Upload
ovid
View
19
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Child care se r vices – demographic and social context –. András Gábos (TÁRKI Social Research Institute). ADAPT2DC Transnational Study Tour, 20-22 May 2014, Budapest. Outline of the presentation. G eneral context Demographic processes Childbearing and labour market participation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Child care services– demographic and social
context –
András Gábos (TÁRKI Social Research Institute)
ADAPT2DC Transnational Study Tour, 20-22 May 2014, Budapest
Outline of the presentation
1. General context
2. Demographic processes
3. Childbearing and labour market participation
4. Poverty and social exclusion
5. Family policies and the Visegrád countries in Europe
1General context
Child care services – a framework
Childcare
services
LM participa
tion
Social inclusion
Child develop
ment
Childbearing
The availability and the quality of childcare services:
- affect parents’ decisions on - childbearing- labour supply
- affect household resources needed for social inclusion- in short term: parental
resources- in long-term: child
development
Work-life balance
Breaking the intergenerational transmission of poverty
Use of childcare and Barcelona target, 2010
Source. C. Thévénet (DG EMPL): Child poverty and child well-being in the European Union. Presentation at the InGRID Expert workshop on ‘Framework and methods for indicator building for various vulnerable groups’ Budapest, 27-29 November 2013. Based on data from EU SILC, 2010.
2Demographic processes in the Visegrád countries
Falling fertility in the Visegrád countries, 1950-2010
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
4,0
Czech Republic Hungary Poland Slovakia Italy Sweden
Source: United Nations Population Statistics.
Systemic change
↘ − / ↗ ↘↘ − / ↗
Falling share of the population aged 0-4 as % of total population, 1950-2010
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Czech Republic Hungary Poland Slovakia Italy Sweden
Source: United Nations Population Statistics.
Systemic change
3Childbearing and labour market participation
Maternal employment rates compared to female employment rates, 2011
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Female employment rate (25-54 age cohort) Maternal employment rate - child under 15 (2)
OECD average maternal employment rate = 65.2%
Source: OECD Family Database.
Visegrád countries
- low maternal employment (similar to the Southern countries)
- the gap between female and maternal employment is large (among the largest within the OECD)
- Poland is an exception (with higher than OECD-average figures)
Maternal employment rates by age of youngest child, 2011
Source: OECD Family Database.
0
20
40
60
80
100
< 3 years (2) 3-5 years (3) 6-14 years (4)
Visegrád countries
- Huge disparities in ME by the age of child
- Very low employment for mothers with a child younger than 3 (among the lowest within OECD)
- Poland is again an exception
- Not the same pattern for mothers with an older child
Maternal employment rates by number of children under 15, 2011
0
20
40
60
80
100
1 child 2 children (3) 3 children or more
Source: OECD Family Database.
Visegrád countries
- Huge disparities in ME by the number of children
- Very low employment for mothers with 3 or more children (among the lowest within OECD)
- Poland is again an exception
Female employment and fertility
50 60 70 80 901.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
AUS
AUT
BEL
CAN
CZE
DNK
EST
FIN
FRA
DEU
GRC
HUN
ISL
IRL
ITAJPN
KOR
LUX
NLD
NZL
NOR
POLPRTSVK
SLV
ESP
SWE
CHE
GBR
USA
MEX
R² = 0.0671974722272685
Employment rates of women aged 25-54 yearsTo
tal F
ertil
ity R
ate
30 40 50 60 70 801.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
AUS
BELCAN
DNKFIN
FRA
DEU
GRC
IRL
ITAJPN
KOR
LUXNLD
NOR
NLZ
PRT
SWE
GBRUSA
R² = 0.163766872302227
Employment rates of women aged 25-54 years
Tota
l Fer
tility
Rat
e
1980 2010
Source: OECD Family Database.
The negative relationship predicted by economic theory changed in the 1980’s.E.g. Ahn and Mira (2002) Rindfuss, Guzzo és Morgan 2000; Billari et al. 2002; Del Boca et al. 2003; d’Addio and d’Ercole 2005.
Female employment and fertility
1980 2010
Source: OECD Family Database.
Cross-sectional macro-level correlations might be misleading. At micro level, the negative relationship is still there, although weakened in this period.Engelhardt, Kögel and Prskawetz 2001; Engelhardt and Prskawetz 2002; Kögel 2003; Kögel 2006.
4Poverty and social exclusion
Child poverty risk outcomes
Joblessness: children living in
jobless households
In-work poverty: children living in
households confronted with
such poverty
Impact of social transfers (cash benefits excl.
pensions) on child poverty
Grou
p A
Finland +++ +++ ++ +++ Denmark +++ + +++ ++
Sweden ++ + ++ ++ Slovenia ++ +++ + ++
Netherlands ++ ++ + + Austria ++ ++ + +++
Germany ++ + + + France + + + +
Czech Republic + + + +
Grou
p B
United Kingdom + – – – + ++ Belgium + – – ++ + Estonia + – ++ +
Hungary – – – ++ ++
Grou
p C
Bulgaria – – – – – – –
Slovakia – – – – –
Lithuania – – – – +
Grou
p D
Malta + + – – Portugal – + – –
Greece – ++ – – – – Luxembourg – +++ – – +
Poland – + – – Italy – – ++ – – – –
Latvia – – + – – Spain – – + – – – –
Romania – – – + – – – – –
Relative outcomes of countries related to child poverty risk and main determinants of child poverty risk, 2010
Source. Gábos (2013) based on the methodology developed by the EU Task-Force on Child Poverty and Child Well-being in the EU (2008).
Visegrád countries
- Considerable variation across V4- Czech Republic: good (but not very good) performance in all dimensions- Hungary: the risk of poverty is strongly related to poor LM outcomes. Cash transfers and LM participation are protective - Slovakia: the risk of poverty is strongly related to poor LM outcomes. - Poland: in-work poverty is the concern
Use of childcare and gradient
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 900
1
2
3
4
5
6
4.48105843385206
4.12823044988426
1.70414494014229
0.883889592785661
1.19546463033661
1.99593566448363
3.14469281577848
4.55468211476111
2.24847200129896
4.7
2.24489743672948
3.179449834126953.00182953653684
2.02854624965448
5.5
2.87475040226426
3.85810724073686
2.95232109419332
2.61387244298316
1.77905568115098
2.90374275480241
3.71843626397301
0.576049389895106
2.89939579867932 2.887727717424883.11805785279426
1.83470450176668
Use of childcare and number of hours (factor) Children aged less than 3
Gra
die
nt
in t
he u
se o
f ch
ildca
re
(based o
n m
oth
er'
s level of
educa
tion)
large use of childcare, low gradient
large use of childcare, large gradientlow use of childcare, large
gradient
low use of childcare, low gradient
Source. C. Thévénet (DG EMPL): Child poverty and child well-being in the European Union. Presentation at the InGRID Expert workshop on ‘Framework and methods for indicator building for various vulnerable groups’ Budapest, 27-29 November 2013. Based on data from EU SILC, 2010.
5Family policies and the Visegrád countries in Europe
Public spending on family benefits in cash, services and tax measures, in per cent of GDP, 2009
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
2,5
3,0
3,5
4,0
4,5Tax breaks towards families Services Cash
OECD-33 average =2.6%
Source: OECD Family Database.
Visegrád countries
- Considerable variation across countries- Czech Republic, Slovakia: spend near OECD average- Hungary: spends at Scandinavian level, strongly cash focused- Poland: spends at Mediterranean level.
Family policy country groups
Most flexible- high female employment rate- high part-time rate- good childcare provision- generous leave and benefits- good work-life balance
Mixed, mainly flexible- medium or high female employment rate- good childcare options, or significant recent efforts to increase these- mix of traditional policies and flexible policies
Mixed, mainly traditional- usually low female employment rate- low part-time rate- few children in childcare- long parental leave
Most traditional (family-oriented)- few children in full-time childcare or relatives commonly look after children- low female employment rate- support to large families
Source: Eurofound 2014.
BEDKFINLSEUK
CZHULVMTPLROSK
ATCYDEFRIELUPTSI
BGEEELESHRITLT
ImPRovE – Poverty Reduction in Europe: Social Policy and Innovation
- FP7, 2012-2016, U of Antwerp
InGRID – Integrating Expertise in Inclusive Growth
- FP7, 2013-2017, KU Leuven
STYLE – Strategic Transitions for Youth Labour in Europe
- FP7, 2014-2017, U of Brighton
Thank you for your [email protected]
Summary
Increase in mean age at birth in the Visegrád countries, 1950-2010
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Czech Republic Hungary Poland Slovakia Italy Sweden
Source: United Nations Population Statistics.
Systemic change