Childbearing under different family policy schemes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20377/jfr-987Keywords:
fertility, family policy, educational differences, longitudinal analysisAbstract
Objective: This study assesses whether and how changes in family policies are associated with first and second births in Finland, Germany and the United Kingdom, and whether these associations differ by women’s education.
Background: Family policies are expected to impact the direct and indirect costs of childbearing by providing resources that influence the monetary and non-monetary costs of having children. The countries analysed here have undergone substantial changes in family policy throughout the two decades analysed, but each country has changed different aspects of their policies, and they have done so in different policy environments.
Method: We analysed women aged 18–44 and their transitions to first and second births using register data from Finland (N = 57,518 / 21,685) and panel data from Germany (G-SOEP, N=37,716 / 16,756) and the UK (BHPS and Understanding Society, N = 13,213 / 9,992) complemented with annual family policy information. The data were analysed using logistic regression models and interactions, and the results are presented as average marginal effects.
Results: The results suggest that the association between changes in family policies and transitions to first and second child birth varied by birth parity, women’s education level, and between countries. For example in Finland, increases in paternity leave length were associated with greater propensities to transition to first birth for highly educated women, whereas increases in child allowances had a similar association for lower educated women. In Germany, reductions in maternity leave length were associated with increased transitions to first birth for higher educated women. In the UK, increases in maternity leave length were associated with greater transitions to first births among all women.
Conclusion: The results highlight that to the extent that family policies influence fertility, they do so depending on both the country context and often differentially within countries based on women’s education level and birth parity.
References
Aassve, A., & Lappegård, T. (2009). Childcare cash benefits and fertility timing in Norway. European Journal of Population, 25(1): 67–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-008-9158-6
Aassve, A., Billari, F. C., & Spéder, Z. (2006). Societal transition, policy changes and family formation: Evidence from Hungary. European Journal of Population, 22(2): 127–152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-005-7434-2
Baizan, P. (2021). Welfare regime patterns in the social class-fertility relationship: Second births in Austria, France, Norway and the United Kingdom. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 73: 100611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2021.100611
Barro, R. J., & Becker, G. S. (1989). Fertility choice in a model of economic growth. Econometrica, 57(2): 481–501. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1912563
Becker, G. S. (1960). An economic analysis of fertility. In G. B. Roberts (Ed.), Demographic and economic change in developed countries (pp. 209–240). Columbia University Press.
Becker, G. S., & Lewis, H. G. (1973). On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children. Journal of Political Economy, 81(2): S279–S288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/260166
Bergsvik, J., Fauske, A., & Hart, R. K. (2021). Can policies stall the fertility fall? A systematic review of the (quasi‐) experimental literature. Population and Development Review, 47(4): 913–964. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/padr.12431
Berrington, A., Stone, J., & Beaujouan, E. (2015). Educational differences in timing and quantum of childbearing in Britain: A study of cohorts born 1940–1969. Demographic Research, 33: 733–764. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2015.33.26
Billari, F. C. (2008). Lowest-low fertility in Europe: Exploring the causes and finding some surprises. The Japanese Journal of Population, 6(1): 2–18.
Breen, R., Karlson, K. B., & Holm, A. (2018). Interpreting and understanding logits, probits, and other nonlinear probability models. Annual Review of Sociology, 44: 39–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041429
Brzozowska, Z., Beaujouan, E., & Zeman, K. (2022). Is two still best? Change in parity-specific fertility across education in low-fertility countries. Population Research and Policy Review, 41(5): 2085–2114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-022-09716-4
Castles, F. G. (2003). The world turned upside down: Below replacement fertility, changing preferences and family-friendly public policy in 21 OECD countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 13(3): 209–227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287030133001
Cherlin, A. J. (2016). A happy ending to a half-century of family change? Population and Development Review, 42(1): 121–129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2016.00111.x
Churchill, H. (2013). Retrenchment and restructuring: family support and children’s services reform under the coalition. Journal of Children’s Services, 8(3): 209–222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-05-2013-0020
Cygan-Rehm, K. (2016). Parental leave benefit and differential fertility responses: Evidence from a German reform. Journal of Population Economics, 29(1): 73–103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-015-0562-z
D’Addio, A. C., & d’Ercole, M. M. (2005). Trends and determinants of fertility rates. The role of policies. OECD.
