CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Social Policies and FamilyFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Social Investment Policies and Childbearing Across 20 Countries: Longitudinal and Micro-Level Analyses

Open access
Billingsley, Sunnee, Neyer, Gerda, Wesolowski, Katharina·2022·European Journal of Population
DOI 10.1007/s10680-022-09626-3PMC PMC9727052
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study analyses the influence of family policies on women’s first and second births in 20 countries over the period 1995 to 2007. Welfare states have shifted towards social investment policies, yet family policy–fertility research has not explicitly considered this development. We distinguish between social investment-oriented and passive support that families may receive upon the birth of a child and consider changes in policies over time. These indicators are merged with fertility histories provided by harmonized individual-level data, and we use time-conditioned, fixed effects linear probability models. We find higher social investment-oriented support to be correlated with increased first birth probabilities, in contrast to passive family support. First birth probabilities particularly declined with higher passive family support for women over age 30, which points to a potential increase in childlessness. Social investment-oriented support is positively related to first and second births particularly for lower-educated women and has no relationship to childbirth for highly educated women, countering the Matthew-effect assumptions about social investment policies. Passive support is negatively related to second births for post-secondary educated women and those who are studying. Family policies that support women’s employment and labour market attachment are positively linked to family expansion and these policies minimize educational differences in childbearing.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10680-022-09626-3

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mixed results on the effect of financial support on fertility are obtained when using broader measures of financial support.

    “Mixed results are also obtained when using broader measures of financial support (Billingsley and Ferrarini 2014; Billingsley, Neyer, and Wesolowski 2022).”

    From Family Policies in Low Fertility Countries: Evidence and Reflections (2025) · cites this paper as Billingsley, Neyer, and Wesolowski 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 68

