Search

Various pro-cycling policies emerged around the world with the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. France experimented with a €50 bike repair subsidy. Our questionnaire survey (n = 7343) focuses on beneficiaries' sociological profiles. Despite its success in quantitative terms, the repair subsidy benefited more regular cyclists—who cycle daily—and people who are confident cycling in urban areas. Women were more likely to benefit than men, and people in low-income households more than those in high-income households. Because these populations are usually underrepresented among cyclists in France, the scheme may appear to have reduced inequities in cycling. However, the scheme could have reached out more to the low-income population who were largely unaware of it. This selectivity is partly explained by awareness of the subsidy, which is lower among the younger and the less educated part of the population. Our survey shows that the scheme is selective primarily because of its design. It would have been necessary to accompany it with measures specifically designed for vulnerable groups. • Bike repair subsidy has been successful in quantitative terms. • Bike repair subsidy mainly benefited regular, confident, and women cyclists. • Low-income cyclists benefited the most although they were poorly informed. • Access to information about subsidies is itself socially selective. • Although the scheme is based on equal treatment, it can hardly be considered fair. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In 2008, the federal government allotted $7 billion in child care subsidies to low-income families through the state-administered Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), now the government''s largest child care program (). Although subsidies reduce costs for families and facilitate parental employment, it is unclear how they impact the quality of care families purchase. This study investigates the impact of government subsidization on parents’ selection of child care quality using multivariate regression and propensity score matching approaches to account for differential selection into subsidy receipt and care arrangements. Data were drawn from the Child Care Supplement to the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (CCS-FFCWS), conducted in 2002 and 2003 in 14 of the 20 FFCWS cities when focal children were 3 years old (N =456). Our results indicate that families who used subsidies chose higher quality care than comparable mothers who did not use subsidies, but only because subsidy recipients were more likely to use center-based care. Subgroup analyses revealed that families using subsidies purchased higher-quality home-based care but lower-quality center-based care than comparable non-recipients. Findings suggest that child care subsidies may serve as more than a work support for low-income families by enhancing the quality of nonmaternal care children experience but that this effect is largely attributable to recipients’ using formal child care arrangements (versus kith and kin care) more often than non-recipients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: We incorporate habit formation into an analysis of the effect of cereal price changes on the nutrient intake of the poor in China. We find that the poor’s nutrient intake responds asymmetrically to declines and increases in cereal prices, and that the asymmetric response of their fat intake may be due to habit formation. Our results also imply that introducing cereal price subsidies can increase their total energy intake by increasing their calorie intake from fat and protein, while ending such subsidies would insignificantly affect their total energy intake, but further increase their calorie intake from fat and protein. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

We use qualitative and quantitative data from a multi-year study of low-income families included in New Hope, an experimental anti-poverty intervention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to understand why low-income families’ use of program-based child care as well as subsidies offered to pay for such care is often low and/or episodic. Ethnographic analyses from 38 families in experimental and control groups suggest that child care choices and subsidy use must fit into the family daily routines and with the beliefs people have about child care. Both ecocultural theory and parents’ own reports of child care decisions suggest four themes accounting for child care choice: material and social resources; conflicts in the family; values and beliefs about parenting and child development; and predictability and stability of child care. Child care subsidy programs can be more effective if they offer greater flexibility and a range of options that better fit into the varied daily routines of the low-income families they are intended to serve. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]