Money or kindergarten? Distributive effects of cash versus in-kind family transfers for young children

Michael Förster and Gerlinde Verbist

No 13/04, ImPRovE Working Papers from Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp

Abstract: Public support to families with pre-school children can be in the form of cash benefits (e.g. child allowances) or of “in-kind” support (e.g. care services such as kindergartens). The mix of these support measures varies greatly across OECD countries, from a cash / in-kind composition of 10%/90% to 80%/20%. This paper imputes the value of services into an “extended” household income and compares the resulting distributive patterns and the redistributive effect of these two strands of family policies. On average, cash and in-kind transfers each constitute 7 – 8% of the incomes of families with young children. Both instruments are redistributive. Cash transfers reduce child poverty by one third, with the estimated impacts in Austria, Ireland, Sweden, Hungary and Finland performing above average. When services are accounted for, child poverty falls by one quarter and poverty among children enrolled in childcare is more than halved. This reduction is highest in Belgium, France, Hungary, Iceland and Sweden. The paper also presents simulations in which cash transfers are replaced by services, and vice versa, to provide a better understanding of these effects. The results from these simulations do not allow us to draw “generalised” conclusions as to which of the two instruments fares “better”. However, in a majority of countries, if all in-kind spending on childcare were transformed into cash benefits, a lump-sum approach (i.e. a basic income supplement to all children) would be more effective in reducing poverty than an up-rating of present child benefits. The analysis in this paper is exploratory in that it considers only the first-round distributive effects of the policy instruments and does not capture additional indirect and longer-term redistributive effects, in particular possible labour supply effects and their potential impact on household incomes. The hypothetical simulations constitute extreme cases in that the entire volume of early childhood education and care (ECEC) services is replaced by cash transfers, and vice versa. The simulations nevertheless provide useful benchmarks for estimating potential losses or gains in redistribution when key elements of the early childhood policy mix are to be changed.

Keywords: child poverty; income distribution; cash and in-kind transfers; family policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: D31 H40 I38 J13 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013-04
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-dem, nep-eur and nep-ltv
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.centrumvoorsociaalbeleid.be/ImPRovE/Wor ... vE%20WP%201304_1.pdf (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 404 Not Found (http://www.centrumvoorsociaalbeleid.be/ImPRovE/Working%20Papers/ImPRovE%20WP%201304_1.pdf [302 Moved Temporarily]--> https://www.centrumvoorsociaalbeleid.be/ImPRovE/Working%20Papers/ImPRovE%20WP%201304_1.pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: Money or Kindergarten? Distributive Effects of Cash Versus In-Kind Family Transfers for Young Children (2012)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hdl:improv:1304

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in ImPRovE Working Papers from Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Tim Goedem ().