The provision of childcare services. 2009

8/3/2019 The provision of childcare services. 2009.

1/92

European Commission

The provision o childcare servicesA comparative review o 30 European countries


2/92

This publication is supported under the European Community Programme or Employment and SocialSolidarity - PROGRESS (2007-2013).

This programme is managed by the Directorate-General or Employment, Social Aairs and Equal

Opportunities o the European Commission. It was established to inancially support the implementationo the objectives o the European Union in the employment and social aairs area, as set out in the SocialAgenda, and thereby contribute to the achievement o the Lisbon Strategy goals in these ields.

The seven-year Programme targets all stakeholders who can help shape the development o appropriateand eective employment and social legislation and policies, across the EU-27, EFTA-EEA and EUcandidate and potential candidate countries.

PROGRESS mission is to strengthen the EU contribution in support o Member States commitment.PROGRESS will be instrumental in:

providing analysis and policy advice on PROGRESS policy areas; monitoring and reporting on the implementation o EU legislation and policies in

PROGRESS policy areas;

promoting policy transer, learning and support among Member States on EUobjectives and priorities; and

relaying the views o the stakeholders and society at large

For more inormation see:http://ec.europa.eu/progress


3/92

Janneke Plantenga and Chantal Remery

European Commission

Directorate-General or Employment, Social Aairsand Equal opportunitiesG1 Unit

Manuscrit completed in March 2009

European Commissions Expert Group on Gender and Employment Issues (EGGE)

The National Experts (* indicates non-EU countries)

Danile Meulders, Belgium (BE) Karoly Fazekas, Hungary (HU)Iskra Beleva, Bulgaria (BG) Frances Camilleri-Cassar, Malta (MT)

Alena Kkov,Czech Republic (CZ) Janneke Plantenga & Chantal Remery, The Netherlands (NL)

Ruth Emerek, Denmark (DK) Ingrid Mairhuber, Austria (AT)

Friederike Maier, Germany (DE) Ania Plomien, Poland (PL)Reelika Leetmaa, Estonia (EE) Virgnia Ferreira, Portugal (PT)

Ursula Barry, Ireland (IE) Elena Zamr, Romania (RO)

Maria Karamessini, Greece (EL) Aleksandra Kanjuo Mrela, Slovenia (SI)

Elvira Gonzlez Gago, Spain (ES) Magdalena Piscov, Slovakia (SK)

Rachel Silvera, France (FR) Hanna Sutela, Finland (FI)Annamaria Simonazzi, Italy (IT) Anita Nyberg, Sweden (SE)

Alexia Panayiotou, Cyprus (CY) Colette Fagan, United Kingdom (UK)

Ilze Trapenciere, Latvia (LV) Lilja Msesdttir, Iceland (IS)*

Ruta Braziene, Lithuania (LT) Ulrike Papouschek, Liechtenstein(LI)*

Robert Plasman, Luxembourg (LU) Anne Lise Ellingster, Norway(NO)*

The provision o childcare servicesA comparative review o 30 European countries


4/92

This report was nanced by and prepared or the use o the European Commissions Directorate-General or Employment, Social Aairs and EqualOpportunities It does not necessarily represent the Commissions ocial position. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on its behal isresponsible or the use that might be made o the inormation contained in this publication.

photos 1, 5: iStock photo 2, 3, 4: 123RFFor any use or reproduction o photos which are not under European Communities copyright,permission must be sought directly rom the copyright holder(s).

More inormation on the European Union is available on the Internet. (http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data as well as an abstract can be ound at the end o this publication.

Luxembourg: Oce or Ocial Publications o the European Communities, 2009

ISBN: 978-92-79-12007-7doi: 10.2767/10651

European Communities, 2009Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Belgium

PRINTED ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER

Europe Direct is a service to help youind answers to your questions about

the European Union

Freephone number (*) :00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow accessto 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

1 2

3

5

4


5/92

T h e p r o v i s i o n o c h i l d c a r e s e r v i c e s

3

Executive summary (EN) ..............................................................................7

Rsum (FR) ....................................................................................................11

Kurzassung (DE) ...........................................................................................15

Introduction ...................................................................................................19

1. Investing in childcare services .......................................................211.1 Improving labour market participation ............................. ................................. ....21

1.2 Improving ertility ................................. ................................ ................................. ...............24

1.3 Improving social inclusion .............................. ................................. ...............................26

1.4 Summary and conclusions .............................. ................................. ..............................28

2. Childcare services ...............................................................................29

2.1 Introduction ................................. ................................. ................................. ..........................29

2.2 The use o childcare services.............................. ................................. ..........................30

2.3 Supply and demand ................................ ................................. ................................. .........39

2.4 Quality o childcare services ................................ ................................. .........................43

2.5 Aordability..............................................................................................................................48

2.6 Acceptability............................................................................................................................52

2.7 Summary and conclusions ............................... ................................. .............................54

3. Policy issues ..........................................................................................57

3.1 Childcare provision: achievements and challenges ............................. ..........57

3.2 Rebalancing time, money and services..................................................................60

3.3 Policies with regard to the quality o childcare services ..............................62

3.4 The response to the recommendations given at the EU level ................64

3.5 Summary and conclusions ............................. ................................. ...............................65

4. Summary and conclusions ..............................................................67

Appendix .........................................................................................................69

Reerences .......................................................................................................81

Contents


6/92


7/92

5


Country abbreviations

AT Austria

BE Belgium

BG Bulgaria

CY Cyprus

CZ Czech Republic

DK Denmark

DE Germany

EE Estonia

EL Greece

ES Spain

FI Finland

FR France

HU Hungary

IE Ireland

IS Iceland

IT Italy

LI Liechtenstein

LT Lithuania

LU Luxembourg

LV LatviaMT Malta

NL The Netherlands

NO Norway

PL Poland

PT Portugal

RO Romania

SI Slovenia

SK Slovakia

SE Sweden

UK United Kingdom


8/92


9/92

7


Introduction

In recent decades, childcare services have become a mat-ter o serious public concern. Aordable and good-qualitychildcare services may improve the reconciliation o workand amily lie and thus oster labour market participationand gender equality. Childcare acilities may also providean important answer to declining ertility rates, by lower-ing the cost o childbearing in terms o labour market andcareer opportunities. Finally there is a growing tendencyto see childcare services rom a social pedagogical per-spective. In this perspective the main policy rationale is nolonger the reconciliation o work and care, but rather the

contribution o childcare services to child development andsocioeconomic integration. The importance o providingchildcare services has also been recognised at the EU level.At the Barcelona Summit in 2002, some explicit conclusionsand targets were dened with regard to the provision ochildcare services. Conrming the goal o ull employment,the European Council agreed that Member States shouldremove disincentives to emale participation in the labourmarket and strive to provide childcare by 2010 to at least90 % o children between 3 years old and the mandatoryschool age and at least 33 % o children under 3 years oage. The importance o these targets has been rearmed as

recently as 2008 in the employment guidelines (200810)adopted by the Council.

Taking into account recently published EU-SILC (EuropeanUnion statistics on income and living conditions) dataon the provision o (ormal and other) childcare services,this report provides an analysis o both the quantitativeand qualitative provision o childcare services or 27 EUMember States and three European Economic Area (EEA)countries, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. It discussesthe extent to which the demand or childcare is covered,the importance attached to childcare services within thenational context, and the policies developed at the na-

tional level to improve the provision o childcare acilities.As such, the report updates and extends the discussion ochildcare in a report by the Commissions previous networko gender experts (see Plantenga and Remery, 2005).

Investing in childcare services

There are several reasons why countries might invest in child-care services. A classical argument reers to the act that theavailability o good-quality childcare services has a positiveimpact on the emale participation rate. A higher participa-tion rate may increase gender equality, oster economic

growth and help improve the sustainability o the present-day welare state, especially in the light o an ageing popu-lation. Another argument points to the act that childcareservices might increase ertility rates by making a child less

costly in terms o income and career opportunities. In act,the ertility and participation arguments may be interpretedas two sides o the same coin. In the participation argument,the ertility rate is taken or granted and childcare servicesshould acilitate the combination o care responsibilities withpaid work. In the ertility argument, participation is taken orgranted. Here childcare services are supposed to acilitate thecombination o paid work with care responsibilities. In addi-tion to the reconciliation argument, the provision o childcareservices might also contribute to the goal o reducing poverty.Higher participation in the labour market reduces the risk opoverty over peoples liespan and especially in old age. Theimproved well-being o parents may also reduce child pover-

ty and thus improve uture outcomes or children. The eecton children may even be more direct: good-quality childcareservices may serve a child-development purpose, providingthem with a rich, sae and stimulating environment. As suchchildcare services may oer an important contribution tochild development and socioeconomic integration.

The arguments in avour o childcare services are well knownand most European countries have taken initiatives to increasethe availability o (quality) childcare services. However, manyMember States are ar rom reaching the Barcelona childcaretargets. Barriers seem to be nancial as well as ideological.

Perhaps one o the most complicated challenges reers tothe act that the policy objectives on participation, genderequality, ertility and social integration are not always easilycompatible. Child development concerns, or example, or theambition to reduce child poverty may translate into a policytargeted at increasing childcare services, but may just as easilytranslate into a policy avouring extended leave acilities and/or increasing the provision o childcare allowances. Long pa-rental leave acilities, however, or a avourable nancial incen-tive structure may not promote labour supply and may resultin large dierences in male and emale working time patterns.Another complicated matter reers to the issue o parentalchoice. Parents may dier in their preerences with regard to

work and amily outcomes and most public policies tend toenhance parental choice. The result may be a complicatedmixture o time acilities, nancial allowances and servicesthat may not necessarily be very coherent and/or may not bevery avourable rom a gender equality point o view.

