Skip to main content

Family policy, contextual features, and public opinion

  • Chapter
Public Attitudes towards Family Policies in Europe
  • 408 Accesses

Abstract

It has been discussed before that Western welfare states face similar demographic and socio-economic challenges in terms of new welfare needs, low fertility rates, and ageing societies (see Chapter 1 and 2). These challenges are accompanied by serious financing problems within the established branches of social security (e.g., healthcare and pension systems) and discussions concerning the future viability of the welfare state (e.g., Taylor-Gooby 2004; Bonoli 2005). Accordingly, the European Union has formulated clear policy goals for all member states in order to meet current and future challenges and to achieve social inclusion and cohesion. Among these goals are increasing fertility, raising employment participation of men and women, increasing gender equality, and reducing (child) poverty (European Commission 2007). Public support for families and especially measures supporting the reconciliation of paid work and family life are seen as a powerful means in helping to achieve these goals. Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated a positive relationship between policies promoting the dual-earner model of the family and different social outcomes, such as fertility (Castles 2003; Ferrarini 2006), child well-being (Kamerman et al. 2003), and women’s labor-market participation (Ferrarini 2006; Kangas and Rostgaard 2007).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Again, Germany is the only representative of the general family support cluster.

  2. 2.

    Esping-Andersen (1990) has often been cited in his criticism of aggregate social spending as a measure for comparing welfare states. However, the recently developed databases (e.g., the OECD Social Expenditure Database) provide disaggregated, comparable expenditure data at program level, which are well suited for comparing the spending priorities of welfare states (Castles 2009).

  3. 3.

    Spending data for Italy, Luxembourg, and Austria are also depicted in the table for completeness. However, since data on public attitudes were not available for these countries, they could not be included in the correlation analysis and their expenditure patterns are not discussed in detail.

  4. 4.

    Home-based (but regulated) family daycare is widely used in countries, such as Denmark, and has lower cost structures for staff and space (OECD 2002).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Appendix

Appendix

Table A 5: Responsibility, satisfaction, and skepticism. Cluster- and country means, standard deviation in parentheses

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mischke, M. (2014). Family policy, contextual features, and public opinion. In: Public Attitudes towards Family Policies in Europe. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-03577-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics