The Demographic Facts of Ageing in Australia

by

Graeme Hugo ARC Australian Professorial Fellow,

Professor of Geography, and Director of the Australian Population and

Migration Research Centre, The University of Adelaide

Adelaide. SA. 5005. Australia. Email: graeme.hugo@adelaide.edu.au

Telephone: (61) (08) 8313 3996

Appendix Q for Aged Care Financing Authority Second Annual Report 2014

April 2014

Revised July 2014

- i -

List of Contents

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1

The Growth of Australia’s Older Population ........................................................................... 3

Why is Australia’s Population Ageing? ................................................................................... 5

Fertility ........................................................................................................................... 5

Mortality and Life Expectancy ....................................................................................... 8

Longevity, Health and Disability ................................................................................... 9

International Migration ................................................................................................ 13

How do Baby Boomers Differ from the Previous Generation Entering Old Age? ............... 17

Differences Within the Baby Boomer Generation ................................................................. 22

A Different Spatial Distribution............................................................................................. 25

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 39

References .............................................................................................................................. 42

- ii -

List of Tables

Table 1: Australia: Population Change by Age, 2006-11 ............................................. 3

Table 2: Australia: Population Change by Age, 2011 and Projected 2031 ................... 4

Table 3: Australia: Comparison of Projected Growth of Population, 2031 .................. 4

Table 4: Australia: Expectation of Life at Age 50, 1901-1910, 1970-72, 1981

and 2011 ........................................................................................................... 9

Table 5: Proportion of the Population with Disabilities, 1981-2012 ........................... 11

Table 6: Australia: Disaggregation of Life Expectancy Into ‘Disability Free’

and ‘With Disability’ Years, 1998 and 2012 (Years) .................................... 12

Table 7: Australia: Population Aged 65+ by Birthplace, 1971-2011.......................... 16

Table 8: Australia: Baby Boomers and Pre-war Generation As They Enter Old

Age, Social Indicators .................................................................................... 19

Table 9: Health Status at Mid-life: Baby Boomers Compared with Pre-war

Generation ...................................................................................................... 22

Table 10: Australia: Tenure by Age, 2011 .................................................................... 24

Table 11: Comparison of Owners and Renters: Demography ...................................... 25

Table 12: Comparison of Owners and Renters: Chronic Conditions ............................ 25

Table 13: A Typology of Migration of Older Australians ............................................. 27

Table 14: Australia: Percent Who Moved in the Last 5 years, 1976-81 to 2006-

11.................................................................................................................... 28

Table 15: Australia: Changes in Participation Rates of the Older Population in

the Workforce, 1970-2014 ............................................................................. 29

Table 16: Australia: Growth of Population, 1981-2011................................................ 30

- iii -

Table 17: Adelaide Statistical Division: Number of Aged Care Beds in Suburban

Sectors, 2000 and 2013 .................................................................................. 36

Table 18: Metropolitan Adelaide: Total Population and Aged 70+, 2011 and

Projected 2021 and 2026 ................................................................................ 37

Table 19: Metropolitan Adelaide: Number Beds/1000 persons Aged 70+, 2011

and Projected 2021 and 2026 ......................................................................... 37

Table 20: Projections of Aged Care Workforce Demand .............................................. 40

- iv -

List of Figures

Figure 1: Australia: Total Fertility Rate, 1901-2012 ...................................................... 6

Figure 2: Australia: Age Structure 1961 to 2011 Showing Baby Boomer Cohort ......... 7

Figure 3: Australia: Expectation of Life at Birth, 1870-2011 ........................................ 8

Figure 4: Australia: Settler Arrivals by Region of Last Residence, 1947-1996,

and Permanent Additions by Region of Birth, 1997-2013 ............................ 15

Figure 5: Australia: Persons 15 Years and Over, Visited a GP 12 or More Times

in the Previous 12 Months ............................................................................. 21

Figure 6: Australia: Average Household Net Worth by Age of the Household

Reference Person, 1994-2012 ........................................................................ 23

Figure 7: Australia: Persons Who Moved in the Last Five Years by Age, 2001-

06 and 2006-11 .............................................................................................. 27

Figure 8: Adelaide Statistical Division: Distribution of Population Aged 65

Years and Over Between Metropolitan Sectors, 1971-2011 ......................... 31

Figure 9: Adelaide Statistical Division: Growth of the Population Aged 65+ by

SLA, 2006-11 ................................................................................................. 33

Figure 10: Metropolitan Adelaide Sectors and Aged Care Beds, 2000 and 2013 ........... 35

Figure 11: Australia: Rest of State Age-Sex Specific Net Migration Profile, 2006-

2011................................................................................................................ 39

Introduction

There is now widespread recognition that Australia’s population is ageing1 and that

this has important implications for the national economy and society. Despite this there is

considerable misunderstanding of the nature, scale, location and implications of population

ageing in Australia. This is even the case in the aged care sector which is to be so crucially

impacted by the ageing of the population. The aim of this appendix is to summarise the basic

dimensions of the growth of Australia’s older population over the next two decades. The

note will use the most recent Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2013a) population

projections. It must be stressed, however, that anticipating change of older populations does

not involve ‘crystal ball gazing’. There is a very high degree of certainty around projections

of their numbers over the next three decades and they can be used with a high degree of

confidence. This is because Australia’s older population of the 2020s and 2030s is already in

Australia but are currently aged in their 40s and 50s. We not only know their numbers but

also where they live and their economic and social characteristics. This can provide us with a

clear window through which to view the size and characteristics of Australia’s future older

population.

Anticipating change in the numbers, characteristics and distribution of Australia’s

older population is fundamental to planning the efficient and equitable provision of both

residential aged care and home care. There are considerable lead-up times required,

especially in the residential care sector as well as massive investments required to meet the

inevitable increase in demand. Accordingly it is crucial that there is a full analysis of the

details of the numbers of people who will need these services, their characteristics which will

influence the nature of this demand, and where they live which will shape the location of

1 Demographic ageing of a population occurs when the proportion of the total population in the older age

groups (usually 65+) increases. Currently all global populations are ageing, although the rate varies greatly between countries (United Nations, 2013).

- 2 -

future demand. It is argued here that the projections currently available, while useful, need to

be enhanced through more detailed and nuanced future scenario development. This will

provide greater certainty in the scale, nature and timing of expansion of both residential care

and home care services. This paper summarises the current state of knowledge on these

issues.

There are four demographic aspects of the ageing of Australia’s population over the

next two decades:

• The numbers of older people will increase rapidly because the ‘shockwave’ of baby

boomers will all move past age 65. Accordingly the median ABS projections (ABS,

2013a) anticipate the numbers aged 65+ in Australia will increased by 84.8 percent

from 3.1 million to 5.7 million between 2011 and 2031.

• The proportion that the older (65+) population will make up of the total population

will increase from 13.8 percent in 2011 to 18.7 percent in 2031. This raises issues of

worsening ratios between the working and non-working population and the effects of

intergenerational transfers.

• The third dimension of population ageing in Australia is one which is often

overlooked and relates to their characteristics. They are quite different to earlier

generations entering the retirement stage of the life cycle – economically, socially,

and in their values, attitudes, expectations and, most importantly, their health. This is

because each cohort lives through quite different economic, social and cultural

conditions, and have different sets of education, world experience, etc. Baby boomers

differ in a myriad of ways from the previous generation of older people and this will

also have a major impact on the nature of the care and residential arrangements which

they need, seek, prefer and can pay for.

