EMPLOYMENT MATTERS

A lunchtime seminar series aboutemployment relations and

the world of work

http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/emar/events.htm 

 

Sharing Responsibility? Short and Long-term Effects of Sweden's

"Daddy Month" Reform

Dr John EkbergDepartment of Economics

Stockholm Universitywith Rickard Eriksson and Guido Friebel

London, 27 May 2004

Background to the Swedish parental-leave system

• In 1974 the maternity-leave system was changed to parental-leave system.

• Parents compensated in relation to earnings for 360 days.

• January 1 1995, the “daddy-month” was introduced. (The objective of the presentation today)

• January 1 2002, the second “daddy-month” was introduced.

Changes in the Swedish Parental Leave System

Per

cen

t

year

Reimbursement rate Reimbursement rate, f irst month

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

75

80

85

90

Other changes in the parental leave benefit system:1995: Introduction of the daddy-month.2002: Introduction of the second daddy-month. Guarantee level 120 SEK/day2003: The guarantee level is increased to 150 SEK/day

Father’s share of parental leave

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1974 1977 1987 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year

Perc

ent

Evaluation strategy of the“daddy month”

For children born 14 days before and 14 days after the introduction of the first daddy-month in 1995 we study:

• Fathers’ parental leave (short term effect)• Fathers’ care for sick children (long term

effect) • A natural experiment • We use household time instead of

earnings

Objectives of the reform "It is important that fathers use their opportunity of taking parental leave.

Research shows that an early established and close relation between father and child is beneficial for both the father and the child and provides a good founding for the relation later in life. ...

An increased use of parental leave by fathers should contribute to a change in attitudes among managers so that they will view parental leave as something natural to consider when planning and organizing the work. Such change in attitudes is necessary for both men and women to dare to take parental leave without a feeling of jeopardizing their career or opportunities of development at work. Another reason for increasing fathers' use of parental leave is that women's prospects of achieving equal opportunities with men in the labor market are limited as long as women are responsible for the practical housework and children. A shared responsibility for practical care of children would mean a more even distribution of interruptions in work between women and men, and women would thereby gain better opportunities of development and making a career in their profession."

From the Government Proposition 93/94:147 to the Swedish Parliament

Objectives of the reform(in summary)

• Enhance an early and close contact between father and child.

• Reduce employer discrimination against fathers and mothers on parental leave.

• Less unequal division of household and child care responsibility in order to achieve less unequal labor market outcomes.

Natural experiment?

• The reform was decided on in June 1994.

• Children’s date of birth is normally distributed with standard deviation two weeks.

• No difference in age distribution between mothers of children born before and after the reform.

Mothers’ age distribution

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

Per

cent

Before After

The number of births per day

Nu

mb

er

of b

irth

's

date01oct1994 31dec1994 31mar1995

200

250

300

350

Economic theory andthe Daddy month

Why is parental leave unevenly distributed between men and women?

• Specialization (Becker 1981)• Signaling (Spence 1973)• Gender roles, Economics and identity, Akerlof &

Kranton (2000)Reinforcing factors• Human capital investments and HC depreciation

during time out• Replacement costs for employers

Fathers’ share of care for sick children by level of parental leave

Before

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Zero days 0< days =20 20< days =40 40< days =60 60 > days

Pe

rce

nt

Before

Previous empirical studies

A. Effects of time out on earningsNordic countries• Stafford & Sundström (Labour 1996), Sweden, Telia

1983-86, men and women, support for signaling for men.

• Albrecht et al (JHR 1999) Sweden ”Family and Work” data 1992-93, men and women, some support for signaling for men.

• Smith & Datta Gupta (Economica 2002) Denmark 1980-1995 for women, support for human capital depreciation, no support for signaling.

Between European countries• Ruhm (QJE 1998) Panel data for nine countries

1969-93. Parental leave increases women’s employment, but decreases wages.

B. Determinants of fathers’ parental leave

• Sundström & Duvander (Eur. Sociological Rev.), Swedish register data 1994, positive effect from income and education.