Childcare services

Aordable and accessible quality childcare provision isextremely important or working parents. ThroughoutEurope, however, the availability and aordability o child-care diers extensively. The EU-SILC data indicate that

in some countries parents make extensive use o ormalcentre-based arrangements (including education at pre-school), whereas in other countries they rely more onother arrangements (such as childminders and/or amily,

Executive summary (EN)


10/92

8

riends or neighbours). In the age category 02, the use oormal childcare arrangements in 2006 varies rom 73 %in Denmark to only 2 % in the Czech Republic and Poland.It appears that in seven Member States (Denmark, Neth-erlands, Sweden, Belgium, Spain, Portugal and UnitedKingdom) and Iceland and Norway the use o childcareservices is above or at the Barcelona target o 33 %. In anumber o countries, though, childcare services are onlyused on a part-time basis and may not cover a ull workingweek. The use o ormal care arrangements increases withthe increasing age o children. At age 3 up to the man-datory school age, Belgium ranks highest in 2006, witha use o ormal childcare arrangements o almost 100 %.At the other end is Poland, with a use o 28 %. O coursethe high user rate is to a large extent due to the inclusiono pre-school arrangements under the heading o ormalarrangements and the high coverage rate o pre-school

arrangements or children in this particular age category.According to the Barcelona target, the actual coveragerate should be at least 90 % in 2010. It appears that nineMember States (and Iceland) meet the Barcelona target orscore rather high. When interpreting these gures, it hasto be taken into account, though, that in most countries,pre-school is only part time, as a result o which workingparents still need additional childcare acilities which maybe much less available.

The use o childcare acilities does not directly answerthe question o whether demand is ully met. The actual

demand or childcare is infuenced by the participationrate o parents (especially mothers), levels o unemploy-ment, the length o parental leave, the opening hours oschool and the availability o alternatives like grandpar-ents and or other (inormal) arrangements. A relativelylow coverage rate may thereore not indicate shortages,but alternative ways o looking ater young children, likeextended parental leave acilities or a home care allow-ance. In the Nordic EU Member States childcare is ramedas a social right (Denmark, Finland and Sweden). In othercountries, however, the supply o high-quality and a-ordable childcare acilities may be insucient. In partic-ular, ormal childcare acilities or the youngest children

seem to be in short supply in quite a number o Europeancountries. For children aged 3 years up to the mandatoryschool age, supply is higher but the opening hours o theacilities may not always match working hours. Moreover,in most countries there are clear regional dierences.

In addition to availability, the quality o the service pro-vided is also signicant when it comes to parents deci-sions to use childcare acilities. Quality o childcare reersto aspects that contribute to the social, emotional andcognitive development o the child. Problematic is thesevere lack o harmonised statistics on this matter. More

qualitative data indicate, again, a large variation acrossEurope. Stachild ratios, or example, seem to dierwidely between European countries. Another aspectis the educational level o childminders. In some coun-

tries childminders appear to have a rather low level oeducation. Furthermore, in almost all countries there isa large dierence in education between nursery schools,pre-schools and crches, on the one hand, and privatechildminders on the other. In regard to the ormer group,strict requirements are oten set and inspected by gov-ernment. Private childminders, however, usually have asignicantly lower level o education.

In most countries childcare services are subsidised by onemeans or another. There are large dierences, however, be-tween Member States. With respect to the macrodivisiono costs, the share that parents pay seems to vary rom 8 %in Sweden to as high as 80 % in Poland. In most countriescosts o childcare depend upon amily income. The Nordiccountries (with the exception o Iceland) have set a maxi-mum to the childcare ee, while in other countries low-

income groups may attend childcare or ree. There are,however, also countries where low-income amilies payrelatively more than medium and high-income groups. Inquite a ew countries childcare is considered to be expen-sive. In addition, public childcare may be aordable, butprivate childcare is oten expensive. Quite apart rom theavailability and aordability, cultural norms may also infu-ence the demand or childcare services. In most countriesattitudes vary according to the age o the child. Only inBelgium and France do childcare services seem to be gen-erally accepted, including or very young children. In mostother countries childcare acilities are generally regarded

as positive or older children, but not or very young chil-dren. In addition, the number o hours may be an issue,resulting in a part-time use o childcare acilities. Even inthe Nordic countries, where childcare (or older children)is accepted and used on a large scale, good motherhoodand the well-being o children in childcare are occasion-ally a topic or public discussion.

Policy issues

From a policy perspective, the provision o childcareservices raises several issues. An important question re-ers to the underlying motives or investing in childcare

services, which may dier rom ensuring uture laboursupply to promoting child development. A predomi-nance o labour market concerns, or example, may leadto a rather strict policy with regard to availability, com-pared to a policy that emphasises the important role ochildcare arrangements in terms o social inclusion. An-other important issue reers to the policy mix between -nancial allowances, time acilities and services, given theparticular policy ambitions. The decision on that issuemay depend on undamental debates about the mostdesirable organisation o society or on rather practicalconsiderations about what is easible rom a nancial

point o view. In addition, the policy might be inspired bythe conviction that parents should be allowed to choosebetween dierent options, given the act that dierentparents will have dierent preerences.


11/92

9


In eect, a number o countries seem to raise the pro-vision o childcare services, although the actual growthrate is sometimes disappointing, partly because o budg-etary constraints. At the same time a number o countriesare rebalancing the policy mix between the provision oservices, time and money, with the aim to increase pa-rental choice, to improve the labour market position owomen or to promote amily lie. The result may not al-ways be a coherent model that provides a continuum osupport to amilies (the parents as well as the children).The period o leave, or example, is not in all cases at-tuned to the provision o childcare services. In addition,the emphasis on acilitating parental choice may trans-late into adverse eects in the sense that socioeconomicdierences between amilies increase.

Another important policy issue reers to the quality o

childcare services, in particular the quality o sta. Rais-ing the level o training would enhance their status andbring their proession more in line with that o teachers.Several countries are trying to raise the level o qualica-tions. Again, however, there may be important budgetaryconstrains which decelerate the introduction o these pol-icy measures. It is also important to decide on a coherentpicture o quality requirements that is or centre-basedand home-based childcare, or private and public in or-der to prevent negative interactions. Finally it is important

to note that the high prole o childcare services withinthe European employment strategy does have its impactat the level o the Member States. Although the Barcelonatargets may not have a large impact on all national policydebates, the monitoring o progress within the Lisbonstrategy does help to highlight the issue o childcare as animportant policy priority.

Summary and conclusions

The results provided in this report, the score o the Eu-ropean Member States on the Barcelona targets and theongoing debates suggest that the childcare issue willremain an important policy priority in the near utureas well. Despite all the eorts and improvements, high-quality and aordable childcare acilities are still in shortsupply in quite a number o European Union Member

States. The availability o the EU-SILC data enables an as-sessment o the current state o aairs and allows or acareul monitoring o the measures taken in the dierentMember States. This inormation, in combination with theemphasis on the provision o childcare services within thecontext o the European employment strategy, shouldprovide the necessary basis or a policy which is targetedtowards a coherent socioeconomic inrastructure, keep-ing in mind the policy goals with regard to participation,gender equality, ertility and social integration.


12/92


13/92

11


Introduction

Durant les dernires dcennies les services de gardedenants sont devenus un sujet dintrt public important.Des services de garde denants abordables nancire-ment et de qualit peuvent grandement contribuer con-cilier travail et vie amiliale, et promouvoir ainsi lemploi etlgalit entre les hommes et les emmes. Les structuresde garde peuvent aussi ournir une rponse importanteaux taux de condit dclinants, car elles permettent dediminuer limpact de la maternit sur les opportunitsproessionnelles et sur la prsence sur le march du tra-vail. Il y a nalement une tendance croissante considrer

les services de garde denants dun point de vue socio-pdagogique. Sous cet angle, la principale justicationpolitique consiste non plus concilier travail et gardedenants, mais plutt la contribution que les servicesde garde apportent au dveloppement de lenant et lintgration socio-conomique. Limportance de lore deservices de garde denants a aussi t reconnue au niveaueuropen. Au sommet de Barcelone en 2002, des conclu-sions et des objectis explicites ont t dnis en ce quiconcerne lore de services de garde. Tout en conrmantlobjecti du plein emploi, le Conseil europen de 2002 adcid que les Etats membres devaient supprimer les l-

ments dissuasis la participation des emmes lemploiet semployer orir des services de garde denants dici2010 au moins 90 % des enants dont lge va de 3 ans celui de la scolarisation obligatoire, et au moins 33 % desenants ayant moins de 3 ans. Limportance de ces objec-tis a t rappele rcemment travers ladoption par leConseil des Lignes directrices pour lemploi (200810).

Prenant en considration les donnes SILC rcemmentpublies sur lore (ormelle et autre) de services de gardedenants, ce rapport ournit une analyse de lore quan-titative et qualitative des services de garde denants des27 Etats membres de lUE et de trois pays de lEEE, lIslande,

la Norvge et le Liechtenstein. Ce rapport traite de plus-ieurs sujets, dont: la mesure dans laquelle la demande deservices de garde denants est couverte, limportance don-ne aux services de garde dans le contexte national, et lespolitiques dveloppes au niveau national an damliorerlore de structures daccueil. Le rapport met jour etdveloppe la discussion sur la garde denants prsentedans un rapport du prcdent rseau dexperts sur le gen-re de la Commission (voir Plantenga et Remery 2005).

