IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/ifosdt/v68y2015i11p07-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Debatte um das Betreuungsgeld: Falsche Anreize für eine moderne Familienpolitik?

Author

Listed:
  • Klaus Hurrelmann
  • Stefan Sell
  • Miriam Beblo
  • Notburga Ott

Abstract

Das 2013 eingeführte Betreuungsgeld wurde im April 2015 von Bundesverfassungsgericht auf seine Rechtsmäßigkeit geprüft. Ein Urteil wird im Sommer 2015 erwartet. Nach Ansicht von Klaus Hurrelmann, Hertie School of Governance, Berlin, ist das Betreuungsgeld ein Rückfall der Familienpolitik in veraltete Muster. Seine Einführung sei ein Symptom für eine unentschiedene, widersprüchliche und die Eltern verunsichernde staatliche Familien- und Bildungspolitik und verstärke die Familienfixiertheit der Erziehung und Bildung, die dringend gelockert werden müsste. Auch für Stefan Sell, Hochschule Koblenz, ist das Betreuungsgeld ein fragwürdiges Unterfangen. Man rutsche zwangsläufig in die Fahrrinne einer Monetarisierung von Familienleistungen, an deren Ende eine Art »Elterngehalt« stehen müsste. Derzeit sei auch von erheblichen Mitnahmeeffekten auszugehen. Nach Ansicht von Miriam Beblo, Universität Hamburg, ist das Betreuungsgeld weder modern noch nachhaltig. Diese familienpolitische Maßnahme führe längerfristig zu einer stärkeren Einkommensungleichheit unter den Eltern, hemme die Erwerbsarbeit von Müttern und befördere die Abkoppelung insbesondere der Einkommensschwächeren vom Arbeitsmarkt. Die Verliererinnen seien die niedriger qualifizierten und geringer verdienenden Frauen. Notburga Ott, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, sieht die monetäre Förderung der Erziehungsleistung der Eltern, die in der Gesellschaft große Zustimmung erfährt, im System von Kindergeld und Elterngeld gut verankert. Dagegen habe die Koppelung des Betreuungsgelds an die Nicht-Inanspruchnahme öffentlich geförderter Kinderbetreuung negative Effekte auf die Frauenerwerbstätigkeit und die Bildungschancen der Kinder.

