Fertility, female labour force participation and reconciliation

policies in Spain
A look at the ‘turning point’ hypothesis

Marta Ibanez
mibanez@uniovi.es
University of Oviedo (Spain)

RECWOWE Workshop
Warsaw 14-16 May 2010
Outline:

1. Fertility and labour market: selected theories

2. The Spanish institutional context
3. Decision to have children. Micro-analytical model
4. Some conclusions

R ECW WE
R ECON CI LI N G WOR K AND WELFAR E I N EU RO PE
1
 Fertility Rate and percentage of newborns of foreign mother

% of newborns of foreign mother

3 25
TFR

% of newborns o f foreig n mother

2,5
20
Total Fertility Rates

2
15

1,5

10
1

5
0,5

0 0

76 978 980 982 984 986 988 990 992 994 996 998 000 002 004 006 008
19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2

Source: Vital Statistics, INE (www.ine.es)

• Sharp drop since 1976

• Very low rates in the 90’s
• Slight increase in the 21st century (mass immigration)
2
 Live births per 1000 women at age
specified
200

150

100

50

0
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Spain - 1971 Spain - 1990 Spain - 2009

3
Fertility and labour market theories
• At the macro level point of view
Second demographic transition thesis

• At the institutional level

Sexual division of work models
Welfare State typologies

• At the micro level

Gary Becker and the micro-economic theory of the family
Richard Easterlin
Rational choice theory
4
 Modernization process
• Second modernity, risk society (Beck), reflexive
modernity (Giddens), liquid society (Bauman)
– Individualization, Rationalization, Pure Relationship

• Second demographic transition (Van de Kaa)

– Post-position of marriage and the 1st. child
– Decrease in fertility
– Increased cohabitation, divorce and "stepfamilies“

• Child responsibility increases (consumption standards

and expectations)

• Maternity / paternity as rewarding situation

5
 At the institutional level:
the care arrangements and the turning point hypothesis
• Ideal-type and “empirical” models - (Pfau-Effinger)
– The family economy model
– The housewife model of the male breadwinner family
– The male breadwinner / female part-time carer model
– The dual breadwinner / dual carer model

• Misalignments of the institutions involved (abrupt change): women's

double burden
– Young women with higher education levels to their male peers
– Internalisation of the equalitarian partner model (ideal)
– Need two incomes in the household
– Poor adaptation of companies to the settlement needs
– Low public support
– Little presence of the male caregiver
– “Ambivalent familism”
6
 At the micro level:
decision to have children
• Having the first child depends on the difficulty of
emancipation and forming a couple:

– House prices
– Unemployment, underemployment and / or job
insecurity

7
 • Having the second or following
child depends on:
• Benefits: instrumental and expressive.
Depend on:
– Order No. Child
– Family type (Hakim preferences Ta. )
• Direct costs
• Opportunity costs: lost revenue, loss of employment
opportunities, reduced availability of time ...
• Uncertainty: with uncertain job prospects long-term
commitments are reduced, such as getting married and
having a baby
• Gender equality: equal sharing of child care
8
 Spanish institutional context
• Reconciliation Policies
Political dimension

• Labour market, working hour organization and

wage gap
Economical dimension

• Daily living and gender roles

Cultural dimension
9
Reconciliation Policies: expenditures
Public spending on family and children aid programs
% of costs in social benefits % GDP
2000 2007 2000 2007
European Union (25) 8,3 7,9 (p) 2,1 2,0 (p)
Euro area (13) 8,4 8,1 (p) 2,2 2,1 (p)
Germany 11,2 10,6 (p) 3,2 2,8 (p)
Spain 4,9 6,0 (p) 1,0 1,2 (p)
France 9,1 8,5 (p) 2,5 2,5 (p)
Italy 3,8 4,7 (p) 0,9 1,2 (p)
Poland 5,0 4,5 1,0 0,8
Sweden 6,9 6,0 (p) 1,8 1,5 (p)
United Kingdom 9,0 10,2 (p) 2,7 3,0 (p)
Source: Eurostat. (p) provisional value.

• Weak tradition on family aid programs

• Increased expenditure in the period 2000 – 2007
• Still below the European average
10
 Reconciliation Policies: main
characteristics
• Universal public care from 3 to 6 years
• Formal care from 0 to 3 years scarce and
relatively expensive
• Parental leave taken mainly by mothers
• Lack of agreement on policies that should be
supported (formal care vs. increased pay
leave)

11
 Parental leaves
Percentage of men enjoying maternity/paternity leave

14,0
12,0
10,0
8,0
6,0
4,0
2,0
0,0
19 92T I
19 93T I
19 94T I
19 95T I
19 96T I

19 99T I
20 00T I
20 01T I

20 03T I
20 04T I

20 07T I
20 08T I
19 97T I
19 98T I

20 02T I

20 05T I
20 06T I

20 09T I
Source: Labour Force Survey (EPA) - INE

2007: Gender Equality Act. Two weeks of paid leave for men
Job characteristics of men who take leave for the birth of their children:
• Over-representation of employees in the public sector
• Under-representation in the construction and other masculinized sectors

The need for further testing (now possible thanks to the larger size of samples)
12
 Labour market, working hour
organization and wage gap
• Family patterns of division of labour (as the
number of children in the household)
• The women's double biography
• Working times: flexibility and part-time work
• Temporary recruitment
• Wage differences between men and women
(within the pair)

13
 Gender gap for aged 25-49
[percentage points in favour of men]
12 11,3
Unemployment gap
10 (Female - Male)
8,2 8
7,6 7,2
8
5,1
6 5,1
4,7 4,2
4,1
4 3,6
2,8
2,9 2,6 2,6
2,3 1,9 2,2
2 1,8 1,9 1,8 1,6 1,4
2 1,5 1,5
1,2
0,3
0 0,4
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Poland Spain EU27

14
 Gender gap for aged 25-49
[percentage points in favour of men]
35 32,9 31,5 Employment gap
29,4 (Male - Female)
30 27,6
25,8
23,7
25 22,3
20,5
20 18,8 18,1 17,3 16,8
16,1 15,8 15,5 15,2
15 13,8 14,5 12,7
12,6 12,6 12,6 13
11,2 11 11,9 12,5
10,1
11,8
10
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Poland Spain EU27

15
 Employment rates and gender gap for aged 25-
49, according to the number of children
2009 88,4 91,4 88,7
90 84,8
78,979,0 80,2
72,273,2 75,1 75,4
71,1
70 64,2 62,8
60,2
48,9
Employment rate (percentage points)

50
24,6 26,5 25,9
30 20,3
16,0 13,3
10 -1,0 -0,1

-10
Spain Poland Spain Poland Spain Poland Spain Poland

No children 1 child 2 children 3 children or more

Males Females Males - Females Country, number of children

16
Employment rates and gender gap for aged 25-
49, according to the number of children
2005 89,6 92,6 90,1
90 83,0 82,0 84,6 80,5
72,9 69,971,2 67,9 64,9
70 61,9
55,8 55,8
49,5
Employment rate (percentage points)

50 40,6
36,8
27,7 24,7
30 19,7
10,1 14,1
10 -1,3

-10
Spain Poland Spain Poland Spain Poland Spain Poland

No children 1 child 2 children 3 children or more

Males Females Males - Females Country, number of children

17
Family Models of Gender Labour Division according to the number of
Family Models of
children at home by countries.
Sample: couples where any of its members are working.
Gender Division of
Three or more
Tw o children 43
50
17
17
40
33
Labour
ES

One child 40 17 43
No dependents 38 11 51 ES: Without minors,
majority of FT+FT. With
Three or more 40 32 29
Tw o children 24 33 43
FR

minors, the adjustment is

One child 25 21 54
No dependents 39 16 46

made by leaving paid work

Three or more 46 37 16
Tw o children 27 46 27
UK

One child 25 37 38
30 22 48
No dependents
Three or more 45 45 10 DE, UK (FR): FT+PT,
30 55 15
Tw o children
organization very sensitive to
DE

One child 26 46 28
35 25 40
No dependents
Three or more 40 8 52 changes in the number or
Tw o children 34 7 58
minors
PL

One child 34 7 59
No dependents 48 8 44
Three or more
Tw o children 31
47
7
7
62
47
CZ & PL: FT+FT, children
CZ

One child
No dependents 36
40
5
6
59
54
don’t change labour division
Three or more
Tw o children 32
44
30
29
38
27
significantly
EU

One child 31 24 45
No dependents 37 18 45

Only one earner One full time, one part time Both full time

Source: Eurostat (web: “Number of private households by number of children and

household composition” 2008). Own computations.

