ArticlePDF Available

The Effect of Flexibility in Working Hours on Fertility: A Comparative Analysis of Selected European Countries

Authors:
Alfredo Ariza at Pablo de Olavide University
Alfredo Ariza
Sara de la Rica at University of the Basque Country
Sara de la Rica
Arantza Ugidos at University of the Basque Country
Arantza Ugidos
Download full-text PDF
Read full-text
Download citation

Abstract and Figures

The main aim of this paper is to measure the extent to which part-time work enhances fertility for married or cohabiting women of fertile age. the study covers eleven European countries. the data used are a pool sample of five waves of the European Community Household Panel. Given that we believe that the decisions concerning fertility and labor market status are taken jointly, we carry out a simultaneous estimation approach. Results suggest that policy makers wishing to implement adequate part-time schedules so as to enhance fertility should look at the part-time schedules available in Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands, which enhance fertility for women who take advantage of this flexibility measure so as to reconcile family and work.
Figures - uploaded by Arantza Ugidos
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Arantza Ugidos
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Arantza Ugidos
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Arantza Ugidos
Content may be subject to copyright.
Wkh hhfw ri h{lelolw| lq zrunlqj krxuv rq
ihuwlolw|= D frpsdudwlyh dqdo|vlv ri vhohfwhg
Hxurshdq frxqwulhv
DoiuhgrDul}d/VdudghodUlfddqgDudqw}dXjlgrv
Xqlyhuvlgdg gho Sdðv Ydvfr
Vhswhpehu 55/ 5336
4 Lqwurgxfwlrq
5 Lqvwlwxwlrqdo edfnjurxqg 0 sduw0wlph zrun/ fklogfduh
idflolwlhv/ sduhqwdo ohdyh dqg idplo| uhodwhg ehqhwv
514 sduw0wlph zrun
515 Rwkhu idplo| srolflhv
516 Idplo| uhodwhg wd{hv dqg ehqhwv
6 Gdwd dqg ghvfulswlyh dqdo|vlv
7 Wkh hfrqrphwulf prgho
8 Hpslulfdo uhvxowv
9Frqfoxvlrq
Uhihuhqfhv
21
TABLES
Table 1 : Definition of Part-time in Selected European countries.
Statistical definitions* of part-time work. Selected
countries.
Other features concerning part-time.
Belgium Self classification
Denmark Self classification
France Self classification
Germany Combination: Self classification, but if a self classified part-
timer reports to work more than 36 hours/week is reclassified
as full-timer.
Workers that work less than 15 hours per week have no social
protection.
Greece Combination: Self classification, but if a self classified part-
timer reports to work fewer hours than stipulated in the
collective agreement of his activity is reclassified as part-
timer.
Ireland Cut off: 30 hours usually worked /week
Italy Combination: Self classification, but if a self classified part-
timer reports to work fewer hours than stipulated in the
collective agreement of his activity is reclassified as part-
timer.
Netherlands Cut off: 35 hours usually worked /week
Portugal Self classification
Spain Combination: Self classification, but if a self classified part-
timer works more than 35 hours/week is reclassified as full-
timer; if a self classified as full-timer work less than 30 hours
is reclassified as part-timer.
Workers that work less than 12 hours per week have no social
protection.
United
Kingdom
Combination: Self classification but, if a self classified part-
timer reports to work more than 40 hours/week is reclassified
as full-timer.
Workers that work less than 16 hours per week have no social
protection (21% of female part-timers work less than 12
hours)
Source: Van Bastelaer, Lemaître and Marianna (1997), Koopmans and Schippers (2003), MTAS (2000)
Statistical definitions used in the National LFS. They may differ from administrative definitions of the Country, which usually are referred to a fraction of the
"normal hours" worked in similar full-time jobs.
• Self Classification: Based on the individual response to the question "Main job: Full-Time / Part-Time ?" in the national LFS.
• Cut-off: Based on the individual response to the question "How many hours do you usually work per week?" in the National LFS. Then the National Statistics
Institute establishes a cut-off which is used to classify individuals as part-timers or full-timers if they are below or above such threshold.
• Combination: The same as Self Classification but corrected for the National Statistics Institute following some threshold rule.
22
Table 2: Distribution of Part-time, 1994-1998.
Females, %, over total employment
Belgium Denmark France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Netherlands Portugal Spain U.Kingdom
Average 23.69 17.50 18.44 22.15 11.81 23.50 14.60 43.58 10.40 14.05 30.51
BY AGE
16-20 19.1 31.5 31.2 4.8 13.9 17.6 11.7 32.0 6.1 17.1 28.7
21-25 19.6 12.4 19.0 6.7 10.6 10.3 11.9 18.9 5.5 15.8 12.8
26-30 16.8 10.3 15.4 14.6 11.4 14.7 13.0 23.6 5.9 13.8 19.9
31-35 28.4 12.7 18.4 25.1 11.4 24.0 14.6 46.0 6.2 14.4 33.9
36-40 26.6 14.1 17.8 28.4 9.0 32.6 15.3 58.7 7.6 13.5 37.8
41-45 25.4 15.9 18.3 27.4 8.3 36.9 15.9 55.4 10.0 13.9 33.1
46-50 20.3 21.0 19.2 27.0 11.7 33.8 15.1 53.8 13.6 12.9 32.8
>50 24.6 26.4 19.9 28.4 16.5 32.5 16.3 53.1 16.9 13.1 38.7
BY EDUCATION
Primary 31.9 22.8 26.0 24.6 13.9 36.1 13.9 44.3 11.2 17.2 39.4
Secondary 25.6 17.8 17.3 23.4 7.6 22.3 13.2 45.0 4.1 12.9 32.2
Tertiary 20.4 14.2 13.4 17.0 12.1 15.0 21.6 39.8 11.2 10.2 22.3
BY MARITAL STATUS
Single 12.2 15.7 15.2 5.8 9.3 11.0 10.7 16.9 7.9 12.9 15.3
Married 27.8 21.6 20.8 30.2 12.6 32.3 16.5 59.0 10.7 14.6 38.6
Other 17.7 10.3 14.1 17.4 12.0 34.4 11.6 38.0 14.3 15.9 27.9
BY TYPE OF CONTRACT
Permanent 23.4 15.6 15.6 22.9 4.3 16.8 11.0 43.0 6.3 7.9 28.7
Temporal 27.9 14.7 36.9 20.4 17.4 11.5 16.3 49.7 4.8 17.6 39.9
REASON TO WORK PART-TIME (AMONG PART-TIMERS)
Don`t want
work more 19.6 39.5 14.3 4.2 20.6 23.3 12.3 25.7 5.9 7.3 9.2
Housework 48.0 26.8 29.3 34.5 23.6 43.1 31.9 52.8 24.9 27.7 18.0
Can't find
Full-time 19.5 15.6 41.1 3.5 25.0 18.0 19.0 8.4 25.0 32.3 3.3
HOURLY WAGE (PART-TIMERS) / HOURLY WAGE (FULL-TIMERS)
0.33 0.41 0.28 0.32 0.37 0.27 0.42 0.32 0.43 0.26 0.21
Source: ECHP, 1994-98. All figures are % part-time among female workers except Reason to work Part-time which is measured only among part-
timers.
