IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/see/wpaper/2013125.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing the Impact of the Maternity Capital Policy in Russia Using a Dynamic Model of Fertility and Employment

Author

Listed:
  • Fabián Slonimczyk
  • Anna Yurko

Abstract

With declining population and fertility rates below replacement levels, Russia is currently facing a demographic crisis. Starting in 2007, the federal government has pursued an ambitious pro-natalist policy. Women who give birth to at least two children are entitled to "maternity capital" assistance ($11,000). In this paper we estimate a structural dynamic programming model of fertility and labor force participation in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the policy. We find that the program increased long-run fertility by about 0.15 children per woman.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabián Slonimczyk & Anna Yurko, 2013. "Assessing the Impact of the Maternity Capital Policy in Russia Using a Dynamic Model of Fertility and Employment," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 125, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
    • Handle: RePEc:see:wpaper:2013:125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1417195/1/WP125.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gans, Joshua S. & Leigh, Andrew, 2009. "Born on the first of July: An (un)natural experiment in birth timing," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-2), pages 246-263, February.
    2. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    3. Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1984. "An Estimable Dynamic Stochastic Model of Fertility and Child Mortality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(5), pages 852-874, October.
    4. Michael P. Keane & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2010. "The Role Of Labor And Marriage Markets, Preference Heterogeneity, And The Welfare System In The Life Cycle Decisions Of Black, Hispanic, And White Women," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(3), pages 851-892, August.
    5. Cristino R. Arroyo & Junsen Zhang, 1997. "Dynamic microeconomic models of fertility choice: A survey," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 23-65.
    6. Hotz, V Joseph & Miller, Robert A, 1988. "An Empirical Analysis of Life Cycle Fertility and Female Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 91-118, January.
    7. McFadden, Daniel, 1989. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
    8. Michael Alexeev & Shlomo Weber, 2013. "Russian economy, the," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Daniel Chen, 2011. "Can countries reverse fertility decline? Evidence from France’s marriage and baby bonuses, 1929–1981," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(3), pages 253-272, June.
    12. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    13. Gary S. Becker, 1960. "An Economic Analysis of Fertility," NBER Chapters, in: Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries, pages 209-240, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. M. R. Rosenzweig & Stark, O. (ed.), 1997. "Handbook of Population and Family Economics," Handbook of Population and Family Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    15. Alexeev, Michael & Weber, Shlomo (ed.), 2013. "The Oxford Handbook of the Russian Economy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199759927.
    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. Gordey Yastrebov, 2016. "Intergenerational Social Mobility in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 69/SOC/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. Natalya Y. Shelkova, 2020. "Stronger women, better men? Family bargaining and public policy in contemporary Russia," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 335-355, June.
    3. Slonimczyk, Fabián & Yurko, Anna, 2014. "Assessing the impact of the maternity capital policy in Russia," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 265-281.
    4. Yelena I. Andreeva & Dmitry G. Bychkov & Olesya A. Feoktistova, 2018. "Introducing New Family Support Benefits in Russia: an Estimate of Public Expenditures," Finansovyj žhurnal — Financial Journal, Financial Research Institute, Moscow 125375, Russia, issue 2, pages 36-46, April.
    5. Slonimczyk, Fabian & Gimpelson, Vladimir, 2013. "Informality and Mobility: Evidence from Russian Panel Data," IZA Discussion Papers 7703, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Nikolai Botev, 2015. "Could Pronatalist Policies Discourage Childbearing?," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 41(2), pages 301-314, June.
    7. Svetlana Biryukova & Oxana Sinyavskaya & Irina Nurimanova, 2016. "Estimating effects of 2007 family policy changes on probability of second and subsequent births in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 68/SOC/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    8. Dormidontova, Yulia (Дормидонтова, Юлия) & Kazakova, Yuliya (Казакова, Юлия) & Lyashok, Victor (Ляшок, Виктор) & Grishina, E. (Гришина, Е.) & Tsatsura, Elena (Цацура, Елена), 2016. "Analysis of the Effectiveness of Social Support for Families with Children in Russia: The Example of the Altai Territory and Samara Region [Анализ Эффективности Социальной Поддержки Семей С Детьми ," Working Papers 3134, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.