Investir dans les services

de garde denants

Les Etats peuvent investir dans les services de gardedenants pour plusieurs raisons. Un argument clas-sique se rre au ait que la disponibilit de services de

garde denants de qualit a un impact positi sur le tauxdemploi des emmes. Un plus haut taux demploi peutentraner une augmentation de lgalit entre les hom-mes et les emmes, une croissance de lconomie, et aider amliorer la viabilit du systme de scurit sociale ac-tuel, surtout si lon tient compte du vieillissement de lapopulation. Un autre argument souligne que les servicesde garde denants pourraient contribuer augmenterle taux de condit en rendant le ait davoir un enantmoins coteux en termes de revenu et dopportunitsproessionnelles. En ralit, la condit et lemploi desemmes sont des arguments qui reprsentent les deuxaces dune mme mdaille. Dans largument sur le taux

demploi, le taux de condit est considr comme ac-quis et les services de garde denants devraient aciliterla combinaison entre responsabilits de garde et travailrmunr. Dans largument sur la condit, lemploi estconsidr comme acquis. Dans ce cas, les services degarde denants sont supposs aciliter la combinaisonentre travail rmunr et responsabilits de garde. Enplus de largument sur la conciliation, lore de servicesde garde peut aussi contribuer lobjecti de rduction dela pauvret. Un taux demploi plus lev rduit le risquede pauvret tout au long de la vie, surtout durant la vieil-lesse. Lamlioration du bien-tre des parents peut aussi

rduire la pauvret des enants, et amliorer donc les per-spectives utures des enants. Leet sur les enants peutmme tre plus direct: des services de garde denants dequalit peuvent contribuer au dveloppement de lenanten lui procurant un environnement riche, sr et stimulant.Ainsi, les services de garde denants peuvent contribuerde aon importante au dveloppement et lintgrationsocio-conomique de lenant.

Les arguments en aveur des services de garde denantssont bien connus et la plupart des pays europens ontpris des initiatives an daugmenter lore de services degarde (de qualit). Touteois, de nombreux Etats membres

sont encore loin datteindre les objectis de Barcelone. Lesbarrires semblent tre aussi bien de nature nancirequidologique. Un des ds les plus compliqus est peuttre d au ait que les objectis politiques concernant laparticipation lemploi, lgalit entre les hommes et lesemmes, la condit et lintgration sociale ne sont pastoujours acilement compatibles. Les proccupationsconcernant le dveloppement de lenant, par exemple,ou bien lambition de rduire la pauvret des enants,peuvent se traduire par une politique ayant pour butdaugmenter lore de services de garde denants, toutcomme elles peuvent se traduire par une politique qui

vise allonger la dure des congs (maternit ou paren-tal) et/ou laugmentation des allocations pour soccuperdes enants. Touteois, des congs parentaux de longuedure ou laugmentation des allocations peuvent ne pas

Rsum (FR)


14/92

12

promouvoir la prsence des parents (et en particulier desmres) sur le march du travail et peuvent rsulter en degrandes disparits de nombre dheures de travail entrehommes et emmes. Il aut aussi prendre en compte laproblmatique du choix des parents. Les parents peuventavoir des prrences direntes concernant le travail etla amille et la plupart des politiques publiques ont tend-ance avoriser le choix des parents. Le rsultat peut treun mlange compliqu darrangements horaires fexiblesde travail, dallocations et de services (gardes denants)qui peuvent ne pas tre ncessairement trs cohrents et/ou pas trs avorables du point de vue de lgalit entre leshommes et les emmes.

Les services de garde denants

Lore de services de garde denants abordables nan-

cirement et de qualit est extrmement importantepour des parents qui travaillent. Touteois, en Europe, ladisponibilit et le cot des services de garde denantssont extrmement dirents. Les donnes EU-SILCindiquent que dans certains pays les parents recourenttrs souvent des services ormels bass sur les struc-tures daccueil (y compris lducation prscolaire), tandisque dans dautres pays ils ont plus recours dautrestypes de services (comme les puriculteurs/trices priv(e)s et/ou le soutien amilial, les amis ou les voisins). Dansla catgorie des 0-2 ans, lutilisation des services ormelsen 2006 varie de 73 % au Danemark seulement 2 %

en Rpublique Tchque et en Pologne. Il apparat quedans sept Etats membres (Danemark, Pays-Bas, Sude,Belgique, Espagne, Portugal et Royaume-Uni), ainsi quenIslande et en Norvge, le recours aux services de gardedpassent lobjecti de 33 % x Barcelone. Cependant,dans un certain nombre de pays, les services de gardesont utiliss mi-temps et ne couvrent pas une semainede travail entire.

Le recours aux services de garde ormels augmente aveclaugmentation de lge des enants. Dans la catgorie de3 ans ge de scolarisation obligatoire, la Belgique est lamieux place en 2006 avec un taux dutilisation des serv-

ices de garde qui avoisine les 100 %. En bas de lchellese trouve la Pologne, avec un taux dutilisation de 28 %.Naturellement, le taux dutilisation lev est d engrande partie linclusion de services prscolaires dansles services ormels et au taux lev de couverture desservices prscolaires pour les enants de cette catgorieparticulire dge. Selon les objectis de Barcelone, le tauxde couverture devrait atteindre au moins 90 % en 2010.Il semblerait que neu Etats membres (ainsi que lIslande)atteignent les objectis de Barcelone ou ont mmemieux. Quand lon interprte ces chires, il aut touteoisprendre en considration que dans la plupart des pays

les services prscolaires onctionnent temps partiel, cequi ait que les parents qui travaillent ont besoin dautresstructures de garde pour complter les journes, etcelles-ci peuvent tre bien moins disponibles.

Le recours aux structures de garde ne rpond pas la ques-tion du niveau de satisaction de la demande. La demanderelle de services de garde denants est infuence par letaux de participation parentale (mres) au march du tra-vail, par le taux de chmage, par la dure du cong pa-rental, par les horaires scolaires et par la possibilit davoirrecours des solutions de remplacement en conant lacharge aux grands-parents ou en prenant dautres dispo-sitions inormelles. Un aible taux de couverture nindiquedonc pas ncessairement une demande non satisaitemais peut refter lexistence de modalits de garde di-rentes, par exemple les possibilits de cong parental oulallocation pour la garde des enants domicile. Dans lesEtats membres nordiques, les services de garde denantconstituent un droit social (Finlande, Danemark et Sude).Touteois, dans dautres pays lore de structures daccueilde qualit et abordables nancirement peut tre insu-

sante. En particulier, lore de services ormels de gardedenants en bas ge est assez basse dans un grand nombrede pays europens. Pour les enants entre 3 ans et lge descolarisation obligatoire, lore est plus importante maisles horaires ne correspondent pas toujours aux heures detravail. De plus, il existe dvidentes disparits rgionalesdans plusieurs pays.

Outre la disponibilit, la qualit du service oert a aussiun poids important dans les dcisions des parents de re-courir aux structures daccueil. La qualit des services degarde des enants se rre aux aspects qui contribuent

au dveloppement social, motionnel et cogniti delenant. Le manque de statistiques harmonises cesujet est problmatique. Des donnes de type qualita-tives indiquent, l encore, une orte variation dun pays lautre. Le ratio personnel/enant connat, par exemple,de trs ortes variations dun pays europen lautre. Unautre aspect est le niveau dducation des puriculteurs/trices qui dans certains pays puriculteurs/trices sem-blent avoir un niveau dducation relativement aible. Deplus, dans quasiment tous les pays il existe une grandedirence au niveau de la ormation entre les colesmaternelles, les pr-coles et les crches dune part, et lespuriculteurs/trices priv(e)s dautre part. Ces dernires

sont souvent soumises de strictes conditions et sontsouvent sujettes des inspections par le gouvernement.Touteois, les puriculteurs/trices priv(e)s ont souventun niveau dducation bien plus bas.

Dans la plupart des pays les services de garde denantssont subventionns dune aon ou dune autre. Il existetouteois dimportantes dirences entre Etats membres.En ce qui concerne la division des cots au niveau macro,la participation conomique des parents semble varier de8 % en Sude 80 % en Pologne. Dans la plupart des pays,les cots des services de garde dpendent du revenu amil-

ial. Les pays nordiques ( lexception de lIslande) ont xun plaond aux rais des services de garde, tandis que dansdautres pays les catgories ayant un aible revenu sont ex-emptes de dpenses. Il existe touteois des pays o les


15/92

13


amilles bas revenu payent relativement plus que cellesdisposant dun revenu moyen ou lev. Dans bon nombrede pays les services de garde sont considrs comme peuabordables. De plus, si les services de garde publics peu-vent tre peu coteux, les services du priv sont souventchers. Outre la question des cots et de la disponibilit, lesnormes culturelles peuvent aussi infuencer la demandede services de garde. Dans la plupart des pays les attitudesvarient suivant lge de lenant. Les services de garde pourles enants les plus jeunes semblent tre gnralementaccepts uniquement en France et en Belgique. Dans laplupart des autres pays les structures daccueil sont gn-ralement considres positive pour les enants plus gs,mais pas pour les enants en bas ge. De plus, le nombredheures peut constituer un problme, avec pour rsultatune utilisation temps partiel des structures daccueil.Mme dans les pays nordiques o lutilisation des services

de garde (pour les enants plus gs) est accepte et uti-lise grande chelle, la problmatique dtre une bonnemre et celle du bien-tre des enants dans les structuresde garde sont priodiquement sujet de discussion auniveau politique.

La question des politiques

Du point de vue des politiques lore des services de gardedenants soulve plusieurs questions. Un sujet importantconcerne les motivations sous-jacentes pour investir dansles services de garde, qui peuvent direr de la simple ga-

rantie dune uture ore demploi promouvoir le dvel-oppement de lenant. Une prdominance de lintrtdu march du travail peut conduire, par exemple, unepolitique plutt stricte de lore, surtout si on la compare une politique mettant laccent sur limportance du rledes services de garde des enants en termes dinclusionsociale. Une autre question importante concerne la com-binaison politique concrte entre allocations nancires,possibilits de congs (maternit et parental) et services.La dcision concrte ce propos peut dpendre des d-bats ondamentaux concernant le mode dorganisationsouhaitable de la socit ou porter plutt sur des consid-rations pratiques sur ce qui est aisable nancirement.