23
Table 3:Childcare provisions in Selected European Countries
Public funded childcare *
by age of child
Other institutional specific country
aspects
Age at which
compulsory
schooling
begins 0-3 years
(%)
3-6 years
(%)
Belgium 6 30 > 95 • Reception families allow a great hourly
flexibility to parents. Parents can deduce up to
80% of the cost from their income taxes.
• Hours of schooling are 7.
Denmark 748 82
•After school centres also available
France 623 99
•Only available in the mornings
• Halte Garderies provide occasional care or for
few hours
• Allowance to families for the employment of a
registered childminder (AFEAMA), pays the
social security contributions when a childminder
is employed and gives 800 francs to parents of
children under 3 (400 if aged 3-6). Also a tax
deduction up to 3750 francs a year. Not means-
tested.
• Allowance for childcare in the home (AGED),
pays the social security of both employer and
employee if a person is employed to look after
children at home, for dual- earner families or lone
parent employed. Payment up to a maximum of
4130 francs a month (1996). Recipients of AGED
can deduct from their income tax a 50% of the
actual cost of care, up to a limit of 45000 francs a
year. Not means-tested.
Germany (West) 62 78
•Only available in the mornings
• Childcare out of school very scarce.
24
Table 3:Childcare provisions in Selected European Countries (cont.)
Age at which
compulsory
schooling
begins
Public funded childcare *
by age of child
Other institutional specific country
aspects
0-3 years
(%)
3-6 years
(%)
Germany (East) 6 50 100
Greece 6 3 (a) 70 (a) •Greek schools hours shifts from morning to
afternoon
Ireland 62 55
•Primarily served for low income families
Italy 66 91
• Public funded childcare system are very rigid
and scarce.
Netherlands ** 5 8 (b) 71 (b) •95% children attend a nursery school at four
Portugal 612 48
•Many care facilities open only five hours a day
and close for lunch
Spain 62 84
• Very rigid and scarce childcare
United Kingdom 5 2 60 (c) •Primarily served for low income families
Source : European Commission Network on Childcare and Other Measures to Reconcile Employment and Family Responsibilities (ed.) (1996): A Review of
Services For Young Children in the European Union 1990–1995. Luxembourg European Commission Directorate General V, Blossfeld and Hakim (1997),
Del Boca (2002) and Koopmans and Schippers (2003)
(a) Greece statistics referred to age groups 0-2,5 and 2,5-5.
(b) Dutch statistics referred to age group 0-4.
(c) British statistics referred to age group 0-5.
* Public funded means that more than half of total costs are paid from public sources (usually between 75-100%)
** In The Netherlands, public funds usually covers less than half of total costs.
25
Table 4 :Maternity, paternity and parental leave in Selected European Countries
Maternity leave (paid) Paternity leave (paid) Parental leave
(months)
Other
weeks RR Days RR
Belgium 15 82-75 3 100 6-12 • Since 1996, career breaks are extended from a full/half
career break to full, 1/5, 1/4, 1/3, 1/2 career breaks.
• Career-breaks program allows the worker to take a paid
leave of 3 to 12 months in relation to the birth of a child.
• In 1998 a parental leave legislation entitles each parent to a
full-time leave of 3 moths or a part-time leave of up to 6
months. The leave may be taken until the child is 4 years of
age.
Denmark 18 flat rate 10 flat rate 6-12 • 1984 law entitles fathers to share the leave provided.
• 1992 law entitles each parent to a full time leave of 13
weeks (which may be extended up to 26 weeks upon
employers agreement). The leave may be taken if the child is
under one year of age.
France 16-26 84 3 - 36 • Since 1997 the benefit may only be paid up to a social
security ceiling.
• Unpaid leave up to the child is 3 years of age.
• Childrearing benefit, provides a flat-rate benefit of 2694
francs per month (in 1996) available to families with at least
two children, being the youngest younger than 3 years if the
mother or father stops working completely or reduces hours.
Paid at a reduced rate if the mother (father) works part-time.
Germany 14 100 - - 36 • Paid childcare leave up to the child's third birthday, since
1992.
• Since 1992, parents receive a flat rate childcare payment
during the first two years of children's life. This entitlement
depends on household income.
Greece 16 100 - - 3.5 • Legislation in 1984 entitles each parent to a leave of 3
months each. The leave may be taken until the child is 3.5
years old.
• In 1996, the allowance for the third child increased from
103 € to 121€ per month. The age up to which this allowance
could be received increased from 3 to 6.
26
Table 4 :Maternity, paternity and parental leave in Selected European Countries (cont.)
Maternity leave (paid) Paternity leave (paid) Parental leave
(months)
Other
weeks RR Days RR
Ireland 14 70 - - - • Since 1981 exists a dual benefit system. The basic flat rate
continued to be offered but a new system provided 70%
earnings for employed women only.
• Since 1998, both parents may take a separate leave of 14
weeks each, until the child is five years of age.
• Job Sharing, is an individual responsibility (not promoted)
that allows mothers to reduce hours of work by half reducing
their net income approximately a third.
Italy 22 80 - - 6 • Duration of leave is 5 months (2 months before and 3
months after birth).
• Since 1973 a paid childcare leave of six months is
available.
Netherlands 16 100 - - 48ª• Legislation introduced in 1990 entitles each parent to an
unpaid part-time leave of six months (parent must work at
least 20 hours per week). Leave is not transferable and may
be taken until the child is eight years of age.
• Government guarantees minimum income to every adult. A
couple wit h a 10 years old child receives 909 € per month.
Portugal 18 100 - - 6-24 • 1984 law entitles parents to an unpaid leave of 26 weeks
which may be extended to 2 years in special circumstances.
Spain 16 75 2 100 12-36 • the maternity benefit is the 100% of benefit base. This may
not mean 100% of wage.
• Since 1980 parents are entitled to a full time unpaid leave
until the child is 3 years of age. During the first year the
employee is entitled to return to his/her former job. After one
year, the employee is only entitled to return to a job of the
same level.
United Kingdom 14 flat rate - - - • Legislation in 1991 created a dual system of benefits. The
basic flat rate benefit continued to be offered as the "State
Maternity Allowance".
• Statutory Maternity Pay is offered to employed women.
Mothers are paid 90% of earnings for the first 6 weeks, then a
flat rate benefit for the following 12 weeks.
• Since 1979 working mothers may be absent of work up to
29 weeks.
Source: Gauthier, A.H., Bortnik, A. (2001), Drew, E., Emerek, R. and Mahon, E. (1998) and European Observatory in Family Matters (1997)
RR is Replacement Rate of normal earnings during the period of leave. (a): Parent entitled to work reduced hours- non transferable.
27
Table 5 : Family related taxes and benefits. Selected European countries.