Daly, M. (2010). Shifts in family policy in the UK under New Labour. Journal of European Social Policy, 20(5): 433–443. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928710380480
DICE Database. (2014). Parental leave entitlements: Historical perspective (around 1870 – 2014), Database for Institutional Comparisons in Europe.
Drago, R., Sawyer, K., Shreffler, K. M., Warren, D., & Wooden, M. (2011). Did Australia’s baby bonus increase the fertility intentions and births? Population Research and Policy Review, 30(3): 381–397. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-010-9193-y
Duvander, A., Lappegård, T., & Johansson, M. (2020). Impact of a reform towards shared parental leave on continued fertility in Norway and Sweden. Population Research and Policy Review, 39: 1205–1229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-020-09574-y
Ellingsæter, A. L. (2009). Leave policy in the Nordic welfare states: a ‘recipe’ for high employment/high fertility?. Community, Work and Family, 12(1): 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800801890152
Esping‐Andersen, G., & Billari, F. C. (2015). Re-theorizing family demographics. Population and Development Review, 41(1): 1–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2015.00024.x
Farré, L., & González, L. (2019). Does paternity leave reduce fertility?. Journal of Public Economics, 172: 52–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.12.002
Fleckenstein, T. (2011). The politics of ideas in welfare state transformation: Christian democracy and the reform of family policy in Germany. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 18(4): 543–571. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxr022
Fleckenstein, T., & Lee, S. C. (2014). The politics of post-industrial social policy: Family policy reforms in Britain, Germany, South Korea, and Sweden. Comparative Political Studies, 47(4): 601–630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414012451564
Fluchtmann, J., van Veen, V., & Adema, W. (2023). Fertility, employment and family policy: A cross-country panel analysis. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 299.
Gathmann, C., & Sass, B. (2018). Taxing childcare: Effects on childcare choices, family labor supply, and children. Journal of Labor Economics, 36(3): 665–709. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/696143
Gauthier, A. H. (2007a). Some theoretical and methodological comments on the impact of policies on fertility. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 6: 25–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2008s25
Gauthier, A. H. (2007b). The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: a review of the literature. Population Research and Policy Review, 26(3): 323–346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-007-9033-x
German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). (2017). Data for years 1984–2016, version 33, SOEP.
Haataja, A. (2005). Outcomes of the two 1990s family policy reforms at the turn of the 2000s in Finland. Finnish Yearbook of Population Research, 41: 5–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23979/fypr.45011
Härkönen, J. (2018). Single-mother poverty: How much do educational differences in single motherhood matter? In R. Nieuwenhuis, & L. C. Madonado (Eds.), The triple bind of single-parent families. Resources, employment and policies to improve wellbeing (pp. 31–50). Policy Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt2204rvq.8
Hart, R. K., Andersen, S. N., & Drange, N. (2022). Effects of extended paternity leave on family dynamics. Journal of Marriage and Family, 84(3): 814–839. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12818
Hiilamo, H. (2017). Fertility response to economic recessions in Finland 1991–2015. Finnish Yearbook of Population Research, 52: 15–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23979/fypr.65254
Kalwij, A. (2010). The impact of family policy expenditure on fertility in Western Europe. Demography, 47(2): 503–519. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.0.0104
Kennedy, S., & Thomson, E. (2010). Children’s experiences of family disruption in Sweden: Differentials by parent education over three decades. Demographic Research, 23(17): 479–508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2010.23.17
Klesment, M., Puur, A., Rahnu, L., & Sakkeus, L. (2014). Varying association between education and second births in Europe: Comparative analysis based on the EU-SILC data. Demographic Research, 31(27): 813–860. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2014.31.27
Kreyenfeld, M. (2021). Causal modelling in fertility research: A review of the literature and an application to a parental leave policy reform. Comparative Population Studies, 46: 269–302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2021-10
Lalive, R., & Zweimüller, J. (2009). How does parental leave affect fertility and return to work? Evidence from two natural experiments. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(3): 1363–1402. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2009.124.3.1363
Leinter, S., Ostner, I., & Schmitt, C. (2008). Family policies in Germany. In I. Ostner & C. Schmitt (Eds.), Family policies in the context of family change: The Nordic countries in comparative perspective (pp. 175–202). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90895-3_9