- 3 -

• Finally, the geography of the next generation of the older Australian population will

be different to that of the previous generation. The distribution of Australians aged

65+ and 80+ in 2021 and 2031 will be quite different to that of 2001 and 2013. Yet

much of the aged care infrastructure, especially residential care are ‘location specific

capital’ (De Vanzo, 1981). They have a fixed location which will be increasingly

mismatched with the location of older Australians.

The Growth of Australia’s Older Population

Australia’s population is currently growing at 1.8 percent per annum (ABS, 2014),

one of the fastest population growth rates in the world and certainly the fastest among OECD

countries. Table 1 shows that over the most recent intercensal period the 65+ population

grew significantly faster than the total population and working age populations. The most

rapid growth was in the ‘young aged’ 65-74 ages as they begin to be entered by baby

boomers.

Table 1: Australia: Population Change by Age, 2006-11 Source: ABS 2011 Census

2006 2011 % Change

Total 19,855,291 21,507,716 8.3

65-74 1,373,435 1,627,407 18.5

75+ 1,270,935 1,384,880 9.0

65+ 2,644,370 3,012,287 13.9

15-64 13,273,710 14,351,405 8.1

Population projections over the next two decades, however, show that the growth of

those aged 65+ will be more than twice as fast as the total population (Table 2). Moreover

- 4 -

the fastest growth will be in the ‘old old’ 75+ age groups. These are the age groups which

have the highest level of demand for aged care and other services, especially health.

Table 2: Australia: Population Change by Age, 2011 and Projected 2031 Source: ABS Estimated Resident Population and 2031 Projections Series B

2011 2031 % Change

Total 22,340,024 30,501,192 36.5

65-74 1,681,931 2,878,511 71.1

75+ 1,405,980 2,826,768 101.1

65+ 3,087,911 5,705,279 84.8

15-64 15,018,500 19,255,273 28.2

To underline the high degree of confidence we can place in these numbers, Table 3

provides the projections for the three main scenarios of future population change which the

ABS has provided – Series A, B and C – respectively high, medium and low population

growth scenarios. It will be noted that there is little variation in the numbers of 65+

anticipated by all three scenarios (2.5 percent). This is because the aged population of the

next three decades will not be influenced by fertility and little affected by migration. It will,

however, be noted in Table 3 that there are more significant differences in the percentage

that the aged will represent in the total population under the different scenarios (8.8 percent).

Table 3: Australia: Comparison of Projected Growth of Population, 2031 Source: ABS 2013 Projections

Series A Series B Series C Difference

Series A and C)

2011 (m) 2031 (m) 2031 (m) 2031 (m) in 2031 (m

Total Population 22.34 31.87 30.5 29.3 2.57

65+ 3.09 5.83 5.71 5.69 0.14

Percent 65+ 13.8 18.3 18.7 19.4 1.1

- 5 -

This is because the higher growth projections assume higher levels of migration and fertility

which lead to greater increases of the young population and reduce the proportion that the

aged comprise of the total population. The crucial point, however, is that there is really

only one realistic scenario with respect to the future numerical growth of Australia’s

older population. There are only different scenarios with respect to the proportion they

make up of the total population.

Why is Australia’s Population Ageing?

Trends in the numbers of older people (say those aged 65 years and over) in any area

are a function of the following demographic processes.

• Fertility – the rate at which women in that area were having children 65-90 years ago.

• Mortality – the rate at which older people are lost to death.

• Migration – the extent to which older people move into or out of the area.

• The ‘ageing in place’ of residents in the area into the 65+ age groups.

In Australia all of these processes are contributing to the unprecedented increase in its

older population and will continue to do so over the next two decades.

Fertility

The most salient demographic element in the ageing of the Australian populations

over the next three decades is the Baby Boom generation moving into the retirement ages.

Figure 1 shows the Australian Total Fertility Rate2 over the last century and it can be seen

that the period following World War II saw an upswing in the number of babies women were

having on average. While most countries experience an upswing in fertility after a war, the

2 The TFR can be defined as: the average number of children that would be born alive to a woman during her

lifetime if she were to pass through all her child-bearing years conforming to the age-specific fertility rates of a given year.

- 6 -

Australian post-World War II boom was greater and longer lasting than most. Indeed it was

sustained for two decades. This created a ‘bulge’ in the Australian age pyramid which, as

Figure 2 shows, has subsequently moved upwards and is now entering the 65+ age group.

Because fertility has subsequently almost halved, the baby boom has created a ‘shock wave’

of rapidly increasing numbers in particular ages as the cohort has passed through different life

cycle stages.3

Figure 1: Australia: Total Fertility Rate, 1901-2012 Source: CBCS, Demography and ABS, Births Australia, various issues

3 The first baby boomers turned 65 in 2011 and will begin passing 70 in 2016 and 85 in 2031.

- 7 -

Figure 2: Australia: Age Structure 1961 to 2011 Showing Baby Boomer Cohort Source: ABS Censuses

1961

1986

2011

800 600 400 200 0 200 400 600 800

0-45-9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475-7980-84

85+

Number (000s)

Age

Males Females

800 600 400 200 0 200 400 600 800

0-45-9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475-7980-84

85+

Number (000s)

Age

Males Females

800 600 400 200 0 200 400 600 800

0-45-9

10-1415-1920-2425-2930-3435-3940-4445-4950-5455-5960-6465-6970-7475-7980-84

85+

Number (000s)

Age

Males Females

- 8 -

Figure 3: Australia: Expectation of Life at Birth, 1870-2011 Source: Hugo 1986 and ABS Deaths Australia, various issues

Mortality and Life Expectancy

Another factor contributing to ageing of the Australian population, as Figure 3 shows,

is the steep increase in life expectancy among Australians over the last century. In the period

since World War II we have added 12.6 years of life to Australian males and 12.9 years to

females. Hence more Australians are surviving their younger years than ever before.

However, perhaps the biggest change in life expectancy has come in the older ages. Prior to

1970 we had added very few years of extra life to Australians aged 50 years or more,

although major improvements were recorded in their chances of making it to age 50. Table 4

shows that between 1901 and 1970 only 1.8 extra years of life were added to Australian

- 9 -

males aged 50. The increase was greater for women (4.6 years) because of the reduction in

pregnancy/child birth related deaths. However the table shows that there has since been a

dramatic change with 8.8 years being added to the life expectancy of Australian men aged 50

between 1970 and 2011 and 7.3 years for women of that age. This massive change was not

anticipated by commentators at the time (National Population Inquiry, 1975, 1978). It was

Table 4: Australia: Expectation of Life at Age 50, 1901-1910, 1970-72, 1981 and 2011

Source: ABS

Year Males Females

1901-1910 21.2 23.7

1970-1972 23.2 28.3

1981 25.2 30.8

2011 32.0 35.6

achieved on the one hand through medical breakthroughs such as better diagnosis of heart

conditions, bypass operations and the development of Intensive Care Units. On the other

hand, major improvements in lifestyle through better diet, reduced smoking and safer cars

have also had an impact. As a result, not only are more Australians surviving to reach

retirement age but more are having an extended period of retirement. This is contributing

significantly to the growth of our older population. On average, Australian males reaching 65

in 2012 could expect to live to age 84 and women 87.

