The Effect of Family Fertility Support Policies on Fertility, Their Contribution, and Policy Pathways to Fertility Improvement in OECD Countries
Level 4 - case-series / case-control
Level is by design analogy (non-clinical macro-level observational econometric and comparative policy analysis).
OpenAlex W4323664921 · doi:10.3390/ijerph20064790
What was done
The authors evaluated the relationship between family welfare policies (cash benefits, services/in-kind expenditure, and tax incentives) and fertility rates in OECD countries. The methodology combined regression analysis, grey relational analysis (GRA), and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to assess policy contributions and configuration pathways.
What was found
Family welfare policies were associated with sustained improvements in fertility, but the positive effect was attenuated in countries where total fertility rates remained below 1.5. Across countries, cash benefits provided the largest relative contribution to fertility promotion in over 50% of nations, services and in-kind expenditures in 29%, and tax incentives in 14%. The fsQCA identified three distinct policy configurations capable of boosting fertility, with cash benefits, services, and in-kind spending emerging as the primary core conditions.
Why it matters
This study highlights that pro-fertility policies are not universally interchangeable and that their effectiveness depends on baseline fertility levels and specific policy mixes, with cash and service provisions outperforming tax incentives.
Limits
The abstract does not state the exact sample size (number of countries or country-years), specific regression effect sizes, or confidence intervals. Cross-national macro-level ecological analyses are vulnerable to confounding from unmeasured macroeconomic, cultural, and demographic shifts.
Cited by
- supports South Korea spends approximately 1% of its GDP on family and child benefits, placing it well below the OECD average.