Search

In deze bijdrage onderzoek ik de uitkomsten van het hedendaagse gezinsbeleid, en daarvoor wordt het stof van het mattheuseffect geblazen. Twee vragen staan centraal: 1) Wie plukt de vruchten van overheidsinvesteringen in het gezinsbeleid?; en 2) Wat zijn hiervan de implicaties voor de doelstellingen van de overheidsinvesteringen in het gezinsbeleid? Met andere woorden, is er ook vandaag een mattheuseffect werkzaam in het gezinsbeleid, hoe manifesteert zich dat en wat zijn daarvan de gevolgen? Daarbij ligt de focus op drie beleidsinstrumenten: kinderopvang, ouderschapsverlof en kinderbijslagen. De resultaten tonen dat er een mattheuseffect schuilt in het gebruik van kinderopvang en ouderschapsverlof, maar niet noodzakelijk in de kinderbijslag. Om kinderarmoede afdoende te bestrijden moeten overheden niet alleen inzetten op het wegwerken van het mattheuseffect maar moeten zij er tegelijkertijd voor zorgen dat gezinnen met kinderen een voldoende mate van inkomensbescherming kunnen genieten. Daarbij kunnen kinderbijslagen dan een cruciale rol spelen, maar hun impact hangt af van hoe de middelen worden ingezet. Kortom, zowel het doelmatiger inzetten van kinderbijslagen als het wegwerken van het mattheuseffect in de kinderopvang en ouderschapsverlof is noodzakelijk om van sociale investeringen in het gezinsbeleid een waarlijk succes te maken.

ispartof: Samenleving en politiek vol:22 pages:100-103

ispartof: Samenleving en Politiek vol:22 issue:4 pages:100-103 status: published

The long-standing wisdom that universally designed benefits outperform targeted benefits in terms of poverty reduction has come under siege. Recent empirical studies tend to find that targeting is not necessarily associated anymore with lower levels of poverty reduction. In this study, we investigate for a broad set of European countries (1) the relationship between child benefits and child poverty reduction; (2) whether a universal or targeted approach is more effective in reducing child poverty; and (3) the causal mechanisms explaining the link between (1) and (2). In doing so, we take into account the general characteristics of the child benefit system, the size of the redistributive budget and the generosity of benefit levels. In contrast to previous studies, we construct an indicator of targeting that captures the design instead of the outcomes of child benefit systems. We find that targeting towards lower incomes is associated with higher levels of child poverty reduction, conditional on the direction of targeting and the characteristics of the benefit system.

nrpages: 266 status: published

Under the social investment paradigm, a child-centred investment strategy has been developed. Mainstay of such strategy is the provision of childcare services, which are expected to increase maternal employment rates, further childrens human capital and mitigate social inequalities in early life. In this article, I critically assess the child-centred investment strategy and explore whether childcare services in European countries in their current state of affairs are up to the task of producing the anticipated benefits. The argument I develop is fairly simple: in order to be effective, childcare services should cover all social groups, in particular children from a disadvantaged background. Drawing on recent EU-SILC data I show that in all but one country this condition is not met: childcare is often used at low or moderate levels, and children from low-income families participate to a much lesser extent than children from high-income families. In order to overcome these childcare deficits, countries should pursue a consistent investment strategy which entails increasing childcare supply and increasing employment opportunities for all social groups. This will require huge budgetary efforts for most member states.

Childcare services are increasingly regarded as a major policy lever to mitigate social inequalities. Such services are believed to be effective in reducing poverty and increasing employment rates by allowing both parents to engage in paid employment, as well as to benefit the cognitive and non-cognitive development of young children. This holds in particular for young children from disadvantaged backgrounds, enhancing their future success in education and in the labour market. However, recent studies have shown that the use of formal childcare services is socially stratified, i.e. higher-income families or families with a high-educated mother use childcare services to a much larger extent than lower-income families or families with a low-skilled mother. Due to this social gap in childcare use, government investment in childcare could fail to live up to its inequality-reducing potential or, worse still, may actually exacerbate rather than mitigate social inequalities. Drawing on the comparative social policy literature, this article explores, for the first time, the determinants of inequalities in childcare coverage for a broad set of countries. Our results contribute to a proper understanding of the mechanisms driving inequality in childcare service use, which is crucial to the future of childcare services as an effective policy instrument to mitigate social inequalities in early life.

Het verminderen van kinderarmoede is voor alle overheden in ons land, de Europese incluis, een absolute beleidsprioriteit. Toch boeken we geen vooruitgang en, erger, lijkt het probleem alleen maar groter te worden. Frank Vandenbroucke stak onlangs nog de lont in het kruitvat met zijn vaststelling dat de kinderarmoede in ons land significant was gestegen, terwijl het armoederisico voor gepensioneerden - traditioneel een zeer kwetsbare groep - significant was gedaald. Vandenbroucke besloot dat kinderarmoede de nieuwe koortsthermometer voor welvaartsstaten aan het worden is. Dat de Belgische welvaartsstaat koorts heeft is het vertrekpunt van deze bijdrage.

