Consequences of Family Policies on Childbearing Behavior: Effects or Artifacts?

Abstract

This paper argues that theoretical and methodological aspects account for the ambiguous results of investigations into the effects of family policies on fertility.Theoretically we employ approaches of comparative welfare-state research, of the sociology of "constructed categories", and of the "new institutionalism" to demonstrate that investigations into the effects of policies on fertility need to contextualize policies and reduce their complexities by focusing on "critical junctures", "space", and "usage". As regards methods we argue that the policy effects can only be assessed properly if we study the impact of policies on individual behavior, event-history models applied to individual-level data being the state-of-theart of such an approach. We present studies on the impact of family policies onSwedish childbearing behavior to demonstrate that an analytical and methodological approach as we advocate prevents us from drawing misleading conclusions about the effects of family policies on childbearing and fertility.2

Welfare state context, female labour-market attachment and childbearing in Germany and Denmark

“…The findings show that research on the role of welfare regimes and economic factors in fertility needs to pay proper attention to birth-order specific differences in behaviour (cf. Andersson 2000; Kreyenfeld and Andersson 2014;Neyer and Andersson 2008).…”

“…Proponents of comparative welfare state research have pointed out that policies in modern societies that help mothers to combine work and family life are also conducive to higher fertility (Bernhardt 1993;Esping-Andersen 1999Gauthier 2007;Matysiak and Vignoli 2013;McDonald 2000;Neyer and Andersson 2008). The male-breadwinner family model, which was dominant for several decades, has increasingly become viewed as a precarious arrangement.…”

“…From these considerations it follows that social policies and institutions that enable or hinder mothers' participation in the labour market also influence fertility behaviour (Bernhardt 1993;Castles 2003;Esping-Andersen 1999Luci and Thévenon 2011;McDonald 2000;Neyer and Andersson 2008;Rindfuss and Brewster 1996;Sørensen 1991). Furthermore, welfare-state setups, social institutions and social policies are likely to influence the correlation between women's labour-force participation and their fertility (e.g., Neyer 2013).…”

Reconciling studies of men’s gender attitudes and fertility

“…As argued by McDonald (2000), current low fertility rates in the developed world are the consequence of the low level of gender equality in family responsibilities despite high gender equality in economic provision. Thus, greater male involvement in domestic tasks and childrearing will not only increase domestic gender equality, but most probably fertility as well (see also Neyer and Andersson 2008). Similarly, Feyrer et al (2008) emphasize the importance of greater male involvement in childrearing for increasing women's willingness to have more children, as a response to women's increasing labor-market status and household bargaining power.…”

Economic Uncertainty and Fertility

“…Meanwhile, the low fertility observed in the German-speaking countries was attributed to the traditional family policies which were dominant in these countries (Caldwell and Schindlmayr 2003;EspingAndersen 1999;McDonald 2000;Neyer 2003). Micro-level studies grappled with the question of how the policy context can be integrated into fertility models in a convincing manner (Neyer and Andersson 2008). However, it became clear that the social policy context had become an essential variable which can be seen as mediating the relationship between economic and social conditions and birth behavior (Ellingsaeter and Pedersen 2015;Kreyenfeld et al 2012).…”