Individuals can be money poor, time poor or both. While income is the most used indicator of poverty, broader indexes including non-monetary aspects of deprivation have been proposed and measured. As one such measure, our study focuses on the element of deprivation arising from the time deficit of many working people. The usual poverty threshold is calculated as the amount of income to buy the minimum required goods and services from the market. This minimum required purchase is greater for these people since they have less time than the average person to produce some goods and services for themselves at home. So, they need money to buy these in the market in order to maintain the same consumption. The income standard must be supplemented to adequately measure actual poverty.
Time use data make it possible to establish time requirements and time availability and provide a measure of time poverty. Using Canadian GSS 1998 data, and building on the work of Vickery (1977, ‚The time poor: A new look at poverty’, The Journal of Human Resources 12(1), pp. 27-48) and of Douthitt (1993, ‚The inclusion of time availability in Canadian poverty measures’, Time-Use Methodology: Toward Consensus (ISTAT, Roma), pp. 83–91), and our own previous study, we estimate time-adjusted poverty thresholds and rates for single and dual parent Canadian families. As expected, we have found high incidence of time deficit among the employed single parents with children. We make a case for the acceptance of a redefined poverty standard for such time-deprived groups.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Aas D. (1982) Designs for large scale time use studies of the 24 hour day. In: Staikov Z. (ed.) It’s About Time: Proceedings of the International Research Group on Time Budgets and Social Activities. (Sofia, Bulgaria), pp 17–53
Berk S.F. (1985) The Gender Factory: The Apportionment of Work in American Households.Plenum, New York
Citro Constance F., Michael Robert T. (eds.) (1995) Measuring Poverty: A New Approach. Panel on Poverty and Family Assistance. National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington DC
Douthitt, R. (1993) The Inclusion of Time Availability in Canadian Poverty Measures. Time-Use Methodology: Toward Consensus. ISTAT, Roma, pp 83–91
Gershuny, J. (2000) Changing Times: Work and Leisure in Postindustrial Society. Oxford University, New York
Harvey, A. and A.K. Mukhopadhyay: 1996, ‚The Role of Time-Use Studies in Measuring Household Outputs. Accounting for Time’. Conference of the International Association for Research on Income and Wealth, Lillihammer, Norway, August
Harvey, A., A.K. Mukhopadhyay and J. Hunt: 2002, ‚Re-estimating Poverty Rates for Canada: Accounting for Time Poverty’. The 27th General Conference of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, Djurhamn, Sweden, 18–24 August
Klasen, S. (2000). Measuring poverty and deprivation in South Africa. Review of Income and Wealth 46(1):33–58
Shelton, B.A. (1992). Women, Men, and Time: Gender Differences in Paid Work, Housework, and Leisure. Greenwood Press, Westwood, Connecticut
Statistics Canada (1998a). General Social Survey: Cycle 12. Housing and Social Statistics Division, Ottawa
Statistics Canada (1998b) General Social Survey: Cycle 12, User’s Guide. Housing and Social Statistics Division, Ottawa
Statistics Canada (1999) Income in Canada. Income Statistics Division, Ottawa
Statistics Canada (2001) Low Income Cutoffs from 1991 to 2000 and Low Income Measures from 1990 to 1999. Income Statistics Division, Ottawa
Vickery, C. (1977) The time poor: A new look at poverty. The Journal of Human Resources 12(1):27–48
About this article
Cite this article
Harvey, A.S., Mukhopadhyay, A.K. When Twenty-Four Hours is not Enough: Time Poverty of Working Parents. Soc Indic Res 82, 57–77 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-006-9002-5
- lone parent