IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v702y2022i1p55-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Income Support Policies for Single Parents in Europe and the United States: What Works Best?

Author

Listed:
  • Elise Aerts
  • Ive Marx
  • Zachary Parolin

Abstract

Poverty rates among single parents vary considerably across countries, in part reflecting differences in the generosity and design of minimum income protections. We ask what the optimal ways are to target income support to single parents, if the prime objective of policy is to shelter those households from poverty. We map minimum income provisions for working and nonworking single-parent households across Europe and the United States, showing that three things matter for adequate minimum income protection. First, minimum wage levels matter, obviously for working single parents, but also for jobless ones since they effectively set the ‘glass ceiling’ for out-of-work benefits. Second, the overall generosity of the child benefit package is crucial to shelter both working and jobless single parents from poverty. Third, countries that employ a strategy of “targeting within universalism†(that is directing extra support to vulnerable groups such as single parents within the context of a universal benefit program) tend to do best.

Suggested Citation

  • Elise Aerts & Ive Marx & Zachary Parolin, 2022. "Income Support Policies for Single Parents in Europe and the United States: What Works Best?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 702(1), pages 55-76, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:702:y:2022:i:1:p:55-76
    DOI: 10.1177/00027162221120448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00027162221120448
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00027162221120448?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah Marchal & Wim Van Lancker, 2019. "The Measurement of Targeting Design in Complex Welfare States: A Proposal and Empirical Applications," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 693-726, June.
    2. Kenworthy, Lane, 2013. "Progress for the Poor," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199676927.
    3. Joakim Palme & Walter Korpi, 1998. "The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality and Poverty in the Western Countries," LIS Working papers 174, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    4. David Brady & Rebekah Burroway, 2012. "Targeting, Universalism, and Single-Mother Poverty: A Multilevel Analysis Across 18 Affluent Democracies," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 49(2), pages 719-746, May.
    5. Bradshaw, Jonathan, 2012. "The case for family benefits," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 590-596.
    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. Eleonora Miaci & Raffaele Guetto & Daniele Vignoli, 2024. "Fertility intentions in Italy during the Covid-19 Pandemic. Evidence from the Familydemic survey," RIEDS - Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica - The Italian Journal of Economic, Demographic and Statistical Studies, SIEDS Societa' Italiana di Economia Demografia e Statistica, vol. 78(1), pages 222-234, January-M.
    2. Ernst, Ekkehard & Merola, Rossana & Reljic, Jelena, 2024. "Fiscal policy instruments for inclusive labour markets: A review," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1406, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    3. Stewart, Kitty & Patrick, Ruth & Reeves, Aaron, 2023. "The sins of the parents: conceptualising adult-oriented reforms to family policy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121533, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. Janet C. Gornick & Laurie C. Maldonado & Amanda Sheely, 2022. "Effective Policies for Single-Parent Families and Prospects for Policy Reforms in the United States: Concluding Reflections," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 702(1), pages 236-251, July.
    2. Brady, David & Bostic, Amie, 2015. "Paradoxes of Social Policy: Welfare Transfers, Relative Poverty, and Redistribution Preferences," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 80(2), pages 268-298.
    3. Bruno, Bosco & Ambra, Poggi, 2016. "Government effectiveness, middle class and poverty in the EU: A dynamic multilevel analysis," Working Papers 344, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 27 Jun 2016.
    4. Bea Cantillon & Natascha Van Mechelen, 2013. "Poverty reduction and social security: Cracks in a policy paradigm," Working Papers 1304, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    5. Naoki Akaeda, 2023. "Does Social Policy Crowd Out or Crowd In Social Trust? The Perspectives of Transfer Share, Low-Income Targeting, and Universalism," LIS Working papers 870, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    6. repec:aia:ginidp:dp53 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Bodenstein, Thilo & Kemmerling, Achim, 2015. "A Paradox of Redistribution in International Aid? The Determinants of Poverty-Oriented Development Assistance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 359-369.
    8. Elvire Guillaud & Matthew Olckers & Michaël Zemmour, 2020. "Four Levers of Redistribution: The Impact of Tax and Transfer Systems on Inequality Reduction," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 66(2), pages 444-466, June.
    9. Mechelen, N. (Natascha) van & Bradshaw, J. (Jonathan), 2012. "GINI DP 50: Child Poverty as a Government Priority: Child Benefit Packages for Working Families, 1992-2009," GINI Discussion Papers 50, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    10. Ive Marx & Brian Nolan & Javier Olivera, 2014. "The Welfare State and Anti-Poverty Policy in Rich Countries," Working Papers 1403, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    11. Wim Van Lancker & Natascha Van Mechelen, 2014. "Universalism under siege? Exploring the association between targeting, child benefits and child poverty across 26 countries," Working Papers 1401, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    12. Wang, Chen & Caminada, Koen, 2011. "Disentangling income inequality and the redistributive effect of social transfers and taxes in 36 LIS countries," MPRA Paper 32821, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Lin Yang, 2018. "The net effect of housing-related costs and advantages on the relationship between inequality and poverty," CASE Papers /211, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    14. Gerlinde Verbist & Wim Van Lancker, 2016. "Horizontal and Vertical Equity Objectives of Child Benefit Systems: An Empirical Assessment for European Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 1299-1318, September.
    15. David Brady & Amie Bostic, 2014. "Paradoxes of social policy: Welfare transfers, relative poverty and redistribution preferences," LIS Working papers 624, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    16. Xabier Garcia-Fuente, 2021. "The Paradox of Redistribution in Time. Social Spending in 53 Countries, 1967-2018," LIS Working papers 815, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    17. Naoki Akaeda, 2022. "The Consequences of Social Policy for Subjective Well-Being: A New Paradox?," LIS Working papers 846, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    18. Coady, David & D’Angelo, Devin & Evans, Brooks, 2020. "Fiscal redistribution and social welfare: doing more or more to do?," EUROMOD Working Papers EM10/20, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    19. Bruch, Sarah K. & van der Naald, Joseph & Gornick, Janet C., 2022. "Poverty Reduction through Federal and State Policy Mechanisms: Variation Over Time and Across the U.S. States," SocArXiv jz5xp, Center for Open Science.
    20. Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard & Chen Wang & Jinxian Wang, 2019. "Income Inequality and Fiscal Redistribution in 31 Countries After the Crisis," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 61(1), pages 119-148, March.
    21. Chrysa Leventi & Olga Rastrigina & Holly Sutherland, 2016. "The importance of income-tested benefits in good times and bad: lessons from EU countries," ImPRovE Working Papers 16/01, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.

    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:sae:anname:v:702:y:2022:i:1:p:55-76. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.