ICMEC seminar, 22 February 2010

The provision of child care services; the Barcelona

targets revisited

Janneke PlantengaJ.Plantenga@uu.nl

Agenda …Some facts and figures

Policy issues

Challenges ahead

Presentation based on publication of group of 30 experts: J.Plantenga and C. Remery (2009). The provision of child care services: A comparative review of 30 European countries.

• http://bookshop.europa.eu/eubookshop/download.action?fileName=KE7809680ENC_002.pdf&eubphfUid=10369611&catalogNbr=KE-78-09-680-EN-C

 

 

Assessing child care services …

Harmonized data for 27 countries within the context of EU SILC – Statistics on Income and Living Conditions

Formal arrangements: pre-school or equivalent, compulsory education, centre-based

services outside school hours, and child care at day-care centre.

Other arrangements:child care by a professional minder at the child’s home or at the

child-minder’s home, and care by grandparents, other household members (outside parents), other relatives, friends and neighbours.

Interpreting the EU-SILC data…

For correct interpretation several underlying issues have to be taken into account:

• SILC data register use of child care services; • The definition of ‘formal’ and ‘other’ child care

arrangements; • The impact of the educational system; • The underlying hours

Use of formal childcare arrangements, 0-2 year olds

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

DK NL SE BE ES IS PT UK NO FR LU SI IT FI CY EE IE DE LV EL HU MT SK LT AT CZ PL BG RO LI

Country

Formal arr. Barcelona target

Use of formal and other childcare arrangements, 0-2 year olds

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

DK NL SE BE ES IS PT UK NO FR LU SI IT FI CY EE IE DE LV EL HU MT SK LT AT CZ PL BG RO LI

Country

Formal arr. Other arr.

Use of formal childcare arrangements by hours, 0-2 year olds

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

DK NL SE BE ES IS PT UK NO FR LU SI IT FI CY EE IE DE LV EL HU MT SK LT AT CZ PL BG RO LI

Country

1-29 h. ≥30 h.

Use of other childcare arrangements by hours, 0-2 year olds

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

DK NL SE BE ES IS PT UK NO FR LU SI IT FI CY EE IE DE LV EL HU MT SK LT AT CZ PL BG RO LI

Country

1-29 h. ≥30 h.

Use of formal childcare arrangements, 3 to mandatory school age

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

BE IS DK FR IE SE ES IT NL UK DE CY EE SI NO FI PT SK HU AT CZ EL LV LU MT LT PL BG RO LI

Country

Formal arr. Barcelona target

Use of formal and other childcare arrangements, 3 to mandatory school age

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

BE IS DK FR IE SE ES IT NL UK DE CY EE SI NO FI PT SK HU AT CZ EL LV LU MT LT PL BG RO LI

Country

Formal arr. Other arr.

Use of formal childcare arrangements by hours, 3 to mandatory school age

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

BE IS DK FR IE SE ES IT NL UK DE CY EE SI NO FI PT SK HU AT CZ EL LV LU MT LT PL BG RO LI

Country

1-29 h. ≥30 h.

Policy issues:

Dimensions:

• Child care provision;• Rebalancing time, money and services; • Policies with regard to quality of child care

services• Affordability and acceptance

Policy issues: availability

Information on the use of childcare facilities – though informative - does not answer the question whether demand is fully met.

Child care framed as a social right: Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Iceland.

Countries with (almost) full coverage: Norway, France, Belgium, Slovenia.

Reasonable growth: United Kingdom, Germany and Netherlands;

limited growth: Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Spain, Greece Austria and Liechtenstein.

Others: clear shortage in child care facilities.

Policy issues: rebalancing services, time and money

Debating the parallel model: after a period of parental leave parents have the choice between childcare provisions or a home care allowance Examples from Finland, France, Sweden and Norway

Reshaping the sequential model: with the age of a child policy shifts from leave to services, with the optimal length of the leave as a critical element. Examples from Estonia, Portugal, Ireland, The Netherlands, The UK, the Czech Republic and Germany.

Policy issues: quality

Investments in the qualification level of child care workforce; quality control and maintenance.

In general: large difference in education of staff between nurseries and primary school ànd between nurseries, pre-schools and crèches on the one hand and private child-minders on the other hand.

Policy issues: affordability and acceptance

Large differences. In quite a few countries, childcare is considered to be expensive.

With regard to acceptance: in most countries attitudes vary by age. Even in countries where child care is used on a large scale, every now and then good motherhood and the wellbeing of children in child care facilities are topics of public debate.

Summary of current state of affairs

Europe seems to combine one employment model with a large variety of care models.

Some countries have extensive formal centre based arrangements (including education at preschool) whereas others rely more other arrangements (such as childminders at home and/or family or friend)

In addition, in some countries demand is met (although the actual user rate may be low) whereas in other countries child care services are in short supply.

Challenge at individual level

to deal with the pressure to increase labour force participation against the background of an inadequate social infrastructure. Given the unequal division of care responsibilities, this challenge is especially acute for women.

Challenge at national level

to reconcile the interest of the labour market, the employer, the employee and the child in a way that is both efficient and just from a social, demographic and economic perspective. A coherent point of view, providing a continuum in the provision of money (child care allowances), time (leave facilities) and services (child care provision) is essential in this respect.

Challenge at European level

to reconcile the need to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy of the world (the strategic goal of the Lisbon agenda) with the need to modernize the European social model, taking into account that work and family constraints can lead to a lower fertility rate, or to a lower employment rate, affecting in either way the sustainability of the European social model. Different social arrangements may be compatible with an open, global economy, as long as there is opportunity for both labour and care.