Longevity, Health and Disability

Increased longevity of Australians is, of course, a good news story although its

implications for income support, superannuation, the age of retirement etc. are currently

being worked through. From the perspective of demand for aged care it is not only the extra

- 10 -

years of life which is of significance but it is the number of extra years which are years lived

with disability. A Global Burden of Disease (2012) study for the 1990-2010 period found

that in high income countries the gain in years of extra life lived as a result of decreases in

mortality has been largely offset by years of life lived with disability.

Public perceptions are that baby boomers are healthier than previous generations but

is this the case? There are a number of factors which would lead us to conclude that they are

likely to be healthier:

• Baby boomers are in many ways a privileged generation being the first generation to

grow up in an era of increasing affluence and prosperity.

• They have unprecedentedly high levels of education compared with earlier

generations.

• They were the first generation to grow up in an era of expanding job and educational

opportunities.

• They were the first generation to grow up having access to immunisation and

antibiotics.

• They have substantially lower levels of smoking than previous generations.

On the other hand there are some arguments for suggesting they could have a higher

level of disability than previous generations:

• Firstly, the very medical breakthroughs which have ‘rescued’ baby boomers from

dying of a heart attack or stroke like the previous generation may in fact leave them

with a chronic illness or disability.

• Secondly, baby boomers, more than previous generations, have adopted increasingly

sedentary life styles and have a higher incidence of obesity than any previous

generation.

- 11 -

Whether or not Australia fits the High Income Country Model established by the

Global Burden of Disease (2012) study is of particular significance to anticipating future

need for aged care. If the Australian situation were to conform to that pattern the changes in

mortality would have delivered a ‘double whammy’ to the future demand for health and aged

care.

• There will be many more older people than we previously anticipated.

• On average they will have higher levels of chronic illness and disability.

However, the data presently available do not allow us to give a definite answer.

Perhaps a detailed analysis of the most recent ABS Health Survey, which for the first time

collected clinical data and did not rely totally on self-rated health, will clarify the issue.

Table 5 presents results of ABS sample surveys of self-completed health for ages 45 and over

between 1981 and 2012 and some complex patterns are in evidence.

Table 5: Proportion of the Population with Disabilities, 1981-2012 Source: ABS, 1999 and 2013b

Age Group 1981 1988 1993 1998 2003 2009 2012

45-54 16.7 17.4 18.4 20.9 21.6 18.0 18.1

55-64 27.1 30.5 30.9 33.4 33.8 31.8 29.4

65-74 34.6 44.0 45.3 44.8 44.4 43.6 42.0

75+ 53.1 63.4 64.0 67.5 68.0 65.2 67.6

All People 13.2 15.5 16.6 18.8 20.0 18.5 18.5

• There is an overall increase in the proportion of the population reporting a disability

up to 2003 and thereafter a small decline.

• For the 75+, 45-54 and 55-64 population there was also an increase up to 2003 and

thereafter a small decline.

• For the 65-74 group the proportion with a disability peaked in 1993 and has declined

since then.

- 12 -

The self-report data hence do show a pattern of a small decrease in the incidence of disability

in older ages but this should be treated with caution.

A recent study by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2014, 3) has

examined the change in life expectancy in Australia between 1998 and 2012 and the results

are summarised in Table 6. They show that virtually all of the increase in life expectancy

between 1998 and 2012 (4 years for males and 2.8 years for females) were disability free

years. This result would indicate that in Australia, at least in recent years, the increase in

longevity has not increased the number of years that Australians on average will spend with a

disability. However, these data remain based on self-reported health and such data is not

only questionable but also is subject to systematic change over time. It is only through the

use of clinical data, as was collected in the most recent ABS Health Survey, that more

definitive statements can be made.

Table 6: Australia: Disaggregation of Life Expectancy Into ‘Disability Free’ and ‘With Disability’ Years, 1998 and 2012 (Years)

Source: AIHW, 2014, 3

Male Female

1998 2012 1998 2012

Life Expectancy at Birth 75.9 79.9 81.5 84.3

Disability Free Expectancy 58.0 62.4 62.1 64.5

With Disability Expectancy 17.9 17.5 19.4 19.8

One of the most important determinants of future need for aged care relates to the

incidence of dementia. The Global Burden of Disease (2012, 2218) study of years living

with disability found that there was a largely unrecognised burden of mental illness in both

developed and underdeveloped nations. In the Australian context Access Economics (2011,

- 13 -

9) projected the numbers with dementia to more than double from 266,574 in 2011 to

553,285 in 2030 and by 2050 would number 942,624. This would suggest that the numbers

of Australians living with dementia would increase significantly faster than the total

population over this period. With an increasing proportion of residential care residents

suffering dementia such projections would appear to have very significant implications for

future demand for both residential and home care packages. However, the uncertainty around

these projections was recently drawn attention to by Sachdev (2014) who draws upon

European evidence to suggest that projected levels of prevalence of dementia were not being

reached. It is apparent that action on preventative health, especially improving diet and

exercise and reducing obesity could lower the risk of dementia for future generations.

Accordingly, while there is a high degree of certainty about the numbers of older

Australians, there will be over the next quarter century a great deal of uncertainty about the

proportion of them who will be needing care, both residential and home. There is a pressing

need to develop a number of specific scenarios with respect to future prevalence of disability

and dementia in order to develop more nuanced and informed projections of future need for

aged care. This is fundamental to maintaining and enhancing the effective, efficient and

equitable provision of aged care support services in Australia.

International Migration

It is sometimes suggested that a ‘solution’ to Australia’s ageing population is to be

found in international migration. International migration is highly selective of the young

adult population and hence migration can have a ‘younging’ effect. However, immigrants

themselves age so that their overall impact on age structure is limited (Young, 1988). Indeed

the massive immigration of young adults in the early postwar decades is now contributing

significantly to the growth of Australia’s older population as these immigrants ‘age in place’.

- 14 -

In fact, Australia’s overseas-born population is older than the Australia-born with 19.0

percent aged 65 in 2011 compared with 11.9 percent.

Australian postwar immigration has had a profound impact on the contemporary older

population. With half its population being either overseas-born or Australia-born with an

overseas-born parent, Australia is more influenced by migration than any other OECD

country. Moreover Figure 4 shows that the intake has gone from being overwhelmingly

mono-culturally Anglo Celtic to one of the most ethnically diverse global inflows. Due to the

- 15 -

Figure 4: Australia: Settler Arrivals by Region of Last Residence, 1947-1996, and Permanent Additions by Region of Birth, 1997-2013

Source: DIBP data

young age of migrants at the time of the move, the impact in diversifying Australia’s aged

population has been delayed. However, Table 7 shows that the overseas-born population

aged 65+ has almost doubled since 1991 while the Australia-born grew by around a third. In

2011, 36 percent of Australians aged 65+ were overseas-born and 22 percent were from

Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) backgrounds.