Twintig jaar geleden onderzochten we in een CSB bericht de mogelijke wegen naar meer doelmatigheid in de kinderbijslag en in de fiscale voordelen voor kinderen ten laste. We schreven toen dat kinderbijslagen en belastingaftrekken voor kinderen ten laste globaal een grote doelmatigheid [realiseren], maar ook dat ondanks de grote middeleninzet, het bestaande instrumentarium er duidelijk niet in slaagt om de minimale kosten van kinderen in lage inkomensgezinnen te dekken. In dit CSB bericht hernemen we deze oefening. We bekijken de kenmerken, de uitgaven en de verdeling van de uitgaven, en we nemen daarna de doelmatigheid onder de loep: in welke mate slagen de financiële tegemoetkomingen voor kinderen er in om 1) de kosten van kinderen te dragen; en 2) de (kinder)armoede te reduceren? Daarna bespreken we de evolutie van de bedragen voor kinderbijslagen en fiscale voordelen voor kinderen ten laste en onderzoeken we de gevolgen van deze erosie voor de doelmatigheid van kinderbijslagen en fiscale voordelen voor kinderen. We eindigen met reflecties over de staatshervorming, en de mogelijkheid om de kinderbijslagen te hervormen.

Alleenstaande moeders vormen een zeer kwetsbare groep in onze samenleving en kampen met een verhoogd armoederisico. De reden daarvoor is tweeledig. Ten eerste hebben alleenstaande moeders per definitie maar een inkomen om rond te komen, terwijl in tijden waarin tweeverdienersschap de norm is een aanvullend inkomen vaak noodzakelijk is om financieel het hoofd boven water te houden. Daarnaast hebben zij het moeilijker om een inkomen te verwerven uit arbeid omdat zij geen partner hebben om op terug te vallen die (ten dele) de zorg voor de kinderen op zich kan nemen. Wanneer alleenstaande moeders niet tewerkgesteld zijn, wordt hun kwetsbaarheid nog pregnanter. Toch is het armoederisico van alleenstaande moeders niet in alle landen even groot. Deze landenverschillen zijn in hoofdzaak te herleiden tot verschillen in tewerkstelling en in sociale bescherming. Eerder onderzoek wees al uit dat vooral kinderbijslagen een efficiënt beleidsinstrument kunnen zijn om armoede te bestrijden, in het bijzonder bij alleenstaande moeders. In dit artikel bouwen we verder op dit inzicht en onderzoeken we in welke mate de financiële toelagen die specifiek gerelateerd zijn aan het hebben van kinderen, kortweg kinderbijslagen, het armoederisico van alleenstaande moeders kunnen verminderen. Hiertoe vergelijken we België met 14 Europese welvaartsstaten, en besteden we bijzondere aandacht aan het ontwerp van het beleid. De betrachting is om te ontrafelen welk kinderbijslagstelsel het meest efficiënt (doelmatig) is in het bestrijden van armoede bij alleenstaande moeders. ispartof: CSB-berichten status: published

Single mothers are vulnerable to living in poverty in contemporary European societies, which translates into economic dependency and threatens womens capacity to form autonomous households. Given their difficulties to engage in paid employment in a context of increasing dual earnership, the question how to safeguard the economic status of single mothers is a crucial one. In this article we address this issue by focusing on child benefits and exploring their impact on the poverty risk of single mothers in 15 European countries. In doing so, we combine two methodological traditions and devote specific attention to the design of child benefit systems in Europe which adds to the universality versus targeting-debate. We find that child benefits play a major role in complementing the household income of single mothers but that the poverty-reducing impact differs greatly between countries, depending on the generosity and the design of the benefit system. We also find that designing a single mother-friendly child benefit system does not necessarily come at a great cost. Our results demonstrate that a welldesigned child benefit system has the potential to play a crucial role in strengthening womens autonomy.

In the past decades, social conditions were favourable in the rich welfare states of the West. Employment and incomes were on the rise and social spending remained high while passive welfare states were progressively transformed into so-called investment states accompanied by an increasing policy focus on social inclusion and equal opportunities. Despite these favourable conditions, however, contemporary welfare states did not succeed in reducing poverty and inequality. What lies beneath the disquieting poverty standstill and how did welfare states miss this window of opportunity? In this article, we aim to shed more light on this question. We identify three structural trends behind the poverty standstill. First, work-rich households benefited most of rising employment rates while this has only been partially the case for the vulnerable workless households. Second, income protection for the working-age population out of work has become less adequate. Third, social spending for policies accommodating new social risks is primarily allocated towards higher income groups. Our analysis should not be read as a unilateral critique on the idea of the social investment state, but puts forward the hypothesis that social spending and, more generally, social redistribution in the social investment state have become less pro-poor.

