When Rationing Plays a Role: Selection Criteria in the Italian Early Childcare System*

Abstract

Our study explores the impact of selection criteria on the costs and benefits of early childcare for mothers' employment, child development, and municipalities' revenues by exploiting the selection criteria of different Italian municipalities in assigning childcare slots. In Italy, only around 13% of the demand for public childcare coverage is met, and the number of applications exceeds the number of places in childcare services in all regions. In conditions of excess demand, municipalities introduce selection criteria to give priority to families for whom access to public childcare appears to be more valuable. We analyse through simulations the consequences of introducing different selection criteria, using a representative Italian sample of households with children under 3 years of age (European Survey on Living and Income Conditions), and the selection criteria employed by six representative Italian municipalities. Our results have interesting policy implications. The benefits for child outcomes and mothers' employment are stronger in municipalities where the selection criteria give priority to more disadvantaged households. However, in these contexts, selected households are less able to contribute to the financial sustainability of the service.

Class politics in the sandbox? An analysis of the socio‐economic determinants of preferences towards public spending and parental fees for childcare

“…In the case of low availability, governments can target spending towards socially disadvantaged individuals and introduce admission criteria to allocate childcare slots. While these criteria can in principle be designed to prioritise access to low‐income parents, in practice, higher‐income parents are likely to be in an advantaged position because employment criteria may outweigh social desirability criteria when rationing access (Del Boca et al, 2016), or because those parents' higher social capital makes it easier for them to navigate through the sometimes vague and complex admission procedures (Hogrebe, 2016). 6 Thus, lower availability of childcare provision is likely to be associated with higher social inequality in access to care (Van Lancker, 2013, 2018).…”

“…Finally, in the country cluster characterised by low availability (the medium‐inequality country cluster of Germany, France, Italy and Spain), there tends to be a chronic excess demand for childcare places. Where and when governments apply social selection criteria to distribute scarce childcare slots, they may, not necessarily though, reduce social stratification in access to public service provision by prioritising access for socially disadvantaged groups (Del Boca et al, 2016). In such a situation, rich individuals could support the establishment of private alternatives to public provision, even if these go along with higher fees (Da Roit & Sabatinelli, 2013; Del Boca et al, 2004; Naldini & Jurado, 2013).…”

“…Yet, if childcare is hardly available, this will be of little help for parents who cannot enroll their child because of the shortage of supply. With low availability of childcare, again higher‐income parents are likely to be better positioned to enroll their children compared to lower‐income parents because they are better equipped to enroll at alternative providers or because more subtle, socially adverse selection criteria may exist that benefit the better off (Del Boca, Pronzato, & Sorrenti, 2016; Hogrebe, 2016).…”

Discrimination in Universal Social Programs? A Nationwide Field Experiment on Access to Child Care

“…Eurydice (2019);b2 Felfe and Lalive (2018); b6 OECD (2020); c6Malik et al (2018); d1 Expat (2022); c3 DelBoca et al (2016); d4 Harvey (2022); d5 Renfrewshire Council (2023); d6 NYC Department ofEducation (2023). Table shows means and standard deviations of variables by treatment group.…”