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

*194

5-47

1949

-50

1952

-53

1955

-56

1958

-59

1961

-62

1964

-65

1967

-68

1970

-71

1973

-74

1976

-77

1979

-80

1982

-83

1985

-86

1988

-89

1991

-92

1994

-95

1997

–98

2000

–01

2003

–04

2006

–07

2009

–10

2012

-13

Num

ber

Year

UK and Ireland Other Europe Africa Americas NZ and Pacific Middle East Asia

*July 1945 to June 1947

Note: Middle East includes North Africa from 1996-97.

- 16 -

Table 7: Australia: Population Aged 65+ by Birthplace, 1971-2011 Source: ABS 1971-2001 Censuses

Year Australia-Born Overseas-Born Non-English Speaking

Origin-Born Mainly English Speaking

Origin-Born

No. % %

Growth pa

No. % %

Growth pa

No. % %

Growth pa

No. % %

Growth pa

1971 816,396 8.0 248,599 9.6 75,433 5.6 173,166 14.1 1976 913,075 8.4 2.3 295,911 10.9 3.5 na - - na - - 1981 1,053,565 9.2 2.9 350,839 11.7 3.5 135,678 9 +6.0* 215,161 14.4 +2.2* 1986 1,188,679 9.8 2.4 458,041 14.1 5.5 222,972 13.3 10.4 235,069 15 1.8 1991 1,323,473 10.4 2.2 528,335 14.1 2.9 271,054 12.4 4 257,281 16.4 1.8 1996 1,418,879 10.7 1.4 620,898 15.9 3.3 352,958 14.9 5.4 267,940 17.3 0.8 2001 1,485,462 10.9 0.9 726,558 17.7 3.9 433,617 17.3 4.2 292,941 18.3 1.8 2006 1,560,584 11.1 1.0 840,503 19.0 3.0 509,860 18.6 3.3 330,543 19.7 2.4 2011 1,787,009 11.9 2.7 1,004,641 19.0 3.6 608,449 18.0 3.6 396,192 20.8 3.7

* % growth 1971-81

- 17 -

How do Baby Boomers Differ from the Previous Generation Entering Old

Age?

The passage of baby boomers into older ages thus represents a massive quantitative

change with a doubling of the numbers aged 65+ in the next quarter century and an even

greater growth of those aged 75+. However, it is more than a quantitative change. Baby

boomers differ significantly economically, socially and culturally and in their attitudes,

resources and expectations from the previous generation born in the 1910s, 20s and 30s. This

will profoundly influence the way they tackle and experience the post-retirement years. They

will not behave the same and service providers catering to this age group must recognise that

it will not simply be a situation of ‘more of the same’. What are some of the major ways in

which baby boomers are different?

While there is considerable diversity in each generation, baby boomers are more

segmented than the previous generation. While ‘mass market’ options were possible for

many of the previous generation, baby boomers have created more differentiated markets for

all the goods and services they have demanded and needed as they reach each stage of the life

cycle. It will thus be a highly segmented market, not only for aged housing and aged care but

for all the goods and services older people use. This will mean that policies, programs and

approaches which have been successful among the current generation of 65+ people will not

necessarily work for baby boomers. In order to demonstrate this we have compared the

characteristics of the current older generation at the time they entered the older ages in the

1980s with the current characteristics of baby boomers who are just reaching this stage of the

life cycle.4 Table 8 compares some key demographic, economic and social characteristics of

the two groups with the following being particularly important:

4 This analysis was undertaken by Dr. Jennifer Buckley of the Australian Population and Migration Research

Centre.

- 18 -

• The baby boomers are the first generation of Australians to experience high rates of

divorce and separation so that a third are entering their older years without a spouse

compared with less than a fifth among the previous generation.

• The proportion of baby boomer women who had never had children was significantly

higher (14 compared with nine percent).

• The proportion living alone is twice as high.

• One of the largest differences relates to education with 43 percent of boomers who

had completed secondary school compared with only six percent of the previous

generation. Moreover, while almost a fifth of baby boomers had a Bachelor or higher

degree qualification, only three percent of the older generation did.

- 19 -

Table 8: Australia: Baby Boomers and Pre-war Generation As They Enter Old Age, Social Indicators

Source: ABS National Health Surveys 1989-90 and 2008-09; ABS Census 1981 and 2006

Social Indicators

Baby Boomers

(1946-65)

%

Pre-war Generation

(1927-36)

%

Social Supports

Entering later life without a spouse 34 19

Childless 14 9

Living alone 11 6

Education

Completed secondary school 43 6

Bachelor degree or higher 19 3

Religion

Identify as Christian 66 80

Housing

Owner/purchaser 80.7 84.1

Rental 19.3 15.9

No Private Health Cover 37 42

Overseas-Born 31 21

NES Overseas-Born 20 12

• A higher proportion of the previous generation identified themselves as a Christian.

• While both had high rates of home ownership, the percentage renting among baby

boomers is higher (19.3 compared with 15.9 percent).

• Two thirds of baby boomers have private health cover compared with 58 percent of

the older generation.

• Baby boomers are more ethnically diverse with 31 percent overseas-born (compared

with 21 percent) with a fifth being born in a CALD country (compared with 12

percent).

- 20 -

This small slice of the wide difference between the generations is indicative of how there are

significant differences in attitudes, perceptions, characteristics, resources and experience

which will mean their behaviour, expectations and demand for services will also differ. They

certainly need to be considered when considering the future aged care needs of this group.

For example:

• The extent to which baby boomers will be able to call upon a partner or a child to

assist in their day to day care will be considerably less than the previous generation of

older Australians. Yet policy is to increase the proportion of care being delivered at

home rather than in a residential care context.

• The proportion of baby boomers owning their home outright will be less than is

currently the case. Yet home ownership is one of the three pillars of the Australian

aged care system.

• Increasing cultural diversity presents many challenges in aged care provision because

until relatively recently the population aged 85+ was overwhelmingly Anglo Celtic in

origin.

One of the most important dimensions of difference between generations relates to

health. Much of the public and policy discourse on the ageing of baby boomers has focused

on the pressure that this will place on Australia’s health system. Indeed, they will lead to

nearly a doubling of the population aged 65 years and over in the next quarter century.

Unfortunately most of the data we have available on health, however, is self-reported and, as

was explained earlier, needs to be interpreted carefully. Figure 5 shows that there is a pattern

of demand for health services increasing significantly in the older years in Australia.

However, as was indicated earlier, the implications for the health system are more severe than

is suggested by the sheer increased numbers of older people. Although there are problems

- 21 -

Figure 5: Australia: Persons 15 Years and Over, Visited a GP 12 or More Times in the Previous 12 Months

Source: ABS, 2012

with the data when we make the direct comparison across generations, the evidence is that

they have a higher rate of illness and morbidity than the previous generation. Most tellingly,

Table 9 shows that baby boomers are eight times more likely than the older generation to

have three or more health problems. This perhaps reflects the ‘rescued from death’ factor

discussed in an earlier section, although comparability of the data over time can be

questioned. Nevertheless, the data in Table 9 indicate the nature and scale of the health

challenge which the baby boomers pose. The incidence of obesity and overweight is two and

a half times that of the previous generation. The close links between obesity and poor health

makes it imperative that our efforts to reduce obesity in the Australian population include a

strong focus on baby boomers. Partly associated with obesity patterns, the incidence of

diabetes is three times higher and asthma twice as great. It is interesting that the only risk

- 22 -

factor for which baby boomers are better off is smoking with 18 percent of boomers currently

smoking compared with a quarter of the older generation.

