Universal versus economically polarized change in age at first birth: A French - British comparison

Population and Development Review

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 89-115

  Rendall, Michael S ^a   Ekert Jaffé, Olivia ^a   Joshi, Heather ^b   Lynch, Kevin ^c   Mougin, Rémi ^d  

^a RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

^b INSTITUT NATIONAL D'ÉTUDES DÉMOGRAPHIQUES   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHILD CARE; CHILDBEARING; EMPLOYMENT; INCOME; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS; WOMENS STATUS;

EURASIA; EUROPE; FRANCE; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 63149136999     PISSN: 00987921     EISSN: 17284457     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2009.00262.x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Adsera, A. 2004. "Changing fertility rates in developed countries: The impact of labor market institutions," Journal of Population Economics 17: 17-43.
2. Algava, E. and M. Avenel. 2001. "Les bénéficiaries de l'Allocation de parent isolé(API)" [Recipients of the single-parent benefit], DRESS Etudes et Résultats 112. Paris: Ministère de L'émploi et de la solidarité.
3. Blank, R. M. and R. Haskins (eds.). 2001. The New World of Welfare. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
4. Boje, T. P. and A. Amqvist. 2000. "Citizenship, family policy and women's patterns of employment," in T. P. Boje and A. Leira (eds.), Gender, Welfare State and the Market. New York: Routledge, pp. 41-70.
5. Bradshaw, J., S. Kennedy, M. Kilkey, S. Hutton, A. Corden, T. Eardley, H. Holmes, and J. Neale. 1996. The Employment of Lone Parents: A Comparison of Policy in 20 Countries. London: Family Policy Studies Centre.
6. Brewster, K. L. and R. R. Rindfuss. 2000. "Fertility and women's employment in industrialized nations," Annual Review of Sociology 26: 271-296.
7. Chandola, T., D. A. Coleman, and R. W. Hiorns. 1999. "Recent European fertility patterns: Fitting curves to 'distorted'distributions," Population Studies 53: 317-329.
8. Chandola, T., D. A. Coleman, and R. W. Hiorns. 2002. "Distinctive features of age-specific fertility profiles in the English-speaking world: Common patterns in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States, 1970-98," Population Studies 56: 181-200.
9. Chiang, C. L. 1984. The Life Table and Its Applications. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing.
10. Cigno, A. and J. Ermisch. 1989. "A microeconomic analysis of the timing of births," European Economic Review 33: 737-760.
11. Desai, S. and L. J. Waite. 1991. "Women's employment during pregnancy and after the first birth: Occupational characteristics and work commitment," American Sociological Review 56(4): 551-566.
12. Dex, S., P. Walters, and D. M. Alden. 1993. French and British Mothers at Work. London: Macmillan.
13. Ekert-Jaffé, O. and A. Solaz. 2001. "Unemployment, marriage, and cohabitation," Journal of Socio-economics 30: 75-98.
14. Ermisch, J. F. 1989. "Purchased child care, optimal family size and mother's employment," Journal of Population Economics 2(2): 79-102.
15. Forster, M. F. and K. Vleminckx. 2004. "International comparisons of income inequality and poverty: Findings from the Luxembourg Income Study," Socio-economic Review 2: 191-212.
16. Gauthier, A.H. 1996. The State and the Family: A Comparative Analysis of Family Policies in Industrialized Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17. Gauthier, A.H. 2005. "Trends in policies for family-friendly societies," in M. Macura, A. L. MacDonald, and W. Haug (eds.), The New Demographic Regime: Population Challenges and Policy Responses. Geneva: United Nations.
18. Gauthier, A. H. and J. Hatzius. 1997. "Family benefits and fertility: An econometric analysis," Population Studies 51: 295-306.
19. Glover, J. and S. Arber. 1995. "Polarization in mothers' employment," Gender, Work and Organization 2(4): 165-179.
20. Gornick, J. C., M. K. Meyers, and K. E. Ross. 1997. "Supporting the employment of mothers: Policy variation across fourteen welfare states," Journal of European Social Policy 7(1): 45-70.
21. Gornick, J. C., M. K. Meyers, and K. E. Ross. 1998. "Public policies and the employment of mothers: A cross-national study," Social Science Quarterly 79(1): 35-54.
22. Gregory, A. and J. Windebank. 2000. Women's Work in Britain and France: Practice, Theory and Policy. London: Macmillan.
23. Grimshaw, D. and J. Rubery. 1997. "The concentration of women's employment and relative occupational pay: A statistical framework for comparative analysis," Labour Market and Social Policy, Occasional Papers No. 26. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development «http://www.oecd.org».
24. Gustafsson, S. S. 2001. "Optimal age at motherhood: Theoretical and empirical considerations in postponement of maternity," Journal of Population Economics 14: 225-247.