Suggested Citation

  • Klaus Hurrelmann & Stefan Sell & Miriam Beblo & Notburga Ott, 2015. "Debatte um das Betreuungsgeld: Falsche Anreize für eine moderne Familienpolitik?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 68(11), pages 07-19, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ifosdt:v:68:y:2015:i:11:p:07-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/ifosd_2015_11_2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jochen Kluve & Marcus Tamm, 2013. "Parental leave regulations, mothers’ labor force attachment and fathers’ childcare involvement: evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 983-1005, July.
    2. Alessandra Fogli & Laura Veldkamp, 2011. "Nature or Nurture? Learning and the Geography of Female Labor Force Participation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 1103-1138, July.
    3. Kai-Uwe Müller & Katharina Wrohlich, 2016. "Two Steps Forward—One Step Back? Evaluating Contradicting Child Care Policies in Germany," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 62(4), pages 672-698.
    4. Miriam Beblo & Christina Boll, 2014. "Die neuen Elterngeld-Komponenten: Will money trump gender?," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 94(8), pages 564-569, August.
    5. Miriam Beblo & Christina Boll, 2014. "Ökonomische Analysen des Paarverhaltens aus der Lebensverlaufsperspektive und politische Implikationen," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 83(1), pages 121-144.
    6. Wrohlich, Katharina & Müller, Kai-Uwe, 2014. "Two steps forward - one step back? Evaluating recent child care policies in Germany," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100438, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. Holger Bonin & C. Katharina Spieß & Holger Stichnoth & Katharina Wrohlich, 2014. "Familienpolitische Maßnahmen in Deutschland - Evaluationen und Bewertungen: Editorial," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 83(1), pages 5-11.
    8. Katharina Wrohlich & Eva Berger & Johannes Geyer & Peter Haan & Denise Sengül & C. Katharina Spieß & Andreas Thiemann, 2012. "Elterngeld Monitor: Endbericht; Forschungsprojekt im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend," DIW Berlin: Politikberatung kompakt, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, volume 61, number pbk61.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Welteke, Clara & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2019. "Peer effects in parental leave decisions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 146-163.
    2. Johannes Geyer & Alexandra Krause, 2016. "Veränderungen der Erwerbsanreize durch das Elterngeld Plus für Mütter und Väter," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1592, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Geyer, Johannes & Haan, Peter & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2015. "The effects of family policy on maternal labor supply: Combining evidence from a structural model and a quasi-experimental approach," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 84-98.
    4. Bublitz, Elisabeth & Boll, Christina, 2016. "Individual determinants of job-related learning and training activities of employees - An exploratory analysis of gender differences," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145865, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Unterhofer, Ulrike & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2017. "Fathers, Parental Leave and Gender Norms," IZA Discussion Papers 10712, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Holger Bonin & Reinhold Schnabel & Holger Stichnoth, 2014. "Zur Effizienz der ehe- und familienbezogenen Leistungen in Deutschland im Hinblick auf soziale Sicherungs- und Beschäftigungsziele," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 83(1), pages 29-48.
    7. Daniel Brüggmann, 2020. "Women’s employment, income and divorce in West Germany: a causal approach," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 54(1), pages 1-22, December.
    8. Anita Kottwitz & Anja Oppermann & C. Katharina Spiess, 2016. "Parental leave benefits and breastfeeding in Germany: effects of the 2007 reform," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 859-890, December.
    9. Helmut Rainer & Clara Albrecht & Stefan Bauernschuster & Anita Fichtl & Timo Hener & Joachim Ragnitz & Anita Dietrich, 2018. "Deutschland 2017 - Studie zu den Einstellungen und Verhaltensweisen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger im vereinigten Deutschland," ifo Forschungsberichte, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 96.
    10. Gonzalez, Felipe & Prem, Mounu & von Dessauer, Cristine, 2023. "Empowerment or Indoctrination? Women Centers Under Dictatorship," SocArXiv 64mf9, Center for Open Science.
    11. Chia Jung Chang, 2021. "Is the Road to Unemployment Paved with Good Intentions? Labor Market Outcomes of Young Women," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 244-302, June.
    12. Katrin Huber & Geske Rolvering, 2023. "Public child care and mothers’ career trajectories," Working Papers 228, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    13. Kota Ogasawara & Mizuki Komura, 2022. "Consequences of war: Japan’s demographic transition and the marriage market," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 1037-1069, July.
    14. Tendai Zawaira & Matthew W. Clance & Carolyn Chisadza, 2020. "Social Institutions and Gender-Biased Outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa," Working Papers 2020101, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    15. Jones, Kelly & Wilcher, Britni, 2024. "Reducing maternal labor market detachment: A role for paid family leave," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    16. Jeremy Greenwood & Nezih Guner & Guillaume Vandenbroucke, 2017. "Family Economics Writ Large," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1346-1434, December.
    17. Doepke, Matthias & Hannusch, Anne & Kindermann, Fabian & Tertilt, Michèle, 2022. "The Economics of Fertility: A New Era," IZA Discussion Papers 15224, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Stefania Albanesi & Aysegul Sahin, 2018. "The Gender Unemployment Gap," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 30, pages 47-67, October.
    19. Di Miceli, Andrea, 2019. "Horizontal vs. vertical transmission of fertility preferences," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 562-578.
    20. Boyan Jovanovic & Sai Ma, 2023. "Growth through learning," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 50, pages 211-234, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Familienpolitik; Kinderbetreuung;

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • J18 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Public Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ifosdt:v:68:y:2015:i:11:p:07-19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifooode.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.