IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwwpp/dp243.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gütesiegel als neues Instrument der Qualitätssicherung von Humandienstleistungen: Gründe, Anforderungen und Umsetzungsüberlegungen am Beispiel von Kindertageseinrichtungen

Author

Listed:
  • Katharina Spieß
  • Wolfgang Tietze

Abstract

Although there is general consensus that the quality of human services has to be regulated, there is only limited discussion regarding the fundamental nature of these regulations and how they might in turn be altered to produce better services. This paper focuses on one human service in particular: day care. It discusses strategies for improving day care quality through regulation from a primarily economic but also pedagogical perspective. The main argument is that the market on its own cannot ensure good day care quality. However this does not necessarily mean that the state itself has to regulate the quality, instead the state can set up a framework for a functioning quality assurance system. The requirements of such a quality assurance system are discussed in the second part of the paper. After defining these requirements we then evaluate the German quality assurance system in light of them. Our conclusion is that the existing German regulations do not guarantee a sufficiently high standard of service and thus further reforms are needed. We argue that a good first step in the reform process would be to start issuing certificates of approval for day care centers. A combination of this sort of evaluation system with subsidies to the demand side, for example day care vouchers, seems promising. Its main advantage is that it uses elements of competition, not only for the distribution of public resources, but for assuring quality as well - a combination which promises to produce more efficient and higher quality day care than is currently the case under the existing system. Obwohl heute ein weitgehender Konsens darüber vorliegt, dass der Qualitätssicherung bei Humandienstleistungen ein ganz besonderer Stellenwert zukommt, fehlt eine systematische Auseinandersetzung mit den Gründen und Möglichkeiten einer solchen Qualitätssicherung. Am Beispiel der Bildung, Erziehung und Betreuung von Kindern in Kindertageseinrichtungen sollen deshalb in diesem Beitrag systematische Überlegungen zu einer Qualitätssicherung zusammengetragen und diskutiert werden. In einem ersten Teil des Beitrags werden primär aus ökonomischer jedoch auch aus pädagogischer Perspektive die unterschiedlichen Gründe für eine Qualitätssicherung außerhalb des Marktes dargelegt. Eine solche Qualitätssicherung muss jedoch nicht vom Staat selbst übernommen werden, sondern dieser hat lediglich die Rahmenbedingungen für ein funktionierendes Qualitätssicherungssystem zu setzen. Welche Anforderungen ein solches Qualitätssicherungssystem prinzipiell erfüllen muss, diskutieren wir, bevor wir prüfen, inwiefern diese Anforderungen im deutschen Kindertageseinrichtungsbereich erfüllt sind. Als Ergebnis kann festgehalten werden, dass das deutsche Qualitätssicherungssystem zu keinen ausreichenden Ergebnissen führt und von daher reformbedürftig ist. Als Ansatzpunkt für solche Reformüberlegungen schlagen wir ein Gütesiegelsystem vor, das in Kombination mit einer Subjektsubventionierung über Kinderbetreuungsgutscheine, wettbewerbliche Elemente nicht nur bei der Zuteilung von Finanzmitteln, sondern auch bei der Qualitätssicherung nutzbar macht. Damit verspricht das Gütesiegelsystem im Vergleich zum bisherigen System effizient und sehr viel effektiver zu sein.

Suggested Citation

  • Katharina Spieß & Wolfgang Tietze, 2001. "Gütesiegel als neues Instrument der Qualitätssicherung von Humandienstleistungen: Gründe, Anforderungen und Umsetzungsüberlegungen am Beispiel von Kindertageseinrichtungen," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 243, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp243
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.38610.de/dp243.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michaela Kreyenfeld & Gert Wagner, 2000. "Die Zusammenarbeit von Staat und Markt in der Sozialpolitik: das Beispiel Betreuungsgutscheine und Qualitätsregulierung für die institutionelle Kinderbetreuung," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 199, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Michaela Kreyenfeld & Katharina Spieß & Gert G. Wagner, 2000. "Kindertageseinrichtungen in Deutschland: ein neues Steuerungsmodell bei der Bereitstellung sozialer Dienstleistungen," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 67(18), pages 269-275.
    3. Blau, David M, 1993. "The Supply of Child Care Labor," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 11(2), pages 324-347, April.
    4. David M. Blau, 1997. "The Production of Quality in Child Care Centers," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 32(2), pages 354-387.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. H. Naci Mocan & Deborah Viola, 1997. "The Determinants of Child Care Workers' Wages and Compensation: Sectoral Differences, Human Capital, Race, Insiders and Outsiders," NBER Working Papers 6328, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Chikako Yamauchi, 2010. "The availability of child care centers, perceived search costs and parental life satisfaction," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 231-253, June.
    3. Gørtz, Mette & Johansen, Eva Rye & Simonsen, Marianne, 2018. "Academic achievement and the gender composition of preschool staff," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 241-258.
    4. Blau, David & Currie, Janet, 2006. "Pre-School, Day Care, and After-School Care: Who's Minding the Kids?," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & F. Welch (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 20, pages 1163-1278, Elsevier.
    5. David M. Blau & H. Naci Mocan, 2002. "The Supply Of Quality In Child Care Centers," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 483-496, August.
    6. H. Naci Mocan, 1995. "The Child Care Industry: Cost Functions, Efficiency, and Quality," NBER Working Papers 5293, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. David Blau, 2003. "Child Care Subsidy Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, pages 443-516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Sarah Flood & Joel McMurry & Aaron Sojourner & Matthew Wiswall, 2022. "Inequality in Early Care Experienced by US Children," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 36(2), pages 199-222, Spring.
    9. V. Joseph Hotz & Mo Xiao, 2011. "The Impact of Regulations on the Supply and Quality of Care in Child Care Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1775-1805, August.
    10. Subhendu Chakrabarti & Sumana Guha, 2016. "Differentials in Information Technology Professional Category and Turnover Propensity: A Study," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 17(3_suppl), pages 90-106, June.
    11. Yamauchi, Chikako & Leigh, Andrew, 2011. "Which children benefit from non-parental care?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1468-1490.
    12. Tom Kornstad & Thor Thoresen, 2007. "A discrete choice model for labor supply and childcare," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 20(4), pages 781-803, October.
    13. Emily Moschini, 2019. "Child Care Subsidies with One- and Two-Parent Families," 2019 Meeting Papers 42, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Alois Stutzer & Reto Dursteler, 2005. "Versagen in der staatlichen Krippenförderung ? Betreuungsgutscheine als Alternative," CREMA Working Paper Series 2005-26, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    15. Renn, Sandra, 2005. "Demografischer Wandel und langfristiges Angebot öffentlicher Leistungen im föderativen System," Forschungs- und Sitzungsberichte der ARL: Aufsätze, in: Färber, Gisela (ed.), Das föderative System in Deutschland: Bestandsaufnahme, Reformbedarf und Handlungsempfehlungen aus raumwissenschaftlicher Sicht, volume 127, pages 174-205, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft.
    16. Debby Cryer, 1999. "Defining and Assessing Early Childhood Program Quality," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 563(1), pages 39-55, May.
    17. Margaret R. Burchinal, 1999. "Child Care Experiences and Developmental Outcomes," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 563(1), pages 73-97, May.
    18. Emre Akgunduz & Egbert Jongen & Paul P.M. Leseman & Janneke Plantenga, 2015. "Quasi-experimental evidence on the relation between child care subsidies and child care quality," CPB Discussion Paper 310, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    19. V. Joseph Hotz & Mo Xiao, 2005. "The Impact of Minimum Quality Standards on Firm Entry, Exit and Product Quality: The Case of the Child Care Market," Working Papers 05-28, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    20. Lyn Craig, 2007. "How Employed Mothers in Australia Find Time for Both Market Work and Childcare," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 69-87, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law

    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:diwwpp:dp243. 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: 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.