Data

• Register data, hence not self-reported

• Data cover all occurrences of parental leave and care for sick children in Sweden since 1993

• Source: National Social Insurance Board

Number of observations in samples

Sample 1994 1995

Children 3709 3892

Fathers 3134 3467

Mothers 3676 3866

Mothers and fathers

3101 3441

Mean of parental leave days in the cohorts two weeks before and after

the reform             

Sample Before After

  Mean Std Mean Std Mean-diff t-stat

Fathers

360-days 29.5 61.9 44.2 57.4 14.7 10.8

90-flat 8.0 21.1 9.3 21.8 1.4 2.8

Mothers

360-days 323.7 87.3 298.9 80.5 -24.7 -12.8

90-flat 59.9 42.8 63.1 44.0 3.2 3.2

Distribution of father's parental leave (by number of days)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 days 0 to 10 10 to20

20 to30

30 to40

40 to50

50 to60

60 to70

70 to80

80 to90

90 to100

100more

Per

cen

t

Before After

Difference of fractions (after-before)

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

0 days 0 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 50 to 60 60 to 70 70 to 80 80 to 90 90 to 100 100 morePer

cen

t

Mean increase in fathers' use of parental leave days

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Year

Num

ber

of d

ays

Distribution of fathers’ parental leave before and after the reform

0

5

10

15

20

25

95:

1

95:

2

95:

3

95:

4

96:

1

96:

2

96:

3

96:

4

97:

1

97:

2

97:

3

97:

4

98:

1

98:

2

98:

3

98:

4

99:

1

99:

2

99:

3

99:

4

00:

1

00:

2

00:

3

00:

4

01:

1

01:

2

01:

3

01:

4

02:

1

02:

2

02:

3

02:

4

Pe

rce

nt

Before After

Distribution of mothers’ parental leave before and after the reform

0

5

10

15

20

25

94:4

95:1

95:2

95:3

95:4

96:1

96:2

96:3

96:4

97:1

97:2

97:3

97:4

98:1

98:2

98:3

98:4

99:1

99:2

99:3

99:4

00:1

00:2

00:3

00:4

01:1

01:2

01:3

01:4

02:1

02:2

02:3

02:4

Per

cent

Before After

Total number of days out for care of sick children (before reform).

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1994

-12-

22

1995

-03-

22

1995

-06-

22

1995

-09-

22

1995

-12-

22

1996

-03-

22

1996

-06-

22

1996

-09-

22

1996

-12-

22

1997

-03-

22

1997

-06-

22

1997

-09-

22

1997

-12-

22

1998

-03-

22

1998

-06-

22

1998

-09-

22

1998

-12-

22

1999

-03-

22

1999

-06-

22

1999

-09-

22

1999

-12-

22

2000

-03-

22

2000

-06-

22

2000

-09-

22

2000

-12-

22

2001

-03-

22

2001

-06-

22

2001

-09-

22

2001

-12-

22

2002

-03-

22

2002

-06-

22

2002

-09-

22

Fathers’ share of care for sick children, two week cohorts.

Sample Before After Mean Std Mean Std Mean-diff t-stat Fathers’ Share

35.04

32.02

35.52

32.35

0.47

0.60

Difference in fathers’ shares of care for sick children by year

Care for sick children

Two weeks

Three months

Share men

before

Share men after

Percent Change

Share men before

Share men after

Percent Change

1995 48,44 38,12 -10,32 49,92 38,01 -11,91 1996 35,01 35,32 0,30 35,25 36,26 1,02 1997 34,32 33,76 -0,54 33,76 33,80 -0,04 1998 35,44 33,83 -1,62 34,04 34,92 0,89 1999 34,16 34,43 0,26 34,54 35,28 0,74 2000 33,77 34,63 0,86 33,17 34,10 0,93 2001 33,12 32,64 -0,48 33,30 33,48 0,19 2002 30,98 31,97 0,99 31,64 32,69 1,05 2003 33,07 N.A Total 1994-2003

34,60 34,45 -0.45 34,58 34,60 0,02

Fathers’ share of care for sick children by level of parental leave.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Zero days 0< days =20 20< days =40 40< days =60 60 > days

Pe

rce

nt

Before After

Summary of findings

• The daddy-month did increase fathers’ use of parental leave.

• The increase in parental leave did not increase fathers share of care for sick children.

• Men’s share of parental leave is positively associated with their share of care for sick children.

Policy

• Details in policy implementation potentially important, e.g. the unexpected effects of the Swedish 8 year rule.

• “Icelandic model”- 1/3 to mothers, 1/3 to fathers, and 1/3 to allocate unrestricted.

• Decreasing reimbursement rate with the age of the child. To give fathers incentives to stay home with young children.

 

DISCUSSION  

 

EMPLOYMENT MATTERS

A lunchtime seminar series aboutemployment relations and

the world of work

http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/emar/events.htm