18
 Spanish women double biography
Female Labour Force Participation Rate by cohorts (fictitious)

80

70

60

50

40

30

20
16-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59
years old

46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 71-75 76-80 81- 85

Source: EPA. 1976TIII, 1980TIV, 1985TIV, 1990TIV, 1995TIV, 2000TIV, 2005 annual average.

• Cohort of women born in 1955-60: return to work after

having children
• Women born after 1961 don’t leave the pay work
19
 Temporary work rate by ages
according to occupational categories
Females

100,0

80,0

60,0

40,0

20,0

0,0
16-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60+

Management & Prof. Support Technicians Clerks

Service Workers Workers Skilled Installation & machinery op
Unskilled w orkers

20
 Temporary work rate by ages
according to occupational categories
100,0
90,0 Males
80,0
70,0
60,0
50,0
40,0
30,0
20,0
10,0
0,0
16-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60y+
Management & professionals Support technicians
Clerks Service workers
Workers skilled Installations & machinery operators
Unskilled workers

21
 Wage gap
• In 2006 the average Distribution of the difference of income
annual wage for female within the couple
Normal

workers was 73.7% of

Media =7.410,8808

that of their male

600 Desviación típica =14.206,27693
N =2.447

counterparts

Frecuencia
400

• Mostly explained by:

– the number of working 200

hours
– the labour market 0
-100.000 -50.000 0 50.000 100.000 150.000
segregation Diferencia de Ingresos varón - mujer

Source: Micro data EU-SILC 2007. (*) Only dual income couples
according to the collection of gross income per year in euros
(employees and self-employed).

22
Daily living and gender roles

23
 Could vary start/end of working day for family
reasons
T
O TOTot a l
1
00
FTFull- ti
m e
07
8 9
E
D 73 F
T
7
8 6
0
64 7
9 PTPar t-tim e
70 7
2
584
0
6
3 AGAgr ic ulture;fis
h in
g
2
0 INIn
d u stry
P
H807
456 0 7
782 P
T
SESe
r v ices(e xceptp ublicad minis t
rati
onand c
om munit
yserv
ice
s;a
cti
v
iti
e
sof
hou s eholdsa n
d e
xtr
a -t
errit
oria lorg
aniz
ati
ons)
6
3
7
4
8
1 5
8
8
0
85 P
H Pub lica dm inis
trati
on and defen c
e;compuls
oryso
cia
lsecur
it
y
7
0 93 P
ola
nd
S
E 7
8 A
G E
D Edu c ati
on ;h ealth;ot herserv icea c
ti
viti
es
;acti
v
iti
eso fhous
eho
ld
s;ex
tra
-
S
pain
E
U27 te
r rit orialo r
g a
n iz
ati
on s
IN

Percentage of employed persons between 15 and 64 years old who could

vary start/end of working day for family reasons in 2005

24
 La decisión de tener hijos
• CONFLICTO MATERNIDAD-OCUPACIÓN:
– H2 Distintas preferencias: Mayor riesgo de las amas de casa y las
que trabajan a tiempo parcial (están en dichas situaciones de
actividad porque desean tener hijos)
• CONCILIACIÓN:
– H1 Cambio de tendencia: Las mujeres trabajando a tiempo
completo tienen más probabilidades de tener hijos pues su actividad
aumenta la seguridad económica del hogar
– H3 Estabilidad: Vínculo matrimonial (frente a convivencia) y contrato
indefinido.
En ocupadas, influencia de las condiciones de empleo (proxis: nivel de
estudios y categoría ocupacional):
– Las empleos con peores condiciones laborales dificultan la
conciliación
– Los puestos ejecutivos exigen la elección entre carrera laboral y
maternidad
25
 Decision to have children
OCCUPATION-MATERNITY CONFLICT:
• Different preferences (Hakim): Increased fertility risk of
housewives and women working part-time (they are in such
situations because they want to have children)

CONCILIATION:
• The positive turn: Women working full time are more likely to
have children as their activity increases household economic
security
In working women:
– Permanent contracts
– The influence of employment conditions (proxies: level of education,
and occupational category):
• The jobs with worse working conditions are more difficult to reconcile
• Executive positions require a choice between career and motherhood

26
 Methodological approach (1/2)
• DATA: long EU-SILC 2004-07
• Multivariate technique: Cox Regression (or
Proportional-Hazards Analysis or Relative-Hazards
Analysis). Using SPSSWin
• Dependent variable: to have a child (1) or not (0) in the
four years sample
• Temporary dependent variable: mother’s age
• Two kind of samples (four samples in total):
– Regard the number of children: Women never mothers and
mothers
– Regard their activity status: All the women and exclusively
working ones
27
 Methodological approach (2/2)
• Independent variables:
– Economic activity in January year before survey
(Inactive, unemployed, working full-time and
working part-time
– Type of labour contract (employees with temporary
contract, with permanent ones and self employed)
– Working weeks hours
– Occupational category
• Control variables:
– Type of bond (married-cohabitation); number of
children and ages of them; educational level;
partner variables
28
 Descriptive result. ALL WOMEN 19-45 living in partnership
Independent variables, according to dependent variable
1st. child 2nd. child and/or next
No Yes No Yes
N= (809) (249) (2652) (304)
N weighted* (4.015.842) (1.208.888) (9.909.655) (1.295.140)
- Married 71,9 86,5 92,3 93,6
- De facto partner 28,1 13,5 7,7 6,4
Number of children
- One 42,1 82,0
- Two 49,4 10,7
- Three or more 8,5 7,2
Child(ren) under three years old 10,6 12,1
Age groups WOMAN
- Under 25 years old 9,7 7,7 1,6 2,8
- From 25 to 30 years old 36,3 45,4 9,0 22,4
- From 31 to 35 years old 29,1 40,4 21,3 45,2
- 36 years old or more 24,9 6,5 68,1 29,6
Economic activity in January
- Working full time 68,7 69,6 43,4 44,3
- Working part time 9,5 7,3 15,6 12,8
- Unemployed 11,1 10,3 13,1 14,6
- No active 10,7 12,7 27,8 28,4
Level of studies
- Primary 8,2 5,8 15,9 8,4
- Lower Secondary 18,4 18,4 29,5 27,0
- Upper Secondary 25,9 26,4 25,7 22,3
- Tertiary 47,6 49,3 28,9 42,4
Economic activity changes last year
- It doesn’t change 85,5 68,5 85,1 80,1
- From working to no working 7,8 24,0 7,4 11,9
- From no working to working 6,8 4,2 6,7 6,2
- From no working to no working 3,3 ,8 1,8
Source: Longitudinal EU-SILC (microdata). Spain 2004-2007.
29
 Descriptive result. ALL WOMEN 19-45 living in partnership
Independent variables, according to dependent variable
1st. child 2nd. child and/or next
No Yes No Yes
N= (809) (249) (2652) (304)
N weighted* (4.015.842) (1.208.888) (9.909.655) (1.295.140)
Age groups MAN
- Under 25 years old 3,7 4,0 ,6 ,5
- From 25 to 30 years old 29,6 32,9 5,3 15,4
- From 31 to 35 years old 34,0 44,2 15,2 34,5
- 36 years old or more 32,6 19,0 78,9 49,6
Economic activity in January
- Working full time 91,7 93,9 90,7 92,3
- Working part time 3,2 2,5 2,5 1,6
- Unemployed 2,1 3,6 4,0 4,4
- No active 3,0 2,8 1,6
Level of studies
- Primary 9,9 14,7 20,1 10,6
- Lower Secondary 24,6 22,9 28,7 22,1
- Upper Secondary 28,8 27,5 24,7 26,5
- Tertiary 36,7 34,9 26,4 40,8
Economic activity changes last year
- It doesn’t change 90,0 91,0 91,6 92,4
- From working to no working 4,5 3,8 3,2 2,5
- From no working to working 5,2 5,2 5,1 5,1
- From no working to no working ,3 ,1
Source: Longitudinal EU-SILC (microdata). Spain 2004-2007.

30
 Descriptive result. EXCLUSIVELY WORKING WOMEN 19-45 living in
partnership
Independent variables, according to dependent variable
1st. child 2nd. child and/or next
WOMEN No Yes No Yes
N= (549) (123) (1.470) (150)
Labour relationship
- Self-employed 8,2 5,7 15,5 14,7
- Employee- permanent contract 69,6 84,6 70,4 72,0
- Employee- temporary contract 22,2 9,8 14,1 13,3
Working weeks hours
- Less than 30 hours a week 10,0 10,5 25,3 21,3
- More than 31 hours a week 90,0 89,5 74,7 78,7
Occupational category
- Managers 2,0 5,3 3,3
- Professionals 20,8 24,2 17,2 22,7
- Technicians & Clerks 39,1 44,4 32,6 39,3
- Skilled workers - Services 9,1 4,8 12,2 8,7
- Shop & market sales 10,8 15,3 8,5 12,0
- Skilled workers - Non Services 6,8 3,2 7,1 4,7
- Elementary occupations- Services 9,5 6,5 15,0 5,3
- Elementary occupations-Non services 2,0 1,6 2,1 4,0
Source: Longitudinal EU-SILC (microdata). Spain 2004-2007.

31
 Descriptive result. ONLY WORKING WOMEN 19-45 living in partnership
Independen variables, according to dependent variable

1st. child 2nd. child and/or next

MAN
N= (477) (104) (1.172) (108)
N ponderado (2.463.410) (525.300) (4.454.112) (489.401)
Labour relationship
- Self-employed 11,8 11,4 20,5 19,6
- Employee- permanent contract 72,8 80,7 68,9 66,0
- Employee- temporary contract 15,4 7,9 10,7 14,4
Working weeks hours
- Less than 35 hours a week 2,2 5,7 4,0 ,6
- From 35 to 40 hours a week 57,6 68,6 56,4 59,0
- More than 40 hours a week 40,2 25,7 39,6 40,4
Occupational category
- Managers 4,3 3,0 9,2 8,0
- Professionals 11,5 18,2 11,9 20,7
- Technicians & Clerks 25,9 29,8 20,0 33,0
- Skilled workers - Services 6,5 4,5 7,9 4,3
- Shop & market sales 1,9 5,7 3,8 3,8
- Skilled workers - Non Services 37,5 30,4 36,2 21,9
- Elementary occupations- Services 5,3 3,3 5,2 3,6
- Elementary occupations-Non services 7,3 5,1 5,8 4,6
Source: Longitudinal EU-SILC (microdata). Spain 2004-2007.

32
 Results: regression models
ALL WOMEN WITHOUT CHILDREN
• Married couples
(Husband working situation doesn’t fit the model)

ALL WOMEN WITH ONE CHILD. Female characteristics:

• To have only one child
• To be a housewife
• To have university studies (see the table)
• Male characteristics reduce the coefficient significances
slightly : “homogamy” between the couple

See survival plots

33
 Results: regression models
EMPLOYED WOMEN WITHOUT CHILDREN:
• Married couples
• University studies

EMPLOYED WOMEN WITH ONE CHILD:

• To have only one child
• University studies /Upper secondary studies
Male characteristics
• Temporary contract/ Permanent contract
• Elementary occupations- Shop & market sales

– Working more than 40 hours a week

– Managers & Professionals

See survival plots 34

 Conclusions
OCCUPATION-MATERNITY CONFLICT:
• After having the first child 24% of the sample changed their
economic situation from working to not working
• In the mother’s sample the risk of being pregnant is higher in
inactive women
¿Different preferences hypothesis (Hakim)
or Self-fulfilling prophecy?
CONCILIATION:
• In working women, having a child is related with a university degree
(good employment conditions correlates with it)
“The positive turn hypothesis” in Spain depends of own market
resources (human capital)

TWO SCENARIOS in higher risk to have children:

• Inactive women (housewife) related with low educational level
• Working women with university degree
35
 Economic activity by level of education
(Women with one child)
Working Working part Un- No
full time time employed active TOTAL
Primary 25,5 13,9 17,0 43,6 100,0
(N=459)
Lower 31,1 14,9 16,6 37,4 100,0
Secondary (N=878)
Upper 42,5 17,6 12,1 27,8 100,0
Secondary (N=738)
Tertiary 62,9 14,3 7,8 15,0 100,0
(N=841)
Source: Longitudinal EU-SILC (microdata). Spain 2004-2007.

Back to presentation

36
Back to present
ation 37
Back topresent
Back to
ation
presentation 38