De plus, les politiques concrtes peuvent tre inspirespar la conviction que les parents devraient avoir la possi-bilit de choisir entre direntes options, tant donn quedes parents dirents auront des prrences direntes.

En eet, un bon nombre de pays semblent aug-menter lore de services de garde, bien que le niveaudaugmentation soit au nal parois dcevant, en partie cause de contraintes budgtaires. Dans le mme temps,un certain nombre de pays est en train de rquilibrer lacombinaison politique concrte entre ore de services,temps et argent, avec pour but daugmenter les possibil-

its de choix parental, damliorer le taux de participation

des emmes lemploi, ou encore de promouvoir la vieamiliale. Au nal le rsultat nest pas toujours un modlecohrent orant un ensemble de modalits permettantun soutien continu aux amilles (aussi bien aux parentsquaux enants). La priode de cong, par exemple, nestpas toujours en syntonie avec lore de services de garde.De plus, laccent mis sur la acilitation du choix parentalpeut se traduire par des eets nuisibles, dans le sens queles dirences socio-conomiques entre les amilles peu-vent augmenter.

Une autre question politique importante concerne laqualit des services de garde, et en particulier la qualitdu personnel. Augmenter le niveau de ormation pour-rait amliorer leur statut et placer leur proession plus enligne avec celle des enseignants. Plusieurs pays essaientdaugmenter le niveau des qualications. Mais l encore,

lexistence dimportantes contraintes budgtaires peu-vent ralentir lintroduction concrte de ces mesures. Dansce cas aussi il est important de dnir un cadre cohrentdes qualits requises aussi bien pour des modles basssur la garde des enants domicile qu ceux bass sur lesstructures daccueil et aussi bien pour le secteur publicque pour le priv de aon prvenir des interactions n-gatives. Enn, il est important de noter que limportancedonne aux services de garde denants dans la StratgieEuropenne pour lEmploi a eu un impact sur le niveaudes Etats membres. Bien que les objectis de Barcelonepuissent ne pas avoir un grand impact dans tous les d-

bats sur les politiques nationales, le suivi des progrs ral-iss dans le cadre de la stratgie de Lisbonne contribue mettre en vidence le sujet des gardes denants en tantque priorit politique importante.

Rsum et conclusions

Les rsultats ournis dans ce rapport, les perormancesrelles des Etats membres europens concernant les objectis de Barcelone, et les dbats en cours, suggrentque la question des gardes denants restera une prioritpolitique importante dans le utur proche. Malgr tous leseorts et malgr toutes les amliorations, lore de struc-

tures daccueil de qualit et abordables nancirementest toujours peu leve dans bon nombre dEtats mem-bres. La disponibilit des donnes SILC permet dvaluerla situation actuelle et de raliser un suivi minutieux desmesures prises par les dirents Etats membres. Ces in-ormations, en combinaison avec laccent mis sur lorede services de garde dans le cadre de la Stratgie Eu-ropenne pour lEmploi, devraient ournir les bases nces-saires pour une politique oriente vers une inrastructuresocio-conomique cohrente en lien avec les objectispolitiques de participation au march du travail, dgalitentre les hommes et les emmes ainsi que la condit et

lintgration sociale.


16/92


17/92

15


Einleitung

In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten hat sich die Kinderbe-treuung zu einer wichtigen Angelegenheit von ent-lichem Belang entwickelt. Eine bezahlbare Kinderbe-treuung von guter Qualitt kann die Vereinbarkeit vonArbeits- und Familienleben verbessern und damit dieTeilnahme am Arbeitsmarkt und die Gleichstellung derGeschlechter rdern. Einrichtungen zur Kinderbetreu-ung knnen auch eine bedeutende Lsung r die sin-kende Fertilittsrate bieten, indem die Kosten r Kinder,die durch Einkommensverzicht oder reduzierte Karriere-mglichkeiten entstehen, gesenkt werden. Schlielich

gibt es eine steigende Tendenz, die Kinderbetreuungvon einem sozial-pdagogischen Gesichtspunkt zu be-trachten. Von diesem Gesichtspunkt aus ist der wich-tigste Grundsatz nicht mehr die Vereinbarkeit von Arbeitund Betreuung, sondern der Beitrag der Kinderbetreu-ungs-Einrichtungen zur Entwicklung des Kindes und dersoziokonomischen Integration. Wie wichtig es ist, Ein-richtungen zur Kinderbetreuung zur Vergung zu stel-len, wurde auch au EU-Ebene anerkannt. Beim EU-Gipelin Barcelona 2002 wurden einige deutliche Schlussolge-rungen und Ziele im Hinblick au die Bereitstellung vonKinderbetreuungs-Einrichtungen estgelegt. Der Euro-

pische Rat hat das Ziel der Vollbeschtigung bekr-tigt und die Mitgliedstaaten augeordert, Hindernisseaus dem Weg zu rumen, die Frauen an der Teilnahmeam Arbeitsmarkt hindern. Weiterhin sollten die Mitglied-staaten sich darum bemhen, bis 2010 Einrichtungen zurKinderbetreuung r mindestens 90 % der Kinder im Al-ter zwischen drei und dem Pfichtschulalter und r min-destens 33 % der Kinder unter drei Jahren zur Vergungzu stellen. Die Wichtigkeit dieser Ziele wurden krzlichim Jahre 2008 in den beschtigungspolitische Leitlinien(2008-2010) vom Rat besttigt.

Unter Einbeziehung der krzlich verentlichten SILC-

Daten zur Bereitstellung (entlicher und sonstiger)Kinderbetreuungssttten, wird in diesem Bericht sowohldie mengenmige als auch qualitative Bereitstellungvon Kinderbetreuungssttten in 27 Mitgliedsstaaten unddrei EWR-Staaten, nmlich Island, Norwegen und Lich-tenstein analysiert. Im Zuge dessen wird der Umang, inwelchem der Bedar an Kinderbetreuung gedeckt wird,die Bedeutung der Kinderbetreuungssttten im natio-nalen Zusammenhang und die au nationaler Ebene zurVerbesserung der Bereitstellung von Kinderbetreuungs-sttten entwickelten Manahmen durchleuchtet. Dem-nach wird die im letzten Bericht dargelegte Diskussion

des vorherigen Netzwerks aus Gender-Experten der EU-Kommission (siehe Plantenga und Remery 2005) berdie Kinderbetreuung in diesem Bericht aktualisiert underweitert.

Investition in die Kinderbetreuung

Es gibt mehrere Grnde, die dar sprechen, dass die Mit-gliedsstaaten in die Kinderbetreuung investieren knnten.Ein klassisches Argument bezieht sich au die Tatsache,dass die Vergbarkeit von guten Kinderbetreuungsstt-ten eine positive Auswirkung au die Teilnahme der Frauenam Arbeitsmarkt zur Folge hat. Eine hhere Teilnahmerateknnte die Gleichstellung der Geschlechter rdern, dasWirtschatswachstum vorantreiben und die Nachhaltigkeitder heutigen Wohlahrtsstaaten verstrken, vor allem hin-sichtlich einer alternden Gesellschat. Ein weiteres Argu-ment weist au die Tatsache hin, dass die Kinderbetreuung

zur Erhhung der Fertilittsrate hren kann, indem dieKosten r ein Kind, die durch Einkommensverzicht oderreduzierte Karrieremglichkeiten entstehen, gesenkt wer-den. In der Tat knnen die Argumente der Teilnahme undder Fertilitt als zwei Seiten derselben Medaille betrachtetwerden. Bei dem Teilnahme-Argument wird die Geburten-rate vorausgesetzt und die Kinderbetreuung sollte die Ver-einbarkeit von Familien und bezahlter Arbeit erleichtern.Beim Fertilitts-Argument wird die Teilnahme vorausge-setzt. Hier soll die Kinderbetreuung die Vereinbarkeit vonbezahlter Arbeit und Familienleben erleichtern. Zustzlichzum Argument der Vereinbarkeit kann die Bereitstellung

der Kinderbetreuung auch zur Armutssenkung beitragen.Eine hhere Teilnahme am Arbeitsmarkt senkt die Geahrder Armut, die im Laue des Lebens entstehen kann, vorallem im Alter. Die bessere nanzielle Stellung der Elternkann auch zur Senkung der Kinderarmut und somit zur Ver-besserung der Zukuntsaussichten r das Kind hren. DieAuswirkung au die Kinder knnte sogar noch direkter sein:Eine gute Kinderbetreuungssttte knnte dem Zweck derkindlichen Entwicklung dienen, indem es dem Kind einevielltige, sichere und stimulierende Umgebung bietet.In diesem Sinne knnten Kinderbetreuungssttten einenwichtigen Beitrag zur Entwicklung des Kindes und zur so-ziokonomischen Integration leisten.

Die Argumente, die r die Kinderbetreuung sprechen, sindsehr wohl bekannt und die meisten Lnder in Europa ha-ben Initiativen ergrien, um die Vergbarkeit von (Quali-tts-) Kinderbetreuungssttten zu erhhen. Jedoch sindviele Mitgliedsstaaten weit davon enternt, die in Barcelonagesetzten Ziele zu erreichen. Dabei stellen sowohl nanzi-elle als auch ideologische Aspekte eine Barriere dar. Eineder vielleicht kompliziertesten Herausorderungen ist dieTatsache, dass die politischen Ziele bezglich der Teilnah-me am Arbeitsmarkt, der Gleichstellung der Geschlechter,der Geburtenrate und der sozialen Integration nicht immer

miteinander vereinbar sind. Die Entwicklung des Kindesbeispielsweise oder die Bemhungen um die Senkungder Kinderarmut knnten zu einer Politik hren, die audie Erhhung der Vergbarkeit von Kinderbetreuungs-

Kurzassung (DE)


18/92

16

sttten ausgelegt ist. Sie knnte jedoch genauso leicht zueiner Politik hren, die einen lngeren Erziehungsurlaubbzw. eine Erhhung des Kindergeldes rdert. Allerdingssind der verlngerte Erziehungsurlaub oder eine erhhtenanzielle Frderung r das Arbeitskrteangebot nichtrderlich und knnten zu groen Unterschieden bezglichder Arbeitszeit von Frauen und Mnner hren. Eine weiterekomplizierte Angelegenheit betrit die reie Elternwahl. DieEntscheidungen der Eltern im Hinblick au die Arbeit unddie Auswirkungen au die Familie knnen unterschiedlichsein und meist untersttzt die entliche Politik die reieElternwahl. Das Ergebnis knnte zu einer komplexen Mi-schung aus Mglichkeiten bezglich der Arbeitszeit, der -nanziellen Frderung und der Dienstleistungen hren, dienicht zwangslug einheitlich ist bzw. sich nicht vorteilhatau die Gleichstellung der Geschlechter auswirkt.

Kinderbetreuungssttten

Erschwingliche und vergbare Kinderbetreuungsstttenvon hoher Qualitt sind r berusttige Eltern von enor-mer Bedeutung. In Europa ist jedoch die Vergbarkeit undErschwinglichkeit der Kinderbetreuungssttten sehr unter-schiedlich. Die EU-SILC-Daten deuten darau hin, dass in eini-gen Lndern Eltern umassenden Gebrauch von entlichenEinrichtungen (einschlielich Vorschulerziehung) machen,wohingegen Eltern in anderen Lndern mehr au sonsti-ge Lsungen (wie Tagesmtter beziehungsweise Familie,Freunde oder Nachbarn) bauen. In der Altersgruppe von

null bis zwei Jahren variierte 2006 die Inanspruchnahme derKinderbetreuungssttten von Dnemark mit 73 % bis Tsche-chien und Polen mit nur 2 %. Es scheint, dass die Inanspruch-nahme der Kinderbetreuungssttten in sieben Lndern (D-nemark, Niederlande, Schweden, Belgien, Spanien, Portugalund Grobritannien) sowie Island und Norwegen ber oderbei dem in Barcelona estgelegten Ziel von 33 % liegt. Je-doch wird die Kinderbetreuung in einigen Lndern nur inForm einer Teilzeitbetreuung in Anspruch genommen unddeckt wahrscheinlich nicht die gesamte Arbeitswoche ab.Die Inanspruchnahme von entlichen Betreuungseinrich-tungen steigt mit dem Alter der Kinder. Innerhalb der Alters-gruppe von drei Jahren bis zum Pfichtschulalter war Belgien

2006 an erster Stelle, wobei seine Kinderbetreuungsstttenbeinahe zu 100 % in Anspruch genommen wurden. Polenbendet sich mit 28 % an letzter Stelle im Ranking. Natrlichist die hohe Inanspruchnahme grtenteils der Miteinbe-ziehung von Vorschuleinrichtungen unter dem Deckmantelentliche Einrichtungen und der hohen Deckungsrate derVorschuleinrichtungen r die Kinder dieser Altersgruppe zuverdanken. Laut den Zielsetzungen von Barcelona sollte dietatschliche Deckungsrate bis 2010 mindestens 90 % betra-gen. Es stellt sich heraus, dass neun Mitgliedstaaten (und Is-land) die Zielsetzungen von Barcelona bereits erreicht habenoder nahe daran sind. Bei der Deutung dieser Zahlen muss

man jedoch bedenken, dass die Vorschule in den meistenLndern eine Teilzeiteinrichtung ist, weshalb berusttige El-tern weitere Einrichtungen zur Kinderbetreuung bentigen,deren Vergbarkeit wiederum geringer sein knnte.

Die Inanspruchnahme der Kinderbetreuungssttten lieertkeine Antwort au die Frage, ob der Bedar vollstndig ge-deckt wird. Der tatschliche Bedar an Kinderbetreuungs-sttten wird durch die Teilnahme der Eltern am Arbeitsmarkt(Mtter), die Arbeitslosenrate, die Dauer des Erziehungsur-laubs, die nungszeiten der Schulen und die Vergbarkeitvon alternativen Optionen, wie beispielsweise der Betreu-ung durch Groeltern oder andere (nicht im entlichenDienst stehende) Betreuungspersonen, beeinfusst. Einerelativ geringe Deckungsrate deutet nicht zwangslug auEngpsse hin, sondern mglicherweise au alternative Op-tionen der Kinderbetreuung wie auch au einen lngerenErziehungsurlaub oder Zuschsse r die Betreuung, diezuhause stattndet. In den nordischen EU-Mitgliedstaatenwird Kinderbetreuung behandelt wie ein soziales Recht(Finnland, Dnemark und Schweden). Jedoch knnte in denanderen Lndern die Vergbarkeit von hoch qualitativen

und erschwinglichen Kinderbetreuungseinrichtungen un-zureichend sein. Vor allem scheint die Vergbarkeit der -entlichen Kinderbetreuungssttten r die kleinsten Kinderin einigen europischen Lndern gering zu sein. Die Verg-barkeit ist r Kinder von drei Jahren bis zum Pfichtschulalterhher, wobei die nungszeiten dieser Einrichtungen nichtimmer mit den Arbeitszeiten bereinstimmen. Darber hin-aus gibt es in den meisten Lndern groe Unterschiede auregionaler Ebene.

Zustzlich zu der Vergbarkeit spielt die Qualitt der Einrich-tungen eine wichtige Rolle bei der Entscheidung der Eltern,

Kinderbetreuungssttten in Anspruch zu nehmen. Bei derQualittsbeurteilung der Kinderbetreuung spielen soziale,emotionale und kognitive Entwicklungsmglichkeiten rdas Kind eine Rolle. Der groe Mangel an harmonisiertenStatistiken zu diesem Thema stellt ebenalls ein Problem dar.Vergbare, eher qualitative Daten weisen ebenalls au groeSchwankungen in Europa hin. Das Betreuer-Kind-Verhltnis,zum Beispiel, scheint sich sehr stark zwischen den europi-schen Lndern zu unterscheiden. Ein weiterer Qualittsas-pekt ist das Ausbildungsniveau der Betreuungspersonen. Inmanchen Lndern scheint das Ausbildungsniveau der Be-treuungspersonen eher niedrig zu sein. Darber hinaus gibtes in den meisten Lndern groe Unterschiede bezglich

des Ausbildungsniveaus des Personals in Kindergrten, Vor-schulen und Kinderkrippen einerseits und des Ausbildungs-niveaus von privaten Kinderbetreuern andererseits. An dieerstgenannte Gruppe werden meistens strenge Anorderun-gen gestellt und deren Einhaltung wird auch staatlich ber-wacht. In der Regel vergen private Kinderbetreuer jedochber ein deutlich niedrigeres Ausbildungsniveau.

In den meisten Lndern werden Dienstleistungen im Be-reich der Kinderbetreuung au dem einen oder anderenWege nanziell gerdert. Allerdings weisen die aktuellenFinanzierungsprogramme erhebliche Unterschiede au. Be-

zglich der Makro-Auteilung der Kosten scheinen die vonden Eltern geleisteten Beitrge von 8 % in Schweden bishin zu 80 % in Polen zu variieren. In den meisten Lndernsind die Kosten r die Kinderbetreuung vom Familienein-


19/92

17


kommen abhngig. Die nordischen Lnder (mit Ausnahmevon Island) haben einen Maximalgebhr r die Kinderbe-treuung estgelegt und in anderen Lndern knnen Elternmit geringem Einkommen die Kinderbetreuung kostenlosin Anspruch nehmen. Es gibt jedoch auch Lnder, in denenFamilien mit einem verhltnismig geringen Einkommenhhere Beitrge leisten mssen als Familien mit mittlerenoder hohen Einkommen. In einigen Lndern gilt die Kinder-betreuung als teuer. Darber hinaus kann die entlicheKinderbetreuung erschwinglich sein, whrend die privateKinderbetreuung hug teuer ist. Neben der Vergbarkeitund Erschwinglichkeit knnen sich auch gesellschatlicheNormen au den Bedar an Kinderbetreuungssttten aus-wirken. In den meisten Lndern ndert sich die Einstellungje nach Alter des Kindes. Nur in Belgien und in Frankreichscheinen Kinderbetreuungssttten allgemein berwortetzu sein. In den meisten anderen Lndern ist man der Mei-

nung, dass Kinderbetreuungssttten r grere Kinder, jedoch nicht r sehr kleine Kinder geeignet sind. Darberhinaus kann die Anzahl der Stunden ein Punkt sein, der zueiner Inanspruchnahme der Kinderbetreuungssttten inForm von Teilzeitbetreuung hrt. Sogar in den nordischenLndern, in denen die Kinderbetreuung (r grere Kin-der) allgemein berwortet wird und in groem Umanggenutzt wird, wird das Thema Gute-Mutter-Sein und dasWohlergehen der Kinder in den Betreuungssttten hin undwieder entlich diskutiert.

