On the relationship between female labour force participation and fertility in G7 countries: Evidence from panel cointegration and Granger causality

Empirical Economics

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 361-372

  Mishra, Vinod ^a   Nielsen, Ingrid ^a   Smyth, Russell ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Female labour force participation; Fertility; G7 countries; Panel cointegration; Panel unit roots

Indexed keywords

COINTEGRATION ANALYSIS; FERTILITY; GRANGER CAUSALITY TEST; LABOR PARTICIPATION; LABOR SUPPLY; PANEL DATA; WOMENS EMPLOYMENT;

EID: 77951127957     PISSN: 03777332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00181-009-0270-1     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Ahn N, Mira P (2002) A note on the changing relationship between fertility and female employment rates in developed countries. J Popul Econ 15: 667-682.
2. Cheng BS (1996a) The causal relationship between African American fertility and female labor supply: policy implications. Rev Black Polit Econ 25: 77-88.
3. Cheng BS (1996b) An investigation of cointegration and causality between fertility and female labor force participation. Appl Econ Lett 3: 29-32.
4. Cheng BS, Hsu RC, Chu Q (1997) The causality between fertility and female labor force participation in Japan. Appl Econ Lett 4: 113-116.
5. Chevalier A, Viitanen TK (2002) The causality between female labour force participation and the availability of childcare. Appl Econ Lett 9: 915-918.
6. Cleveland G, Gunderson M, Hyatt D (1996) Child care costs and the employment decision of women: Canadian evidence. Can J Econ 29: 132-151.
7. Del Boca D (2002a) Low fertility and labour force attachment of Italian women: Evidence and Interpretations. OECD Occasional Paper DEELSA/ELSA/WD(2002)5.
8. Del Boca D (2002b) The effect of child care and part time opportunities on participation and fertility decisions in Italy. J Popul Econ 15: 549-573.
9. Engelhardt H, Kogel T, Prskawetz A (2004) Fertility and women's employment reconsidered: a macro-level time series analysis for developed countries 1960-2000. Pop Stud 58: 109-120.
10. Im K-S, Pesaran H, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J Econom 115: 53-74.
11. Johansen S (1988) Statistical analysis of cointegrating vectors. J Econ Dyn Cont 12: 231-254.
12. Kreyenfeld M, Karsten H (2000) Does the availability of child care influence the employment of mothers? Findings from western Germany. Popul Res Policy Rev 19: 317-337.
13. Levin A, Lin C-F, Chu CSJ (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite sample properties. J Econom 108: 1-24.
14. Narayan PK, Smyth R (2006) Female labour force participation, fertility and infant mortality in Australia: Some empirical evidence from Granger causality tests. App Econ 38: 563-572.
15. Nickell S (1981) Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica 49: 1417-1426.
16. Pedroni P (2000) Fully modified OLS for heterogeneous cointegrated panels. Adv Econom 15: 93-130.
17. Pedroni P (2004) Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to PPP hypothesis: new results. Econom Theor 20: 597-627.
18. Pesaran MH (2004) General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics No. 435, University of Cambridge, and CESifo Working Paper Series No. 1229.
19. Pesaran MH (2007) A simple unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econom 22: 265-312.
20. Strauss J, Yigit T (2003) Shortfalls of panel unit root testing. Econ Lett 81: 309-313.
21. Waldfogel J, Higuchi Y, Abe M (1998) Maternity leave policies and women's employment after childbirth: evidence from the United States, Britain, and Japan. Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion Working Paper, London School of Economics.
22. Zimmermann KF (1985) Family economy. Springer, Berlin.