as long as they wish and as long as their ability and
competency allow them to do.
14

15. Thank You
Thuttai Keeratipongpaiboon
Department of Economics
SOAS, University of London
Email: 231827@soas.ac.uk
15

16. Supporting Documents
16

17. Living Arrangements of the Elderly
Share of the Elderly, by Living Arrangements and Regions of Residence, 1990 & 2007
1990 2007
• The majority of elderly people in Bangkok live in two-generational households. Meanwhile, the majority of
older persons in the Northeast and Central regions live in three-generational households.
• Trend: more elderly people are found in one-generational households in every region.
• Skipped generational households are mostly found in the Northeast and North regions; an upward trend.
• The average size of household is decreasing in every region. This is because of a delay of marriage and
changing value towards having children. Source: author’s own calculation from the 1990 and 2007 SES data
17

18. Factors affecting Family Relationship
Key factors to decrease the importance of family: Industrialisation, Urbanisation and Migration
- Family - Wage Employment - Parental
Productive of Individuals Power
+
Industrialisation Enterprise -
Cost of Home- Joint/Stem
produced Goods + Female - Family
Labour
- +
Demand for Force
+ Participations - +
+ Female Labour
+ Ability to Care
Universal Per Capita Purchase + of the
+ +
Primary and - Income - Privacy/Care Elderly
+ Fertility
Secondary + +
Schooling +
- Child Survival Availability of
+
Caregivers
+ Filial Piety +
Housing
Urbanisation - Availability
+
+ Separation of
Migration the Generations
Remarks: - Straight and single-headed arrows show casual relationships that run from the cause to the effect; meanwhile, curved and double-headed
arrows represent correlated factors,
- A sign shown next to the arrow demonstrates a relation between factors. The net impact of factors can be calculated by multiplying the
signs. For example, if there is a negative sign between factor A and B, and also a negative sign between factor B and C, the relationship of
factors A and C is positive.
Source: Mason (1992), Figure 1 18

19. Regional Population Ageing in Thailand
Shares of the Elderly and Old-Age Dependency Rations, Thailand, 2000-2025
Share of the Elderly (%) Old-Age Dependency Ratio (%)
Region
2000 2010 2020 2025 2000 2010 2020 2025
Whole Kingdom 9.43 11.90 17.51 21.22 14.30 17.61 26.58 33.28
Bangkok 7.88 11.28 20.40 26.97 10.61 16.06 30.68 42.50
Central (excl.BKK) 9.84 11.63 16.98 20.80 14.54 16.87 25.18 31.83
North 11.09 13.43 20.16 24.21 17.02 19.65 31.02 39.08
North-East 8.71 11.93 16.95 20.12 13.62 17.99 25.92 31.67
South 9.41 10.76 14.61 17.45 15.06 16.42 22.45 27.28
Source: Author’s own calculation from the Thailand’s Population Projection 2000-2030 provided by NESDB 19

20. Age Profiles of Household Savings
Age Profiles of Savings (Whole Kingdom), by ages of household heads, 2007
household per capita income  household per capita consumption exp enditure
household saving ratio  x 100
household per capita income
Source: Author’s own calculation from the 2007 SES data provided by NSO 20

21. Old-Age Poverty
Share of the Poor Elderly (60+), by Region, Thailand, 1990-2007
Total Elderly People Share of Poor Elderly People to Total Elderly People (%) • Poor if household per capita income is
Regions below the poverty line
(%) 1990 1994 1998 2004 2007
Whole Kingdom 100.00 25.61 20.96 18.14 13.55 12.82 • The majority of poor elderly people
Bangkok 100.00 7.14 2.34 1.79 1.79 1.55 are in the Northeast region.
Central (excl.BKK) 100.00 21.93 10.97 13.25 7.95 5.26 • Rich households have positive
North 100.00 26.85 19.77 15.97 19.77 14.18 savings; meanwhile, poor households
North-East 100.00 30.61 32.18 27.10 17.65 20.40 are likely to face the problem of
South 100.00 31.29 18.63 15.36 10.36 9.55 insufficient income.
Source: Author’s own calculation from the 1990-2007 SES data
Share of Poor Elderly People, by Region, Thailand, 1990-2007 Age Profiles of Household Savings, by Income Groups, Thailand, 2007
100
50
Household Saving Rate (%)
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
Age of Household Head
1st Decile 2nd Decile 3rd Decile 4th Decile 5th Decile
6th Decile 7th Decile 8th Decile 9th Decile 10th Decile
household per capita income  household per capita consumption exp enditure
household saving rate  x 100
household per capita income
Source: Author’s own calculation from the 1990-2007 SES data Source: Author’s own calculation from the 2007 SES data 21