Table 9: Health Status at Mid-life: Baby Boomers Compared with Pre-war Generation

Source: ABS; National Health Surveys, 1989-90, 2007-08

Health Indicators

Baby Boomers

at Mid-life

%

Pre-war Generation

at Mid-life

%

Obesity 26 12

Diabetes 9 3

Asthma 10 5

Hearing loss 17 8

Arthritis 33 26

Migraine 6 4

Back problems 9 6

Multiple conditions (≥3) 4 0.5

High cholesterol 14 8

Alcohol risk 15 11

Currently smoking 18 24

Emphysema/bronchitis 3 5

No private health cover 37 42

Differences Within the Baby Boomer Generation

In the last section we have demonstrated that baby boomers as a group are clearly

different to the previous generation entering the older years. However, it is very important to

realise that there is considerable variation within the baby boomer generation. It is important

to recognise that in fact it is a more diverse generation than the one which preceded it.

Nevertheless there are pervasive stereotypes such as the baby boomers being a ‘cashed up’

generation. Figure 6, indeed, shows that baby boomers in the 55-74 age group had the

highest wealth levels of all generations. Moreover they have the fastest growing wealth

- 23 -

levels with the situation being quite static below age 45. However, it would be wrong to

characterise all baby boomers as being wealthy. There is in fact a significant number of baby

boomers who are highly vulnerable to experiencing significant problems once they enter the

older age groups. We will demonstrate this using data from the South Australian Monitoring

and Surveillance System (SAMSS).

Figure 6: Australia: Average Household Net Worth by Age of the Household Reference Person, 1994-2012

Source: ABS, 2002, 2007 and 2013c

One important measure of differentiation relates to housing. It is often assumed that

ownership of the family home provides the basis for the wellbeing of the older population.

Yet as was indicated earlier, a smaller proportion of baby boomers than the previous

- 24 -

generation are entering the older ages owning their own home than previous generations.

Table 10 presents data from the Australian 2011 population census and shows that the

proportions renting increase substantially with each successive generation. Moreover the

proportion who had a mortgage increases even more suggesting that the numbers of baby

boomers who will still have a mortgage debt when they leave the workforce will be much

greater than was the case for the previous generation.

Table 10: Australia: Tenure by Age, 2011 Source: ABS 2011 Census

Tenure 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Percent

Owned outright 27.5 51.3 72.1 76.2

Owned with a mortgage 49.4 30.9 12.2 6.6

Being purchased under a rent/buy scheme 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1

Rented 21.5 16.2 13.4 12.6

Being occupied rent-free 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0

Being occupied under a life tenure scheme 0.1 0.2 0.8 2.5

Other tenure type 0.4 0.4 0.5 1.1

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

N 2976481 2532605 1644047 1391101

The baby boomers who are renting represent a group who have high levels of

vulnerability to experiencing difficulty in old age when their income reduces due to leaving

the workforce. This is evident in data collected in a survey of the South Australian

population. In putting together data from the SAMSS for the 2007-13 period there were

13,425 baby boomers, of whom 1,229 (9.1 percent) were renting. Comparisons of those

renters with other baby boomers (owners and purchasers) showed there were some very

striking differences. Table 11 shows that renters were significantly more likely to not be in

the workforce, not have tertiary education, be currently married and be in the lowest income

quintiles. This disadvantage is carried through to health and Table 12 shows that they are at

- 25 -

much higher risk of having a chronic disease or disability. Most tellingly, they are twice as

likely to have a mental health problem.

Table 11: Comparison of Owners and Renters: Demography Source: SAMSS, 2007-13

Owners (%) Renters (%)

Percent Employed 75.7 56.9

Percent with Degree 24.1 15.0

Currently Married 83.9 46.1

Percent in 2 Lowest SEIFA Quintiles 34.4 49.4

Table 12: Comparison of Owners and Renters: Chronic Conditions Source: SAMSS, 2007-13

Owners (%) Renters (%)

Diabetes 7.8 13.0

Asthma 10 16.8

COPD 4.4 8.4

Arthritis 25.9 31.6

Osteoporosis 3.8 5.6

Mental Health 15.4 29.6

At Least One Chronic Condition 47.4 61.1

Clearly there is a significant group among baby boomers who are very vulnerable to

disadvantage. Those who are currently renting are especially important in that respect.

These are factors which must be taken into account in developing a range of future scenarios

with respect to need for aged care.

A Different Spatial Distribution

Where older people live is important for a number of reasons:

- 26 -

• Older people have lower levels of personal mobility which means they are restricted

in their ability to travel long distances to obtain services and interact.

• Housing is often the major element in older people’s assets.

• Their local area is often where their main social contacts are located.

• Their home can hold many important memories crucial to their wellbeing.

There is a literature which shows a high level attachment to home place among older

Australians (Pinnegar et al., 2012, 12). However, there is some discussion as to the extent to

which it is attachment to the actual dwelling they occupy and the extent to which it is to the

locality in which they live. This is a crucial distinction from the perspectives of both policy

and the wellbeing of older Australians.

The distribution of the older population is also important because the elderly are

historically among Australia’s least residentially mobile groups. Figure 7 shows the

proportion of each age group moving in the five years previous to the 2011 and 1991

censuses and it will be noticed that there has been little change in the extent to which older

Australians have changed their place of residence over the last two decades. Traditionally,

mobility tends to be greatest upon retirement when, as Table 13 shows, most moves are

voluntary and involve moving to more environmentally amenable locations or trading down

to age-appropriate housing. However, in the oldest years movement is generally forced on

people due to the onset of disability or the loss of a spouse. Table 14 presents results of five

intercensal periods in Australia since 1976 which suggest that the overall level of residential

mobility among older Australians over the last 35 years has reduced. Several things are

operating here such as the increased independence of older people which has allowed them to

remain in their home longer as well as government policy encouraging people to ‘remain at

home rather than in a home’. Nevertheless, there is no evidence of an upswing in ‘young

aged’ migration.

- 27 -

Figure 7: Australia: Persons Who Moved in the Last Five Years by Age, 2001-06 and 2006-11

Source: ABS 2006 and 2011 Censuses

Table 13: A Typology of Migration of Older Australians Source: Hugo, 1988, 17

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

1800005 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99

Number Moved

Age in years

Moved 2006-2011 Moved 2001-06

Age Type Selectivity Reason for Moving

‘Young Old’ Mainly VoluntaryHigher Income

- recreational, retirement to resort locations – environmental factor

60s and early 70s - trade down to age-appropriate housingLower Income

- closer to children

- forced housing adjustment – renters and mortgage holders

‘Old Old’Showing Element of Compulsion

Little Selectivity

- onset of widowhood or disability forces move to be closer to children

70s and over- inability to live independently forces need to live with children or residential care

- 28 -

Table 14: Australia: Percent Who Moved in the Last 5 years, 1976-81 to 2006-11 Source: ABS Censuses; 1981-2001 ABS, One Percent Sample

Year 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+

1976-81 26.9 26.8 24.7 24.4 32.9

1986-91 30.7 28.1 27.2 26.2 32.5

1996-2001 26.0 24.6 19.7 21.0 25.7

2001-06 24.7 22.2 19.7 18.7 23.6

2006-11 21.9 19.8 17.1 15.9 20.7

However, the important question relates to the extent to which baby boomers will

move to a greater (or lesser) extent than previous generations of older Australians. The

whole thrust of current government policy is to reduce, or at least delay, ‘forced’ moves from

independent living to residential care. The changing of the mix of independent and

residential care in the housing of older Australians is one of the key targets of aged policy

that needs to be monitored closely. An important immediate question, however, is the extent

to which baby boomers will make residential adjustments as they enter or approach

retirement. It must be said that the jury is still out on this question. Certainly the substantial

increase in the age at which people are leaving the Australian workforce (Table 15) means

that baby boomers will have delayed the decision of whether or not to move upon retirement

compared with their counterparts of the 1990s and early 2000s.

