This paper uses variation among siblings to identify the consequences of childhood poverty on both labour and marriage market outcomes. In the labour market, individuals who experienced childhood poverty are found to have lower earnings and lower labour market attachment and to have worse jobs both vertically in terms of low-paying industries and horizontally in terms of job positions. In the marriage market, childhood poverty is found to have negative consequences for the probability of marriage, cohabitation, and having children around the age of 30. The effect sizes are found to exhibit an inverse u-shape in the age of the child, peaking during adolescence. Results on educational choices suggest that the mechanisms behind these results can be that childhood poverty affects the skill formation, networks, and decision making of the child.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Using age cut-offs at 14, 18, or 25 yields similar results.
Table 9 in Appendix shows the number of observations excluded from the sample in each selection step.
Section 5 shows results where other poverty measures are used.
The outcome years are treated as separate cross-sections by allowing for separate fixed effects for each outcome year. This assumption is preferred since it is less restrictive than the alternative of pooling the cross-sections and taking out only one family fixed effect. However, estimations that do not allow for year variation in the fixed effects deliver similar results.
Cut-offs at ages 14, 18, and 25 were implemented with similar results.
Table 9 in Appendix shows the identifying variation in the data. That is the number of sibling pairs with variation in accumulated childhood poverty within each age interval. The precision is increased by using 4 years of outcomes from 2008 to 2011.
One might be concerned that the older siblings experienced substantially more childhood poverty than younger siblings. This is only the case for 55% of the sibling pairs. It thus raises no concern. Estimations where the control group is split into two by the birth order can be found in Section 5.2.
An individual is defined as being poor if the disposable income of the individual is below 50% of the median income of the full population of Danes ages 18 to 55 in a given year. An individual is defined as being rich if the disposable income of the individual is above 150% of the median income of the full population of Danes ages 18 to 55 in a given year. The results can also be found in Table 10 in Appendix.
Age 22 is chosen as it is the first age childhood poverty is no longer measured. Other early cut-offs yield similar results. A high-end job is defined using information on the job description and includes high-end white-collar workers and blue-collar workers with large salaries. The results can also be found in Tables 11–13 in Appendix.
The results can also be found in Table 12 in Appendix.
A similar result is found for high school enrolment. The estimates are available upon request.
Outside the labour market is defined as non-employed and not receiving UI-benefits.
Clearly, most of the variation in the data across municipalities is captured by the family fixed effects. Thus, this result is in itself perhaps less surprising.
Aaronson D (1998) Using sibling data to estimate the impact of neighborhoods on children’s educational outcomes. J Hum Resour 33(4):915–946
Angrist J (2002) How do sex ratios affect marriage and labor markets? Evidence from America’s second generation. Q J Econ 117(3):997–1038
Antel JJ (1992) The intergenerational transfer of welfare dependency: some statistical evidence. Rev Econ Stat 74(3):467–473
Bagger J, Birchenall JA, Mansour H, Urzúa S (2013) Education, birth order and family size. Discussion paper, National Bureau of Economic Research
Becker GS (1973) A theory of marriage: Part I. J Polit Econ 81(4):813–846
Behrman JR, Taubman P (1986) Birth order, schooling, and earnings. J Labor Econ 4(3, Part 2):121–145
Black SE, Devereux PJ (2010) Recent developments in intergenerational mobility. Discussion paper, National Bureau of Economic Research
Black SE, Devereux PJ, Salvanes KG (2005) The more the merrier? The effect of family size and birth order on children’s education. Q J Econ 120(2):669–700
Black SE, Devereux PJ, Salvanes KG (2011) Older and wiser? Birth order and IQ of young men. CESifo Econ Stud 57(1):103–120
Blake J (1989) Family size and achievement, vol 3. University of California Press
Booth AL, Kee HJ (2009) Birth order matters: the effect of family size and birth order on educational attainment. J Popul Econ 22(2):367–397
Breining SN (2014) The sibling relationship dynamics and spillovers. Aarhus University
Case AC, Katz LF (1991) The company you keep: the effects of family and neighborhood on disadvantaged youths. Discussion paper, National Bureau of Economic Research
Conger RD, Elder GH Jr (1994) Families in troubled times: adapting to change in rural America. Social Institutions and Social Change. ERIC
Cunha F, Heckman J (2007) The technology of skill formation. Discussion paper, National Bureau of Economic Research
Cunha F, Heckman JJ (2008) Formulating, identifying and estimating the technology of cognitive and noncognitive skill formation. J Hum Resour 43(4):738–782
Dahl GB, Lochner L (2012) The impact of family income on child achievement: evidence from the earned income tax credit. Am Econ Rev 102(5):1927–1956
Duncan GJ, Morris PA, Rodrigues C (2011) Does money really matter? Estimating impacts of family income on young children’s achievement with data from random-assignment experiments. Dev Psychol 47(5):1263
Duncan GJ, Yeung WJ, Brooks-Gunn J, Smith JR (1998) How much does childhood poverty affect the life chances of children? Am Sociol Rev 63(3):406–423
Elder GH, Caspi A (1988) Economic stress in lives: developmental perspectives. J Soc Issues 44(4):25–45
Galster G, Andersson R, Musterd S, Kauppinen TM (2008) Does neighborhood income mix affect earnings of adults? New evidence from Sweden. J Urban Econ 63(3):858–870
Galster GC (2012) The mechanism(s) of neighbourhood effects: theory, evidence, and policy implications. In: Neighbourhood effects research: new perspectives. Springer, pp 23–56
Gottschalk P (1990) AFDC Participation across generations. Am Econ Rev 80(2):367–371
Holzer HJ, Whitmore Schanzenbach D, Duncan GJ, Ludwig J (2008) The economic costs of childhood poverty in the United States. Journal of Children and Poverty 14(1):41–61
Humlum MK (2011) Timing of family income, borrowing constraints, and child achievement. J Popul Econ 24(3):979–1004
Jenkins SP, Schluter C (2002) The effect of family income during childhood on later-life attainment: evidence from Germany. Discussion paper, IZA
Levy DM, Duncan G (2000) Using sibling samples to assess the effect of childhood family income on completed schooling. Discussion paper, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research
Løken KV, Mogstad M, Wiswall M (2012) What linear estimators miss: the effects of family income on child outcomes. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 4(2):1–35
McLoyd VC (1990) The impact of economic hardship on black families and children: psychological distress, parenting, and socioemotional development. Child Dev 61(2):311–346
Milligan K, Stabile M (2011) Do child tax benefits affect the well-being of children? Evidence from Canadian child benefit expansions. Am Econ J Econ Pol 3(3):175–205
Moffitt R (1983) An economic model of welfare stigma. Am Econ Rev 73(5):1023–1035
Solon G (1999) Intergenerational mobility in the labor market. Handbook of labor economics 3:1761–1800
Solon G, Corcoran M, Gordon R, Laren D (1988) Sibling and intergenerational correlations in welfare program participation. J Human Res 23(3):388–396
Svarer M (2007) Working late do workplace sex ratios affect partnership formation and dissolution? J Hum Resour 42(3):582–595
The author would like to thank the anonymous referees for helpful comments and suggestions. I express my thanks for useful comments on this paper and earlier drafts to Erdal Tekin, Rune Vejlin, participants in the European Economic Association Annual Congress 2015, and participants in the 8th Nordic Econometric Meeting. The usual disclaimer applies.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Responsible editor: Erdal Tekin
About this article
Cite this article
Lesner, R.V. The long-term effect of childhood poverty. J Popul Econ 31, 969–1004 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-017-0674-8
- Child development
- Family background
- Intergenerational mobility