[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwvjh/79-3-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wirkungen eines Betreuungsgeldes bei bedarfsgerechtem Ausbau frühkindlicher Kindertagesbetreuung: eine Mikrosimulationsstudie

Author

Listed:
  • Denis Beninger
  • Holger Bonin
  • Julia Horstschräer
  • Grit Mühler
Abstract
Our paper analyzes the impact of the introduction of a home care allowance for children between 13 and 36 months of age and explicitly takes the expansion of publicly funded day care into account. We use the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) to estimate a structural model in which parents decide simultaneously about labor supply, usage of external day care and their time spent for child care within the family. The model also allows for possible rationing of the parents with respect to day care places. Simulations using the estimated model parameters show that a home care allowance reduces labor supply and the usage of external day care. Solely increasing supply of publicly funded day care in contrast yields opposite results. When we consider the introduction of a home care allowance and the expansion of publicly funded day care combined, we observe in total a reduction in labor supply and day care usage. A home care allowance in fact increases the household income especially for poorly educated families, but at the same time discourages these parents to use external day care which can be important for early education. Der Beitrag evaluiert die Wirkungen eines Betreuungsgeldes bei gleichzeitigem Ausbau der öffentlich geförderten Tagesbetreuung für Kinder im Alter von 13 bis 36 Monaten. Wir schatzen mit SOEP-Daten und unter Berücksichtigung partiell beobachtbarer Rationierungen im Betreuungsbereich ein strukturelles Modell, in dem Eltern simultan über den Umfang des Arbeitsangebots, den Umfang externer Betreuung und die Intensität der Kinderbetreuung in der Familie entscheiden. Simulationen auf Grundlage der geschätzten Modellparameter ergeben, dass ein Betreuungsgeld das Arbeitsangebot und die Nachfrage nach externen Betreuungsangeboten spürbar verringert. Für sich betrachtet wirkt der Ausbau der Kindertagesbetreuung bei beiden Zielgrößen in die umgekehrte Richtung. Im Gesamteffekt beider Maßnahmen fallen sowohl das Arbeitsangebot als auch die Inanspruchnahme von Betreuung außerhalb der Familie. Zwar verbessert sich die Einkommensposition bildungsferner Familien, ein Betreuungsgeld behindert bei dieser Gruppe aber die Nutzung externer frühkindlicher Bildungsangebote.

