Childbearing and well-being: a comparative analysis of European welfare regimes

Abstract

Fertility rates in contemporary Europe have reached dramatically low levels. In light of this we are interested in the extent to which childbearing events may worsen individuals’ material well-being. Using a sample of women drawn from the European Community Household Panel Survey, we make a comparison of the impact of childbearing on well-being using a welfare-regime classification. Recognizing that poverty status is a poor proxy for well-being, we also derive several measures of well-being that are multidimensional in nature. These measures are referred to as deprivation indices and avoid the poor/non-poor dichotomy. We provide descriptive statistics of poverty status and deprivations indices, as well as an analysis of a more causal nature, the latter consisting of a Difference-in-Differences estimator combined with Propensity Score Matching techniques (DD-PSM). We find that independently of how well-being is defined, childbearing events never have a positive impact on individuals’ material well-being. But our estimates are largely consistent with welfare-regime theory: women in the social-democratic welfare states suffer the least as a result of childbearing, whereas women in conservative and Mediterranean states suffer significantly more. For the liberal welfare regime the results are more mixed, and depend on the definition of well-being.

Keywords

childbearing deprivation indices ECHP poverty propensity score matching

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bane, M. J. and Ellwood, D. T. (1986) ‘Slipping Into and Out of Poverty: the Dynamics of Spells’ , Journal of Human Resources 21 (1): 1-23 .

Becker, S. and Ichino, A. (2002) ‘Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Based on Propensity Scores’ , The STATA Journal 2 (4): 358-377 .

Betti, G. and Verma, V. (1999) ‘Measuring the Degree of Poverty in a Dynamic and Comparative Context: a Multi-dimensional Approach Using Fuzzy Set Theory’ , Proceedings of the ICCS-VI, 11: 289-301 (Aug.), Lahore, Pakistan.

Billari, F. C. and Kohler, H-P. (2002) Patterns of Lowest-low Fertility in Europe, WP 2002-040. Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research .

Browning, M. , Bourguignon, F. , Chiappori, P. A. and Lechene, V. (1994) ‘Income and Outcomes: a Structural Model of Intra-household Allocation’ , Journal of Political Economy 102 (6): 1067-1096 .

Castles, F. G. (2003) ‘The World Turned Upside Down: Below Replacement Fertility, Changing Preferences and Family-friendly Public Policy in 21 OECD Countries’ , Journal of European Social Policy 13 (3): 209-227 .

Cerioli, A. and Zani, S. (1990) ‘A Fuzzy Approach to the Measurement of Poverty’, in C. Dagum and M. Zenga (eds) Income and Wealth Distribution, Inequality and Poverty, Studies in Contemporary Economics, pp. 272-284. Berlin: Springer Verlag .

Cheli, B. and Lemmi, A. (1995) ‘A Totally Fuzzy and Relative Approach to the Multidimensional Analysis of Poverty’ , Economic Notes 24: 115-134 .

Dehejia, R. and Wahba, S. (1998) ‘Causal Effects in Nonexperimental Studies: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs’ , Journal of the American Statistical Association 94 (448): 1053-1062 .

10.

Dehejia, R. and Wahba, S. (2002) ‘Propensity Score Matching Methods for Nonexperimental Causal Studies’ , The Review of Economics and Statistics 84 (1): 151-161 .

11.

Del Boca, D. , Locatelli, M. , Pasqua, S. and Pronzato, C. (2003) ‘Analysing Women’s Employment and Fertility Rates in Europe: Differences and Similarities in Northern and Southern Europe’ , paper presented at the Epunet conference (June), Colcester.

12.

Del Boca, D. , Aaberge, R. , Colombino, U. , Ermisch, J. , Francesconi, M. , Pasqua, S. and Strom, S. (2005) ‘Labour Market Participation of Women and Fertility: the Effect of Social Policies’, in T. Boeri , D. Del Boca and C. Pissarides (eds) European Women at Work: an Economic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press .

13.

De Vos, K. and Zaidi, A. M. (1997) ‘Equivalence Scale Sensitivity of Poverty Statistics for the Member States of the European Community’ , Review of Income and Wealth 43 (3): 319-333 .

14.

Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) The Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .

15.

Esping-Andersen, G. (1999) The Social Foundations of Post-industrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press .