De welvaart in westerse welvaartsstaten is de voorbije decennia sterk toegenomen en het aantal mensen aan het werk is gestegen. En toch is men er in de meeste landen niet in geslaagd om deze prima facie gunstige parameters om te zetten in minder ongelijkheden en minder armoede: waarom hebben rijke welvaartsstaten de window of opportunity rond de eeuwwisseling gemist om enige vooruitgang te boeken in de strijd tegen de relatieve inkomensarmoede? In dit artikel zoeken wij naar antwoorden op deze vraag. We vinden dat in de veranderende welvaartsstaat (van oude naar nieuwe sociale risicos en van de klassieke welvaartsstaat naar de investeringsstaat) drie structurele elementen aan de basis liggen van deze stilstand: werkarme huishoudens profiteerden weinig van jobgroei; inkomensbescherming kreeg minder prioriteit; en het beleid voor nieuwe sociale risicos (zoals de arbeid-gezincombinatie) is minder herverdelend. De heroriëntatie van sociale uitgaven naar de werkenden ging met andere woorden ten koste van degenen die naast de arbeidsmarkt bleven staan. Het succes van armoedebestrijding in de toekomst zal dan ook afhangen van de wijze waarop beleidsstrategieën gericht op werk geïmplementeerd zullen worden en van de effectieve aandacht voor herverdelende correcties in het concrete beleid.

ispartof: De sociale staat van Vlaanderen 2011 pages:131-163 ispartof: pages:131-163 status: published

Departing from growing concerns about in-work poverty and the proliferation of flexible employment, we investigate the association between temporary employment and poverty and the role of regulations in a European comparative perspective. In doing so, we focus specifically on possible gender dimensions, because some are concerned that the impact of flexible employment on income security will be different for men and women and that gender inequality will increase. By means of a logistic multilevel model, we analyse recent EU-SILC data for 24 European countries. The results show that the temporarily employed have a higher poverty risk vis-à-vis permanent workers, mainly caused by lower wages. However, the risk factors to become working poor are similar. The poorly educated, young workers and those living in a single earner household with dependent children have an increased probability to live in poverty, whether they are employed on temporary or permanent basis. Differences between European welfare regimes demonstrate that policy constellations influence the magnitude of these risk factors. Looking at specific policy measures, we find that policies encouraging dual earnership are associated with a lower poverty risk. Counter-intuitively, temporary working women have a lower poverty risk than their male counterparts. They are better protected because they are more often secondary earners in a dual earning household, while men are more often primary earners. Finally, we identify the Netherlands and Czech Republic as countries shaping advantageous circumstances for the temporarily employed. This article advances knowledge on the linkages between temporary employment, economic insecurity and gender differences in European welfare states.

ispartof: pages:--- nrpages: 90 status: published

In this contribution, we discuss some of the new tensions that are emerging between the foundations of the welfare state. Several developments have led to the advent of the social investment state, in which people are to be activated and empowered instead of passively protected. We argue that this social policy shift has been accompanied by a normative shift towards a more stringent interpretation of social protection in which individual responsibility and quid pro quo have become the primordial focus. Using the Belgian (Flemish) disciplinary policy on truancy and school allowances as case in point, we demonstrate that this social policy paradigm may have detrimental consequences for societies weakest: they will not always be able to meet the newly emerged standard of reciprocity. This implies an erosion of the ideal of social protection and encourages new forms of social exclusion. As these changes in the social policy framework are not confined to the Belgian case alone, our analysis bears relevance for all European welfare states.

In the last decades, measures to reconcile work and family life arose in response to new societal needs stemming from the generalization of dual earnership. However, dual earnership has not been adopted evenly across various social groups in European societies. Consequently, concerns about the distribution of the benefit of those policies arise: does this new orientation entail a loss of redistributive power of the welfare state? We address this question by focussing on the interaction of three types of family measures and their overall distributional effect in Europe with the Belgian region of Flanders as case in point. We develop a fine-grained analysis to reveal the budgetary impact of the variation in use and generosity, and find that the redistributive effect of child benefits is largely undone by subsidized childcare and parental leave benefits. As such, our analysis supports concern about a reduction of the redistributive character of the new‟ welfare state.

This article argues that the effect of policy institutions on female labor market participation is mediated by reference groups surrounding individual women. Using recent data on individual women between 20 and 49 years in 22 European countries, we distinguish between two types of institutions: public childcare availability and public sector employment. We hypothesize that both institutions are conducive to womens employment but that the effect differs across different social groups. More generally the analysis aims at the identification of good practices, i.e. countries that succeed in shaping women-friendly circumstances on the labor market. By means of a logistic multilevel model, we find that both public childcare and public sector employment are associated with higher female employment chances. We also find that women embedded in different reference groups behave differently on the labor market, that public childcare provision and public sector employment are helpful to raise the odds of employment for lower and medium educated women respectively. Finally, we observe that, ceteris paribus, non-urban areas shape better employment opportunities than urban areas.