The evidence about baby boomer residential mobility is limited and mixed. Beer and

Faulkner (2009, 133) found that 41.5 percent of respondents aged 55-64 in 2006 had moved

to their current home in the last 10 years – a higher level of mobility than is reflected in

census data. Olsberg and Winters (2005) found that two thirds of their respondents wanted to

say in their own homes. There is then a need to more fully investigate the housing intentions

of baby boomers but also to carefully monitor three key types of retirement related migration

over the next decade:

- 29 -

Table 15: Australia: Changes in Participation Rates of the Older Population in the Workforce, 1970-2014

Source: ABS Labour Force Surveys

1. Migration to environmentally amenable resort communities in coastal, riverine and

other non-metropolitan areas.

2. Voluntary trading down to more age-appropriate housing within metropolitan areas.

3. Involuntary trading down among renters and mortgage holders who are unable to keep

up payments when they cease full-time work.

While recognising that any significant shift in residential mobility levels and patterns

may produce changes, we will now turn to examine the current spatial distribution of older

Australians. Ageing in place has been, and will continue to be, the major process whereby

the older population of any area will increase or decrease and this has advantages in

facilitating projection of future changes in the aged population of individual areas.

Table 16 shows that the majority (65.4 percent) of Australia’s older population live in

major cities (those with more than 100,000 residents). However, they are less concentrated in

these cities than is the case for the total population (69.5 percent). Until 1996 the proportion

of major city populations aged 65+ was above the total population average but the increasing

movement of older people to coastal areas and regional cities has changed the

metropolitan/non-metropolitan balance. Moreover the extent to which this has occurred is

masked to some extent in Table 16 because over the 1981-2011 period a number of regional

centres increased in population and moved from being ‘other urban’ to ‘major urban’.

Age Group Percent Participation

May 1970 June 1999 Feb 2010 Jan 2014

Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females

55-59 91.5 28.7 72.9 44.1 79.4 64.4 79.0 63.5

60-64 79.2 14.9 46.9 17.6 61.7 41.8 61.8 42.5

65+ 23.2 3.6 9.7 3.2 14.8 6.4 16.0 7.5

- 30 -

Moreover there was a considerable extension of the urban boundaries of Australian capital

cities. Hence, the redistribution from larger cities to smaller cities and urban places is greater

than is indicated in Table 16. The proportion of the elderly living in rural areas has increased

slightly between 1981 and 2011 but 11.1 percent of the nation’s 65+ population live in such

areas compared with 10.9 percent of the total population. The rural elderly grew significantly

faster (2.65 percent per annum) than the total population in rural areas (0.38 percent) between

1981 and 2011.

Table 16: Australia: Growth of Population, 1981-2011 Source: ABS Censuses 1981 and 2011

Section of State

65+ Population Total

Population

2011 (%)

Annual Rate of Growth

1981-2011 1981 2011

No. % No. % Population Total

Major Urban 919,096 64.3 1,965,505 65.4 69.5 2.57 1.61

Other Urban 358,562 25.1 708,788 23.6 19.6 2.30 0.81

Rural 151,743 10.6 332,460 11.1 10.9 2.65 0.38

Total 1,429,401 100.0 3,006,733 100.0 100.0 2.51 1.29

There is a problem in interpreting the data in Table 16 due to the movement of places

between categories over an intercensal period. In order to overcome this we have held the

capital city division boundaries constant between 2006 and 2011 to compare the changes in

the total and 65+ population. This analysis indicates that for the total population the average

annual growth rates between 2006 and 2011 are 1.8 percent compared with 1.26 percent for

non-metropolitan areas outside of the capital cities. However, for the 65+ population, the

situation is reversed. In the capitals the 65+ population grew by 2.45 percent per annum – a

very fast growth rate – 36 percent higher than that for the total population. However, for

non-metropolitan areas the 65+ population grew even faster at 2.9 percent per annum –

130 percent higher than for the total population. This is clear evidence that the older

- 31 -

population is growing faster outside of the capitals than within them. Moreover it is also

evident that retirement migration from capitals to non-metropolitan, especially coastal, areas

is playing a role in this.

While it is important to bear in mind that over a third of older Australians live in

places of less than 100,000 inhabitants, the majority live in large cities, especially the

metropolitan capital cities. It is important, therefore, to examine the changing distribution of

older populations in those cities. To illustrate some of the key patterns we will use

Metropolitan Adelaide. Figure 8 presents data on the changing distribution of older people

within Adelaide between 1971 and 2011 and divides the metropolitan area up into inner,

Figure 8: Adelaide Statistical Division: Distribution of Population Aged 65 Years and Over Between Metropolitan Sectors, 1971-2011

Source: ABS 1971 to 2011

coastal, middle and outer sectors, the boundaries of which have been presented elsewhere

(Hugo, Rudd and Downie, 1984). Some quite spectacular changes are in evidence over the

last 40 years in which the aged population of Adelaide more than doubled. In 1971 almost a

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

1971 1981 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011

Per

sons

Year

Inner

Coastal

Middle

Outer

- 32 -

third of Adelaide’s elderly lived in the inner suburbs where 15.4 percent of the population

were aged 65 or over and a similar situation applied in the coastal SLAs. Together these

older areas had 44.5 percent of the elderly. However, by 1991 the elderly population of the

inner suburbs had begun to decline so that their share of the 65+ proportion fell from 30 to

13.4 percent. Similarly with the coastal suburbs where, although there was growth in

numbers, their share of the total Adelaide aged population fell. Together they accounted for

28.1 percent of the city’s elderly. By 2011 these patterns had continued so that only 24.4

percent of the 65+ population lived in these two areas although coastal areas maintained their

share. Clearly urban renewal, urban consolidation and gentrification have had significant

impacts in these areas and much of the recent population growth in these areas has been of

younger people.

The middle suburbs show an interesting pattern with the numbers aged 65+ doubling

between 1971 and 1991 and their share of the metropolitan aged population increasing to

45.6 percent. However since then the numbers have begun to decline with the death and

outmigration of older people who had settled these suburbs as young families in the late

1940s, 1950s and 1960s. Accordingly their share of the metropolitan aged population has

fallen to 33.3 percent in 2011. Nevertheless the number of older people in the middle

suburbs is still substantial. The real growth of older populations however is in the outer

suburbs. The number of people aged 65+ in this area quadrupled between 1971 and 1991 and

more than doubled again by 2011. The proportion of the Adelaide population aged 65+ in

this zone has increased from 12.4 percent in 1971 to 42.3 percent in 2011. The older

population in this area increased about 8 times over the last three decades to number 77,350.