  1. Adsera, A. (2011). Where are the babies? Labor market conditions and fertility in Europe. European Journal of Population, 27(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-010-9222-x · DOI
  2. Aisenbrey, S., Evertsson, M., & Grunow, D. (2009). Is there a career penalty for mothers’ time out? A comparison of Germany, Sweden and the United States. Social Forces, 88(2), 573–605. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0252 · DOI
  3. Amuedo-Dorantes, C., & Kimmel, J. (2005). The motherhood wage gap for women in the united states: The importance of college and fertility delay? Review of Economics of the Household, 3(1), 17–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-004-0978-9 · DOI
  4. Bäckman, O., & Ferrarini, T. (2010). Combating child poverty? A multilevel assessment of family policy institutions and child poverty in 21 old and new welfare states. Journal of Social Policy, 39(2), 275–296. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279409990456 · DOI
  5. Becker, G. S. (1981). A treatise on the family. Harvard University Press.
  6. Begall, K., & Mills, M. (2011). The impact of subjective work control, job strain and work-family conflict on fertility intentions: A European comparison. European Journal of Population, 27(4), 433–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-011-9244-z · DOI
  7. Billingsley, S. (2010). The post-communist fertility puzzle. Population Research and Policy Review, 29(2), 193–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-009-9136-7 · DOI
  8. Billingsley, S., & Duntava, A. (2017). Putting the pieces together: 40 years of fertility trends across 19 post-socialist countries. Post-Soviet Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2017.1293393 · DOI
  9. Billingsley, S., & Ferrarini, T. (2014). Family policy and fertility intentions in 21 European countries. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76(2), 428–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12097 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Bongaarts, J., & Sobotka, T. (2012). A demographic explanation for the recent rise in European fertility. Population and Development Review, 38(1), 83–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2012.00473.x · DOI · Paper page
  11. Bonoli, G. (2005). The politics of the new social policies: Providing coverage against new social risks in mature welfare states. Policy & Politics, 33(3), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1332/0305573054325765 · DOI
  12. Bonoli, G., Cantillon, B., & Lancker, W. V. (2017). Social investment and the Matthew effect. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198790488.003.0005 · DOI
  13. Brewster, K. L., & Rindfuss, R. R. (2000). Fertility and women’s employment in industrialized nations. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.271 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Budig, M. J., Misra, J., & Boeckmann, I. (2012). The motherhood penalty in cross-national perspective: The importance of work-family policies and cultural attitudes. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 19(2), 163–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxs006 · DOI
  15. Cantillon, B., & Van Lancker, W. (2013). Three shortcomings of the social investment perspective. Social Policy and Society, 12(4), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746413000080 · DOI
  16. Castles, F. G. (2003). The world turned upside down: Below replacement fertility, changing preferences and family-friendly public policy in 21 OECD countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 13(3), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287030133001 · DOI
  17. Daly, M. (2011). What adult worker model? A critical look at recent social policy reform in Europe from a gender and family perspective. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 18(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxr002 · DOI
  18. Duvander, A.-Z., Lappegård, T., & Andersson, G. (2010). Family policy and fertility: Fathers’ and mothers’ use of parental leave and continued childbearing in Norway and Sweden. Journal of European Social Policy, 20(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928709352541 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Ermisch, J. F. (2003). An economic analysis of the family. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1dr35fd · DOI
  20. Esping-Andersen, G. (Ed.). (2002). Why we need a new welfare state. Oxford University Press.
  21. Ferrarini, T. (2003). Parental leave institutions in eighteen post-war welfare states. Stockholm University.
  22. Ferrarini, T., Nelson, K., Korpi, W., & Palme, J. (2013). Social citizenship rights and social insurance replacement rate validity: Pitfalls and possibilities. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(9), 1251–1266. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2013.822907 · DOI
  23. Frejka, T. (2008). Overview chapter 5: Determinants of family formation and childbearing during the societal transition in central and eastern Europe. Demographic Research, 19, 139–170. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2008.19.7 · DOI
  24. Gauthier, A. H. (2007). The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: A review of the literature. Population Research and Policy Review, 26(3), 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-007-9033-x · DOI · Paper page
  25. Gauthier, A. H., & Hatzius, J. (1997). Family benefits and fertility: An econometric analysis. Population Studies, 51(3), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/0032472031000150066 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Giesselmann, M., & Schmidt-Catran, A. W. (2020). Interactions in fixed effects regression models. Sociological Methods & Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124120914934 · DOI
  27. Goldscheider, F., Bernhardt, E., & Lappegård, T. (2015). The gender revolution: A framework for understanding changing family and demographic behavior. Population and Development Review, 41(2), 207–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2015.00045.x · DOI · Paper page
  28. Goldstein, J. R., Sobotka, T., & Jasilioniene, A. (2009). The end of “lowest-low” fertility? Population and Development Review, 35(4), 663–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2009.00304.x · DOI · Paper page
  29. Hemerijck, A. (Ed.). (2017). The uses of social investment (First edition). Oxford University Press.
  30. Hernes, H. M. (1987). Welfare state and women’s power. Essays in state feminism. Norwegian University Press.
  31. Hoem, Jan M. (2008). Overview chapter 8: The impact of public policies on European fertility. Demographic Research, 19, 249–260. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2008.19.10 · DOI
  32. Hook, J. L. (2006). Care in context: Men’s unpaid work in 20 countries, 1965–2003. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 639–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100406 · DOI
  33. Hook, J. L. (2010). Gender inequality in the welfare state: Sex segregation in housework, 1965–2003. American Journal of Sociology, 115(5), 1480–1523. https://doi.org/10.1086/651384 · DOI
  34. Hotz, J. V., Klerman, J. A., & Willis, R. J. (1997). The economics of fertility in developed countries. In M. R. Rosenzweig & O. Stark (Eds.), Handbook of population and family economics. Elsevier.
  35. Jenson, J. (2009). Lost in translation: The social investment perspective and gender equality. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 16(4), 446–483. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxp019 · DOI
  36. Jenson, J. (2012). Redesigning citizenship regimes after neoliberalism: Moving towards social investment. In N. Morel, B. Palier, & J. Palme (Eds.), Towards a social investment welfare state? Ideas, policies and challenges (pp. 61–87). Policy Press.
