Fiscal and Redistributive Impacts of the Introduction of Dynamic Components in Maternity Benefits

• Autorzy: Daniela Danková , Renata Halásková , Ján Šebo
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Research background: Social security systems combine several subsystems aimed at addressing the risks of temporary or permanent loss of an individual's income. The subject of the research are parametric changes of alternative public policy aimed at addressing the temporary loss of income caused by the dropout from the labour market due to childcare. The effects of public policies may be fiscally neutral from the entire system, but not from the point of view of the individual.
Purpose of the article: The purpose of this study is to examine the fiscal and redistributive effects of parametric changes in social insurance subsystem with an accent on maternity benefits in the conditions of the Slovak Republic by using a modified microsimulation model.
Methods: Using a microsimulation model, we investigate the impacts of the alternative policy setting. Microsimulation model contains four basic modules (i) macroeconomic module, (ii) demographic module simulating future population structure from 2017 to 2080 (iii) status module modelling particular attributes (characteristics), (iv) social policy module. The model is applied to maternity benefits in two scenarios in the Slovak Republic: scenario 1 - the current legislative setting of maternity benefit policy parameters and scenario 2 - dynamic maternity benefit.
Findings & value added: Results in the area of redistributive impacts in social insurance focused on maternity benefits show that dynamic policy parameters can positively affect work-life balance, especially for individuals with higher education. The results in the area of fiscal impacts show that the dynamic model of maternity benefits increases the efficiency of public spending and stimulates the faster return on the labour market. The results indicate the direction of possible government interventions and provide valuable information for policy makers in areas public policies that are associated with temporary labour market dropouts in the case of maternity. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Maternity benefit; Social policy; Societal policy; Work-Life Balance (WLB); Redistribution

PL

Zasiłek macierzyński; Polityka socjalna; Polityka społeczna; Równowaga praca-życie; Redystrybucja

• Czasopismo: Equilibrium
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: 17
• Numer: nr 1
• Strony: 103--131

Twórcy

autor

Daniela Danková

• Metteris, spol. s.r.o., Slovakia

autor

Renata Halásková

• University of Ostrava, Czechia

autor

Ján Šebo

• Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia

Bibliografia

• Adda, J., Dustmann, C., & Stevens, K. (2017). The career costs of children. Journal of Political Economy, 125(2), 293-337. doi: 10.1086/690952.
• Adsera, A. (2005). Vanishing children: from high unemployment to low fertility in developed countries. American Economic Review, 95(2), 189-193. doi: 10.1257/000282805774669763.
• Anderson, D. J., Binder, M., & Krause, K. (2003). The motherhood wage penalty revisited: experience, heterogeneity, work effort, and work-schedule flexibility. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 56(2), 273-294. doi: 10.2307/3590938.
• Ayllón, S. (2019). Job insecurity and fertility in Europe. Review of Economics of the Household, 17, 1321-1347. doi: 10.1007/s1115 0-019-09450-5.
• Balco, M., Šebo, J., Mešťan, M., & Šebová, Ľ. (2018). Application of the lifecycle theory in Slovak pension system. Ekonomický časopis, 66(1), 64-80.
• Baroni, E., Zamac, J., & Öberg, G. (2009). IFSIM handbook. Institute for Futures Studies, Stockholm Working Paper, 7.
• Billingsley, S., Neyer, G., & Wesolowski, K. (2018). The influence of family policies on womens childbearing: a longitudinal micro-data analysis of 21 countries. Stockholm University, Stockholm Research Reports in Demography, 19. doi: 10.17045/sthlmuni.6754193.v1.
• Cazzola, A., Pasquini, L., & Angeli, A. (2016). The relationship between unemployment and fertility in Italy: a time-series analysis. Demographic Research, 34(1), 1-38. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2016.34.1.
• Comolli, Ch. L. (2017). The fertility response to the great recession in Europe and the United States: structural economic conditions and perceived economic uncertainty. Demographic Research, 36, 1549-1600. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2017.36.51.
• Correll, S. J., Benard, S., & Paik, I. (2007). Getting a job: is there a motherhood penalty? American Journal of Sociology, 112(5), 1297-1339. doi: 10.1086/511799.
• Currie, J., & Schwandt, H. (2014). Short-and long-term effects of unemployment on fertility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(41), 14734-14739. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1408975111.
• Cygan-Rehm, K. (2016). Parental leave benefit and differential fertility responses: evidence from a German reform. Journal of Population Economics, 29(1), 73-103. doi: 10.1007/s00148-015-0562-z.
• Černam, M., & Dujava, D. (2021). What is cost of a child? Analysis of the impact of parenthood on mothers' and fathers' incomes. Retrieved form https://www.mfsr.sk/sk/financie/institut-financnej-politiky/publikacie-ifp/komentare/komentare-z-roku-2021/10-kolko-stoji-dieta-jul-2021.html (20.11.2021).
• Dančíková, Z. (2020). Even men can't have it all: maternity leave for fathers and the entry of mothers into work. Retrieved form https://www.mfsr.sk/sk/financie/institut-financnej-politiky/publikacie-ifp/komentare/komentare-z-roku-2020/6-ani-muzi-nemozu-mat-vsetko-materska-otcov-nastup-matiek-do-prace-jun-2020.html (26.06.2020).
• Esping-Andersen, G. (2009). The incomplete revolution: adapting to women's new roles. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• European Commission (2008). Work-life balance package. MEMO/08/603. Retrieved form http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-08-603_en.htm.
• European Commission (2018). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the development of childcare facilities for young children with a view to increase female labour participation, strike a work-life balance for working parents and bring about sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe (the "Barcelona objectives"). Retrieved from https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52018DC0273.
• European Commission (2019). Key data on early childhood education and care in Europe - 2019 edition. Eurydice report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• European Commission (2021). The childcare gap in EU member states. Retrieved form https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=en&pubId=8378&furtherPubs=yes.
• European parliament (2015). Maternity, paternity and parental leave: data related to duration and compensation rates in the European Union. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/509999/IPOL_SU(2015)509999_EN.pdf.
• Fernández-Kranz, D., Lacuesta, A., & Rodríguez-Planas, N. (2013). The motherhood earnings Dip: evidence from administrative records. Journal of Human Resources, 48(1), 169-197. doi: 10.1353/jhr.2013.0007.
• Ferragina, E. (2019). Does family policy influence women's employment? Reviewing the evidence in the field. Political Studies Review, 17(1), 65-80. doi: 10.1177/1478929917736438.
• Fodor, J., & Cenker, J. (2019). Default strategy in pension saving. The case of Slovakia. Institut financnej politiky. Economics analysis, 51. Retrieved form https://www.mfsr.sk/files/archiv/48/Lifecycling_analysis.pdf
• Gerbery, D. (2017). Family policy in Slovakia aimed at supporting families with dependent children. Forum Socialni Politiky, 11(4), 1-10.
• Geyer, J., Haan, P., & Wrohlich, K., (2014). The effects of family policy on maternal labour supply: combining evidence from a structural model and a quasiexperimental approach. Labour Economics, 36(13), 84-98. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2015.07.001.
• Hegewisch, A., & Gornick, J. (2011). The impact of work-family policies on women's employment: a review of research from OECD countries. Community, Work & Family, 14(2), 119-138. doi: 10.1080/13668803.2011.571395.
• Hidas, S., & Horváthová, V. (2018). Women still can't have it all. Barriers to higher maternal employment in Slovakia. Retrieved form https://www.finance.gov.sk/sk/financie/institut-financnej-politiky/publikacie-ifp/ekonomicke-analyzy/48-women-still-cant-have-it-all-barriers-higher-maternal-employment-slovakia-maj-2018-2.html.
