Family and Children policy in an international perspective presentation: Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs, 23 November 2009, Seoul Willem Adema Senior Economist, Employment, Labour and Social Affairs, OECD (

1.OECD work on families and children 2.Outcomes for families and children: Korea in international comparison 3.Cross-national differences in policy objectives and policy response. 4.Workplace practices play an important role in determining fertility rates in Korea Presentation outline

OECD work on families and children

Reviews of 13 OECD countries feeding into synthesis issue - Key outcomes - Tax/benefit systems - Childcare - Workplace practices T Babies and Bosses reviews of policies towards the reconciliation of work and family life.

Different dimensions of Child well-being Policy amenable indicators for all OECD countries Public policies to enhance child well-being, including pre-natal services, parental leave, family services. Investing over the early life course! Doing better for children on child well-being.

The structure of the OECD Family and Children database Structure of Families Labour Market Position of Families Public Policies for Families and Children Module on Child well-being

Future indicator work includes: Historical information on parental leave reform and effect on child well-being, fertility and labour force participation Extending knowledge basis on tax/benefit support as children grow up More disaggregate information by age and sex Indicators on family violence, families with disabled children, child protection, the gap between intended and real fertility rates, informal care.

Doing Better for Families in 2011 Actualised information on outcomes and policies Removing barriers to work and family formation, including quality of childcare, cost of children, desired fertility, flexitime entitlements Promoting child development, e.g. evidence from longitudinal datasets, policies for at risk teens Family dissolution, e.g. policies towards sole parent-families and child support (maintenance) Vulnerable families and children, e.g., child protection systems, institutional and foster care

Outcomes for families and children: Korea in international comparison

Compared across countries, Korea scores poorly in terms of work and family outcomes…

…, but “scores” are above average in terms of Child well-being:

Korea has the lowest total fertility rate across the OECD… Replacement level

…as the mean age of women at first child birth is relatively high,… Data concern 2005

…families are getting smaller…

…and fertility is strongly associated with marriage in Korea.

With female employment rates below average, fertility rates were high in 1980…. Female employment rates and total fertility rates 1980

…but as the work/family relationship has changed both fertility rates and female employment in Korea are below OECD average. Female employment rates and total fertility rates 2005

Cross-national differences in policy objectives and policy response.

Increasing female employment to sustain economic growth and pension systems Tackling child poverty Promoting child development Gender equity The mix of family policy objectives differs considerably across the OECD …

…and so does the policy response; with little public spending on family benefits in Korea Public spending on family benefits, per cent of GDP, 2005

Public spending covers: –Extensive health, housing and education support –Paid parental leave for around one year or more –Public childcare and early education –Out-of-School-Hours care The policy model is expensive; tax-to-GDP ratios in these countries are 45 to 48% compared with an OECD average of 36% and 28% for Korea. Therefore, many countries income-test support or leave ‘gaps’ in public family support Nordic countries and France provide a continuum of care and employment supports to families with children

The French spending over the early life course profile is therefore relatively flat...

…whereas the Korean profile reflects the “more common “inverted U shape’ pattern

Nevertheless, Korean maternity leave policy design reflects the OECD “norm”…

…as does the duration of parental leave which is largely unpaid…

…while childcare participation of very young children (0-3) is above the OECD average.

Workplace practices play an important role in determining fertility rates in Korea

Korean Women have made great progress in educational attainment… Percentage of female population that has attained at least an upper secondary education by age group, 2006

…with young women now doing as well as young men. Percentage of population age that has attained at least an upper secondary education by sex, 2006

But workplace cultures establish a main barrier to better work/family balance in Korea Women are still often expected to leave work on marriage/childbirth Regular employment, pursuing a career and motherhood seem difficult to combine –workplace cultures do not support work/family balance –Female labour market outcomes are unfavourable –Seniority pay systems punish those who take time off for caring

Gender pay gaps are the largest in the OECD area… Gender gap in median earnings of full-time employees, 2006 or latest year available

…and working hours in Korea leave little time for family commitments… Share of workers by distribution of usual working hours, by gender, 2005

…which contributes to employment among high-skilled women being relatively low. Female employment rates by educational attainment 2006

More investment in quality formal childcare support through a mix of direct investment and money to parents Mould parental leave and childcare policies into a coherent system To increase employment and birth-rates, Korea needs better family-friendly policies.

Maintain employer/employee relationship during parental leave More opportunities for women/mothers to stay/return to regular employment. Increase the role of performance-related pay …but above all Korean workplaces practices need changing

…potential labour market gains are substantial Total labour force from 1980 to 2000, and projections from 2005 to 2030, in thousands ‘Constant rates’: assumes constant labour force participation rates for men and women from 2000 to 2030; ’Gender equity in participation rates’: assumes that female participation rates reach current male participation rates in each country by 2030.

Thank you for your attention