가구주 근로유형과 가계저축: 예비적 저축행동 이론의 관점 (Householder's Working Type and Household Saving: A Perspective of the Precautionary Saving Behavior Theory)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국소비문화학회
· 수록지 정보 : 소비문화연구 / 15권 / 1호 / 93 ~ 118페이지
· 저자명 : 심영

초록

본 연구는 예비적 저축행동 이론의 관점에서 가구주 근로유형이 가계저축에 미치는 영향을 분석하고, 근로유형별 가계저축에 미치는 영향 요인을 파악하고자 하였다. 실증분석 자료는 2009년도 한국복지패널조사(KOWEPS) 자료로, 가구주 근로유형이 상용직과 비상용직(임시직, 일용직, 공공근로)인 가계로 한정하여2009년도 한국복지패널조사 가구 총 6,207가구 중 2,463가구를 본 연구의 실증분석에 사용하였다.
실증분석 결과, 가구주의 근로유형은 가계저축에 통계적으로 유의미한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났으나 예비적 저축행동 이론에서 제시하는 기대와는 일치하지 않았다. 즉, 상용직 가구주 가계가 임시직, 일용직 혹은 공공근로의 비상용직 가구주 가계보다 더 많은 예비적 저축을 하였고, 나아가 더 많은 예비적 자산을 축적하는 것으로 나타났다. 가구주 근로유형별 가계저축에 영향을 미치는 요인을 살펴본 결과, 가구주 근로유형별로 영향 요인 및 정도에 차이가 존재하기는 하였으나 주로 월평균 총소비지출, 부채 유무, 순자산, 빈곤 여부, 가구원수, 기초보장 유무가 유의미한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 여기에서 특히 주목할 만한 것은 예비적 저축에 대한기초보장의 정적 영향이었다.

영어초록

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a householder's working type on household saving from the perspective of precautionary saving behavior theory and the determinants of household saving by householder's working type.
The data for this study was from the 2009 year of the Korea Welfare Panel Survey (KOWEPS), consisting of 2,463 households with householders whose working type was regular or non-regular employment(temporary, daily or public work). OLS regression analyses and Chow-tests were performed. In the regression analyses, the dependent variables for household saving were precautionary saving and precautionary asset. Precautionary saving was operationalized with the amount of average monthly saving and the ratio of average monthly saving to average monthly disposable income, and precautionary asset was operationalized with the amount of financial assets and the ratio of financial assets to net assets. The independent variables were household income, household assets, householder's working type(regular, non-regular), householder's age, sex, education level and marriage status, income level, the number of household members, housing type, debt, and public transfer income. Monthly average total consumption expenditures for household income, and net assets for household assets, the existence of spouse for marriage status, poverty for income level were used. Public transfer income was classified into three, social insurance, basic assistance and government assistance. For the analyses, Stata 11.0version was used.
The results are as follows: Householder's working type was significantly related to the precautionary saving behavior of a household.
However, the precautionary saving and the precautionary asset of a household with a householder in non-regular working type was lower than those of a household with a householder in regular working type. This result is not consistent with the expectation from the perspective of precautionary saving behavior that the saving of a household with a householder in non-regular working type is expected to be higher than that of a household with a householder in regular working type. According to the analyses of the determinants for precautionary saving behavior by householder's working type, monthly average total consumption expenditures,debt, net assets, poverty, the number of household members, basic assistance were statistically significant variables. The positive relation of basic assistance to precautionary saving(the amount of average monthly saving and the ratio of average monthly saving) is a noteworthy result in the analyses of the determinants for household saving by householder's working type.
The above results suggest the followings. First, it is easy to predict the unstability of economic life of a household with a householder in non-regular working type because of relatively low precautionary saving and precautionary asset. The reason for the low precautionary saving and the low precautionary asset may be a low current income of the household in spite of its willingness to save.
If this reasoning is possible, it suggests that policies are needed for households with householders in non-regular working type to save.
Second, the relatively low precautionary saving and precautionary asset of a household with a householder in non-regular working type suggest also their long-term economic stability. This suggests they need to try a long-term financial planning even though they have limitations to save for future because of their low current income. It is necessary to develop the financial planning for the households with unstable incomes. Third, the determinants for precautionary saving behavior by householder's working type were mostly the ones which reflect the economic condition of a household. This suggests that the economic condition of a household is a core factor for household saving. Consequently, it emphasizes the efforts for a household to acquire the adequate level of income for saving. Forth, the positive relation of basic assistance to precautionary saving(the amount of average monthly saving and the ratio of average monthly saving) suggests the possibility for a household to accumulate the precautionary saving and the precautionary asset in the channel of basic assistance.

참고자료

· 없음