IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/42725.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is the fertility response to the Australian baby bonus heterogeneous across maternal age? Evidence from Victoria

Author

Listed:
  • Sinclair, Sarah
  • Boymal, Jonathan
  • de Silva, Ashton J

Abstract

The Australian baby bonus, offering parents $3,000 on the birth of a child, was announced on May 11 2004. The focus of this paper is to analyse the response to the policy across maternal age levels in order to separate policy effects from prevailing demographic trends such as recuperation of previously postponed births. Using multivariate time series analysis, we find that all age groups except teenagers show a positive fertility response to the policy. The results suggest that the policy may have elicited fertility behaviour change, evidenced by a higher cumulative growth in fertility of maternal age groups 20-24 and 24-30 which is sustained past 2008 even as a growth in birth ratios of older age groups was stabilising. A short term birth timing effect was also estimated to further explore the extent to which incentives matter for decisions around family formation.

Suggested Citation

  • Sinclair, Sarah & Boymal, Jonathan & de Silva, Ashton J, 2012. "Is the fertility response to the Australian baby bonus heterogeneous across maternal age? Evidence from Victoria," MPRA Paper 42725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:42725
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/42725/1/MPRA_paper_42725.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nick Parr, 2011. "The contribution of increases in family benefits to Australia’s early 21st-century fertility increase: An empirical analysis," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 25(6), pages 215-244.
    2. Beatrice Brunner & Andreas Kuhn, 2011. "Financial Incentives, the Timing of Births, Birth Complications, and Newborns’ Health: Evidence from the Abolition of Austria’s Baby Bonus," NRN working papers 2011-16, The Austrian Center for Labor Economics and the Analysis of the Welfare State, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    3. John Bongaarts, 2008. "What can fertility indicators tell us about pronatalist policy options?," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 6(1), pages 39-55.
    4. Tamm, Marcus, 2013. "The Impact of a Large Parental Leave Benefit Reform on the Timing of Birth around the Day of Implementation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 75(4), pages 585-601.
    5. Sarah Sinclair & Jonathan Boymal & Ashton De Silva, 2012. "A Re‐Appraisal of the Fertility Response to the Australian Baby Bonus," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(s1), pages 78-87, June.
    6. Michael Neugart & Henry Ohlsson, 2013. "Economic incentives and the timing of births: evidence from the German parental benefit reform of 2007," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 87-108, January.
    7. Edith Duclos & Pierre Lefebvre & Philip Merrigan, 2001. "A 'Natural Experiment' on the Economics of Storks: Evidence on the Impact of Differential Family Policy on Fertility Rates in Canada," Cahiers de recherche CREFE / CREFE Working Papers 136, CREFE, Université du Québec à Montréal.
    8. Laroque, Guy & Salanié, Bernard, 2005. "Does Fertility Respond to Financial Incentives?," CEPR Discussion Papers 5007, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Alma Cohen & Rajeev Dehejia & Dmitri Romanov, 2007. "Do Financial Incentives Affect Fertility?," NBER Working Papers 13700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Pedro Mira & Namkee Ahn, 2002. "A note on the changing relationship between fertility and female employment rates in developed countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 15(4), pages 667-682.
    11. John Bongaarts & Tomáš Sobotka, 2012. "A Demographic Explanation for the Recent Rise in European Fertility," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 38(1), pages 83-120, March.
    12. Harvey,Andrew C., 1991. "Forecasting, Structural Time Series Models and the Kalman Filter," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521405737, January.
    13. Angela Luci & Olivier Thevenon, 2011. "The impact of family policy packages on fertility trends in developed countries," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00657603, HAL.
    14. Brunner, Beatrice & Kuhn, Andreas, 2011. "Financial Incentives, the Timing of Births, Birth Complications, and Newborns' Health: Evidence from the Abolition of Austria's Baby Bonus," IZA Discussion Papers 6141, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Massimiliano Bratti & Konstantinos Tatsiramos, 2012. "The effect of delaying motherhood on the second childbirth in Europe," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 25(1), pages 291-321, January.
    16. Beatrice Brunner & Andreas Kuhn, 2011. "Financial incentives, the timing of births, birth complications, and newborns' health: Evidence from the abolition of Austria's baby bonus," ECON - Working Papers 048, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    17. Adriaan Kalwij, 2010. "The impact of family policy expenditure on fertility in western Europe," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 47(2), pages 503-519, May.
    18. Gary S. Becker & Robert J. Barro, 1988. "A Reformulation of the Economic Theory of Fertility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(1), pages 1-25.
    19. Kevin Milligan, 2005. "Subsidizing the Stork: New Evidence on Tax Incentives and Fertility," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(3), pages 539-555, August.
    20. Angela Luci & Olivier Thevenon, 2011. "The impact of family policy packages on fertility trends in developed countries," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00660630, HAL.
    21. Mark Wooden & Nicole Watson, 2007. "The HILDA Survey and its Contribution to Economic and Social Research (So Far)," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 83(261), pages 208-231, June.
    22. Anne Gauthier, 2007. "The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: a review of the literature," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 26(3), pages 323-346, June.
    23. Tomáš Sobotka, 2003. "Tempo-quantum and period-cohort interplay in fertility changes in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 8(6), pages 151-214.
    24. Wolfgang Lutz & Vegard Skirbekk, 2005. "Policies Addressing the Tempo Effect in Low‐Fertility Countries," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 31(4), pages 699-720, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Micaela Bassford & Hayley Fisher, 2020. "The Impact of Paid Parental Leave on Fertility Intentions," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 96(315), pages 402-430, December.

    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. Gordey Yastrebov, 2016. "Intergenerational Social Mobility in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 69/SOC/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. 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.
    3. Mengni Chen & Chris J Lloyd & Paul S F Yip, 2018. "A new method of identifying target groups for pronatalist policy applied to Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-13, February.
    4. Magdalena Smyk & Joanna Tyrowicz & Lucas van der Velde, 2021. "A Cautionary Note on the Reliability of the Online Survey Data: The Case of Wage Indicator," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 50(1), pages 429-464, February.
    5. Hippolyte d'Albis & Angela Greulich & Grégory Ponthière, 2017. "Education, labour, and the demographic consequences of birth postponement in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(23), pages 691-728.
    6. Mikko Myrskylä & Rachel Margolis, 2013. "Parental benefits improve parental well-being: evidence from a 2007 policy change in Germany," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2013-010, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    7. Héctor Bellido & Miriam Marcén, 2019. "Fertility and the business cycle: the European case," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1289-1319, December.
    8. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    9. Nakajima, Ryo & Tanaka, Ryuichi, 2014. "Estimating the effects of pronatal policies on residential choice and fertility," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 179-200.
    10. Cristina Borra & Libertad González & Almudena Sevilla, 2019. "The Impact of Scheduling Birth Early on Infant Health," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 30-78.
    11. Suzanne Bonner & Dipanwita Sarkar, 2020. "Who responds to fertility-boosting incentives? Evidence from pro-natal policies in Australia," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 42(18), pages 513-548.
    12. Krzysztof Makarski & Joanna Tyrowicz & Magda Malec, 2018. "Evaluating welfare and economic effects of raised fertility," GRAPE Working Papers 25, GRAPE Group for Research in Applied Economics.
    13. Lucia Granelli, 2016. "Family Tax Policy in a Model with Endogenous Fertility à la Barro-Becker," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2016010, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    14. Sunnee Billingsley & Gerda Neyer & Katharina Wesolowski, 2022. "Social Investment Policies and Childbearing Across 20 Countries: Longitudinal and Micro-Level Analyses," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(5), pages 951-974, December.
    15. Ross Guest, 2013. "Population Ageing and Productivity: Implications and Policy Options for New Zealand," Treasury Working Paper Series 13/21, New Zealand Treasury.
    16. Anne Gauthier, 2007. "The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: a review of the literature," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 26(3), pages 323-346, June.
    17. Natalie Malak & Md Mahbubur Rahman & Terry A. Yip, 2019. "Baby bonus, anyone? Examining heterogeneous responses to a pro-natalist policy," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 1205-1246, October.
    18. Cristina Borra & Libertad González Luna & Almudena Sevilla-Sanz, 2013. "The impact of eliminating a child benefit on birth timing and infant health," Economics Working Papers 1382, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    19. Kristen Harknett & Francesco Billari & Carla Medalia, 2014. "Do Family Support Environments Influence Fertility? Evidence from 20 European Countries," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 30(1), pages 1-33, February.
    20. Kamila Cygan-Rehm, 2016. "Parental leave benefit and differential fertility responses: evidence from a German reform," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 73-103, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Baby bonus; fertility; family policy; postponement; recuperation; age specific fertility; STAMP;
    All these keywords.

    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
    • J11 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Demographic Trends, Macroeconomic Effects, and Forecasts

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:42725. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.