Suggested Citation

  • Denis Beninger & Holger Bonin & Julia Horstschräer & Grit Mühler, 2010. "Wirkungen eines Betreuungsgeldes bei bedarfsgerechtem Ausbau frühkindlicher Kindertagesbetreuung: eine Mikrosimulationsstudie," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 79(3), pages 147-168.
    • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:79-3-10
    DOI: 10.3790/vjh.79.3.147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3790/vjh.79.3.147
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3790/vjh.79.3.147?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miriam Beblo & Charlotte Lauer & Katharina Wrohlich, 2005. "Ganztagsschulen und Erwerbsbeteiligung von Müttern: eine Mikrosimulationsstudie für Deutschland," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 543, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Spiess, C.Katharina & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2008. "The Parental Leave Benefit Reform in Germany: Costs and Labour Market Outcomes of Moving towards the Nordic Model," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27, pages 575-591.
    3. Helene Dearing & Helmut Hofer & Christine Lietz & Rudolf Winter-Ebmer & Katharina Wrohlich, 2007. "Why Are Mothers Working Longer Hours in Austria than in Germany? A Comparative Microsimulation Analysis," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 28(4), pages 463-495, December.
    4. Viktor Steiner & Katharina Wrohlich, 2008. "Introducing Family Tax Splitting in Germany: How Would It Affect the Income Distribution, Work Incentives, and Household Welfare?," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 64(1), pages 115-142, March.
    5. Viktor Steiner & Katharina Wrohlich, 2004. "Household Taxation, Income Splitting and Labor Supply Incentives – A Microsimulation Study for Germany," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 50(3), pages 541-568.
    6. Viitanen, Tarja K & Arnaud Chevalier, 2003. "The Supply of Childcare in Britain: Do Mothers Queue for Childcare?," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2003 211, Royal Economic Society.
    7. John Creedy & Guyonne Kalb & Hsein Kew, 2007. "Confidence Intervals For Policy Reforms In Behavioural Tax Microsimulation Modelling," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 37-65, January.
    8. Laisney, François & Beninger, Denis & Beblo, Miriam, 2003. "Family Tax Splitting: A Microsimulation of its Potential Labour Supply and Intra-household Welfare Effects in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-32, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Richard Blundell & Mike Brewer & Peter Haan & Andrew Shephard, 2009. "Optimal Income Taxation of Lone Mothers: An Empirical Comparison of the UK and Germany," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(535), pages 101-121, February.
    10. Steiner, Viktor & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2006. "Introducing Family Tax Splitting in Germany: How Would It Affect the Income Distribution and Work Incentives?," IZA Discussion Papers 2245, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Spieß, C. Katharina & Büchel, Felix & Wagner, Gert G., 2003. "Children's School Placement in Germany: Does Kindergarten Attendance Matter?," IZA Discussion Papers 722, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. John M. Abowd & Henry S. Farber, 1982. "Job Queues and the Union Status of Workers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 35(3), pages 354-367, April.
    13. Pfeiffer, Friedhelm & Reuß, Karsten, 2008. "Ungleichheit und die differentiellen Erträge frühkindlicher Bildungsinvestitionen im Lebenszyklus," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-001, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Bonin, Holger & Kempe, Wolfram & Schneider, Hilmar, 2002. "Household Labor Supply Effects of Low-Wage Subsidies in Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 637, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Ghazala Naz, 2004. "The impact of cash-benefit reform on parents’ labour force participation," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 17(2), pages 369-383, June.
    16. Ziefle, Andrea, 2004. "Die individuellen Kosten des Erziehungsurlaubs: Eine empirische Analyse der kurz- und längerfristigen Folgen für den Karriereverlauf von Frauen," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Labor Market Policy and Employment SP I 2004-102, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Maiterth Ralf, 2004. "Verteilungswirkungen alternativer Konzepte zur Familienförderung / Distributional Effects of Alternative Concepts of Family Support: Eine empirische Analyse auf Grundlage der Einkommensteuerstatistik ," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 224(6), pages 696-730, December.
    18. Pål Schøne, 2004. "Labour supply effects of a cash-for-care subsidy," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 17(4), pages 703-727, December.
    19. Arthur van Soest, 1995. "Structural Models of Family Labor Supply: A Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(1), pages 63-88.
    20. Poirier, Dale J., 1980. "Partial observability in bivariate probit models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 209-217, February.
    21. Bergs, Christian & Fuest, Clemens & Peichl, Andreas & Schaefer, Thilo, 2006. "Das Familienrealsplitting als Reformoption der Familienbesteuerung," Wirtschaftsdienst – Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik (1949 - 2007), ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 86(10), pages 639-644.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kai-Uwe Müller & Katharina Wrohlich, 2016. "Two Steps Forward—One Step Back? Evaluating Contradicting Child Care Policies in Germany," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 62(4), pages 672-698.
    2. Bechara, Peggy & Beimann, Boris & Kambeck, Rainer & Schaffner, Sandra & von den Driesch, Ellen, 2013. "Gutachten zur Reform des Ehegattensplittings," RWI Projektberichte, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, number 111424.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Beninger, Denis & Bonin, Holger & Clauss, Markus & Horstschräer, Julia & Mühler, Grit, 2009. "Fiskalische Auswirkungen sowie arbeitsmarkt- und verteilungspolitische Effekte einer Einführung eines Betreuungsgeldes für Kinder unter 3 Jahren: Studie im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen.," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 110517.
    2. Anna Kurowska & Michal Myck & Katharina Wrohlich, 2012. "Family and Labor Market Choices: Requirements to Guide Effective Evidence-Based Policy," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1234, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Wrohlich, Katharina, 2006. "Labor Supply and Child Care Choices in a Rationed Child Care Market," IZA Discussion Papers 2053, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Viktor Steiner & Katharina Wrohlich, 2008. "Introducing Family Tax Splitting in Germany: How Would It Affect the Income Distribution, Work Incentives, and Household Welfare?," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 64(1), pages 115-142, March.
    5. Kai-Uwe Müller & Katharina Wrohlich, 2016. "Two Steps Forward—One Step Back? Evaluating Contradicting Child Care Policies in Germany," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 62(4), pages 672-698.
    6. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2014. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the United States: New Results," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(3), pages 723-838.
    7. Bergs Christian & Fuest Clemens & Peichl Andreas & Schaefer Thilo, 2007. "Reformoptionen der Familienbesteuerung: Aufkommens-, Verteilungs- und Arbeitsangebotseffekte," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 58(1), pages 1-27, April.
    8. Hans Fehr & Manuel Kallweit & Fabian Kindermann, 2013. "Reforming Family Taxation in Germany - Labor Supply vs. Insurance Effects," CESifo Working Paper Series 4386, CESifo.
    9. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2012. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US: New Results," Working Papers halshs-00805736, HAL.
    10. Peter Haan & Katharina Wrohlich, 2010. "Optimal Taxation: The Design of Child‐Related Cash and In‐Kind Benefits," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 11(3), pages 278-301, August.
    11. Peter Haan, "undated". "Conditional logit versus random coefficient models: An analysis using GLLAMM," German Stata Users' Group Meetings 2004 7, Stata Users Group.
    12. Peter Haan, 2004. "Discrete Choice Labor Supply: Conditional Logit vs. Random Coefficient Models," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 394, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    13. Wrohlich, Katharina & Müller, Kai-Uwe, 2014. "Two steps forward - one step back? Evaluating recent child care policies in Germany," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100438, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. repec:bla:germec:v:11:y:2010:i::p:278-301 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Geyer, Johannes & Haan, Peter & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2015. "The effects of family policy on maternal labor supply: Combining evidence from a structural model and a quasi-experimental approach," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 84-98.
    16. C. Spiess & Katharina Wrohlich, 2008. "The Parental Leave Benefit Reform in Germany: Costs and Labour Market Outcomes of Moving towards the Nordic Model," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 27(5), pages 575-591, October.
    17. Bargain, Olivier B. & Orsini, Kristian & Peichl, Andreas, 2011. "Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US," IZA Discussion Papers 5820, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Olivier Bargain & Mathias Dolls & Dirk Neumann & Andreas Peichl & Sebastian Siegloch, 2011. "Tax-Benefit Systems in Europe and the US: Between Equity and Efficiency," CESifo Working Paper Series 3534, CESifo.
    19. Kai-Uwe Müller & Michael Neumann & Katharina Wrohlich, 2018. "Labor Supply under Participation and Hours Constraints," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1758, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    20. Olivier Bargain & Andreas Peichl, 2013. "Steady-State Labor Supply Elasticities: An International Comparison," AMSE Working Papers 1322, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    21. Löffler, Max & Peichl, Andreas & Pestel, Nico & Siegloch, Sebastian & Sommer, Eric, 2014. "Documentation IZA?MOD v3.0: The IZA Policy Simulation Model," IZA Discussion Papers 8553, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Behavioral microsimulation; day care; family policy; Germany;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:79-3-10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.