Tax system of
the couple
Non income related family
benefits
Income related family
benefits
Tax allowances Other benefits
Belgium optional Vary according to number of
children, age of the child,
employment status
non- existent Vary according to number of
children, age of the child
some tax relief for
children expenditure
Denmark individual Vary according to age of child,
lone parents
non- existent non- existent
France joint Vary according to number of
children, age of the child, lone
parents, mother's employment
status
Vary according to number of
children, age of the child,
lone parents, mother's
employment status
Vary according to number of
children
Germany joint Vary according to number of
children, age of the child
non- existent Vary according to number of
children, fixed accounts for
each child
special tax allowances for
lone parents
Greece joint Vary according to number of
children, age of the child,
(taxable)
Vary according to number of
children, lone parents
Vary according to number of
dependants
Ireland optional Vary according to number of
children
Vary according to number of
children
Tax exemption limit is
increased according to
marital status and number of
children
Italy individual non existent Vary according to number of
persons in the household,
lone parents
Vary according to number of
children
some school costs are
deducted from taxable
income
Netherlands individual Vary according to number of
children, age of the child
non- existent tax free allowance received
according to age of the child
Portugal joint Vary according to number of
children, age of the child
(various schemes) tax deduction according to
marital status and number of
dependants
Spain optional non existent Vary according to number of
children
tax deduction
pre-school care costs
deducted from taxable
income,
couples can be taxed
separately
United
Kingdom
individual Vary according to number of
children, lone parents
Vary according to age of the
child
non-existent lone parents can receive a
personal allowance
Source: Gauthier, A.H., Bortnik, A. (2001), Drew, E., Emerek, R. and Mahon, E. (1998), Koopmans and Schippers (2003)
and European Observatory in Family Matters (1997)
28
Table 6: Distribution of births by labour status of the mother
BELGIUM DENMARK FRANCE GERMANY GREECE IRELAND
Total % births Total % births Total % births Total % births Total % births Total % births
No Work 3111 7.4 853 16.9 4486 12.1 5112 10.0 6075 12.1 2271 9.6
28.0 19.5 30.3 23.3 39.8 45.1
Part-Time 2069 11.4 534 10.3 1752 9.1 3530 2.3 946 9.6 816 13.2
18.6 12.2 11.9 12.1 6.2 16.2
Full-Time 5926 8.3 2933 10.9 8545 6.2 13277 6.1 8238 6.9 1953 9.8
53.4 68.3 57.8 60.5 54.0 38.7
ITALY NETHERLANDS PORTUGAL SPAIN U. KINGDOM
Total % births Total % births Total % births Total % births Total % births
No Work 5326 9.0 6959 9.5 3013 9.4 7721 6.7 2823 13.5
49.1 35.8 33.6 52.9 32.0
Part-Time 956 11.3 6446 14.3 461 8.7 991 6.2 1884 10.7
8.8 33.1 5.2 6.8 21.4
Full-Time 4570 7.2 6060 3.9 5325 7.4 5878 5.2 4106 5.0
42.1 31.1 61.2 40.3 46.6
Source: ECHP, 1994-98.
Sample: Women aged 17-44, with partner, at any moment in the sample.
29
Table 7A: Estimation of Fertility - Workers Sample
Variables BELGIUM DENMARK FRANCE GERMANY GREECE
1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F
Constant 0.55
(0.43)
-0.47
(0.66)
-4.61
(2.06)
-1.37
(0.70)
-4.18
(0.91)
-1.10
(0.38)
-0.25
(0.89)
-0.89
(0.48)
-0.38
(0.47)
-0.67
(0.27)
Age -0.06
(0.008)
-0.08
(0.005)
0.0002
(0.01)
-0.02
(0.006)
-0.04
(0.01)
-0.02
(0.004)
-0.07
(0.01)
-0.06
(0.003)
-0.04
(0.005)
-0.06
(0.003)
FEMALE COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS (a)
University 0.29
(0.06)
0.18
(0.08)
0.13
(0.21)
0.07
(0.07)
0.17
(0.17)
-0.07
(0.06)
0.30
(0.12)
-0.20
(0.07)
0.55
(0.11)
0.44
(0.05)
Secondary -0.05
(0.06)
0.01
(0.08)
- - 0.25
(0.14)
-0.08
(0.06)
0.50
(0.14)
0.04
(0.05)
0.32
(0.10)
-0.09
(0.05)
PARTNER COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS (b)
University -0.07
(0.06)
0.02
(0.07)
0.36
(0.26)
0.14
(0.08)
0.02
(0.19)
0.08
(0.06)
0.01
(0.10)
0.19
(0.07)
--
Secondary -0.12
(0.06)
0.03
(0.07)
-0.13
(0.26)
0.06
(0.06)
0.12
(0.15)
0.001
(0.05)
0.03
(0.12)
0.005
(0.05)
--
HOUSEHOLD INCOME (c)
Log family
income
0.23
(0.07)
0.20
(0.09)
0.20
(0.29)
0.12
(0.09)
0.47
(0.13)
0.11
(0.05)
0.10
(0.12)
-0.05
(0.06)
-0.16
(0.07)
0.10
(0.04)
AGE OF THE YOUNGEST CHILD- REFERENCE: NO CHILD (d)
<3 years -----0.47
(0.15)
0.15
(0.05)
----
3-6 years -----0.44
(0.17)
0.11
(0.06)
----
>6 years -----0.93
(0.16)
-0.25
(0.07)
----
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε1v-0.95
(0.02)
-0.29
(0.60)
0.05
(0.36)
- -0.51
(0.08)
0.95
(0.07)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε0v-0.40
(0.24)
-0.91
(0.05)
- -0.79
(0.07)
0.98
(0.21)
0.01
(0.01)
Standard error in brackets. Other variables included are: year dummies, dummies for region and occupation dummies when available.
Notes: (a) In Ireland education variables for females have been excluded for convergence problems. Very few observations in Denmark in the reference, so the reference in this
country is secondary or lower (b) Not included in Belgium , Denmark, Germany, Greece, Ireland and Spain, due to convergence problems. (c) Log family income is the log of
monthly net earning of the family minus wage of the women, measured in Euro. (d) Not included in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece Ireland and Spain due to lack of
observations or convergence problems.
30
Table 7A: Estimation of Fertility - Workers sample (cont.)
