Characteristics of the sample

As noted in the previous chapter, 393 people in Maldives aged 65+ years were surveyed. What follows is a description of the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of these participants. Specifically the findings related to their family, living arrangements, education, work and income are presented to provide the basis to understand how they relate to the achievements in the life domains and wellbeing.

5.1.1 Demographic characteristics

A summary of the key characteristics of the sample with respect to age, gender and island cluster is provided in Table 5.1. The age of the participants ranges from 65 years to 101 years, with a median age of 73.27 years. When compared to the total population of 65+ year olds in Maldives (in 2006), the sample has an appropriate representation of the age group divisions beyond 65+ years. It also has an equal representation of males (50.1%) and females (49.9%), the M:F ratio being 1.01:1, although the M:F ratio in the total population of this age group at 2006 Census was 1.27:1 (Ministry of Planning and National Development, 2008).

108

Out of the three island clusters from which the sample was drawn, the moderate population cluster had the majority of the participants (48.6%), while 21.6 per cent were from the dense population cluster, and 29.8 per cent were from the sparse population cluster. The age and geographic distribution of the sample closely matches the wider demographic profile of older people in Maldives (see Table 5.1) and provides a solid basis for considering questions of wellbeing and its correlates among this group.

Table 5.1: Representativeness of the survey sample compared to the total population of 65+

years, 2006, Maldives (N=393)

Sample Characteristics Sample

(N)

Sample (%)

Total population 65+

years in 2006 (%)*

Age groups

65 - 69 years 116 29.5 40.7

70 - 74 years 139 35.4 30.0

75 - 79 years 76 19.3 17.1

80 + years 62 15.8 12.2

Gender

Male 197 50.1 55.9

Female 196 49.9 44.1

Island Clusters (geographic isolation)

Dense population cluster (pop >= 100,000) 85 21.6 22.1 Moderate population cluster (pop 1000 to 99,999) 191 48.6 50.5 Sparse population cluster (pop <1000) 117 29.8 27.4

* Data from Census 2006 data set (Ministry of Planning and National Development, 2007b).

5.1.2 Marriage and children

Marriage is almost universal among the participants with only 1.3 per cent ‘never married’ (Table 5.2). At the time of the survey, 35.6 per cent of the participants were ‘widowed’ and 8.4 per cent were ‘divorced’. Widowhood was higher among females (26.7%) than widowerhood among men (8.9%). Although 54.7 per cent of the sample was married, the majority were men (35.9%) with 18.8 per cent being married women. This is consistent with the findings from the 2006 Census in Maldives where higher widowhood was also observed among older females (Ministry of Planning and National Development, 2007b).

As described in Chapter 2, multiple marriages are common in Maldives, with the majority of the participants (71.5%) having had more than one partner during their life time, and only about a quarter of the participants, both male and female (27.2%), having had only one partner during their lifetime.

109

Table 5.2: Current marital status and number of marriages during the life time, by gender (N=393)

Marital status

Married Widowed Divorced Never

married Total

With regard to children, most of the participants (96.2%) had children ranging in total between 1-16 (Table 5.3).

Table 5.3: Number of children by gender (N=393) No. of

Living in an extended family continues to be the norm in Maldives, with 45.8 per cent of the participants living in the household with ‘spouse and children’ and another 36.4 per cent living with ‘children only’ (Table 5.4). Only 7.1 per cent of the participants lived with ‘spouse only’ and another 7.4 per cent lived alone. The living arrangements of the respondents by gender and residential island cluster are presented in Table 5.4.

The proportion of men who lived with ‘spouse and children’ was twice that of women (30.8% compared to 15%) while the proportion of women living with

‘children only’ was more than twice that of men (25.2% compared to 11.2%).

This is most likely a reflection of higher widowhood among females than males.

These gender differences were, however, not statistically significant.

Of those participants who lived with ‘spouse and children’ and with ‘spouse only’

the majority lived in the moderate population cluster (23% out of 45.8% of all living with ‘spouse and children, and 4.8% out of 7.1% of those living with

‘spouse only’). Although more participants who lived ‘alone’ were also in the

110

moderate population cluster, examination of data within the island clusters shows that those who lived ‘alone’ were highest in the sparse population island cluster, this being 9.4 per cent (11 / 117) compared with 6.3 per cent (12 / 191) in the moderate population cluster and 7.1 per cent (6 / 85) in the dense population cluster (see Table 5.4).

Table 5.4: Living arrangements by gender and island cluster (N=393) Living

The percentage of older people living alone was higher in this study compared to the findings of the 2006 Census, in which the figure was only 3 per cent. This could indicate a change since then. In 2006, the percent of those living with friends and non-relatives was higher (2%) than that observed in this study (0.5%).

It could indicate that when the older people do not have the option to live with family, they may be preferring to live alone rather than with friends and others.

The majority of the participants (79.1%) lived in their own or their spouse's home (Table 5.5). Another 16.3 per cent lived in houses owned by ‘another family member’ (i.e. children, siblings and other relatives). Very few participants (4.1%) lived in rented places, while living in a place owned by a friend or a non-relative was a rare occurrence.

Table 5.5: Ownership of house by gender and island cluster (N=393) Home

111

Ownership of the house was higher among men (43.8% compared to 35.4% of women), although this difference was not statistically significant. The difference in gender could be due to inheritance laws in Maldives that favour men. Although the differences by island cluster were not significant, home ownership was lowest in the dense population island cluster (15.8%) and highest in the moderate population cluster. The differences in island cluster could be a reflection of land shortages and higher cost in the dense population cluster compared to the other two clusters of islands.

