The Impact of the Great Recession on Fertility in Europe

Transcription

1 The Impact of the Great Recession on Fertility in Europe Anna Matysiak 1 Tomáš Sobotka 1 Daniele Vignoli 2 1 Wittgenstein Centre (IIASA, VID/ÖAW, WU), Vienna Institute of Demography/Austrian Academy of Sciences 2 University of Florence, DiSIA Department of Statistics, Informatics, Applications

2 Background The global economic recession has hit almost all European countries for most of the period of Past research: economic recessions frequently lead to fertility declines and stimulate fertility postponement (Sobotka et al. 2011, Cherlin et al 2013). Fertility decline after 2008 pronounced in countries and regions that experienced stronger economic downturns and faster increases in unemployment (Lanzieri 2013). Stronger effect on first births & at younger ages (Goldstein et al. 2011)

3 Changes in TFR in , main European regions & the US Nordic Europe Western Europe, UK, IE European Union (27 countries) German-speaking Central and Eastern Europe 1.20 Beginning of Great Recession Southern Europe 1.00 Source: Own computations based on Eurostat 2013 & national statistical offices

4 Birth timing: accelerated postponement? Relative changes in age-specific fertility rates five years before (2003-8) and five years into the recession ( ) Source: Own computations based on Eurostat 2013 & national statistical offices

5 Why and how is the recent recession likely to have affected fertility? Massive unemployment in some countries Rise in the share of NEETS & workless households Falling incomes, rise in negative equity on housing (mortgages under water ), foreclosures (US) Strongly affects young adults, further exacerbates the previous trend of their rising economic and employment uncertainty Delayed home leaving, econ. independence (Aassve et al. 2012) Massive cuts in government budgets, also for family support (doubledip effect on fertility?) Prolonged duration of the recession; loss of hope in the future (Southern Europe) Source: OECD 2014: Society at a Glance The crisis and its aftermath

6 Past research The effect of unemployment is unclear and depends on whether unemployment is measured at individual level or aggregate level Aggregate level unemployment usually depresses fertility (Simó Noguera et al. 2005, Berkowitz King 2005, Aaberge et al. 2005: 150, Adsera 2005, 2011, Neels et al. 2012, Currie and Schwandt 2014), the results for individual unemployment are conflicting The effects are sex- and age-specific and differentiated by social status / education (Kreyenfeld 2009, Pailhe and Solaz 2012, Neels et al. 2012, Currie and Schwandt 2014) Other aggregate-level factors found important in some studies: GDP change, consumer confidence, housing foreclosure rate, selfemployment rate, fixed-term contracts

7 Limits of previous research Only few studies on the effects of the recent recession on fertility in Europe (Goldstein et al. 2011, overview by Eurostat / Lanzieri 2013) Lack of suitable (panel) data for sound multi-country studies Little or no use of regional data US: wider range of suitable surveys & research underway to study wide-ranging effect of the Great Recession on families (e.g., Guzzo 2012, Cherlin et al. 2013, Currie and Schwandt 2015)

8 Aims, data, methods

9 Aim Using macro data in for NUTS-2 regions to study the impact of aggregate-level employment conditions on fertility change Main contribution: using recent data covering extended period of the recession, using regions as a main unit

10 Data Coverage: : EU, Switzerland, Norway; 286 NUTS-2 units Fertility: Age-specific fertility rates, cumulated into age groups (15-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-49) Total Fertility Rates Almost complete coverage, high precision, based on vital statistics Employment conditions: unemployment rates (ages 15-24, 25-64, 20-64), long-term unemployment (% of unemployed), % self-employed, young adults NEETs (not in employment, education, training, age 18-24), GDP per capita (in PPP) Missing for some regions & periods (small sample or not collected), some fluctuations, based on Labour Force Surveys Other variables considered: indicators on poverty, social exclusion (based on EU-SILC, high % missing, unstable); expanded country-level (will be added)

