Head, Asian Social and Health Outreach, OECD Reconciling work and family life: Korean policy challenges in an international perspective Presentation: Chung-Ang University 19 February 2008, Seoul Willem Adema Head, Asian Social and Health Outreach, OECD (www.oecd.org/els/social/family)

Presentation outline OECD work on family policy Context and outcomes underlying family policy challenges in Korea What are family policy objectives across the OECD area? How does Korea compare in terms of policy response and workplace practices? Options for policy development

OECD work on family policy - Babies and Bosses - Fertility studies - Employment Outlook - Starting Strong - Work on child well-being - The OECD Family database

The OECD Family database Structure of families Labour market position of families Public policies towards families Child outcomes www.oecd.org/els/social/family

Child Well-being project Under three’s policy package Child well-being and sole parenthood Child well-becoming (e.g. parental employment, intergeneration equality), Distribution of public spending, over time and across family types Child outcomes and child policy

The Korean public support profile over the early lifecourse reflects education spending patterns.

Family policy challenges in Korea Rapid ageing and low fertility How to increase effectiveness of public policy support? Address “family-unfriendly” workplace practices

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

In international comparison, Korea scores badly in terms of key Work and Family outcomes

Korea will age more rapidly than most other OECD countries… Population aged 65 and over, relative to the population aged 20-64, 2000 and 2050

Desired and observed total fertility rates, 1981, 1990 and 2000 …in part, because parents have fewer children than they would like and birth rates have fallen... Desired and observed total fertility rates, 1981, 1990 and 2000

1980 Female employment rates, and total fertility rates 2005 …and countries with high female employment rates now also have the highest fertility rates. 1980 Female employment rates, and total fertility rates 2005 NB Different scales on the horizontal axis of the panels; female employment has increased everywhere

Fertility concerns may drive the family policy debate in Korea, but in other OECD countries different policy objectives play a key role Increasing female employment to sustain economic growth and pension systems Tackling child poverty Promoting child development Gender equity

Public spending on family benefits, per cent of GDP, 2003 Policy responses also differ across countries: public family support is limited in Korea… Public spending on family benefits, per cent of GDP, 2003 Public support included here only concerns items that are exclusively for families (e.g. child payments and allowances, parental leave benefits and childcare support). Spending recorded in other social policy areas as health and housing support also assist families, but not exclusively, and is not included here.

…by contrast, Nordic countries provide a continuum of care and employment supports to families with children Public spending covers: Extensive health, housing and education support Paid parental leave for around one year or more Public childcare and early education Out-of-School-Hours care The policy model is expensive; in Denmark and Sweden tax-to-GDP ratio is 50%. Therefore, many countries income-test support or leave ‘gaps’ in public family support

For example, Iceland frontloads investment in families with children

In terms of childcare participation, Korea is not doing all that badly…

… it seems that Workplace cultures rather than childcare policy are the main barrier to better work/family balance in Korea Women are often expected to leave work on marriage/childbirth Regular employment, pursuing a career and motherhood seem difficult to combine workplace cultures don’t support work/family balance Female labour market outcomes are unfavourable

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

Female labour market outcomes are unfavourable: for example, Korea has the largest gender pay gap in the OECD The proportion of women with supervisory responsibilities is 8%, against 20-30% in many OECD countries. One third of female workers (and 40 of female workers of childbearing age) are in temporary employment, compared to 18% on average across the OECD

The share of women working in temporary employment is very high

Educational attainment in Korea has improved markedly for both sexes…

…but employment among high-skilled women is relatively low in Korea.

Parental educational attainment is positively associated with literacy of youngsters, PISA 2003…

...as is maternal employment, although the effect of FT/PT employment varies across countries.

Korea also needs to better use its ‘female capital’ to avoid shrinking of the labour force Total labour force from 1980 to 2000, and projections from 2005 to 2030, in thousands ‘Constant rates’: assumes constant labour force participation rates for men and women from 2000 to 2030; ’Gender equity in participation rates’: assumes that female participation rates reach current male participation rates in each country by 2030.

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

…but above all Korean workplaces practices need to change More opportunities for women/mothers to stay/return to regular employment. Increase the role of performance-related pay Maintain employer/employee relationship during parental leave There is not a ‘one-size-fits all solution’, but ‘right to request workplace flexibility’ could help find employers and employees solutions that suit them both

More information http://www.oecd.org/els/social/family D'Addio, A-C. and M. Mira d'Ercole (2005), “Trends and Determinants of Fertility Rates in OECD Countries: The Role of Policies”, Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 27, OECD, Paris (www.oecd.org/els/workingpapers). OECD (2002), Babies and Bosses, Reconciling Work and Family Life, Vol. 1, Australia, Denmark and the Netherlands. OECD (2003), Babies and Bosses, Reconciling Work and Family Life, Vol. 2, Austria, Ireland and Japan. OECD (2004), Babies and Bosses, Reconciling Work and Family Life, Vol. 3, New Zealand, Portugal and Switzerland. OECD (2005), Babies and Bosses, Reconciling Work and Family Life, Vol. 4, Canada, Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. OECD (2006), Starting Strong, Early Education and Care. OECD (2007), Facing the Future, Korea’s health, Family and Pension Policy Challenges. OECD (2007), Babies and Bosses, Reconciling Work and Family Life: A Synthesis of findings for OECD countries.