5.1.4 Education

The educational attainment of the participants was low, with 64.4 per cent being able to ‘read and write’, and 12 per cent of the participants being illiterate (see Table 5.6). Although the differences observed by gender were not statistically significant (p>.05), among those who were illiterate, there were more men than women (7.1% and 4.8% respectively), and more women than men can ‘read and write’ (33.3% compared to 31.0% men). At ‘primary’, ‘secondary’ and

‘vocational’ levels the difference is very small (Table 5.6). This reflects the historical impact of the adult literacy programme in the 1980s (described in Chapter 2).

Table 5.6: Educational attainment by gender and island cluster (N=393) Educational

*‘Read and write’ is defined as being able to read and write the local language only.

There were more illiterate participants in the sparsely and moderate population clusters (5.6% and 5.3% respectively) than the dense population cluster (1%);

however, these differences were not significant (p>.05). The moderate and sparse population clusters had lower educational levels, with a higher proportion of participants who were able to ‘read and write’, while in the dense population cluster the proportion with ‘primary’, ‘secondary’ education was greater. The literacy rate of the sample is lower (88%) than the literacy rate recorded for 65+

112

year olds in the 2006 Census: 90.4 per cent (Ministry of Planning and National Development, 2007b).

5.1.5 Income and work

Almost all participants (99.2%; N=387) had some means of income, with only 0.8 per cent (N=3) reporting not getting any money. Most participants had more than one source of income (see Table 5.7). The most common source of income was the old-age pension with 95.1 per cent of participants receiving it, followed by informal remittances from family and friends (58.7%), and work (29.0%). The most common ‘other’ source of income was the allowance for long-service from former employers. There were no significant gender differences among those who received the old-age pension (p>.05), although more men (17.9%) than women (11.0%) received income from work, while more women (34.4%) received money from family and friends compared to men (24.4%). The majority of the old-age pension recipients (46.4%) lived in the moderate population cluster with the lowest number living in the dense population cluster.

Table 5.7: Sources of income by gender and island cluster (N=390)

Source of means-test), the findings show that a small proportion do not receive it. This could be a result of difficulty in registering or personal choice given existing wealth.

A large proportion of the participants (73.6%) were engaged in informal household work (Table 5.8), 41.5 per cent women and 32.1 per cent men. About one fifth (19.2%) of the participants were not engaged in any type of work (either paid or unpaid), the majority of these being women (12.3% compared with 6.9%

men). These differences, however, were not statistically significant (p>.05). A third of the older people (33.1%) were engaged in paid work, with 3.1 per cent as

113

employees and 30.1 per cent self-employed. Engagement in any type of paid work was more common among men (21.6%) than women (11.5%). Self-employment was most prevalent in the moderate population cluster, and least in the dense population cluster (see Table 5.8).

Although the differences by gender and island clusters were not significant, the gender difference reflects the traditional role of men as the income earner and women as the home-maker. Island cluster difference also reflect the most common occupations in the islands – fishing and other self-managed small businesses in the more isolated islands, compared with the more commercial businesses in the dense population cluster.

Table 5.8: Engagement in work by gender and island cluster (N=390)

Engagement

As described in the previous chapter, wellbeing was measured using the indicator

‘overall satisfaction with life’ on a scale of 1-5, subsequently collapsed to a scale of 1-3 (1 being low and 3 being high) for analysis. The mean level of wellbeing for the sample was 2.55 (Std. Error = 0.033) and the majority (64.5%) of older people surveyed had a high level of wellbeing (reported as ‘satisfied’ with life).

The levels of wellbeing in the sample are presented in Table 5.9.

Significant differences in the levels of wellbeing exist by gender (chi square=9.681, df=2, p=.008), with fewer women reporting a high level of wellbeing (28.6% being satisfied with life) compared to men (35.8%). Among those who reported low levels of wellbeing (reported as ‘dissatisfied’ with life), the proportion of women was higher than men (5.9% and 3.1% respectively).

114

Moderate levels of wellbeing (‘neither satisfied nor dissatisfied’ with life), were reported by more women (15.6%) than men (11.0%).

Table 5.9: Levels of wellbeing by gender and island cluster* (N=391) Wellbeing

*Island clusters represent geographic isolation and are based on population size - see Chapter 3 for details.

The majority of the participants (36.1%) with high levels of wellbeing (‘satisfied’

with their life) resided in the moderate population cluster (Table 5.9). When data within the island clusters are examined, a similar result is observed, i.e., the largest proportion of those with high levels of wellbeing (74.2%) were from the moderate population cluster, while the sparse population cluster had the lowest proportion of those with high levels of wellbeing (46.2%). Within the sparse population cluster, however, a similar proportion of participants (45.3%) reported their wellbeing to be moderate (‘neither satisfied nor dissatisfied’ with life). The highest proportion of those with low levels of wellbeing (‘dissatisfied’ with life) was found among those living in the dense population cluster (14.3%, compared to 6.8% and 8.5% in the moderate and sparse population clusters respectively).

Chi-square tests (see Chapter 5) indicate that these differences in the levels of wellbeing by island cluster are significant (chi square=34.650, df=4, p=.000).

The results of the statistical analysis on the relationship between wellbeing and the life domains are presented in Chapter 6.