Barcelona targets revisited : compilation of briefing notes : workshop 25 November 2013.
Date: 2014-03-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union
Subjects: Belgium, France, Germany, Latvia, Netherlands, Slovakia, child, child care, child protection, early childhood, teaching method, working life

 
DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES 

POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND 
CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS 

WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND GENDER EQUALITY 

Barcelona Targets Revisited 

Compilation of briefing notes 

WORKSHOP  
25 November 2013 

Abstract 

In  2002,  the  European  Council  decided  in  Barcelona  to  set  targets  for  the 
availability of childcare  facilities. Member States agreed to provide childcare by 
2010 to at least 90 % of children between 3 years old and the mandatory school 
age  and  to  at  least  33  %  of  children  under  3  years  of  age.  The  Workshop 
organised  by  the  Policy  Department  takes  stock  of  the  situation  in  Belgium, 
France,  Germany,  Latvia,  the  Netherlands,  and  Slovakia.  Besides,  analyses  are 
presented  of  the  effects  of  the  crisis  and  to  what  extend  the  offer  of  childcare 
services  has  been  combined  with  other  policies  to  encourage 
female 
employment and the reconciliation of work and family life.  

PE 493.037 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Women's Rights 
and Gender Equality.  

AUTHORS 

Prof. Dr. Janneke Plantenga, Utrecht University School of Economics  
Dr. Alexandra Scheele, Brandenburgische Technische Universität Cottbus-Senftenberg 
Dr. Jan Peeters, Centre for Innovation in the Early Years, Ghent University 
Olga Rastrigina, Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex 
PhDr. Magdalena Piscová, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava  
Olivier Thévenon, Institut national d’études démographiques, Paris  

RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR 

Ms Erika Schulze 
Policy Department C - Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
European Parliament 
B-1047 Brussels 
E-mail: poldep-citizens@ep.europa.eu 

LINGUISTIC VERSION 

Original: EN 
Translation: FR, DE 

ABOUT THE EDITOR 

To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its newsletter please write to:  poldep-
citizens@ep.europa.eu 

European Parliament, manuscript completed in November 2013. 
© European Union, Brussels 2013  

This document is available on the Internet at: 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies 

DISCLAIMER 

The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do 
not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. 

Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the 
source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Barcelona Targets Revisited 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

CONTENTS 

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 

7 

"RECONCILIATION OF WORK AND PRIVATE LIFE” WITH A FOCUS ON  THE 
ROLE OF CHILDCARE FACILITIES 

8 

LIST OF FIGURES 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

1  CHILD CARE FACILITIES 

1.1  USE OF CHILDCARE FOR CHILDREN AGED 0–2 

1.2  USE OF CHILDCARE FOR CHILDREN AGED THREE TO MANDATORY 

SCHOOL AGE 

1.3  THE CONTEXT OF CHILDCARE 

2  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 

REFERENCES 

ANNEX 

8 

9 

11 

11 

14 

16 

18 

19 

19 

PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE MODEL OF 
THE NETHERLANDS 

21 

LIST OF TABLES 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

INTRODUCTION 

1  THE DUTCH CHILDCARE ACT OF 2005 

2  THE DUTCH CHILDCARE SECTOR, 2005 – 2009 

2.1  SUPPLY SIDE DEVELOPMENTS 

2.2  QUALITY DEVELOPMENTS 

2.3  COST EFFICIENCY 

3  FINANCIAL RESTRUCTURING: DEVELOPMENTS SINCE 2009 

4  CONCLUSIONS 

REFERENCES 

21 

21 

22 

23 

24 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE MODEL OF 
GERMANY 

30 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

1  GENERAL INFORMATION 

1.1  SOCIO-ECONOMIC SITUATION 

1.2  DEVELOPMENTS IN FAMILY POLICIES 

2  ACHIEVEMENT OF THE BARCELONA TARGETS 

30 

31 

31 

33 

34 

3 

 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

3  ADMINISTRATIVE SETUP AND STRUCTURES 

3.1  STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR CHILDCARE SERVICES 

3.1.1  Distribution of competences between the different governance levels 
3.1.2  Financing 

3.2  CHILDCARE SERVICE PROVIDERS 

3.3  DESIGN OF CHILDCARE - OPENING HOURS 

3.4  PRICE FOR PARENTS 

3.5  QUALITY INSURANCE 

3.6  COMPLEMENTARY MEASURES 

REFERENCES 

37 

37 

37 
38 
38 

39 

39 

39 

40 

42 

PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE MODEL OF 
BELGIUM 

44 

1  GENERAL INFORMATION 

2  OBJECTIVES OF THE ECEC4 SYSTEM IN BELGIUM 

2.1  THE THREE FUNCTIONS OF CHILDCARE 

2.2  PROGRESSIVE UNIVERSALISM: A PRIORITY FOR THE FLEMISH 

COMMUNITY 

2.3  EMPHASIS ON THE PEDAGOGICAL FUNCTION IN THE FRENCH 

COMMUNITY 

2.4  THE GERMAN-SPEAKING COMMUNITY: A HOLISTIC APPROACH AND 

STRENGTHENING OF THE OUT-OF-SCHOOL SECTOR 

45 

46 

46 

47 

47 

48 

2.5  NO INTEGRATION OF CHILDCARE (0 TO 3) IN THE EDUCATION SYSTEM 48 

3  ACHIEVEMENT OF BARCELONA TARGETS 

4  EFFECT OF THE CRISIS ON UNEMPLOYMENT RATES OF MEN AND 
WOMEN AND FERTILITY RATE 

48 

49 

5  WHO IS PROVIDING CHILDCARE AND PRE-PRIMARY EDUCATION?  49 

6  COMPLEMENTARY MEASURES 

6.1  MATERNITY, PATERNITY, AND PARENTAL LEAVE 

6.2  FEES AND TAXES 

7  QUALITY INSURANCE 

7.1  FLEMISH COMMUNITY 

7.1.1  Childcare services 
7.1.2  The pre-primary schools 

7.2  FÉDÉRATION WALLONIE-BRUXELLES 

7.2.1  Childcare services (0-3) 
7.2.2  Pre-primary education 

4 

50 

50 

51 

51 

52 

52 
52 
53 

53 
53 

 
Barcelona Targets Revisited 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

7.3  GERMAN-SPEAKING COMMUNITY 

8  CHALLENGES FOR ECEC IN BELGIUM 

8.1  THE LEVEL OF QUALIFICATION OF THE CHILDCARE WORKER 

8.2  CHALLENGE FOR PRE-PRIMARY EDUCATION 

REFERENCES 

53 

53 

54 

54 

56 

PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE MODEL OF 
LATVIA 

58 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

1  SOCIO-ECONOMIC SITUATION IN LATVIA 

1.1  SITUATION IN THE LABOUR MARKET 

1.2  DEMOGRAPHIC DEVELOPMENTS 

2  ACHIEVEMENTS TOWARDS CHILDCARE PROVISION TARGETS 

2.1  BARCELONA TARGETS 

2.2  NATIONAL OBJECTIVES 

2.3  DEVELOPMENT OF CHILDCARE FACILITIES DURING THE ECONOMIC 

CRISIS AND RECOVERY 

3  PROVISION OF PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES 

3.1  CHILDCARE SERVICE PROVIDERS 

3.2  FINANCING 

3.3  PRICE 

3.4  QUALITY INSURANCE 

3.5  DESIGN OF THE CHILDCARE 

3.6  COMPLEMENTARY MEASURES 

REFERENCES 

ANNEX 

58 

59 

59 

60 

61 

62 

63 

64 

65 

65 

66 

66 

67 

68 

68 

69 

70 

PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE MODEL OF 
SLOVAKIA 

71 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

1  STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS OF CHILDCARE 

1.1  EMPLOYMENT PATTERNS 

1.2  CHILDCARE CULTURE 

1.3  MATERNITY AND PARENTAL LEAVE 

2  THE STRUCTURE OF PRE-SCHOOL FACILITIES 

2.1  PROVIDERS OF PRE-SCHOOL CARE FACILITIES 

1.1.1.  Care for children under 3 years of age 

5 

72 

74 

74 

74 

75 

76 

76 

76 

 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1.1.2.  Care for children over three years until mandatory school age 

2.2  ROMA MINORITY CHILDREN PRE-SCHOOL EDUCATION 

3  POLICY MEASURES 

REFERENCES 

ANNEX 

NOTES 

77 
80 

82 

84 

85 

86 

PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: THE MODEL OF 
FRANCE 

88 

LIST OF FIGURES 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

1  POLICY FRAME AND KEY OUTCOMES 

1.1  HIGH INVESTMENT FOR FAMILIES IN FRANCE 

1.2  “WORK AND FAMILY LIFE RECONCILIATION”: AN OBJECTIVE DRIVING 

CHILDCARE POLICY 

1.3  KEY RESULTS 

2  CHILDCARE SERVICES: A DIVERSIFIED LANDSCAPE 

88 

89 

90 

90 

92 

93 

94 

2.1  AMBIVALENT SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN BELOW AGE 3  95 

2.2  A DIVERSIFIED SET OF CHILDCARE SERVICE PROVIDERS 

2.3  A CENTRALISED GOVERNANCE FOR CHILDCARE PROVISION 

3  ACHIEVING THE BARCELONA TARGETS 

3.1  QUANTITATIVE TARGETS AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL ARE FULLY MET 

3.2  LARGE DIFFERENCES IN CHILDCARE ARRANGEMENTS DEPENDING ON 

95 

97 

98 

98 

FAMILIES’ SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS 

3.3  ARE NEEDS AND PREFERENCES MET? 

3.4  LARGE REGIONAL DISPARITIES 

4  STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES AND CURRENT DEBATES 

REFERENCES 

100 

101 

101 

102 

104 

6 

 
 
"Reconciliation of work and private life” with a focus on the role of childcare facilities 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 

CEGO  Centrum  voor  Ervaringsgericht  Onderwijs  -  Centre  for  Experiential 

Education 

Catholic University of Leuven 

CNAF  Caisse Nationale des Allocations Familiales 

CSR  Country specific recommendation 

DREES  Direction  de  la  Recherche,  des  Etudes,  de  l’Evaluation  et  des 

Statistiques du Ministère des Afffaires Sociales 

ECEC  Early Childhood Education and Care (0 to 6) 

ECERS  Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale 

EU  European Union 

GDP  Gross Domestic Product 

GGD  Municipal health services 

HCF  Haut Conseil de la Famille 

ITERS  Infant Toddler Environmental Rating Scale 

MeMoQ  Measuring and Monitoring Quality 

MESRaS of 

The Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak 

SR 

Republic 

MLSAaF of 

Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic 

SR 

NRP  National Reform Programme 

O.N.E.  Office de la Naissance et de l‘ Enfance 

PAJE  Prestation d’Accueil du Jeune Enfant 

PSU  Prestation de Service Unique 

7 

 
"RECONCILIATION OF WORK AND PRIVATE LIFE” 
WITH A FOCUS ON  
THE ROLE OF CHILDCARE FACILITIES 
Prof. Dr. Janneke PLANTENGA1 
Chair of Economics of the Welfare State 
Utrecht University School of Economics, The Netherlands 

Abstract 

Starting  with  the  Barcelona  targets  on  child  care  facilities,  this  paper  assesses 
the European state of affairs in 2011. It appears that several EU Member States 
have met the Barcelona targets. Only a few countries however, with the Nordic 
countries  as  the  most  well  know  examples,  have  developed  a  system  of 
childcare arrangements that seems to be based on the assumption that fathers 
and mothers will be fully engaged in the labour market.  

LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE 1 

Use of formal childcare arrangements, 0-2 year-olds, 2011 

12 

FIGURE 2 

Use of formal and other types of childcare arrangements, 0-2 year-olds, 2011  13 

FIGURE 3 

Use of formal childcare arrangements by hours, 0-2 year-olds, 2011 

14 

FIGURE 4 

Use of formal childcare arrangements, 3 to compulsory school age, 2011 

14 

FIGURE 5 

Use  of  formal  and  other  types  of  childcare  arrangements,  3  to  compulsory  school 
15 
age, 2011 

FIGURE 6 

Use of formal childcare arrangements by hours, 3 to compulsory school age, 2011 

16

1  Professor  of  economics  at  Utrecht  University  School  of  Economics  (USE).  Research  interests  focus  on  labour 
market flexibilisation,  the  reconciliation  of  work  and family  life  and  (European)  social  policy.  Dutch  member  and 
coordinator  of  the  European  Network  of  Experts  on  Gender  Equality  (ENEGE).  She  has  written  widely  on 
(redistribution) of unpaid work, changing working time patterns, child care issues and modernising social security. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
"Reconciliation of work and private life” with a focus on the role of childcare facilities 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Background  

Over the last decades, European employment rates are steadily increasing to a large extent 
because  of  the  changing  labour  market  behaviour  of  women.  As  a  result  of  the  strong 
increase in female employment, the gender gap in employment rates has narrowed to 12,2 
in 2012 compared to a gap of almost 18 percentage points in 2000. The increasing female 
participation rate has made the reconciliation of work and family life one of the major topics 
of the European social agenda. Also family support programmes over the last decades have 
changed rather dramatically in focus.  Instead  of simply providing cash benefits to families 
in  need,  family  support  programs  now  also  include  childcare  services  and  time  related 
provisions  such  as  parental  leave.  The  extent  of  public  involvement,  however,  differs 
extensively among the EU Member States, both in terms of generosity and in terms of the 
specific policy packages. 

Aim  

The purpose of this paper is to describe the situation in 2011, and to illustrate the changing 
care  infrastructure  in  the  different  EU  Member  States,  focusing  especially  on  child  care 
services.  It  appears  that  several  countries  are  in  a  process  of  making  their  care 
infrastructure  more  compatible  with  the  demand  of  the  adult  worker  model.  At  the  same 
time, however, the European Union still exhibits a highly diverse picture; although the male 
breadwinner model has eroded, it is still far from being replaced by an adult worker model 
and a gender equal division of paid and unpaid work.  

Key Findings 

It  appears  that  10  EU  Member  States  (Belgium,  Denmark,  France,  Luxembourg,  the 
Netherlands,  Portugal,  Slovenia,  Spain,  Sweden,  and  the  United  Kingdom2)  meet  the 
Barcelona  target  of  33%  for  the  age  category  0-2.    In  addition,  another  10  EU  Member 
States  (Belgium,  Denmark,  Estonia,  France,  Germany,  Italy,  the  Netherlands,  Slovenia, 
Sweden, and the United Kingdom) meet the Barcelona target of 90% for the children in the 
age category from 3 years of age to mandatory school age or at least score rather high.  

The available statistics also indicate that formal arrangements are not always organized on 
a  full-time  basis  (or  at  least  for  30  hours  or  more).  Especially  in  the  Netherlands  and  the 
UK,  the  use  of  part-time  child  care  services  is  high.  It  also  appears  that  ‘other 
arrangements’  (covering  family  and  friends)  are  an  important  complement  to  formal  child 
care arrangements.  

Only  a  few  countries,  with  the  Nordic  countries  as  the  most  well-known  example,  have 
developed a system of child care arrangements that seems to be based on the assumption 
that  fathers  and  mothers  will  be  fully  engaged  in  the  labour  market.  Perhaps  one  of  the 
basic problems of the reconciliation agenda is that care policy can only to a certain extent 
be redesigned as ‘employment led’. Whereas fiscal policy and social security policy becomes 
more  and  more  targeted  towards  increasing  the  employment  rate,  care  policies  are  also 

2 For ranking, see tables in the note. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

motivated  by  different  issues,  like  fertility  rate,  family  values  and  child  well-being, 
which may not always be in line with the increasing employment rate of women 

Yet, despite all the difficulties, there appears to be a certain consensus on the importance 
of  available  and  affordable  child  care  services  within  the  context  of  a  gender  equal  adult 
worker  model.  Care  services  seem  to  escape  the  trade-offs  between  facilitating  care  and 
stimulating  labour  supply  as  there  is  strong  evidence  that  the  availability  of  good  quality 
child  care  services  has  positive  impact  on  the  one  hand  on  female  participation  rates  and 
on  the  other  on  increasing  fertility  rates  by  making  a  child  less  costly  in  terms  of  income 
and  career  opportunities.  In  fact,  the  increasing  participation  rate  has  been  a  decisive 
factor in formulating the Barcelona child care targets as part of the European employment 
strategy.  The  outcomes  of  the  overview  seem  to  suggest  that  redesigning  the  care 
infrastructure will remain an important policy priority also in the near future.   

INTRODUCTION 

Background 

Over the last decades, European employment rates have been steadily increasing to a large 
extent because of the  changing labour market behavior of women. As a result of the 
strong increase in female employment, the gender gap in employment rates has narrowed 
to  12,2  in  2012  compared  to  a  gap  of  almost  18  percentage  points  in  2000  (calculation 
based  on  EU27).  This  development  has  been  referred  to  by  Jane  Lewis  as  the  rise  of  the 
adult  worker  model  (Lewis  2001).  The  male  breadwinner  model,  with  the  gendered 
division  of  paid  and  unpaid  work,  no  longer  describes  the  behaviour  of  a  significant 
proportion  of  families.  The  adult  worker  model  which  assumes  that  both  men  and  women 
are  active  at  the  labour  market,  now  rather  serves  as  a  normative  framework,  inspiring 
both  the  labour  market  behaviour  of  individual  men  and  women  as  well  as  the  policy 
measures at national and international level.   

The increasing female participation rate has made the reconciliation of work and family 
life one of the major topics of the European social agenda. At the level of the EU  Member 
States,  it  has  changed  the  family  support  programmes  over  the  last  decade  rather 
dramatically in focus. Instead of simply providing cash benefits to families in need,  family 
support programs now also include childcare services and time related provisions such as 
parental  leave.  The  extent  of  public  involvement,  however,  differs  extensively  among  the 
EU Member States, both in terms of generosity and in terms of the specific policy packages. 
Some countries provide elaborate systems of parental leave for example, while others are 
oriented  much  more  towards  financial  support  and/or  child  care  services.  Whereas  in  all 
instances, the overall idea is to support young families, the impact in terms of employment 
patterns, fertility rates and gender equality can be rather different.   

Outline 

This  paper  illustrates  the  changing  care  infrastructure  in  the  different  EU  Member 
States, focusing especially on child care services. It appears that several countries are in a 
process  of  making  their  care  infrastructure  more  compatible  with  the  demand  of  the 
adult worker model. At the same time, however, the European Union still exhibits a highly 
diverse picture; although the male breadwinner model has eroded, it is still far from being 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The role of childcare facilities for the reconciliation of work and private life of men and women 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

replaced  by  an  adult  worker  model  and  a  gender  equal  division  of  paid  and  unpaid  work 
(see Plantenga and Remery (2013) for more details). 

1  CHILD CARE FACILITIES 

KEY FINDINGS 

 

 

In  2011,  10  EU  Member  States  (Belgium,  Denmark,  France,  Luxembourg,  the 
Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) meet the 
Barcelona target of 33% for the age category 0-2. 

In  2011,  10  EU  Member  States  meet  the  Barcelona  target  of  90%  for  the 
children  in  the  age  category  3  to  mandatory  school  age  or  at  least  score 
rather  high:  Belgium,  Denmark,  Estonia,  France,  Germany,  Italy,  the  Netherlands, 
Slovenia,  Sweden,  and  the  United  Kingdom.  Other  countries  score  at  least  50  per 
cent, the only exception being Poland and Romania.   

  Other  arrangements  (covering  family  and  friends)  are  an  important  complement 

to formal child care arrangements. 

  Formal  arrangements  are  not  always  organized  on  a  full-time  basis  (or  at  least  for 
30 hours  or more).  Especially in  the Netherlands and the UK the use  of  part-time 
child care services is high. 

Personal  services  are  extremely  important  in  the  lives  of  working  parents.  This  applies  in 
particular to  childcare  services as  care  responsibilities constitute a major  obstacle to (full) 
employment. Indeed, numerous studies show that the availability of good-quality childcare 
services  has  a  positive  impact  on  the  female  participation  rate  (for  overviews,  see  Blau 
and Currie 2004; OECD 2007; Hegewisch and Gornick 2011).  

The  European  Council  and  European  Union  have  long  recognized  the  importance  of 
affordable and accessible quality childcare provision. In March 1992, the Council of the EU 
passed  a  recommendation  on  childcare  to  the  effect  that  Member  States  ‘should  take 
and/or  progressively  encourage  initiatives  to  enable  women  and  men  to  reconcile  their 
occupational,  family  and  upbringing  responsibilities  arising  for  the  care  of  children’ 
(92/241/EEC). Ten years later, at the 2002 Barcelona Summit, the aims were formulated 
more  explicitly  and  targets  were  set  with  regard  to  childcare.  Confirming  the  goal  of  full 
employment, the European Council agreed that Member States should remove disincentives 
to  female  labour  force  participation  and,  taking  into  account  the  demand  for  childcare 
facilities and in line with national patterns of provisions, strive to provide childcare by 2010 
for at least 90 per cent of children between three years old and the mandatory school age 
and at least 33 per cent of children under three years of age. Yet, many EU Member States 
are  still  far  from  reaching  the  Barcelona  child  care  targets.  The  actual  state  of  affairs  is 
summarized in Figures 1 to 4.   

1.1  Use of childcare for children aged 0–2 

Figure  1  summarises  the  use  of  childcare  services  for  children  in  the  youngest  age 
category, on the basis of the EU-SILC statistics for the year 2011. This data source covers 
children cared for in formal and other arrangements, as a proportion of all children of the 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

same age group. Formal arrangements in this respect refer to the following services: pre-
school or  equivalent, compulsory education, centre-based services  outside school hours, a 
collective  crèche  or  another  day-care  centre  including  family  day  care,  and  professional 
certified  child-minders;  other  arrangements  are  defined  as  care  provided  by  family 
members, neighbours or non-certified child-minders. 

Figure 1: Use of formal childcare arrangements, 0-2 year-olds, 2011 

2
-
0
p
u
o
r
g
e
g
a
,

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
%

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Total

Barcelona target

Source: EU SILC 2011 

The  use  of  formal  childcare  facilities  is  the  most  important  indicator  to  monitor  the 
provision of childcare facilities in the different Member States. On the basis of this indicator, 
it  appears  that  10  EU  Member  States  (Denmark,  Netherlands,  Sweden,  France, 
Luxembourg,  Belgium  Spain,  Slovenia,  Portugal,  and  the  United  Kingdom)  have  already 
met the Barcelona target. At the lower end of the ranking we see Czech Republic, Slovakia, 
Poland and Romania with a score of 5 per cent or less. 

Formal arrangements may only be part of the story, however. Parents may have access to 
other, informal arrangements in order to cover their demand for child care services. In 
order  to  provide  a  fuller  picture  of  the  use  of  childcare  services,  Figure  2  combines  the 
information on formal arrangements of Figure 1 with information on ‘other arrangements’. 
Other arrangements, in this respect,t are defined as the care provided by family members, 
neighbours or non-certified child-minders. It should be taken into account that the sum of 
the  score  on  formal  and  informal  arrangements  may  exceed  100%  as  parents  might 
combine different arrangements to cover a full working day. 

From  the  table  it  appears  that  Member  States  like  the  Netherlands,  Luxembourg, 
Slovenia, Portugal, and the United Kingdom, score  relatively high on formal arrangements 
but  seem  to  combine  these  arrangements  with  an  equally  well-developed  system  of  other 
arrangements.  Italy,  Cyprus  and  Greece  combine  a  medium  score  on  formal 
arrangements with a much higher score on other arrangements, whereas quite a number of 
countries  that  score  low  on  formal  arrangements  have  a  high  score  for  informal 
arrangements.  This  is  in  particular  the  case  for  the  Czech  Republic,  Slovakia,  Poland 
and  Romania.  Only  three  countries  (Denmark,  Sweden  and  Finland)  do  not  seem  to 
combine formal arrangements with childcare provided by friends and family. Countries that 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The role of childcare facilities for the reconciliation of work and private life of men and women 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

score  below  25%  for  both  formal  and  other  arrangements  are  Germany,  Latvia,  Hungary 
and Lithuania.  

Figure 2: Use of formal and other types of childcare arrangements, 0-2 year-olds, 
2011 

2
-
0
p
u
o
r
g
e
g
a
,

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
%

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Formal care

Other types of care

Source: EU SILC 2011 

The  time  dimension  of  the  arrangements  is  another  important  issue  in  the  life  of  (full-
time)  working  parents;  Figure  3  provides  some  information  about  the  number  of  hours 
that  formal  arrangements  are  used.  It  appears  that  in  countries  such  as  Denmark, 
Slovenia  and  Portugal  most  formal  childcare  services  are  used  for  30  hours  or  more. 
Especially in Denmark, the social right to childcare seems to translate into a high full-time 
coverage rate. In other countries, part-time arrangements are much more common. In the 
Netherlands, childcare services are provided on a full-time basis, but the use of the facility 
may be limited to a few days per week, reflecting the high level of part-time employment in 
the  Netherlands.  As  a  result,  only  6  per  cent  of  the  children  make  use  of  formal 
arrangements  on  a  full-time  basis.  Also  in  the  United  Kingdom,  employed  mothers 
typically work part-time, which corresponds to a high part-time use of childcare services.   

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 3: Use of formal childcare arrangements by hours, 0-2 year-olds, 2011 

2
-
0
p
u
o
r
g
e
g
a
,

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
%

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

1-29h.

30h. and more

Source: EU SILC 2011 

1.2   Use  of  childcare  for  children  aged  three  to  mandatory  school 

age 

Figure 4: Use of formal childcare arrangements, 3 to compulsory school age, 2011 

y
r
o
s
l
u
p
m
o
c

-
3
,

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
%

e
g
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Total

Barcelona target

Source: EU SILC 2011 

Figure  4  provides  data  on  the  use  of  formal  and  other  childcare  services  for  the  age 
category  three  years  to  the  mandatory  school  age.  The  Barcelona  target  states  that  the 
actual coverage rate should be at least 90 per cent. Taking again the  user rate of formal 
arrangements  as  the  most  important  indicator  to  monitor  the  provision  of  childcare 
facilities,  it  appears  that  10  EU  Member  States  meet  the  Barcelona  target  or  at  least 
score  rather  high:  Belgium,  Denmark,  France,  Italy,  Sweden,  United  Kingdom,  Estonia, 
Slovenia, Germany and the Netherlands Other countries score at least 50 per cent, the only 
exception being Poland and Romania.   

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The role of childcare facilities for the reconciliation of work and private life of men and women 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 5: Use of formal and other types of childcare arrangements, 3 to 
compulsory school age, 2011 

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

l

o
o
h
c
s
y
r
o
s
l
u
p
m
o
c

-
3
,

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
%

e
g
a

Formal care

Other types of care

Source: EU SILC 2011 

Compared  to  the  scores  for  Figure  1,  it  seems  that  the  use  of  formal  care  arrangements 
increases with the increasing age of children. Of course this is, to a large extent, due to the 
inclusion of pre-school arrangements under the heading of formal arrangements and the 
high coverage rate of pre-school arrangements for children in the age category three years 
to  the  mandatory  school  age.  It  has  to  be  taken  into  account,  though,  that  in  most 
countries  pre-school  is  only  part-time,  as  a  result  of  which  working  parents  still  need 
additional  childcare  facilities,  which  may  be  much  less  available.  Despite  pre-school 
arrangements, however, other arrangements remain important in matching work and care 
responsibilities; see Figure 5 for more details. Only in four countries (Denmark, Sweden, 
Finland and Latvia) the use of other arrangements is close to zero; most other countries 
score 30 and 40 per cent. Two countries even score above 50 per cent: the Netherlands 
and  Romania.  Apparently,  in  these  countries  relatives,  neighbours  and  friends  play  an 
important role in matching pre-school arrangements with a full-time working day.  

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 6: Use of formal childcare arrangements by hours, 3 to compulsory school 
age, 2011 

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

e
g
a

l

o
o
h
c
s
y
r
o
s
l
u
p
m
o
c

-
3
,

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
%

1-29h.

30h. and more

Source: EU SILC 2011 

Finally,  Figure  6  indicates  the  use  of  formal  childcare  arrangements  by  hours.  It  appears 
that  in  a  large  number  of  countries  (Denmark,  Estonia,  Slovenia,  Portugal,  Hungary, 
Slovakia,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Bulgaria,  Hungary  and  Poland),  formal  arrangements  are  to  a 
large extent organized on a full-time basis (or at least for 30 hours or more). Across the 
EU,  Denmark,  Estonia  and  Slovenia  have  the  highest  coverage  rate  of  children  of  three 
years  old  to  compulsory  school  age  in  formal  care  arrangement  for  30  or  more  hours  a 
week. In Estonia, most of the pre-school childcare institutions have opening hours from 7 
a.m.  till  6  p.m.  or  7  p.m.  Another  example  is  Slovakia,  where  most  of  the  kindergartens 
operate  on  a  full-time  basis.  The  usual  opening  hours  are  from  6:30  a.m.  to  5  p.m.  In 
contrast,  other  countries  have  organised  the  formal  arrangements  on  a  part-time  basis, 
the  most  extreme  cases  being  the  United  Kingdom,  the  Netherlands  and  Ireland.  In  the 
United  Kingdom  longer  hours  of  attendance  in  excess  of  the  free  part-time  place  (12.5 
hours  per  week  for  3–4-year-olds)  are  rarely  available  in  school-based  nurseries.  In 
Ireland, children from the age of four enter the primary school system, with school hours 
generally  between  9  a.m.  and  1  p.m.  for  the  first  two  years.  In  the  Netherlands  most 
three-year-  olds  either  visit  playgroups  that  only  cover  two  mornings  per  week,  or  visit 
childcare  facilities  on  a  part-time  basis.  After  the  fourth  birthday,  children  start  primary 
school  but  opening  hours  are  limited  to  approximately  25  hours  per  week  (see  Plantenga 
and Remery 2009). 