• Hofmann, B., & Hohmeyer, K. (2012). Perceived economic uncertainty and fertility. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75(2), 503-521.doi: 10.1111/jomf.12011.
• Kinoshita, Y., & Guo, F. (2015). What can boost female labour force participation in Asia? IMF Working Paper, WP/15/56. doi: 10.5089/9781498329750.001.
• Kleven, H., Landais, C., Posch, J., Steinhauer, A., & Zweimüller, J. (2019). Child penalties across countries: evidence and explanations. NBER Working Paper, 25524. doi: 10.3386/w25524.
• Kocourková, J., Šťastná, A., & Černíková, A. (2019). The impact of the economic crisis on fertility levels in EU member states. Politicka Ekonomie, 67(1), 82-104. doi: 10.18267/j.polek.1230
• Kohler, H. P., Billari, F. C., & Ortega, J. A. (2002). The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s. Population and Development Review, 28(4), 641-680. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2002.00641.x.
• Kreyenfeld, M., & Andersson, G. (2014). Socioeconomic differences in the unemployment and fertility nexus: evidence from Denmark and Germany. Advances in Life Course Research, 21, 59-73. doi: 10.1016/j.alcr.2014.01.007.
• Kreyenfeld, M., Andersson, G., & Pailhe, A. (2012). Economic uncertainty and family dynamics. Demographic Research, Special Collection 12. 835-852. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2012.27.28.
• Leers, T., Meijdam, A. C. & Verbon, H., A. A. (2001). The politics of pension reform under ageing. CESifo Working Paper, 521.
• Liechti, L. (2017). Resource-related inequalities in mothers' employment in two family-policy regimes: evidence from Switzerland and West Germany. European Societies, 19(1), 91-112. doi: 10.1080/14616696.2016.1258083.
• Luci-Greulich, A., & Thévenon, O. (2013). The impact of family policies on fertility trends in developed countries. European Journal of Population, 29(4), 387-416. doi: 10.1007/s10680-013-9295-4.
• Masselot, A. (2018). Family leave: enforcement of the protection against dismissal and unfavourable treatment. European Commission B-1049. Brussels: Publications Office of the European Union.
• Matysiak, A., Sobotka, T., & Vignoli, D. (2021). The great recession and fertility in Europe: a sub-national analysis. European Journal of Population, 37(1), 29-64. doi: 10.1007/s10680-020-09556-y.
• Matysiak, A., & Vignoli, D. (2013). Diverse effects of women's employment on fertility: insights from Italy and Poland. European Journal of Population, 29(3), 273-302. doi: 10.1007/s10680-013-9287-4.
• Moene, K., O., & Wallerstein, M. (2001). Inequality, social insurance, and redistribution. American Political Science Review, 95(4), 859-874. doi: 10.1017/S0003055400400067.
• Müller, K.-U., & Wrohlich, K. (2020). Does subsidized care for toddlers increase maternal labour supply? Evidence from a large-scale expansion of early childcare. Labour Economics, 62, 101776. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2019.101776.
• NBER (2018). US business cycle expansions and contractions. Retrieved from https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions (27.11.2021).
• Neels, K. (2010). Temporal variation in unemployment rates and their association with tempo and quantum of fertility: some evidence for Belgium, France and the Netherlands. Retrieved from https://paa2010.princeton.edu/papers/101064 (15.10.2021).
• Neyer, G., & Andersson, G. (2008). Consequences of family policies on childbearing behavior: effects or artifacts? Population and Development Review, 34(4), 699-724. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2008.00246.x.
• OECD (2022). OECD family database. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm (4.3. 2021).
• Olivetti, C., & Petrongolo, B. (2017). The economic consequences of family policies: lessons from a century of legislation in high-income countries. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(1), 205-230. doi: 10.1257/jep.31.1.205.
• Pailhé, A., & Solaz, A. (2012). The influence of employment uncertainty on childbearing in France: a tempo or quantum effect? Demographic Research, 26(1), 1-40. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2012.26.1.
• Raute, A. (2019). Can financial incentives reduce the baby gap? Evidence from a reform in maternity leave benefits. Journal of Public Economics, 169, 203-222. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.07.010.
• Rossin-Slater, M. (2017). Maternity and family leave policy. NBER Working Paper, 23069. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2903122.
• Šebo, J., Danková, D., & Králik, I. (2020). Projecting a life-cycle income - a simulation model for the Slovak pension benefit statement. Olsztyn Economic Journal, 15(4), 271-284. doi: 10.31648/oej.6380.
• Seltzer, N. (2019). Beyond the great recession: labour market polarization and ongoing fertility decline in the United States. Demography, 56(4), 1463-1493. doi: 10.1007/s13524-019-00790-6.
• Skrętowicz, B., & Wójcik, M. (2016). Unemployment in selected EU countries. Olsztyn Economic Journal, 11(3), 211-226. doi: 10.31648/oej.2926.
• Sobotka, T., Matysiak, A., & Brzozowska, Z. (2020). Policy responses to low fertility: how effective are they? UNFPA Working Paper, 1.
• Spielauer, M. (2016). Whas is dynamic social science microsimulation? Retrieved form https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/microsimulation/modgen/new/chap1-eng.pdf (27.12.2021).
• Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2011). Dimensions of family policy and female labour market participation: analyzing group-specific policy effects. Governance, 24(2), 331-357. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2011.01521.x.
• Strang, L., & Broeks, M. (2017). Maternity leave policies: trade-offs between labour market demands and health benefits for children (Research report RR-1734-EC). doi: 10.7249/RR1734.
• Wesolowski, K., & Ferrarini, T. (2018). Family policies and fertility: examining the link between family policy institutions and fertility rates in 33 countries 1995-2011. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 38(11-12), 1057-1070. doi: 10.1108/IJSSP-04-2018-0052.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.24136/eq.2022.005