Politische Angelegenheiten

Aus der politischen Perspektive wirt das Bereitstellen vonKinderbetreuungssttten mehrere Fragen au. Eine wichtigeFrage bezieht sich au grundlegende Motive r eine Inves-tition in Kinderbetreuungssttten und kann sich von der Si-cherstellung des kntigen Angebots an Arbeitnehmern bishin zur Entwicklungsrderung der Kinder erstrecken. Dievorherrschende Besorgnis bezglich des Arbeitsmarkteskann beispielsweise zu einer sehr strikten Politik im Hinblickau die Vergbarkeit hren. Im Vergleich dazu gibt es auchdie Manahmen, die die wichtige Rolle der Kinderbetreu-ungseinrichtungen in Verbindung mit der sozialen Integra-tion betonen. Ein weiterer wichtiger Aspekt betrit die po-

litische Mischung aus nanziellen Frderungen, zeitlichenRegelungen und Dienstleistungen. Dies ist jedoch von dengegebenen politischen Bestrebungen abhngig. Die tat-schlichen Entscheidungen bezglich dieser Themen kn-nen an grundlegende Debatten ber die erstrebenswertes-te Gesellschatsorm oder eher an praktische berlegungenin Hinblick au die aus nanzieller Sicht sinnvollste Lsunggekoppelt sein. Darber hinaus kann es sein, dass die aktu-elle Politik von der berzeugung geleitet wird, dass es denEltern reistehen sollte, zwischen verschiedenen Optionenzu whlen, da die Wnsche von Eltern zu Eltern variieren.

In der Tat scheinen viele Lnder die Vergbarkeit von Kin-derbetreuungssttten zu erhhen, obwohl die tatschlicheWachstumsrate manchmal enttuschend ist. Teilweise istdies au eingeschrnkte Budgets zurckzuhren. Gleich-

zeitig versucht die Politik in vielen Lndern, einen Mittel-weg bezglich der Vergbarkeit von Dienstleistungen, Zeitund Geld zu nden. Dabei ist das Ziel, die reie Elternwahlzu rdern, die Stellung der Frau au dem Arbeitsmarkt zuverbessern oder die Familie an sich zu untersttzen. Das Er-gebnis ist nicht immer ein kohrentes Modell, das ein Kon-tinuum der Familienrderung (r Eltern wie auch Kinder)bietet. Beispielsweise ist die Dauer des Erziehungsurlaubsnicht immer an die Vergbarkeit der Kinderbetreuungs-sttten angepasst. Des Weiteren kann die Betonung derreien Elternwahl nachteilige Auswirkungen mit sich brin-gen, die dazu hren, dass soziokonomische Unterschiedezwischen den Familien vergrert werden.

Ein weiterer wichtiger politischer Bereich betrit die Qualittder Kinderbetreuungssttten, besser gesagt die Ausbildungs-qualitt des Betreuungspersonals. Indem das Ausbildungs-

niveau angehoben wird, kann deren Position verbessert undderen Beru dem Lehrerberu angenhert werden. In einigenLndern wird versucht, das Ausbildungsniveau anzuheben.Auch hier knnen sich bedeutende Budgetbeschrnkun-gen au die tatschliche Durchhrung dieser politischenManahmen hemmend auswirken. Ebenso ist es wichtig,eine Entscheidung in Hinblick au ein einheitliches Bild beiden Qualittsanorderungen zu llen, um negative Wech-selwirkungen zu vermeiden. Dies gilt sowohl r die Betreu-ung in Einrichtungen als auch r husliche Kinderbetreu-ung, r den privaten und entlichen Bereich. Schlielichist es auch wichtig zu beachten, dass der hohe Stellenwert

der Kinderbetreuungssttten innerhalb der EuropischenBeschtigungsstrategie einen Einfuss au das Niveau derMitgliedstaaten hat. Obwohl die Zielsetzungen von Barce-lona keinen groen Einfuss au alle nationalen politischenDebatten haben, ist eine berwachung der Entwicklung derLissabon Strategie hilreich, um das Thema Kinderbetreuungals eine wichtige politische Prioritt hervorzuheben.

Zusammenassung und Schlussolgerung

Die in diesem Bericht dargelegten Ergebnisse, die tatsch-liche Erllung der Barcelona-Ziele durch die europischenMitgliedstaaten und die ortdauernden Diskussionen deu-

ten darau hin, dass das Thema Kinderbetreuung in nchs-ter Zeit eine wichtige politische Prioritt darstellen wird.Trotz all der Bemhungen und Verbesserungen gibt es in ei-nigen europischen Mitgliedstaaten zu wenige hochwerti-ge und erschwingliche Kinderbetreuungssttten. Durch dieSILC-Daten sind eine Beurteilung der aktuellen Lage sowieeine grndliche berwachung der Manahmen, die in ver-schiedenen EU-Mitgliedsstaaten ergrien werden, mglich.Diese Inormationen sollten zusammen mit der Betonungau die Vergbarkeit von Kinderbetreuungssttten in derEuropischen Beschtigungsstrategie eine Basis r einePolitik bieten, die au die einheitliche soziokonomische In-

rastruktur ausgerichtet ist. Dabei sind die politischen Zieleim Hinblick au die Teilnahme am Arbeitsmarkt, die Gleich-stellung der Geschlechter, die Fertilitt und soziale Integra-tion zu beachten.


20/92


21/92

19


In recent decades, childcare services have become amatter o serious public concern. Aordable and good-quality childcare services may improve the reconciliationo work and amily lie and thus oster labour market par-ticipation and gender equality. Childcare acilities mayalso provide an important answer to declining ertilityrates, by lowering the cost o childbearing in terms o la-bour market and career opportunities. Finally there is agrowing tendency to see childcare services rom a socialpedagogical perspective. In this perspective the mainpolicy rational is no longer the reconciliation o work andcare, but rather the contribution o childcare services tochild development and socioeconomic integration.

The importance o providing childcare services has alsobeen recognised at the EU level. At the Barcelona Sum-mit in 2002, some explicit conclusions and targets weredened with regard to the provision o childcare services.Conrming the goal o ull employment, the EuropeanCouncil agreed that Member States should remove dis-incentives to emale labour orce participation and striveto provide childcare by 2010 to at least 90 % o childrenbetween 3 years old and the mandatory school age andat least 33 % o children under 3 years o age. These tar-gets are part o the European employment strategy and

o the (current and past) integrated guidelines askingMember States to apply a lie-cycle approach in theiremployment policies.

Since 2007, harmonised EU statistics on the provision o(ormal and other) childcare services exist within the con-text o the EU statistics on income and living conditions

(SILC). On the basis o the SILC data it is possible to drawsome comparisons across countries and to assess theirprogress towards the Barcelona targets. In addition, theSILC data contain inormation on the number o hours dur-ing a usual week or which childcare is received or or whichschool is attended. However, there remain some importantgaps in inormation at the EU level. Little is known or exam-ple, about the quality, aordability and attitudes towardsinstitutionalised childcare and about the link between theshare o children covered by childcare, the Barcelona tar-gets and the existence o an uncovered demand.

Taking into account the SILC data, this report provides

an analysis o both the quantitative and qualitative pro-vision o childcare services or the 27 EU Member Statesand three EEA countries Iceland, Liechtenstein andNorway. It discusses the extent to which the demand orchildcare is covered, the importance attached to child-care services within the national context, and the poli-cies developed at the national level to improve the pro-vision o childcare acilities. As such, the report updatesand extends the discussion o childcare in a report by theCommissions previous network o gender experts (seePlantenga and Remery, 2005). The report is organised asollows. Chapter 1 deals with the importance o childcare

services within the context o labour orce participation,gender equality, the ertility rate and social integration.Chapter 2 evaluates the availability, quality, and aord-ability o childcare services. Chapter 3 presents the re-cent policies developed at the national level with regardto the provision o childcare services. Finally, Chapter 4provides a short summary and the main conclusions.

Introduction


22/92


23/92


21

Investing in childcare services1.

There are several reasons why countries might invest inchildcare services. A classical argument reers to the actthat the availability o good-quality childcare serviceshas a positive impact on the emale participation rate. Ahigher participation rate may increase gender equality,oster economic growth and help improve the sustain-ability o the present-day welare state, especially in thelight o an ageing population. Another argument pointsto the act that childcare services might increase ertilityrates by making a child less costly in terms o income andcareer opportunities. In act, the ertility and participationargument may be interpreted as two sides o the samecoin. In the participation argument, the ertility rate is

taken or granted and childcare services should acilitatethe combination o care responsibilities with paid work.In the ertility argument, participation is taken or grant-ed. Here childcare services are supposed to acilitate thecombination o paid work with care responsibilities. Inaddition to the reconciliation argument, the provision ochildcare services might also contribute to the goal o re-ducing poverty. Higher participation in the labour orcereduces the risk o poverty throughout peoples liespanand especially in old age. The improved well-being oparents may also reduce child poverty and thus improveuture outcomes or children. The eect on children may

even be more direct: good-quality childcare services mayserve a child-development purpose, providing the childwith a rich, sae and stimulating environment. As suchchildcare services may oer an important contributionto child development and socioeconomic integration.

The arguments in avour o childcare services are wellknown and most European countries have taken ini-tiatives to increase the availability o (quality) childcareservices. However, many Member States are ar romreaching the Barcelona childcare targets. The Joint Em-ployment Report (JER) 2006/07, or example, indicatesthat the potential contribution o women to raising the

aggregate employment rate is still not ully exploited. A-ordable and accessible quality childcare provision mustbe expanded to allow both parents to work, to betterreconcile work and amily lie and to reduce high levelso child poverty (JER 2006/07: 4). Barriers seem to be -nancial as well as ideological. Perhaps one o the mostcomplicated challenges reers to the act that the policyobjectives on participation, gender equality, ertility andsocial integration are not always easily compatible. Childdevelopment concerns, or example, or the ambition toreduce child poverty may translate into a policy targetedat increasing childcare services, but may just as easily

translate into a policy avouring extended leave acilitiesand/or increasing the provision o childcare allowances.Long parental leave, however, or a avourable nancialincentive structure may not promote labour supply and

may result in large dierences in male and emale work-ing time patterns. Another complicated matter reers tothe issue o parental choice. Parents may dier in theirpreerences with regard to work and amily outcomesand most public policies tend to enhance parentalchoice. The result may be a complicated mixture o timeacilities, nancial allowances and services that may notnecessarily be very coherent and/or may not be vary a-vourable rom a gender equality point o view.

