IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article

Can child care policy encourage employment and fertility?: Evidence from a structural model

  • Haan, Peter
  • Wrohlich, Katharina

We develop a structural model of female employment and fertility which accounts for intertemporal feedback effects between these two outcomes. To identify the effect of financial incentives on employment and fertility we exploit variation in the tax and transfer system, which differs by employment state and number of children. Specifically, we simulate in detail the effects of the tax and transfer system, including child care costs. The model provides estimates of the structural preferences of women that can be used to study the effect of various policy reforms. Results show that increasing child care subsidies, conditional on employment, increases the labor supply of all women as well as the fertility rates of the childless and highly educated women.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927537110001533
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Labour Economics.

Volume (Year): 18 (2011)
Issue (Month): 4 (August)
Pages: 498-512

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:labeco:v:18:y:2011:i:4:p:498-512
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/labeco

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.:

as in new window
  1. Rebecca M. Blank, 2002. "Evaluating Welfare Reform in the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(4), pages 1105-1166, December.
  2. Siv Gustafsson & Frank Stafford, 1992. "Child Care Subsidies and Labor Supply in Sweden," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 27(1), pages 204-230.
  3. Kevin Milligan, 2002. "Subsidizing the Stork: New Evidence on Tax Incentives and Fertility," NBER Working Papers 8845, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Peter Haan & Katharina Wrohlich, 2007. "Optimal Taxation: The Design of Child Related Cash- and In-Kind-Benefits," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 65, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
  5. Whittington, Leslie A & Alm, James & Peters, H Elizabeth, 1990. "Fertility and the Personal Exemption: Implicit Pronatalist Policy in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 545-56, June.
  6. Katharina Wrohlich, 2005. "The Excess Demand for Subsidized Child Care in Germany," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 470, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  7. Susan L. Averett & H. Elizabeth Peters & Donald M. Waldman, . "Tax Credits, Labor Supply, and Child Care," University of Chicago - Population Research Center 92-9a, Chicago - Population Research Center.
  8. Azmat, Ghazala & Gonzalez, Libertad, 2009. "Targeting Fertility and Female Participation Through the Income Tax," IZA Discussion Papers 4405, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  9. Daniela Del Boca & Robert M. Sauer, 2006. "Life Cycle Employment and Fertility Across Institutional Environments," CHILD Working Papers wp14_06, CHILD - Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic economics - ITALY.
  10. Akay, Alpaslan, 2009. "The Wooldridge Method for the Initial Values Problem Is Simple: What About Performance?," IZA Discussion Papers 3943, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  11. Viktor Steiner & Katharina Wrohlich, 2004. "Household Taxation, Income Splitting and Labor Supply Incentives – A Microsimulation Study for Germany," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 50(3), pages 541-568.
  12. Katharina Wrohlich, 2011. "Labor Supply and Child Care Choices in a Rationed Child Care Market," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1169, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  13. Raquel Carrasco, 1999. "Binary Choice with Binary Endogenous Regressors in Panel Data: Estimating the Effect of Fertility on Female Labour Participation," Working Papers 1999.3, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  14. Pierre‐Carl Michaud & Konstantinos Tatsiramos, 2011. "Fertility and female employment dynamics in Europe: the effect of using alternative econometric modeling assumptions," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(4), pages 641-668, 06.
  15. Laroque, Guy & Salanié, Bernard, 2005. "Does Fertility Respond to Financial Incentives?," CEPR Discussion Papers 5007, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  16. Blundell, Richard, 2000. "Work Incentives and 'In-Work' Benefit Reforms: A Review," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 27-44, Spring.
  17. V. Joseph Hotz & John Karl Scholz, 2001. "The Earned Income Tax Credit," NBER Working Papers 8078, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Ribar, D.C., 1991. "A Structural Model of Child Care and the Labor Supply of Married Women," Papers 1-91-1, Pennsylvania State - Department of Economics.
  19. Blau, David M & Robins, Philip K, 1988. "Child-Care Costs and Family Labor Supply," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(3), pages 374-81, August.
  20. Mike Brewer & Anita Ratcliffe & Sarah Smith (Tanner), 2008. "Does welfare reform affect fertility? Evidence from the UK," IFS Working Papers W08/09, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  21. Marco Francesconi, 2002. "A Joint Dynamic Model of Fertility and Work of Married Women," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 336-380, Part.
  22. Reagan Baughman & Stacy Dickert-Conlin, 2003. "Did Expanding the EITC Promote Motherhood?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 247-251, May.
  23. Anne Gauthier, 2007. "The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: a review of the literature," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 323-346, June.
  24. Guy Laroque & Bernard Salanié, 2003. "Fertility and Financial Incentives in France," Working Papers 2003-32, Centre de Recherche en Economie et Statistique.
  25. David Blau & Philip Robins, 1989. "Fertility, Employment, and Child-Care Costs," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 26(2), pages 287-299, May.
  26. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2005. "Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 39-54.
  27. Michael P. Keane & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2002. "Estimating Welfare Effects Consistent with Forward-Looking Behavior. Part II: Empirical Results," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 37(3), pages 600-622.
  28. Rafael Lalive & Josef Zweim�ller, . "Does Parental Leave Affect Fertility and Return-to-Work? Evidence from a �True Natural Experiment�," IEW - Working Papers 242, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  29. Dean R. Hyslop, 1999. "State Dependence, Serial Correlation and Heterogeneity in Intertemporal Labor Force Participation of Married Women," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(6), pages 1255-1294, November.
  30. Viktor Steiner & Katharina Wrohlich & Peter Haan & Johannes Geyer, 2008. "Documentation of the Tax-Benefit Microsimulation Model STSM: Version 2008," Data Documentation 31, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  31. Viktor Steiner & Peter Haan & Katharina Wrohlich, 2005. "Dokumentation des Steuer-Transfer-Mikrosimulationsmodells STSM 1999 - 2002," Data Documentation 9, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  32. Heckman, James & Singer, Burton, 1984. "A Method for Minimizing the Impact of Distributional Assumptions in Econometric Models for Duration Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 271-320, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:labeco:v:18:y:2011:i:4:p:498-512. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.