1.3  The context of childcare 

Information  on  the  use  of  childcare  facilities  is  helpful  in  order  to  assess  the  relative 
importance  of  this  particular  reconciliation  policy;  it  does  not,  however,  answer  the 
question  of  whether  demand is  fully  met.  The  actual  demand  for  childcare  is  influenced 
by  the  participation  rate  of  parents  (mothers),  levels  of  unemployment,  the  length  of 
parental  leave,  the  opening  hours  of  schools,  and  the  availability  of  alternatives  such  as 
grandparents and/or other (informal) arrangements. In Finland, for example, the coverage 
rate of formal arrangements for the youngest age category is, according to Figure 1, 26 per 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The role of childcare facilities for the reconciliation of work and private life of men and women 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

cent, which is well below the Barcelona target of 33 per cent. Yet, childcare facilities are not 
in short supply. In fact, since 1990, Finnish children under the age of three are guaranteed 
a  municipal  childcare  place,  irrespective  of  the  labour  market  status  of  the  parents.  In 
1996,  this  right  is  expanded  to  cover  all  children  under  school  age.  This  entitlement 
complements the home care allowance system which enables the parent to stay at home to 
care for his/her child with full job security until the child is three years old. Partly due to the 
popularity of the home care alternative, the supply of public day-care services has met the 
demand since the turn of the 1990 (Plantenga and Remery 2009). 

If  we  combine  the  information  of  Figures  1-6  with  information  on  the  national  care  and 
school  system,  it  could  be  acknowledged  that  childcare  is  framed  as  a  social  right  in 
Finland,  Denmark  and  Sweden.  Also  in  a  few  other  countries,  notably  Norway, 
Belgium, France and  Slovenia, policies seem to be targeted at full coverage. Slovenia, 
for  example,  has  a  rather  high  coverage  rate  of  childcare  services.  Unlike  many  other 
countries in Eastern and Central Europe that underwent economic and political transition at 
the end of the last century, the availability of public care services did not diminish after the 
transition. Most women choose to stay at home for one year (taking up the whole length of 
their maternity/parental leave) and then to return to full-time work. Yet another example is 
France. For a long time already, the childcare system has offered almost total coverage for 
children aged 2–3 for working parents, as well as quite long openings hours that are almost 
compatible with full-time employment. 

In  some  other  countries,  childcare  services  are  still  in  short  supply,  yet  there  is  a 
movement  towards  a  fuller  coverage  of  childcare  services.  This  concerns  in  particular 
the  United  Kingdom,  the  Netherlands  and  Germany.  In  the  Netherlands,  for 
example,  childcare  services  have  increased  especially  since  the  mid-1990s.  In  2005,  the 
financial  structure  has  become  demand  driven  which,  in  principle,  should  be  compatible 
with full coverage (Plantenga and Remery 2009; Plantenga 2012). The level of provision is 
also increasing in Luxembourg, Portugal, Italy, Spain, Austria and Greece, although at 
a somewhat more moderate pace and/or from a relatively low starting point. In  Italy, for 
example, the scarcity of formal childcare for young children is particularly due to its weak 
welfare state, which relies more on financial transfers than on the supply of services in kind 
(Ferrera 1996; Bettio et al. 2006). However, a new, more positive attitude towards formal 
childcare for young children is spreading, translating into an increasing supply of day-care 
centres, albeit at a very slow pace. 

In other countries, though, the developments are still extremely  limited – perhaps hardly 
existing  at  all.  This  concerns  (among  others)  Cyprus,  Estonia  Ireland,  Latvia, 
Lithuania,  Poland,  the  Czech  Republic  and  Malta.  Barriers  to  invest  in  childcare 
services seem to be financial as well as ideological. 

Perhaps  one  of  the  most  complicated  challenges  refers  to  the  fact  that  the  policy 
objectives on participation, fertility and social integration are not always easily compatible. 
Child development concerns, for example, or the ambition to increase the fertility rate may 
either  translate  into  a  policy  targeted  at  increasing  childcare  services  or  into  a  policy 
favouring extended leave  facilities and/or increasing the provision of  childcare allowances. 
Especially  in  Central  and  Eastern  European  Member  States,  leave  facilities  and  financial 
support have been favoured over childcare services. Long parental leave facilities, however, 
or  a  favourable  financial  incentive  structures  may  not  promote  labour  supply  and  may 
result in a large gender gap both in terms of wages and in terms of working hours.  

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Probably one of the basic problems of the adult worker model is that care policy can 

only to a certain extent be redesigned as ‘employment led’. 

  Care  services  seem  capable  to  escape  trade-offs  between  facilitating  care  and 
stimulating  labour  supply  as  there  is  strong  evidence  that  the  availability  of  good 
quality  child  care  services  has  positive  impact  on  the  one  hand  on  the  female 
participation rate and on the other on increasing fertility rates by making a child less 
costly in terms of income and career opportunities.  

This chapter has illustrated the highly diverse reality in terms of employment patterns and 
reconciliation  policies  among  EU  Member  States.  Although  most  EU  Member  States 
emphasise  the  importance  of  a  higher  female  employment  rate,  each  country  appears  to 
have  its  own  unique  support  structure,  ranging  from  leave  arrangements,  day  care 
centres,  kindergartens,  family-type  care  arrangements,  child-minders  at  home,  (pre-) 
school education system, etc.  

The  overview  also  indicated  a  large  gap  between  the  implicit  assumptions  of  the  adult 
worker  model  and  the  actual  reality  of  most  European  Member  States.  Only  a  few 
countries,  with  the  Nordic  countries  as  the  most  well-known  example,  have  developed  a 
system of child care arrangements that seems to be based on the assumption that fathers 
and mothers will both be fully engaged in the labour market.  

Perhaps one of the basic problems of the adult worker model is that care policy can only 
to  a  certain  extent  be  redesigned  as  ‘employment  led’.  Whereas  fiscal  policy  and  social 
security policy becomes more and more targeted towards increasing the employment rate, 
care  policies  are  also  motivated  by  different  issues,  like  fertility  rate,  family  values  and 
child  well-being.  Although  policies  in  these  areas  may  not  by  definition  contradict  labour 
market  considerations,  they  could  generate  trade-offs  between  facilitating  care  and 
stimulating  labour  supply.  This  raises  the  question  of  the  optimal  design  of  the  care 
infrastructure;  how  to  reconcile  the  interest  of  the  individual  family,  the  market  and  the 
state  in  a  way  that  is  both  efficient  and  fair  from  a  social,  demographic  and  economic 
perspective.   

Yet, despite all difficulties, there appears to be a certain  consensus on the importance of 
available  and  affordable  child  care  services  within  the  context  of  a  gender  equal  adult 
worker  model.  Care  services  seem  capable  to  escape  trade-offs  between  facilitating  care 
and  stimulating  labour  supply  as  there  is  strong  evidence  that  the  availability  of  good 
quality child care services has positive impact on the one hand on the female participation 
rate and on the other on increasing fertility rates by making a child less costly in terms of 
income  and  career  opportunities.  In  fact,  the  increasing  participation  rate  has  been  a 
decisive  factor  in  formulating  the  Barcelona  child  care  targets  as  part  of  the  European 
employment strategy. The outcomes of the overview seem to suggest that redesigning the 
care infrastructure will remain an important policy priority also in the near future.   

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The role of childcare facilities for the reconciliation of work and private life of men and women 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

REFERENCES 

  Bettio,  F.,  Simonazzi,  A.  and  Villa,  P.  (2006)  ‘Change  in  care  regimes  and  female 
migration:  the  “care  drain”  in  the  Mediterranean’,  Journal  of  European  Social  Policy, 
16(3): 271–85. 

  Blau, D. and Currie, J. (2004) ‘Preschool, day care, and afterschool care: who’s minding 
the  kids’,  NBER  Working  Paper  Series  No.  10670,  National  Bureau  of  Economics 
Research 

  Hegewisch,  A.  and  Gornick,  J.  (2011)  ‘The  impact  of  work-family  policies  on  women’s 
employment: a review of research from OECD countries’, Community, Work and Family, 
14(2): 119–38. 

 

J. Lewis (2001)  ‘The Decline of the Male Breadwinner Model. Implications for Work and 
Care’. Social, Politics, 152-169.   

  OECD (2007) Babies and Bosses, Paris: OECD. 

  Plantenga,  J.  (2012)  ‘Local  providers  and  loyal  parents:  competition  and  consumer 
choice in the Dutch childcare sector’, in E. Lloyd and H. Penn (eds), Childcare Markets: 
Can They Deliver an Equitable Service?, Bristol: Policy Press 

  Plantenga,  J.  and  Remery,  C.  (2009)  The  Provision  of  Childcare  Services:  A 
Comparative  Review  of  Thirty  European  Countries,  Luxembourg:  Office  for  Official 
Publications of the European Communities. 

  Plantenga, J. and Remery, C. (2013). Reconciliation of work and private life. In: Bettio, 
F.,  J.  Plantenga  and  M.  smith  (2013).  Gender  and  the  European  Labour  Market. 
Abingdon/Oxon: Routledge    

ANNEX 

List of Country Abbreviations:  

AT  Austria 

BE  Belgium 

BG  Bulgaria 

CY  Cyprus 

CZ  Czech Republic 

DE  Germany 

DK  Denmark 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

EE  Estonia 

EL  Greece 

ES  Spain 

FI  Finland 

FR  France 

HR  Croatia 

HU  Hungary 

IE  Ireland 

IT  Italy 

LT  Lithuania 

LU  Luxembourg 

LV  Latvia 

MT  Malta 

NL  Netherlands 

PL  Poland 

PT  Portugal 

RO  Romania 

SE  Sweden 

Sl  Slovenia 

SK  Slovakia 

UK  United Kingdom 

EU  European Union 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN 
UNION: THE MODEL OF THE NETHERLANDS 
Prof. Dr. Janneke PLANTENGA3 
Chair of Economics of the Welfare State 
Utrecht University School of Economics, The Netherlands 

Abstract 

Since  the  introduction of  the  Dutch  Childcare  Act  in  2005,  there  is  no  longer  a 
public provision of child care services. Instead, only private for-profit or not-for-
profit  providers  operate  and  compete  in  the  Dutch  child  care  market.  The 
change in policy implied an enormous growth of the Dutch child care sector. The 
developments  with  regard  to  quality  and  cost  efficiency  have,  however,  been 
less positive.   

LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE 1 

The child care sector in the Netherlands, 1990 – 2008 

26 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Background  

The Dutch childcare sector has been completely re-organised since the introduction of the 
Childcare Act  on 1 January 2005. Financial support is redirected from  the local authorities 
to  the  parents  with  the  aim  of  increasing  parental  choice.  The  explicit  objective  of  the 
childcare reform is to stimulate the operation of market forces so that childcare services are 
provided  in  an  efficient  way.  The  child  care  act  implies  that  there  is  no  longer  a  public 

3  Professor  of  economics  at  Utrecht  University  School  of  Economics  (USE).  Research  interests  focus  on  labour 
market flexibilisation,  the  reconciliation  of  work  and family  life  and  (European)  social  policy.  Dutch  member  and 
coordinator  of  the  European  Network  of  Experts  on  Gender  Equality  (ENEGE).  She  has  written  widely  on 
(redistribution) of unpaid work, changing working time patterns, child care issues and modernising social security. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

provision of child care services in the Netherlands. Instead, only private for-profit or not-
for-profit providers operate and compete in the Dutch child care market.  

Aim  
The purpose of this study is to assess the  growth, quality and cost efficiency of the Dutch 
child  care  sector  since  the  introduction  of  the  Child  care  act  in  2005  with  respect  to  the 
implementation of the Barcelona Targets.  

Key Findings 
The  change  in  policy  implied  an  enormous  growth  of  the  Dutch  child  care  sector  as  a 
result  of  which  the  Netherlands  reached  the  Barcelona  targets  for  the  youngest  age 
category by about 2008. For the older age category, the national data are difficult to assess 
because  of  the  interaction  with  the  school  system.  Yet,  on  the  basis  of  a  qualitative 
assessment, it seems fair to state that at the age of 3, most children are either in child care 
or in play groups whereas children aged 4 are almost universally enrolled in (pre-)primary 
school.  

Child  care  is  mainly  seen  as  an  instrument  to  increase  the  labour market  participation 
rate  of  women.  Perhaps  partly  as  a  result  of  this  particular  focus,  the  overall  quality 
scores rather low. The cost efficiency of the system also appears problematic because of 
the implicit incentive to sell broad products for as many hours as possible.  

Current  policy  is  mainly  about  cost  containment.  Every  now  and  then  there  is  some 
debate  about  the  drawback  of  the  market  system  –  yet  within  the  next  few  years  a 
complete  change  of  the  current  Childcare  Act  is  not  foreseen.  Quality  is  not  a  big  issue 
either. Perhaps the low profile of the child care quality can be party explained by the part-
time  use  of  child care  within the Dutch context. Childcare is still mainly seen as a labour 
market  instrument  and  not  as  a  facility  which  may  be  beneficial  for  child  development. 
Child  development  issues  are  instead  solved  within  the  context  of  the  educational 
system. 

INTRODUCTION 

Background 
Institutionalised  childcare  developed  rather  late  in  the  Netherlands.  At  the  end  of  the 
eighties,  the  Netherlands  had  (together  with  Ireland  and  the  UK)  the  lowest  level  of 
institutionalised childcare facilities in the European Union (Moss, 1990). It was only during 
the 1990’s that the number of places started to increase. An important (financial) measure 
in this respect was the Stimulative Measure on Childcare, which was introduced by the 
government  in  1990  (Plantinga  et  al.,  2010;  Verschuur  et  al.,  2005).  At  that  time,  there 
was a heavy emphasis on the importance of strong market structures and deregulation. 

For  the  child  care  sector,  this  implied  that  policy  was  targeted  towards  a  public-private 
partnership.  Together  with  the  central  government,  also  employers  were  supposed  to 
pay a part of the child care bill. The main argument in that respect referred to the positive 
impact  of  child  care  facilities  on  (female)  labour  supply.  By  investing  in  child  care, 
employers  could  lower  the  costs  of  recruiting,  absenteeism  and  the  training  of  new 
personnel.  The  focus  on  the  economic  benefits  also  implied  that  child  care  policy  became 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of the Netherlands 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

part  of  labour  market  policy;  child  care  policies  are  only  recently  (and  only  in  specific 
circles) discussed as part of the care system.  

Outline 

In this short overview, first a description will be given of the Dutch Childcare Act of 2005. 
The  next  section,  covering  developments  from  2005-2009,  will  focus  on  supply  side 
developments and the quality and cost efficiency of the child care sector. The final section 
covers the developments since 2009, when, as the result of severe budget cuts, the Dutch 
child  care  sector  is  in  a  process  of  restructuring.  The  quickly  changing  policy  setting  also 
implies that general statements about affordability and availability are difficult to make.   

1  THE DUTCH CHILDCARE ACT OF 2005 

KEY FINDINGS 

  The  explicit  objective  of  the  Dutch  Childcare  Act  is  to  stimulate  the  operation  of 

market forces so that childcare services are provided in an efficient way.  

  The  change  from  supply-financing  to  demand-financing  implies  that  there  is  no 
longer  a  public  provision  of  child  care  services  in  the  Netherlands.  Instead,  only 
private for-profit or not-for-profit providers operate and compete in the Dutch child 
care market.  

  A major advantage of the introduction of the Childcare Act is that access to childcare 

services is now standardised in all municipalities. 

The Dutch childcare sector has been completely re-organised since the introduction of the 
Childcare Act  on 1 January 2005. Financial support is redirected from  the local authorities 
to  the  parents  with  the  aim  of  increasing  parental  choice.  The  explicit  objective  of  the 
childcare reform is to stimulate the operation of market forces so that childcare services are 
provided  in  an  efficient  way.  The  government  no  longer  set  the  targets,  for  instance 
‘meeting  the  Barcelona  target  in  2013’  but  the  consumer  is  supposed  to  persuade  the 
supplier  by  the  laws  of  supply  and  demand.  The  change  towards  a  demand-driven 
financing  system  implies  that  there  is  no  longer  public  provision  of  childcare  services  in 
the  Netherlands.  Instead,  only  private  for-profit  (60  per  cent  of  all  Dutch  childcare 
organisations) or not-for-profit providers (the remaining 40 per cent) operate and compete 
in the Dutch childcare market (Noailly and Visser, 2009). 

The change from supply-financing to demand-financing implies that working parents pay 
the  full  price  for  the  childcare  facility  and  are  compensated  directly  by  their  employers 
and  the  tax  authorities.  The  financing  is  thus  on  a  tripartite  basis.  In  principle,  the 
employers  pay  one  third  of  the  actual  childcare  costs  (the  so-called  ‘fixed  fee’).  In 
addition, parents receive a payment by the tax authorities based on their income and the 
costs  of  the  childcare.  At  the  lower  income  level,  the  state  pays  most  of  the  remaining 
childcare costs, while at the highest income levels the part paid by the state becomes zero.  
Parents receive a higher fiscal refund for a second or third child.   

A  major  advantage  of  the  introduction  of  the  Childcare  Act  is  that  access  to  childcare 
in  all  municipalities;  national  regulation  replaces 
services 

is  now  standardised 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

programmes  previously  administered  at  a  local  level.  It  should  be  taken  into  account 
though,  that,  in  contrast  to  some  of  the  Scandinavian  countries,  Dutch  parents  are  not 
entitled to child care services; only dual earner families can apply for subsidized child care 
services  and  are  depending  on  the  specific  supply  of  services  in  the  child  care  market. 
Consistent with the focus on child care services as a labour market instrument, the opening 
hours  cover  all  day,  five  days  a  week  and  mostly  50  weeks  per  year.  In  addition, 
breadwinner  families  with  children  aged  2,5  –  4  can  make  use  of  playgroups,  which  are 
traditionally  more  education  rather  than  care  oriented  and  are  generally  used  for  two  or 
three half days a week. 

2  THE DUTCH CHILDCARE SECTOR, 2005 – 2009 

KEY FINDINGS 

  The introduction of income prices and the increase in the subsidy rate in 2006 and 
2007  translated  into  a  large  demand  which  implied  an  enormous  growth  of  the 
Dutch childcare sector. 

  The Netherlands reached the Barcelona targets for the youngest age category by 
about  2008.  For  the  older  age  category,  the  national  data  are  difficult  to  assess, 
because of the interaction with the school system. 

  During  the  same  period  (2005  –  2009),  the  developments  with  regard  to  the 

quality dimension appeared to be less positive. 

  The  cost  containment  proved  to  be  difficult,  partly  because  of  third-party 

payment incentives. 

  Home-care services proved to be especially difficult to control. 

  Tailor-made small contracts in the childcare sector are rare. 

2.1  Supply side developments 

The  introduction  of  prices  related  to  income  increased  the  affordability  of  child  care 
services.  In  addition,  in  2006  and  2007  the  subsidy  rate  increased  rather  dramatically, 
especially for the medium and higher income groups. As a result, on average, the parental 
cost  share  in  the  full  price  dropped  from  37%  in  2005  to  18%  in  2007  (Bettendorf  et  al. 
2012).  The  increased  subsidies  translated  into  a  large  demand  which  implied  an 
enormous growth of the Dutch childcare sector. Table 1 illustrates the growth rates for the 
period 1990-2008, differentiating between the age category 0-3 and 4-12 as most children 
start  primary  school  at  the  age  of  4  (although  compulsory  school  starts  at  the  age  of  5). 
The  figures  indicate  that  the  number  of  centre  based  child  care  places  increased  over 
this period from 26.000 to more than 300.000 places. 

As most children make use of child care facilities on a part-time basis, more children make 
use of the same child care place, with one child for example covering the Monday and the 
Thursday,  while  another  child  making  use  of  the  remaining  days.  The  number  of  children 
enrolled  therefore  increased  from  approximately  50.000  in  1990  towards  more  than 
585.000  in  2008.  This  implied  that  the  enrolment  rate  for  child  care  in  the  youngest  age 
category  increased  from  5.7%  in  1990  to  34%  in  2008.  The  growth  rates  for  the  after 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of the Netherlands 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

school  care  (covering  the  hours  before  and  after  a  regular  school  day),  are  even  more 
impressive although the share of enrolled children in 2008 is still rather limited with 12,3%.   

These developments suggest that the Netherlands reached the  Barcelona targets for the 
youngest  age  category  by  about  2008.  For  the  older  age  category,  the  national  data  are 
difficult to assess because of the interaction with the school system. Yet, on the basis of a 
qualitative assessment, it seems fair to state that at the age of 3, most children are either 
in  child  care  or  play  groups  whereas  children  aged  4  are  almost  universally  enrolled  in  
(pre-) primary schools.  

Table 1: The child care sector in the Netherlands, 1990 – 2008 

1990 

1996 

2000 

2004 

2008 

767 
1317 
2083 

49,9 
12,7 

22,7 
3,0 

756 
1238 
1994 

Population  in  the  Netherlands  (x 
1000)  
Children aged 0-3 
Children aged 4-12 
Children aged 0-12 
Number  of  childcare  places  (x 
1000) 
Child care for children aged 0-3 
Child care for children aged 4-12  
Capacity per 100 children  
Child care for children aged 0-3 
Child care for children aged 4-12  
Enrolled children (x 1000) 
Child care for children aged 0-3 
Child care for children aged 4-12  
Home  based  paid  child  care 
children aged 0-12 
Enrolled children (%) 
Child care for children aged 0-3 
Child care for children aged 4-12  
Home  based  (paid)  child  care  for 
children aged 0-12 
Source: Merens and Hermans 2009; Merens et al 2011: 122   

43,4 
4,6 
2,1 

5,7 
0,4 
0,1 

3,0 
0,2 

6,5 
1,0 

for 

13,1 
1,7 
0,7 

100,1 
23,0 
13,6 

790 
1776 
2566 

818 
1796 
2613 

746 
1792 
2538 

74,7 
36,1 

117,6 
71,1 

160,4 
146,0 

9,5 
2,0 

14,4 
4,0 

21,5 
8,1 

159,8 
61,1 
23,5 

203,6 
103,3 
23,9 

253,3 
220,4 
112,2 

20,2 
3,4 
0,9 

24,9 
5,8 
0,9 

34,0 
12,3 
4,4 

2.2  Quality developments  

During  the  same  period  (2005  –  2009),  the  developments  with  regard  to  the  quality 
dimension  appeared  to  be  less  positive.  The  Childcare  Act  only  contains  a  broad  outline 
with  regard  to  quality,  stating  that  the  provider  is  supposed  to  supply  ‘sound’  childcare 
services  which  is  understood  to  mean  ‘that  the  service  will  contribute  to  a  good  and 
healthy development of the child in a safe and healthy environment’ (article 49.1). Within 
the context of self-regulation, further details were left to the sector itself, which in 2004 
signed  a  covenant  on  basic  quality  requirements.  The  Covenant  Quality  Childcare,  which 
came  into  force  on  1  January  2005,  is  formulated  by  employers  and  parents.  It  is 
evaluated and adjusted on a regular basis. Agreements have been made on the presence of 
a  pedagogic  policy  plan,  child/staff  ratios,  housing,  parental  participation,  safety,  health, 
and  quality  of  personnel.  The  municipal  health  services  (GGD)  have  to  inspect 
implementation of these agreements.  

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The role of parents in monitoring and assessing quality seems rather limited. Most parents 
find it difficult to make an informed decision and to respond smoothly to changes in prices 
and quality. Quality especially can only to a certain extent be examined by parents; studies 
have  found  that  they  have  only  limited  insight  into  pedagogical  principles,  hygiene  and 
safety  (Walker,  1991;  Mocan,  2007).  In  addition,  it  seems  that  parents  find  certain 
characteristics more important than experts do. For parents, it is of great importance that 
the  staff  actively  plays  with  the  children  and  that  there  are  appropriate  activities  for 
children of different ages. A pleasant atmosphere and short travel distance between home 
and  the  childcare  centre  are  also  very  important  to  parents.  A  pedagogical  plan,  qualified 
leaders  and  a  quality  mark,  score  lower.  As  a  result,  there  is  a  real  risk  that  parents 
overestimate childcare quality (Mocan, 2007). Indeed, parents are in general very satisfied 
about  the  quality  of  childcare:  in  a  scale  from  0  to  10,  the  average  mark  given  is  higher 
than 8 (Vyvoj,  2005; SEO, 2005, 2009).  

However, a recent study of the quality of Dutch childcare facilities indicates that the quality 
of childcare is rather low (NCKO, 2009). In this study, ‘process quality’ in a representative 
sample  of  200  childcare  centres  was  investigated.  Process  quality  referred  to  health  and 
safety,  interaction  between  staff  and  children,  and  activities  that  stimulate  child 
development.  None  of  the  centres  that  were  investigated  in  this  study  received  a  good 
score;  51  per  cent  received  a  mediocre  score  and  49  per  cent  an  insufficient  score. 
Moreover,  process  quality  seems  to  have  decreased  compared  to  results  from  2005  and 
2001  (Vermeer  et  al.,  2005).  According  to  the  researchers,  possible  explanations  for  this 
are the expansive growth of childcare combined with shortages of qualified personnel 
and higher work pressure.  

2.3  Cost efficiency  

A  final  dimension  to  be  covered  in  this  note  refers  to  cost  efficiency.  According  to  theory, 
the  market  is  more  efficient  than  public  provision  because  competition  creates  downward 
pressure on costs. In real life, however, things prove to be more difficult, partly as a result 
of specific private-public cooperation.    

The government tries to contain costs by setting a  cap on the hourly price of childcare; 
in  2009,  the  maximum  price  per  hour  for  childcare  services  was  set  at  €6.10,  indicating 
that  only  costs  up  to  €6.10  would  be  (partially)  reimbursed  by  the  tax  authorities.  In 
reality, most companies set their market prices at the level on or just below the maximum 
price. Yet, cost containment proved to be difficult, partly because of third-party payment 
incentives. This problem arises when the supplier and the consumer can agree on the use 
of the actual services, whereas the costs of these services are mainly paid by a third party 
(in  this  case  the  government).  In  the  extreme  case,  the  third  party  covers  all  the  (extra) 
costs:  the  services  are  free  for  the  consumer  and  the  supplier  is  not  constrained  by  the 
ability of the consumer to pay. The result is an inefficient large volume of services (viz. 
Barr,  2001).  The  third-party  payment  problem  is  a  well-known  problem  within  healthcare 
insurance,  but  also  seems  relevant  in  the  case  of  a  heavily  subsidised  private  market.  
Suppliers,  for  example,  benefit  from  getting  parents  to  sign  large  contracts  (in  terms  of 
number of hours per day / number of weeks per year) as the costs of the extra volume will 
to  a  large  extent  be  covered  by  the  government.  Large  contracts  also  proved  efficient 
because  companies  could  lower  average  prices  per  hour  as  the  fixed  costs  (price  of 
building, heating etc.) could be spread over a larger number of hours.  

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of the Netherlands 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

In  the  case  of  the  Netherlands,  home-care  services  proved  to  be  especially  difficult  to 
control.  In  2005,  home-care  services  were  explicitly  brought  under  the  scope  of  the 
Childcare  Act,  although  already  at  that  time  there  were  questions  about  the  possibility  to 
monitor effectively the supply of these services. After 2005, several agencies specialised in 
formalising  informal  care  arrangements  (for  example  grandparents  looking  after  their 
grandchildren) as a result of which there was an enormous increase in (formal) home-care 
services. Whereas home-care services covered approximately 5 to 10 per cent of the total 
childcare  market  before  2005,  after  the  introduction  of  the  Childcare  Act  the  share 
increased  to  approximately  25  per  cent  (Jongen,  2008).    Within  the  more  formal  centre-
based childcare facilities, the developments were more subtle, but the incentives pointed in 
the same direction: to sell more hours per day and more weeks per year. As a result, 
there  are  hardly  any  tailor-made  small  contracts  in  the  childcare  sector.  Contracts  for  40 
weeks  a  year  for  only  6  hours  a  day,  for  example,  are  simply  not  on  offer.  The  most 
standard contract is for two or three days a week, covering 11 hours per day and 52 weeks 
per year. 

3  FINANCIAL  RESTRUCTURING:  DEVELOPMENTS  SINCE 

2009 

KEY FINDINGS 

 

 

In absolute terms, the developments between 2005 and 2009 led to a strong rise in 
public expenditure due to an unexpected increase in child care demand. 

In  order  to  limit  the  ‘improper’  use  of  child  care  services,  a  link  has  been 
introduced between the number of working hours of the secondary worker (most of 
the time the mother of the child) and the use of child care services. 

  The  economic  crisis  lowered  the  demand  for  childcare  services  quite 

substantially, especially among lower and medium income families. 

In absolute terms, the developments between 2005 and 2009 led to a strong rise in public 
expenditure. Whereas in the years before the Childcare Act it was presumed that parental 
demand  for  formal  childcare  services  would  be  rather  limited  because  of  the  particular 
Dutch cultural tradition, in fact demand increased dramatically and led to unexpectedly high 
costs.  In  2008,  the  financial  setback  was  estimated  at  approximately  €500  million  on  a 
yearly  basis.  The  eagerness  to  publicly invest  in  childcare  services  was  further  diminished 
by the fact that the growth in the female participation rate in the labour market fell 
behind the growth in the use of formal childcare services, partly because the new demand 
was  in  fact  a  substitution  away  from  unpaid  informal  arrangements,  and/or  due  to  the 
growth  of  large  contracts.  In  order  to  solve  part  of  the  financial  problems,  the  parental 
contributions  were  increased  from  1  January  2009  onwards.  In  addition,  the  government 
decided to control the use of more informal forms of childcare, such as host families, by 
introducing  quality  standards  and  by  lowering  the  maximum  price  per  hour  to  €5  (OCW, 
2008).   

