This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Born on the First of July: An (Un)natural Experiment in Birth Timing

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Joshua S. Gans
Andrew Leigh

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

It is well understood that government policies can distort behaviour. But what is less often recognized is the anticipated introduction of a policy can introduce its own distortions. We study one such “introduction effect”, using evidence from a unique policy change in Australia. In 2004, the Australian government announced that children born on or after July 1, 2004 would receive a $3000 “Baby Bonus.” Although the policy was only announced a few months before its introduction, parents appear to have behaved strategically in order to receive this benefit, with the number of births dipping sharply in the days before the policy commenced. On July 1, 2004, more Australian children were born than on any other single date in the past thirty years. We estimate that over 1000 births were “moved” so as to ensure that their parents were eligible for the Baby Bonus, with about one quarter being moved by more than two weeks. Most of the effect was due to changes in the timing of inducement and caesarean section procedures. This birth-timing event represents a considerable opportunity for health researchers to study the impact of planned birthdays and hospital management issues.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://econrsss.anu.edu.au/pdf/DP529.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 529.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Jul 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:auu:dpaper:529

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://econrsss.anu.edu.au/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Drew Treasure).

Related research
Keywords: introduction effect; timing of births; policy distortion;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household
J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Kevin Milligan, 2002. "Subsidizing the Stork: New Evidence on Tax Incentives and Fertility," NBER Working Papers 8845, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Joshua S. Gans & Andrew Leigh, 2006. "The Millennium Bub," CEPR Discussion Papers 531, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Dustmann, Christian & Schönberg, Uta, 2008. "The Effect of Expansions in Maternity Leave Coverage on Children's Long-Term Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 3605, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). [Downloadable!]
  3. Robert Drago & Katina Sawyer & Karina Sheffler & Diana Warren & Mark Wooden, 2009. "Did Australia's Baby Bonus Increase the Fertility Rate?," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2009n01, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne. [Downloadable!]
  4. Joshua S. Gans & Andrew Leigh, 2006. "Bargaining Over Labor: Do Patients have any Power?," CEPR Discussion Papers 528, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
  5. Samuel Berlinski & Sebastian Galiani & Patrick J. McEwan, 2009. "Preschool and maternal labour market outcomes: evidence from a regression discontinuity design," IFS Working Papers W09/05, Institute for Fiscal Studies. [Downloadable!]
  6. Marcus Tamm, 2009. "The Impact of a Large Parental Leave Benefit Reform on the Timing of Birth around the Day of Implementation," Ruhr Economic Papers 0098, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen. [Downloadable!]
  7. Joshua S. Gans & Andrew Leigh, 2006. "Did the Death of Australian Inheritance Taxes Affect Deaths?," CEPR Discussion Papers 530, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  8. Mike Brewer & Anita Ratcliffe & Sarah Smith, 2008. "Does welfare reform affect fertility? Evidence from the UK," IFS Working Papers W08/09, Institute for Fiscal Studies. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The RePEc project started in 1997. Its precursor, NetEc, dates back to 1993.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-23.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.