11 Hierarchical structure of data Country 1 Country 2 Country 3 Country J 3 level: H Countries Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region J 2 level: J Regions Year 2000 Year 2001 Year 2002 Year level: Years ( )

12 Method Three-level growth-curve model with regional age-specific fertility rates as dependent variables allows us to model the trend in the regional age-specific fertility rates net of the indicators of the recession the effects of the recession indicators are decomposed into the within-region, between-region within-country and between-country effects

13 Method Three-level growth-curve model with regional age-specific fertility rates as dependent variables =( )+[ 1 ( 1 ) Random intercept at regional and country level =1 ]+(+ + )+ Random slope at regional and country level - an age-specific fertility rate in country c, region r at time t - one of our major explanantory variables i in country c, region r at the time t t time factor, introduced as a piecewise linear spline with nodes in 2005, 2008 and 2010, county-specific and region-specific random effects

14 Method Three-level growth-curve model with regional age-specific fertility rates as dependent variables =( )+[ 1 ( 1 ) Random intercept at regional and country level =1 ]+(+ + )+ Random slope at regional and country level 1 =( 1 )+( )+ within region variation between-region within-country variation between country variation - average level of variable X in a country c and region r - average level of variable X in a country c

15 Method =( )+[ 1 ( 1 )+ 2 ( )+ 3 =1 ]+(+ + )+ Between-region Within-country effect Withinregion effect Between-country effect - average level of variable X in a country c and region r - average level of variable X in a country c We are mainly interested in the within-region effects Several model specifications were prepared, we also interacted the withinregion effects with macro-regions and a recession dummy

16 Main results

17 Explanatory power of the recession covariates Proportion of the variance in fertility rates explained by: Recession indicators + time Only recession indicators trend + European macroregions TFR 43,1 82,0 ASFR ,2 66,4 ASFR ,7 68,9 ASFR ,5 75,5 ASFR ,8 80,8 ASFR ,9 67,6

18 All countries & regions combined How a 10 pp. annual increase in unemployment rate the share of long-term unemployed in the % of young adult NEETs in the % self-employed and a 10 pp annual decrease in the GDP per capita predicted to change fertility rates?

19 All countries & regions combined Effects on TFR Effects on age-specific fertility Absolute change in TFR Absolute change in FR Insignificant results (p>0.1) more transparent

20 Effects prior and during the recession Absolute change in TFR

21 Country groups: effects on TFR Effects of 10pp increase on TFR Unemployment: Anglo-Saxon German-speaking CEE LT-unemployment: All besides Southern Europe Self-employment: Southern Europe NEETs Southern Europe GDP: German-speaking Southern Europe CEE

22 Country groups: effects on age-specific fertility Southern Europe CEE German - speaking France + Benelux

23 Conclusions Our recession indicators explain around 50% variation in fertility rates (apart from the model for fertility at ages 35+) Clear effect of poor economic conditions on fertility (consistently with previous country-level research) Reflected both in unemployment and less standard proxies of unemployment such as self-employment and changes in the gdp The effects get more intensive after 2008 (recession) The role of uncertainty indicators varies by age: unemployment is more important at younger ages (15-24) and self-employment at higher ages (20-29)

24 Conclusions The role of uncertainty indicators varies also by European macroregions Effects of self-employment and NEETs are more important in Southern Europe Effects of unemployment are very strong in CEE but also in Germanspeaking countries Relatively constant effects of long-term unemployment and GDP Effects in general weaker and less often significant in countries which were not hit by the recession (France + Benelux or Nordic countries)

25 Future plans Extend the analysis by introducing country-level covariates (e.g. expenditures on ALMP or social / family policies) Group Western European countries into one macro-region Rerunning the models only for the recession period to see the effects by macro-regions during the recession

26 A. Matysiak and T. Sobotka s research was funded by the European Research Council under the European Union s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/ ) / ERC Grant agreement n (EURREP). EURREP website: