Advertisement

Do children from small families do better?

  • Nick ParrEmail author
Article

Abstract

The education, income, wealth and satisfaction with life of australians aged 25–54 are examined in relation to the circumstances of their childhood, paying particular attention to variation by number of siblings when growing up. The data are from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survery. Educational attainment, income earned and household wealth tend to be greater for people who grew up in relatively small families. The effect of the number of siblings on educational attainment is greater for females than for males. However the advantages of growing up in a smaller family do not translate into higher levels of satisfaction with life. The implications of the findings for the public debate on fertility and child-related benefits in Australia are discussed, as are the implications of a child-quality-child-quantity trade-off for the explanation of fertility levels in more developed countries.

Keywords

Australia developed countries family size education income wealth life satisfaction fertility economic theory intergenerational social mobility 

References

  1. Ahlburg, Dennis A., Allen C. Kelley and Karen Oppenheim Mason. 1996.The Impact of Population Growth on Well-Being in Developing Countries. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). 2005.The Health and Welfare of Australias Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples 2005. Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
  3. Axinn, William G., Marin E. Clarkberg and Arland Thornton. 1994. Family influences on family size preferences.Demography 31 (1): 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker, Gary S. 1981.A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Becker, Gary S. and Robert J. Barro. 1988. A reformulation of the economic theory of fertility.Quarterly Journal of Economics C3(1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker, Gary S. and H. Gregg Lewis. 1973. On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children.Journal of Political Economy 81(2): 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becker, Gary S. and Kevin M. Murphy. 2000.Social Economics: Market Behavior in a Social Environment. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Berrington, Ann and Ian Diamond. 1999. Marital dissolution among the 1958 British birth cohort: the role of cohabitation.Population Studies 53(1): 19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Birrell, Bob and Siew-Ean Khoo. 1995.The Second Generation in Australia: Educational and Occupational Outcomes. Bureau of Immigration, Multicultural and Population Research Statistical Report No. 14. Canberra: AGPS.Google Scholar
  10. Blake, Judith, 1968. Are babies consumer durables? A critique of the economic theory of reproductive motivation.Population Studies 22(1): 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blake, Judith. 1981, Family size and the quality of children.Demography 18(4): 421–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blake, Judith. 1989.Family Size and Achievement. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Breusch, Trevor and Edith Gray. 2004a. New estimates of mothers forgone earnings using HILDA data.Australian Journal of Labour Economics 7(2): 125–150.Google Scholar
  14. Breusch, Trevor and Edith Gray. 2004b. Does marriage improve the wages of men and women in Australia? Paper presented to 12th Biennial Conference of the Australian Population Association, Canberra, 15–17 September. <http://acsr.anu.edu.au/APA2004/papers/7D_Breusch.pdf>.Accessed:2005.Google Scholar
  15. Caldwell, John C. 1982.Theory of Fertility Decline. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  16. Chapman, Bruce, Yvonne Dunlop, Matthew Gray, Amy Liu and Deborah Mitchell. 2001. The impact of children on the lifetime earnings of Australian women: evidence from the 1990s.Australian Economic Record 34(4): 373–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Craig, Lyn 2003. The time cost of children: a cross-national comparison of the interaction between time use and fertility rate. Paper presented to 25th IATUR Conference on Time Use Research Comparing Time, Brussels, 17–19 September.Google Scholar
  18. Craig, Lyn and Michael Bittman. 2003. The time costs of Children in Australia. Paper presented to Rethinking Expenditures on Children: Towards an International Research Agenda, Australian National University, Canberra, 15–16 January.Google Scholar
  19. Crimmins, Eileen M. and Richard A. Easterlin. 2000. What goals motivate individual behavior? Pp. 159–168 in K. Warner Schaie and John Hendricks (eds.),Social Structures and the Ageing Self. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Addio, Anna Cristina and Marco Mira d Ercole. 2005. Trends and determinants of fertility rates in OECD countries: the role of policies.OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 27. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  21. Dodson, Louise. 2004. The mother of all spending sprees.Sydney Morning Herald 12 May: <http://www.smh.com.au>.Accessed: 2004.Google Scholar
  22. Drew, Michael E. and Jon D. Stanford. 2003. A review of Australia s compulsory superannuation scheme after a decade.Queensland University of Technology Discussion Papers in Economics, Finance and International Competitiveness No. 127. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.Google Scholar
  23. Duncan, Otis Dudley, Ronald Freedman, J. Michael Coble and Doris P. Slesinger. 1965. Marital fertility and size of family of orientation.Demography 2(1–2): 508–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Easterlin, Richard A. 2005. Life cycle happiness and its sources. Paper presented to 2005 Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, Philadelphia, 31 March –2 April.Google Scholar
  25. Headey, Bruce 2003. Income and wealth — facilitating multiple approaches to measurement and permitting different levels of aggregation.Hilda Project Technical Paper Series No 3/03. <http://www.melbourneinstitute. com/hilda/hdps07.pdf>.Accessed: 2005.Google Scholar
  26. Headey, Bruce, Gary Marks and Mark Wooden. 2005. The structure and distribution of household wealth in Australia.Australian Economic Review 38(2): 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Headey, Bruce and Mark Wooden. 2005. The structure and distribution of household wealth in Australia.Australian Economic Review 38(2): 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Headey, Bruce and Mark Wooden. 2004. The effects of wealth and income on subjective well-being and ill-being.Economic Record 80 (Special Issue): S24-S33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Henman, Paul, 2001.Updating Australian Budget Standards Costs of Children Estimates. Policy Research Paper No. 7. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Family and Community Services.Google Scholar
  30. Hunter, B. 1999.Three Nations, Not One: Indigenous and Other Australian Poverty. Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research Working Paper No. 1/1999. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
  31. Jackson, Natalie. 2002. The Higher Education Contribution Scheme — A HECS on the family? Pp. 105–120 in G. A. Carmichael, and A. Dharmalingam (eds),Populations of New Zealand and Australia at the Millennium: A Joint Special Issue of the Journal of Population Research and New Zealand Population Review. Canberra and Wellington: Australian Population Association and Population Association of New Zealand.Google Scholar
  32. Jones, Gavin W. 2004. The demography of disadvantage.Journal of Population Research 21(2): 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Keister, Lisa A. 2003. Sharing the wealth: the effect of siblings on adults wealth ownership.Demography 40(3): 521–542.Google Scholar
  34. Kelley, Allen C. 1996. The consequences of rapid population growth on human resource development: the case of education. Pp. 67–138 in D.A. Ahlburg, A.C. Kelley and K.O. Mason,The Impact of Population Growth on Well-Being in Developing Countries. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Kiernan, Kathleen E. 1989. Who remains childless?Journal of Biosocial Science 21(4): 387–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Larkins, Frank P. 2001. The economic benefits of Australian university degrees: bachelor and research higher degrees.Australian Economic Review 34(4): 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Marjoribanks, Kevin. 2002.Family, and School Capital: Towards a Context Theory of School Outcomes. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Marks, Gary, Julie McMillan and Kylie Hillman. 2001.Tertiary Entrance Performance: the Role of Student Background and School Factors. Research Report No 22. Melbourne: Australian Council for Higher Education.Google Scholar
  39. McDonald, Peter. 2000. Gender equity, social institutions and the future of fertility.Journal of Population Research 17(1): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Murphy, M. and L.B. Knudsen. 2002. The intergenerational transmission of fertility in contemporary Denmark: the effects of number of siblings (full and half), birth order, and whether male or female.Population Studies 56(3): 235–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parr, Nicholas. 2002. Family planning promotion, contraceptive use and fertility decline in Ghana.African Population Studies 17(1): 83–101.Google Scholar
  42. Parr, Nicholas J. 2005. Family background, schooling and childlessness in Australia.Journal of Biosocial Science 37(2): 229–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Parr, Nick and Fei Guo. 2005. The occupational concentration and mobility of Asian immigrants in Australia.Asian and Pacific Migration Review 14(3): 351–380.Google Scholar
  44. Parr, Nick and Magdalena Mok. 1995. Differences in the educational achievements, aspirations and values of birthplace groups in New South Wales.People and Place 3(2): 1–8.Google Scholar
  45. Park, Hyunjoon. 2005. Public policy and the effect of sibship size on educational achievement: a comparative study of 20 countries. Paper presented to 2005 Population Association of America Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, 31 March–2 April.Google Scholar
  46. Percival, Richard and Ann Harding. 2002. All they need is love and around $450,000.AMP_NATSEM Income and Wealth Report Issue 3. Australia: AMP. <http://www.canberra.edu. au/centres/natsem/publications>.Accessed: 2004.Google Scholar
  47. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). 2000.Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills. Paris: OECD. <http://pisaweb.acer.edu.au/oecd/oecd_pisa_data.html>.Accessed: 2005.Google Scholar
  48. Psacharopoulos, George and Harry Anthony Patrinos. 2004. Returns to investment in education: a further update.Education Economics 12(2): 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Robinson, Warren C. 1997. The economic theory of fertility over three decades.Population Studies 51(1): 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shields, Michael and Mark Wooden. 2003. Marriage, children and subjective well-being. Paper presented at Eighth Australian Institute of Family Studies Conference —Step Forward for Families: Research, Practice and Policy, Melbourne Exhibition Centre, 12–14 February. <http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/hilda/hbiblio-cp.html>.Accessed: 2004.Google Scholar
  51. Watson, Nicole and Mark Wooden. 2002a. The HILDA Survey and its potential to contribute to population research: Paper presented to 11th Biennial Conference of the Australian Population Association, Sydney, 2–4 October. <http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/hilda/confpapern03.pdf>.Accessed: 2004.Google Scholar
  52. Watson, Nicole and Mark Wooden. 2002b. The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey: Wave 1 survey methodology.Hilda Project Technical Paper Series No. 1/02. <http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/hilda/hdps-techn01.pdf>. Accessed: 2004.Google Scholar
  53. Watson, Nicole and Mark Wooden. 2002c. Assessing the quality of the HILDA Survey Wave 1 data.Hilda Project Technical Paper Series No 4/02. <http://www.melbourneinstitute. com/hilda/hdps-techn04.pdf>.Accessed: 2004.Google Scholar
  54. Weerasinghe, Daminda P. and Nicholas J. Parr. 2002. Effect of wealth on marital fertility in Sri Lanka.Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition 20(2): 112–119.Google Scholar
  55. Weston, Ruth, Lixia Qu, Robyn Parker and Michael Alexander. 2004.Its Not for Lack of Wanting Kids … A Report on the Fertility Decision Making Project. Research Report No. 11. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business, Division of Economic and Financial StudiesMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations