Gender Imbalance

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Thanks in part to the gender pay gap, the gender wealth gap more than doubled between 2002 and 2014. But our research shows Australian women don’t just trail men in total wealth, they also have less diverse asset portfolios. 
Women are more likely than men to have their assets tied up in a family home. This means their finances are more precarious, and they have less saved for retirement.
The latest data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey show the family home accounts for close to half of the total assets held by single women, and only 39% of the total assets held by single men. Other property, superannuation, business assets and financial investments, on average, play a much larger role in the asset portfolios of men than women.
Gender differences in the level and composition of wealth are especially important as society ages. Wealth has particular ramifications for the economic wellbeing of older people, given their limited access to other forms of income, such as wages.
This gender gap compounds over time, with many women facing a shortfall in savings by retirement age. And with the state shifting the responsibilities for retirement, aged care and health care onto individuals, the gender wealth gap will increasingly translate into a gap in the lifestyles that Australian men and women can achieve in old age. 
 
All of this is evidence of a “care penalty”, which means that taking paid leave or moving into part-time jobs to cater for the care needs of children or other family members has negative impacts on women’s retirement savings and career trajectories. But it is also the result of policy, such as the recent tax concessions for superannuation, which have done more for the wealth of men than women. 
Exacerbating this problem, women are dramatically over-represented in the oldest age groups. The over-65 age group has 14.5% more women than men, and the oldest population groups have three times as many women as men. 
Furthermore, women are less likely than men to have access to the support of a spouse in their old age. Only 15.2% of women, compared to 54.5% of men, have a surviving spouse when they die. This means they are more likely to need external aged care services.
<h2>The home takes centre stage</h2>
In the absence of significant savings, superannuation or other assets, the family home has become the key form of wealth for many Australian women.
In fact, without the home, the age pension and superannuation balances are unlikely to meet the day-to-day living needs of many retirees. 
The importance of the home has in part been driven by the family courts. Prior to 2000 superannuation was not treated as an asset for distribution in divorce proceedings. The family home also tends to be retained by the primary carers of the children after separation – women. 
But as an asset to build wealth around, the family home has some drawbacks. Housing assets are, by nature, both hard and costly to buy and sell. While the family home can be a key form of savings for many Australians, relying on this form of wealth comes with relatively high costs. 
Research also shows that older women are more prone to selling up their family home than older men, with these sales often triggered by the loss of a spouse or ill-health. 
The centrality of the family home in their portfolios also means women are particularly vulnerable to the way housing is treated in the age pension asset test. Including the family home in this test would force many retirees to draw down their home equity to fund their retirement at earlier life stages. 
This creates a range of risks, given the fundamental uncertainty of future price and interest rate movements, and because the risks associated with future house price movements cannot be defended against. 
The gender impacts of policies are commonly overlooked but should never be neglected. This is especially true in an ageing society where the majority of older people are women and gender gaps in economic status are large.
Gender statements in federal and state budgets, as well as a fully resourced Office for Women with full ministerial backing, are needed to ensure the level of commitment and accountability to older women that they deserve.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rachel-ong-113482" target="_blank">Rachel Ong</a> is deputy director, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, Curtin University.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/siobhan-austen-106020" target="_blank">Siobhan Austen</a> is associate professor, School of Economics &amp; Finance, Curtin University.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Women rely on the family home to support them in old age