In the ollowing pages the case or investing in child-care care services is outlined in somewhat more detail.Section 1.1 provides an overview o labour market out-

comes and illustrates the impact o parenthood on thelabour market behaviour o men and women. Section1.2 ocuses on ertility trends and changing patternso amily ormation, whereas Section 1.3 elaborates onsocial inclusion and child development. Finally Section1.4 contains a short summary. Each section provides anoverview o cross-national dierences as well as a shortoverview o the relevant literature on the eectivenesso childcare subsidies. As such this chapter serves a dualgoal: to illustrate the dierences between 30 Europeancountries in work and amily patterns and to assess therole o childcare services in this respect.

Improving labour market1.1

participation

The Lisbon targets o 2000 state that the employmentrate in the EU should be raised to 70 % and the emaleemployment rate to 60 % by 2010. Although recenteconomic developments have been quite positive, sus-tained eorts are needed to reach the target o 70 %(JER 2007/08: 4). Graph 1 shows the employment rateso all the EU Member States and the three EEA countries.

The dierence between the highest and lowest-rankingcountry is almost 30 percentage points, with Iceland hav-ing a total employment rate o 85.1 % and Malta an em-ployment rate o 55.7 % (data or Liechtenstein missing).From the graph it also appears that among the EU Mem-ber States Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, Austria,the United Kingdom, Cyprus and Finland have alreadymet the Lisbon target or total employment, with Ger-many, Estonia and Ireland close behind. At the lower endo the ranking are Hungary, Poland and Malta.

The emale employment rates are summarised in Graph 2.

It appears that the cross-national dierences are largeramong women than among the total labour orce, at al-most 48 versus 30 percentage points. Again the highest-ranking country is Iceland, with a emale employment rate


24/92

22

o almost 81 %, whereas in Malta the emale employmentrate is just below 37 % (data or Liechtenstein missing).Graph 2 also indicates that 15 EU Member States (andIceland and Norway) have met or exceeded the Lisbontarget o 60 % emale employment: Denmark, Sweden,the Netherlands, Finland, Estonia, the United Kingdom,Latvia, Austria, Germany, Slovenia, Cyprus, Lithuania, Por-

tugal, Ireland and France. At the other end it appears thatGreece, Italy and Malta are still ar rom the Lisbon target,as the emale employment rates are under 50 %.

The dierence between total and emale employmentrates indicates that throughout Europe there is still a largegap between the employment rates o men and women,

with women alling signicantly behind. Graph 3 ranks allthe countries in this respect. The highest employment gen-der gaps are ound in the southern part o Europe: Malta,Greece, Italy, Spain and Cyprus. Ireland and Luxembourgalso score rather unavourably in this respect. Small gen-der gaps are ound in Sweden and Finland (less than 5 per-centage points). Lithuania and Norway also score rather

avourably. When interpreting the data, it has to be notedthat the Lisbon targets and related to this the employ-ment data are based on a headcount. Dierences inworking hours are not taken into account. As women workpart-time more oten than men, the employment gendergap, as presented in Graph 3, is in act underestimated.When measured in ull-time equivalents, the gender gap

Graph 1. Total employment rate 2007

0

20

40

60

80

100

MTPLHUITROSKELBGBELUFRLTEUESCZSIPTLVIEEEDEFICYUKATSENLDKNOIS

Employmentrate%

Lisbon target

Total employment rate

NB: EU = EU-27.

Source: Eurostat, EU labour orce survey 2007. For IS and NO: Eurostat employment statistics 2006.

Graph 2. Employment rate o women 2007

0

20

40

60

80

100

MTITELPLHUROSKESLUBECZBGEUFRIEPTLTCYSIDEATLVUKEEFINLSEDKNOIS

Employmentrate%

Lisbon target

Female employment rate

NB: EU = EU-27.

Source: Eurostat, EU labour orce sur vey 2007. For IS and NO: Eurostat employment statistics 2006.


25/92

23


calculated or the EU-27 increases to 20.6 percentagepoints compared to 14.2 percentage points when meas-ured in headcount. The Dutch gender gap particularly in-creases rom 12.6 percentage points when calculated inheadcounts to 29.1 percentage points when calculated inull-time equivalents (see or more details the appendix).

An important reason or employment dierences betweenmen and women is the dierent impact o parenthood.Whereas men with children tend to work more than menwithout children, the opposite is true or women: womenwithout children have higher employment rates than wom-en with children. The dierent impact is illustrated in Graph4, which compares the absolute dierence in employmentrates o men and women without the presence o any chil-dren and with the presence o a child aged 06 within theage group 2049. Remarkably, the impact o parenthoodon men is rather similar in the Member States and hoversaround 10 percentage points (data or Sweden, Iceland,Liechtenstein and Norway missing). For women, however,

the impact diers considerably. The highest gures areound in the Czech Republic (40.5 percentage points), Hun-gary (33.6 percentage points) and Slovakia (32.8 percent-age points). In Romania and Belgium, on the other hand,the dierence is rather small (2.1 and 0.9 percentage pointsrespectively). Portugal and Slovenia are the only countrieswhere women are more likely to be employed ater havingchildren. The employment impact o parenthood on wom-en is 3.9 percentage points in Portugal and 5.5 percent-age points in Slovenia.

The impact o childcare subsidies

Theoretically the impact o childcare subsidies on labourorce participation is rather straightorward: childcaresubsidies reduce the relative price o childcare and

thereore increase the relative return o market work(Jaumotte, 2003; OECD, 2007). Empirical studies o therelationship between childcare costs and labour orceparticipation are consistent with this prediction: whencosts go down, labour orce participation goes up,especially among mothers. For Germany, Bchel andSpie (2002a, 2002b), or example, show that extensive

childcare possibilities intensiy the labour market par-ticipation rate o mothers above all in the ormer WestGermany. In Greece two evaluation studies suggest thatthe availability o public childcare services contributes tothe activation o important numbers o non-employedwomen (Data RC 2006; EETAA 2006). For the Netherlands,Euwals et al. (2007) show that between 1992 and 2004participation o women in the labour market has be-come less reliant on the presence o children. Accordingto the authors this is probably related to the increase inthe availability and aordability o childcare since 1990.A recent study in Austria revealed a signicant positivecorrelation between the labour-market participation o

mothers and the availability o adequate childcare serv-ices and a clearly negative correlation i the childcareacility closes or lunch (Neuwirth and Wernhart, 2007).

Studies may also ocus on the impact o the lack o (a-ordable) childcare. In Hungary, almost 60 % o those onmaternity and parental leave experience diculties inbalancing work and amily duties and claim this to bethe main barrier in returning to employment; 80 % o therespondents mentioned the lack o available childcareservices as a major explanatory actor or their inactivity(Frey 2002). In the United Kingdoman estimated hal o

non-working parents said they would take up employ-ment i they could obtain good-quality, aordable and re-liable childcare (Bryson et al., 2006). Related to this issue,a study on Spain shows that increases in the price o paid

Graph 3. Employment gender gap 2007

Percentage

points

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

FISENOLTEEDKLVISBGFRSIDEUKPTRONLPLHUBEATEUSKIELUCZCYESITELMT

NB: EU = EU-27.

Source: Eurostat, EU labour orce survey 2007. For IS and NO: Eurostat employment statistics 2006.


26/92

24

care services reduce the likelihood o labour participationo the mother: an EUR 1 increase in the hourly price oday-care centres reduces the probability o employmentby 32 % (Borra, 2006). A Polish study shows that amongsuch variables as education, age structure, maternityleave, institutionalised childcare, public transport, levelo urbanisation and sociocultural traits, the most impor-

tant actor that aects the emerging pattern o womensproessional activity rates in Poland is the availabilityo childcare. The lowering o the provision o childcareplaces in nurseries and pre-schools negatively aectedactivity rates o women (Mickiewicz and Bell, 2000). Ata more general level, gures rom the European Unionlabour orce survey 2005 (module on reconciliation be-tween work and amily lie) seem to suggest that the lacko childcare acilities prevents a considerable group o in-active women rom participating in the labour market. Inaddition, insucient childcare acilities seem to restrainthe average working hours among emale employees(see Eurostat employment statistics and LFS Ad hoc mod-

ule Reconciliation between work and amily lie).

One could argue that, by increasing the labour orce par-ticipation rate o women, childcare could also contributeto reducing gender inequality in terms o careers and/or level o payment. Although several studies are avail-able on the impact o children on wages and/or level o jobs, hardly any studies ocus explicitly on the relationbetween childcare and the gender pay gap. In Germany,extended ormal day care and gainully employed moth-ers on average correlate with higher earnings (Bchel andSpie, 2002a). In Greece, with respect to career advance-

ment, two evaluation studies show that a great share owomen who have recourse to public childcare were ableto maintain or improve the jobs they already have, im-plying that the improvement o public childcare services

contributes not only to raising emale activity rates butalso to securing employment and upgrading jobs (DataRC, 2006; EETAA, 2006).

