The Effects of Daycare Center Use on Marital Fertility in Japan

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the International Studies in Population book series (ISIP, volume 11)

Abstract

Using data from the 2007 National Survey on Work and Family, this chapter analyzes the effects of daycare center use on marital fertility in Japan. The findings indicate a strong positive effect for women living in areas where there were no waiting lists for admission to daycare centers. For these women, using a daycare center increased the predicted probability of having a second child by 10 % points and of progressing to a third birth by 9 % points. This effect was not significant, however, for women living in areas where there were waiting lists. The two-stage estimation results indicate that shortening waiting lists had little effect on fertility, which suggests that the areal differences in the results (areas with waiting lists versus areas without them) were not due to the waiting lists per se, but rather to other factors such as regional characteristics or women’s employment status in those areas.

Keywords

Marital Fertility Daycare Center Instrument Variable Parity Progression Parity Progression Ratio 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Research for this chapter was funded by a grant from Nihon University Population Research Institute, the “Academic Frontier” Project for Private Universities, and a matching-fund subsidy from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology in Japan.

References

  1. Baker, M., Gruber, J., & Milligan, K. (2008). Universal child care, maternal labor supply, and family well-being. Journal of Political Economy, 116(4), 709–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blau, D. M. (2003). Childcare subsidy programs. In R. A. Moffit (Ed.), Means-tested transfer programs in the U.S (pp. 443–516). Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Daily Yomiuri Online. (2009, 9 September). Day care waiting list grows 30 % from ’08, tops 25,000. http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20090909TDY03103.htm. Accessed 9 Sept 2009.
  4. Del Boca, D. (2002). The effect of child care and part time opportunities on participation and fertility decisions in Italy. Journal of Population Economics, 15(3), 549–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gauthier, A. H. (2007). The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: A review of the literature. Population Research and Policy Review, 26, 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kravdal, Ø. (1996). How the local supply of day-care centers influences fertility in Norway: A parity-specific approach. Population Research and Policy Review, 15, 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kreyenfeld, M., & Hank, K. (2000). Does the availability of child care influence the employment of mothers? Findings from Western Germany. Population Research and Policy Review, 19, 317–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Neyer, G., & Andersson, G. (2007). Consequences of family policies on childbearing behavior: Effects of artifacts? (MPIDR Working Paper). Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. http://www.demogr.mpg.de/papers/working/wp-2007-021.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2009.
  9. Ogawa, N. (2003). Japan’s changing fertility mechanisms and its policy responses. Journal of Population Research, 20(1), 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ogawa, N. (2005). Analysis of policies for the promotion of women’s employment and child rearing. In Population Problems Research Council, The Mainichi Newspapers (Ed.), Perceptions of family in the age of very low fertility (pp. 107–147). Tokyo: Population Problems Research Council, The Mainichi Newspapers.Google Scholar
  11. Powell, L. M. (2002). Joint labor supply and childcare choice: Decisions of married mothers. Journal of Human Resources, 37(4), 106–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Retherford, R. D., & Ogawa, N. (2006). Japan’s baby bust: Causes, implications, and policy responses. In F. R. Harris (Ed.), The baby bust: Who will do the work? Who will pay the taxes? (pp. 5–47). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  13. Ribar, D. C. (1995). A structural model of child care and the labor supply of married women. Journal of Labor Economics, 13, 558–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rindfuss, R. R., Guilkey, D., Morgan, S. P., Kravdal, Ø., & Guzzo, K. B. (2007). Child care availability and first-birth timing in Norway. Demography, 44(2), 345–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rosen, M. (2004). Fertility and public policies: Evidence from Norway and Finland. Demographic Research, 10, 143–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Suruga, T., & Nishimoto, M. (2002). The influence of policies for promoting childcare on child birth-related behavior. The Quarterly of Social Security Research, 37(4), 371–379.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sang-Hyop Lee
    • 1
    • 2
  • Naohiro Ogawa
    • 3
  • Rikiya Matsukura
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of Hawaii at ManoaHonoluluUSA
  2. 2.Population and Health StudiesEast-West CenterHonoluluUSA
  3. 3.Population Research Institute and College of EconomicsNihon UniversityTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Population Research InstituteNihon UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations