Kadın İstihdamı ile Doğum Oranı Arasındaki İlişki Üzerine Eşbütünleşme Analizi: İsveç ve ABD Örneği

Yıl 2022, , 333 - 348, 28.04.2022

Fatma Yeşilkaya

https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2022.02.18

Cited By: 1

Öz

Çalışmada kadın istihdamı ve doğum oranı arasındaki uzun dönemli ilişki incelenmektedir. Doğum oranının kadın istihdamına etkisi İsveç ve ABD için 1991-2020 yılları verilerinden hareketle zaman seri analizi araştırma yöntemi olarak kullanılmıştır. Analizlerle hem ABD hem İsveç için kadın istihdamı ve doğum oranı arasında eşbütünleşme ilişkisi tespit edilmiştir. ABD için uzun dönemli katsayı tahmin sonuçları incelendiğinde, doğum oranının kadın istihdam oranını FMOLS modelinde 0.80, DOLS modelinde 0.91 ve CCR modelinde ise 0.64 birim artırdığı tespit edilmiştir. İsveç için uzun dönem tahmin sonuçlarında doğum oranının kadın istihdam oranını FMOLS modelinde 1.41 ve CCR modelinde ise 0.71 birim artırdığı tespit edilmiştir. Dolayısıyla, uzun dönemli katsayı tahmin sonuçlarına göre iki ülke için de kadın istihdam oranı ile doğum oranı arasında pozitif yönlü bir ilişki olduğu görülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doğum Oranı, Kadın İstihdamı, Zaman Serisi Analizi

Cointegration Analysis on the Relationship between Women's Employment and Birth Rate: The Case of Sweden and the USA

Öz

This study examines the long-term relationship between female employment and birth rate. The study used the time series analysis method based on 1991-2020 for Sweden and the USA. As a result of the analysis, a cointegration relationship between female employment and birth rate was determined for both the USA and Sweden. When the long-term coefficient estimation results for the USA are examined, it is determined that the birth rate increases the female employment rate by 0.80 in the FMOLS model, 0.91 in the DOLS model, and 0.64 units in the CCR model. In the long-term estimation results for Sweden, it was determined that the birth rate increased the female employment rate by 1.41 units in the FMOLS model and 0.71 units in the CCR model. Therefore, according to the long-term coefficient estimation results, it is seen that there is a positive relationship between the female employment rate and the birth rate in both countries.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Birth Rate, Female Employment, Time Series Analysis