Hence a much greater proportion of our older population are living in low density suburbs

with nucleated shopping centres, low density network of public transport and low density of

services for the elderly. The crucial point is that the centre of gravity in the spatial

- 33 -

distribution of older persons has shifted from the inner to the middle suburbs and the most

rapid rate of growth of the aged population is even further out in the outer suburbs.

There is an important deconcentration of the older population in Adelaide occurring

as is evident in Figure 9 which depicts the growth rate of the 65+ population by SLA over the

2006-11 intercensal period. A striking pattern is in evidence with all growth above 5 percent

per annum being in the outer suburbs while inner and inner-middle suburbs experienced slow

growth or even declines in the number of older people5. The only other growth area is in the

Figure 9: Adelaide Statistical Division: Growth of the Population Aged 65+ by SLA, 2006-11

Source: ABS 2006 and 2011 Census

5 The Elizabeth area is also experiencing a decline of its older population reflecting the fact that it was

developed as a satellite city in the 1950s.

- 34 -

long established seaside area of Holdfast Bay which is favoured both for retirement migration

and has a number of aged care residential facilities.

The patterns and dynamics described here for Adelaide are duplicated in other capital

cities and can be summarised as follows:

• The highest concentrations in terms of the percentage of the total population aged 65+

and 75+ are highest in inner and middle suburbs due largely to institutions being

located in these areas. The largest numbers of older people is now in the middle

suburbs but the fastest growing numbers are in the outer suburbs.

• In the past most people in the pre-retirement ages or retirement ages have ‘aged in

place’ in the same house in which they bought up their children.

• There are some interesting signs that the baby boomer generation may be showing a

greater tendency to sell the family home when they have become ‘empty nesters’.

This however is yet to be fully established since baby boomers are delaying

retirement.

• There are some patterns where baby boomers are selling their houses in the outer

suburbs and downsizing to inner suburban areas and coastal suburbs within the

metropolitan area.

The changing distribution of older people within Australian metropolitan areas raises

important issues about providing services to them. Where the services are mobile and home-

based, shifts in the population distribution can readily be accommodated. However, where

they involve fixed capital investment, as is the case with residential care establishments, there

are the dangers of an increasing mismatch between the location of the supply (residential

care) and of demand (older people). Figure 10 depicts the distribution of aged care beds in

Metropolitan Adelaide in 2000 and 2013. This shows that there has been a significant change

- 35 -

Figure 10: Metropolitan Adelaide Sectors and Aged Care Beds, 2000 and 2013

- 36 -

in the distribution over this period in response to the changing distribution of the aged

population discussed here. Table 17 shows how there has been a significant change in the

distribution of aged care beds in Adelaide over the 2000-13 period with an 18.6 percent

decline in the inner suburbs and a doubling in the outer suburbs. Clearly there has been a

significant response to the changing distribution of the older population in Adelaide.

Table 17: Adelaide Statistical Division: Number of Aged Care Beds in Suburban Sectors, 2000 and 2013

Source: Aylward, Hugo and Harris 2000; Department of Social Services, unpublished data

Suburban Sector Low Care Beds High Care Beds Total Beds % Change

2000 2013 2000 2013 2000 2013 2000-2013

Coastal 537 696 780 651 1317 1347 2.3

Inner 1290 889 1618 1479 2908 2368 -18.6

Middle 1836 1970 2311 2161 4147 4131 -0.4

Outer 1299 2244 1269 2932 2568 5176 101.6

Total 4962 5799 5978 7223 10940 13022 19.0

However, the growth of the aged population over the next three decades will be

unprecedentedly high and the dangers of a mismatch between the location of aged care

residential facilities and of the older people needing them increasing. Table 18 shows the

projected increase in Adelaide’s older population over the period 2011-26. Some 54.3

percent of the growth of the 70+ population will be in the outer suburbs and another 26.5

percent in the middle suburbs. Hence there will be an increasing mismatch between the

distribution of beds and the distribution of older people unless the decentralisation of beds,

which has been recorded over 2000-2013 is continued (Table 19).

In considering the changing distribution of the older population it is important to bear

in mind that more than a third of aged Australians live outside the capital cities. There are

particular concentrations in the following ‘types’ of non-metropolitan areas.

- 37 -

Table 18: Metropolitan Adelaide: Total Population and Aged 70+, 2011 and Projected 2021 and 2026

Source: ABS 2011 Census and ABS for the purpose of the Commonwealth, through the Dept. of Health and Ageing, and other governments, 2007

Suburban Sector 2011 2021 2026

Total 70+ Total 70+ Total 70+

Coastal 104562 14626 111308 18630 113273 21098

Inner 144029 16865 170895 21676 180249 25035

Middle 365171 47449 408564 60141 425330 67747

Outer 554644 53035 635464 80827 665689 94587

Total 1168406 131975 1326231 181274 1384541 208467

Table 19: Metropolitan Adelaide: Number Beds/1000 persons Aged 70+, 2011 and Projected 2021 and 2026

Source: ABS 2011 Census and ABS for the purpose of the Commonwealth, through the Dept. of Health and Ageing, and other governments, 2007

Suburban Sector 2011 2021 2026

Coastal 92.1 72.3 63.8

Inner 140.4 109.2 94.6

Middle 87.1 68.7 61.0

Outer 97.6 64.0 54.7

Total 98.7 71.8 62.5

• Firstly, there are particular concentrations in non-metropolitan coastal resort areas.

This is particularly noticeable along the northern and southern coast of New South

Wales and in southeastern Queensland with the growth fuelled particularly by

retirement migration toward attractive environment and equable climates. A

particular feature of these developments has been widespread patterns of people

taking up more or less full-time residence in their former holiday homes upon

retirement.

- 38 -

• A similar ‘holiday shack’ associated development can be identified along rivers,

especially the River Murray.

• Another pattern associated with older people seeking out attractive environments

upon retirement, once they are freed from the necessity of living within commuting

range of their workplace, is the growth of retirement communities in favourable

inland ecological areas near the larger cities.

• Many country towns have an above average concentration of older people. This often

reflects a pattern of older people retiring off of farm properties into nearby towns

which allows them to maintain (and perhaps even enhance) existing local social

networks and ‘keep an eye’ on their children who have taken over the farm.

• The remainder of non-metropolitan LGAs with above average concentrations of older

people are found in the more closely settled agricultural areas of the respective states.

These also tend to be the longest settled agricultural parts of those states although

located beyond the commuting zones of the largest cities, they tend to be the most

accessible of the purely agricultural areas to the capital cities. Here the above average

levels of ageing are less a function of inmovement of older persons than of the heavy

outmovement of younger adults from these older areas – one of the stereotypical

characteristics of rural depopulation is an ‘old’ population structure. In particular

localities (especially in seaside, riverside and other scenically attractive medium sized

country towns) this effect may be supplemented by inmigration of retirees, especially

those moving off of farms.