Despite the more stringent policy, total public spending on childcare costs continued to be 
higher than foreseen. In combination with the financial crisis and the pressure of the public 
budget,  it  proved  yet  again  necessary  to  cut  costs.  Both  in  2011  and  in  2012,  the  fiscal 
refund became more limited. In addition, in order to limit the ‘improper’ use of child care 
services,  a  link  has  been  introduced  between  the  number  of  working  hours  of  the 

27 

 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

secondary  worker  (most  of  the  time  the  mother  of  the  child)  and  the  use  of  child  care 
services.  For  children  in  the  youngest  age  category,  this  linkage  is  set  at  140%  implying 
that  a  mother  working  20  hours  is  now  entitled  to  28  hours  of  subsidized  child  care.  For 
out-of-school  care,  the  linkage  is  70%  taking  into  account  that  a  substantial  part  of  the 
working  hours  are  covered  by  the  school  system.  The  actual  impact  of  the  linkage  was 
rather  low,  but  it  reinforced  once  more  that  child  care  services  should  only  be  seen  as  a 
labour market instrument.  

The  increasing  price  level  and  the  rising  levels  of  unemployment  due  to  the  economic 
crisis  lowered  the  demand  for  childcare  services  quite  substantially,  especially  among 
lower  and  medium  income  families.  By  contrast,  child-minding  by  families  or  friends 
increased (Merens et al. 2012: 94). The high demand and supply of informal child care is in 
part the effect  of (but also contributes to) the  Dutch  part-time  working  culture, which 
makes  it  possible  for  a  part-time  working  grandparent  to  take  care  of  the  grandchild  for 
one or two days a week, while families living in the same neighbourhood might also share 
child care responsibilities during the week and during holidays. 

4  CONCLUSIONS 

KEY FINDINGS 

  The  Dutch  child  care  market  is  an  untypical  market;  the  quality  of  the  product  is 

difficult to assess and the specific governance structure creates inefficiencies. 

  The current polity is mainly about cost containment. 

In  the  Netherlands,  a  market  for  child  care  services  has  been  set  up,  with  the  main 
argument  that  this  would  be  efficient  in  providing  a  care  infrastructure  which  would 
facilitate women’s labour force participation. However, the childcare market has proven to 
be a rather unusual market. Although more than 2.000 childcare suppliers are active on the 
supply-side and at least one million parents on the demand side, market competition does 
not seem to be perfect. The demand side is confronted with limited information especially 
with  regard  to  the  quality  of  the  product.  On  the  supply-side,  the  incentive  structures  do 
not  create  tailor-made  products  but  rather  one-dimensional  large  contracts,  leading  to  an 
inefficiently large volume of services.  

Current policy is mainly about cost containment. Every now and then there is some debate 
about  the  drawback  of  the  market  system  –  yet  within  the  next  few  years  a  complete 
change  of  the  current  Childcare  Act  is  not  foreseen.  Quality  is  not  a  big  issue  either. 
Perhaps the low profile of the child care quality can be party explained by the part-time use 
of  child  care  within  the  Dutch  context.  Childcare  is  still  mainly  seen  as  a  labour  market 
instrument  and  not  as  a  facility  which  may  be  beneficial  for  child  development.  Child 
development issues are instead solved within the context of education. 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of the Netherlands 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

REFERENCES 

 

Jongen, E. (2008). Kinderopvang: waarheen, waarvoor? TPEdigitaal, 2(4), pp 27-48 

  Merens,  A  and  B.  Hermans  (2009).  Emancipatiemonitor  2008  (Emancipation  Monitor 
2008). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau / Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek   

  Merens,  A.,  M.  van  den  Brakel,  M.  Hartgers  and  B.  Hermans 

(2011). 
Emancipatiemonitor 2010 (Emancipation Monitor 2010). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel 
Planbureau / Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek   

  Merens,  A.,  M.  Hartgers,  and  M.  van  den  Brakel  (2012).  Emancipatiemonitor  2012 
(Emancipation  Monitor  2012).  Den  Haag:  Sociaal  en  Cultureel  Planbureau  /  Centraal 
Bureau voor de Statistiek  

  Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid (2011). Informatiesheet maatregelen 

kinderopvang. SZW, november 2011  

  Mocan,  H.N.  (2007).  Can  Consumers  Detect  Lemons?  An  empirical  analysis  of 
information  asymmetry  in  the  market  for    child  care.  Journal  of  Population  Economics, 
20 (4), pp 743-80  

  Moss, P. (1990). Childcare in the European Community. Women of Europe. Supplement 

No. 31. Brussels: European Commission Childcare Network, August. 

  NCKO  (2009).  Pedagogische  kwaliteit  van  de  opvang  voor  0-  tot  4-jarigen  in 
van 

kinderdagverblijven 

Amsterdam: 

Universiteit 

Nederlandse 
Amsterdam/Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. 

2008. 

in 

  Noailly,  J.  and  Visser,  S.  (2009)  ‘The  impact  of  market  forces  on  childcare  provision: 
insights  from  the  2005  Child  Care  Act  in  the  Netherlands’  Journal  of  Social  Policy,  vol 
38, no 3, pp 477-498 

  OCW (2008). Uitgaven kinderopvang. Brief aan de Tweede Kamer  14 maart 2008. Den 

Haag: Ministerie van OCW 

  Plantinga,  M.,  Plantenga,  J.  and  J.J.  Siegers    (2010).  The  relation  between  market 
forces  and  employee  motivation.  Consequences  of  the  introduction  of  market  forces  in 
the Dutch child-care sector. European Sociological Review, 26(4), pp 401-414.  

  SEO  (Stichting  Economisch  Onderzoek)  (2005).  De  markt  voor  kinderopvang  in  2004. 

Amsterdam: Stichting Economisch Onderzoek  

  SEO  (Stichting  Economisch  Onderzoek)  (2009).  Ontwikkelingen  op  de  markt  voor 

kinderopvang 2004-2008. Amsterdam: SEO economisch onderzoek. 

  Vermeer, H.J., van IJzendoorn, M.H., de Kruif, R.E.L., Fukkink R.G., Tavecchio, L.W.C., 
Riksen-Walraven,  J.M.A.  and  J.  van  Zeijl.  (  (2005).  Kwaliteit  van  Nederlandse 
kinderdagverblijven:  trends  in  kwaliteit  in  de  jaren  1995-2005.  Universiteit  Leiden, 
Universiteit  van  Amsterdam,  Radboud  Universiteit  Nijmegen:  Nederlands  consortium 
kinderopvang Onderzoek.  

  Verschuur,  A  et  al.,  (2005).  Professionele  opvang  gevraagd.  Geschiedenis  van  de 
Nederlandse kinderopvang. Den Haag: Stichting Geschiedschrijving Kinderopvang.  

  Vyvoj  (2005):  De  klant  in  beeld.  Wet  kinderopvang  en  de  gevolgen  voor  ouders  . 
Concept  rapportagenul-meting  gevolgen  Wet  Kinderopvang  voor  de  gebruikers. 
Paterswolde: Vyvoj 

  Walker, J.R. (1991). Public Policy and the Supply of Childcare Services.  In: D. M. Blau 

(ed). The Economics of Child Care. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.      

29 

 
 
PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN 
UNION: THE MODEL OF GERMANY 
Dr. Alexandra SCHEELE4 
Chair of Economic and Industrial Sociology, Brandenburgische 
Technische Universität Cottbus-Senftenberg, Germany 

Abstract 

Since 2008, Germany has made effort to increase the number of public childcare 
services  for  children  under  the  age  of  three  in  order  to  meet  the  Barcelona 
targets  and  to  improve  the  opportunities  for  the  reconciliation  of  work  and 
family  life.  There  are  still  significant  differences  between  Western  and  Eastern 
Germany  regarding  the  supply  of  services  which  can  be  explained  by  different 
childcare  traditions  and  the  administrative  set  up  between  the  Federal  German 
State and the regions (Länder).   

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The  aim  of  the  present  briefing  note  is  to  provide  an  overview  on  the  German  childcare 
services model. 

Germany  has  a  low  birth-rate  –  particularly  among  women  with  college  or  university 
degree  –  and  Germany  has  a  low  female  employment  rate  in  full-time  equivalents. 
These  developments  (plus  the  skill  shortage  and  changing  gender  roles)  have  led  to  an 
increased  political  and  public  interest  into  the  reconciliation  of  work  and  family  life  and  in 
improving the provision of public childcare services. 

While childcare facilities for children from 3 years of age have been available for 90% of 
all children in this age group for a longer time, it is still difficult to find adequate childcare 
services  for  children  less  than  3  years  of  age  –  especially  in  Western  Germany.  The 
children’s  support  act  (Kinderförderungsgesetz)  which  came  into  force  in  2008, 
committed  the  Federal,  regional  (Länder)  and  local  governments  to  create  day-care 
opportunities for 35%  of all children under three years  of age by August 2013.  The latest 

4  PhD  (social  sciences),  research  assistant  at  the  Brandenburg  University  of  Technology  Cottbus-Senftenberg, 
chair  for  economic  and  industrial  sociology.  Member  of  the  European  Group  of  Experts  in  the  field  of  Gender 
Equality  (ENEGE),  Member  of  the  Editorial  Board  of  "Femina  Politica  -  Zeitschrift  für  feministische 
Politikwissenschaft", research and publications on the gendered dimensions of the current economic  crisis, work 
organisation and gender, the quality of work. 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Germany 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

evaluation  from  March  2013  shows  that  596.300  children  under  the  age  of  three  were  in 
formal childcare, which corresponds with a quota of 29.3%. 

However,  there  are  significant  differences  between  Western  and  Eastern  Germany 
regarding the childcare infrastructure. While the share of children under the age of three in 
public  childcare  services  is  51.6%  in  Brandenburg,  it  is  only  15.9%  in  North  Rhine-
Westphalia.  In  addition,  there  are  huge  variations  regarding  opening hours  and  prices  not 
only  between  Eastern  and  Western  Germany  but  also  depending  on  the  provider  and  the 
region.  All  these  differences  can  be  explained  with  different  childcare  traditions  and 
employment  patterns  between  Eastern  and  Western  Germany,  the  decentralised 
implementation of childcare facilities and the variety of childcare providers.  

1  GENERAL INFORMATION 

KEY FINDINGS 

 

In 2012, Germany’s female employment rate (15-64) was at 68%. Germany has 
reached  the  Lisbon  target  of  65%  already  in  2005.  The  gender  gap  regarding  the 
employment rate in this age group is 9.6%.  

  Since the share of part-time workers among women is high (45.6% compared to 
10.5%  among  men  in  2012),  the  employment  rate  for  women  in  full-time 
equivalents was only 52.4% in 2012. 

  Germany  faces  a  negative  demographic  balance.  The  birth-rate  is  at  1.4  and  a 
high  share  of  women  stays  childless  –  especially  among  women  with  college  or 
university degree. 

  German family policy is characterised by comparatively generous monetary transfer: 
According  to  the  latest  evaluation,  Germany  provides  148  different  measures 
related to families with a total financial volume of EUR 125.5 billion. 

 

Improving public childcare services became a policy issue for several reasons: 
a)  low  birth-rate,  b)  target  to  raise  female  employment,  c)  skill  shortage  in 
industries and services, and d) changing gender roles.  

1.1  Socio-economic situation  

Between  2000  and  2011,  the  general  employment  rate  increased  from  66%  (2000)  to 
72.5% in 2011. Although the  employment rate  of men is still above the rate of women, 
women’s  employment  shows  a  higher  increase:  While  in  the  year  2000,  the  male 
employment  rate  was  73%  and  in  2011  77.3%,  the  female  employment  rate  increased 
from 58% in 2000 to 67.7% in 2011.5 Germany reached the Lisbon target6 in 2005, when 
the female employment rate was already 65.5%. In 2012, the female employment rate was 
at  68.0.  Women’s  labour  market  participation  in  Germany  in  this  age  group  is  above  the 

5 Eurostat, LFS  
6 Lisbon target: increasing female employment (for the age group of 15-65 years) to 60% until the year 2010 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

EU-28 average of 58.5%. There is still a way for reaching the targets of the Europe 2020-
strategy7.  

The increase in female employment is mainly due to the growth of  part-time work, both 
in  employment  covered  by  social  security  and  outside  social  security.  The  share  of  part-
time  workers  among  women  is  high  (45.6%  compared  to  10.5%  among  men  in  2012), 
even compared to the high levels of the EU average (32.5%). As a result, the employment 
rate  for  women  in  full-time  equivalents  was  only  52.4% in  2012.  It is  also  mainly  women 
who work in so-called “Mini-Jobs” – jobs with a salary up to 400 Euro per month which are 
not  subject  to  social  security  contribution.  In  2011,  women’s  share  among  all  marginal 
part-time  employees  (6.94  million  in  commercial  Mini-Jobs  and  about  231.000  in  private 
households)  was  62%  in  commercial  Mini-Jobs  and  91%  in  private  households.8  In  2012, 
12.1% of women aged  15-64 stated that they would be inactive or work part time due to 
personal and family responsibilities, 2.4 p.p. higher than the EU average (9.7%). 

Germany’s  population  is  about  82  million.  Regarding  the  demographic  development, 
there  was  an  increase  in  the  population  until  1971,  which  was  the  effect  of  a  surplus  of 
births over deaths. Since 1972, there is a surplus of deaths over births: In 2011, 190.000 
less people were born than people died.9 Since the end of the 1990s, the birth-rate is only 
at 1.4 children. According to the recently published survey10, every fifth woman between 40 
and  44  is  childless.  There  are  significant  differences  between  Western  and  Eastern 
Germany: In 2012, the share of childless women was 23% in Western Germany. While the 
share  was  only  15%  in  Eastern  Germany,  it  saw  a  sharp  rise  of  childless  women  of  5% 
(while it was +1% in Western Germany) in 2008. Another striking aspect is the high share 
of  childless  female  graduates:  in  2012,  the  share  of  childless  women  with  a  college  or 
university degree between 45 and 49 years was 30%. This has been the highest account so 
far.  

This  negative  demographic  balance  has  been  only  partly  been  levelled  out  by 
immigration:  Until  2003,  high  immigration  figures  led  to  a  net  migration  gain  and  to  a 
rising  population.  Between  2003  and  2011  this  development  stopped,  but  in  2011  there 
was again a net migration gain – and rising population.  

In spite of the obvious relevance of migration for Germany’s demographic development, it 
has  been  the  low  birth-rate  which  dominated  the  political  and  public  discourse  in  the 
last decade and which had a positive impact on the debate on improving the reconciliation 
of work and family life – and on the expansion of public childcare services.  

The  financial  and  economic  crisis  had  no  negative  effect  on  the  introduction  or 
maintenance  of  childcare  facilities.  In  this  context,  it  is  worth  noting  that  Abels  and 
Lepperhoff (2013) argue that in June 2012 the regions (Länder) used the negotiations over 
the  Fiscal  Compact  and  the  European  Stability  Mechanism  (ESM)  in  the  Bundesrat 11  to 
obtain  compensation  in  the  form  of  financial  subsidies  from  the  Federal  Government.  In 
order to receive a two-thirds majority in both legislative chambers for the aforementioned 

7  EU2020  headline  target  for  employment:  75%  of  men  and  women  between  20  and  64  years  of  age  in 
employment. 
8 BMFSFJ (2012) 
9 Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsentwicklung (2013), 6f. 
10 

Statistisches Bundesamt (2013)

11 First chamber of the German parliament in which the regions (Länder) are represented. 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
  
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Germany 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

pieces  of  legislation,  the  government  yielded  to  the  request  and  agreed  to  boost  the 
financial capacities of municipalities to establish childcare facilities.  

1.2  Developments in family policies 

On  June  20th,  2013,  the  Federal  Minister  for  Family  and  the  Federal  Minister  for  Finances 
presented  the  results  of  the  latest  evaluation  on  family  policies  in  Germany.12  This 
evaluation identified for the year 2010 148 different measures related to families with a 
total  financial  volume  of  EUR  125.5  billion.  Among  these  are  child  allowance  and  parental 
leave  payments  as  well  as  equalizations  of  financial  burdens  within  the  tax  system. 
Although  German  family  policy  is  obviously  characterised  by  comparatively  generous 
monetary  transfer,  public  childcare  services  have  only  played  a  secondary  role  for  a  long 
time and were only improved hesitantly.  

This  has  changed  with  the  decline  in  the  birth  rate,  which  was  interpreted  as  a 
demographic  crisis  and  started  to  become  a  hot  policy  debate  at  the  beginning  of  the 
millennium. The perception of this demographic crisis is related, firstly, to the projected fall 
in population figures and, secondly, to the associated  aging of the population. This debate 
is  primarily  dominated  by  the  question  of  how  to  stop  or  lessen  the  declining  birth  rate: 
From approximately 2.5 children per woman at the beginning of the 1960s the birth rate is 
now  fairly  constant  at  around  1.4  children  per  woman.13  A  further  argument  discussed  in 
the context of declining birth rates was that in 2000 the EU did set targets for the level of 
women’s  employment  within  the  Lisbon  Strategy  (60%)  and  for  the  expansion  of 
childcare provisions (Barcelona Targets). To improve the reconciliation of working life and 
family,  childcare  places  for  at  least  33  %  of  under-threes  and  for  90  %  of  three-to-six-
year-olds were to be created in the EU member states by 2010.  

Thirdly, the skill shortage in many industrial sectors and the fact that many women attain 
high professional qualification, but often leave their jobs after the birth of the first child was 
calling  attention  to  the  lack  of  childcare  facilities  and  the  difficulties  for  mothers  (or 
generally speaking parents) to reconcile work and family life. Even employer’s associations 
supported  the  idea  of  better  centre-based  facilities  and  argued  that  it  is  economically  not 
efficient to let the qualifications of mothers unused.  

Finally, role models for women have changed dramatically. While the orientation towards 
employment in Eastern Germany has been constantly high and while it has been growing in 
the  Western,  not  the  least  as  a  consequence  of,  for  example,  increasing  separation  and 
divorce rates, nevertheless, employment levels for mothers in Germany were very low and 
were frequently achieved by means of part-time or low-wage employment.  

These  different  developments  are  the  background  for  the  increasing  political  and  public 
interest  in  a  better  reconciliation  of  family  and  working  life  and  within  this  context  in  an 
expansion of public child care. It is surprising that the positive impacts of early childhood 
education and the social integration of migrant children and children with a problematic 
social background only had a marginal status within the debate. 

http://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/Content/DE/Pressemitteilungen/Finanzpolitik/2013/06/2013-06-20-

12 
PM-BMFSFJ.html 
13 Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsentwicklung (2013). 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2  ACHIEVEMENT OF THE BARCELONA TARGETS  

KEY FINDINGS 

  Regarding  children  between  3  years  old  and  the  mandatory  school  age, 
Germany has surpassed the Barcelona target of 90% coverage rate: in 2012, 93,4% 
of all children between the age of 3 and 5, were in public childcare services. 

 

In March 2013, 596.300 children under 3 years of age were in formal childcare. 
This corresponds to a quota of 29.3%. 

  There  are  significant  differences  between  Eastern  and  Western  Germany 
regarding  the  provision  of  childcare  services  in  terms  of  availability  and  opening 
hours which can be explained with the predominant and only slowly changing male 
breadwinner  model  in  Western  Germany  and  a  predominant  dual-earner  model  in 
Eastern Germany.   

At  the  Barcelona  Summit  in  2002,  based  on  the  assumption  that  ensuring  childcare 
provision is  an  essential  step  towards  equal  opportunities  in  employment  between  women 
and men, the European Council set the targets of providing childcare by 2010 to: 

  at least 90% of children between 3 years old and the mandatory school age and  

  at least 33% of children under 3 years of age.14 

Regarding  children  between  3  years  old  and  the  mandatory  school  age,  Germany  has 
surpassed the 90% coverage rate. In 2012, 93.4% of all children between the age of 3 and 
5,  were  in  public  childcare  services.15  This  can  be  explained  with  the  legal  entitlement 
(Social  Security  Code  –  SGB  VIII,  §  24,  Art.  1)  to  early  childhood  education  for  children 
from 3 years of age which became effective in 1996.  

Regarding  the  lower  age-group  (0  to  3  years)  Germany  has  now  nearly  reached  the 
Barcelona  target  with  a  level  of  coverage  at  29.3%.  This  is  related  to  a  relatively  new 
political decision.  

Responding to the Barcelona targets, the grand coalition of CDU/CSU and SPD (from 2005 
to  2009)  passed  the  Kinderförderungsgesetz  (KiföG:  children’s  support  act)  on  28 
August 2008 (BT-Drucksache 16/10173). It states that Federal, regional (Länder) and local 
governments  have  to  create  day-care  opportunities  for  35%  of  all  children  under  three 
years of age by August 2013 – since then every child is legally entitled to a place in a day 
care  centre.16  In  estimates  from  2007,  this  meant  750.000  new  places  for  under-threes. 
According to the most recent evaluation17 on the level of childcare facilities, there is a need 
of 780.000 places nationwide for children under the age of three.  

In  March  2013,  596.300  children  under  the  age  of  three  were  in  formal  childcare.  This 
corresponds to a quota of 29,3% (2012: 27,6%).18  

14 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-08-592_en.htm 
15 Statistisches Bundesamt (2012b). 12 
16 http://www.bmfsfj.de/BMFSFJ/Kinder-und-Jugend/kinderbetreuung.html  
17 
http://www.bmfsfj.de/RedaktionBMFSFJ/Broschuerenstelle/Pdf-Anlagen/Kif_C3_B6G-Vierter-Zwischenbericht-zur-
Evaluation-des-Kinderf_C3_B6rderungsgesetzes,property=pdf,bereich=bmfsfj,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf 
18 Statistisches Bundesamt (2013) and BMFSFJ (2013), p. 6 

Zwischenbericht 

Kinderförderungsgesetzes. 

Evaluation 

BMFSFJ 

(2013), 

Vierter 

des 

zur 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Germany 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Table 1: Share of children under the age of 3 in public childcare services the 
different regions (Länder)in 2006 and 2011 

Region (Land) 

Baden-
Württemberg 
Bavaria 
Berlin 

Brandenburg 
Bremen 
Hamburg 
Hesse 
Mecklenburg 
West Pomerania 
Lower Saxony 
North-Rhine 
Westphalia  
Rhineland 
Palatinate  
Saarland 
Saxony 
Saxony-Anhalt 
Schleswig-
Holstein 
Thuringia  
Germany 
Western 
Germany 
(without Berlin  
Eastern Germany 
(without Berlin) 

Share 
in 
2006 

Share 
in 
2011 

8,8 
8,2 

37,9 
40,5 
9,2 
21,1 
9,0 

43,1 
5,1 

6,5 

9,4 
10,2 
33,5 
50,2 

7,6 
37,9 
13,6 

8,0 

39,7 

20,9 
20,6 

41,9 
51,6 
19,6 
32,4 
21,6 

51,7 
19,1 

15,9 

24,8 
20,3 
44,2 
56,1 

21,8 
46,9 
25,4 

20,0 

49,0 

2006-
2011 

+12,1 
+12,4 

+4,0 
+11,1 
+10,4 
+11,3 
+12,6 

+8,6 
+14,0 

+9,4 

+15,4 
+10,1 
+10,7 
+5,9 

+14,2 
+9,0 
+11,8 

+12,0 

+9,3 

Source: BMFSFJ, 2011, 14  

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 1: Share of children under the age of three (in %) in childcare services on 
1. March 2013 

There  are  significant  differences  regarding  the  provisions  of  childcare  services  between 
Eastern  and  Western  Germany.  Western  Germany  –  despite  considerable  differences 
between the 11 states – still has a very low overall level of childcare provisions for under-
threes,  much  of  which  is  only  available  on  a  half-day  basis.  There  are  also  differences 
regarding the attendance rates for day-care institutions. Whereas in 2011 over 90 % of all 
children between the ages of three and six were placed in public childcare institutions, the 
figures for the care of under-threes were widely diverging: The attendance rate in Eastern 
Germany was 49 %, in Western Germany only 22 % (Eastern and Western Germany 2012: 
27.6 %;  see  Statistisches  Bundesamt,  2012b,  9).  For  working  parents,  this  often  means 
(additional)  private  organisation  of  childcare.  Further,  a  study  by  the  Deutsches 
Jugendinstitut  (Research  on  Children,  Youth  and  Families)  shows  that  39.5%  of  parents 
want  a  place  for  their  children  under  the  age  of  three  –  which  means  that  there  is  still  a 
lack of nearly 10% between demand and supply.19  

The  regional  differences  can  be  explained  as  cultural  distinctions  and  different 
employment  regimes  for  men  and  women.  Western  Germany  is  still  characterised  by  a 
conservative  male  breadwinner  model  which  has  only  partly  modernised  into  a  second 
earner  model  (Leitner,  2013)  plus  the  ideological  framing  that  especially  small  children 
need to be cared for by their mother. As a consequence – and at the same time stabilising 
this  model  –  childcare  coverage  was  always  extremely  low,  especially  for  the  lower  age 
group of 0 to 3 years – not only in terms of availability but also in terms of opening hours 
which are often limited to half-day care in the mornings without lunch. There has only been 
successive change in this regard since the mid-1990s.  

19 BMFSFJ (2013), p. 7 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Germany 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

In  contrast  to  this,  Eastern  Germany  can  be  characterised  by  a  dominance  of  the  adult 
worker  model  –  following  the  idea  that  women  and  men  are  equally  integrated  into  the 
labour  market  –  which  has  its  roots  in  the  GDR-policies.  The  GDR  had  a  tradition  of 
providing  all-day  care  for  all  children  in  crèches,  kindergartens  and  schools,  and, 
consequently,  Eastern  Germany  still  has  a  comparatively  expanded  care  infrastructure, 
including for under-threes (Abels/Lepperhoff 2013). 

On  a  normative  level,  opinions  regarding  successful  childhood  can  be  observed  to 
differ  between  Eastern  and  Western  Germany.  Whereas  there  are  still  extremely  high 
approval rates for care of children under the age of three exclusively within the family (as a 
rule  by  the  mother)  in  Western  Germany,  the  majority  of  the  Eastern  German  population 
regards mothers returning to work at an early point not as detrimental for children’s early 
development (Abels/Lepperhoff 2013).  

3  ADMINISTRATIVE SETUP AND STRUCTURES 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Formal childcare services are extremely heterogeneous in Germany. This is a 
result of the regional (Länder) and local responsibilities with respect to childcare for 
children under school age and for schooled children.  

 

In Germany, what can be called “provider-pluralism” (Oliver/Mätzke 2012) can be 
found. Public childcare services in Germany are provided by public service providers, 
by  church-affiliated  providers,  by  voluntary  sector  associations,  by  commercial 
organisations, and by companies. 

  Opening hours and prices for child-care services vary according to the provider 
and  the  region  (Land).  In  addition,  prices  are  income-related  which  means  that 
parents  with  higher  income  are  to  pay  more  for  a  place  than  parents  with  lower 
income. There is also a variation according to the daily duration of care. 

  Although,  generally,  nursery  school-teachers  have  finished  vocational  training  and 
might offer good care, there are no clearly defined standards for the quality of 
childcare service.  

3.1  Structure and responsibilities for childcare services  

3.1.1  Distribution of competences between the different governance levels 

Formal childcare services are extremely heterogeneous in Germany. This is a result of the 
regional  (Länder)  and  local  responsibilities  with  respect  to  childcare  for  children  under 
school  age  and  for  schooled  children.  The  allocation  of  subsidised  childcare  is  the 
communes’  responsibility  and  has  to  be  organised  and  financed  by local  authorities  within 
the framework of the Länder. 

The  Federal  Government,  therefore,  has  only  limited  scope  for  introducing  changes 
(Abels/Lepperhoff  2013).  Due  to  the  distribution  of  competences  between  the  different 
governance  levels,  the  process  of  reforming  childcare  institutions  is  highly  controversial 
between  the  Federal  Government,  the  regions  (Länder)  and  local  authorities.  While  the 
concrete  stipulations  are  regulated  by  implementing  laws  on  the  regional  level  (Land), 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

planning for care provisions is up to the local youth welfare offices. Costs for building and 
operating the institutions are funded by local authorities, while the Länder grant subsidies. 
The result is a conflict of interests as places are to be increased, on the one hand, due to 
the  nationwide  crisis  in  family  policy,  demography  and  equality  policy,  while  on  the  other 
hand  this  increase  has  to  be  implemented,  staffed  and  financed  mainly  on  the  local  and 
regional level (Länder). 

3.1.2  Financing 

The  Federal  Government  has  provided  the  regional  (Länder)  investment  funds  with  an 
amount  of  EUR  580  million  for  the  expansion  of  childcare  facilities  which  makes  a  total  of 
EUR 5.4 billion for the years 2008 to 2014. From 2015 onwards, the annual share of federal 
subsidies  for  operating costs  will  be  EUR  845  million.  Still,  the long-term  financing  will  be 
on the shoulders of the federal states. The government has developed a 10-point-plan with 
which all measures are bundled and that it is supporting the federal states to improve and 
secure the quality of child care services. 