Variables IRELAND ITALY NETHERLANDS PORTUGAL SPAIN U. KINGDOM
1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F
Constant -2.02
(0.73)
-4.60
(0.76)
-0.18
(1.20)
-0.01
(0.61)
-5.49
(0.44)
-12.30
(28.02)
-2.32
(1.10)
-0.66
(0.45)
-3.23
(1.02)
0.40
(0.40)
-2.43
(0.53)
-2.84
(0.71)
Age -0.05
(0.01)
-0.04
(0.008)
-0.06
(0.02)
-0.03
(0.008)
-0.03
(0.004)
-0.01
(0.006)
-0.02
(0.02)
-0.04
(0.005)
-0.05
(0.01)
-0.04
(0.004)
-0.03
(0.007)
-0.001
(0.006)
FEMALE COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS(a)
University - - 0.44
(0.28)
-0.06
(0.14)
-0.02
(0.09)
-0.02
(0.15)
0.13
(0.30)
0.07
(0.11)
0.32
(0.17)
0.30
(0.07)
0.009
(0.08)
0.01
(0.10)
Secondary - - 0.32
(0.16)
0.09
(0.08)
0.13
(0.08)
0.01
(0.12)
-0.12
(0.43)
0.16
(0.08)
-0.17
(0.20)
-0.21
(0.08)
0.01
(0.10)
0.08
(0.12)
PARTNER COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS (B)
University 0.34
(0.16)
-0.06
(0.12)
-0.11
(0.21)
0.31
(0.12)
---0.36
(0.39)
0.08
(0.12)
0.44
(0.17)
0.22
(0.07)
0.11
(0.08)
-0.09
(0.08)
Secondary 0.01
(0.14)
0.04
(0.10)
-0.37
(0.15)
0.02
(0.08)
---0.89
(0.48)
0.09
(0.08)
0.73
(0.15)
-0.05
(0.07)
0.10
(0.12)
-0.30
(0.14)
HOUSEHOLD INCOME(C)
Log (family
income)
0.29
(0.10)
0.58
(0.11)
0.16
(0.15)
-0.09
(0.08)
0.55
(0.06)
0.62
(0.11)
-0.21
(0.17)
0.05
(0.06)
0.33
(0.14)
-0.07
(0.05)
0.17
(0.07)
0.16
(0.09)
AGE OF THE YOUNGEST CHILD- REFERENCE: NO CHILD (d)
<3 years ---0.21
(0.21)
0.25
(0.12)
1.07
(0.06)
0.85
(0.15)
0.04
(0.20)
-0.04
(0.07)
- - 0.44
(0.14)
0.91
(0.19)
3-6 years ---0.14
(0.24)
-0.28
(0.13)
0.05
(0.10)
-0.48
(0.24)
-0.75
(0.36)
-0.34
(0.11)
- - 0.30
(0.16)
0.51
(0.23)
>6 years ---0.66
(0.22)
-0.53
(0.12)
-0.26
(0.08)
-0.26
(0.11)
-0.94
(0.29)
-0.47
(0.09)
- - 0.05
(0.14)
0.15
(0.18)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε
1v0.48
(0.17)
- -0.28
(0.41)
-0.73
(0.13)
0.55
(0.39)
- -0.04
(0.20)
0.78
(0.13)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε
0v-0.30
(0.20)
-0.39
(0.69)
-0.71
(0.13)
-0.35
(0.62)
-0.52
(0.09)
-0.41
(0.18)
Standard error in brackets. Other variables included are: year dummies, dummies for region and occupation dummies when available.
Notes: (a) In Ireland education variables for females have been excluded for convergence problems. Very few observations in Denmark in the reference, so the reference in this country is
secondary or lower (b) Not included in Belgium , Denmark, Germany, Greece, Ireland and Spain, due to convergence problems. (c) Log family income is the log of monthly net earning of
the family minus wage of the women, measured in Euro. (d) Not included in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece Ireland and Spain due to lack of observations or convergence problems.
31
Table 7B: Estimation of Fertility - All women
Variables BELGIUM DENMARK FRANCE GERMANY GREECE
1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F
Constant 0.56
(0.42)
1.58
(0.10)
-2.75
(2.54)
-2.48
(0.36)
-2.85
(1.00)
-0.17
(0.15)
-3.50
(0.96)
-0.58
(0.22)
0.08
(0.73)
1.34
(0.16)
Age -0.12
(0.02)
-0.08
(0.004)
-0.04
(0.03)
-0.005
(0.003)
-0.03
(0.01)
-0.02
(0.003)
-0.06
(0.01)
-0.04
(0.002)
-0.06
(0.01)
-0.08
(0.002)
FEMALE COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS
University -0.17
(0.10)
0.16
(0.05)
0.09
(0.17)
0.10
(0.05)
0.12
(0.15)
0.09
(0.04)
0.44
(0.19)
-0.18
(0.04)
0.60
(0.15)
0.37
(0.04)
Secondary -0.50
(0.12)
-0.13
(0.06)
- - 0.21
(0.13)
0.06
(0.03)
0.77
(0.15)
0.03
(0.03)
0.29
(0.13)
0.08
(0.03)
PARTNER COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS (a)
University - - 0.28
(0.25)
0.02
(0.04)
0.12
(0.16)
0.004
(0.04)
-0.42
(0.15)
0.24
(0.04)
0.34
(0.15)
0.23
(0.04)
Secondary - - 0.10
(0.23)
-0.03
(0.04)
0.10
(0.14)
-0.002
(0.03)
-0.33
(0.11)
-0.02
(0.03)
-0.09
(0.12)
0.10
(0.03)
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Log family
income
0.42
(0.17)
0.08
(0.06)
0.16
(0.25)
0.21
(0.05)
0.36
(0.11)
-0.01
(0.02)
0.31
(0.13)
0.07
(0.03)
-0.20
(0.09)
-0.12
(0.03)
AGE OF THE YOUNGEST CHILD- REFERENCE: NO CHILD (B)
<3 years -----0.46
(0.12)
0.09
(0.03)
----
3-6 years -----0.55
(0.15)
0.08
(0.04)
----
>6 years -----0.89
(0.14)
-0.05
(0.04)
----
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε1v-0.55
(0.27)
-0.38
(0.68)
-0.10
(0.31)
-0.74
(0.07)
0.85
(0.15)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε0v-0.67
(0.19)
-0.99
(0.004)
- -0.97
(0.01)
-0.90
(0.01)
0.81
(0.25)
Standard error in brackets. Other variables included are: year dummies, dummies for region when available.
Notes: (a) Not included in Belgium , Ireland and The Netherlands, due to convergence problems. (b) Very few observations in Denmark in the reference, so the reference in this
country is secondary or lower. (c) Not included in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece and Spain due to lack of observations or convergence problems. (d) Log family income is the
log of monthly net earning of the family minus wage of the women, measured in Euro.
32
Table 7B: Estimation of Fertility - All women (Cont.)
Variables IRELAND ITALY NETHERLANDS PORTUGAL SPAIN U. KINGDOM
1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F1
ˆ
F0
ˆ
F
Constant -0.46
(1.44)
-0.51
(0.26)
-0.37
(1.26)
1.10
(0.28)
-1.98
(0.64)
-2.14
(0.37)
0.40
(2.44)
0.01
(0.28)
-2.09
(0.79)
0.02
(0.20)
-2.71
(0.68)
0.02
(0.31)
Age -0.03
(0.01)
-0.02
(0.005)
-0.07
(0.02)
-0.04
(0.004)
-0.05
(0.005)
-0.02
(0.004)
-0.04
(0.03)
-0.04
(0.008)
-0.04
(0.008)
-0.06
(0.002)
-0.04
(0.009)
-0.02
(0.004)
FEMALE COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS
University 0.04
(0.20)
0.15
(0.07)
0.64
(0.22)
-0.05
(0.11)
0.11
(0.11)
-0.007
(0.08)
0.15
(0.45)
0.07
(0.12)
0.26
(0.11)
0.06
(0.04)
0.16
(0.09)
0.01
(0.05)
Secondary 0.02
(0.16)
0.17
(0.05)
0.28
(0.14)
0.01
(0.05)
0.16
(0.10)
-0.04
(0.06)
0.48
(0.56)
-0.02
(0.07)
-0.14
(0.13)
-0.04
(0.04)
0.12
(0.11)
0.07
(0.07)
PARTNER COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS (a)
University - - 0.10
(0.20)
0.16
(0.08)
---0.04
(0.41)
0.07
(0.12)
0.22
(0.13)
0.20
(0.04)
0.05
(0.09)
-0.10
(0.05)
Secondary ---0.29
(0.14)
-0.04
(0.04)
---1.06
(0.54)
-0.02
(0.07)
0.29
(0.10)
-0.01
(0.04)
0.08
(0.13)
-0.23
(0.08)
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Log (family
income)
0.19
(0.10)
-0.02
(0.03)
0.07
(0.14)
-0.14
(0.04)
0.30
(0.08)
0.07
(0.05)
-0.03
(0.19)
0.01
(0.04)
0.04
(0.10)
0.05
(0.03)
0.28
(0.09)
-0.12
(0.04)
AGE OF THE YOUNGEST CHILD- REFERENCE: NO CHILD (B)
<3 years -0.62
(0.26)
0.36
(0.07)
-0.30
(0.17)
-0.06
(0.05)
0.50
(0.07)
1.33
(0.07)
-0.10
(0.24)
-0.15
(0.05)
---0.05
(0.19)
0.52
(0.07)
3-6 years -0.99
(0.26)
0.20
(0.09)
-0.26
(0.22)
-0.52
(0.07)
-0.54
(0.10)
0.21
(0.08)
-0.57
(0.34)
-0.38
(0.08)
---0.06
(0.23)
0.39
(0.10)
>6 years -1.17
(0.26)
-0.02
(0.13)
-0.79
(0.25)
-0.75
(0.07)
-0.89
(0.09)
-0.11
(0.07)
-0.95
(0.34)
-0.59
(0.09)
---0.31
(0.23)
0.12
(0.09)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε
1v-0.24
(0.49)
-0.50
(0.28)
-0.03
(0.12)
0.32
(0.86)
-0.95
(0.07)
0.67
(0.21)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε
0v- -0.86
(0.10)
-0.24
(0.43)
-0.04
(0.17)
- -0.55
(0.44)
0.51
(0.32)
-0.45
(0.14)
Standard error in brackets. Other variables included are: dummies for region when available.