25. Gustafsson, S. S. and C. Wetzels. 2000. "Optimal age for first birth: Germany, Great Britain, the Netherlands and Sweden," in S. S. Gustafsson, and D. E. Meulders (eds.), Gender and the Labour Market: Econometric Evidence of Obstacles to Achieving Gender Equality. New York: St. Martin's Press, pp. 188-209.
26. Hantrais, L. 1994. "La féconditéen France et au Royaume-Uni: Les effets possibles de la politique familiale" [Fertility in France and the United Kingdom: Possible effects of family policy], Population 4: 987-1016.
27. Hattersley, L. and R. Creeser. 1995. Longitudinal Study 1971-1991: History, Organisation and Quality of Data. Office for National Statistics, Series LS No. 7. London: HMSO.
28. Hauser, R. M. and J. R. Warren. 1997. "Socioeconomic indexes for occupations: A review, update, and critique," Sociological Methodology 27: 177-298.
29. Hoffman, S. D. and E. M. Foster. 2000. "AFDC benefits and nonmarital births to young women," Journal of Human Resources 35(2): 376-391.
30. INSEE. 1995. Echantillon Démographique Permanent: Manuel de l'Utilisation [French Demographic Panel: User Guide]. Paris: INSEE Département de la Démographic.
31. Kamerman, S. B. and A. J. Kahn (eds.). 1997. Family Change and Family Policies in Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Lesthaeghe, R. 1995. "The second demographic transition in Western countries: An interpretation," in K. O. Mason and A. M. Jensen (eds.), Gender and Family Change in Industrialized Countries. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 17-62.
33. McDonald, P. 2006. "Low fertility and the state: The efficacy of policy," Population and Development Review 32(3): 485-510.
34. McLanahan, S. 2004. "Diverging destinies: How children fare under the second demographic transition," Demography 41 (4): 607-627.
35. Meron, M. and I. Widmer. 2002. "Les femmes au chomage retardent l'arrivée du premier enfant " [Unemployment leads women to postpone the birth of their first child], Population 57(2): 327-358.
36. Merrigan, P. and Y. St.-Pierre. 1998. "An econometric and neo-classical analysis of the timing and spacing of births in Canada from 1950 to 1990," Journal of Population Economics 11(1): 29-51.
37. Milligan, K. 2005. "Subsidizing the stork: New evidence on tax incentives and fertility," Review of Economics and Statistics 87(3): 539-555.
38. Office for National Statistics. 2007. Birth Statistics, Series FM1 «http://www.ons.gov.uk»
39. Pampel F. 2001. The Institutional Context of Population Change: Patterns of Fertility and Mortality across High-Income Nations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Rendall, M. S., C. Couet, T. Lappegard, I. Robert-Bobée, M. Rønsen, and S. Smallwood. 2005. "First births by age and education in Britain, France, and Norway," Population Trends 121: 27-34.
41. Rendall, M. S., O. Ekert-Jaffé, H. Joshi, K. Lynch, and R. Mougin. 2008. "Universal versus economically polarized change in age at first birth: A French-British comparison," RAND Labor and Population Working Paper HYPERLINK «http://www.rand.org/pubs/ -working_papers/WR568/» WR-568 «http://www.rand.org/labor/ pubs/working_papers».
42. Rindfuss, R. R., K. B. Guzzo, and S. P. Morgan. 2003. "The changing institutional context of low fertility," Population Research and Policy Review 22: 411-438.
43. Rosenzweig, M. R. 1999. "Welfare, marital prospects, and nonmarital childbearing," Journal of Political Economy 107(6): S2-S32.
44. Ruhm, C. 1998. "The economic consequences of parental leave mandates: Lessons from Europe," Quarterly Journal of Economics 113(1): 285-317.
45. Sobotka, T. 2004. "Is lowest-low fertility in Europe explained by the postponement of child-bearing?," Population and Development Review 30(2): 195-220.
46. Schulze, H. and H. Tyrell. 2002. "What happened to the European family in the 1980s?The polarization between the family and other forms of private life," in F. Kaufmann, A. Kuijsten, H. Schulze, and K.P. Strohmeier (eds.), Family Life and Family Policies in Europe, Volume 2, Problems and Issues in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 69-119.
47. Stier, H., N. Lewin-Epstein, and M. Braun. 2001. "Welfare regimes, family-supportive policies, and women's employment along the life-course," American Journal of Sociology 106(6): 1731-1760.
48. Sullivan, R. 2005. "The age pattern of first-birth rates among U.S. women: The bimodal 1990s," Demography 42(2): 259-273.
49. Thelot, C. and M. Villac. 1998. Politique Familiale: Bilan et Perspectives [Family Policy: Balance Sheet and Perspectives]. Paris: La Documentation Française.
50. Toulemon, L. and M. Mazuy. 2001. "Cinq projections de féconditéfondées sur une hypothèse de stabilitédes comportements" [Five fertility projections under a hypothesis of stable behavior], Population 56(4): 647-656.