3.2  Childcare service providers  

In  Germany,  what  is  called  a  “provider-pluralism”  (Oliver/Mätzke  2012)  can  be  found. 
Public  childcare  services  in  Germany  are  provided  by  public  service  providers,  by  church-
affiliated providers, by  voluntary sector associations, by commercial organisations, and by 
companies.  In  March  2013,  there  were  nationwide  52  484  day-care  facilities  for  children. 
Compared to March 2012, this is an increase by 540 facilities (+1.0). 

According  to  the  latest  available  statistics  on  the  structure  of  childcare  service  providers 
by  the  Federal  Statistical  Office20,  one  third  (17.200  of  52.000  services)  of  the  childcare 
services were provided by public service providers (mainly by municipalities) which means 
that  the  majority  (67%)  is  provided  by  private  agencies.  Of  these,  more  than  half  (51%) 
are  run  by  Christian-confessional  organisations  of  the  voluntary  sector,  e.g.  The 
“Diakonische Werk” (protestant) or “Caritas” (catholic). With nearly 17.900 services, these 
two church-affiliated providers run more child care facilities than public service providers.  

Operating  costs  of  childcare  services  are  regulated  at  regions  (Länder)  level  by  laws  on 
childcare  services 
(personnel  costs, 
(Kindertagesstättengesetz).  Operating  costs 
infrsturcture  etc.)  are  brought  up  by  parents’  contributions,  by  providers’  contributions, 
allocation of funds by the regions (Länder) and by the youth welfare offices and municipals. 
To  give  an  example:  In  Rhineland  Palatinate,  this  law  regulates  that  the  provider’s 
contribution to personnel costs vary between 5 and 15% depending on the kind of service. 
The  rest  is  financed  by  parents’  contributions  and  allocation  of  funds  by  the  regions  – 
possible  funding  gaps  are  equalised  by  the  youth  welfare  offices.  The  ongoing  non-
personnel-costs are to be beard by the childcare service provider.          

20 Statistisches Bundesamt (2012b), 19f. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Germany 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

3.3  Design of childcare - Opening hours 

In  March  2012,  every  fifth  childcare  service  (21%)  opened  before  7  a.m,  63%  opened 
between  7  and  7.30  a.,  and  16%  after  7.30  a.m.  Again  there  are  significant  differences 
between  Eastern  and  Western  Germany.  While  in  Eastern  Germany  81%  of  all  services 
opened before 7 a.m., only 5% of the services in Western Germany opened that early. Only 
in  Hamburg  nearly  every  third  facility  opened  before  7  a.m..  There  are  similar  differences 
regarding  closure  times:  In  Eastern  Germany,  only  10%  of  the  childcare  facilities  closed 
before 4.30 p.m – while in Western Germany 48% closed that early. 51% of the services in 
Western Germany closed between 4.30 and 6 p.m. – in Eastern Germany it were 87%.21 

3.4  Price for parents 

Prices  for  child-care  services  vary  according  to  the  provider  and  the  region  (Land).  In 
addition,  prices  are  income-related  which  means  that  parents  with  higher  income  have  to 
pay more for a place than parents with lower income. There is also a variation according to 
the  daily  duration  of  care  (half-day  care  or  full-time)  and  the  prices/fees  for  siblings  are 
often lower. Low-income families are entitled to receive a full reduction if they apply for an 
exemption at the local family office.  

Due to these variations, it is difficult to present reliable data on costs which vary between 
EUR 50 to EUR 500 per month.  

deductibility 

The  tax  system  provides  two  forms  of  tax  reductions  for  parents  which  can  be  combined: 
First,  the  income  tax  exemption  for  dependent  children  (Kinderfreibetrag)  and  second  the 
von 
tax 
Kinderbetreuungskosten). The tax exemption for dependent children is 2.184 Euro from the 
yearly  salary  of  each  parent  and  tax  deductibility  for  child  care  is  about  two  third  of  the 
amount actually paid for childcare up to a maximum of EUR 4000.22 

Absetzbarkeit 

(Steuerliche 

child-care 

costs 

of 

3.5  Quality insurance 

The quality of public childcare services is a controversial debate. It has been criticised that 
the children support law (KFöG) ruled on hwo the infrastructure should be set up but was 
not accompanied by guidelines on quality standards and how quality can be maintained.  
Due to the fact that not only the responsibilities for child care services and early education 
lay upon the local and the regional (Länder) level but that there are also multiple providers, 
there is no nation-wide coherent concept to set up and secure quality standards. This is 
particularly true regarding extra-familiar child-minders (Tagesmütter). While the employees 
in public childcare services are at least qualified and have finished a vocational training to 
become  a  nursery  school-teacher,  everybody  can  become  a  child-minder.  The  only 
qualification  is  a  160  hour  training  which  is  completed  with  a  certificate  which  allows 
persons to care for children.  

21 Statistisches Bundesamt (2012b), 20 
22http://www.bmfsfj.de/RedaktionBMFSFJ/Internetredaktion/Pdf-
Anlagen/fallbeispiele2,property=pdf,bereich=bmfsfj,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

According  to  the  Social  Code  (SGB  VII  §22,  Abs.  2)  childcare  services  are  to  1.)  promote 
the  development  of  children  to  an  independent  and  social  personality,  2.)  support  and 
complete  education  and  learning,  and  3.)  assist  parents  to  reconcile  work  and  care.  The 
mandate  comprises  education,  learning,  and  care  of  children  and  refers  to  the  social, 
emotional,  physical  and  mental  development.  It  includes  the  teaching  of  values  and  rules 
which are important for the orientation of children.23  

A  Study  by  the  Workers  Welfare  Federal  Association  (Arbeiterwohlfahrt,  AWO)  from  2013 
shows huge deficits regarding the quality of child-care services. Therefore the AWO pleads 
for nation-wide standards which follow educational requirements; more financial funds for 
childcare facilities; a better evaluation and planning of needs since it is not transparent for 
how many places how much qualified staff would be needed; a better integration of extra-
familiar  child-minders  and  day  care;  combatting  the  skill  shortage  among  the  nursery 
school-teachers; and to develop a concept with which the quality of childcare services can 
be guaranteed.24 

3.6  Complementary measures  

On  January  1st,  2007  the  Federal  Law  on  Parental  Allowance  and  Parental  Leave 
(Bundeselterngeld- und Elternzeitgesetz – BEEG25) came into force. Parents (or in particular 
cases, grandparents) are since then entitled to an unpaid continuous leave for up to three 
years. 

Time  for  parental  leave  (36  calendar  months  after  the  month  of  birth  for  births  after 
1992)  is  computed  as  time  of  contributions  to  the  statutory  pension’s  scheme  based  on 
average  earnings.  In  addition,  the  legal  entitlement  on  parental  leave  regulates  that 
mothers and fathers receive subsidies in relation to their former income for the new-born 
child. These subsidies range from a minimum of EUR 300 to a maximum of EUR  1,800 per 
month,  the  latter  being  equivalent  to  about  67%  of  the  median  income.  The  overall 
duration is 14 months. It is possible to work part-time during parental leave but the income 
is charged against parental benefit. The leave can be shared between mothers and fathers; 
if  only  one  parent  makes  use  of  parental  leave,  the  duration  is  reduced  to  12  months. 
Parental  leave  regulations  offer  a  relatively  high  flexibility  and  the  possibility  to  transfer 
leave entitlements to grandparents.26   

There is an entitlement to leave of 10 days per year to care for a sick child under the age 
of  12,  if  there  are  more  children;  the  total  period  is  25  days  per  family.  Besides,  since 
2000,  all  employees  in  public  services  as  well  as  in  the  private  economy  have  a  legal 
entitlement to request to work part time, if they have worked with the same employer 
for more than six months. Employers are to approve this request as long as this request is 
not opposed to operational or company-related reasons.27  

All families who are residents in Germany are entitled to child benefits (Kindergeld). It is 
a  monthly,  not  means-tested  payment  of  EUR  184  for  the  first  and  the  second  child,  EUR 
190 for the third child and EUR 215 for each additional child. Child benefits are paid at least 

23 AWO (2012) 
24 AWO (2013)  
25 http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/beeg/index.html#BJNR274810006BJNE002100000 
26 http://www.leavenetwork.org/fileadmin/Leavenetwork/Annual_reviews/2012_annual_review.pdf, p.12 
27 http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bundesrecht/tzbfg/gesamt.pdf 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Germany 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

until  the  age  of  18  or  until  the  end  of  the  child’s  25th  birthday  if  the  child  is  in  school, 
professional training, or at university. 

Since  August  2013, parents  who  do  not  want  to  make  use  of  public  childcare  but  want  to 
care  for  their  children  privately  are  entitled  to  receive  a  child  care  subsidy 
(Betreuungsgeld) of EUR 100  for children aged between 15 and 36 months (and 150 Euro 
from August 2014). This legal entitlement has been included in the parental leave act.  This 
payment is for all children born after August 1st 2012. The Betreuungsgeld will be paid for 
22 months. An additional payment of EUR 15 will be given to those parents who invest the 
Betreuungsgeld  for  retirement  provisions  or  for  educational  measures  from  January  1st 
2014. This policy measure has been part of the coalition agreement between the CDU/CSU 
and  FDP  from  October  2009  and  is  still  causing  controversial  debates  within  the 
government  and  between  the  government  and  the  opposite  parties  for  about  a  year. 
Arguing  that this improves  the  freedom  of  choice  for  parents,  parents  with  children  under 
the  age  of  three  are  entitled  to  make  use  of  this  payment  if  they  make  now  or  only  little 
use  of  public  financed  child  care  facilities.  Regarding  the  further  expansion  of  public 
childcare critics fear that this process will be slowed down and that many parents won’t be 
able to find a position in day nurseries. These  parents  will then (involuntarily) receive the 
state subsidies and the government might argue that the demand for childcare facilities is 
lower than expected and that therefore – and for financial reasons – the further creation of 
facilities will be stopped. 

41 

 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

REFERENCES 

  Abels, G./Lepperhoff, J. (2013), Saving the Euro, securing childcare: The fiscal compact 
and  its  gendered  impact  in  Germany.  Paper  was  presented  at  the  3rd  European 
Conference  on Politics and Gender (ECPG) of the ECPR  Standing Group on Gender and 
Politics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, 21-23 March 2013.  

  AWO  (2012),  Bundeseinheitliche  Qualitätsstandards  in  Kindertageseinrichtungen  und 

Kindertagespflege. Positionspapier 

  AWO 

(2013),  Auswirkungen  des  Kita-Rechtsanspruchs  auf  die  Qualität  der 
Kinderbetreuung. 
http://www.awo-
informationsservice.org/index.php?id=601&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=5172&cHash=40ecb73
89a8f8d8e66a4f3a6ff899e7a 

Pressekonferent 

2013 

Mai 

30. 

  Bundesinstitut  für  Bevölkerungsforschung  (2013),  Bevölkerungsentwicklung  2013. 

http://www.bib-
demografie.de/SharedDocs/Publikationen/DE/Download/Broschueren/bevoelkerung_201
3.pdf;jsessionid=C4E1C7E73BF16D1DDB6B9216909D2A38.2_cid292?__blob=publicatio
nFile&v=9 

  Bundesministerium  für  Familie,  Senioren,  Frauen  und  Jugend,  BMFSFJ  (2004), 
Tagesbetreuungsausbaugesetz,  Gesetz  zum  qualitätsorientierten  und  bedarfsgerechten 
Ausbau der Tagesbetreuung und zur weiteren Entwicklung der Kinder- und Jugendhilfe, 
Berlin: BMFSFJ. 

  DIW  Berlin  (2013),  Evaluationsmodul:  Förderung  und  Wohlergehen  von  Kindern: 
Endbericht;  Studie  im  Auftrag  der  Geschäftsstelle  für  die  Gesamtevaluation  ehe-  und 
familienbezogener  Maßnahmen  und  Leistungen  in  Deutschland,  Prognos  AG,  für  das 
BMFSFJ  und  das  BMF.  AutorInnen:  Kai-Uwe  Müller,  C.  Katharina  Spieß,  Chrysanthi 
Tsiasioti,  Katharina  Wrohlich,  Elisabeth  Bügelmayer,  Luke  Haywood,  Frauke  Peter, 
73. 
Witzke. 
Marko 
www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.423215.de/diwkompakt_2013-
073.pdf 

Politikberatung 

Ringmann, 

kompakt 

Sven 

  Leitner,  S.  (2013),  Varianten  von  Familialismus.  Eine  historisch  vergleichende  Analyse 
kontinentaleuropäischen 

Altenpflegepolitiken 

und 

in 

Kinderbetreuungs- 

der 
Wohlfahrtsstaaten. Berlin .  

  Oliver,  Rebecca/Mätzke,  Margitta,  (2012):  Regional  Diversity  in  Public  Childcare: 
Explaining  the  varied  fate  of  central  governments’  child  care  agendas  in  Italy  and 
Germany. Paper presented at the Espanet Conference 2012.  

  Scheele, A. (2006), Feminisierung der Arbeit im demografischen Wandel? In: Berger, P. 
A./Kahlert,  H.  (Hg.):  Der  Demographische  Wandel.  Chancen  für  die  Neuordnung  der 
Geschlechterverhältnisse. Frankfurt/Main, New York, 267-292 

  Statistisches Bundesamt (2012a), Geburten in Deutschland, Wiesbaden: destatis. 

  Statistisches  Bundesamt  (2012b),  Kindertagesbetreuung 

in  Deutschland  2012, 

Wiesbaden: destatis. 

  Statistisches  Bundesamt  (2013a),  29,3%  der  unter  3-jährigen  am  1.  März  2013  in 
18.9.2013 

Kindertagesbetreuung. 
https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2013/09/PD13_3

Pressemitteilung 

42 

 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Germany 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

15_225pdf.pdf;jsessionid=1F76A806F73C70D3296C8B9057B6E386.cae3?__blob=public
ationFile 

  Statistisches  Bundesamt  (2013b),  Jede  fünfte  Frau  zwischen  40  und  44  ist  kinderlos. 
7.11.2013. 

Pressemitteilung 
http://www.destatis.de/DE/Presseservice/Presse/Pressemitteilungen 
/2013/11/PD13_371_126.html 

vom 

371 

Nr. 

  http://www.bmfsfj.de/BMFSFJ/Service/publikationen,did=196786.html 

43 

 
 
PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN 
UNION: THE MODEL OF BELGIUM  
Dr. Jan PEETERS28 
Coordinator of the Centre for Innovation in the Early Years,  
Ghent University, Belgium 

Abstract 

Belgium has reached the Barcelona Targets with 99% enrolment in pre-primary 
and nearly 40% in childcare. Pre-primary is not only universal, it is also free of 
charge for the parents. Despite the crisis, the Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles and 
the  Flemish  Community  have  invested  a  lot in increasing  the  number  of  places 
in  childcare,  in  making  childcare  affordable  and  in  raising  the  level  of 
qualification of the workers and the quality of the provisions.  

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

STRENGTHS OF THE BELGIAN MODEL 

  Substantial increase in number of places despite of the crisis 

  Affordable childcare and considerable child benefits 

  Unemployment of women decreases despite the crisis 

 

Investment in the quality of childcare through professional development 

  Long tradition in quality monitoring 

  Progressive  Universalism:  entitlements  for  all  with  additional  resources  for 

disadvantaged children 

The  aim  of  this  briefing  note  on  ‘Public  Childcare  Services  in  the  European  Union:  The 
model of Belgium’ is to inform the European Parliament Members about the achievements 
towards the so called  Barcelona Targets (Availability of childcare facilities for 90% of all 
children  from  3  years  of  age  until  the  mandatory  school  age;  and  33%  coverage  for 
children  under  3  years  of  age)  and  more  specifically  on  the  model  of  Early  Childhood 

28 Coordinator of the Research and Resource Centre for Innovation in the Early Years of the Department of Social 
Welfare Studies at the Ghent University (Belgium). He was involved in several Early Childhood Education and Care 
research  projects  for  the  European  Commission  DG  EaC  (Competence  requirements  to  work  in  ECEC  and  Role 
ECEC in preventing early School Leaving) and is currently promoter of the Eurofound study ‘Assessing Child Care 
Services’. He has published numerous books and articles and has given presentations on international conferences 
on professionalism, gender, poverty and diversity in the early years. 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Belgium 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Education  and  Care  (ECEC)  for  children  from  0  to  6,  including  childcare  (0  to  3)  and  pre-
primary education (2.5 - 6) in the different communities of Belgium. 

Belgium  is  one  of  the  6  Member  States  that  has  achieved  both  objectives  of  the 
Barcelona  Targets,  with  99%  of  enrolment  in  pre-primary  education  and  nearly  40%  in 
childcare  (EU-SILC  2010-2011).  Even  in  times  of  economic  crisis,  policy  makers, 
researchers and stakeholders in Belgium invested quite a lot in increasing the accessibility 
of  vulnerable  groups  and  in  making  childcare  and  pre-primary  affordable  for  all  parents. 
Belgium is supporting parents with quite generous child benefits and has a birthrate above 
the EU average.  

The  two  large  communities  have  also  established  relevant  measures  to  rethink  the 
professional qualification of the childcare workers and focus on pedagogical coaching as 
a  tool  to  increase  professionalism.  In  Flanders,  three  University  Colleges  started  a 
specialized  bachelor  training  for  childcare  and  the  discussion  about  the  need  of  such 
training has started in the French Community.  In Flanders, the upcoming implementation 
of  the  new  law  on  childcare  (Decreet  Opvang  baby’s  en  peuters)  seems  to  be  promising, 
more specifically the foreseen overall quality monitoring system that will be the same for all 
childcare services. It has to be noted that the two others communities of Belgium have also 
a long tradition in quality monitoring in childcare and pre-primary. 

1  GENERAL INFORMATION 

BELGIUM AT A GLANCE 

  Fertility rate: 

Belgium: 

1.84  

EU 27:  1.59 

  Unemployment rates:  
2007:  male 

Belgium: 

female 

2012:  male  

female  

6.7%    
8.5%  
7.7% 
7.4% 

EU 27:  6.6% 
7.9% 
10.4% 
10.5% 

  Universal coverage pre-primary 

  Number of childcare places: increased sharply 

  Paid maternity leave – 15 weeks 

  Paid paternity leave - 10 days 

Belgium  is  a  federal  state  with  three  communities29  and  three  regions30  next  to  the 
federal  level.  During  the  last  few  decades,  policy  domains  and  competences  have  been 
divided over the different levels of authority. Policy areas such as family services, childcare 
services31,  education,  youth  work  and  welfare  are  regulated  at  the  community  level. 

29The Flemish, French and German communities. Out of a total population of approximately 10, 5 million, about 6 
million live in the Flemish community, some  4 million in the French community and about 73,000 in the German 
community. Please note that, the term “French Community of Belgium” (as stated in the Belgian Constitution) has 
now been changed into ‘the Federation Wallonia-Brussels’ (Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles).  
30The Flemish, the Walloon (including the German speaking part of Belgium) and the Brussels Capital region. 
31 Including e.g. preschool day care (0-3 y) and out-of-school care (3-12 y). 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
  
     
 
 
 
      
 
 
     
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Basically,  the  same  kind  of  services  is  offered  to  families  in  all  three  communities  but 
different emphases or nuances exist. 

The  three  communities  of  Belgium  have  each  a  distinct  system  for  ECEC  (split  system, 
UNESCO,  2010).  The  childcare  facilities  for  the  0  to  3  years  old  are  under  the 
responsibility  of  the  Department  of  Welfare  with  governmental  organisations  that  are 
responsible  for  the  quality  policy:  Office  de  la  Naissance  et  de  l’Enfance,  Fédération 
Wallonie-Brussels  (French-speaking  part),  Kind  en  Gezin,  Flemish  Community  of  Belgium 
(Dutch-speaking  part),  Kind  und  Familie,  German  Community  of  Belgium  (German-
speaking part). 

The  pre-primary  education  (kleuterscholen,  écoles  maternelles)  from  2½    years  old  to 
mandatory school age is under the responsibility of the Department of Education and is 
integrated in the system of elementary education (2½ until 12 years). Both together make 
up  elementary  education  and  fall  within  the  scope  of  the  respective  legislation.  The 
German-speaking  Community  has  raised  the  entry  into  pre-primary  education  from  2½ 
(like it is in the two other Communities) to 2 years 8 months.  

2  OBJECTIVES OF THE ECEC4 SYSTEM IN BELGIUM 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Childcare has three important functions: economic, educational and social.  

  A choice for progressive universalism (social function) in the Flemish Community.  

 

Important investment in the educational function in the French Community.  

  Strengthening out-of-school care in the German-speaking Community.  

  No integration of childcare (0 to 3) in pre-primary education.  

2.1  The three functions of childcare 

Since the second half of the 19th century, the child care sector evolved separately from the 
pre-primary  school.  While  pre-primary  is  considered  as  an  educational  environment  that 
may  benefit  all  children  (Luc,  1997),  this  was  not  the  case  for  child  care  for  the  under 
threes.  Until  the  1960s,  childcare  for  children  below  three  years  of  age  remained 
predominantly  a  charity  for  the  poor,  with  a  strong  medical  and  hygienic  emphasis 
(Humblet,  Vandenbroeck,  2007).  Due  to  the  growing  female  employment  since  the  1970, 
childcare  gradually  also  became  an  economic  instrument  for  equal  opportunities  for  men 
and women in the labour market.  

In  recent  years,  both  in  the  French  and  the  Flemish  speaking  communities,  a  growing 
consensus  can  be  noted  among  policy  makers  and  leading  administrators  that  three 
societal functions should be combined in child care (0 to 3). 

  Obviously,  child  care  has  an  economic  function  which,  since  long,  prevails, 
enabling  both  men  and  women  to  reconcile  their  parental  responsibilities  with 
activities  on  the  labour  market.  The  childcare  system  in  Belgium  is  also  accessible 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Belgium 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

for  parents  (mostly  mothers)  who  work  part-time,  there  is  no  evidence  that  they 
would experience more problems to find a place than parents that work full time.  

  Since the last decades more attention was also given to the educational function, 
being  the  focus  of  the  Unicef  Report  Card  8  (Unicef  Innocenti  Research  Centre, 
2008)  and  the  Communication  of  the  European  Commission  (2011). For  a  growing 
number  of  children,  child  care  is  an  important  socializing  milieu  in  which  essential 
competences are can be acquainted at a young age. 

  Last but not least, a growing concern about the social function of child care can be 
observed,  dealing  with  issues  of  social  justice,  equal  opportunities  and  therefore 
also  with  issues  of  accessibility,  desirability  and  parental  involvement.  At  the 
European  level,  this  concern  is  rooted  in  a  broader  commitment  towards  the 
reduction of child poverty rates across the Member States and accompanied by the 
recognition  that  high  quality  ECEC  has  an  important  role  to  play  in  tackling 
disadvantage from an early stage (European Commission, 2013). 

2.2  Progressive Universalism: a priority for the Flemish Community 

The  provision  of  structural  services  for  all  as  well  as  providing  additional  funding  towards 
disadvantaged groups seems to be the most effective strategy for making ECEC accessible, 
especially for children from immigrant or low-income families. (Education, Audiovisual and 
Culture  Executive  Agency,  2009;  Leseman,  2002).  Flanders  has  therefore  chosen  for 
progressive universalism: universal entitlements to publicly funded ECEC provision with 
a flexible allocation of funds that target additional resources toward disadvantaged children 
and families. 

The  2002  decree  on  ‘Equal  Opportunities  in  Education’  of  the  Flemish  government  put  in 
place,  amongst  other  things,  a  new  system  of  funding  in  pre-primary  and  primary 
education,  taking  into  account  the  school’s  composition  in  terms  of  the  socio-economic 
characteristics of its pupils. One of the aims of the policy is to improve the opportunities of 
underprivileged pupils in education. 

For  the  childcare  sector,  the  Flemish  government  decided  early  2009,  to  take  structural 
and  legislative  measures.  Since  then,  all  funded  child  care  centres  are  obliged  to  reserve 
20%  of  their  capacity  for  single-parent  families,  families  living  in  poverty,  and  crisis 
situations. 

2.3  Emphasis on the pedagogical function in the French Community 

In the new millennium, the pedagogical quality has received most political attention in the 
French-speaking  Community,  as  reflected  in  new  legislation  (1999  and  2004),  the 
reorganization of the governmental organization –the Office de la Naissance et de l’Enfance 
-, and the development of projects in the field. 

The  legislative  framework  defines  very  broad  objectives  that  can  be  translated  into 
concrete  qualitative  pedagogical  practice  on  the  level  of  the  institutions.  Each  childcare 
provision  develops  a  pedagogical  programme  together  with  the  families  in  which  the 
pedagogical  guidelines  are  defined.  With  this  legislation,  the  functions  of  the  inspectorate 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

profoundly  changed,  their  mission  is  now  more  focused  on  staff  development  and 
pedagogical coaching (accompagnement). 

The  focus  on  the  pedagogical  function  of  childcare  has  increased  the  valorization  of 
pedagogical coaching and there is now less focus on bureaucratic control systems. These 
policy  evolutions  have  been  accompanied  by  publications  that  have  inspired  a  growing 
number  of  practitioners.  Scholars  are  reporting  that  more  and  more  practitioners  are 
starting  to  reflect  on  their  own  pedagogical  practice  in  order  to  increase  the  quality  of 
their service towards children and parents (Pirard, 2009).  

2.4  The  German-speaking  Community:  a  holistic  approach  and 

strengthening of the out-of-school sector 

Pre-primary education in the German-speaking Community emphasis a holistic approach 
towards  education  and  promotes  activities  which  foster  the  children’s  socio-emotional, 
intellectual,  psychomotoric  and  aesthetic  development.  First  and  foreign  language 
acquisition are all important aspects of the curriculum. 

There is only one day care centre in the German-speaking Community and one service for 
family day care (Regionalzentrum für Kleinkindbetreuung) with around 100 family day care 
providers (Tagesmutter). 

In  2013,  the  Government  of  the  German-speaking  Community  signed  an  agreement  with 
the  Regionalzentrum  für  Kleinkindbetreuung  (regional  centre  for  day  care  for  young 
children)  and  the  local  communities  about  the  financing  of  the  out-of-school  care.  On  the 
basis of this agreement, the costs for  the out-of-school care are divided between the local 
communities  and  the  Government.  This  treaty  is  seen  as  very  important  for  the 
development of the out of school sector in this part of Belgium. 

2.5  No integration of childcare (0 to 3) in the education system  

In spite  of the  Communication of the  European Commission on ECEC of February 2011 in 
which the Commission argued for an integrated concept of care and education for the 0 to 
6 years olds, the integration of childcare (0 to 3) into a broader pedagogic setting – in the 
Belgium  case  this  would  be  the  pre-primary  education  -  was  not  considered  by  the  three 
Communities of Belgium. 

3  ACHIEVEMENT OF BARCELONA TARGETS 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Both objectives achieved.  

  Number of places increased considerably.  

  No effect of the crisis on the maintenance of the childcare services.  

Belgium is one of the 6 Member States that has achieved both objectives of the Barcelona 
Targets, with 99% of enrolment in pre-primary education and nearly 40% in childcare (EU-

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Belgium 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

SILC 2010-2011). In 2003, the French Community of Belgium launched the Cicogne Plan 
(The  Stork  Plan)  to  reach  the  Barcelona  Targets  that  created  10.000  extra  places  (ONE, 
2012). This Cicogne Plan aimed at a more equal distribution of the provision of childcare 
places between the different regions and also aimed at creating affordable childcare places. 
The  Flemish  Government  also  used  the  Barcelona  Targets  to  create  a  more  balanced 
supply in the different regions. 

The crisis had no negative effect on the number of places; on the contrary, the number of 
places  increased  from  327  per  1000  children  under  the  age  of  three  to  380/1000.  From 
2010  until  2011,  2808  extra  places  were  created  (an  increase  of  2,3%),  a  high 
investment in times of crisis which reflects the political will of the Flemish and the Walloon 
communities  to  create  more  places  in  child  care  as  a  means  to  contribute  to  the  Europe 
2020 employment targets. (Belgian Federal Government, BE2020, 2013): 

 

In Flanders, an increased supply was embedded in a decree, aiming at a supply for 
at  least  half  of  all  children  under  the  age  of  three  for  all  families  with  a  childcare 
need from 2020 onwards, within an agreed budgetary framework.  

  Wallonia  equally  aims  to  improve  the  reconciliation  of  work  and  private  life, 
through  the  reinforcement  of  neighborhood  services.  For  childcare,  a  plan  is  being 
prepared  that  potentially  could lead  to  16.000  new  places  in  Brussels  and  Wallonia 
within ten years.  

4  EFFECT  OF  THE  CRISIS  ON  UNEMPLOYMENT  RATES  OF 

MEN AND WOMEN AND FERTILITY RATE 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Unemployment rates of women decreased.  

  Birth rate has slowly increased.  

Since the crisis, unemployment rates among men increased from 6.7% in 2007 to 7.7% in 
2012 while decreasing among women from 8.5 to 7.4. The unemployment rates are rather 
low compared to the European average: 10.4% for men and 10.5 for women in 2012.  

The  birth  rate  has  been  slowly  increasing  since  2003,  especially  in  the  large  towns, 
bringing  the  fertility  rate  in  Belgium  to  1.84  (EU  27:  1.59).  According  to  the  last  report 
from Kind en Gezin (2013), the birth rate in 2012 shows a slight decline.  

5  WHO  IS  PROVIDING  CHILDCARE  AND  PRE-PRIMARY 

EDUCATION? 

  Different providers: public and private.  

