IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joprea/v40y2023i3d10.1007_s12546-023-09309-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions towards pronatalist policies in Singapore

Author

Listed:
  • Jolene Tan

    (Australian National University)

Abstract

Fertility rates have been declining in most high-income countries. Singapore is at the forefront of developing pronatalist policies to increase birth rates. This study examines perceptions towards pronatalist policies among men and women in Singapore and compares which policies are perceived as the most important contributors to the conduciveness for childbearing. Using data from the Singapore Perceptions of the Marriage and Parenthood Package study (N = 2000), the results from dominance analysis highlight two important findings. First, paternity leave, shared parental leave, and the Baby Bonus are the top three contributors to the conduciveness to have children. Second, the combined positive effect of financial incentives and work–life policies is perceived to be favorable to fertility. The findings suggest that low-fertility countries may wish to consider adopting this basket of policies as they are like to be regarded as supportive of childbearing. Although previous research suggests that pronatalist policies may only have a modest effect on fertility, the findings raise further questions as to whether fertility may decline even further in the absence of these policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jolene Tan, 2023. "Perceptions towards pronatalist policies in Singapore," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 1-27, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joprea:v:40:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s12546-023-09309-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s12546-023-09309-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12546-023-09309-8
    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/s12546-023-09309-8?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. Yeon Jeong Son, 2018. "Do childbirth grants increase the fertility rate? Policy impacts in South Korea," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 713-735, September.
    2. Jolene Tan, 2022. "Heterogeneity among the never married in a low-fertility context," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 47(24), pages 727-776.
    3. Berna Miller Torr & Susan E. Short, 2004. "Second Births and the Second Shift: A Research Note on Gender Equity and Fertility," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 30(1), pages 109-130, March.
    4. Ann-Zofie Duvander & Trude Lappegard & Mats Johansson, 2020. "Impact of a Reform Towards Shared Parental Leave on Continued Fertility in Norway and Sweden," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 39(6), pages 1205-1229, December.
    5. Maria Rita Testa & Vegard Skirbekk & Wolfgang Lutz, 2006. "The Low Fertility Trap Hypothesis. Forces that May Lead to Further Postponement and Fewer Births in Europe," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 4(1), pages 167-192.
    6. Anne Gauthier, 2007. "The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: a review of the literature," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 26(3), pages 323-346, June.
    7. Nikolai Botev, 2015. "Could Pronatalist Policies Discourage Childbearing?," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 41(2), pages 301-314, June.
    8. Nathan Deutscher & Robert Breunig, 2018. "Baby Bonuses: Natural Experiments in Cash Transfers, Birth Timing and Child Outcomes," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 94(304), pages 1-24, March.
    9. Kevin Milligan, 2005. "Subsidizing the Stork: New Evidence on Tax Incentives and Fertility," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(3), pages 539-555, August.
    10. Mengni Chen & Stuart Gietel-Basten & Paul S. F. Yip, 2020. "Targeting and Mistargeting of Family Policies in High-Income Pacific Asian Societies: A Review of Financial Incentives," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 39(3), pages 389-413, June.
    11. Mengni Chen & Paul S. F. Yip, 2017. "The Discrepancy Between Ideal and Actual Parity in Hong Kong: Fertility Desire, Intention, and Behavior," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 36(4), pages 583-605, August.
    12. repec:cai:poeine:pope_203_0417 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Gøsta Esping-Andersen & Francesco C. Billari, 2015. "Re-theorizing Family Demographics," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 1-31, March.
    14. Gavin W. Jones, 2012. "Population Policy in a Prosperous City-State: Dilemmas for Singapore," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 38(2), pages 311-336, June.
    15. Tomas Frejka & Gavin W. Jones & Jean‐Paul Sardon, 2010. "East Asian Childbearing Patterns and Policy Developments," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 36(3), pages 579-606, September.
    16. Joseph N. Luchman, 2021. "Determining relative importance in Stata using dominance analysis: domin and domme," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 21(2), pages 510-538, June.
    17. Rodolfo Bulatao, 1981. "Values and disvalues of children in successive childbearing decisions," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 18(1), pages 1-25, February.
    18. Peter McDonald, 2013. "Societal foundations for explaining fertility: Gender equity," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 28(34), pages 981-994.
    19. Aart C. Liefbroer, 2009. "Changes in Family Size Intentions Across Young Adulthood: A Life-Course Perspective [Evolution des intentions en matière de taille de famille en début d’âge adulte: une approche biographique]," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 25(4), pages 363-386, November.
    20. Mui Teng Yap & Christopher Gee, 2015. "Singapore'S Demographic Transition, The Labor Force And Government Policies: The Last Fifty Years," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 60(03), pages 1-22.
    21. Frances Goldscheider & Eva Bernhardt & Trude Lappegård, 2015. "The Gender Revolution: A Framework for Understanding Changing Family and Demographic Behavior," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 41(2), pages 207-239, June.
    22. Haya Stier & Amit Kaplan, 2020. "Are Children a Joy or a Burden? Individual- and Macro-level Characteristics and the Perception of Children," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 36(2), pages 387-413, April.
    23. Peter Mcdonald, 2006. "Low Fertility and the State: The Efficacy of Policy," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 32(3), pages 485-510, September.
    24. T. Paul Schultz, 1990. "Testing the Neoclassical Model of Family Labor Supply and Fertility," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 599-634.
    25. Gromping, Ulrike, 2007. "Estimators of Relative Importance in Linear Regression Based on Variance Decomposition," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 61, pages 139-147, May.
    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. Jolene Tan, 2024. "Beyond fertility figures: towards reproductive rights and choices," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-6, December.

