The reasoning by Jaehrling et al. is quite similar to that in a pair of papers I published last year with Laurie C. Maldonado. In Community, Work & Family we showed how paid leave facilitates the employment of particularly single parents. Yet, despite their employment, single-parent families faced higher poverty risks compared to two-parent families. In the Belgian Review of Social Security we argued that the increased emphasis in policies ‘preparing’ individuals for economic independence through activation may come at the expense of redistributive policies ‘repairing’ adverse economic outcomes such as poverty. We raised the concern that it remains to be seen whether employment is a sufficient strategy against poverty, particularly for single parents.

Jaehrling et al. seem to empirically confirm our concern, discussing the decreased adequacy of social assistance, among other redistributive policies. Moreover, they add several very interesting explanations to how it is possible that single-parents’ employment growth did not reduce their poverty risks. I conclude by mentioning three:

• Selection: It could be that single parents represent an increasingly disadvantaged group in terms of employment and poverty. This would be the case, for instance, of single parenthood would become increasingly concentrated among the lower educated, who have less earnings potential to stay out of poverty by means of employment. However, this explanation found little support. It was found that in Sweden an increasing percentage of single-parents has multiple young children in the household.
• Precarious Employment: With single parent families being overrepresented among jobs with little stability, fixed-term contracts, and lower wages, they find more difficulties in making ends meet based on employment alone.
• Competition with dual-earner families: while single parents families, mostly headed by mothers, were front-runners in terms of maternal / women’s employment, this is no longer the case. With the overall trends towards higher female labour force participation rates, this means that single-parent families increasingly have to compete with dual-earner families. With their double incomes, these dual earners drive up the median incomes, and therefore the income-levels that are regarded necessary to stay out of (relative) poverty. Income levels that are increasingly difficult to reach for single earners.

References

Jaehrling, K., Kalina, T., & Mesaros, L. (2015). A Paradox of Activation Strategies: Why Increasing Labour Market Participation among Single Mothers Failed to Bring Down Poverty Rates. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 22(1), 86–110.

Maldonado, L. C., & Nieuwenhuis, R. (2015). Family policies and single parent poverty in 18 OECD countries, 1978–2008. Community, Work and Family, 18(4), 395–415.

Nieuwenhuis, R., & Maldonado, L. C. (2015). Prepare Versus Repair? Combining Parental Leave and Family Allowances for Social Investment Against Single-Parent Poverty. Belgian Review of Social Security, (1), 1–10.

• carries out policy-relevant analysis and research on the current socio-economic situation in the EU on the basis of the most recent available data
• examines major issues which are features of the situation or affect it with the aim of providing evidence on which to base policy-making across the EU.

It will be interesting to see what kind of questions and comments the paper attracts at this stage, which is much more policy-oriented compared to last week’s academic seminar. For those who missed it, the abstract of our paper reads:

Although employment growth is propagated as being crucial to reduce poverty across OECD countries, the actual impact of employment growth on poverty rates is still unclear. [Results show that] the increase in women’s employment has had a significant impact on poverty trends. […] However, in the Nordic countries no such poverty reducing effect was found, as in these countries womens employment rates were very high and stable throughout the observation period. In countries that initially showed marked increases in women’s employment, such as the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Canada, and the United States, the initial increases in women’s employment rates were typically followed by a period in which these trends levelled off.

Hence, our findings suggest that the potential of following an employment strategy to reduce poverty in OECD countries has, to a large extent, been depleted.

The paper is available here and isjoint work with Wim van Lancker, Diego Collado and Bea Cantillon. The program of the seminar is available online.

The paper is found, of course, online. If you have difficulties accessing it, please do not hesitate to contact me directly for a copy.