Within non metropolitan areas there is a strong likelihood that the growth of the aged

population will be more influenced by internal migration than is the case within metropolitan

areas where most people age in place after retirement. Figure 11 shows the net migration by

age and sex for areas outside of the Capital Cities in Australia for the 2006-11 period. This

- 39 -

shows definitely that there was a net migration gain in these areas and the pre-retirement and

retirement ages. This overwhelmingly reflects retirement migration out of Australia’s

capitals. To what extent baby boomers make these moves to coastal areas and other favoured

non-metropolitan locations will influence the growth of the aged population outside of cities.

Currently through there is a higher percentage of older Australians living outside the capitals

than is the case for the total population and the aged population is growing faster outside the

capitals than within them.

Figure 11: Australia: Rest of State Age-Sex Specific Net Migration Profile, 2006-2011 Source: ABS 2006 and 2011 Censuses

Conclusion

This short paper has sought to present the ‘facts’ insofar as it is possible on the

changing size, characteristics and distribution of Australia’s older population. We can be

very certain about the future size of this population, many of the characteristics of the future

aged population are also fixed and many are currently living where they will be living when

they enter old age. There are some uncertainties and these will strongly be influenced by

policy interventions. Some of the most important of these are:

-40,000

-30,000

-20,000

-10,000

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

Net

Mig

ratio

n

Age

Males Females

- 40 -

• How healthy will baby boomers be in old age? The signs are not good here but real

efforts to reduce obesity among baby boomers could have massive dividends in

improving their lives in old age but substantially reducing demands on the health and

aged care systems.

• How many baby boomers will move as they approach or enter retirement? This will

be influenced by whether or not they continue working into old age, the availability of

alternative housing options, patterns of partnering among baby boomers, etc.

• What will be the preferences of baby boomers for housing – both while they are fully

independent and when they need care?

A crucial element relates to what it means for the aged care workforce. There is a

need not only to focus on the changing demography of the aged population but also on the

workers involved in the industry proving support to them. In this respect the Productivity

Commission (2011) has calculated the projections in Table 20 and this suggests that there

will be a more than doubling of demand in the next two decades.

Table 20: Projections of Aged Care Workforce Demand Source: Productivity Commission 2011

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Residential Care

Direct care workers (FTE workers) 85,000 107,000 157,000 254,000 353,000

Direct care workers (total workers) 144,000 182,000 266,000 431,000 598,000

Total residential care workforce

(direct and support workers) 189,000 239,000 349,000 565,000 785,000

Community Care

Direct care workers (FTE workers) 11,000 41,000 57,000 82,000 102,000

Direct care workers (total workers) 19,000 66,000 92,000 132,000 164,000

Total community care workforce

(direct and support workers) 22,000 78,000 109,000 156,000 194,000

Total Workforce Requirementa 212,000 317,000 459,000 721,000 979,000

a Total workforce requirement may not reflect sum of components due to rounding.

- 41 -

The picture of substantial growth in the aged care sector is in broad outline a very

clear one. The overall dimensions of growth are determined by demography. It is the detail

which needs to be clarified in terms of how the older baby boomer population is segmented

into meaningful groups in terms of their demand and need for particular type of housing and a

range of services and where they will be living.

- 42 -

References

Access Economics, 2011. Dementia Across Australia: 2011-2050, 9 September, Deloitte

Access Economics Pty. Ltd.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Births Australia, Catalogue No. 3301.0, ABS,

Canberra, various issues.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Deaths Australia, various issues, Catalogue No.

3302.0, ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 1999. Disability, Ageing and Carers: Summary of

Findings, Catalogue No. 4430.0, ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2002. Experimental Estimates of the Distribution of

Household Wealth Australia, 1994-2000, Working Papers in Econometrics and

Applied Statistics, Working Paper No. 2002/1, September, ABS Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2012. Patient Experiences in Australia: Summary of

Findings, 2011-12, Catalogue No. 4839.0, ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2013a. Population Projections Australia, 2012 to

2101, Catalogue No. 3222.0, ABS, Canberra, various issues.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2013b. Disability, Ageing and Carers, Australia:

Summary of Findings, 2012, Catalogue No. 4430.0, ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2013c. Household Wealth and Wealth Distribution,

2011-12, Catalogue No. 6554.0, ABS, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2014. Australian Demographic Statistics, September

Quarter, 2013, Catalogue No. 3101.0, ABS, Canberra, various issues.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2014. Australia’s Health 2014 – In Brief,

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra.

- 43 -

Aylward, R., Hugo, G. and Harris, K., 2000. Accessibility of the Aged to Residential Care

Facilities and Related Services in South Australia. Final Report to the Office for the

Ageing Metropolitan Division, Department of Human Services, South Australia,

December.

Beer, A. and Faulkner, D., 2009. 21st Century Housing Careers and Australia’s Housing

Future, AHURI Final Report No. 128, Australian Housing and Urban Research

Institute, Melbourne.

Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics (CBCS). Demography, various issues,

Government Printer, Canberra.

Da Vanzo, J., 1981. Micro economic approaches to studying migration decisions, in

Migration Decision Making: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Microlevel Studies in

Developed and Developing Countries, G. F De Jong and R.W. Gardiner (eds.), 4, pp.

90-103.

Global Burden of Disease Study, 2012. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291

diseases and injuries in 21 regions, 1990—2010: a systematic analysis for the Global

Burden of Disease Study 2010, Lancet, vol. 380, pp. 2197-2223.

Hugo, G.J., 1986. Australia’s Changing Population: Trends and Implications, Oxford

University Press, Melbourne.

Hugo, G.J., 1988. Migration of the Elderly in Australia, in A Rogers and W.J. Serow (eds.)

Elderly Migration: An International Comparative Study, A Final Report to the

National Institute on Ageing, University of Colorado at Boulder, Colorado.

Hugo, G.J., Rudd, D.M. and Downie, M., 1984. Adelaide’s Aged Population: Changing

Spatial Patterns and Their Policy Implications, Urban Policy and Research, 2 (2), pp.

17-25.

- 44 -

National Population Inquiry (NPI), 1975. Population and Australia: A Demographic

Analysis and Projection, two volumes, AGPS, Canberra.

National Population Inquiry (NPI), 1978. Population and Australia: Recent Demographic

Trends and their Implications, AGPS, Canberra.

Olsberg, D. and Winters, M., 2005. Ageing in Place: Intergenerational and Intrafamilial

Housing Transfers and Shifts in Later Life, AHURI Final Report NO. 88, Australian

Housing and Urban Research Institute, Melbourne.

Pinnegar, S., van den Nouwelant, R., Judd, B. and Randolph, B., 2012. Understanding

housing and location choices of retiring Australians in the ‘baby boom’ generation, A

scoping report prepared for the National Housing Supply Council, City Futures

Centre, Sydney.

Productivity Commission, 2011. Caring for Older Australians, Report No. 53, Final Inquiry

Report, Canberra.

Sachdev, P.S., 2014. Is the Incidence of Dementia Declining?, A Report for Alzheimer’s

Australia, Paper 39, April, Alzheimer’s Australia Inc.

United Nations, 2013. World Population Ageing 2013. Department of Economic and Social

Affairs, United Nations, New York.

Young, C., 1988. Towards a population policy. Myths and misperceptions concerning the

demographic effects of immigration, Australian Quarterly, 60 (2): 220-230.