Kaynakça

• Ahn, N. & P. Mira (2002), “A Note on the Changing Relationship between Fertility and Female Employment Rates in Developed Countries”, Journal of Population Economics, 15, 667-82.
• Almqvist, A.L. & G. Kaufman (2016), “What Work-Family Conflicts Do Fathers Experience in Sweden and in the United States?”, in: I. Crespi & E. Ruspini (eds.), Balancing Work and Family in a Changing Society The Fathers’ Perspective (177-89), New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Blackstone, A. (2003), “Gender Roles and Society”, in: J.R. Miller et al. (eds.), Human Ecology: An Encyclopedia of Children, Families, Communities, and Environments (335-38), California: Santa Barbara.
• Da Rocha, J.M. & L. Fuster (2006), “Why are Fertility Rates and Female Employment Ratios Positively Correlated across O.E.C.D. Countries?”, International Economic Review, 47, 1187-1222.
• Demirtaş, G. & N. Yayla (2017), “Küresel Entegrasyonun Kadın İstihdamı Üzerine Etkisi: Ampirik Bir İnceleme”, Journal of Yasar University, 12(48), 339-49.
• Engelhardt, H. & A. Prskawetz (2005), “A Pooled Time-Series Analysis on the Relation between Fertility and Female Employment”, European Demographic Research Papers, No. 501, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
• Engelhardt, H. et al. (2004), “Fertility and Women’s Employment Reconsidered: A Macro-Level Time-Series Analysis for Developed Countries, 1960-2000”, Population Studies, 58(1), 109-20.
• Engle, R.F. & C.W.J. Granger (1987), “Cointegration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation and Testing”, Econometrica, 55, 251-76.
• Evan, T. & P. Vozarova (2018), “Influence of Women’s Workforce Participation and Pensions on Total Fertility Rate: A Theoretical and Econometric Study”, Eurasian Economic Review, (8), 51-72.
• Galtry, J. (2003), “The Impact on Breastfeeding of Labour Market Policy and Practice in Ireland, Sweden, and the USA”, Social Science & Medicine, 57(1), 167-77.
• Granger, C.W.J. (1969), “Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Models”, Econometrica, 37, 424-38.
• Gregory, A. & S. Milner (2009), “Editorial: Work-Life Balance: A Matter of Choice?”, Gender, Work and Organization, 16(1), 1-13.
• Güriş, S. et al. (2019), “OECD Ülkelerinde Kadınların İşgücüne Katılımını Etkileyen Faktörlerin Panel Nitel Tercih Modelleri ile İncelenmesi”, International Balkan and Near Eastern Social Sciences Congress Series, 742-50.
• Hilgeman, C. & C.T. Butts (2009), “Women’s Employment and Fertility: A Welfare Regime Paradox”, Social Science Research, 38, 103-17.
• Kenjoh, E. (2005), “New Mothers’ Employment and Public Policy in the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Japan”, Labour Review of Labour Economics and Industrial Relations, 19(1), 5-49.
• Koray, M. (2018), Sosyal Politika, Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
• Kutlar, A. vd. (2012), “Kadınların İşgücüne Katılması ile Doğurganlık, Boşanma ve Ücret Haddi Arasındaki İlişki: Türkiye Üzerine Bir Araştırma”, Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 7(1), 149-68.
• Lee, J. & M. Strazicich (2013), “Minimum LM Unit Root Test with One Structural Break”, Economics Bulletin, 33(4), 2483-92.
• Lockwood, N.R. (2003), “Work/Life Balance: Challenges and Solutions”, SHRM Research Quarterly, 1-12.
• Matysiak, A. & D. Vignoli (2013), “Diverse Effects of Women’s Employment on Fertility: Insights from Italy and Poland”, European Journal of Population, 29, 273-302.
• Mishra, V. et al. (2010), “On the Relationship between Female Labour Force Participation and Fertility in G7 Countries: Evidence from Panel Cointegration and Granger Causality”, Empirical Economics, 38(2), 361-72.
• Oakley, A. (1972), Sex, Gender, Society, New York: Harper&Row.
• Oakley, A. (1985), Sex, Gender, and Society, Aldershot: Gower Publishing.
• OECD (2020), “How’s Life? 2020 Measuring Well-being”, <https://www.oecd.org/statistics/how-s-life-23089679.htm>, 28.06.2021.
• Oshio, T. (2019), “Is a Positive Association between Female Employment and Fertility still Spurious in Developed Countries?”, Demographic Research, 41(45), 1277-88.
• Park, J.Y. (1992), “Canonical Cointegrating Regressions”, Econometrica, 60, 119-43.
• Phillips, P.C.B. & B.E. Hansen (1990), “Statistical Inference in Instrumental Variable Regression with I(1) Processes, Review of Economic Studies, 57, 99-125.
• Phillips, P.C.B. & S. Ouliaris (1990), “Asymptotic Properties of Residual Based Tests for Cointegration”, Econometrica, 58, 165-93.
• Rothbard, N.P. & T.L. Dumas (2006), “Research Perspectives: Managing the Work-Home Interface”, in: F. Jones et al. (eds.), Work-Life Balance: A Psychological Perspective, New York: Psychology Press, 71-89.
• Saikkonen, P. (1992), “Estimation and Testing of Cointegrated Systems by an Autoregressive Approximation”, Econometric Theory, 8, 1-27.
• Shin, Y. (1994), “A Residual-Based Test of the Null of Cointegration against the Alternative of No Cointegration”, Econometric Theory, 10, 91-115.
• Stock, J. & M. Watson (1993), “A Simple Estimator of Cointegrating Vectors in Higher Order Integrated Systems”, Econometrica, 61(4), 783-820.
• Sundström, M. & F.P. Stafford (1992), “Female Labour Force Participation, Fertility and Public Policy in Sweden”, European Journal of Population, 8, 199-215.
• Toda, H.Y. & T. Yamamoto (1995), “Statistical Inference in Vector Autoregressions with Possibly Integrated Processes”, Journal of Econometrics, 66, 225-50.
• Üçler, G. & O. Kızılkaya (2014), “Kadın İstihdamının Boşanma ve Doğurganlık Üzerine Etkileri: Türkiye Üzerine Bölgesel Panel Veri Analizi”, Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(2), 28-43.