Notes: (a) Not included in Belgium , Ireland and The Netherlands, due to convergence problems. (b) Very few observations in Denmark in the reference, so the reference in this country is
secondary or lower. (c) Not included in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece and Spain due to lack of observations or convergence problems. (d) Log family income is the log of monthly
net earning of the family minus wage of the woman, measured in Euro.
33
Table 8A: Estimation of Part-time - Workers sample.
BELGIUM DENMARK FRANCE GERMANY GREECE IRELAND ITALY NETHERLANDS PORTUGAL SPAIN U.KINGDOM
Constant -0.64
(0.11)
-1.11
(0.17)
-1.53
(0.09)
-2.46
(0.09)
-0.98
(0.11)
-0.91
(0.38)
-1.62
(0.20)
-1.28
(0.07)
-1.62
(0.18)
-1.47
(0.12)
-1.31
(0.11)
Age -0.005
(0.003)
-0.005
(0.005)
0.002
(0.002)
0.009
(0.002)
-0.008
(0.003)
0.006
(0.005)
-0.01
(0.005)
0.01
(0.002)
0.02
(0.004)
-0.005
(0.003)
0.001
(0.003)
FEMALE COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS(a)
University -0.43
(0.04)
0.02
(0.06)
0.09
(0.05)
0.03
(0.04)
0.03
(0.05)
-0.58
(0.10)
0.47
(0.08)
-0.005
(0.04)
0.09
(0.10)
-0.07
(0.05)
-0.15
(0.04)
Secondary -0.12
(0.04)
- 0.008
(0.04)
0.25
(0.03)
-0.17
(0.04)
-0.27
(0.07)
0.13
(0.05)
0.05
(0.03)
-0.46
(0.09)
-0.19
(0.04)
0.09
(0.05)
PARTNER COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS (b)
University 0.12
(0.04)
-0.11
(0.05)
- -0.08
(0.05)
-0.12
(0.09)
0.02
(0.04)
0.25
(0.13)
-0.01
(0.04)
-0.10
(0.04)
Secondary -0.002
(0.04)
-0.05
(0.04)
- -0.08
(0.04)
-0.01
(0.05)
-0.06
(0.03)
-0.20
(0.09)
-0.01
(0.04)
-0.04
(0.06)
AGE OF THE YOUNGEST CHILD- REFERENCE: NO CHILD (c)
<3 years 0.42
(0.04)
-0.06
(0.08)
0.29
(0.04)
1.26
(0.04)
0.12
(0.05)
1.06
(0.08)
0.43
(0.07)
1.54
(0.03)
-0.07
(0.07)
0.42
(0.05)
1.23
(0.05)
3-6 years 0.16
(0.05)
-0.08
(0.10)
0.22
(0.05)
1.51
(0.05)
0.18
(0.06)
1.14
(0.10)
0.40
(0.08)
1.58
(0.05)
-0.11
(0.09)
0.22
(0.06)
1.25
(0.07)
>6 years 0.17
(0.05)
0.21
(0.08)
0.15
(0.04)
0.94
(0.03)
0.05
(0.05)
1.07
(0.10)
0.44
(0.07)
1.18
(0.03)
-0.16
(0.07)
0.15
(0.05)
0.98
(0.05)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε
1v-0.95
(0.02)
0.29
(0.60)
0.05
(0.36)
-0.51
(0.08)
0.94
(0.06)
0.48
(0.17)
0.34
(0.36)
0.74
(0.13)
0.55
(0.39)
-0.04
(0.20)
0.93
(0.11)
Standard error in brackets. Other variables included are: year dummies, occupation dummies of the partner.
Notes: (a) Not included in Belgium , Ireland and The Netherlands, due to convergence problems. (b) Very few observations in Denmark in the reference, so the reference in this
country is secondary or lower. (c) Not included in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece and Spain due to lack of observations or convergence problems.
34
Table 8B: Estimation of Part-time - All women
BELGIUM DENMARK FRANCE GERMANY GREECE IRELAND ITALY NETHERLANDS PORTUGAL SPAIN U.KINGDOM
Constant -1.54
(0.10)
-2.28
(0.15)
-1.80
(0.08)
-3.08
(0.10)
-1.86
(0.10)
-1.73
(0.14)
-2.07
(0.16)
-1.88
(0.06)
-2.13
(0.17)
1.63
(0.08)
-2.26
(0.10)
Age -0.0002
(0.003)
0.03
(0.004)
0.005
(0.002)
0.003
(0.002)
-0.003
(0.002)
0.002
(0.004)
-0.005
(0.004)
0.02
(0.002)
0.01
(0.004)
0.004
(0.003)
0.005
(0.003)
FEMALE COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS
University -0.09
(0.04)
-0.05
(0.05)
0.10
(0.04)
0.15
(0.04)
0.47
(0.05)
0.15
(0.06)
0.66
(0.07)
0.20
(0.04)
0.45
(0.09)
0.11
(0.04)
0.04
(0.04)
Secondary -0.007
(0.04)
-0.10
(0.03)
0.26
(0.03)
0.03
(0.04)
0.20
(0.05)
0.21
(0.04)
0.05
(0.03)
-0.25
(0.09)
-0.05
(0.04)
0.15
(0.05)
PARTNER COMPLETED EDUCATION - REFERENCE: PRIMARY OR LESS (a)
University 0.10
(0.04)
-0.06
(0.05)
0.30
(0.04)
-0.03
(0.05)
-0.09
(0.08)
-0.09
(0.04)
0.28
(0.13)
0.05
(0.04)
-0.08
(0.04)
Secondary 0.07
(0.04)
-0.08
(0.03)
0.18
(0.03)
-0.07
(0.04)
- -0.002
(0.04)
-0.18
(0.03)
-0.12
(0.09)
-0.03
(0.04)
-0.01
(0.05)
AGE OF THE YOUNGEST CHILD- REFERENCE: NO CHILD (B)
<3 years 0.32
(0.05)
0.09
(0.07)
0.08
(0.04)
0.24
(0.04)
0.08
(0.05)
0.58
(0.07)
0.21
(0.06)
0.64
(0.02)
-0.02
(0.07)
-0.05
(0.04)
0.75
(0.05)
3-6 years 0.13
(0.06)
0.14
(0.09)
0.11
(0.05)
1.02
(0.04)
0.19
(0.06)
0.52
(0.09)
0.22
(0.07)
0.36
(0.04)
-0.08
(0.09)
-0.22
(0.06)
0.92
(0.06)
>6 years 0.16
(0.05)
0.22
(0.07)
0.11
(0.04)
0.91
(0.03)
0.04
(0.05)
0.61
(0.08)
0.28
(0.06)
0.24
(0.03)
-0.06
(0.07)
-0.15
(0.05)
0.80
(0.05)
ρ
ρρ
ρε
εε
ε
1v-0.55
(0.27)
0.38
(0.68)
-0.10
(0.31)
0.74
(0.07)
0.85
(0.15)
-0.24
(0.49)
0.50
(0.28)
0.03
(0.12)
0.32
(0.86)
0.96
(0.07)
0.67
(0.21)
Standard error in brackets. Other variables included are: year dummies, occupation dummies of the partner.
