IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v154y2021i3d10.1007_s11205-020-02566-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Back to the Future: a Sensitivity Analysis to Predict Future Fertility Rates Considering the Influence of Family Policies—The Cases of Spain and Norway

Author

Listed:
  • Vicente Díaz Gandasegui

    (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)

  • Begoña Elizalde-San Miguel

    (Universidad Pública de Navarra)

  • Maria T. Sanz

    (Universidad de Valencia)

Abstract

This article analyzes the relationship between family policies focused on childcare for children under the age of three and fertility levels. In the current context of very low European fertility, it is important to understand whether public support for families can help increase fertility or if, on the contrary, existing fertility levels are the exact reflection of the reproductive desires of families, regardless of the family-support of the policies that may exist in each country. This analysis was carried out through a stochastic dynamic mathematical model that incorporates both demographic variables and family policy variables. A sensitivity analysis was carried out on Spain and Norway, two countries that have very different models of family policies. This sensitivity analysis allows establishing a relationship between the existing family policies and the total fertility rate and also the expected evolution of fertility rates in the future, if the current family policies remain constant. The results showed that the models which lead to an increase in fertility are those which are most generous and which also incorporate a gender perspective, so they allow the identification of good practices and maximum levels of policy efficiency in regards to different objectives such as increase fertility and advances towards gender equality. By contrast, models with erratic and insufficient support clearly contribute to maintaining fertility at very low levels and perpetuate unequal gender relationships. There is, therefore, space for state agency to develop more effective public policies in both dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Vicente Díaz Gandasegui & Begoña Elizalde-San Miguel & Maria T. Sanz, 2021. "Back to the Future: a Sensitivity Analysis to Predict Future Fertility Rates Considering the Influence of Family Policies—The Cases of Spain and Norway," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 943-968, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:154:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s11205-020-02566-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-020-02566-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-020-02566-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-020-02566-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adriaan Kalwij, 2010. "The impact of family policy expenditure on fertility in western Europe," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 47(2), pages 503-519, May.
    2. Angela Luci-Greulich & Olivier Thévenon, 2013. "The Impact of Family Policies on Fertility Trends in Developed Countries," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(4), pages 387-416, November.
    3. Begoña Elizalde-San Miguel & Vicente Díaz Gandasegui & Maria T. Sanz García, 2019. "Family Policy Index: A Tool for Policy Makers to Increase the Effectiveness of Family Policies," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 387-409, February.
    4. Mary C. Brinton & Dong-Ju Lee, 2016. "Gender-Role Ideology, Labor Market Institutions, and Post-industrial Fertility," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 42(3), pages 405-433, September.
    5. Jan M. Hoem, 2008. "Overview Chapter 8: The impact of public policies on European fertility," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 19(10), pages 249-260.
    6. Eva Beaujouan & Caroline Berghammer, 2019. "The Gap Between Lifetime Fertility Intentions and Completed Fertility in Europe and the United States: A Cohort Approach," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(4), pages 507-535, August.
    7. Maria T. Sanz & Vicente Díaz Gandasegui & Begoña Elizalde-San Miguel, 2019. "Sense and sensibility: using a model to examine the relationship between public pre-school places and fertility," The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 213-230, October.
    8. Janet C. Gornick & Marcia K. Meyers, 2008. "Creating Gender Egalitarian Societies: An Agenda for Reform," Politics & Society, , vol. 36(3), pages 313-349, September.
    9. Anne H. Gauthier & Dimiter Philipov, 2008. "Can policies enhance fertility in Europe?," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16.
    10. Anne Salles & Clémentine Rossier & Sara Brachet, 2010. "Understanding the long term effects of family policies on fertility: The diffusion of different family models in France and Germany," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 22(34), pages 1057-1096.
    11. Tomáš Sobotka & Éva Beaujouan, 2014. "Two Is Best? The Persistence of a Two-Child Family Ideal in Europe," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 40(3), pages 391-419, September.
    12. Pau Baizan & Bruno Arpino & Carlos Eric Delclòs, 2016. "The Effect of Gender Policies on Fertility: The Moderating Role of Education and Normative Context," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(1), pages 1-30, February.
    13. Walter Korpi, 2000. "Faces of Inequality: Gender, Class and Patterns of Inequalities in Different Types of Welfare States," LIS Working papers 224, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaotian Zhang & Xiaoyun Liu & Yang Wang & Lulin Zhou & Xiaoran Cheng, 2022. "Sustainable Development of China’s Maternity Insurance System in the Context of Population Policy Changes: Using a Grounded Theory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Allan Puur & Sanan Abdullayev & Martin Klesment & Mark Gortfelder, 2023. "Parental Leave and Fertility: Individual-Level Responses in the Tempo and Quantum of Second and Third Births," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 39(1), pages 1-28, December.
    2. Sunnee Billingsley & Gerda Neyer & Katharina Wesolowski, 2022. "Social Investment Policies and Childbearing Across 20 Countries: Longitudinal and Micro-Level Analyses," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(5), pages 951-974, December.
    3. Kristen Harknett & Francesco Billari & Carla Medalia, 2014. "Do Family Support Environments Influence Fertility? Evidence from 20 European Countries," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(1), pages 1-33, February.
    4. Jac Thomas & Francisco Rowe & Paul Williamson & Eric S. Lin, 2022. "The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Jennifer Glass & Carolyn E. Waldrep, 2023. "Child Allowances and Work-Family Reconciliation Policies: What Best Reduces Child Poverty and Gender Inequality While Enabling Desired Fertility?," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 42(5), pages 1-57, October.
    6. Jolene Tan, 2024. "Beyond fertility figures: towards reproductive rights and choices," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-6, December.
    7. Tomáš Sobotka, 2020. "Introduction: the relevance of studying fertility across time and space," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24.
    8. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    9. Zuzanna Brzozowska & Eva Beaujouan & Kryštof Zeman, 2022. "Is Two Still Best? Change in Parity-Specific Fertility Across Education in Low-Fertility Countries," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(5), pages 2085-2114, October.
    10. Joanna Szczepaniak-Sienniak, 2021. "Transformations of State Family Policy in Poland from 1989 to the Pandemic Period," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4B), pages 883-900.
    11. Nadia Khamis & Luis Ayuso, 2022. "Female Breadwinner: More Egalitarian Couples? An International Comparison," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 534-545, September.
    12. Katharina Wesolowski & Sunnee Billingsley & Gerda Neyer, 2020. "Disentangling the complexity of family policies: SPIN data with an application to Lithuania and Sweden, 1995–2015," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 43(42), pages 1235-1262.
    13. Hippolyte d’ALBIS & Paula E. GOBBI & Angela GREULICH, 2017. "Having a Second Child and Access to Childcare : Evidence from European Countries," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(2), pages 177-210, June.
    14. Raffaele Guetto & Giammarco Alderotti & Daniele Vignoli, 2023. "Can Policy Reforms Enhance Fertility? An Ex-Ante Evaluation through Factorial Survey Experiments," Econometrics Working Papers Archive 2023_08, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Statistica, Informatica, Applicazioni "G. Parenti".
    15. Angela Greulich & Olivier Thevenon & Mathilde Guergoat-Larivière, 2016. "Securing women's employment: A fertility booster in European countries?," Post-Print hal-01298862, HAL.
    16. Qi Yang & Jianyuan Huang, 2020. "Content Analysis of Family Policy Instruments to Promote the Sustainable Development of Families in China from 1989–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, January.
    17. AKEJU, Kemi Funlayo, 2021. "Fertility Preference in Older Women: Effect of Place of Residence and Use of Contraceptives in Nigeria," International Journal of Social Sciences Perspectives, Online Academic Press, vol. 8(1), pages 25-30.
    18. Caroline Sten Hartnett & Alison Gemmill, 2020. "Recent Trends in U.S. Childbearing Intentions," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(6), pages 2035-2045, December.
    19. Soo-Yeon Yoon, 2017. "The influence of a supportive environment for families on women’s fertility intentions and behavior in South Korea," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(7), pages 227-254.
    20. Janna Bergsvik & Agnes Fauske & Rannveig Kaldager Hart, 2021. "Can Policies Stall the Fertility Fall? A Systematic Review of the (Quasi‐) Experimental Literature," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 47(4), pages 913-964, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:154:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s11205-020-02566-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.