  37. Kalwij, A. (2010). The impact of family policy expenditure on fertility in Western Europe. Demography, 47(2), 503–519. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.0.0104 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Korpi, W. (2000). Faces of inequality: Gender, class, and patterns of inequalities in different types of welfare states. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 7(2), 127–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/7.2.127 · DOI
  39. Korpi, W., Ferrarini, T., & Englund, S. (2013). Women’s opportunities under different family policy constellations: Gender, class, and inequality tradeoffs in Western countries re-examined. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 20(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxs028 · DOI
  40. Lohmann, H., & Zagel, H. (2016). Family policy in comparative perspective: The concepts and measurement of familization and defamilization. Journal of European Social Policy, 26(1), 48–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928715621712 · DOI
  41. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-013-9295-4 · DOI
  42. McDonald, P. (2000). Gender equity in theories of fertility transition. Population and Development Review, 26(3), 427–439. · DOI · Paper page
  43. McDonald, P. (2013). Societal foundations for explaining fertility: Gender equity. Demographic Research, 28, 981–994. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2013.28.34 · DOI
  44. Meyers, M. K., & Gornick, J. C. (2003). Public or private responsibility? Early childhood education and care, inequality, and the welfare state. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 34(3), 379–411. · DOI
  45. Miller, A. R. (2011). The effects of motherhood timing on career path. Journal of Population Economics, 24(3), 1071–1100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-009-0296-x · DOI
  46. Mood, C. (2010). Logistic regression: Why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp006 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Morel, N., Palier, B., & Palme, J. (Eds.). (2012). Towards a social investment welfare state? Ideas, policies and challenges. Policy Press.
  48. Morgan, K. J. (2012). Beyond the welfare state as we knew it? In N. Morel, B. Palier, & J. Palme (Eds.), Towards a social investment welfare state? Ideas, policies and challenges. Policy Press.
  49. Morgan, K. J., & Zippel, K. (2003). Paid to care: The origins and effects of care leave policies in western Europe. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 10(1), 49–85. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxg004 · DOI
  50. Myrskylä, M., Goldstein, J. R., & Cheng, Y. A. (2013). New cohort fertility forecasts for the developed world: Rises, falls, and reversals. Population and Development Review, 39(1), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00572.x · DOI · Paper page
  51. Neyer, G. (2003). Family policies and low fertility in western Europe. Journal of Population and Social Security (Population). Supplement to, 1, 46–93.
  52. Neyer, G. (2005). Family policies in Western Europe fertility policies at the intersection of gender, employment, and care policies. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 34(1), 91–102.
  53. Neyer, G., & Andersson, G. (2008). Consequences of family policies on childbearing behavior: Effects or artifacts? Population and Development Review, 34(4), 699–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2008.00246.x · DOI · Paper page
  54. Nieuwenhuis, R., Need, A., & der Kolk, H. V. (2017). Is there such a thing as too long childcare leave? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 37(1/2), 2–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-07-2015-0074 · DOI
  55. OECD. (2011). Doing better for families. OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd.org/social/soc/doingbetterforfamilies.htm · DOI
  56. Parolin, Z., & Van Lancker, W. (2021). What a social investment ‘litmus test’ must address: A response to Plavgo and Hemerijck. Journal of European Social Policy. https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287211012974 · DOI
  57. Perelli-Harris, B., Kreyenfeld, M., & Kubisch, K. (2011) Harmonized histories manual for the preparation of comparative fertility and union histories (MPIDR Working Paper WP-2010–011) Max-Planck Institute for Demographic Research. · DOI
  58. Pettit, B., & Hook, J. (2005). The structure of women’s employment in comparative perspective. Social Forces, 84(2), 779–801. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2006.0029 · DOI
  59. Plavgo, I., & Hemerijck, A. (2021). The social investment litmus test: Family formation, employment and poverty. Journal of European Social Policy, 31(3), 282–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928720950627 · DOI
  60. Rovny, A. E. (2011). Welfare state policy determinants of fertility level: A comparative analysis. Journal of European Social Policy, 21(4), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928711412221 · DOI
  61. Sainsbury, D. (1996). Gender equality and welfare states. Cambridge University Press. · DOI
  62. Saraceno, C. (2011). Childcare needs and childcare policies: A multidimensional issue. Current Sociology, 59(1), 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392110385971 · DOI
  63. Saraceno, C. (2015). A critical look to the social investment approach from a gender perspective. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 22(2), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxv008 · DOI
  64. Saraceno, C. (2017). Family relationships and gender equality in the social investment discourse. In A. Hemerijck (Ed.), The uses of social investment. Oxford University Press.
  65. Sleebos, J. (2003). Low fertility rates in OECD countries: Facts and policy responses (OECD Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers No. 15; OECD Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers, Vol. 15). https://doi.org/10.1787/568477207883 · DOI
  66. Szelewa, D., & Polakowski, M. P. (2008). Who cares? Changing patterns of childcare in Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 18(2), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928707087589 · DOI
  67. Wesolowski, K., Billingsley, S., & Neyer, G. (2020). Disentangling the complexity of family policies: SPIN data with an application to Lithuania and Sweden, 1995–2015. Demographic Research, 43, 1235–1262. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2020.43.42 · DOI
  68. Ziefle, A., & Gangl, M. (2014). Do women respond to changes in family policy? A quasi-experimental study of the duration of mothers’ employment interruptions in Germany. European Sociological Review, 30(5), 562–581. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcu056 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Billingsley, S., Neyer, G., & Wesolowski, K.
Affiliations
  • Södertörn University (SE)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
  • Örebro University (SE)
Corresponding author
Billingsley, Sunnee
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Population
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2022-06-30
Volume
38
Issue
5
Pages
951-974
ISSN
  • 0168-6577 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-9885
DOI
10.1007/s10680-022-09626-3
PMC
PMC9727052
OpenAlex
W4283727883
Cited by
15
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2
FWCI
3.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • European Journal of Population / Revue européenne de Démographie (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Vetenskapsrådet (349-2007-8701)
  • Stockholm University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Policies and Family
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Keywords
social investment policy, family policy, fertility, first birth, second birth, childlessness, welfare state, women's employment, labour market attachment, family expansion, Matthew effect, cross-national comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review