Notes: (a) Not included in Belgium , Ireland and The Netherlands, due to convergence problems. (b) Very few observations in Denmark in the reference, so the reference in this
country is secondary or lower. (c) Not included in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece and Spain due to lack of observations or convergence problems.
35
Table 9: Effect of Part -Time on Fertility
BELGIUM DENMARK FRANCE GERMANY GREECE IRELAND ITALY NETHERLANDS PORTUGAL SPAIN U.KINGDOM
All
01 ˆˆ FF −
-0.22
(0.01)
-0.22
(0.008)
-0.09
(0.005)
-0.02
(0.001)
-0.07
(0.007)
0.10
(0.01)
-0.03
(0.001)
0.01
(0.0007)
-0.003
(0.0003)
-0.02
(0.001)
-0.06
(0.005)
workers
01 ˆˆ FF −
0.56
(0.11)
-0.18
(0.01)
-0.05
(0.004)
0.07
(0.004)
-0.06
(0.005)
0.02
(0.0009)
0.13
(0.01)
0.05
(0.003)
-0.04
(0.002)
-0.02
(0.002)
-0.05
(0.003)
Standard error in brackets. 1
ˆ
F is the prediction of Fertility obtained in the estimation in Table 3 for part-timers. 0
ˆ
Fis the prediction for non part-timers.
Standard errors obtained by the Delta Method.
Source: Eurostat. 36
Graph 1: Total Fertility Rates. Selected European Countries
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
U. Kingdom
Source: Eurostat. 37
Graph 2: Female Participation Rates. Selected European Countries
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
U. Kingdom
Source: Eurostat and OECD data. 38
Graph 3: Cross Country Correlations Total Fertility Rates, Female Participation Rates & Female Part-Time Rates.
Selected European Countries.
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998
TFR-FPR TFR-PTR FPR-PTR
Source: Eurostat data. 39
Graph 4: Time series correlation Total fertility Rates-Female Participation Rates
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
Belgium Denmark France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Netherlands Portugal Spain U. Kingdom
Temporary correlation TFR-FPR (1970-1984) Temporary correlation TFR-FPR (1985-1999)
Source: Part-time rates (% over Total employment), based on a common definition, OECD. 40
Graph 5: Female Part-time Rates. Selected European Countries.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Belgium
Denmark
Germany
Greece
France
Ireland
Italy
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
UK
Source: ECHP, 1994-1998.Women 16-65 years. 41
Graph 6: Female labour status by age of youngest child. Selected European Countries.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
No child
Child 0 - 2
Child 3 - 5
Child > 5
Full-time Part-time No work
Belgium Denmark France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Netherlands Portugal Spain U.Kingdom
Source: Final sample, ECHP data. 1994-1998. 42
Graph 7: Labour status total women and women who give birth. Selected European Countries.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
Total
mothers
No work Part-time Full-time
Belgium Denmark France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Netherlands SpainPortugal U.Kingdom
... se debe a un cambio en ese momento en las variables que refieren la interacción entre familia y trabajo. 5 Para enfoques directamente vinculados a la interacción entre fertilidad y participación laboral ver, entre otros, ÁLVAREZ (2002), ARIZA et al. (2005), DE LA RICA y FERRERO (2003). ...
Educación y sesgo de familia: aproximación a la vulnerabilidad laboral de las mujeres casadas en España 2005-2012
Article
Full-text available
  • Nov 2013
El propósito de este trabajo es analizar el papel de la educación en la desigualdad laboral por razones de género, edad y estado civil en España en el período 2005.t1-2012.t4 con los datos individuales de la EPA. Los ejes de indagación son dos: 1.º) aproximación en corte transversal al sesgo de familia expresado en los perfiles laborales del ciclo de vida, la segregación ocupacional, la concentración del empleo en grupos de ocupación y el reparto de las cargas familiares entre cónyuges y 2.º) tratamiento longitudinal en panel deslizante de la interferencia de la familia en la posición de mercado de las mujeres casadas según su edad y nivel educativo. El análisis transversal muestra asociaciones negativas educación-matrimonio en ambos sexos y educación-participación en ellas por comparación con ellos, que junto con una mayor segregación de género en las casadas sugieren que estas soportan un sesgo específico de familia que dificulta su presencia en el mercado. La percepción individual de la interferencia de la familia lo confirma, pues son ellas quienes adolecen primordialmente de problemas de conciliación familia-trabajo, incluso en edades inferiores a 44 años donde están más educadas que sus maridos y la igualdad de género es un valor social asentado. El análisis longitudinal cuantifica, con estimaciones Logit multinomial, la desventaja de las casadas en términos de probabilidad de entrada impedida al mercado de las inactivas y de probabilidad de abandono prematuro de las ocupadas, debido a problemas de conciliación familia-trabajo. En breve, las responsabilidades familiares excluyen del mercado a las mujeres casadas con independencia de su edad y educación.
View
... The opportunity costs of having a subsequent child and the tensions a mother experiences while combining paid work with taking care of her first child may also discourage her from having another (Bernhardt 1993;Kravdal 1994;Balbo et al. 2013;Goldscheider et al. 2015). It has been argued and empirically demonstrated that shorter or fewer career breaks and lower tensions between paid work and childrearing both facilitate birth transitions (Ariza et al. 2003;Begall and Mills 2011;Dommermuth et al. 2017). ...
