1. Labour and income effects of caregiving across Europe
Comments on
Labour and income effects of caregiving across Europe
by David Casado-Marin
Pilar Garcia-Gomez
Angel Lopez-Nicolas

2. This paper
Effects of exposure to caregiving (at home or elsewhere) on women participation, employment, income and receipt of social transfers
Exploiting longitudinal features of ECHP
Using non-parametric estimators (propensity score matching)

3. Two “counterfactuals”
Women working at t = 1
treatment: caregiving at t = 2,3
control: working also at t = 2,3
Outcome at t = 3
Women not working at t = 1
control: not working also at t = 2,3

4. Main findings
No effects on participation/employment of women who were initially working
Negative effects on participation/employment of women who were not working initially
Caregiving also involves decline in earnings partly compensated by social transfers

5. It is a relevant issue
What is happening to
zone C with ageing?

6. Most countries subsidise caregiving either formal or informal
Most countries subsidise caregiving either formal or informal. Variety of approaches in this respect which does not correspond to taxonomy of welfare states in the paper

7. 4 comments
Data issues
Quality of the matching
Endogeneity
Outcomes

8. 1. Data issues
EU-SILC provides better basis to assess nature of social transfers
Longitudinal features to be still exploited
Much more detail than ECHP on income sources
Larger country samples. Possible to carry out within country estimations

9. 2. Quality of matching Need to display estimated ps.
Here example with women
caregivers and non-caregivers
In 2001
Balancing property is rejected
Here. Please provide test
Treatment group: Y to “Do your present daily activities include, without pay, looking
after children or other persons who need special help because of old age, illness or disability ?” . Matching over age groups, education, household size, income, employment status

10. 3. Endogeneity
Decision as to whether or not to become caregiver affected by LM status, income, transfers, etc. Potential instruments
Presence of disabled family members?
Structure of the subsidies (support to formal vs. informal caregiving)
Legislation on hours of work (part-time, role of collective bargaining, etc.)

11. 4. Outcomes Is receipt of social transfers an outcome?
Or rather a treatment?
What is the take-up rate of the various transfers to caregivers?

12. Overall Nice paper on relevant issue. Interesting results.
Try to find data for within country analysis as institutions are much different from country to country.
Provide more diagnostic tests
Non parametric estimates do not solve endogeneity