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
In 2019, <a href="https://www.communitycouncil.com.au/content/australia-we-want-media-release-7-may-2019" target="_blank">The Australia We Want</a> report noted that at least half of Australian women do not feel safe walking alone at night. This is unsurprising given the <a href="https://www.plan.org.au/freetobe" target="_blank">prevalence of sexual harassment</a> and gender violence women manage when moving through cities every day. Women’s avoidance of areas of the city creates a <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-harm-done-sexual-entertainment-districts-make-the-city-a-more-threatening-place-for-women-81091" target="_blank">complex internal geography of exclusion zones</a> and “take extreme care” zones – all in the hope that this vigilance will keep them out of harm’s way.
Protecting women from the violence committed by some men is a priority. So too is recognising that most <a href="https://theconversation.com/gender-makes-a-world-of-difference-for-safety-on-public-transport-80313" target="_blank">cities are gender-blind and disregard women’s needs and experiences</a>.
We need to understand the patterns that exclude women from areas of cities and not defer to the usual responses – brighter lighting, more CCTV cameras and more authority figures. In fact, <a href="http://planfreetobe.org/">our research</a> into unsafe “hotspots” has found young women’s perceptions of urban safety do not correlate with the most brightly lit spaces.
We know that creating safer cities for women requires one fundamental shift: that we <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-design-safer-parks-for-women-city-planners-must-listen-to-their-stories-98317" target="_blank">listen to women’s voices</a>. We need to develop urban strategies and planning policies that draw on women’s experience and expertise as users of city spaces.
What does the research tell us?
<a href="https://www.plan.org.au/" target="_blank">Plan International</a>, the <a href="https://www.monash.edu/mada/research/labs/xyx-lab-monash-space-gender-communication-lab" target="_blank">Monash University XYX Lab</a> and <a href="https://www.arup.com/" target="_blank">ARUP</a> lighting researchers have pooled their expertise to drill down into the stories of young women and analyse the relationship between urban lighting and women’s perceptions of safety.
<a href="https://research.arup.io/story/cities-for-girls">The research </a>struck on some compelling correlations between light levels and unsafe places. Analysing over 80 of the most unsafe “hotspots” identified by women in Melbourne, the research found that high illuminance – or very bright and overlit spaces – does not correlate with young women’s perceptions of urban safety.
This is important information as planners often light spaces to a high <a href="https://www.standards.org.au/standards-catalogue/sa-snz/electrotechnology/lg-002/as-slash-nzs--1158-dot-4-colon-2015" target="_blank">“P” Category</a> (a measure used in urban place-making guidelines) of lighting. It’s assumed this will reduce the risk of crime and increase the feeling of safety.
But our research shows that designing lighting that is positive for women’s urban experience requires more nuance. The findings show that sites with higher light levels are more likely to be perceived as unsafe sites – the average light level across these sites was twice what was measured across safe sites. This is a finding with the potential to radically change a city’s approach to lighting for safety.
The analysis showed that consistent and layered lighting – where there are multiple light sources and where surfaces with different reflective values are taken into consideration – makes women feel most safe. This kind of lighting reduces the “floodlit effect”, the sharp drop-off of light beyond the path, and the potential for glare and contrast to blind and disorientate.
The emphasis on LED lights for their energy efficiency is unquestioned. But in urban lighting they are mostly a higher colour temperature such as 4000K “cool white” and above. This new research challenges the effects of this approach.
Instead of yellowish sodium lighting, women prefer a high-quality LED light that enables them to distinguish shapes and colours. 
ARUP’s research shows the human visual spectrum reacts better to warm light, and the data from young women showed how sensitive they are to cool white light with regard to feeling safe in cities. Spaces with warmer colour temperatures are perceived as safer places.
Looking deeper into the quality of light in our cities, the majority of bad areas had a very large range of colour rendering. The lowest colour rendering came from sodium luminaires that make everything look overly yellow. Women preferred a high-quality LED light that enabled them to distinguish shapes and colour, helping to create a sense of safety.
What does this mean for urban design?
More broadly, the research challenged the assumptions that urban lighting design relies on in general, and the effect it has on the character of our cities at night.
At present, illuminance (the measure of light falling on a surface, or Lux) is the only unit of measurement required to comply with the P Categories of the Australian Standards. Based on the results, it appears other metrics such as luminance (light bouncing off a surface and hitting the observer’s eye) should be considered too. This will ensure the context of material finishes and surface intensity is taken into account for how the eye perceives space.
Through research such as this, we have the knowledge, data and technology to engage women in trialling new ways of co-designing better outcomes for cities after dark. We can use considered urban design as a tool for positive change.
Nicole Kalms, Director of XYX Lab + Associate Professor in the Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture at Monash University, Monash University
This article was co-authored by ARUP VIC/SA lighting leader Tim Hunt. The site analysis was led by ARUP lighting designer Hoa Yang.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113359/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/more-lighting-alone-does-not-create-safer-cities-look-at-what-research-with-young-women-tells-us-113359" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Gender Imbalance

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Gender Imbalance

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News