View
... Particularly in Scandinavian countries (Esping-Andersen, 2002), public sector employment has been important for women being able to combine motherhood with employment and increasing fertility. Large public sector employment, and the availability of part-time or flexible schedules specifically, appear to be positively related to fertility decisions to some other European countries as well (Ariza et al., 2003;Adsera, 2011;Conti and Sette, 2013;Billari et al., 2009). However, Ariza (2003), found part-time employment to be conducive to work-family conciliation only in some contexts across Europe (notably Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands) and neither research based on the US (Budig, 2003) nor on Spain (Martin Garcia, 2010) found a difference between full-time and parttime jobs in their effect on fertility. ...
The importance of job characteristics to women's fertility intentions and behavior in Russia
Article
Full-text available
  • Jan 2015
  • Genus
We assess whether a relationship between employment conditions and fertility exists in the low-fertility context of Russia. Using multiple data sources, we study both intentions and transitions to the first and second birth. Occupational characteristics appear more related to the timing of entering parenthood than to having a second birth. Differences by occupational branch were few, but we find evidence that family-friendly job characteristics influence first and second intentions and conceptions. Attitudes toward work and family roles do not mediate this relationship. Women who change occupational branches after entering parenthood are less likely to continue childbearing. © 2016, Universita degli Studi di Roma 'La Sapienza'. All rights reserved.
View
... The positive relationship in Figure 3.16 is what we would expect, given the assumptions of our rational decision making model -as Hill et al. argue, job flexibility should make it easier for women to be employed, increasing their net income and decreasing the cost of children (Hill, Hawkins et al. 2001). In contrast, using survey data from 11 countries, Ariza found a positive relationship only in half, and a negative relationship in the other 6 countries (Ariza, de la Rica et al. 2005), suggesting that some cultural or institutional factor might be at work. In the absence of better data, this will remain at the level of speculation. ...
Politics, Culture and Fertility Trends.
Article
  • Jan 2011
Total fertility rates have been falling across the world, with a majority of the world's countries and population now below generational replacement rate. Contrary to the initial assumption that women are merely delaying child-birth, in some advanced industrial countries the sub-replacement fertility trend has persisted for decades, indicating permanently lowered fertility expectations. This study looks at the differences and similarities between low fertility countries and those who have bounced back towards replacement levels. I use micro-level data from the World Values Survey to assess cultural shifts that relate to individual-level fertility decisions, as well as macro-level data to evaluate country-level conditions and, when either direct or indirect pro-natalist policies are in place, policy effectiveness. The results show a combination of cultural change and either family-friendly labor market norms or government intervention can indeed lead to a sustained rise in total fertility. However, cultural, historical and political factors might delay or prevent policy adjustment.
View
... Además de las limitaciones en la vertiente del gasto, cabe destacar que las mujeres españolas se enfrentan a un mercado laboral peculiar, sujeto a particulares rigideces e imperfecciones que han tendido a sostener la seguridad en el empleo de tiempo completo de los participantes del mercado de trabajo a costa de menores probabilidades de empleo para los nuevos trabajadores y para las personas que buscan empleo de tiempo parcial (Borra, 2010). En el mismo sentido, Ariza et al. (2005) señalan que en Francia, Grecia, Portugal y España el trabajo femenino de tiempo parcial es, principalmente, involuntario; mientras que en Dinamarca, Alemania, Irlanda, Países Bajos y el Reino Unido se puede considerar una elección de las mujeres. Esto es una señal de que faltan en el mercado de trabajo español empleos de tiempo parcial en condiciones aceptables o favorables, lo que ha conducido a que la mayoría de las mujeres que se incorporan al mercado laboral español lo realicen fundamentalmente mediante el empleo a tiempo completo. ...
WOMEN, WORK AND FAMILY IN SPAIN
Article
  • Oct 2015
The aim of this paper is to analyse the changes in the determinants of the decision to participate in the labour market, union formation and non-maternity. We use the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions Survey (2005-2011). The econometric technique is a trivariate probit model, which allows estimating the three dependent variables simultaneously. The results show, among other things, that highly educated women are more likely to participate in the labour market and not to have children and less likely to live in a couple.
View
... Part-time work is more prevalent among women with fewer years of formal schooling (except in Italy) and the percentage of part-timers with temporary contracts is relatively high, particularly in the Netherlands, UK, and France. Consequently, average hourly pay for part-time work can be above or below pay for full-time jobs (Ariza et al., 2003) find that in Denmark and France most women working part-time are aged under 30, while in the Netherlands, Belgium and the UK they are over 30. They also note that in France and Spain part-time employment is mainly involuntary whereas in Denmark, the Netherlands, and the UK, it is typically the woman's choice. ...
View
... Además de las limitaciones en la vertiente del gasto, cabe destacar que las mujeres españolas se enfrentan a un mercado laboral peculiar, sujeto a particulares rigideces e imperfecciones que han tendido a sostener la seguridad en el empleo de tiempo completo de los participantes del mercado de trabajo a costa de menores probabilidades de empleo para los nuevos trabajadores y para las personas que buscan empleo de tiempo parcial (Borra, 2010). En el mismo sentido, Ariza et al. (2005) señalan que en Francia, Grecia, Portugal y España el trabajo femenino de tiempo parcial es, principalmente, involuntario; mientras que en Dinamarca, Alemania, Irlanda, Países Bajos y el Reino Unido se puede considerar una elección de las mujeres. Esto es una señal de que faltan en el mercado de trabajo español empleos de tiempo parcial en condiciones aceptables o favorables, lo que ha conducido a que la mayoría de las mujeres que se incorporan al mercado laboral español lo realicen fundamentalmente mediante el empleo a tiempo completo. ...
Mujer, trabajo y familia en España
Article
Full-text available
  • Oct 2015
The aim of this paper is to analyse the changes in the determinants of the decision to participate in the labour market, union formation and non-maternity. We use the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions Survey (2005-2011). The econometric technique is a trivariate probit model, which allows estimating the three dependent variables simultaneously. The results show, among other things, that highly educated women are more likely to participate in the labour market and not to have children and less likely to live in a couple.
View
Large Private Companies: A Stimulus for the Marriage Rate under the Premises of Job Security – The Case of the Romanian Counties
Article
Full-text available
  • Sep 2020
Large corporations are part of the global economy, specific to today’s globalized world. With more than socio-economic implications, large companies have the ability to deliver a better degree of remuneration, incentives, and even a better quality of life to employees, compared to small companies, which lack the financial possibility to massively invest in the human resource or make investments in a foreign economy via establishing subsidiaries in emerging countries. Taking into account the impact on the economy and on individuals of large businesses, the main purpose of the paper was to determine and assess, at county level and, considering other specific indicators to the economic well-being and job security, the impact these have on the marriage rate in Romania. Being given the strong positive correlation discovered between the marriage rate and the total number of active enterprises with more than 250 employees in the 42 analyzed Romanian counties, an econometric model was designed and built, also in relation with the monthly average nominal net earnings.
View
Rejuvenating Korea: Policies for a Changing Society
Book
Full-text available
  • Oct 2019
Korean families are changing fast. While birth rates remain low, Koreans are marryingand starting a family later than ever before, if at all. Couple-with-children households,the dominant household type in Korea until recently, will soon make up fewer thanone quarter of all households. These changes will have a profound effect on Korea’sfuture. Among other things, the Korean labour force is set to decline by about 2.5million workers by 2040, with potential major implications for economic performanceand the sustainability of public finances. Since the early 2000s, public policy haschanged to help parents reconcile work and family commitments: Korea has developeda comprehensive formal day-care and kindergarten system with enrolment rates thatare now on par with the Nordic countries. Korea also has one year of paid parentalleave for both parents, but only about 25% of mothers and 5% of fathers use it, asworkplace cultures are often not conducive to parents, especially fathers, takingleave. Cultural change will take time, but this review suggests there also is a needfor additional labour market, education and social policy reform to help Koreans achieveboth work and family aspirations, and contribute to the rejuvenation of Korean society.
