The organization of the project

 

Three workpackages

To treat these relatively complex topics, the project is articulated in three interrelated work packages. The first, WP1, focuses on the changing work-family equilibria, specifically on the interlinkage between employment and family decisions, on increasingly unstable employment careers and on changes in family formation. This perspective brings into focus the WP2 on family capacities to compensate - or not - for increasing market and social risks. In WP3 the consequences of changing work-family equilibria for the inequalities between families/households and the overall rising inequality in post industrial European societies in recent decades is assessed.

WP1: Changing work-family equilibria
WP2: The role of the family for risk coping: accumulation of risks or compensation
WP3: The consequences for social and economic inequalities between families.

WP1: Changing work-family equilibria

The increasing female labour market participation in European countries over recent decades has been paralleled by a sharp decline in fertility rates. As it is, citizens are having less children than they wish, and the demographic equilibrium of societies is at risk.

Consequently, there appears to be a trade-off between work and childbearing, as women either limit their fertility in order to accommodate their labour force activity or adjust their labour force behaviour to their fertility choices. Since the mid 1980s, however, there is a positive macro level correlation between female workforce participation and fertility rates: women have more children where they can combine work and family. A detailed investigation at the micro level, and the role that social policies play, is still lacking.
Further, the growth of insecure, “non-standard” employment has raised concerns that the “new” flexible jobs may crowd out more stable employment, becoming an additional source of insecurity for workers and their families. Only recently research on labour markets has developed interest in the consequences for family formation and fertility decisions. The increased labour market deregulation leading to increased instability of employment careers especially among households in the reproductive years, is supposed to represent a menace for fertility. The idea is that long-term commitments like marriage or parenthood require some stability and a secure economic basis. Increased uncertainty, however, is not unavoidable but may be mediated by different types of institutional contexts: the kind of labour market deregulation, the nature and generosity of the welfare system, the specific nature of family arrangements and family policies are among them.
The main objective, therefore, is to provide a more detailed investigation of the work-family interface with systematic consideration of the household situation in a longitudinal perspective. What are the mechanisms behind the formation of  “new” families, changing household typologies and their diversity in international comparison? The systematic cross national description of a household typology (double income households with no kids, singles, no income households….) is the first step. But it is not sufficient to study the underlying dynamics. Therefore, the analysis of life courses and the detailed sequencing of events are important. The project intends to investigate both directions: on one side the effects of the employment situation, including detailed information on the contractual situation and the kind of employment, on family formation and fertility decisions; and the effects of fertility events on the employment behavior on the other side. Of interest is especially the extent to which the increasing flexibilisation or even precarisation of employment careers and the combined economic insecurity contribute to declining fertility and family instability, across different institutional contexts. The economic and employment household situation of the household should be particularly important with regard to fertility events, as - one supposes - they require two people. Thus, characteristics of both the adult partners are important.
 

WP2: The role of the family for risk coping: accumulation of risks or compensation?

 When investigating the consequences of the growth of individuals’ risks - such as career and economic insecurity - it is fundamental to consider that individuals are usually grouped in families or households. Also at the beginning of the third millennium the family remains an important source of welfare and maintains its fundamental role in generating social inequality by providing their members with different resources. Considering this, two possible scenarios emerge. The first, positive one puts the risk compensation capacity of families in the forefront. The second, more pessimistic scenario rather sees the accumulation of risks on the household level. Which of the two prevails depends not least on how people are combined in households. Literature on household employment patterns revealed that the increase in dual earner households led to an increasing cleavage between working-poor and working-rich households supporting the more pessimistic scenario of risk accumulation, though results depend on the precise national context.
We ask, considering the employment situation of the household, whether the household/family has the capacity to compensate for certain risks, most importantly of involuntary non employment or precarious employment, or if patterns of risk accumulation prevail. Does precariousness come in couples or can its negative effects on the family level be cushioned by a partner providing a stable income – if there is any partner? Existing research points towards an importance of the specific welfare situation of the country. Thus, what determines families’ capacities to positively cope with “new” and old risks and how does this depend on education and the family of origin? Certain risks burden almost exclusively on the younger cohorts and the older ones accumulate much of the wealth. Does this lead to an increasing importance of the intergenerational transfers?
 

WP3: The consequences for social and economic inequalities between families

 These outlined developments (increasing female labour market participation, changes in household types, declining fertility, marital instability, increasing employment and economic insecurity) come – presumably – with considerable changes in the inequality structure in contemporary societies. So far  little is known about it. We argue that the family/household constitutes the most adequate unit of analysis and therefore that the inequality between households must come to the forefront.
Inequality between households can be thought of as the product of two processes: the way in which resources are distributed among individuals, and the way in which individuals with different endowments are grouped in households. Thus, changes in the sorting of individuals with certain characteristics in households and changes in the distribution of households due to changes in individual’s behaviour may lead to changed inequality structure of societies. Increased similarity between partners could tend to further exacerbate the growing degree of inequality. Thus, while on the one hand, the increased (potential) resource pooling can contribute to an overall polarisation between households, on the other hand the additional women labour supply can have in fact an overall positive effect, because women's earnings make an important contribution towards keeping families out of poverty. To the extent that the well-being of children is enhanced by living in economically stable families, this will have consequences for coming generations.
We ask to what extent the developments of household types impact on the social and economic inequality within societies. Is the inequality between households/families increasing due to changes in the employment behaviour of women? What are the consequences of the increasing share of single-headed households? How does fertility behavior, stratified by education, contribute to the situation? Did families lose their welfare function? Again, the welfare state may have an important capacity to intervene, redistribute and limit inequality.
A surge in inequality shall influence not only the distribution of living standards today but also the opportunity structure for subsequent generations. The more unequal family income is, the greater the inequalities in parental investment in their children. Against this backdrop it is important to identify more precisely how recent changes affect the inequality structure. Not without reason, more equal countries usually perform much better.
However, the theoretical writings on these topics seem to be much more straightforward than the empirical reality suggests. It is still open to discussion whether and in which specific institutional context certain trends lead to increasing inequalities. The project will carefully investigate the empirical evidence supporting or not the arguments present in the literature.