    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. Wojciech Charemza & Svetlana Makarova & Imran Shah, 2015. "Making the most of high inflation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(34-35), pages 3723-3739, July.
    2. Slonimczyk, Fabián & Yurko, Anna, 2014. "Assessing the impact of the maternity capital policy in Russia," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 265-281.
    3. Jérôme Adda & Christian Dustmann & Katrien Stevens, 2017. "The Career Costs of Children," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(2), pages 293-337.
    4. Juan Pantano & Qi Li, 2013. "The Demographic Consequences of Gender Selection Technology," 2013 Meeting Papers 1161, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    5. Zvi Eckstein & Osnat Lifshitz, 2011. "Dynamic Female Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(6), pages 1675-1726, November.
    6. Qi Li & Juan Pantano, 2023. "The demographic consequences of sex‐selection technology," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(1), pages 309-347, January.
    7. Robert M. Sauer & Christopher Taber, 2021. "Understanding women's wage growth using indirect inference with importance sampling," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 453-473, June.
    8. Azmat, Ghazala & González, Libertad, 2010. "Targeting fertility and female participation through the income tax," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 487-502, June.
    9. Keane, Michael P. & Todd, Petra E. & Wolpin, Kenneth I., 2011. "The Structural Estimation of Behavioral Models: Discrete Choice Dynamic Programming Methods and Applications," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 4, pages 331-461, Elsevier.
    10. Maria Rosaria Marino & Marzia Romanelli & Martino Tasso, 2016. "Women at work: the impact of welfare and fiscal policies in a dynamic labor supply model," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1084, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    11. Jessica Todd & Paul Winters & Guy Stecklov, 2012. "Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer programs on fertility: the case of the Red de Protección Social in Nicaragua," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 25(1), pages 267-290, January.
    12. Sauer, Robert M. & Taber, Christopher, 2017. "Indirect Inference with Importance Sampling: An Application to Women's Wage Growth," IZA Discussion Papers 11004, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Vera Celia P., 2019. "A Structural Approach to Assessing Retention Policies in Public Schools," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 19(3), pages 1-26, July.
    14. Larry E. Jones & Alice Schoonbroodt & Michèle Tertilt, 2010. "Fertility Theories: Can They Explain the Negative Fertility-Income Relationship?," NBER Chapters, in: Demography and the Economy, pages 43-100, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Vera, Celia Patricia, 2018. "A structural approach to assessing retention policies in public schools," MPRA Paper 90657, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Beatrice Brunner & Andreas Kuhn, 2011. "Financial Incentives, the Timing of Births, Birth Complications, and Newborns’ Health: Evidence from the Abolition of Austria’s Baby Bonus," NRN working papers 2011-16, The Austrian Center for Labor Economics and the Analysis of the Welfare State, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    17. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias & Costas Meghir & Jonathan Shaw, 2016. "Female Labor Supply, Human Capital, and Welfare Reform," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1705-1753, September.
    18. Del Boca, Daniela & Locatelli, Marilena, 2006. "The Determinants of Motherhood and Work Status: A Survey," IZA Discussion Papers 2414, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Matthias Doepke & Anne Hannusch & Fabian Kindermann & Michèle Tertilt, 2022. "The Economics of Fertility: A New Era," NBER Working Papers 29948, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Kyeongkuk Kim & Sang-Hyop Lee & Timothy J. Halliday, 2023. "Paid childcare leave, fertility, and female labor supply in South Korea," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1433-1451, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    fertility; female labor supply; structural estimation; Russia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis

    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:see:wpaper:2013:125. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csescuk.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.