Crowded‐out? Changes in informal childcare during the expansion of formal services in Germany

IF 2.6 2区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Ludovica Gambaro, Clara Schäper, C. Katharina Spiess
{"title":"Crowded‐out? Changes in informal childcare during the expansion of formal services in Germany","authors":"Ludovica Gambaro, Clara Schäper, C. Katharina Spiess","doi":"10.1111/spol.13067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Informal childcare care by grandparents, other relatives or friends is an important source of support in many Western countries, including Germany. Yet the role of this type of care is often overlooked in accounts of social policies supporting families with children, which tend to focus on formal childcare. This article examines whether the large formal childcare expansion occurring in Germany in the last two decades has been accompanied by similar or opposite trends in informal childcare usage. It argues that accounting for both formal and informal childcare can offer a more accurate assessment of defamilisation effects of family policies. Drawing on representative data from the German Socio‐Economic Panel the analysis identifies long‐run developments of childcare arrangements for children aged 1–10 between 1997 and 2020, offering for the first time a comprehensive picture of how families with children of different ages mix informal care and service provision. Results show that on average the expansion of formal childcare was not associated with an equal reduction in informal childcare, lending little support to the crowding‐out hypothesis. Further analyses distinguishing between population groups with different propensity to use formal childcare reveal, unexpectedly, remarkable similarities in the use of informal care throughout the period examined. The only exception are families with a migrant background, who tend to use informal childcare less than their counterparts. The general trend is, however, one whereby informal and formal care are increasingly combined.","PeriodicalId":47858,"journal":{"name":"Social Policy & Administration","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Policy & Administration","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.13067","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Informal childcare care by grandparents, other relatives or friends is an important source of support in many Western countries, including Germany. Yet the role of this type of care is often overlooked in accounts of social policies supporting families with children, which tend to focus on formal childcare. This article examines whether the large formal childcare expansion occurring in Germany in the last two decades has been accompanied by similar or opposite trends in informal childcare usage. It argues that accounting for both formal and informal childcare can offer a more accurate assessment of defamilisation effects of family policies. Drawing on representative data from the German Socio‐Economic Panel the analysis identifies long‐run developments of childcare arrangements for children aged 1–10 between 1997 and 2020, offering for the first time a comprehensive picture of how families with children of different ages mix informal care and service provision. Results show that on average the expansion of formal childcare was not associated with an equal reduction in informal childcare, lending little support to the crowding‐out hypothesis. Further analyses distinguishing between population groups with different propensity to use formal childcare reveal, unexpectedly, remarkable similarities in the use of informal care throughout the period examined. The only exception are families with a migrant background, who tend to use informal childcare less than their counterparts. The general trend is, however, one whereby informal and formal care are increasingly combined.
拥挤不堪?德国正规服务扩张期间非正规托儿服务的变化
在包括德国在内的许多西方国家,由祖父母、其他亲戚或朋友提供的非正规儿童保育服务是一个重要的支持来源。然而,在有关支持有子女家庭的社会政策的论述中,这类照顾的作用往往被忽视,因为这些政策往往侧重于正规托儿服务。本文研究了德国在过去二十年中正规托儿服务的大规模扩张是否伴随着非正规托儿服务使用的类似或相反趋势。文章认为,同时考虑正规和非正规儿童保育可以更准确地评估家庭政策的诽谤效应。该分析利用德国社会经济小组的代表性数据,确定了 1997 年至 2020 年间 1-10 岁儿童保育安排的长期发展情况,首次全面描绘了有不同年龄儿童的家庭如何将非正式保育与服务提供相结合。研究结果表明,平均而言,正规托儿服务的扩大与非正规托儿服务的减少并没有同等的联系,这对 "挤出假说 "几乎没有任何支持。对使用正规托儿服务倾向不同的人口群体进行进一步分析,结果出人意料地发现,在整个研究期间,使用非正规托儿服务的情况非常相似。唯一的例外是有移民背景的家庭,他们往往比同类家庭更少使用非正规托儿服务。不过,总的趋势是非正规保育和正规保育越来越多地结合在一起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Social Policy & Administration is the longest established journal in its field. Whilst remaining faithful to its tradition in academic excellence, the journal also seeks to engender debate about topical and controversial issues. Typical numbers contain papers clustered around a theme. The journal is international in scope. Quality contributions are received from scholars world-wide and cover social policy issues not only in Europe but in the USA, Canada, Australia and Asia Pacific.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信