Lesthaeghe, R. (2010). The unfolding story of the second demographic transition. Population and Development Review, 36(2): 211–251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2010.00328.x
Liu, Q., & Skans, O. N. (2010). The duration of paid parental leave and children's scholastic performance. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 10(1): Article 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1935-1682.2329
Luci-Greulich, A., & Thévenon, O. (2013). The impact of family policies on fertility trends in developed countries. European Journal of Population / Revue Européenne de Démographie, 29(4): 387–416. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-013-9295-4
Lutz, W., & Skirbekk, V. (2005). Policies addressing the tempo effect in low‐fertility countries. Population and Development Review, 31(4): 699–720. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2005.00094.x
Merz, E.-M., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2017). Cross-national differences in the association between educational attainment and completed fertility. Do welfare regimes matter? Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 15: 95–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2017s095
Milligan, K. (2005). Subsidizing the stork: New evidence on tax incentives and fertility. Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(3): 539–555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/0034653054638382
Neyer, G., & Andersson, G. (2008). Consequences of family policies on childbearing behavior: Effects or artifacts? Population and Development Review, 34(4): 699–724. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2008.00246.x
Ní Bhrolcháin, M., & Beaujouan, É. (2012). Fertility postponement is largely due to rising educational enrolment. Population Studies, 66(3): 311–327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2012.697569
OECD. (2023). Fertility rates (indicator).
Pöyliö, H., & Van Winkle, Z. (2019). Do parental resources moderate the relationship between women’s income and timing of parenthood? Advances in Life Course Research, 39: 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2019.02.003
Raute, A. (2019). Can financial incentives reduce the baby gap? Evidence from a reform in maternity leave benefits. Journal of Public Economics, 169: 203–222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.07.010
Riphahn, R. T., & Wiynck, F. (2017). Fertility effects of child benefits. Journal of Population Economics, 30(4): 1135–1184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-017-0647-y
Sobotka, T., Matysiak, A., & Brzozowska, Z. (2020). Policy responses to low fertility: How effective are they?. Working Paper No. 1, UNFPA, Technical Division, Population & Development Branch. https://www.unfpa.org/publications/policy-responses-low-fertility-how-effective-are-they [retrieved September 17, 2024]
Sobotka, T., Skirbekk, V., & Philipov, D. (2011). Economic recession and fertility in the developed world. Population and Development Review, 37(2): 267–306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00411.x
Spéder, Z., Murinkó, L., & Sz. Oláh, L. (2020). Cash support vs. tax incentives: The differential impact of policy interventions on third births in contemporary Hungary. Population Studies, 74(1): 39–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2019.1694165
Statistics Finland. (n. d.) Growth Environment Panel (FinGEP), compiled from several administrative registers by Statistics Finland (Licence number Dnro: TK-53-507-12).
Testa, M. R., Bordone, V., Osiewalska, B., & Skirbekk, V. (2016). Are daughters' childbearing intentions related to their mothers' socio-economic status?. Demographic Research, 35(1): 581–616. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2016.35.21
Thévenon, O. (2011). Family policies in OECD Countries: A comparative analysis. Population and Development Review, 37(1): 57–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00390.x
Trzcinski, E., & Camp, J. K. (2014). Family policy in Germany. In M. Robila (Ed.), Handbook of family policies across the globe (pp.137–153). Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6771-7_10
University of Essex. Institute for Social and Economic Research, NatCen Social Research, Kantar Public. (2018). Understanding Society: Waves 1-7, 2009-2016 and Harmonised BHPS: Waves 1-18, 1991-2009. [data collection]. 10th Release. UK Data Service. SN: 6614.
Wesolowski, K., & Ferrarini, T. (2018). Family policies and fertility: Examining the link between family policy institutions and fertility rates in 33 countries 1995–2011. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 38(11/12): 1057–1070. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-04-2018-0052
Wood, J., Neels, K., & Kil, T. (2014). The educational gradient of childlessness and cohort parity progression in 14 low fertility countries. Demographic Research, 31(46): 1365–1415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2014.31.46
Yu, W. H. (2015). Placing families in context: challenges for cross‐national family research. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(1): 23–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12152
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Funding data
-
Academy of Finland
Grant numbers 320162 -
European Research Council
Grant numbers ERC-2013-CoG-617965;882276