From the abstract:

This study examined towhat extent family policies differently affect poverty among single-parent households and two-parent households. We distinguished between reconciliation policies (tested with parental leave and the proportion of unpaid leave) and financial support policies (tested with family allowances). We used data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, covering 519,825 households in 18 OECD countries from 1978 to 2008, combined with data from the Comparative Family Policy Database. Single parents face higher poverty risks than coupled parents, and single mothers more so than single fathers. We found that employment reduces poverty, particularly for parents in professional occupations and for coupled parents who are dual earners. Longer parental leave, a smaller proportion of unpaid leave, and higher amounts of family allowances were associated with lower poverty among all households with children. Parental leave more effectively facilitated the employment of single mothers, thereby reducing their poverty more than among couples and single fathers. We found some evidence that family allowances reduced poverty most strongly among single fathers. An income decomposition showed that family allowances reduce poverty among two-parent households with up to 3 percentage points, and among single-parent households (mothers and fathers) up to 13 percentage points

Maldonado, L., & Nieuwenhuis, R. (2015). Family policies and single parent poverty in 18 OECD countries, 1978–2008 Community, Work & Family, 18 (4), 395-415 DOI: 10.1080/13668803.2015.1080661

The purpose of this research proposal is to assess the capacity of the European social investment strategy to alleviate poverty in Sweden and other European countries. This social investment strategy, which is currently dominant in European social policy making, assumes that poverty is best combatted by public services preparing individuals for economic independence through employment, rather than through government expenditure on monetary transfers repairing poverty. Assessing this strategy is important for two reasons. First, inequality and poverty are rising across Europe, including in Sweden where inequality rose by about 25% since 1980. Second, for social investment to succeed, it is pertinent that the services improve employment, that this employment is sufficiently paid and secure to protect against poverty, and that the degree to which services reduce poverty by stimulating employment actually outweighs the possible increase of poverty associated with cutbacks in social protection. Whether this is actually the case, is as of yet unknown.

This research proposal will focus on two policy domains of immediate importance for the social investment strategy: labour market policy and family policy. For these types of policies, the following questions will be answered: To what extent: (a.) has the shift from cash benefits to public services increased employment, (b.) has employment reduced poverty, and (c.) was anti-poverty effects of employment offset by reductions in cash benefits?

If you happen to be in New York and are interested in attending this talk, please contact me. There might be some ‘tickets’ available.

From the announcement:

Women’s employment rates have risen markedly across OECD countries in recent decades, although evidence is mounting that this trend is stagnating. Rense Nieuwenhuis will discuss how these trends have affected earnings inequality within and among coupled households, as well as poverty rates. His research is based on LIS data to cover OECD countries for about 3 decades. In his talk, he will also relate his findings to current policy developments in Europe.

Rense is a sociologist interested in how the interplay between social policies and demographic trends gives rise to economic inequalities. His publications appeared in the Journal of Marriage and Family and the European Sociological Review, among other journals. In 2014 he obtained a Phd (‘Cum Laude’) from the University of Twente in the Netherlands, and currently he is an assistant professor at the Swedish Institute for Social Research (SOFI).

Light refreshments will be provided. After the talk, all are welcome to join us for a social gathering at Bryant Park. 

From our contribution:

The position of single-parent families directly relates to one of the major critiques of the social investment strategy. Despite efforts to improve employment and make work pay to prevent poverty, European welfare states have witnessed disappointing trends in poverty (Vandenbroucke and Vleminckx, 2011). Cantillon (2011) argued that social investment policies are better suited for work-rich households than work- poor households at the bottom of the income distribution. This critique begs the empirical question of whether a transition to ‘in kind’ social investment policies can be sufficiently effective in improving employment to protect households against poverty, and if reducing transfers has rendered tax-benefit systems inadequate (cf. Nelson, 2011). We examine this below, focusing on family policies. Specifically, we assess whether social investment (reconciliation policies) is a more effective strategy than social protection (family allowances) for single-parent families.

We conclude:

Social investment, by facilitating employment, can be a beneficial strategy to reduce poverty among single-parent families but we argue that this strategy alone is not sufficient. Family allowances, too, reduce poverty. Therefore, in order for welfare states to genuinely invest in single-parent families, we recommend combining strategies that prepare and repair.

The special issue is available online, and access is open to anyone.

]]> http://www.rensenieuwenhuis.nl/prepare-versus-repair-on-social-investment-for-single-parent-families/feed/ 0