More Money — More Births? Estimating Effects of 2007 Family Policy Changes on Probability of Second and Subsequent Births in Russia

Светлана Сергеевна Бирюкова, Оксана Вячеславовна Синявская
{"title":"More Money — More Births? Estimating Effects of 2007 Family Policy Changes on Probability of Second and Subsequent Births in Russia","authors":"Светлана Сергеевна Бирюкова, Оксана Вячеславовна Синявская","doi":"10.14515/MONITORING.2021.2.1830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From 2007 to 2015 total fertility rate in Russia increased from 1.42 to 1.78, following a long period of decline in 1990-1999 and stagnation in 2000-2006. Politicians attribute this growth to a package of pro-natalist policy measures introduced in 2007 and particularly to the maternity (family) capital program, the most well-known innovation of the 2007 reform. Existing studies, although sparse, have not actually proven this point of view clearly yet. This paper aims to reveal whether the pro-natalist measures of 2007 have influenced probability of second and consequent births in Russia. Since in 2007 several family policy measures were introduced simultaneously, and the authors estimate their cumulative effect applying a set of binary logistic regressions on the panel of Russian Generations and Gender Survey data collected in 2004, 2007, and 2011. The study reveals that the probability of second and subsequent births before the introduction of policy measures does not differ significantly from that observed after it. The authors find no effect of 2007 family policy changes on probability of second and consequent births in Russia. The data shows some signs of selective influence of the 2007 policy changes on women with lower human capital and incomes, however, further studies on bigger samples are needed to prove this fact. The study extends the academic discussion and adds to the pool of empirical evidence on the pro-natalist policy effects on fertility. By demonstrating no significant effects of Russian 2007 family policy measures the paper contributes to the overcoming of existing publication bias in the field. \nAcknowledgements. The authors are grateful for the support granted to the research within the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE).","PeriodicalId":284552,"journal":{"name":"The monitoring of public opinion economic&social changes","volume":"130 9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The monitoring of public opinion economic&social changes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14515/MONITORING.2021.2.1830","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

From 2007 to 2015 total fertility rate in Russia increased from 1.42 to 1.78, following a long period of decline in 1990-1999 and stagnation in 2000-2006. Politicians attribute this growth to a package of pro-natalist policy measures introduced in 2007 and particularly to the maternity (family) capital program, the most well-known innovation of the 2007 reform. Existing studies, although sparse, have not actually proven this point of view clearly yet. This paper aims to reveal whether the pro-natalist measures of 2007 have influenced probability of second and consequent births in Russia. Since in 2007 several family policy measures were introduced simultaneously, and the authors estimate their cumulative effect applying a set of binary logistic regressions on the panel of Russian Generations and Gender Survey data collected in 2004, 2007, and 2011. The study reveals that the probability of second and subsequent births before the introduction of policy measures does not differ significantly from that observed after it. The authors find no effect of 2007 family policy changes on probability of second and consequent births in Russia. The data shows some signs of selective influence of the 2007 policy changes on women with lower human capital and incomes, however, further studies on bigger samples are needed to prove this fact. The study extends the academic discussion and adds to the pool of empirical evidence on the pro-natalist policy effects on fertility. By demonstrating no significant effects of Russian 2007 family policy measures the paper contributes to the overcoming of existing publication bias in the field. Acknowledgements. The authors are grateful for the support granted to the research within the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
更多的钱-更多的出生率?2007年俄罗斯家庭政策变化对二胎及以后生育概率的影响
在经历了1990-1999年的长期下降和2000-2006年的停滞之后,从2007年到2015年,俄罗斯的总生育率从1.42上升到1.78。政治家们将这一增长归因于2007年推出的一揽子亲生育政策措施,尤其是2007年改革中最著名的创新——生育(家庭)资本计划。现有的研究虽然很少,但实际上还没有清楚地证明这一观点。本文旨在揭示2007年亲生育措施是否影响了俄罗斯第二胎和随后出生的概率。自2007年以来,几项家庭政策措施同时出台,作者对2004年、2007年和2011年收集的俄罗斯代际和性别调查数据进行了一组二元logistic回归,估计了它们的累积效应。研究表明,在政策措施出台之前,二胎及以后生育的概率与政策措施出台之后没有显著差异。作者发现,2007年的家庭政策变化对俄罗斯二胎及后续生育的概率没有影响。数据显示,2007年政策变化对人力资本和收入较低的妇女有选择性影响,但需要对更大样本进行进一步研究来证明这一事实。该研究扩展了学术讨论,并增加了亲生育政策对生育率影响的经验证据库。通过证明俄罗斯2007年家庭政策措施没有显著影响,本文有助于克服该领域现有的发表偏倚。致谢作者感谢国家研究型大学高等经济学院(HSE)基础研究计划对本研究的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Исследования надзора: основные направления и теоретические подходы Мемы как инструмент консолидации протестного движения (на примере коротких видео социальной сети TikTok) Реализация модели «сити-менеджер» в России: ограничения и преимущества Нужна ли красная таблетка: гидроксихлорокиновые войны в «Твиттере» «Система социологии» Питирима Сорокина и системно-коммуникативный подход
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1