16.

EUROSTAT (2002) Income, Poverty and Social Exclusion: Second Report, European Social Statistics, Luxembourg , 76-92.

17.

Ferrera, M. (1996) ‘Il modello Sud-Europeo del welfare state’ , Rivista Italiana de Scienza Politica 26 (1): 67-101 .

18.

Fuchs, V. (1986) ‘His and Hers: Gender Differences in Work and Income 1959-1979’ , Journal of Labor Economics 4 (3): S245-S272 .

19.

Gornick, J. C. and Meyers, M. K. (2003) Families that Work: Policies for Reconciling Parenthood and Employment. New York: Russel Sage Foundation .

20.

Heckman, J. J. , Ichimura, H. and Todd, P. E. (1997) ‘Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme’ , Review of Economic Studies, 64: 605-654 .

21.

Jarvis, S. and Jenkins, S. P. (1996) Changing Places: Income Mobility and Poverty Dynamics in Britain, ISER Working Paper No. 19. Colchester: University of Essex .

22.

Jarvis, S. and Jenkins, S. P. (1999) ‘Marital Splits and Income Changes: Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey’ , Population Studies 53: 237-254 .

23.

Kohler, H-P. , Billari, F. C. and Ortega, J. A. (2002) ‘The Emergence of Lowest-low Fertility in Europe During the 1990s’ , Population and Development Review 28 (4): 641-680 .

24.

Lundberg, S. , Pollak, R. and Wales, T. J. (1997) ‘Do Husbands and Wives Pool Their Resourses?’ , Journal of Human Resources 32 (3): 463-480 .

25.

McElroy, M. B. and Horney, M. J. (1981) ‘Nash-bargaining Decisions: Toward a Generalization of the Theory of Demand’ , International Economic Review 22 (2): 333-349 .

26.

Mayer, K. U. (2001) ‘The Paradox of Global Social Change and National Path Dependencies: Life Course Patterns in Advanced Societies’, in A. E. Woodward and M. Kohli (eds) Inclusions - Exclusions, pp. 89-110. London: Routledge .

27.

Mencarini, L. (1999) ‘An Analysis of Fertility and Infant Mortality in South Africa Based on 1993 LSDS Data’ , in Pre-conference Proceedings of Third African Population Conference, African Population in the 21st Century, pp. 109-128 . UAPS: Dakar, Senegal.

28.

Miceli, D. (1998) Measuring Poverty Using Fuzzy Sets, Discussion Paper No. 38. Canberra: National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling, University of Canberra .

29.

Nicoletti, C. and Peracchi, F. (2002) A Cross-country Comparison of Survey Non-participation in the ECHP, ISER Working Paper No. 2002-32, December. Colchester: University of Essex .

30.

OECD (2001) Employment Outlook, June. Paris: OECD Publishing .

31.

Oxley, H. , Dang, T. and Antolín, P. (2000) ‘Poverty Dynamics in Six OECD Countries’, OECD Economic Studies No. 30. Paris: OECD Publishing .

32.

Peracchi, F. (2002) ‘The European Community Household Panel: a Review’ , Empirical Economics, 27: 63-90 .

33.

Qizilbash, M. (2002) ‘A Note on the Measurement of Poverty and Vulnerability in the South African Context’ , Journal of International Development 14 (6): 757-772 .

34.

Rosenbaum, P. T. and Rubin, D. B. (1983) ‘The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects’ , Biometrika 70 (1): 41-55 .

35.

Smith, J. A. and Todd, P. (2005) ‘Does Matching Overcome Lalonde’s Critique of Nonexperimental Estimators?’ , Journal of Econometrics 125 (1): 305-353 .

36.

Trifiletti, R. , (1999) ‘Southern European Welfare Regimes and the Worsening Position of Women’ , Journal of European Social Policy 9 (1): 49-64 .

37.

Van de Kaa, D. J. (2001) ‘Postmodern Fertility Preferences: From Changing Value Orientation to New Behavior’ , Population and Development Review 27 (supplement): 290-331 .

38.

Whelan, C. T. , Layte, R. , Maitre, B. and Nolan, B. (2001) ‘Income, Deprivation, and Economic Strain: an Analysis of the European Community Household Panel’ , European Sociological Review 17: 357-372 .