KEY FINDING 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

In all three communities, the pre-primary ECEC is organized by three different providers: 
local  communities  (cities  and  towns),  the  public  school  network  of  the  communities 
(Flemish, French and German speaking) and private subsidized providers (mostly Catholic 
schools).  There  are  differences  between  the  two  largest  Communities:  in  the  Flemish 
Community,  the  Catholic  provider  is  the  largest  one,  while  in  the  Fédération  Wallonie-
Bruxelles the public school network of the French Community has the most pupils.  

The  day  to  day  management  of  day  care  centres  for  the  0  to  3  is  provided  by  local 
communities,  by  NGO’s  (non-profit  organisations)  and  by  for  profit  providers.  All  services 
must be registered and in both Communities most places are offered by services subsidized 
by  the  governmental  organizations:  Kind  en  Gezin  and  l’Office  de  la  Naissance  et  de 
l’Enfance.  The  organizing  agency  for  childcare  provisions  in  the  German-speaking 
Community 
für 
Kleinkindbetreuung). This organisation is the only recognized provider there. 

for  Childcare  Facilities  (Regionalzentrum 

is  the  Regional  Centre 

6  COMPLEMENTARY MEASURES 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Paid maternity leave: 15 weeks.  

  Paid paternity leave: 10 days.  

  Each parent can take 3 months parental leave up to the child’s sixth birthday.  

  Generous child benefits.  

  Childcare: parents pay a fee according to their income. 

  Pre-primary: free of charge.  

6.1  Maternity, paternity, and parental leave 

Maternity  leave  is  15  weeks  in  total.  It  can  start  as  soon  as  six  weeks  before  the 
expected  delivery  date  (with  one  obligatory  week  to  be  taken  before  the  expected  birth 
date)  and  continues  for  a  minimum  of  nine  weeks  up  to  14  weeks  afterwards,  depending 
how much has been taken before the birth. Employees in the private sector are entitled to 
82 per cent of their previous earnings during the first four weeks and 75 per cent after that 
(at  most  86  EUR  per  day).  Statutory  public  sector  employees  continue  to  receive  full 
wages.  

Fathers are entitled to ten days  paternity leave during the month after the child’s birth; 
three days must be taken directly following birth and for these three days they also receive 
full compensation. For the remaining seven days they are granted 82 per cent of earnings 
(at most 103.72 EUR per day). 

Up  to  the  child’s  sixth  birthday,  each  parent  is  entitled  to  three  months  parental  leave 
with a payment of 756.19 EUR before tax monthly (2012). The leave period can be taken 
full-time (three months), part-time (six months) or for one day per week over a period of 
15 months. Parents in the Flemish Community receive an additional payment of 160 EUR 
per month.  

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Belgium 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

In  2007,  20  per  cent  of  fathers  made  use  of  the  parental  leave  opportunities  All  women 
employees are entitled to leave with earnings-related benefit (Merla & Deven, 2012). 

Additionally, a comparatively generous child benefit per month of 90.28 EUR for the first 
child, 167.05 EUR for the second child and 249.41 EUR for the third child and for each of 
the  following  children  is  granted  to  all  parents,  even  those  who  have  not  paid  social 
insurance  contributions  (MISSOC,  2013)32.    This  support  for  parents  with  children  may 
explain  why  the  poverty  rate  and  the  risk  of  poverty  for  children  are  below  OECD/EU 
average (Cantillion, Marx, 2008):  

  Child poverty rate: 11,3% for Belgium and 12, 6% on average for OECD countries  

  Risk of poverty rate: 21% for Belgium and 24,3% on average for EU countries 

6.2  Fees and taxes  

In  Belgium,  both  the  Federal  Government  and  the  Communities  have  undertaken  serious 
efforts  to  make  childcare  affordable  for  all  parents.  In  the  subsidized  childcare  centres 
(approximately  80%  of  all  childcare  places),  the  parents  pay  a  fee  according  to  their 
income.  In  the  Flemish  Community,  the  parents  in  the  subsidized  centres  pay  between 
1,54  euro  and  27,36  euro  a  day.  In  the  Fédération  Wallonie-Bruxelles  parents  pay 
between  2.31  euro  and  32.68  euro  and  in  the  German-speaking  Community  between 
1.29 euro and 27 euro.  

The private child centres which receive no subsidies can freely set their price.  

The costs of childcare (0 to 3 and out of school care) is tax deductable: all childcare costs 
are 100% deductable with a maximum of 11,20 euro a day.  

The  pre-primary  school  from  2,5  until  6  is  free  for  parents,  except  for  meals  and  extra-
curricular activities. In Flanders there is a maximum invoice for these activities set at 20€ 
per pupil per year in pre-primary education.  

7  QUALITY INSURANCE 

  Well-developed system of quality control in childcare and pre-primary.  

KEY FINDING 

Belgium has a long tradition in quality monitoring and evaluation, in childcare services and 
also in pre-primary education. Since 1919, a national organization had been responsible for 
monitoring  and  assessing  quality  in  the  childcare  sector  for  children  from  0-3.  After  the 
State  reform,  three  regional  agencies  have  taken  over  this  responsibility  in  1984:  the 
Office  de  la  Naissance  et  de  l’Enfance  for  the  Federation  Wallonia-Brussels,  Kind  en 
Gezin  for  the  Flemish  Community;  and  Kind  und  Familie,  for  the  small  German 
Community. Until the eighties, the control was mainly on the medical-hygienic aspects of 
care. 

32 For instance a family with three children receives 496.74 euro a month 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

7.1  Flemish Community 

7.1.1  Childcare services 

Since 2006, the quality of all childcare centres is controlled in the  Flemish Community by 
the Agentschap Zorginspectie (Agency for Inspection of Care facilities, which is responsible 
for the whole welfare sector. 

In  1992,  Kind  en  Gezin  (Child  and  Family)  introduced  quality  rating  scales  for  the 
inspectorate  based  on  the  American  ITERS  and  ECERS  scales  which  also  measure  the 
pedagogical  quality  of  the  subsidised  centres.  Furthermore,  they  introduced  assessment 
scales  on  ‘well-being’  and  ‘involvement’  developed  by  Ferre  Laevers  and  his  team  at  the 
University of Leuven (CEGO).  

Since  2004,  subsidised  services  have  to  meet  minimum  quality  standards  and  have  to 
develop  a  quality  handbook  in  which  they  describe  the  procedures  of  how  they  evaluate 
quality, how they involve parents, and how the professional development of child carers is 
organised.  While  most  of  the  independent  service  providers  choose  to  work  under  the 
supervision  of  Kind  en  Gezin  which  obliges  them  to  meet  certain  quality  standards,  they 
are  legally  only  required  to  register.  Both  types  of  services  are  subject  to  occasional, 
unannounced checks by Kind en Gezin (OECD, 2012). 

Nevertheless, there is a gap in monitoring the quality of childcare between the subsidised 
and  the  independent  sector.  In  April  2014,  a  new  law  on  childcare  for  the  0  to  3  will  be 
implemented  (Decreet  Opvang  van  baby’s  en  peuters)  and  as  a  part  of  this  new  law  the 
quality  monitoring  system  will  basically  be  the  same  for  all  childcare  services.  To  prepare 
this, Kind en Gezin is currently commissioning a study (MeMoQ) to develop a scientifically 
based  tool  that  allows  measuring  the  educational  quality  of  the  entire  childcare  sector. 
Based on a recommendation of OECD Starting Strong II, the researchers are developing a 
monitoring process that will engage and support staff, parents, and children (OECD, 2006: 
126; Kind en Gezin, CEGO and Ghent University, 2012).  

7.1.2  The pre-primary schools  

The ‘kleuterschool’ for children from 2½ to 6 is inspected on a regular basis to ensure that 
the  ‘developmental  goals’,  defined  by  law,  are  met.  These  are  objectives  in  terms  of 
knowledge, understanding, skills and attitudes that children must attain. These goals deal 
with a number of basic competences children are supposed to have in the area of physical 
education,  artistic  education, 
training  (Dutch),  world  orientation  and 
mathematical initiation.  

language 

The  educational  inspectorate  of  the  Flemish  Ministry  of  Education  and  Training  acts  as  a 
professional  body  of  external  supervision  when  assessing  the  implementation  of  these 
developmental  objectives.  It  consists  of  five  inspection  teams,  one  of  them  being  the 
inspection team for pre-primary and primary education. Elementary schools (2.5 to 12) are 
inspected as a whole. 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Belgium 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

7.2  Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles 

7.2.1  Childcare services (0-3) 

In  1999,  the  Government  of  the  French-speaking  Community  of  Belgium  developed  the 
“Code de Qualité”33. This Quality Code is a set of standards to work with children (0 to 3 
and  out  of  school):  fostering  the  child’s  curiosity;  quality  of  interactions  between  adults 
and  children;  empowering  the  child’s  self-confidence  and  autonomy;  contributing  to  the 
development  of  social  skills  in  a  perspective  of  solidarity  and  co-operation  and  a  strong 
relationship with the parents (Eurydice/Eurybase, 2009b).  

O.N.E. is a  governmental  institution whose mission is to monitor,  to  evaluate and also 
to  support  the  childcare  institutions.  O.N.E.’s  role  of  inspector  has  changed  significantly 
from a controlling and supervisory function towards professional development of staff and 
accompaniment (pedagogical coaching).  

7.2.2  Pre-primary education 

Within  the  Education  Department,  the  inspectorate  is  in  charge  of  evaluating  and 
monitoring  the  quality  of  the  pre-primary  schools.  The  inspectors  are  monitoring  the 
education  quality,  they  control  if  the  official  educational  programs  in  the  schools  are 
implemented  in  practice  and  they  also  control  if  the  necessary  didactical  tools  and  school 
equipment is provided. 

7.3  German-speaking Community 

The pre-primary in the German-speaking Community is like in the two other communities 
subject  to  the  same  regulations  as  the  primary  school.  The  Regional  Centre  for  Childcare 
Facilities  also  supervises  the  only  infant-toddler  centre  in  the  Community  and  an  out-of–
school service. 

8  CHALLENGES FOR ECEC IN BELGIUM  

KEY FINDINGS 

  Level of qualification in pre-primary: bachelor.  

  Level of qualification in childcare (0-3 years of age) is rather low.  

  Better care for the youngest children in pre-primary.  

  More focus on working with disadvantaged parents.  

33 “The Quality and Care Code Law” is a governmental order dated 1999, 2004. In this paper, called “the Quality 
Code”.  

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

8.1  The Level Of Qualification Of The Childcare Worker 

Teachers  in  pre-primary  education  need  a  bachelor  qualification  and  they  almost  receive 
the  same  salary  as  the  teachers  in  primary  and  in  secondary  school.  Consequently,  one 
could say that the level of qualification of the pre-primary teacher is high and the working 
conditions are good, compared to other European Member States.  

However,  the  level  of  qualification  required  in  the  childcare  sector  is  still  problematic.  In 
several  international  reports  (OECD,  2001,  2006,  UNICEF,  2008),  it  was  mentioned  that 
the  qualification  level  of  staff  in  Belgian  childcare  is  very  low  (16  years  plus  3).  The 
situation  in  Flanders  is  even  worse:  in  family  day  care  and  in  the  independent  childcare 
sector,  there  are  no  diploma  requirements.  Only  in  a  subsidised  child  care  centre  (only 
17%  of  the  places),  a  training  on  post-secondary  vocational  level  (1  year)  as 
‘kindbegeleider’ (child care worker) is mandatory. 

In  April  2014,  the  new  decree  on  childcare  for  the  0  to  3  will  be  implemented  (Decreet 
Opvang  van  baby’s  en  peuters)  in  the  Flemish  Community.  This  law  stipulates  that 
everyone  working  in  childcare  has  to  have  some  kind  of  qualification  by  2024  and  that 
every  childcare  worker  has  the  right  to  pedagogical  guidance  from  a  pedagogical  coach. 
According  to  the  new  law,  every  provider  of  childcare  will  have  to  guarantee  pedagogical 
guidance for all the employed childcare workers. Yet some challenges remain. The Flemish 
Government has chosen for a long transition period of ten years for the implementation of 
the  qualification  requirements  and  it  is  still  unclear  what  the  level  of  the  qualification 
(European Qualification Framework) will be.  

In 2011, a new  bachelor training  for pedagogical coaching was established in Brussels, 
Antwerp  and  Ghent.  In  2014,  the  first  Bachelors  in  Pedagogy  of  the  Young  Child 
(Pedagogisch  Coach)  will  graduate.  From  then  onwards,  they  will  function  as  pedagogical 
coaches  or  advisors  that  will  design  the  pedagogical  policy  together  with  the  other 
practitioners with a secondary qualification and take on the supervision of the non-qualified 
who  are  working  towards  a  qualification.  They  are  also  trained  to  work  with  children  and 
their parents.  

In  the  French  Community  there  is  also  an  obligation  to  follow  in-service  trainings  and 
there  is  also  much  attention  for  pedagogical  guidance  as  a  tool  to  increase  the 
competences  of  the  childcare  workers:  the  former  inspectors  have  become  pedagogical 
coaches (accompaniment) and they have the task to support the childcare initiatives. While 
there is not yet a specialized bachelor training for childcare, the discussion about the need 
of such training has started in the French Community 

8.2  Challenge for pre-primary education  

For the pre-primary schools in both Communities, it will be a challenge to work closer with 
parents,  especially  with  those  living  in  disadvantaged  circumstances.  Some  schools  in 
larger  cities  have  a  lot  to  offer  when  it  comes  to  working  in  a  context  of  diversity  but  in 
other schools, a coherent policy to ethnic minority parents and parents living in poverty is 
still lacking. 

Another  problem  for  the  pre-primary  schools  in  Belgium  is  the  care  for  the  youngest 
children (2½ to 4 years). Collaboration with childcare facilities to create smooth transitions 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Belgium 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

between  childcare  and  school  for  the  youngest  children  should  now  be  a  priority,  while 
schools  also  need  to  invest  more  in  the  care  for  and  the  well-being  of  the  youngest 
children. The teacher / child ratio in most schools is way too high for these young children, 
sometimes up to 25 children per teacher.  

55 

 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

REFERENCES 

  Peeters J. , Pirard, F.,  Bouvy, A.   Buysse, B. 2010, Country report on Belgium.   IN P. 
Oberhuemer,  I.  Schreyer & M. Neuman, Professionals in early childhood education and 
care  systems.  European  profiles  and  perspectives.  Opladen  &  Farminghton  Hills: 
Barbara Buddich Publishers;  

  Vandenbroeck, M.  Peeters, J., Pirard, F.  2009, New developments of Belgian childcare 

policy and practice.  Early Childhood Education Research Journal 17(3), 408-416. 

  Peeters,  J.   Chenu,  C.   Van  Landeghem,  G.   Van  Laere,  K.,  Pirard,  F.   Hulpia,  H.,  Van 
Damme,  J.   in  press,   Country  report  for  Belgium   for  the  Impact  of  Early  Childhood 
Education and Care in preventing –Early School Leaving research, Commissioned by The 
European Commission.   

  BE2020  2013,  National  reform  program  2013.  http://www.be2020.eu  (5  September 

2013) 

  Cantillon,  B  Marx,  I.  2008,  Auf  der  Suche  nach  einem  Weg  zu  der  ‘Wohlfart  ohne 
Arbeit’: Das Belgische Wohlfartsystem. In K. Schubert, S. Hegenlilich & U. Bazant (Eds) 
Europaische Wohlfahrtssyteme (71-87). Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.  

  Euridice/Eurybase  2009,  French  Community  Belgium.  Pre-primary  education.  Teachers 

and Education Staff. Brussels : Euridice 

  Humblet, P., Vandenbroeck, M. (2007), Sauver l’enfant pour sauver le monde. Le ‘care’ 
et  la  construction  de  problème  sociaux.  In  Brougère  G.  &  Vandenbroeck  M.  ed. 
Repenser l’éducation des jeunes enfants. 186-206 Bruxelles: Peter Lang 

  Kind en Gezin 2013. Kind in Vlaanderen. Rapport 2012. Brussel: Kind en Gezin 

  Luc, J. 1997, L’invention du jeune enfant au XIXème sciècle. De la sale d’asile à l’école 

maternelle. Paris: Belin.  

  Unicef  Innocenti  Research  Centre.  2008,  Report  Card  8.  The  child  care  transition. 

Florence: Unicef. 

  Council  of  the  European  Union  2011,  Council  conclusions  on  early  childhood  education 
and  care:  Providing  all  our  children  with  the  best  start  for  the  world  of  tomorrow. 
Brussels: EU 

  Education,  Audiovisual  and  Culture  Executive  Agency  2009,  Early  childhood  education 

and care in Europe: tackling social and cultural inequalities. Brussels: Eurydice 

  European  Commission  2013,  Commission  recommendation.  Investing  in  children: 

breaking the cycle of disadvantage. Brussels: COM 20.2.2013 

  Kind en Gezin , CEGO, Universiteit Gent, 2012 Vooronderzoek in functie van de 

ontwikkeling van een instrument voor het meten van de pedagogische kwaliteit in de 
voorschoolse kinderopvang. Eindrapport. Brussel: Kind en Gezin 

  Leseman, P. 2002,  Early childhood education and care for children from low-income or 

minority backgrounds. Paris: O.E.C.D. 

  Merla,L.  &  Deven,  F.  2008,  Belgium  In  P.  Moss  &  M.  Korinthus  (Eds)  .  International 
Review  of  Leave  Policies  and  Related  Research  (142-152).  London:  Departement  for 
Business Enterprise& Regulatory reform.  

  MISSOC,  2013,  Long-term  care,  MISSOC  Analysis  .  Brussels:  Mutual  Information 

System on Social Protection in the EU Member States, the EAA and Switserland.  

  OECD, 2001 Starting Strong Early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD.  

  OECD, 2006, Starting Strong II. Early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD.  

56 

 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Belgium 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

  OECD, 2012. Starting Strong III - A Quality Toolbox for Early Childhood Education and 

Care. Paris : OECD. 

  Office de la Naissance et de l’ Enfance 2012, Rapport Annuel 2011. Bruxelles : ONE. 

  Pirard, F. 2009 Oser la Qualité : Un référentiel en Communauté française de Belgique et 
son  accompagnement.  In  Quel  curriculum  pour  un  accueil  de  qualité  de  la  petite 
enfance, ed S. Rayna, C. Bouve, and P. Moisset, 85-105. Toulouse : ERES.  

  Regierung der Deutschsprachigen Gemeinschaft. 2013,  Absichtserklärung in Bezug auf 

die Anerkunnung und die Aufrechterhaltung von AUBE-Standoreten 

57 

 
 
PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN 
UNION: THE MODEL OF LATVIA 
Olga RASTRIGINA34 
Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, 
United Kingdom  

Abstract 

This  country  note  describes  public  childcare  provision  in  Latvia:  the  context, 
recent  developments  and  the  design  of  actual  services.  Latvia  has  high  female 
employment. Public childcare is provided by local governments and is integrated 
within  the  preschool  education  system.  It  covers  children  up  to  7  years  old. 
However, the demand for childcare for children below 4 is not met. This makes 
it difficult for parents to combine work and family life. Latvia’s progress towards 
the Barcelona targets has been limited. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Historically Latvia has relatively high female labour force participation rate and employment 
rate. The dual-earner family model is also a necessity because on average wages are low. 
Women  tend  to  work  full-time  as  flexible  work  arrangements  are  not  common.  In  light  of 
this, sufficient provision of childcare facilities is important for promoting work-life balance. 

Demographic  developments  in  Latvia  are  not  optimistic.  Number  of  children  born  every 
year decreases both due to high emigration and natural population change. Latvia has one 
of the lowest fertility rates in the EU. Despite negative demographic projections, childcare 
provision needs to be improved in the short-term as demand for childcare is not met. 

Latvia is committed to this objective. The progress  is assessed by the Barcelona targets 
and  national  objectives.  The  progress  towards  achieving  the  Barcelona  targets  so  far  has 
been limited, especially for children below 3 years old. In 2011, only 15% of children below 
3 years old were covered by formal childcare. The coverage rate for children aged 3 years 
to compulsory school age went over the 70% threshold in 2011. However, this is still way 
below the target.  

National  objectives  are  set  for  improving  the  availability  of  preschool  institutions  and 
increasing the variety of childcare options. 

34  Senior  Research  Officer  as  the  Institute  for  Social  and  Economic  Research,  University  of  Essex,  UK.  Research 
associate at the Baltic International Centre for Economic Policy Studies, Latvia. Member of ENEGE. 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Latvia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

In  Latvia,  childcare  historically  is  integrated  within  the  education  system.  It  is  provided 
within  preschool  educational  institutions  or  kindergartens  by  local  authorities.  Public 
preschool  education  is  offered  free  of  charge.  Preschool  education  is  guaranteed  for 
children  of  mandatory  preschool  age  (i.e.  5-6  years  old).  Younger  children  are  ensured 
equal  access  via  co-financing  private  childcare  facilities  in  case  public  facilities  are  not 
available  (since  September  2013).  Childcare  in  kindergartens  is  usually  provided  for  a  full 
day.  Childcare  without  an  educational  component  is  relatively  rare.  It  is  mainly  offered 
by alternative childcare providers, e.g. day care centres. 

In  2008-2009,  Latvia  was  hit  by  a  severe  economic  crisis.  However,  the  number  of 
preschools  and  children  enrolled  in  them  increased  steadily  in  recent  years.  Financial 
support  from  the  European  Regional  Development  Fund  was  used  for  developing  and 
improving  infrastructure  of  preschool  educational  institutions  and  introducing  a  variety  of 
alternative  childcare  facilities.    Nevertheless,  around  9-11%  of  children  in  the  age  1.5-6 
years old can’t get a place in the public kindergarten and are registered on waiting lists. 

The complementary measures to support families with children include state financed child 
related benefits: maternity, paternity, parental, childcare and family state benefit. Except 
for the latter, these benefits are targeted at children below 2 years old. During the second 
year  of  a  child’s  live,  state  financial  support  reduces  rapidly.  This  is  usually  when  parents 
have  to  return  to  work  after  parental  leave.  Due  to  the  lack  of  childcare  facilities  for 
children from 1.5 to 6  years  old and lack of  complementary measures, parents with  small 
children are a sensitive group needing more stable childcare support. 

1  SOCIO-ECONOMIC SITUATION IN LATVIA 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Latvia  is  characterized  by  a  relatively  high  female  employment  rate  while  the 

employment rate for men is lower than the EU on average. 

  Unemployment rates increased during the crisis and remain high. 

  Working  arrangements  are  rather  inflexible:  part-time  work,  work  from  home, 

or work with a flexible schedule are rare. 

  Many people find it hard to combine work and family life. 

  Latvia has one of the lowest fertility rates in the EU and the number of children 

born per year is expected to decline. 

1.1  Situation in the labour market35 

Latvia  is  characterized  both  by  a  relatively  high  female  labour  force  participation  rate 
and a high female employment rate. The latter is considered being a positive legacy of the 
Soviet system, in which women used to work the same quantity of hours as men. There is 

35 This section is based on Rastrigina (2013). Figures in this section are provided by EUROSTAT. 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

no  negative  attitude  towards  working  women.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  considered  to  be  a 
norm.  The  dual-earner  family  model  is  also  a  necessity  because,  on  average,  wages  are 
low. 

In  2008-2009,  Latvia  experienced  one  of  the  deepest  economic  recessions  in  the  EU  with 
an  overall  GDP  decline  of  more  than  25%.  Unemployment  rates  more  than  tripled.  In 
2012, they still remain high: 16.0% for men and 13.9% for women (for the age group 15-
74).  This  is  significantly  higher  than  the  EU-28  average  of  10.4%  for  men  and  10.6%  for 
women. 

However,  even  after  the  adverse  effect  of  the  economic  crisis,  activity  rate  and 
employment  rate  of  women  remains  higher  than in  the  EU-28  on  average.  In  2012,  the 
employment rate for the age group 20-64 was 66.4% for women. This is above the EU-28 
average  (62.3%).  The  employment  rate  of  men  was  70.2%,  which  is  below  the  EU-28 
average (74.5%). 

Working  time  arrangements  in  Latvia  are  rather  inflexible.  Part-time  work,  work  from 
home,  or  work  with  flexible  schedule  are  quite  rare.  According  to  the  Latvian  Labour  law, 
the employer (upon request) has to provide part-time work for a full-time employee in case 
of pregnancy, in the period after child birth, in the period of breast-feeding, and to a parent 
of  a  child  below  14  years  old.  However,  in  practice,  this  happens  rarely.  Part-time 
employment  is  more  common  among  women  than  among  men  (respectively  11.6%  and 
7.1% out of total employment in 2012), but the shares are very low. The respective figures 
for  the  EU-28  average  are  higher,  especially  for  women  (32.5%  for  women  and  9.4%  for 
men).  
Parenthood  affects  employment  rates  but  the  effect  differs  not  much  from  the  EU  on 
average.  In  2012,  the  difference  in  employment  rates  between  women  (20-49)  without 
children and with children below 6 years  old was to the advantage  of  non-mothers by 9.6 
p.p.  The  EU-28  average  was  slightly  higher  at  10.7  p.p.  For  men  the  difference  in 
employment  rates  was  to  the  advantage  of  fathers  by  12.6  p.p.  The  EU-28  average  was 
slightly lower: 11.4 p.p. 

Given  the  relatively  high  labour  market  activity  of  women  and  the  low  working  time 
flexibility,  sufficient  provision  of  childcare  facilities  could  help  avoiding  a  double  burden  of 
work and family care. According to the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living 
and  Working  Conditions  (2010),  Latvia  has  one  of  the  highest  proportions  of  people  who 
experience conflict when it comes to allocating time to work or family life.  

1.2  Demographic developments 

Latvia has one of the lowest fertility rates in the EU: 1.34 as compared to 1.57 in the EU on 
average in 2011 (see Table 1 in the Annex). Due to high emigration and natural population 
change,  the  number  of  children  born  in  Latvia decreased  sharply  since  the  1990s.  Around 
early  2000s,  the  birth  rate  stabilized  at  about  20  thousand  children  per  year.  Favourable 
economic  development  in  the  period  from  2004  up  to  2008  brought  about  a  gradual 
increase  in  the  number  of  children  born.  However,  with  the  economic  crisis,  the  previous 
tendency resumed. 

According to Vitolins (2006), there might be a modest increases in the number of children 
born  after  2011  as  at  this  time  the  relatively  numerous  cohort  of  people  born  in  1980s 
reached active fertility age. After this period, the number of children born will again start to 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Latvia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

decline.  More  recent  projections  by  EUROSTAT  show,  however,  gradual  decline  in  the 
number of children below 5 years old. 

Figure 1: Demographic developments in Latvia 

Number of children below 5

Percentage in total population

120.000

100.000

80.000

60.000

40.000

20.000

0

6,0

5,0

4,0

3,0

2,0

1,0

0,0

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060

Notes: Number of children below 5 is shown on the vertical axis on the left; percentage in total population – on 
the right. 

Source: EUROSTAT 

Latvia  experienced  several  important  emigration  waves  in  the  recent  years,  i.e.  after 
joining the EU and during the recent economic crisis. These fast demographic changes and 
lack  of  reliable  population  statistics  (before  population  census  in  2011),  made  it  more 
difficult  to  predict  the  demand  for  childcare  and  adjust  the  supply  side.  Even  if  negative 
demographic  projections  are  taken  into  account,  the  present  situation  needs  a  fast  short-
term  solution  in  terms  of  increased  capacity  of  public  childcare  provisions.  In  the  recent 
report of the State Regional Development Agency (2009), it was projected that the demand 
for childcare will most probably be satisfied by 2016. 

2  ACHIEVEMENTS  TOWARDS  CHILDCARE  PROVISION 

TARGETS 

KEY FINDINGS 

 

In  the  last  decade,  Latvia’s  progress  towards  Barcelona  targets  has  been 
limited, especially for children below 3 years old.  

  Most of formal childcare is organized for full time. 

  National  objectives  are  set  for  improving  the  availability  of  preschool institutions 

and increasing the variety of childcare options. 

  Despite the severe economic crisis, the number of preschools increased steadily 

in recent years but the demand for child care in Latvia is not satisfied. 

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2.1  Barcelona targets 

The  provision  of  childcare  is  essential  in  order  to  encourage  female  labour  market 
participation and promote equal opportunities in employment between women and men. In 
order  to  facilitate  and  monitor  the  progress  in  childcare  provision,  the  Barcelona  Summit 
set two targets related to childcare provision: 

  The first target focused on the provision, by 2010,  of childcare for 90% of  children 
aged  between  3  years  and  the  mandatory  school  age.  In  the  context  of  Latvia,  it 
means  children  up  to  5  years  old  (as  5-6  years  is  the  mandatory  age  for  entering 
pre-school education). 

  The  second  target  stated  that  at  least  33%  of  children  aged  below  3  should  be 

covered by childcare. 

Latvia’s  progress  towards  achieving  the  Barcelona  targets  so  far  has  been  limited.  The 
coverage of children below the compulsory school age by formal childcare is lower than in 
the EU-28 on average (Figure 2).  

In 2011 only 15% of children below 3 years old were covered by formal childcare while 
in the EU-28 the average was 30%. During the years of economic crisis there was a slight 
decline  in  the  coverage  rates.  This  can  be  related  to  lower  availability  or  affordability  of 
childcare as well as substitution of formal childcare by family care (in case a parent or other 
family member is temporary out of work).  