22. Fertility in Thailand
Source Central
Whole
Bangkok (exclude North Northeast South
and Year Kingdom
Bangkok)
Census
1960-19642 6.48 n/a1 6.06 6.36 6.97 6.52
2 1
1965-1969 6.19 n/a 5.32 5.71 7.20 6.48
3
1970-1974 5.41 3.15 4.75 4.74 6.78 5.95
3
1975-1979 3.88 2.40 3.43 3.23 4.88 4.59
4
1989 2.28 1.30 2.02 1.98 2.78 2.85
5
2000 1.82 1.17 1.53 1.76 2.15 2.25
2010-20506 1.85 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
7
SPC
1
1964-1965 6.30 n/a 5.90 6.47 6.61 6.02
1974-1976 4.90 3.46 4.11 3.74 6.25 6.12
1985-1986 2.73 1.74 2.49 2.25 3.10 4.05
1989 2.41 1.41 2.17 2.06 2.87 3.31
1991 2.17 1.13 1.95 1.97 2.67 2.98
1995-1996 2.02 1.26 1.66 1.89 2.44 2.85
Remarks: 1 Bangkok was included in the Central region during 1960-1969;
2 1970 Census with Own Children Estimate, National Statistic Office;
3 1980 Census with Own Children Estimate, National Statistic Office;
4 1990 Census with Own Children Estimate, National Statistic Office;
5 2000 Census with Indirect Method Estimate, National Statistic Office;
6 The United Nations (2009a), World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision;
7 Survey of Population Change, National Statistical Office.
Source: adapted from Table 1 in Prachuabmoh and Mithranon (2003). 22

23. Alternative Old-Age Dependency Ratios
Name Description
The Standard The proportion of total elderly population to total working-age
population
Type 1 The proportion of total elderly population to economically
active working-age population
Type 2 The proportion of non-economically active elderly population to
economically active working-age population
Type 3 The proportion of non-economically active elderly population to
economically active population aged 15 and over
Type 4 The proportion of non-economically active elderly population to
total working-age population
23

24. Alternative Old-Age Dependency Ratios
Standard and Alternative Old-age Dependency Ratios, the World, 1980-2020
Estimates Projections
Source: Author’s calculation, using the data of the International Labour Organization, http://laborsta.ilo.org/, accessed on 1 March 2010. 24

25. Alternative Old-Age Dependency Ratios
Standard and Alternative Old-age Dependency Ratios, Thailand, 1980-2020
Estimates Projections
Source: Author’s calculation, using the data of the International Labour Organization, http://laborsta.ilo.org/, accessed on 1 March 2010. 25

26. Natural Increases and Net Migration
Estimates (1950-2010) and Projections (2010-2050), Thailand
Thailand
1,200
1,000
800
('000) persons
600
400
200
0
1950-55
1955-60
1960-65
1965-70
1970-75
1975-80
1980-85
1985-90
1990-95
1995-00
2000-05
2005-10
2010-15
2015-20
2020-25
2025-30
2030-35
2035-40
2040-45
2045-50
-200
-400
Natural Increase Net Migration
Remark: Natural Increase = Births – Deaths
Source: Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat,
World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision, http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm accessed 8 March 2012.
26