INCOME
The needs of a household are related to its size and composition. Larger households need greater economic resources to achieve the same standard of living as smaller households, but larger households have economies arising through the sharing of benefits between household members, such as accommodation, heating and other utilities. To make meaningful comparisons of living standards, measures of household income in this section are adjusted or equivalised to take account of differing household size and composition. A more detailed explanation of equivalised income is given in Appendix 3 of the ABS publication Household Income and Income Distribution, Australia (cat. no. 6523.0).
Income statistics presented in this section are based on data from the Census of Population and Housing. There are a number of limitations with household income estimates produced from the Census as they are based on personal income which is collected in ranges. However, the Census, is the best source when analysing incomes relating to small population groups, or for specific geographic areas such as the MDB.
In 2006, the mean equivalised gross weekly household income (hereafter referred to as equivalised household income) of people in the MDB was $675 per week, compared to $732 per week in Australia. The equivalised household income of people living in the major cities of the MDB was $971 per week which was 44% higher than the equivalised household income for all people in the MDB. Equivalised household income of people in remote areas ($593 per week) was higher than in outer regional areas ($571 per week). The income in areas classified as very remote averaged about $528 per week.
Table 2.16 shows the distribution across national income quintiles of equivalised household income of people in the MDB by remoteness area. Almost half (46%) of people in the Basin had an equivalised household income in the lowest two quintiles (up to $515 a week), with close to one-quarter (23%) in the lowest quintile (less than $315 a week).
The distribution of the MDB population across income quintiles in major cities is markedly different from other remoteness categories in the MDB. Less than one-quarter of people in the major cities were in the bottom two income quintiles, while almost two-fifths (38%) were in the top quintile. Conversely, the proportion of people in regional and remote areas within the bottom two quintiles ranged between 48% and 64%. Less than 12% of the population in regional and remote areas were in the highest quintile. For very remote areas, almost two-thirds of people (64%) were in the lowest two quintiles, nearly two-fifths (38%) were in the lowest quintile.
2.16 Population distribution(a), by equivalised household income and remoteness area - 2006 |
|  |
| | Murray-Darling Basin | Australia | |
| | Major cities | Inner regional | Outer regional | Remote | Very remote | Total | | |
| |
| Mean equivalised gross household weekly income ($/week)(b) | 971 | 629 | 571 | 593 | 528 | 675 | 732 | |
| Income quintile(c) | | | | | | | | |
| Lowest quintile (Less than $315 a week) (%) | 10.6 | 24.0 | 30.3 | 30.9 | 38.0 | 23.4 | 20.0 | |
| 2nd quintile ($315 to $515 a week) (%) | 11.4 | 24.0 | 25.5 | 23.6 | 25.7 | 22.1 | 20.0 | |
| 3rd quintile ($516 to $742 a week) (%) | 16.0 | 21.8 | 20.0 | 18.6 | 14.3 | 20.2 | 20.0 | |
| 4th quintile ($743 to $1077 a week) (%) | 24.1 | 18.4 | 15.0 | 15.3 | 12.8 | 18.5 | 20.0 | |
| Highest quintile ($1078 or more a week) (%) | 38.0 | 11.7 | 9.2 | 11.6 | 9.2 | 15.8 | 20.0 | |
| Total population (%)(d) | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
| |
| (a) Persons aged 15 years and over. |
| (b) In 2006 dollars. |
| (c) Based on total Australia. |
| (d) Components may not add to total due to rounding. |
| Source: ABS data available on request, ABS Census of Population and Housing, 2006 |
Print Page
Print All