The coverage rate for children aged 3 years to compulsory school age was more volatile 
during the observed time period. In 2011, it went over the 70% threshold. However, this is 
still way below the target. 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Latvia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 2: Coverage of children with formal childcare in Latvia and in the EU 

A. Children below 3 years 

30 hours or more

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

LV EU LV EU LV EU LV EU LV EU LV EU LV EU

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

B. Children from 3 years to mandatory school age 

100

80

60

40

20

0

LV

EU LV

EU LV

EU LV

EU LV

EU LV

EU LV

EU

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Notes: in 2005-2006 EU-17; in 2007-2009 EU-27; and in 2010-2011 EU-28 

Source: EUROSTAT 

2.2  National objectives  

There are two national objectives related to childcare provisions in Latvia. 

First, childcare provision is addressed in the Latvian National Reform Programme (Ministry 
of  Economics,  2013)  under  the  policy  direction  “Fighting  poverty,  demographic 
challenges and  health protection”.  Within this policy, the target is to eliminate waiting 
lines for pre-school education institutions by 2014. The aim is to improve public support for 
families  with  children,  encourage  child  birth  and  promote  participation  of  parents  in  the 
labour market. 

Second,  the  Family  policy  guidelines  2011-2017  (Ministry  of  Welfare,  2011)  set  as  one  of 
its  goals  promotion  of  work-life  balance  by  increasing  the  range  of  childcare  options 
available  to  parents:  municipal  and  private  kindergartens,  childcare  institutions  in  which 
children  can  stay  for  a  short  time,  babysitting  services  as  well  as  overall  improvement  of 
pre-school childcare facilities and infrastructure. Surprisingly, there is only one quantitative 
target related to this task which is to increase the number of babysitting services provided 
with state funding support from 1 in 2009 to 3 in 2014. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2.3  Development  of  childcare  facilities  during  the  economic  crisis 

and recovery 

Latvia  experienced  sharp  economic  decline  in  the  period  from  the  last  quarter  of  2007  to 
the  3rd  quarter  of  2009.  GDP  fell  by  more  than  25%.  Nevertheless,  already  starting 
from the 4th quarter of 2009 a modest quarter-on-quarter GDP growth appeared.  

Three  consolidation  packages  were  implemented  in  the  period  from  2009  to  2010.  The 
size  of  consolidation  was  remarkable,  reaching  almost  15%  of  the  GDP.  Additional 
austerity measures followed in 2011-2012. The most important measures on the revenue 
side  were  increase  in  direct  and  indirect  taxes  and  broadening  the  tax  base.  On  the 
expenditure  side,  the  strongest  measures  were  cuts  in  public  wages  and  social  transfers, 
including  child  related  benefits  (e.g.  maternity,  paternity,  parental  benefits,  child  birth 
benefit and family benefit).36  

During  the  crisis,  revenues  of  local  authorities  sharply  decreased  and,  with  them,  their 
capacity to satisfy the demand for childcare provision. However, during the same period of 
time,  pre-school  infrastructure  was  set  up  at  national  level  and  development  centres  on 
the  regional  level  supported  by  the  European  Regional  Development  Fund  (ERDF). 
With  the  help  of  this  programme,  14  pre-school  educational  institutions  were  built  or 
enlarged by the end of 2012, 58 were renovated, and 2730 new places for children in the 
kindergartens were created (Ministry of Economics, 2013). The total ERDF funding for this 
activity  is  32.3  million  LVL  (46.1  million  EUR).  As  suggested  by  the  Central  Statistical 
Bureau data (shown in Figure 3), both the number of preschools and the number children 
enrolled was steadily increasing during the past decade.  

Figure 3: Number of preschools and children enrolled 

Number of children enrolled

Number of preschool educational institutions

100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0

620
610
600
590
580
570
560
550
540
530
520
510

 Notes: Number of children enrolled is shown on the vertical axis on the left; number of preschools – on the right. 

 Source: Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia 

36 For more details see Rastrigina and Zasova (2012), Tkacevs (2012). 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Latvia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Despite  increasing  numbers  of  preschools,  the  demand  for  child  care  in  Latvia  is  far  from 
being satisfied. The estimates by the Ministry of Welfare (2012) suggest that about 67.8% 
of  children  in  the  age  group  1.5-6  years  old  were  covered  by  formal  childcare  in 
kindergartens in 2011. Another 8.8% were on  waiting lists for a free slot. The remaining 
23.4%  did  not  express  interest  in  publicly  provided  childcare.  However,  there  is  no 
evidence that the latter group would not be willing to use the services if they were available 
or of better quality. 

According  to  the  data  of  the  Ministry  of  Environmental  Protection  and  Regional 
Development, in 2012 there were 11.8 thousand children registered in the waiting lists for 
public  kindergartens  (Latvian  Association  of  Local  and  Regional  Governments,  2012).  This 
is  about  11%  of  all  children  from  1.5  to  6  years  old.  18  (out  of  110)  municipalities  have 
significant  problems  providing  childcare  (i.e.  the  number  of  children  on  the  waiting  list  is 
more  than  60).  The  worst  situation  is  in  Riga  and  Pieriga  municipalities  where  population 
increased  rapidly  during  the  last  7-8  years.  However,  due  to  financial  constraints  the 
development of infrastructure didn’t keep up with the demographic developments. 

3  PROVISION OF PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Childcare  is  integrated  within  the  education  system.  Childcare  without  an 

educational component is relatively rare. 

  Local authorities are in charge of childcare provision.  

  Preschool education is guaranteed for children of mandatory preschool age (i.e. 5-
6  years  old).  Younger  children  are  ensured  equal  access  via  co-financing  private 
childcare facilities in case public facilities are not available. 

  Local  governments  are  responsible  for  the  financing  of  childcare  facilities. 
Infrastructure  was  improved  with  the  support  of  the  European  Regional 
Development Fund.  

  Quality  standards  are  high  but  the  quality  control  mechanism  is  not  well 

developed. 

  Childcare is provided mostly full-time. 

  Child  related  benefits  are  targeted  at  children  below  2  years  old.  Parents  with 

children from 1.5 to 4 years old need more stable childcare support. 

3.1  Childcare service providers 

In  Latvia,  childcare  historically  is  integrated  within  the  education  system.  The  first 
Education Law (in force from 1991 to 1999) states that preschool education institutions (or 
kindergartens) provide  support to families and promote child's mental, physical and social 
development, intellectual curiosity and health. Children from 1 to 6 years old are covered. 
In  subsequent  editions  of  the  Law  provision  of  preschool  education  is  targeted  at  children 
from 5 to 6 years old (which is probably related to limited capacity and financial means). 

65 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Currently childcare is continued to be provided within preschool educational institutions 
or kindergartens. Children from 1.5 up to 6-7 years old are covered. The mandatory pre-
school  education  starts  at  5-6  years  old,  and  at  7  children  start  basic  education  (primary 
and lower secondary  education combined). The curriculum of the preschool education and 
the implementation depends on child’s age and is regulated by the Guidelines for state pre-
school education (Cabinet of Ministers, 2012).  
Childcare without an educational component is relatively rare. It mainly includes alternative 
childcare  providers  such  as  e.g.  day  care  centres  which  offer  mainly  child-minding  for 
several  hours  a  day.  Private  kindergartens  usually  also  provide  preschool  education  in 
accordance with the curriculum provided in the guidelines. 
Local  authorities  are  responsible  for  the  provision  of  childcare.  According  to  the  General 
Education Law, local governments are obliged to guarantee a place in a public kindergarten 
within the municipality for children aged 5 or more. For children from 1.5 to 4 years old 
municipalities have to ensure equal access to pre-school institutions. 
In 2013, in order to solve the lack of places in the kindergartens, an additional budget of 
EUR  4  600  000  (LVL  3  220  000)  was  allocated  to  improve  the  availability  of  pre-school 
childcare facilities to children above 1.5 years old and up to compulsory school age. Since 
September  2013,  local  governments  co-finance  the  cost  of  the  enrolment  in  private 
childcare facilities for children from 1.5 to 4 years old in case they are registered on the 
waiting list for public kindergarten but can’t get a place. The co-financed amount depends 
on  municipality  and  equals  to  average  cost  per  child  in  public  pre-school  educational 
institution in this municipality.  
Alternative  childcare  providers  remain  relatively  rare  in  Latvia.  In  recent  years,  new 
developments for children below compulsory school age have been put in place: e.g. child 
development centres, day-care centres, child play and development centres, child minding 
centres, child-minding rooms, organized babysitters’ services, play groups, short-term child 
minding, child afternoon centres, baby schools, etc. (State Regional Development Agency, 
2009).  Alternative  childcare  provision  is  very  diverse.  Child  care  can  be  provided  for  the 
whole day or only for several hours, financed by parents or municipality. They could include 
some  ‘educational’  component  or  be  merely  ‘organized  child  minding’.  Overall,  alternative 
childcare provision is usually based on small-scale initiatives with low impact on the society 
as  a  whole.  Main  users  of  alternative  childcare  facilities  are  likely  to  be  children  from 
problematic  families,  low-income  families,  or  children  with  health  or  psychological 
problems. 

3.2  Financing  

Municipalities  are  responsible  for  financing  of  kindergartens.  Different  municipalities  have 
different access to financial resources. This creates disparities in the quality and quantity of 
the provision of childcare facilities.  

In  addition,  during  the  last  years,  financial  support  from  the  European  Regional 
Development  Fund  was  used  for  developing  and  improving  infrastructure  of  preschool 
educational institutions and introducing a variety of alternative childcare facilities. 

3.3  Price  

The cost of public kindergartens is covered by local governments. Parents have to pay for 
the meals and sometimes for some extracurricular activities. These prices are usually quite 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Latvia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

low.  However,  some  low-income  families  may  not  be  able  to  afford  it.  In  these  cases  it 
might be possible to apply for financial support from the municipality (but rules vary across 
municipalities). 

3.4  Quality insurance 

According to the Guidelines for state pre-school education (Cabinet of Ministers, 2012), the 
objectives of pre-school education are: 

 

 

 

 

 

to develop the child's physical abilities; 

to promote development of self-confidence, abilities and interests; 

to develop cognitive abilities and intellectual curiosity by learning and acquiring new 
skills; 

to facilitate communication and cooperation skills; 

to promote a positive attitude of a child towards himself or herself, other people, the 
environment, and the Latvian state; and 

 

to promote safe and healthy lifestyle. 

The  Guidelines  for  state  pre-school  education  also  prescribe  the  content  of  pre-school 
programmes.  The  Cabinet  of  Ministers  sets  requirements  for  professional  qualifications 
of pre-school personnel, their salaries, and maximum workload; and standards with respect 
to hygiene, building and safety requirements.  
The State Department of Education Quality Control provides quality assessment and control 
of ‘educational’ content of pre-school education institutions. It is also in charge of certifying 
and keeping records of private providers of pre-school education. 

High  standards  for  pre-school  institutions  are  frequently  discussed  in  the  context  of 
insufficient  provision  of  pre-school  education  and  childcare.  It  is  claimed  that  high 
standards prevent private firms and individuals from entering the market characterized by 
high  excess  demand.  Some  experts  consider  the  requirements  superfluous,  and  advocate 
simplification.  

In  September  2013,  a  new  regulation  setting  up  softer  criteria  for  private  individuals  and 
companies providing child-care services came in force. The revised criteria are expected to 
give more flexibility to child-care providers, and therefore contribute to solving shortages of 
places in public kindergartens.  However, this raises concerns about child safety and quality 
of services. 

Provision  of  childcare  in  Latvia  is  most  frequently  considered  in  the  context  of  increasing 
labour market participation of parents and improvement of reconciliation of work and family 
life. Therefore, political discussion is mainly focused on increasing the quantity of childcare 
providers. Quality issues get much less attention in the debate. Quality control mechanisms 
are  not  well  developed.  Comparative  information  on  the  quality  standards  and  quality 
assessment across municipalities is scarce.  

67 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

3.5  Design of the childcare 

Childcare in kindergartens is usually provided for a full day. This is partly a historical legacy 
and  a  necessity  as  flexible  work  arrangements  are  not  common.  Figure  2  in  Section  2.1 
shows a split between full-time and part-time childcare in Latvia and in the EU on average. 
Unlike EU average figures, most of the formal childcare provided in Latvia is for 30 hours or 
over. Children spend in kindergartens most of their day-time during working days. However 
in  unusual  hours,  on  weekends,  and  during  summer  breaks,  parents  most  often  have  to 
rely  on  private  childcare  arrangements  (e.g.  a  private  babysitter).  Alternative  childcare 
possibilities still remain relatively rare in Latvia. 

3.6  Complementary measures  

The  Ministry  of  Welfare  is  responsible  for  financial  support  to  families  with  children.  Child 
related  benefits  in  Latvia  are  mainly  targeted  at  children  below  2  years  old.  The  main 
benefits provided by the state are: maternity, paternity, parental and childcare benefits as 
well as family state benefit. 
The duration of maternity leave is 126 calendar days (a maximum of 140 days in special 
circumstances).  Paternity  leave  is  10  calendar  days.  Both  maternity  and  paternity 
benefits are calculated as 80% of the average contribution wage.  

Parental  leave  is  granted  for  a  period  not  exceeding  18  months.  Contributory  parental 
benefit is paid to a mother or a father, but only in case a parent is not working during the 
period of childcare leave. The benefit is calculated at 70% of the average contribution wage 
and is paid until the child turns one year old. 

Parents who are not socially insured are not eligible for contributory maternity, paternity or 
parental benefits. However, they can receive the non-contributory childcare benefit of EUR 
143 (LVL 100) per month from child’s birth till the age of 1.  

After  a  child  turns  1  all  parents  can  claim  a  childcare  benefit  of  EUR  143  (LVL  100)  per 
month until the child turns 1.5 years old; and additional EUR 43 (LVL 30) per month till the 
age of 2. The level of financial support from 1 to 1.5 years was increased in 2013. Before 
this the payment was EUR 43 (LVL 30) per month throughout the second year. 

After  a  child  turns  2  years  old,  the  only  benefit  that  parents  are  eligible  to  receive  is 
universal state family benefit that is paid at a very low level: EUR 11 (LVL 8) per month per 
child.  
Effectively,  benefits  related  to  parental leave  and  childcare  reduce  very  rapidly  during  the 
second  year  of  a  child’s  live.  This  is  usually  when  parents  return  to  work  after  parental 
leave.  However, at present, the lack  of  childcare facilities for children from 1.5 to 6 years 
old is not yet solved. Therefore, parents with small children are a sensitive group needing 
more stable childcare support.  

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Latvia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

REFERENCES 

  Cabinet  of  Ministers  (2012),  Guidelines  for  state  pre-school  education  (Noteikumi  par 
at: 

vadlīnijām). 

Available 

izglītības 

valsts 
http://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=250854 

pirmsskolas 

  Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia: http://www.csb.gov.lv 

  Education  Law  of 

the  Republic  of  Latvia  (in 

force 

from  1991 

to  1999): 

http://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=67960 

  European  Foundation  for  the  Improvement  of  Living  and  Working  Conditions  (2010), 
Second  European  Quality  of  Life  Survey:  Family  life  and  work.  Available  at: 
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2010/02/en/1/EF1002EN.pdf 

  EUROSTAT: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/statistics/themes 

  General Education Law: http://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=20243 

  Latvian Association of Local and Regional Governments (2012), Availability of preschool 
education  institutions  (Par  pirmskolas  izglītības  iestāžu  pieejamību),  communication  to 
at: 
Minister. 
the 
http://www.lm.gov.lv/upload/sabiedribas_lidzdaliba/demografisko_lietu/lpsves_020412
_0420120868.pdf 

Available 

Prime 

  Ministry  of  Economics  (2013),  Progress  report  on  the  implementation  of  the  National 
Reform  Programme  of  Latvia  within  the  “Europe  2020”  strategy,  Riga.  Available  at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/nd/nrp2013_latvia_en.pdf 

  Ministry  of  Welfare  (2011),  Family  policy  guidelines  2011-2017  (Ģimenes  valsts 

politikas pamatnostādnes 2011.–2017.gadam), Riga. 

  Ministry  of  Welfare  (2012),  Availability  of  pre-school  childcare  in  municipalities 
at 

(Pirmsskolas 
http://www.lm.gov.lv/upload/sabiedribas_lidzdaliba/demografisko_lietu/pirmsskolas_dl
p_040412.pdf 

pašvaldībās), 

pieejamība 

Available 

izglītības 

iestāžu 

  Rastrigina O. (2013), Country fiche on gender  equality and policy development: Latvia 

4Q2013, ENEGE. 

  Rastrigina, O. and A. Zasova (2012), The distributional impact of austerity measures in 
Latvia,  Free  Policy  Brief.  Available  at:  http://freepolicybriefs.org/2012/02/06/the-
distributional-impact-of-austerity-measures-in-latvia 

  State  Regional  Development  Agency  (2009),  Development  of  pre-primary  education 
institutions  and  alternative  childcare  services  in  Latvian  regions  (Par  pirmsskolas 
izglītības  iestāžu  un  alternatīvu  bērnu  pieskatīšanas  pakalpojumu  attīstību  Latvijas 
plānošanas reģionos), Riga. 

  Tkacevs, O. (2012), Mid 2009 is a boarder  - budget consolidation begins and economic 
growth resumes (2009. gada vidus kā robeža – sākas konsolidācija, atsākas izaugsme). 
Avaialable  at:  http://www.makroekonomika.lv/print/2009-gada-vidus-ka-robeza-sakas-
konsolidacija-atsakas-izaugsme 

  Vitolins 

(2006),  Demographic  development 

regions 
(Demogrāfiskās  attīstības 
(2006) 
Demographic development in Latvia in the beginning of the 21st century (Demogrāfiskā 
attīstība  Latvijā  21.  gadsimta  sākumā),  Scientific  Research  Articles  3  (9)  /  2006, 
Zinatne. 

the  Latvian 
in  Zvidrins 

tendencies  Latvijas 

reģionos), 

trends 

in 

69 

 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

ANNEX 

Table 1: Demographic developments in Latvia 

Total  
fertility rate 
(1) 

Number  
of live births 
(2) 

Number of 
children age 0-4 
(3) 

Percentage of children 
age 0-4 in total population  
(4) 

Year 

1990 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

 -  

 -  

 -  

1.23 

1.29 

1.24 

1.31 

1.35 

1.41 

1.44 

1.31 

1.17 
1.34b 
 -  

2013 

 -  
Notes: b break in series 

     37,918  

   208,540  

     20,302  

     95,939  

     19,726  

     94,946  

     20,127  

     94,940  

     21,151  

     96,437  

     20,551  

     99,051  

     21,879  

   100,238  

     22,871  

   101,697  

     23,958  

   104,587  

     24,397  

   108,308  

     22,044  

   111,278  

     19,781  

   111,427  

     18,825  

   107,869  

     19,897  

   104,325  

  -   

   101,271  

7.8 

4.0 

4.0 

4.1 

4.2 

4.4 

4.5 

4.6 

4.7 

4.9 

5.1 

5.3 

5.2 

5.1 

5.0 

Source: (1) EUROSTAT, (2) Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN 
UNION: THE MODEL OF SLOVAKIA 
PhDr. Magdalena PISCOVÁ37 
Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia  

Abstract 

Slovakia  belongs  to  the  countries  with  very  low  attendance  of  formal  childcare 
facilities and particularly of pre-school care facilities. The Commission addressed 
recommendations  (CSRs)  within  the  European  Semester  Process  on  the 
employment  of  women  and  on  the  availability  of  childcare  services  to  the 
Slovakian government in 2012 and 2013. While in 2012, the CSR mentioned the 
provision  of  childcare  facilities  in  general,  the  2013  CSR  declared  that  an 
emphasis  should  be  put  on  the  provision  of  childcare  facilities,  particularly  for 
children  below  three  years  old.  Formal  childcare  services  are  still  rarely 
affordable and available and Slovakia is far to achieve the Barcelona objectives.  

LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE 1 

Proportion  of  children 

in  kindergartens 

relative 

to 

children 3-5 (in %) 

the  age  group  of  
77 

LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE 1 

Children under than 3 years in formal care (in%) 

FIGURE 2 

Children over than 3 years in formal care (in%)  

FIGURE 3 

Children attending kindergartens and rejected applications  

76 

77 

78 

37  PhDr,  CSc.  senior  research  fellow  at  the  Institute  of  Sociology,  Slovak  Academy  of  Sciences  in  Bratislava,  in 
2006-2011  director of the institute. Main research topics are family sociology, gender role changes and identity 
issues. Member of European groups of experts in gender equality issues (in the past EGSE, EGGE, EGGSIE) and 
currently of ENEGE. Member of the editorial board of the journal SOCIOLOGIA. Since 2000, national representative 
in the Helsinki group of women in science of the European Commission (DG Research and Innovations). 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

FIGURE 4  

Children attending kindergarten and rejected applications by regions in the school 
79 

year 2012/2013 

FIGURE 5 

Proportion  of  children  of  the  age  group  3-6  years  in  kindergartens  relative  to 
81 

children by household income quartiles 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

KEY FINDINGS 

● 

Barcelona Target 1 – 33% coverage of formal care for children under 3 years is 
hardly to be achieved in Slovakia. The main obstacles are: 

-   Absence of the system of care facilities including the respective legislation and 

supportive mechanism; 

- 

Formal care is not perceived as a preferred form of care. A relevant share of 
women prefers to stay on parental leave up to 3 years of the child even if this is 
related to a low earnings replacement level. 

● 

Barcelona Target 2– 90% coverage children from 3 years to compulsory education in 
formal care is reachable, under the condition that 

-  

-  

the territorial availability of kindergartens is improved to mitigate the 
considerable discrepancies; 

the affordability of kindergartens is increased, particularly for children living in 
low income families. 

A  well-developed  system  of  childcare  facilities  is  an  important  prerequisite  of  women´s 
employment.  Since  long,  the  employment  rate  of  women  in  Slovakia  does  not  reach  the 
average  EU  level.  Extending  the  provision  of  childcare  facilities  becomes  therefore  very 
important. 

The negative impact of parenthood on female employment is significant and nearly tripled 
compared  to  the  average  EU  level.38  The  low  employment  rate  of  women  is  mainly 
significant  in  younger  and  older  age  categories  while  in  the  34-54  age  category,  the 
employment rate even exceeds the EU average level. 

The  analysis  prepared  by  The  financial  policy  institute  of  the  Slovak  Ministry  of  Finances 
evinced that an increase of the employment rate of women to the average EU level would 
bring an increase to Slovakia’s GDP of 1.6%.39 

38 Impact of parenthood is a difference in percentage points between employment rates (age group 20-49) without 
the presence of any children and with the presence of a child aged 0-6. In 2012, the impact of parenthood was in 
Slovakia 31.8 while the EU average level was only 10.7. 
39 Machlica,G.,2011: Ženy by mohli pomôcť  zvýšiť HDP o 1.6%, Financial policy institute, The Ministry of Finance 
of the Slovak Republic, Economic analysis 13/2011, www.finance.gov.sk/ifp  

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

In line with legislation, the public formal childcare for pre-school aged children is usually 
provided  and  managed  by  the  local  authorities.  There  is  a  significant  difference  between 
the  provision  of  childcare  facilities  for  children  below  3  years  and  of  nurseries  and 
kindergartens  for  children  over  3  years  of  age  until  compulsory  school  age..  Local 
authorities  are  not  obliged  by  law  to  provide  nurseries  but  they  are  obliged  to  provide 
kindergartens. The lack of financial  resources on the local level, and particularly in small 
townsk  usually  does  not  allow  municipalities  to  provide  nurseries.  Therefore  public 
nurseries  can  be  found  mainly  in  the  bigger  cities  where  parents  are  potentially  more 
capable  to  cover  the  full  costs  of  the  service.  The  legal  framework  might  also  play  a  role 
because it does not stimulate the creation of public childcare facilities. 

Kindergartens  are  included  in  the  system  of  education  managed  by  regional  authorities. 
The fees paid by parents in public facilities can vary among the regions and in principle the 
fee  is  not  an  income-tested  payment  depending  on  family  income.  Alongside  with  public 
care  facilities,  also  church  related  and  private  providers  exist.  These  facilities  usually 
substitute  the  insufficient  capacity  of  public  facilities.  Considerable  discrepancies  exist 
among  the  regions  with  regard  to  the  availability  of  childcare  facilities.  The  regions  with 
higher  employment  rates  which  experience  higher  demand  for  childcare  facilities  have  to 
deal with the insufficient capacities of childcare facilities and with their low availability. 

This  is  not  the  case  in  regions  with  high  unemployment  rates  and  a  lower  demand  for 
childcare services.  

Alongside  with  public,  private,  and  church  related  facilities,  childcare  services  not 
included in the official network exist and are not  subsidized. These facilities cannot be 
marked  as  “kindergarten”  and  due  to  a  legislative  loophole  they  are  not  subject  to  public 
control  (with  the  exception  of  hygienic  norms).  A  free-trade  license  suffices  to  establish 
such a facility. This type of pre–school facilities mostly fills the gap in childcare provision for 
children below 3 years of age. 

INTRODUCTION 

Historically,  Slovakia  used  to  belong  to  countries  in  which  fertility  rates  approached 
higher  European  levels.  Childcare  for  small  children  was  usually  provided  in  three  ways: 
within the broader family networks (functioning grandmother), through persons performing 
childcare unofficially, and largely by public pre-school childcare facilities, i.e. nurseries and 
kindergartens. The nurseries were available for children as early as of 6 months of age.  

Moreover, facilities providing round-the-clock care on a daily basis (i.e. operating the whole 
week)  were  also  available.  The  state  provided  relatively  high  subsidies  for  childcare 
facilities. A long-term decrease in the number of children attending kindergartens started in 
1986.  This  process  accelerated  at  the  beginning  of  the  90´s  hand  in  hand  with  a  drop  in 
fertility. Even if the drop in fertility was not as radical as in other countries of Central and 
Eastern Europe, in 2001 for the first time ever, the number of deaths exceeded the number 
of births. 

The fertility decrease was accompanied by cuts in the number of  childcare facilities. Since 
2003,  a  slight  increase  in  the  number  of  new  born  children  was  recorded,  followed  since 
2006  with  an  increase  of  the  number  of  children  in  kindergartens.  The  capacities  of 
kindergartens started to increase, too, but the demand keeps exceeding the capacity of the 
existing facilities. Demographical projections expect that the period of growing demand for 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

kindergartens  will  continue  till  2016  40and  then  a  decline  in  the  number  of  children  in 
kindergartens can be expected. 

1  STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS OF CHILDCARE 

KEY FINDINGS 

  The combination of various factors including the very low proportion of female part-
time work has a negative impact of motherhood on female employment in Slovakia.  

  There is a low availability and affordability of child care facilities due to a shortage of 

facilities, particularly in cities. 

  The mostly used form of formal care for children is full-time care. 

  Women are strongly dominant in childcare. 

  There are no paternity leave entitlements in place. 

 

In  the  public,  the  expectation  is  wide-spread  that  the  mother  will  stay  at  home 
during the full available parental leave period (up to three years of child’s age). 

  There is an option to combine work and parental leave. 

1.1  Employment patterns 

The negative impact of motherhood on female employment is not only a result of the lack 
of  formal  childcare  facilities.  It  has  to  be  taken  into  consideration  that  there  is  a 
combination  of  various  circumstances,  for  example  the  fact  that  the  majority  of  women 
work in full-time employment plays an important role. 

Less than 6% of women in Slovakia work part-time which is almost six times below the EU 
average. One of the reasons put forward is a shortage of jobs suitable for part-time work. 
Nevertheless,  findings  from  the  Labour  Force  Survey  (2008)41  confirmed  that  part-time 
work is not a desirable type of work and was seldom considered in Slovakia. What is more, 
part-time work was not perceived as advantageous for the reconciliation of work and family 
life, even among women with small children. Economic reasons are considered to be most 
significant  for  the  low  use  of  part-time  work  -  referring  to  the  broadly  dominant  “two-
breadwinner model”.  

1.2  Childcare culture  

The prevailing full-time work model impacts on the extent of formal care. If children in pre-
school and school age attend care facilities, they stay there mostly for more than 30 hours 
a  week.  The  cultural  background,  including  the  attitudes  towards  formal  care,  plays  an 
important role, particularly in the case of children below 3 years. The “standard” childcare 
pattern expects the mother to make use of the whole maternity and parental leave (up to 

40 Herich,J.(2013): Vývojové tendencie ukazovateľov materských, základných a stredných škôl. Trendová analýza, 
Ústav informácií a prognóz školstva, Bratislava, 29p. 
41 Source: Labour Force Survey 3 / 2008, Statistical Office of SR 

74 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

three years of child’s age), even if this is accompanied by a low earnings replacement level, 
and to return to work only when the child is three years old and can attend a kindergarten. 
Relatively  long  parental  leave  at  the  end  can  prove  more  difficult  for  mothers  when 
returning back to the labour market. 

1.3  Maternity and parental leave  

The  duration  of  maternity  leave  is  now  34  weeks,  37  weeks  for  single  mothers  and  43 
weeks  for  mothers  with  twins  or  more  children).  The  current  level  of  the  maternity 
allowance represents 65% of daily earnings calculated on the basis of the previous year. 
If the maternity allowance is lower than the parental allowance than an additional payment 
is  made  to  make  up  the  difference.    The  ceiling  of  the  maternity  allowance  is  modified 
every  year  and`,  in  2013,  the  ceiling  is  781€  per  month.42  The  period  of  maternity  leave 
counts  as  pensionable  service  and  woman  are  fully  protected  against  termination  of 
employment. 