    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. Youngcho Lee, 2022. "Is Leave for Fathers Pronatalist? A Mixed-Methods Study of the Impact of Fathers’ Uptake of Parental Leave on Couples’ Childbearing Intentions in South Korea," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(4), pages 1471-1500, August.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Ansgar Hudde, 2018. "Societal Agreement on Gender Role Attitudes and Childlessness in 38 Countries," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 34(5), pages 745-767, December.
    5. 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.
    6. Hudde, Ansgar, 2016. "Fertility Is Low When There Is No Societal Agreement on a Specific Gender Role Model," EconStor Preprints 142175, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    7. Man-Yee Kan & Ekaterina Hertog, 2017. "Domestic division of labour and fertility preference in China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(18), pages 557-588.
    8. Kryštof Zeman & Eva Beaujouan & Zuzanna Brzozowska & Tomáš Sobotka, 2018. "Cohort fertility decline in low fertility countries: Decomposition using parity progression ratios," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 38(25), pages 651-690.
    9. 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.
    10. Trude Lappegård, 2020. "Future fertility trends are shaped at the intersection of gender and social stratification," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 18(1), pages 43-48.
    11. Mengni Chen & Paul S. F. Yip, 2017. "The Discrepancy Between Ideal and Actual Parity in Hong Kong: Fertility Desire, Intention, and Behavior," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 36(4), pages 583-605, August.
    12. Ester Lazzari, 2021. "Changing trends between education, childlessness and completed fertility: a cohort analysis of Australian women born in 1952–1971," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 417-441, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Louise Rawlings & Stephen J. Robson & Pauline Ding, 2016. "Socioeconomic Response by Age Group to the Australian Baby Bonus: A Multivariate Analysis of Birth Data from 2001-13," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 19(2), pages 111-129.
    15. Katja Köppen & Heike Trappe, 2019. "The gendered division of labor and its perceived fairness: Implications for childbearing in Germany," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 40(48), pages 1413-1440.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Zhiyun Li & Hualei Yang & Xianchen Zhu & Lin Xie, 2021. "A Multilevel Study of the Impact of Egalitarian Attitudes Toward Gender Roles on Fertility Desires in China," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 40(4), pages 747-769, August.
    19. Barbara S. Okun & Liat Raz‐Yurovich, 2019. "Housework, Gender Role Attitudes, and Couples' Fertility Intentions: Reconsidering Men's Roles in Gender Theories of Family Change," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 169-196, March.
    20. Lisa Van Landschoot & Helga de Valk & Jan Van Bavel, 2017. "Fertility among descendants of immigrants in Belgium: The role of the partner," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(60), pages 1827-1858.

    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:joprea:v:40:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s12546-023-09309-8. 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.