IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rnp/ecopol/ep1765.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pronatalist Demographic Policy in the Eyes of the Population: Ten Years Later
[Пронаталистская Демографическая Политика Глазами Населения: Десять Лет Спустя]

Author

Listed:
  • Maleva, Tatiana M. (Маллева, Татьяна)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration)

  • Makarentseva, Alla O. (Макаренцева, Алла)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration)

  • Tretyakova, Ekaterina A. (Третьякова, Екатерина)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration)

Abstract

Pronatalist demographic policy in Russia has started in 2007 and now, 10 years after, there is an acute discussion about its further development. The aim of this article is the analysis of the attitude to the pronatalist policy in Russia in general and also to the definite demographic measures. Another goal of the study is to trace the changes in this attitude since 2011 up to the year 2017. The research is based on the data of the survey “Person, Family, Society”-2017. The survey includes in-depth interviews, the results of which are also included in the study. In order to make temporal comparative analysis authors use data of the survey “Parents and children, men and women”-2011, which is part of the international Generations & Gender Programme. The results of both surveys demonstrate high support of the pronatalist measures in Russia. Two thirds of respondents vote for prolongation of the maternal capital program in the unaltered way, others would like to change it into benefits to poor families with children. The second option is more favorable for people with low level of income and education, and residents of rural areas. The study also reveals the dissatisfaction with the health system of parents with small children. Respondents with more than 2 children evaluate the impact of the maternal capital program on their reproductive intentions higher than respondents with fewer children. The positive attitude of the population to the measures of the current pronatalist policy and especially maternal capital as well as the current socio-economic and demographic situation are unfavorable for the termination of the maternal capital program.

Suggested Citation

  • Maleva, Tatiana M. (Маллева, Татьяна) & Makarentseva, Alla O. (Макаренцева, Алла) & Tretyakova, Ekaterina A. (Третьякова, Екатерина), 2017. "Pronatalist Demographic Policy in the Eyes of the Population: Ten Years Later [Пронаталистская Демографическая Политика Глазами Населения: Десять Лет Спустя]," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 124-147, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:rnp:ecopol:ep1765
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.ranepa.ru/rnp/ecopol/ep1765.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Svetlana Biryukova & Oxana Sinyavskaya & Irina Nurimanova, 2016. "Estimating effects of 2007 family policy changes on probability of second and subsequent births in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 68/SOC/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. Slonimczyk, Fabián & Yurko, Anna, 2014. "Assessing the impact of the maternity capital policy in Russia," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 265-281.
    3. Claus Wendt & Monika Mischke & Michaela Pfeifer, 2011. "Welfare States and Public Opinion," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13721.
    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. Dmitriy Gorskiy, 2023. "The maternity capital and probability of second birth in Russia: Explaining the last 10 Years' fertility patterns," French Stata Users' Group Meetings 2023 30, Stata Users Group.
    2. Fabián Slonimczyk & Marco Francesconi & Anna Yurko, 2017. "Moving On Up for High School Graduates in Russia: The Consequences of the Unified State Exam Reform," CESifo Working Paper Series 6447, CESifo.
    3. Alex Proshin, 2020. "Impact of Child Subsidies on Child Health, Well-being and Parental Investment in Human Capital: Evidence from Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey 2011-2017," PSE Working Papers halshs-02652268, HAL.
    4. Ekaterina Aleksandrova & Venera Bagranova & Christopher J Gerry, 2021. "The effect of health shocks on labour market outcomes in Russia [Ageing and unused capacity in Europe: is there an early retirement trap?]," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 45(6), pages 1319-1336.
    5. Cheng-Tao Tang & Chun Yee Wong & Ayush Batzorig, 2022. "Do Financial Incentives on High Parity Birth Affect Fertility? Evidence from the Order of Glorious Mother in Mongolia," Working Papers EMS_2022_01, Research Institute, International University of Japan.
    6. Simone M Schneider, 2020. "Beyond endogeneity in analyses of public opinion: Evaluations of healthcare by the foreign born across 24 European countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, June.
    7. Busemeyer, Marius R., 2021. "Health care attitudes and institutional trust during the COVID-19 crisis: Evidence from the case of Germany," Working Papers 01, University of Konstanz, Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality. Perceptions, Participation and Policies".
    8. Ilia Sorvachev & Evgeny Yakovlev, 2019. "Short-Run and Long-Run Effects of Sizable Child Subsidy: Evidence from Russia," Working Papers w0254, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR).
    9. Munoz de Bustillo Llorente Rafael & FERNANDEZ MACIAS Enrique & GONZALEZ VAZQUEZ Ignacio, 2020. "Universality in Social Protection: An Inquiry about its Meaning and Measurement," JRC Research Reports JRC122953, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Lara Lebedinski & Cristiano Perugini & Marko Vladisavljević, 2023. "Child penalty in Russia: evidence from an event study," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 173-215, March.
    11. Alex Proshin, 2020. "Impact of Child Subsidies on Child Health, Well-being and Parental Investment in Human Capital: Evidence from Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey 2011-2017," Working Papers halshs-02652268, HAL.
    12. Jennifer Hook, 2015. "Incorporating ‘Class’ into Work-Family Arrangements: Insights from and for Three Worlds," LIS Working papers 639, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    13. Sorvachev, Ilia & Yakovlev, Evgeny, 2020. "Short- and Long-Run Effects of a Sizable Child Subsidy: Evidence from Russia," IZA Discussion Papers 13019, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Berde, Éva & Kovács, Eszter, 2016. "A svéd és a magyar termékenységi arányszám összehasonlítása [Comparison of Swedish and Hungarian fertility levels]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1348-1374.
    15. Jolanta Aidukaite & Donata Telisauskaite-Cekanavice, 2020. "The Father’s Role in Child Care: Parental Leave Policies in Lithuania and Sweden," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 81-91.
    16. Alex Proshin, 2023. "Impact of Child Subsidies on Child Health, Well-Being, and Investment in Child Human Capital: Evidence from Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey 2010–2017," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 39(1), pages 1-92, December.
    17. Holger Stichnoth & Raphael Abiry & Karsten Reuss, 2015. "Completed fertility effects of family policy measures: evidence from a life-cycle model," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(3), pages 1726-1733.
    18. Fabián Slonimczyk & Vladimir Gimpelson, 2015. "Informality and mobility," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 23(2), pages 299-341, April.
    19. Gorskiy, Dmitriy, 2024. "The Maternity Capital programs in Russia and the second birth spacing," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 75, pages 117-141.
    20. Kryštof Zeman & Eva Beaujouan & Zuzanna Brzozowska & Tomáš Sobotka, 2018. "Cohort fertility decline in low fertility countries: Decomposition using parity progression ratios," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 38(25), pages 651-690.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    demographic policy; maternal capital; fertility; reproductive behavior; large families.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

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

    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:rnp:ecopol:ep1765. 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: RANEPA maintainer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aneeeru.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.