IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwwob/81-40-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trends in der Kinderbetreuung: sozioökonomische Unterschiede verstärken sich in Ost und West

Author

Listed:
  • Pia S. Schober
  • Juliane F. Stahl

Abstract

In East Germany, prior to reunification, day care provision was widely available to encourage mothers to return to work soon after giving birth. Conversely, in West Germany, child care facilities for the under-threes were few and far between and, at the end of the ’80s/beginning of the ’90s, the length of parental leave was gradually increased to up to three years following the birth of a child. Since 2005, postunification Germany has seen a significant expansion in day care services, primarily to help parents combine employment with family responsibilities. Despite these recent trends, however, 25 years after reunification, there are still major disparities between East and West Germany when it comes to child care for the under-threes. The present article examines how the use of day care facilities (Kitas) and informal child care by relatives or babysitters has changed for this age group in both regions since the ’90s. The study specifically analyzes whether the expansion of child day care in recentyears has also resulted in an increase in socio-economic disparities in the use of different types of child care and to what extent this applies to East and West Germany. Using data from the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) study, our analyses show that . in West Germany, since 2006, there has been a significant rise in the probability of children with single mothers, or whose mothers have a university or vocational qualification, attending a day care facility. For children whose mothers have alow level of education or whose parents are at risk of poverty, this increase was less pronounced. In East Germany, considerable growth was observed in day-care attendance among children with highly-educated or single mothers as well as of children at risk of poverty. In some groups, the increased use of these institutions was accompanied by a decline in informal child care. However, West German mothers with a university education and single mothers in East Germany still frequently use informal child care options. In Ostdeutschland wurde vor der Wende durch eine weitreichende Verfügbarkeit von Kindertagesbetreuung eine rasche Rückkehr von Müttern in die Erwerbstätigkeit gefördert. In Westdeutschland existierte kaum institutionelle Kindertagesbetreuung für unter Dreijährige, und Ende der 80er und Anfang der 90er Jahre wurde der Erziehungsurlaub schrittweise auf bis zu drei Jahre nach einer Geburt ausgeweitet. Seit 2005 wurde im vereinten Deutschland die Kindertagesbetreuung stark ausgeweitet, vor allem um Eltern die Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und Familie zu ermöglichen. Trotz dieser neueren Trends werden Kinder unter drei Jahren in Ost- und Westdeutschland immer noch sehr unterschiedlich betreut. Wir gehen der Frage nach, wie sich die Nutzung von Kindertagesbetreuung („Kitas“) und von informeller Betreuung durch Verwandte oder Babysitter für diese Altersgruppe seit den 90er Jahren in Ost- und Westdeutschland verändert hat. Insbesondere untersuchen wir, ob sich im Zuge des Ausbaus von Kindertagesbetreuung in den letzten Jahren die sozioökonomischen Unterschiede in der Inanspruchnahme verschiedener Formen von Kinderbetreuung vergrößert haben und inwiefern dies auf Ost- und Westdeutschland zutrifft. Analysen auf Basis des Sozio-oekonomischen Panels (SOEP) zeigen dass seit 2006 in Westdeutschland die Wahrscheinlichkeit eines Kita-Besuchs für Kinder von Müttern mit Hochschul- oder Berufsabschluss und für alleinerziehende Mütter deutlich stieg. Unter Kindern, deren Mütter niedrige Bildung haben oder deren Eltern von Armut bedroht sind, war der Zuwachs geringer. In Ostdeutschland hat insbesondere die Kitanutzung von Kindern mit hochgebildeten Müttern, Alleinerziehenden, und auch von armutsgefährdeten Kindern signifikant zugenommen. In einigenGruppen ging die verstärkte Nutzung von Kitas mit einer Reduktion informeller Betreuung einher. Mütter mit Hochschulabschluss in Westdeutschland und Alleinerziehende in Ostdeutschland organisierten die Betreuung nach wie vor auch häufig informell.

Suggested Citation

  • Pia S. Schober & Juliane F. Stahl, 2014. "Trends in der Kinderbetreuung: sozioökonomische Unterschiede verstärken sich in Ost und West," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(40), pages 986-994.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwob:81-40-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.483782.de/14-40-7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Boll, Christina & Lagemann, Andreas, 2018. "Das Erwerbsverhalten von Eltern mit Migrationshintergrund: SOEP-basierte Befunde und deren Implikationen für Hamburg," HWWI Policy Papers 112, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).
    2. Uwe Jirjahn & Cornelia Chadi, 2020. "Out-of-partnership births in East and West Germany," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 853-881, September.
    3. Eibich, Peter & Siedler, Thomas, 2020. "Retirement, intergenerational time transfers, and fertility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. Stockhausen, Maximilian, 2016. "The Impact of Private and Public Childcare Provision on the Distribution of Children's Incomes in Germany," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145638, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Thomas Cornelissen & Christian Dustmann & Anna Raute & Uta Schönberg, 2018. "Who Benefits from Universal Child Care? Estimating Marginal Returns to Early Child Care Attendance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(6), pages 2356-2409.
    6. Bönke, Timm & Harnack, Astrid & Wetter, Miriam, 2019. "Wer gewinnt? Wer verliert? Die Entwicklung auf dem deutschen Arbeitsmarkt seit den frühen Jahren der Bundesrepublik bis heute," Discussion Papers 2019/4, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    7. Maximilian Stockhausen, 2017. "The Distribution of Economic Resources to Children in Germany," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 901, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    8. Juliane F. Stahl, 2015. "Wer nutzt welche Qualität? Zusammenhänge zwischen sozioökonomischer Herkunft und Kita-Qualität," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 73, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Charlotte Bartels & Maximilian Stockhausen, 2017. "Children's Opportunities in Germany – An Application Using Multidimensional Measures," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 18(3), pages 327-376, August.
    10. Boll, Christina & Lagemann, Andreas, 2018. "Does culture trump money? Employment and childcare use of migrant and non-migrant mothers of pre-school children in Germany," HWWI Research Papers 187, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).
    11. Uwe Jirjahn, Cornelia Struewing, 2018. "Single Motherhood in East and West Germany: What Can Explain the Differences?," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 15(2), pages 197-229, December.
    12. Boll, Christina & Lagemann, Andreas, 2018. "Does Culture Trump Money? Erwerbsverhalten und Kitanutzung von Müttern mit und ohne Migrationshintergrund in Deutschland," HWWI Research Papers 188, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    child care; disadvantaged groups; early education; social disparities; long-term trend;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I24 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Education and Inequality
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:diw:diwwob:81-40-7. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    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.