The  duration  of  parental  leave  is  three  years  and  might  be  spread  over  five  years.  The 
parental  allowance  is  199.60  €  monthly  (249,50  €  in  case  of  twins),  regardless  of  the 
parent’s employed status. Parents on parental leave providing all-day care for a child under 
6  years  can  request  the  social  insurance  agency  to  pay  their  social  contributions,  so  this 
period counts as an insurance period in the old age pension calculations. A working parent 
with a child under 3 years can opt between parental allowance or child care allowance. 
Child care allowance varies between 41.10 € (without an obligation to report costs for care) 
to a maximum of 230 € monthly (parent has an obligation to report real costs of childcare). 

The  entitlement  to  parental  allowance  and  childcare  allowance  is  mutually  exclusive.  To 
make  the  childcare  allowance  more  efficient  and  attractive,  options  of  increasing  the 
amount  and  the  age  limit  are  investigated.43  Also  the  administration  of  the  childcare 
allowance  will  be  simplified.  The  increase  of  the  number  childcare  allowance  recipients 
against  the  number  of  parental  allowance  recipients  can  have  a  positive  influence  on  the 
state  budget,  because  childcare  allowance  is  not  paid  from  the  state  budget  as  parental 
allowance but from the European Social Fund. 

Although  there  is  a  possibility  for  the  family  to  choose  the  carer  amid  the  parents,  only  a 
minimum  of  fathers  use  the  option  to  stay  on  parental  leave.  In  2011  only  1%  of 
recipients were men. Paternity leave has not yet been introduced in Slovakia.   

42 The increase of maternity allowance up to 65% of daily assessment base planned as a step towards the aim of 
achieving a daily reimbursement at 100% of daily assessment base. Having regard to the need to consolidate the 
public finances, the government has announced a revision and postponement of this aim.  
43 National Reform Programme 2013, p.38 

75 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2  THE STRUCTURE OF PRE-SCHOOL FACILITIES 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Providers of pre-school facilities are local authorities, private entities, and churches. 

  A majority of children (more than 95%) attend public kindergartens. 

  As  there  is  no  legal  obligation  to  provide  childcare  facilities  for  children  under  3 
years  of  age,  municipalities  have  no  motivation  to  provide  nurseries.  However,  a 
new legislation will be prepared.  

  The attendance  of children under 3 years in formal care is extremely low (1-3% of 

children). 

  Formal  care  for  children  over  3  years  is  significantly  higher  but  far  below  the 
respective Barcelona target. Attendance of pre-school education is not compulsory.  

  There  is  a  lack  of  capacities  in  kindergartens  that  have  a  preference  for  older 

children. The number of rejected applications is increasing. 

  There are significant discrepancies in capacities among the regions. 

  Correlation  between  childcare  capacities  and  employment  levels  in  a  region  can  be 

observed. 

2.1  Providers of pre-school care facilities 

1.1.1. 

Care for children under 3 years of age 

Providers of pre-school care facilities are local authorities which are responsible by law for 
the provision of kindergartens. Kindergartens are included in the system of education and 
are  therefore  regulated  by  the  Ministry  of  Education,  Science,  Research  and  Sport 
(hereinafter MESRS of SR). 

Formal care for children below 3 years is different and suffers from a lack of legislation. At 
present there is no authority on the national level which is responsible for care facilities for 
children below 3 years and there are no nation-wide quality standards for formal childcare 
facilities.44 

44  In  the  past  were  nurseries  included  in  the  system  of  medical  facilities  and  main  responsible  authority  was 
Ministry  of  health.  At  present  nurseries  formally  belong  to  the  agenda  of  Ministry  of  Labour,  Social  affairs  and 
Family.  

76 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 1: Children under 3 years in formal care (in%) 

Source: 
table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tps00185 (data for care 1-29 hours in 2008 are not available)  

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab= 

database 

Eurostat 

2013, 

As  shown  in  figure  1,  a  majority  of  children  under  3  years  is  not  in  formal  care  (in  2011 
96%)  and  only  a  small  fraction  (4%)  attends  formal  care  facilities.  One  of  the  main 
challenges  to  reverse  this  trend is  to  enact  legislation  on  formal  care  for  children  under  3 
years. The Action plan of The National Reform Programme 2013 (NRP) defined the task to 
prepare a legislation relating children care facilities (nurseries).  Today, it can be said that 
The  Ministry  of  Labour,  Social  Affairs  and  Family  (hereinafter  MLSAaF  of  SR)  plans  to 
prepare not only a new legislation but also the concrete measures and mechanism that will 
be linked with the new operational programmes. 

1.1.2. 

Care for children over three years until mandatory school age 

The  formal  care  facilities  for  children  over  3  years  until  compulsory  education  can  be 
provided  by  municipal  bodies,  churches  or  private  entities.  Dominant  is  the  share  of 
children  in  public  kindergartens  of  municipalities.  In  2012,  95.6%  of  children  attended 
public kindergartens, 2.3% church kindergartens, and 2.1% private kindergartens.  

Kindergartens  are  subsidized  via income  tax  transfers  from  the  national to  the  local level. 
The fees paid by parents can vary in different regions as the subsidies are not the same in 
all  regions  as  they  also  depend  from  the  number  of  children  from  families  in  social  need 
attending the facility.  

The  final  fee  consists  of  the  cost  for  education  and  the  costs  for  boarding.  The  parents  of 
children attending kindergarten in the last year prior the school attendance do not pay any 
fee  for  education,  only  for  boarding.  The  parents  of  children  coming  from  low-income 
families and therefore in a situation of “material need” do not pay any fee for education and 
the costs for boarding be called rather symbolic.  

77 

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%2005200620072008200920102011Years341223301110197959898979796care more than 30hours weeklycare 1-29 hours weekly no formal care33 % 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 2: Children over 3 years in formal care (in %)  

Source: Eurostat database 2013, 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tps00185 

Compared to Figure 1, the situation is different. Formal care is the dominant form of care 
and covers about 75% of all children in this age group. More than 60% of children attend a 
facility  for  more  than  30  hours  a  week.  The  prevailing  full-time  attendance  of  childcare 
facility  and  low  half-day  attendance  reflects  the  prevailing  full-time  work  model  of  the 
majority of employed women. Even if Slovakia does not meet the Barcelona target of 90% 
for children over 3 years, the difference compared to EU average is not as huge as it is in 
the case of the youngest children.  

Table  1:  Proportion  of  children  in  kindergartens  relative  to  the  age  group  of 
children 3-5 (in %) 

2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012 
86 

87 

86 

90 

86 

89 

91 

93 

91 

92 

87 

87 

86 

Source: Herich, J. (2013): Vývojové tendencie  ukazovateľov materských, základných a stredných škôl. Trendová 
analáza, Ústav informácií a prognóz školstva, Bratislava, p.10  

Since  2000,  a  significant  change  in  the  attendance  of  kindergartens  was  recorded.  The 
highest level of attendance was reached in 2006. Along with the decrease of the proportion 
of children in kindergarten, changes in the age structure of children can be observed. The 
usual  admission  age  for  public  kindergartens  is  three  years  but  it  is  possible  to  make  an 
exception  and  admit  also  two  year  old  children.  This  is,  however,  possible  only  in  regions 
with sufficient capacities in childcare facilities. 

Since  2005,  a  significant  decrease  in  the  share  of  the  youngest  children  in  the 
kindergartens was recorded from 20.6% to 7.8% in 2010. The trend reversed in 2011 and 
2012  when  a  slight  increase  of  the  share  of  the  youngest  children  is  witnessed.  In  the 
school  year  of  2012  /  2013  attended  kindergartens  11.5%  of  children  of  below  3  years, 

78 

01020304050607080901002005200620072008200920102011Years332724402428251010671381357636953636462no formal carecare 1-29 hours weeklycare more than 30hours weekly90 % 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

61.1%  of  children    3  years  old,  73.3%  of  children  4  years  old,  80.8%  of  children  5  years 
old  and  36.4%  of  children  6  years  and  older.45  The  age  structure  of  children  in 
kindergartens  is  influenced  by  the  fact,  that  priority  is  given  to  older  children  as  they 
should be included in the process of pre-primary education and many applications have to 
be  rejected  due  to  insufficient  capacity  of  the  facilities.  The  continual  increase  of  rejected 
applications is apparent since 2006. 

Figure 3: Children attending kindergartens and rejected applications  

Source: Štatistická ročenka školstva, ÚIPŠ, Bratislava  

The number of rejected applications by regions clearly shows significant regional disparities 
in  demand  for  kindergartens.  The  biggest  difference  can  be  found  between  the  Bratislava 
region and the rest of Slovakia. The number of rejected applications in the Bratislava region 
(the highest demand) compared to the Banska Bystrica region (the lowest demand) is nine 
times  higher.  This  is  not  only  due  to  the  high demand  for  kindergartens  in  Bratislava  city 
but  also  due  to  the  high  demand  in  surrounding  village  settlements  of  Bratislava  with  an 
acute shortage of childcare facilities. In these areas, a high proportion of the population has 
small children and commutes for work every day to Bratislava city.  

45  Správa o stave školstva na Slovensku a o systémových krokoch na podporu jeho ďalšieho rozvoja. Príloha č.1. 
Popis  a  analýza  hlavných  problémov  regionálneho  školstva,  (September  2013),  Bratislava,  p.14    available  at: 
https://www.minedu.sk/data/att/5252.pdf 

79 

01000200030004000500060007000800090000200004000060000800001000001200001400001600002000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012YearsChildren in kindergartensrejected applications 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 4: Children attending kindergarten  and  rejected applications by regions  in 
the school year 2012/2013 

Source: Štatistická ročenka školstva, ÚIPŠ, Bratislava  

The  education  in  public  kindergartens  is  implemented  in  compliance  with  the  “State 
educational  programme  for  kindergartens  (ISCED  0)  prepared  by  the  MESRaS  of  SR  that 
came into force in 2008. This programme is obligatory not only for public facilities but also 
for private and church facilities included in the official network of pre-school facilities. The 
educational programme is the high level curricula document and defines common aims and 
requirements for all children attending kindergartens. The functioning of the kindergarten is 
under supervision of school inspectors.  

2.2  Roma minority children pre-school education 

KEY FINDINGS 

  There are special programmes for Roma children. Many barriers to their attendance 
have  been  identified:  the  distance  between  the  settlement  and  the  kindergarten, 
financial  aspect,  unwillingness  and  objections  of  non-Roma  parents  and  distrust  of 
Roma parents against pre-school facilities including the language barrier and lack of 
interest. 

A special issue is the problem of pre-school education of Roma children. The share of Roma 
children  in  kindergartens  in  Slovakia  is  very  low.  According  to  the  research  outcomes 
carried  out  by  the  World  Bank,  UNDP  and  the  European  Commission,  in  the  communities 

80 

050010001500200025003000350040000500010000150002000025000BratislavaregionTrnavaregionTrenčínregionNitraregionŽilinaregionBanskáBystricaregionPrešovregionKošiceregionchildren attending kindergartenrejected applications 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

with  a  high  proportion  of  Roma  in  the  population,  only  28%  of  children  aged  3-6  attend 
kindergartens.46 

The  lowest  share  of  pre-school  training  is  among  the  children  living  in  separated  and 
segregated settlements. The report summaries the following main obstacles:47 shortage of 
pre-school capacities, the distance between the settlement and  the  kindergarten,  financial 
aspects  (mainly  additional  costs,  boarding  is  usually  free),  unwillingness  to  accept  Roma 
children in kindergartens because of objections of non-Roma parents, biases and distrust of 
Roma  parents  against  pre-school  facilities  including  the  language  barrier  and  a  lack  of 
interest.  

There  are  several  projects  tackling  the  low  inclusion  of  Roma  children  in  kindergartens, 
among which the national project “Inclusive model  of education  at pre-primary level 
of the schooling system”. Priority is given to enhancing the competencies of pedagogical 
professionals  participating  in  pre-primary  education  and  increasing  the  chances  of  Roma 
children  through  social  inclusion.  The  majority  of  kindergartens  involved  in  the  national 
project  are  located  in  East  Slovakia  where  the  share  of  the  Roma  population  is  the 
highest.48  Another  project  focused  on  Roma  population  is  the  project  “Training  of 
pedagogical  employees  towards  inclusion  of  marginalized  Roma  communities”, 
testing  a  model  of  full-day  schooling.  The  first  phase  was  completed  and  the  second  one 
will  end in  2014.  Its  aim  is  to  relieve  the  parents  from  the  burden  of  assisting  children in 
their preparation for school classes and intensifies the education of children from a socially 
disadvantaged environment  

Despite  many  projects  carried  out  in  previous  years,  no  significant  progress  in  pre-
school attendance of Roma children can be observed. In the last period, we can mention as 
promising  the  mobile  “container  kindergartens”  applied  in  some  localities  with  high 
proportion of Roma children.  

The low proportion of children from low income families in kindergartens is shown in Figure 
5 referring to the distribution of children according to the income quartiles of households.  

46  In:  Korčeková,V.:  Rómske  deti  do  materských  škôl:  kde  začat?  Zhrnutie  aktuálnych  poznatkov  pre  tvorcov 
politík. SGI, Bratislava júl 2013. 1p. 
47 Ibid ,p.2-3 
48 Source: http://www.npmrk2.sk/ 

81 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure  5:  Proportion  of  children  of  the  age  group  3-6  years  in  kindergartens 
relative to children by household income quartiles 

Source: SILC2010, cited from Šiškovič, M.(2012): Slovenské škôlky: málo kapacít a nižšia účasť sociálne slabších 
rodín, 18/2012, Inštitút finančnej politiky MF SR, Bratislava    

3  POLICY MEASURES 

KEY FINDINGS 

 

In  Slovakia,  the  discussion  on  pre-school  education,  whether  it  should  be 
compulsory or not, is ongoing. 

  Enlargement of the capacities of the existing kindergartens is foreseen by increasing 
the  number  of  children  in  classes  and  adapting  suitable  premises  to  be  used  or  to 
put in place mobile forms of kindergartens (containers). 

 

It  is  considered  to  shorten  the  time  spent  in  the  child  care  facility  to  half  a  day 
which  could  help  to  increase  the  capacity  of  kindergartens  and  to  lower  the 
expenditures for boarding. 

Kindergartens  provide  pre-school  education  for  5  years  old  children.  The  pre-school 
education  is  not  compulsory  by  law  but  is  highly  recommended.  The  pro  and  contra 
issue, 
compulsory  pre-school  education  discussion  became  an 
particularly  in  respect  to  the  marginalised  Roma  minority.  The  enactment  of  mandatory 
pre-school education has been planned or declared already for a couple of years by various 
political representatives but has not been realized yet. 

important  political 

In  relation  to  the  low  enrolment  of  children  in  kindergartens,  the  National  Reform 
Programme in the framework of the European Semester process  2013 declared the need 
to adopt system-level measures to achieve a 95% attendance of children over 4 in the pre-
primary  education  in  kindergartens  by  2020.  The  measures  proposed  in  the  NRP  include 
enlarging the capacities of the existing kindergartens by increasing the number of children 

82 

65,5066,0066,5067,0067,5068,0068,5069,0069,501 Quartile2 Quartile3 Quartile4 Quartile 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

in  classes,  or  by  adapting  suitable  premises  to  be  used  as  kindergarten  classes.  The 
kindergartens  directors  are  encouraged  to  increase  the  maximal  number  of  children  in 
classes if necessary as well as the total capacity of the kindergarten (see note 2). 

The  report  on  the  state  of  education  in  Slovakia  for  public  discussion”  (Správa  o  stave 
školstva  na  Slovensku  na  verejnú  diskusiu)  has  been  published  in  April  2013  by  the 
MESRaS  SR  and  modified  after  interdepartmental  discussion  in  September  2013.  The 
document  discusses  in  detail  the  general  trends  in  education  in  Slovakia  including  pre-
primary  education.  The  document  also  reflects  the  problems  of  low  accessibility  and 
affordability of pre-school facilities and the low enrolment of children in kindergartens. The 
document  drafted  possible  solutions  to  tackle  these  issues.  Discussed  was  also  the 
proposal to shorten the time spent in the child care facility to half a day which could help to 
increase  the  capacity  of  kindergartens  and  to  lower  the  expenditures  for  boarding,  which 
are  very  high  and  exceed  the  financial  capability  of  the  municipalities  and  of  the  parents 
too.49  In  the  document  is  not  specified  the  possible  target  group  of  children  in  a  half  day 
care,  but  it  might  be  addressed  to  the  group  of  children  they  have  (both)  parents 
unemployed.  The  document  raised  a  very  intensive  and  dissenting  discussion.  The  main 
objections  focused  on  the  fact  that  the  report  does  not  include  mechanisms  and  financial 
sources necessary for implementing the proposed measures.  

49 Správa o stave školstva na Slovensku a o systémových krokoch na podporu jeho ďalšieho rozvoja, na verejnú 
diskusiu, Ministerstvo školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu, p.40 available:  
http://www.rokovania.sk/Rokovanie.aspx/BodRokovania Detail?idMaterial=22297 

83 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

REFERENCES 

  European  Commission  (2013),  Barcelona  objectives :  The  development  of  childcare 
facilities  for  young  children  in  Europe  with  a  view  to  sustainable  and  inclusive  growth, 
Brussels, 
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-
equality/files/documents/130531_barcelona_en.pdf 

available 

at: 

  Herich, J.(2013): Vývojové tendencie ukazovateľov materských, základných a stredných 
škôl.  Trendová  analýza,  Ústav  informácií  a  prognóz  školstva,  Bratislava,  29p.  available 
at: 
http://www.uips.sk/sub/uips.sk/images/JH/vyvoj_ukazovatelov_m___z__a_s_13.pdf 

  Korčeková,V. (2013) : Rómske deti do materských škôl: kde začat? Zhrnutie aktuálnych 

poznatkov pre tvorcov politík. SGI, Bratislava  

  Kusá,  Z.,  Tížik,  M.  eds.(2009):  Výskum  európskych  hodnôt  1991-1999-2008, 

Sociologický ústav SAV,Bratislava, 202p 

  Machlica,  G.:  Ženy  by  mohli  pomôcť  zvýšiť  HDP,  Inštitút  finančnej  politiky  MF  SR, 

13/2011, Bratislava, available at: www.finance.gov.sk/ifp 

  Platenga,  J.,  Remery,  Ch.  (eds)  (2009),  The  provision  of  childcare  services.  A 
comparative review of 30 European countries, European Commission’s Expert Group on 
Gender  and  Employment  Issues  (EGGE),  Directorate-General  for  Employment,  Social 
Affairs and Equal opportunities G1 Unit 2009, 92p. 

  Piscová,  M.,Bausová,M.,Zeman.M.(2004):  ISSP:  Rodina  a  rod  2002,  I.  časť, 

Sociologický ústav SAV,Bratislava, 79p. 

  Správa  o  stave  školstva  na  Slovensku  a  o  systémových  krokoch  na  podporu  jeho 
ďalšieho  rozvoja, Príloha č.1, Popis vývoja a analýza hlavných problémov  regionálneho 
školstva, 
at: 
https://www.minedu.sk/data/att/5252.pdf 

September 

available 

MŠMaŠ 

2013, 

142p, 

SR, 

  Šiškovič,  M.(2012):  Slovenské  škôlky:  málo  kapacít  a  nižšia  účasť  sociálne  slabších 
finančnej  politiky  MF  SR,  Bratislava,  available  at: 

Inštitút 

rodín,  18/2012, 
www.finance.gov.sk/ifp 

84 

 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

ANNEX 

Cited from: Barcelona objectives : The development of childcare facilities for young 
children in Europe with a view to sustainable and inclusive growth, p.7 

Cited  from:  Barcelona  objectives:  The  development  of  childcare  facilities  for  young 
children in Europe with a view to sustainable and inclusive growth, p.9 

85 

 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

NOTES 

(1) The  traditional  model  of  mother  taking  care  for  a  small  child  is  deeply  rooted  in 
Slovakia.  However, data from representative comparative  surveys carried  out in last 
years  indicate  a  slight  shift  in  the  attitudes  referring  to  family  patterns  and  values. 
The  affirmative  answers  in  European  Value  Survey  carried  out  in  1991,  1999  and 
2008 (©European Value Survey, Institute of Sociology) to the question “A pre-school 
child is likely to suffer if his or her mother works “ had the following distribution:  

Source: European Value Survey 1991, 1999, 2008, Institute for Sociology SAS 

86 

 Year 199120.3047.9025.401.405.00strongly agreerather agreerather disagreestronglydisagreedon´t knowYear 199917.5043.0028.307.104.10strongly agreerather agreerather disagreestronglydisagreedon´t knowYear 200812.8025.2035.5019.507.00strongly agreerather agreerather disagreestronglydisagreedon´t know 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of Slovakia 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The  shift in attitudes between 1999 and 2008 is significant and indicates  a tendency to not 
perceiving  mother’s  work  as  a  cause  of  suffering  of  small  children.  The  outcomes  from 
another comparative research “International Social Survey” carried out in 2002 and in 2012  
(©ISSP,  Institute for Sociology) confirmed also  a notable decrease in the attitudes refusing 
mother’s full time work. With the statement “Family life suffers when the woman has a full-
time  job”  strongly  agreed  +  agreed  52.9%  respondents  in  2002  and  38.1%  respondents  in 
2012.  

These  data  also  indicate  a  shift in  attitudes  toward  mother´s  full  time  employment.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  opposite  attitude  (strongly  not  agree+  not  agree)  is  still  not  prevailing, 
because one in five respondents (i.e. more than 20%) did not have an opinion on the issue. 

(2) Since September 2013, directors of kindergartens are allowed to increase the number of 
children  in  the  classroom  by  3  more  children  over  the  standard.  The  standard  is  the 
following:   

20 children aged 3-4 years in a classroom 
21 children aged 4-5 years in a classroom 
22 children aged 5-6 years in a classroom 
21 children aged 3-6 years in a classroom 

87 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PUBLIC CHILDCARE SERVICES IN THE EUROPEAN 
UNION: THE MODEL OF FRANCE 
Olivier THÉVENON50  
Institut national d’études démographiques, Paris, France 

Abstract 

At  1.1%  of  GDP,  expenditures  on  childcare  services  for  children  under  school 
age  are  comparatively  high  in  France.  There  is  a  wide  and  diversified  range  of 
childcare  providers  offering  all  kinds  of  services,  both  individual  and  collective. 
Regarding  outcomes,  fertility  is  very  high  in  France  and  female  employment 
rates  among  the  highest  in  Europe.  However,  further  development  of  childcare 
services is required to meet increasing needs due the diversification of families 
and working lives. 

LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE 1 

Public expenditures for families 

FIGURE 2 

Distribution of expenditures on childcare centres by main payers 

FIGURE 3 

High fertility and female activity rates in France 

FIGURE 4 

Childcare supply in France (1995-2010) 

FIGURE 5 

Average enrolment rate of children aged under 3 in formal childcare 

FIGURE 6 

91 

91 

94 

96 

99 

Average  enrolment  rate  of  children  aged  3  to  5  in  pres-school  educational 
99 

programs 

50  Researcher  at  INED  (the  French  Institute  for  Demographic  Research).  Research  interests  cover  family  and 
employment  policies,  in  relation  to  family,  fertility,  labour market  and effects on  children.  Worked  for  the  OECD 
(social  policy  division),  and  contributed  to  the  development  of  the  OECD  family  database  and  to  the  following 
OECD publications: Babies and Bosses; Doing Better for Families; and Closing the Gender Gap. Before joining the 
INED,  he  was  project  manager  at  the  research  department  of  the  French  Ministry  of  Social  affairs,  supervising 
programs  on  the  comparison  of  employment  and  social  protection  systems.  His  publications  are  available on  his 
personal website http://olivierthevenon.site.ined.fr/en/. 

88 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

FIGURE 7 

Regional  variation  in  the  coverage  of  formal  childcare  services  for  children  
10101 

under 3 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Background 

With 4% of GDP  spent  on families, public investment in families with children is relatively 
high in France compared with other European countries. Expenditures on childcare services 
for  children  under  school  age  are  also  comparatively  high  at  1.1%  of  GDP,  with  central 
government and municipalities being the main payers. A reduction in total expenditures for 
families  has  been  decided  since  the  onset  of  the  economic  recession  but  investments  to 
foster the supply of childcare services have increased.   

Aim 

The aim of the present study is to provide a comprehensive overview of childcare policies in 
France and key outcomes related to the Barcelona targets. Strengths and weaknesses of 
the French childcare policy are also discussed as well as the options currently on the table 
to improve the efficiency of childcare provision. 

Since  the  mid-1980s,  the  objective  of  childcare  policies  has  evolved  from  an  emphasis  on 
increased  fertility  and  financial  support  for  (large)  families  to  offset  child-rearing  costs 
towards  a  focus  on  reconciling  work  and  family  life.  Recent  reforms  aim  at  addressing 
more fully the diverse needs of families, including those with a disadvantaged background.  

With  regard  to  outcomes,  fertility  is  very  high  in  France,  and  female  employment  rates 
among  the  highest  in  Europe.  However,  further  development  of  childcare  services  is 
required to meet the increasing needs due to high fertility and the diversification of families 
and working lives. 

There is a wide and diversified range of childcare providers in France offering all kinds of 
services  from  individual  (home-based)  to  collective  (centre-based).  The  governance  of 
childcare availability and quality involves various actors, from municipalities to the central 
government.  Reforms  of  the  governance  structure  were  carried  out  to  encourage  the 
diversification  of  services  (i.e.  to  encourage  the  development  of  services  to  parents  with 
non-standard  working  hours,  to  facilitate  access  for  poor  and/or  migrant  families,  or  to 
develop  services  for  children  with  disabilities  or  severe  illness).  Recent  developments  of 
childcare  service  supply  have  consisted  first  and  foremost  in  increasing  the  number  of 
child-minders. 

With  48%  of  children  under  3  receiving  formal  care,  France  has  surpassed  the  Barcelona 
objective  by  almost  15%.  Average  weekly  hours  of  attendance  (31  hours)  are  also 
comparatively  high  and  above  the  30  hours  threshold.  However,  childcare  arrangements 
are  highly  stratified  by  the  labour  market  status  of  parents  and  household  income  level. 
Regional  disparities  also  remain  very  large  as  the  result  of  differences  in  population 
composition and in municipal policies. 
Key  challenges  for  childcare  policy  are  to  ensure  that  the  increase  in  childcare  availability 
(including  out-of-school  care)  takes  account  of  possible  future  reforms  of  parental  leave, 

89 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

and  to  increase  the  supply  of  services  for  parents  with  non-standard  working  patterns. 
Reducing  inequalities  in  the  costs  to  families,  for  use  of  public  centre-based  services  or 
home-based  child-minders  especially,  is  another  option  under  discussion.  Addressing 
children  with  “specific”  needs  would  also  call  for  adaptation  of  child-minder  training 
schemes. 

1  POLICY FRAME AND KEY OUTCOMES 

KEY FINDINGS 

  With  4 %  of  GDP  spent  on  families,  public  investment  in  families  with  children  is 

relatively high in France compared with other European countries. 

  Expenditures  on  childcare  services  for  children  under  school  age  are  also 
comparatively  high,  at  1.1%  of  GDP,  with  the  central  government  and 
municipalities bearing most of the expenditure.  

  A reduction in the total expenditures for families has been decided since the onset of 
the recession but investments to foster the supply of childcare services have 
been increased.  

  The  objective  of  policies  has  evolved  since  the  mid-1980s  from  an  emphasis  on 
increased  fertility  and  financial  support  for  (large)  families  to  offset  child-rearing 
costs towards a focus on reconciling work and family life.  

  Recent  reforms  aim  at  addressing  more  fully  the  diverse  needs  of  families, 

including those with a disadvantaged background.  

  The fertility rate is very high in France and female employment rates are among the 
highest in Europe. However, further development of childcare services is required to 
meet  the  increasing  needs  due  to  high  fertility  and  to  the  diversification  of 
family and working lives. 

1.1  High investment for families in France 

Family policy has a long history in France and has traditionally been a political issue at the 
crossroads of many concerns. Public investment in families with children is relatively 
high  in  France  compared  with  other  European  countries.  France  even  had  the  highest 
scores  in  2009,  with  about  4%  of  GDP  spent  in  family  benefits,  cash  payments,  spending 
on services and tax breaks for families, compared to an average of 2.96% in the OECD51. 

51 4% of GDP is actually the percentage obtained when considering the core measures of family policies. When all 
family-related rights and supplements are included (such as, for example, those in the pension system), estimates 
of total spending for families are closer to 6% of GDP (HCF, 2011).   

90 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 1: Public expenditures for families (in % of GDP) 

Source: OECD Family Database – 2013. 
In  this  context,  expenditures  in  childcare  and  early  education  services  stand  at  a 
relatively  high  level  in  percentage  of  GDP:  1.1%  of  GDP  compared  to  the  OECD 
average  of  0.7%.  The  government  and  CNAF,  along  with  the  municipalities,  are  the  main 
payers of public childcare centres (Figure 2). However, the contribution of private firms has 
increased sharply over the past decade, from 3% in the early 2000s to 9% in 2008-2009. 

Figure 2: Distribution of expenditures on childcare centres by main payers – 
2008-2012. 

Source: Haut Conseil de la Famille (2013b) 

Expenditures  for  families  have  been  impacted  by  the  on-going  economic  recession,  in  a 
sequence of two steps. Family and tax policy measures were first used to smooth the effect 
of  the  recession:  the  tax  bill  was  reduced  for  low  income  families  in  2009  and  an 
exceptional bonus of €150 was granted to families with school-aged children. 