View
Le Sud revisité : équité de genres et fécondité en Italie et en Espagne
Article
  • Jan 2006
The south revisited : gender equity and fertility in Italy and Spain. McDonald argues the negative relationship between female employment and fertility persists when there is conflict between levels of gender equity in institutions dealing with people as individuals, such as education and the labor market, and those dealing with people as members of families, such as flexibility of employment, supportive social provisions, family allowances, and the family itself. Here, analyses of macro-and micro-level data illustrate that it is not conflict, but reinforced gender inequity in both types of institutions that predicts lower fertility. An evolutionary argument is proposed, with greater equity in employment encouraging greater equity in family-oriented institutions and eventually the family. The European Community Household Panel is used to illustrate the evolution of gender equity effects on the likelihood of second births in Italy and Spain. Both are strong male breadwinner states, but Italian women’s employment equity is more advanced than Spanish women’s.
View
View
A Note on the Changing Relationship Between Fertility and Female Employment Rates in Developed Countries
Article
Full-text available
  • Dec 2002
  • J POPUL ECON
In this paper we look at a panel of OECD aggregate fertility and labor market data between 1970 and 1995 and we report some striking recent developments. Total Fertility Rates (TFR) were falling and Female Participation Rates (FPR) were increasing, conforming to a well known long-run trend. Along the cross-sectional dimension, the correlation between TFR and FPR was negative and significant during the 1970's and up to the early 1980's. This seemed consistent with secular comovements. However, by the late 1980's the correlation had become positive and equally significant. We discuss our findings within the framework of standard neoclassical models of fertility and labor supply adapted to macro data, as in Butz and Ward (1979).
View
The Effect of Child Care and Part Time Opportunities on Participation and Fertility of Italian Women
Article
Full-text available
  • Sep 2002
  • J POPUL ECON
Economic models of household behavior typically yield the prediction that increases in schooling levels and wage rates of married women lead to increases in their labor supply and reductions in fertility. In Italy, low labor market participation rates of married women are observed together with low birth rates. Our explanation involves the Italian institutional structure, particularly as reflected in rigidities and imperfections in the labor market and characteristics of the publicly-funded child care system. These rigidities tend to simultaneously increase the costs of having children and to discourage the labor market participation of married women. We analyze a model of labor supply and fertility, using panel data. The empirical results show that the availability of child care and part time work increase both the probability of working and having a child.
View
Binary Choice with Binary Endogenous Regressors in Panel Data: Estimating the Effect of Fertility on Female Labour Participation.
Article
Full-text available
  • Feb 1998
This paper considers the estimation of binary choice panel data models with discrete endogenous regressors. We present a switching probit model which accounts for selectivity bias as well as for other forms of time invariant unobserved heterogeneity. Individual effects are allowed to be correlated with the explanatory variables, which can be predetermined as opposed to strictly exogenous. This model is applied to estimate a female participation equation with endogenous fertility and predetermined existing children and with individual effects using PSID data. We use the family sex composition as an instrument for exogenous fertility movements. The results indicate that assuming the exogeneity of fertility induces a downward bias in absolute value in the estimated negative effect of fertility on participation, although the failure to account for unobserved heterogeneity exaggerates this effect. Moreover, the estimates that deal with the endogeneity of fertility and control for fixed effects, but treat existing children as strictly exogenous produce a smaller effect of fertility that those obtained treating this variable as predetermined.
View
The Emergence of Lowest-Low Fertility in Europe During the 1990s
Article
Full-text available
  • Dec 2002
  • POPUL DEV REV
Lowest-low fertility, defined as a period total fertility rate at or below 1.3, has rapidly spread in Europe during the 1990s. This article traces the emergence of this new phenomenon to the interaction of five factors. First, tempo and compositional distortions reduce the total fertility rate below the associated level of cohort fertility. Second, socioeconomic changes-including increased returns to human capital and high economic uncertainty in early adulthood-have made late childbearing a rational response for individuals and couples. Third, social interaction effects reinforce this behavioral adjustment and contribute to large and persistent postponement in the mean age at birth. Fourth, institutional settings favor an overall low quantum of fertility. Fifth, postponement-quantum interactions amplify the consequences of this institutional setting when combined with ongoing delays of child-bearing. The article concludes with speculations about future trends in current and prospective lowest-low-fertility countries. Copyright 2002 by The Population Council, Inc..
View
Between Equalization and Marginalization: Women Working Part-Time in Europe and the United States of America
Article
  • Aug 1997
Levels of part-time work vary enormously across industrial society, from 66 per cent among women in the Netherlands to just 8 per cent among women in Greece. Part-time work was almost unknown in Eastern Europe, but is now growing rapidly in the same sectors of industry as in Western Europe and the USA. Between Equalization and Marginalization provides a comparative analysis of the development of part-time work in Europe and the USA from 1950 onwards, using longitudinal and cross-sectional data, and reassesses the competing theories and conflicting perspectives so far offered on the growth of part-time work among women. It concludes that part-time work does not equalize women’s position vis à vis full-time workers, nor does it leave women in part-time jobs wholly marginalized. Instead, it shows that part-time jobs provide new opportunities for secondary earners and play a special role in the context of the sexual division of labour in the family. The country reports - by national experts - cover the USA, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, West Germany, Britain, France, Italy, Greece, Hungary, Slovenia, and Poland. Two chapters by the editors synthesize the results and assess their theoretical implications.
View
View
The effect of fertility on labour force participation: The Spanish evidence
Article
  • Jun 2003
Abstract. The aim of this paper is to estimate the effect of fertility on the decision of labour force participation of married females in Spain, allowing for the existence of unobserved characteristics that affect both fertility and participation. We use a pooling of five waves of the European Household Panel for Spain (1994–1998). Results indicate that not taking into account the unobserved characteristics that affect both variables imposes on average a strong downward bias on the true effect of fertility on participation. This bias is especially strong for highly educated females.
View
A Theory of Allocation of Time
Article
  • Sep 1965
The article attempts to develop a general theory of the allocation of time in non-work activities. It sets out a basic theoretical analysis of choice that includes the cost of time on the same footing as the cost of market goods and treats various empirical implications of the theory. These include a new approach to changes in hours of work and leisure, the full integration of so-called productive consumption into economic analysis, a new analysis of the effect of income on the quantity and quality of commodities consumed, some suggestions on the measurement of productivity, an economic analysis of queues and a few others as well. The integration of production and consumption is at odds with the tendency for economists to separate them sharply, production occurring in firms and consumption in households. It should be pointed out, however, that in recent years economists increasingly recognize that a household is truly a small factory. It combines capital goods, raw materials and labor to clean, feed, procreate and otherwise produce useful commodities.
View
Female labour supply: The influence of taxes and social premiums
Article
  • Jan 1998
Thèse de doctorat : College van Decanen : 1998.
View