評(píng)論
打印
Britain
英國版塊
child care and growth
兒童保育與成長
Home economics
家政學(xué)
More affordable child care would help some mothers into paid work
更多負(fù)擔(dān)得起的托兒服務(wù)將有助于一些母親找到有報(bào)酬的工作
From the age of five, Alison Mbekeani dreamed of becoming a scientist.
從五歲起，艾莉森·姆貝凱尼就夢(mèng)想成為一名科學(xué)家。
Following that dream took her to the University of Liverpool’s School of Tropical Medicine, then to Sierra Leone amid the Ebola outbreak in 2014, then to Durham University for her PhD.
追尋這個(gè)夢(mèng)想，她去了利物浦大學(xué)熱帶醫(yī)學(xué)院，然后在2014年埃博拉疫情爆發(fā)期間去了塞拉利昂，然后去了杜倫大學(xué)攻讀博士學(xué)位。
But becoming a mother to two children put a brake on her career.
但成為兩個(gè)孩子的母親阻礙了她的職業(yè)生涯。
A couple of spots at nursery cost about as much as she was earning -- more once she factored in travel costs.
托兒所幾個(gè)名額的費(fèi)用和她的收入差不多--如果把旅行費(fèi)用考慮在內(nèi)，費(fèi)用會(huì)更高。
She does not expect to return to the lab until her children are 16.
她不希望在孩子們16歲之前回到實(shí)驗(yàn)室。
Dr Mbekeani is not alone.
不只是姆貝凱尼博士有這種情況。
One survey in 2019 found that child-care responsibilities led 29% of mothers with a child under 14 to reduce their working hours, compared with just 5% of fathers.
2019年的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn)，照顧孩子的責(zé)任導(dǎo)致29%的有14歲以下孩子的母親減少了工作時(shí)間，而父親中這一現(xiàn)象僅占5%。
That greatly damages their earnings.
這極大地?fù)p害了他們的收入。
A recent report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (ifs), a think-tank, found that in the ten years following the birth of their first child, mothers’ average hourly wage fell from 98% of average male earnings to 83%.
智庫財(cái)政研究所(IFS)最近的一份報(bào)告發(fā)現(xiàn)，在第一個(gè)孩子出生后的十年里，母親的平均時(shí)薪從男性平均時(shí)薪的98%下降到83%。
In a recent interview with Mumsnet, a parenting website, Boris Johnson said that better access to child care “would have a massive benefit for the economy”.
在最近接受育兒網(wǎng)站Mumsnet的采訪時(shí)，鮑里斯·約翰遜表示，更好地提供兒童保育服務(wù)“將為經(jīng)濟(jì)帶來巨大的好處”。
Would it?
會(huì)嗎？
In an ideal world, the government would not have to worry about any of this.
在理想的世界里，政府不需要擔(dān)心這一切。
Based on their preferences and potential earnings, parents would make a rational judgment over whether to outsource child care or keep it in-house; it might make sense for them to borrow to cover short-term costs, for instance.
根據(jù)他們的喜好和潛在收入，父母會(huì)做出理性判斷，決定是將托兒服務(wù)外包出去，還是留給自己；例如，他們借錢來支付短期成本可能是有意義的。
The question for policymakers is how much parental behaviour does reflect actual preferences and how much it is driven by constraints.
政策制定者面臨的問題是，父母的行為在多大程度上反映了實(shí)際的偏好，在多大程度上受到限制的驅(qū)動(dòng)。
If preferences are pulling women away from work, then government intervention to subsidise child care could just end up helping richer parents who would have paid anyway.
如果偏好讓女性遠(yuǎn)離工作崗位，那么政府對(duì)兒童保育補(bǔ)貼的干預(yù)可能最終只會(huì)幫助更富有的父母，而這些父母無論如何都會(huì)付錢的。
Some data point in this direction.
一些數(shù)據(jù)指向這個(gè)方向。
Three- and four-year-olds are eligible for 15 hours of state-funded child care, as well as another 15 hours when their parents work full-time.
三、四歲的孩子可以享受15小時(shí)的公立托兒服務(wù)，如果他們的父母全職工作，還可以享受另外15小時(shí)的照顧。
But around half of toddlers do not use their full entitlement.
但大約一半的幼兒沒有使用他們的全部應(yīng)得權(quán)利。