More  recently,  family  policy  has  been  included  in  the  austerity  package  with  the  objective 
of reducing expenditures by €2.14 billion by 2016 – so that the branch will no longer be in 
deficit.  This  was  decided  together  with  a  reallocation  of  spending  from  in-cash  to  in-kind 
support. In this perspective, the government decided in June 2013: 

91 

0,00,51,01,52,02,53,03,54,04,5Tax breaks towards familiesServicesCashOECD-33 average =2.6%31%33%9%7%4%16%CAFMunicipalitiesPrivate firmsDépartementsNational StateOthers 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

  A  reduction  of  the  fiscal  advantage  (the  Quotient  Familial)  benefiting  families 

with children.  

  PAJE  payments  supporting  childcare  are  also  reduced,  but  means-tested 

family supplements are increased. 

 

In  contrast,  the  investment  in  childcare  places  is    to  be  increased,  with  the 
objective  of  creating  275,000  new  places  in  5  years  for  children  under  age  3 
(including places in “crèches”, , with child-minders and in preschools). 

1.2  “Work  and  family  life  reconciliation”:  an  objective  driving 

childcare policy 

Family policies in France are the result of a longstanding historical process which has led to 
a compromise between various political ideologies and objectives. This compromise remains 
rooted  in  a  dual  historical  tradition.  Family policy  began  with the  protection  of  children 
and  assistance  to  children  of  deprived  families  and  was  complemented  later  by  the  new 
post-World War II framework for social protection which made a point of safeguarding the 
incomes  of  families  with  children  (large  families  especially)  (Damon,  2006).  The  issue  of 
fertility is also a traditionally underlying concern but in the past decade it has been partly 
reshaped  by  the  issue  of  reconciling  the  work-life  balance.  As  a  consequence  of  these 
developments, current family policy is a compromise between different objectives and 
has inevitably become somewhat ambiguous (Thévenon, 2006). 

Four main periods can be distinguished broadly with regard to childcare policy (Thévenon, 
2010; Vanovermeir, 2012; Borderies, 2013; Saint-Paul, 2013): 

1. 

2. 

3. 

Before  the  1970s:  policy  encouraged  the  male  breadwinner  model  with  inactive 
women (through tax cuts for families and a ‘single wage allowance’ – from 1946 to 
1972 - for households with a single wage earner). 

During  the  1970s  and  1980s:  policies  became  progressively  more  favourable  to 
mothers’  labour  market  participation  (with  the  progressive  abolition  of  the  ‘single 
wage  allowance’  in  1972,  the  introduction  of  a  ‘childcare  allowance’  for  households 
with  a  working  mother,  and  the  development  of  public  childcare  services  in  the 
1980s). However,  a ‘parental education allowance’ was also introduced in 1985 for 
women leaving employment to care for their child in families with three children and 
more. This allowance reserved solely for large families was unique in Europe. 

In the 1990s: policies promoted the diversification of childcare with the development 
of  public  ‘collective’  and  ‘individual’  home-based  services.  Parents  employing  a 
registered  child-minder  at  home  or  at  the  child-minder’s  home  received  an 
allowance covering the payment of social contributions for their employee; childcare 
costs could also be deducted from taxable income. However, at the same time, the 
‘parental education allowance’ was extended to mothers with two children in 1994, 
and with 1 child in 2004 (but for 6 months only), maintaining a dualism in childcare 
policies with unequal effects across households. 

4. 

From  the  mid-2000s  onwards,  more  emphasis  was  placed  on  the  diverse  needs  of 
families: 

o 

The development of services for working parents with non-standard hours 
was set as a main supply-side objective.  

92 

 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

o 

o 

Specific centres with medical and social assistance have been developed since 
1976  and  services  for  families  with  children  with  disabilities  or  severe 
illness have been fostered further. 

low 

the  needs  of 

families  and  children  with 
income 
Meeting 
disadvantaged  backgrounds  (especially  children  of  poor  families  and/or  of 
migrant  families)  is  also  re-affirmed  as  a  key  priority  of  action.  In  this 
perspective,  the  2006  law  set  the  objective  of  increasing  the  accessibility  of 
childcare  services  for  families  receiving  social  assistance  –  with  an  obligation 
for municipalities to provide childcare places to children of these  families who 
are  not  in  school.  A  minimum  target  of  1  in  20  childcare  places  should  be 
reserved  for  these  children.  Priority  to  children  with  parents  in  a  process  of 
social inclusion (receiving benefits or not) was reaffirmed by the 2009 law on 
social assistance. Finally, the 2012 conference on poverty set the objective of 
delivering  more  childcare  places  for  children  from  poor  families,  who  are 
expected to represent at least 10% of all children in collective centres.  

In  this  context,  childcare  policies  are  expected  to  provide  parents  with  “freedom  of 
choice” between (i) work and care, on the one hand, and (ii) among different types 
of  childcare  providers  (public  childcare,  child-minders’  care,  at-home  care…),  on  the 
other. Children now have access to childcare services and preschool from a very young age 
(from  age  of  3  months)  and  this  early  access  is  expected  to  benefit  the  development  of 
children, their school achievement and to help parents balance work and family life. 

Besides,  the  development  of  childcare  services  is  expected  to  be  positive  for  female 
employment  and  child  well-being.  Increased  provision  of  services  is  expected  to  support 
mothers’  participation  in  the  labour  market,  thereby  fostering  gender  equality.  At  the 
same  time,  the  large-scale  provision  of  high  quality  childcare  is  aimed  at  ensuring  child 
safety,  health  and  well-being,  by  focusing  on early  education,  socialisation,  and  cognitive 
development,  thereby  enhancing  equal  opportunities  for  children  and  contributing  to 
prevention of social exclusion. 

1.3  Key results 

Family policies are often described as key components of the relative success of France in 
reconciling  work  and  family.  Thus,  compared  to  other  European  countries,  France  shows 
high fertility rates combined with quite high rates of female employment (Figure 3) 
which  are  due  mainly  to  the  fact  that  full-time  employment  remains  dominant  even  when 
women  have  one  child.  By  contrast,  employment  rates  are  much  lower  –  and  not 
significantly  higher  than  the  OECD  average  –  for  women  with  two  and  especially  three 
children  (Thévenon,  2011).  For  this  reason,  maternal  employment  rates  (74%  for  women 
with  children  under  age  15  in  2009)  are  still  lower  in  France  than,  for  example,  in  the 
Nordic  countries  (84  %  in  Denmark,  80%  in  Sweden).  Labour  market  participation  of 
women  is  also  much  lower  for  all  mothers  with  a  child  under  the  age  of  3  (59%  in  2009) 
than,  for  instance  in  Sweden  (72%)  and  Denmark  (71%),  but  while  women  on  parental 
leave are counted as in employment in Nordic countries, this is not the case in France. 

93 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 3: Fertility and female activity rates in selected Member States and the EU 

Fertility rate - 2011 

Source: OECD Family Database – 2013. 

The  dynamism  of  fertility  places  childcare  policies  under  pressure.  For  example 
47,000  additional  places  in  childcare  services  were  created  between  1998  and  2006, 
whereas the number of live births increased by 61,000 each year. 

Child  poverty  also  raises  concerns  about  the  needs  to  help  parents  combine  work  and 
family.  Thus,  at  19.6%  of  children  under  age  18  in  2010,  child  poverty  rates  are  not 
excessively high in France compared with other countries (the EU-27 average was 27% in 
2011), but it has increased over recent years (and especially since the recession) (Houdré 
et  al.,  2013).  Having  parents  in  work  reduces  poverty  risk,  however.  Less  than  5%  of 
children  with  two  working  parents  are  in  poverty,  against  69%  when  neither  parent  is  in 
work.  Similarly,  children  with  a lone  parent  are  less  at  risk  of  poverty  when  the  parent  is 
working (21%) than when he/she is not (79%). 

2  CHILDCARE SERVICES: A DIVERSIFIED LANDSCAPE 

KEY FINDINGS 

  Both  parental  (actually  maternal)  and  formal  care  are  highly  subsidised,  which 

maintains a certain ambivalence in childcare policies. 

  The early access to formal care (from age 3 months), and to preschool (from age 

2) are quite specific in France. 

  Childcare  providers  are  very  diversified,  and  include  a  continuum  from  individual 

(home-based) to collective (centre-based) services. 

  The  governance  of  childcare  availability  and  quality  involves  a  large  set  of  actors, 

from municipalities to the central government. 

  The  governance  of  the  childcare  sector  was  reformed  to  encourage  the 
diversification  of  services  (i.e.  to  encourage  the  development  of  services  to 

94 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

parents  with  non-standard  working  hours,  to  facilitate  access  for  poor  and/or 
migrant families, or to develop services for children with disabilities). 

  Recent development of childcare service supply has been first and foremost fostered 
by an increase in the number of child-minders. Changes in their work status were 
introduced to encourage their “professionalization”. 

  The system of childcare support to parents was also reformed in 2004 (i) to enable 
parents with one child to take parental leave, and (ii) to make it more advantageous 
to work part-time rather than stop working altogether. 

2.1  Ambivalent support for families with children below age 3 

Childcare policy in France has several characteristics which make it quite specific in Europe 
(and in the OECD, Thévenon, 2006 and 2011). France is assumed to be the country where 
the  diversification  of  childcare  arrangements  is  most  advanced  and  where  this 
diversification is strongly supported by public policies.  

•  Thus, parents with children under the age of 3 receive a child-rearing allowance for six 
months  after  the  birth of  the  first  child  and up  to  child’s  third  birthday  for  subsequent 
children. The shorter period of benefit entitlement for the first child is specific in Europe 
and was introduced in order to avoid a prolonged early interruption of women's careers 
for the birth of a first child. The monthly benefit is rather low at 566€, i.e. around half 
of the minimum wage,  which makes it especially  attractive  to  low  income  earners. 
Part-time  options  are  available  (at  50%  or  80%)  for  parents  who  don’t  want  to  leave 
work  completely.  Since  2004,  parents  working  part-time  receive  a  benefit  which  is 
proportionally  higher  than  that  received  in  case  of  a  complete  labour  market 
withdrawal, to encourage parents to favour part-time work over no work. 

•  Working parents are given the choice between various forms of individual at-home 
and collective centre-based childcare services (see below). Enrolment in childcare 
can  start  at  very  young  age  (from  3  months  onwards).  For  parents  employing  a 
childminder  the  cost  of  social  contributions  is  subsidized  and  they  also  receive  a 
childcare  allowance.  Childcare  costs  can  also  be  set  against  tax  up  to  a  maximum 
amount.  Co-financing  by  employers  through  vouchers  is  possible  for  that  type  of 
childcare. 

•  Preschool  (“écoles  maternelles”)  can  also  start  early  (i.e.  from  the  age  of  2  provided 
the  child  is  potty  trained)  and  is  free  of  charge  for  parents;  but  the  number  of  places 
available  for  two-year-olds  has  shrunk  over  the  past  decades  (the  priority  being  given 
to  children  aged  3  and  above):  more  than  one  third  (35%)  of  two-year-olds  attended 
preschool  in  2000,  but  only  13.6%  in  2010.  Preschools  are  under  the  responsibility  of 
the Ministry of Education. 

2.2  A diversified set of childcare service providers 

As  shown  in  figure  4  below,  childcare  supply  has  been  increasing  strongly  since  the  mid-
1990s,  especially  through  growth  in  the  number  of  child-minders  and  in  individual 
childcare  (+6%  on  average  per  year  between  1995  and  2010  for  child-minders).  The 
number of places in collective centres has also increased, but at a slower rate. 

95 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

By  contrast,  the  number  of  places  in  preschool  for  two-year-olds  has  decreased  (-6%  on 
average). The overall result is a net increase in the ratio between the number of available 
places and the number of children (from 41.3 per 100 children under three in 1995 to 57.2 
in 2010). 

Providers of collective care include a large set of providers: 

•  Municipal  “Crèches”  (nurseries)  are  publicly  run  collective  centres  which  offer 

regular and occasional services for children under the age of 4.  

• 

• 

“Crèches  parentales”  (parents’  nurseries)  are  collective  associations  run  by  parents 
with the assistance of professional and qualified child-minders. 

“Crèches  familiales”  (Family  nurseries)  combine  the  advantage  of  (home-based) 
child-minders’ care and collective childcare with an access infrastructure established 
by municipalities.  

•  The “haltes-garderies” (short-term care) receive children for occasional care or on a 

permanent but part-time basis (usually one or two half-days per week).  

•  The  “crèches  d’entreprise”  (nurseries  run  by  enterprises)  are  employer-financed 

centres at the employees' workplace or very close to it. 

•  Other  providers  also  include  “jardins  d’enfants”,  “micro  crèches  d’éveil”  which 

deliver care for groups of 10 children at most. 

Figure 4: Childcare supply in France (1995-2010) (number of places in thousands) 

Note : childcare at home is not included 

Source: Vanovermeir (2012) from DREES, CNAF, Ministry of Education, and IRCEM data. 

96 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2.3  A centralised governance for childcare provision  

Great efforts have been made to expand childcare availability, to make it accessible to low 
income families and to enhance the quality of services. In this perspective, several reforms 
were introduced over the past decade to increase childcare supply as well as the efficiency 
of  governance  structures.  Recent  reforms  also  aimed  at  introducing  more  flexibility  in 
childcare services in order to adapt to changing parental working patterns.  

More specifically, the governance of collective childcare services was reformed in 2002, and 
the framework of childcare support to parents was also revised in 2004. Furthermore, a tax 
credit  was  introduced  in  2004  for  companies  financing  childcare  services  for  their 
employees. 

Compared  to  other  countries,  the  governance  of  the  childcare  sector  is  relatively 
centralized  but  involves  actors  of  each  level,  from  municipalities  to  central  government. 
There  is,  however,  a  clear  separation  between  administrations  dealing  with  childcare 
provision and preschool administration. 

The governance framework of childcare policy is as follows: 

•  The  national  government  level  defines  national  orientations  and  regulations 
(services  curriculum  and  fees),  and  invests  in  childcare  services.  Governance  of 
childcare  services  is  under  the  responsibility  of  the  family  branch  of  the  social 
security  system  which  was  created  in  1945  and  is  implemented  by  the  French 
Family  Allowance  Fund  (Caisse  nationale  d’allocations  familiales-  CNAF).  The  CNAF 
allocates  subsidies  to  childcare  providers  and  to  parents.  Orientations  for  the 
development  of  childcare  services  are  programmed  under  five-year  strategic  plans 
negotiated between the government, CNAF and representatives of municipalities and 
childcare providers.  

 

 “Mother  and  child  protection  services”  (Protection  maternelle  et  infantile  - 
PMI), also created in 1945, provide basic health care services for young children. 

•  Regional  CAFs  (Caisse  d’Allocation  Familiales)  finance  all  childcare  solutions, 
including  collective  and  individual  services,  and  parental  leave  allowances.  In 
particular,  they  pay  the  Prestation  de  Service  Unique  (PSU)  to  childcare  providers 
under the condition that they apply the national rules on fees paid by parents (fees 
should  not  exceed  12%  of  household  income  for  1  child,  ad  10%  for  2  children), 
that they comply with quality regulations, and ensure the diversity of child access to 
centres.  

Subsidies are paid on an hourly basis in order to encourage centres to supply care 
hours  for  parents  with  long  working  and/or  non-standard  working  hours.  Around 
66% of the running costs are subsidized, up to a ceiling. 

•  Municipalities (or a group of municipalities) manage childcare structures and are 
the main decision-maker regarding the development of new childcare places. They  
also establish family selection criteria to be used for allocating  places in childcare 
centres.  

•  Départements regulate the supply of childminders through obligatory registration; 
planning  is  also  key  at  the  departmental  level,  through  the  role  played  by  the 
regional Caisses d’Allocation Familiales (CAFs). 

97 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Criteria  for  admission  in  collective  centres  are  established  by  each  centre  but  committees 
comprising  directors  of  childcare  centres  and  representatives  of  municipalities  make 
admission  decisions.  Although  criteria  can  vary,  they  are  found  to  be  quite  homogenous 
(Candagio et al., 2012). Thus, the two main criteria mentioned by childcare centres are the 
place  of  residence  (since  municipalities  want  their  service  to  be  used  by  residents)  and 
the  date  of  first  request.  Interestingly,  the  employment  and  family  situation,  the  socio-
economic  status  of  parents,  and  the  health  status  of  children  are  not  reported  as  key 
parameters for admission in a large majority of centres.  

3  ACHIEVING THE BARCELONA TARGETS 

KEY FINDINGS 

  With 48% of children under 3  enrolled in formal care, France  has surpassed the 

Barcelona objective by almost 15%.  

  Average weekly hours of attendance (31 hours) are also comparatively high and 

above the 30-hour threshold. 

  Childcare  arrangements  are  highly  stratified  by  the  labour  market  status  of 

parents and household income level. 

  Parental  care  (accompanied  by  child-rearing  allowance)  is  often  motivated  by 
income constraints, poor working conditions, or by difficulties in combining 
work and family life due to atypical working hours. 

  Differences  in  the  “costs”  of  the  different  options  for  parents  explain  the  clear 
stratification  of  childcare  arrangements  by  socio-economic  status  of 
families. 

As stated above, the main goal of childcare policies is to make it easier for men and women 
to  strike  a  better  balance  between  work  and  family  life.  This  is  one  explanation  for  the 
steady  high  rate  of  female  employment  and  high  birth  rate,  contributing  to  the  material 
wellbeing of families and the quality of parent-child time. 

3.1  Quantitative targets at the national level are fully met 

With  48%  of  children  under  3  receiving  formal  care,  France  has  surpassed  the  Barcelona 
objective  by  almost  15%.  In  this  regard,  France  shows  enrolment  rates  which  are  quite 
close to those of Nordic countries (Figure 5). The average weekly hours of attendance are 
also relatively high compared to practices in other Continental or South European countries.  

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Figure 5: Average enrolment rate of children aged under three years of age in 
formal childcare 

2010

2007

2003

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Source: OECD Family Database – 2013. 

Figure 6: Average enrolment rate of children aged three to five years of age in 
pre-school educational programmes 

2010

2007

2003

100

80

60

40

20

0

Source: OECD Family Database – 2013. 

99 

010203040Average hours of attendance per week 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

3.2  Large  differences  in  childcare  arrangements  depending  on 

families’ socio-economic status 

According  to  the  CNAF,  in  2012,  63%  of  children  under  3  received  day  care  mainly  from 
their parents and 4% from their grandparents. 18% are covered by child-minder care, 10% 
by  childcare  collective  centres  (crèches),  2%  by  at-home  care,  and  3%  by  other 
arrangements (including preschool).  

The type of childcare arrangement chosen by parents is heavily dependent on their labour 
market status and household income level:  

  Parental care is encouraged by the child-rearing allowance; but research shows that 
claims for the full-rate benefit (conditional upon a complete interruption of work) are 
often  motivated  by  income  constraints,  bad  working  conditions  or  by  difficulties  in 
combining work and family life due to atypical working hours. Thus, in 2008, it was 
estimated  that  40%  of  recipients  of  the  full-rate  allowance  would  have 
preferred  to  continue  working.  98%  of  recipients  of  child-rearing  allowance  are 
female. 

  The  share  of  parental  care  –  as  a  childcare  option  -  decreases  with  income, 
whereas  the  share  of  formal  childcare  increases  with  income  (especially  child-
minders’ care and home-based childcare). Thus, 91% of children from families in the 
lowest quintile of income are mainly cared for by their parents, versus only 31% of 
children from families in the quintile with the highest income. 

  Dual-earner  families  are  more  likely  to  make  use  of  formal  care:  in  2007,  64%  of 
children  aged  under  3  and  whose  parents  were  working  were  enrolled  in  formal 
childcare (against 8% of children for whom at least one parent did not work).  

For  children  whose  parents  are  both  working  full-time,  child-minders  represent  the 
leading  child  day  care  arrangement  (37%  of  children),  whereas  18%  of  these 
children  are  cared  for  by  collective  centres,  4%  by  at-home  childcare  and  5%  by 
other arrangements. 27%  of them  receive  day care mainly from their parents, and 
9% from their grandparents. Here again, working conditions and household income 
are  key  determinants  of  childcare  arrangements,  as  longer  working  hours  increase 
the  probability  of  choosing  collective  childcare  as  the  main  childcare  solution.  By 
contrast, grand-parents and/or family members are the main childcare providers at 
night or at the week-end for parents with non-standard work patterns. 

  Differences  in  the  “cost”  for  parents  of  the  different  options  explain  the 
clear  stratification  of  childcare  arrangements  by  socio-economic  status  of 
families:  public  collective  childcare  centres  are  clearly  the  most  affordable  option 
for  households  with,  for  example,  both  parents  working  full-time  and  earning  the 
minimum  wage:  the  childcare  cost  amounts  to  less  than  5%  of  the  household 
income,  versus  10.6%  for  a  child-minder  (HCF,  2013).  By  contrast,  the  cost  of 
childcare  in  public  centres  is  almost  equal  to  that  of  a  child-minder  for  households 
with earnings amounting to 6 times the minimum wage. 

100 

 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

3.3  Are needs and preferences met? 

It is  estimated that 350,000 to 450,000 additional childcare places would be necessary to 
fully  meet  parents’  need  of  childcare  services  (HCF,  2013b).  Moreover,  about  30%  of 
parents  report  being  unable  to  obtain  their  preferred  childcare  solutions.  Working  parents 
usually  have  a  preference  for  “individual”  childcare  solutions  which  are  considered  to  be 
more  “flexible”  but  their  ‘preference’  depends  on  their  working  conditions.  By  contrast, 
collective childcare centres are viewed as best for children by one third of parents and the 
cheapest by more than 50% of them. Overall, 41% of all parents with children under age 6 
prefer the “crèche” but only 18% have a place there. 

3.4  Large regional disparities 

There are large disparities in coverage across the country, as shown in figure 6. In theory, 
52%  of  children  under  the  age  of  3  could  be  covered,  but  the  proportion  actually  varies 
from  28%  in  Corsica  to  86%  in  Haute  Loire  due  to  differences  in  population  composition 
and in local childcare policies.  

Figure 7: Regional variations in the coverage of formal childcare services for 
children under age 3 

Source: Observatoire national de la Petite Enfance, 2011. 

101 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

4  STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES AND CURRENT DEBATES 

KEY FINDINGS 

  High  fertility  and  female  employment  rates  are  clear  markers  of  the  success  of 

French childcare policy. 

  Key challenges for childcare policy are:  

 

 

 

 

 

 

(i) a further increase in female employment rate may require a switch towards 
a  shorter  period  of  parental  leave  with  earnings-related  payments 
accompanied by an ad hoc increase in childcare services. 

(ii)  Increasing  the  supply  of  services  for  parents  with  non-standard 
working  patterns  and  fostering  the  coordination  of  childcare  provider 
networks;  

(iii) Reducing inequalities in costs borne by low to middle income families, 
especially those between public centre-based services or a child-minder. 

(iii)  Increasing  the  supply  of  out-of-school  care  services  for  families  with 
school-aged children, coordinated with school activities. 

(iv)  Adapting  training  schemes  and  obligations  for  child-minders  to  the 
population of children with specific “social” needs. 

(v) Providing better information to the most disadvantaged families. 

To  summarize,  the  strength  and  weakness  of  the  French  experience  over  the  last  twenty 
years are the following. 

France has succeeded in developing diversified childcare provision that has been expanding 
over the last 15 years. It has contributed to maintaining fertility and women’s employment 
rates at a relatively high level. Female employment rates and childcare coverage are both 
well  above  the  Barcelona  targets.  However,  there  are  needs  for  further  development  of 
childcare  services  and  for  the  provision  of  services  for  families  with  specific  needs 
(specifically the needs  of parents with non-standard working patterns, or with a migration 
background, children with disabilities, etc.). 

First,  a  further  increase  in  female  employment  rate  may  require  a  more  comprehensive 
change in childcare policy with a switch towards a shorter period of parental leave with 
earnings-related  payments.  This  may  encourage  fathers  to  take  up  parental  leave, 
thereby  fostering  gender  equality.  Such  a  change  would  nevertheless  require  the 
availability  of  childcare  services  to  be  increased  by  350,000  to  400,000  places  (i.e.  well 
beyond the increase of 275,000 places already planned.  

In  addition,  working  parents  –  and  more  often  those  with  variable  and/or  unpredictable 
working  hours  –  often  have  to  combine  several  childcare  arrangements.  Increasing  the 
supply  of  services  in  the  evenings,  at  nights,  over  the  week-end  and  fostering 
coordination  between  childcare  providers  would  help  those  families  to  find  an 
appropriate childcare solution at an affordable price. Encouraging the formation of networks 
between establishments will provide a means to respond more rapidly to family needs and 
avoid multiple demands. 

102 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Public childcare services in the European Union: The model of France 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Another option under discussion is  to reduce the inequalities in the costs for parents 
of  using  public  childcare  centres  or  child-minders.  Making  child-minders  more 
affordable  to  low  income  families  would  increase  their  use  of  this  childcare  arrangement. 
The replacement of the complex system of childcare support with a unique and harmonized 
childcare subsidy to all parents using formal childcare would both simplify the system and 
contribute to reducing inequalities in childcare costs (HCF, 2013c). 

The ambition to respond more efficiently to the specific needs of families also calls for the 
qualifications  and  training  obligation  of  care  workers  to  be  adapted  and  developed. 
More care workers from ethnic minorities may also facilitate the interaction with children of 
migrant families whose coverage should improve in the near future. 

Furthermore, more flexible transitions from childcare to preschool may reduce the risk that 
children with a disadvantaged background are left behind (Havette et al., 2013). Moreover, 
problems  of  reconciling  work  and  family  do  not  stop  when  children  enter  school  (which  is 
obligatory from the age of 6 years), and could be reduced through greater development of 
out-of-school care services and a better coordination with school activities. 

Last  but  not  least,  the  existing  diversity  of  providers  and  of  public  support  also  raises  a 
need to better inform parents: the CNAF website monenfant.fr aims at providing parents 
with  information  about  opportunities,  as  well  as  cost  simulation  tools.  More  proactive 
information  campaigns  might  be  needed,  however,  to  reach  the  most  disadvantaged 
families. 

Overall, the development of childcare services in France has reached a point at which they 
are  expected  to  meet  many  more  objectives  than  in  the  past.  Further  development  is 
needed  in  order  to  provide  parents  with  more  flexibility  of  care,  and  to  ensure  that 
childcare services reach a larger population with atypical needs. In a context of reduction in 
expenditures on families, however, these two objectives are in strong competition.  

103 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs 
____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

REFERENCES 

  Borderies  F.  F.  (2013),  “loffre  d’accueil  collectif  des  enfants  de  moins  de  trois  ans  en 

2011”, Document de travail 184, DREES, Ministère des Affaires Sociales. 

  Bressé  S.,  Le  Bihan  B.,  Martin  C.  (2007),  « La  garde  des  enfants  en  dehors  des  plage 

horaires standards », Etudes et Résutlats, 551, DREES, Ministère des Affaires Sociales. 

  Damon J. (2009), Les politiques familiales, Presses Universitaires de France. 

  Havette  S.,  Moriceau  C.,  Galtier  B.  (2013),  “De  la  Crèche  à  l’Ecole:  Rupture  ou 

Continuité?”, Dossiers Solidarité et Santé, DREES, Ministère des Affaires Sociales. 

  Haut  Conseil  de  la  Famille  (2013a),  “Accueil  des  jeunes  enfants  et  offre  de  loisirs  et 
d’accueil  des  enfants  et  des  adolescents  autour  du  temps  scolaire:  la  diversitué  de 
l’offre et les disparités d’accès selon les territoires”, Note d’analyse, février. 

  Haut  Conseil  de  la  Famille  (2013b),  “Point  sur  l’évolution  de  l’Accueil  des  enfants  des 

enfants de moins de trois ans”. 

  Haut  Conseil  de  la  Famille  (2013c),  “L’opportunité  et  les  contours  d’un  éventuel 

reprofilage des aides à l’accueil des jeunes enfants”, septembre. 

  Houdré  C.,  Missègue N., Ponceau J. (2013), “Inégalités de niveau de  vie et pauvreté”, 

in Les revenus et le patrimoine des ménages - Insee Références. 

  Letablier  M.  Th.,  Fagnani  J.  (2009),  “Childminders  in  the  French  Childcare  Policy”, 
European  Expert  Group  on  Demography,  Best  Practice  Meeting  on  Child  care  by 
Childminders in Fra,ce, European Alliance for Families. 

  OECD Family Database: www.oecd.org/social/family/database 

  Saint-Paul  de  Th.  (2013),  “Usage  des  crèches  et  milieu  social  en  France”,  DREES, 

Ministère des Affaires Sociales. 

  Thévenon  O.  (2011),  “Pourquoi  réformer  l'accueil  de  la  petite  enfance  en  France? 
Comparaison avec les autres pays de l'OCDE”, Revue d'Economie Politique, 121(5), pp. 
667-712. 

  Thévenon O. (2010). Does fertility respond to work and family-life reconciliation policies 
in France?  In  Noriyuki Takayama and Martin Werding (eds.) Fertility and Public Policy: 
How To Reverse the Trend of Declining Birth Rates Cambridge MA and London UK: MIT-
Press, chapter 10. 

  Thévenon  O.  (2006),  “Régimes  d'Etat  Social  et  convention  familiale  :  une  analyse  des 
régulations  emploi-famille”  Economies  et  Sociétés,  série  Socio-Economie  du  Travail 
27(6) :1137-1171. 

  Vanovermeir  S.  (2012),  “L’accueil  des  jeunes  enfants:  axe  majeur  de  la  politique 
familiale  française  depuis  les  années  1970”,  Dossiers  Solidarité  et  Santé  31,  DREES, 
Ministère des Affaires Sociales. 

104