2013
DOI: 10.1007/s11150-013-9222-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Child-care costs and mothers’ employment rates: an empirical analysis for Austria

Abstract: Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are in line with expectations and the literature, see, for example, Blundell and Macurdy (1999), Keane and Rogerson (2012) and Mahringer and Zulehner (2013). For Belgium more specifically, Bargain and Orsini (2006) The participation elasticity with respect to childcare costs is equal to -0.034 and total hours elasticity to -0.056.…”
Section: Labor Supply Estimatessupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results are in line with expectations and the literature, see, for example, Blundell and Macurdy (1999), Keane and Rogerson (2012) and Mahringer and Zulehner (2013). For Belgium more specifically, Bargain and Orsini (2006) The participation elasticity with respect to childcare costs is equal to -0.034 and total hours elasticity to -0.056.…”
Section: Labor Supply Estimatessupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Their estimates vary across a wide range but indicate that, on average, childcare prices affect labor supply negatively. For example, Blau and Robins (1988) find for the United States an elasticity of maternal employment relative to the price of childcare of -0.34; 1 Ribar (1995) reports an elasticity of -0.09 for married women in the United States; Wrohlich (2004) finds an elasticity of -0.21 for German mothers with full-time working husbands; Mahringer and Zulehner (2013) find an elasticity of -0.13 for Austria; and Hardoy and Schone (2013) find an elasticity of -0.25 for Norway. Gong et al (2010) state that this variation partly reflects the fact that childcare and other welfare institutions vary across countries and that differences in methodology and data sources may also play an important role, making a direct comparison difficult.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further results for Europe and Australia, are more heterogeneous. Whereas the results for the Netherlands (Graafland 2000), the UK (Viitanen 2005), Austria (Mahringer and Zulehner 2015), Spain (Nollenberger and Rodríguez-Planas 2011), and Russia (Lokshin 2004) record subsidies and childcare costs as important determinants of the maternal employment rates and hours worked, the effects are much smaller or not observable for selected Nordic countries. For Sweden, Lundin, Mörk, and Öckert (2008) find that reducing the price of childcare has no effect on female labor market participation.…”
Section: Childcare Costs Subsidies and Labor Supplymentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Otherwise, identification would completely depend on the non-linear functional form of the inverse Mills ratios. Following the line of thought used by Mahringer and Zulehner (2015) to predict individual-level attrition, we use the person serial number from the household roster in the 2005 sample as an instrument of being in the sample or being tracked in the follow-up survey. Mahringer and Zulehner (2015) use whether the individual was the respondent for the familyspecific questions in the interview as the identifier.…”
Section: Heckman Sample Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following the line of thought used by Mahringer and Zulehner (2015) to predict individual-level attrition, we use the person serial number from the household roster in the 2005 sample as an instrument of being in the sample or being tracked in the follow-up survey. Mahringer and Zulehner (2015) use whether the individual was the respondent for the familyspecific questions in the interview as the identifier. Person serial numbers are numbers that are assigned to each member of the household by the surveyor, and are used as identifiers of sample attrition/retention in developing countries (Sarkar et al 2019).…”
Section: Heckman Sample Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%