Anita Ratcliffe

University of Bristol, Bristol, ENG, United Kingdom

Are you Anita Ratcliffe?

Claim your profile

Publications (8)2.77 Total impact

  • Source
    Mike Brewer, Anita Ratcliffe, Sarah dSmith
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper provides evidence on the effect of welfare reform on fertility, focusing on UK reforms in 1999 that increased per-child spending by 50% in real terms. We use a difference-in-differences approach, exploiting the fact that the reforms were targeted at low-income households. The reforms were likely to differentially affect the fertility of women in couples and single women because of the opportunity cost effects of the welfare-to-work element. We find no increase in births among single women, but evidence to support an increase in births (by around 15%) among coupled women. KeywordsWelfare reform–Fertility
    Journal of Population Economics 01/2011; 25(1):245-266. · 0.92 Impact Factor
  • Sarah Smith, Anita Ratcliffe
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Women’s family and working lives have changed enormously over the last 25 years in the United Kingdom (UK). Most of the changes are well-documented and several have been discussed in other chapters – women are increasingly delaying childbearing and more are remaining childless (see Simpson, 2009); they are also delaying partnership, increasingly choosing cohabitation instead of marriage, and a growing number are raising children as lone mothers; and women are working more, both before and after childbearing (see Hansen et al., 2009).
    06/2009: pages 41-58;
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Evidence shows that real-effort investments can affect bilateral bargaining outcomes. This paper investigates whether similar investments can inhibit equilibrium convergence of experimental markets. In one treatment, sellers’ relative effort affects the allocation of production costs, but a random productivity shock ensures that the allocation is not necessarily equitable. In another treatment, sellers’ effort increases the buyers’ valuation of a good. We find that effort investments have a short-lived impact on trading behavior when sellers’ effort benefits buyers, but no effect when effort determines cost allocation. Efficiency rates are high and do not differ across treatments.
    Department of Economics, University of Bristol, UK, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation. 01/2008;
  • Source
    Anita Ratcliffe, Sarah Smith
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Against a background of falling and low fertility, this paper presents an analysis of trends in fertility in the UK across cohorts born between 1935 and 1975. The decline in fertility is shown to have two distinct phases – first, a fall in third and higher-order births (affecting cohorts born 1935-45) and second, a delay in childbearing and a rise in childlessness (affecting cohorts born since 1945). The delay in childbearing and rise in childlessness cannot all be explained by the rise in female participation in higher education, rather there has been increasing polarization in fertility and employment by education.
    01/2007;
  • Source
    Mike Brewer, Anita Ratcliffe, Sarah Smith
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We estimate the causal effect of mandatory participation in the military service on the involvement in criminal activities. We exploit the random assignment of young men to military service in Argentina through a draft lottery to identify this causal effect. Using a unique set of administrative data that includes draft eligibility, participation in the military service, and criminal records, we find that participation in the military service increases the likelihood of developing a criminal record in adulthood. The effects are not only significant for the cohorts that performed military service during war times, but also for those that provided service at peace times. We also find that military service has detrimental effects on future performance in the labor market.
    Journal of Population Economics 01/2007; · 0.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Mike Brewer, Sarah Smith, Anita Ratcliffe, Sarah dSmith
    Journal of Population Economics 25(1):245-266. · 0.92 Impact Factor
  • M. Brewer, A. Ratcliffe, S. Smith
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 1999 the UK government made major reforms to the system of child-contingent benefits, including the introduction of Working Families’ Tax Credit and an increase in means-tested Income Support for families with children. Between 1999-2003 government spending per-child on these benefits rose by 50 per cent in real terms, a change that was unprecedented over a thirty year period. This paper examines whether there was a response in childbearing. To identify the effect of the reforms, we exploit the fact that the spending increases were targeted at low-income households and we use the (exogenously determined) education of the woman and her partner to define treatment and control groups. We argue that the reforms are most likely to have a positive fertility effect for women in couples and show that this is the case. We find that there was an increase in births (by around 15 per cent) among the group affected by the reforms.
    Brewer, M. and Ratcliffe, A. and Smith, S. (2008) Does welfare reform affect fertility? Evidence from the UK. Working paper. IFS Working Papers (W08/09). Institute for Fiscal Studies, London, UK.
  • Source
    Mike Brewer, Anita Ratcliffe, Sarah Smith
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 1999, the Labour government substantially increased benefits for (poorer) households with children with the introduction of the working families tax credit (WFTC) and more generous Income Support benefits. The employment effects of WFTC have been extensively analysed, but far less attention has been paid to the possible impact on fertility. This paper exploits the fact that the 1999 reforms were targeted on low-income households and uses a differences- in-differences approach to evaluate their impact on fertility. It finds that the group affected by the reforms experienced a (relative) significant increase in their fertility. In line with previous work, the effect is greatest for first births. The paper adds to the existing literature on the possible effect of the tax and benefit system on fertility by focusing on the fertility of couples and in looking at the effect of pure financial incentives.