When studying the eectiveness o childcare subsidieson raising emale labour supply a ew caveats have to betaken into account. The rst issue reers to the possibility

o substitution eects. A ull subsidisation o ormal child-care arrangements, or example, might induce workingparents to substitute inormal arrangements or ormalones. As a result, the increase in childcare subsidies maybe (ar) larger than the increase in emale labour orceparticipation. Another issue reers to the impact o child-care subsidies on the hours o work among those alreadyin the labour orce. Whereas the eect in terms o labourmarket participation may be rather straightorward, theeect on working hours is ambiguous, as the increase intake-home wage would create an income eect and asubstitution eect that work in an opposite direction tothe desired hours o work. Finally, the issue o causality

has to be taken into account. In some countries there isstrong evidence o causality rom childcare support to e-male participation. In other countries, however, in particu-lar the Nordic ones, the sequencing seems to be reversed,with an increase in emale labour participation precedingthe extension o childcare acilities (Jaumotte, 2003).

Improving ertility1.2

An important change regarding ertility is the postpone-ment o childbearing: women have ewer children when

young, but more children at later ages. Recuperation athigher ages is, however, only partial. As a result, over thelast ew decades ertility rates have been declining to alevel beneath the replacement rate in every EU Member

Graph 4. Employment impact o parenthood on men and women 2006

Percentage

point

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

SIPTBERODKLTCYELITLUNLESFRPLMTEUFIATIELVUKBGEEDESKHUCZ

Men

Women

Source: Eurostat, EU labour orce survey 2006.


27/92

25


State. In combination with increased lie expectancy thisresults in an ageing population and, in the longer run,a decline in population size. Graph 5 shows the averageage o mothers at birth o the rst child. In the majority othe 30 European countries this average has exceeded 25.The highest average age is ound in the United Kingdom(29.3 years) and Spain (29.2). In Estonia, Latvia, Bulgaria

and Romania it is below 25 (data or Belgium, France, It-aly, Malta and Liechtenstein missing). Graph 6 shows theertility rates in European countries in 2006. The highestertility rates are ound in Iceland and France, and thelowest in Poland and Slovakia. Despite national dier-ences, the total ertility rates are now below replacementlevel or all EU Member States.

Traditionally, the decline in ertility rates has been ex-plained by reerring to the increase in emale labourorce participation. The higher average educationallevel o women and the concomitant desire to build upa proessional career increases the opportunity costso children. This standard economic argument cannotexplain, however, the reversal o the traditionally nega-

tive correlation between ertility and participation rates.Countries with a higher rate o emale employment (suchas Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland) alsohave relatively high ertility rates, while in countries witha low emale participation level (Slovakia, Hungary andPoland) ertility has dropped below 1.5. This suggeststhat the wide availability o reconciliation acilities in the

Graph 5. Mothers average age at birth o rst child 2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

ROBGLTLVEESKPOHUCZISATCYPTSINODKFIELEUIESELUNLDEESUK

Mothersage

NB: EU = EU-25.

Source: Eurostat. Data or DK: 2001. EE, EL, ES and UK: 2002. BE, FR, IT, MT and LI: not available.

Graph 6. Total ertility rates 2006

Totalfertility

rate

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

SKPLSIROLTITDECZHUPTLVBGESELATMTLICYEEBELUNLDKUKFISENOIEFRIS

Source: Eurostat population statistics. Data or BE: 1997; IT: 2005.


28/92

26

Nordic countries supports ertility decisions. In contrast,combining childrearing and being in employment seemsmost incompatible in the Mediterranean countries andsome central European countries (OECD, 2007, 34).

The impact o childcare subsidies

Several studies have underlined the importance o child-care acilities within the context o childbearing behaviour.Ermisch (1989), or example, concludes that the availabilityo childcare services in some OECD countries has lessenedthe reduction o ertility rates associated with the higherlabour orce participation o women. Del Boca et al. (2003)illustrate or Italy that childcare availability has a positiveeect on ertility rates, while higher childcare costs havethe opposite eect. It proves, however, rather dicult toanalyse the specic relationship between the ull range

o policies and ertility rates. DAddio and dErcole (2005)relate actual childcare costs or households with two chil-dren aged 2 and 3 years, cared or on a ull-time basis in apublic or publicly recognised day-care acility, to the totalertility rate. As expected, in countries where actual child-care costs are lower, ertility rates are higher. The correla-tion is, however, not signicant. According to the authors,this might be related to the act that only the costs o apublic day-care acility is taken into account and not theactual availability. Research, however, indicates that it isthe combined eect o childcare availability andcosts thatis most important (DAddio and dErcole, 2005, 55).

In a more sophisticated statistical analysis on ertility ratesin 16 OECD countries, the authors nd that ertility ratesare higher in countries where the direct costs o raisingchildren are lower, where the share o women workingpart-time is higher, where the length o parental leave islonger and where childcare enrolment rates are higher.In addition, simulations o our policy reorms (taxes andtransers that lower the direct costs o children, greateravailability o part-time employment or women, longerperiods o parental leave and greater availability o or-mal childcare or pre-school children) indicate that thesepolicies may be eective in raising ertility levels, though

this diers according to country. In Spain and Germany,or example, there seems to be hardly an impact, whereasin Greece, the Netherlands and Portugal, there is a clearincrease in ertility. The impact o the dierent policiesmay vary. In the Netherlands, where the part-time rateis already high, an increase in ormal childcare acilitiesor pre-school children seems most important. In Por-tugal a combination o lowering the direct costs o chil-dren, increasing ormal childcare acilities or pre-schoolchildren and, to a lesser extent, increasing the availabil-ity o part-time employment seems crucial (DAddio andd Ercole, 2005).

The importance o childcare acilities has been conrmedin a recent Norwegian study. This study concludes thatthe availability o high-quality, aordable childcare

leads to higher rates o women making the transitionto motherhood. The eects proved to be substantivelylarge (Rinduss et al. 2007). With respect to Germany, thebirth rates o women in the ormer East and West in theyears 19962000 have been studied with reerence to theprovision o childcare. The central nding o the survey isthat a sucient supply o ormal childcare places has hadan impact on the decision or a rst child in the ormerEast Germany. In contrast, in the ormer West Germany theavailability o inormal childcare proved to be important.The study concludes that the results express the existingsupply structures in the ormer East and West Germany(Hank et al., 2003). In Poland, the delaying o the decisionto have the rst child began in the 1990s (Kotowska etal., 2007), which coincided with the closure o childcareacilities, increased labour market diculties or women,and higher participation in urther education. According

Kotowska et al. (2007), the main actors that wouldaect the decision to have another child are the ease oaccessing and maintaining employment, the cost relatedto care and education o children and adjusting workinghours to childcare.

Improving social inclusion1.3

Next to reconciliation, social inclusion is receiving in-creasing prominence in the public policies o mostcountries. In this respect, social inclusion might either

reer to parents, more particularly to single mothers andmigrant mothers, or to children. Notwithstanding thegeneral increase in the emale participation rates, sin-gle mothers ace particular challenges in trying to copewith work and amily commitments. As a result, singleparent amilies (o which approximately 80 % are e-male headed) are generally more vulnerable to the risko poverty. The disadvantaged position o single par-ent households is evident rom the statistical indicatorsdeveloped within the context o the EU social inclusionprocess. Graph 7 shows that a ar larger share o loneparents with at least one dependent child is at risk opoverty compared to two-adult households with one

dependent child. Especially in Luxembourg, Ireland, theCzech Republic, the Netherlands, Sweden, Austria andDenmark, the risk o poverty is relatively high or loneparent household compared to other households. In ad-dition children in single parent amilies are more likelyto grow up in poverty, which may hamper child devel-opment. According to the EU-SILC data or 2006, 32 % oadults and children living in lone parent households inthe EU-27 were at risk o poverty while over 77 % o thiscategory reported deprivation.

A more recent challenge is social exclusion among eth-

nic minorities and/or immigrant and migrant women.In several Member States there is a general increase inthe migrant population, both in absolute numbers andas a proportion o the total population. Immigrant and


29/92

27


migrant workers may ace two main orms o potentialdisadvantage, reerring to structural and socioculturalintegration. Structural integration reers to access toeducation, employment, income and economic inde-pendence and this depends partly on the resources themigrant arrives with and partly on the institutions o thereceiving countries. Sociocultural integration reers to

dierences in religion and social values, including gen-der roles within the amily and how the receiving coun-try responds to dierences. All immigrant and migrantworkers ace these disadvantages, but women may be aparticularly vulnerable group because o limited labourmarket opportunities and/or limited independent rightsor social security (see Fagan et al., 2006: 115).

Reducing child poverty is another important challengeunder this heading. At 19 %, the risk o poverty amongchildren is higher than that o the general population.The risk appears to be connected with low work intensityo the household. According to the Joint Report on So-

cial Protection and Social Inclusion 2008, about 10 % oall children live in households where nobody works and60 % o those children are at risk o poverty. The shareo children at risk o poverty reaches 25 % when onlyone parents works, compared to 7 % when both parentswork (JRSPSI, 2008:7). Other actors coupled with lowwork intensity include living with lone parents or in largeamilies. Graph 8 indicates the risk o poverty amongchildren aged 017 years, compared to the risk o pov-erty among the total population. It appears that Latvia,Poland, Italy, Lithuania and Hungary display particularlyhigh percentages o children at risk o poverty. Relative

avourable scores are indicated by Cyprus, Denmark andFinland. Only our countries (Denmark, Germany, Cyprusand Finland) indicate a lower score or children than orthe total population, whereas in Belgium and Slovenia

the risks are equal. In general, countries that have lowrates o child poverty (under 5 % o households with chil-dren) do so because they combine high levels o parentalemployment with an eective redistribution o resourcesthrough the tax benet system (OECD, 2007).

Role o childcare subsidies

Increasing maternal employment is an eective way oimproving amily income. In act, womens labour mar-ket participation is the best and most eective protec-tion against poverty in a amily with children (Esping-Andersen, 2002). Improving the reconciliation o workand amily by investing in

Documents

The provision of childcare services. 2009