Childcare markets: an introduction by Eva Lloyd
Introduction
The state’s role in the provision of early childhood education and care (ECEC) services is of particular interest, since such services are closely linked to other social, educational, demographic and economic policy developments. Robust education systems, labour market policies which acknowledge the key contributions of women, family stability and ideas of inclusive citizenship all to an extent hinge on the provision of comprehensive and high quality early childhood education and care. This role requires states to strike a balance between serving the interests of parents and the wider family, of children and of the state itself. But negotiating the intersections between these policy interests is often conflictual (Archard, 2003; Kamerman and Moss, 2010). Agreeing and enabling a coherent mix of leave policies, financial support and childcare services, while also allowing for parental choice and achieving a satisfactory resolution to the macro-division of costs, may pose serious challenges for governments (Plantenga and Remery, 2009). One particular option for addressing these policy conundrums is the promotion of a market-based approach to the provision of early childhood education and care, the subject of this boo
Modern welfare states traditionally have varied in the amount of public support provided for early childhood education and care systems and in their response to economic challenges, such as the transition to post-industrialist economies and the rise of female labour market participation (Mahon 2002). Viewed as a continuum, publicly supported universal systems in the Nordic countries (Rauhala, 2009) would be located at one end and at the opposite end would be provision in non-welfare states such as those in Sub-Saharan Africa (Prochner and Kabiru, 2008), almost entirely reliant on funding from private or supra-national agencies or NGOs.
Everywhere childhood policies and systems appear in a state of flux, but in the present global economic climate childcare markets are a distinctive and rapidly growing phenomenon (Penn,2009a). Compared to commodity markets, childcare markets tend to form part of a mixed economy, like other human services markets. In this mixed economy the state, private-for-profit and private-not-for-profit providers all play a role in the provision, funding and regulation of ECEC. Among the private-for-profit childcare providers that operate in such markets may be corporate business, whose primary commercial interest may lie elsewhere (Penn, 2011).
Fully state-funded early childhood education and care provision may be directly provided in parallel with privately provided services in some markets. Early education is often treated differently in public policy and may or may not be part of such a market. Or there may not be a consistent national approach to childcare markets. Privatisation of social welfare and education services may mean the participation of the private sector interests in a predominantly publicly funded and delivered service system; it need not necessarily coincide with marketisation, that is the opening up of services to competitive delivery by private providers (Whitfield, 2006). These issues will be explored further in the next sector of this chapter, while other contributions to this volume illustrate the operation of both processes.
In a childcare market parents are proxy customers on behalf of their children, the actual consumers of the service. Parental choice may be supported with the help of public subsidies such as tax credits or vouchers, as long as their income remains below any caps set by governments (Warner and Gradus, 2011). In some countries, including Britain (Kazimirski et al, 2006), employers may be encouraged to provide childcare support to employees in the form of childcare vouchers, in return for corporation tax rebates.
Childcare markets have become the dominant delivery model for early years provision in European countries such as the UK (Penn, 2007; Lloyd, 2012) and the Netherlands (Lloyd and Penn, 2010). In other European countries they are also increasingly substituting for the role of the public sector in respect of ECEC and other human services that may traditionally have been delivered directly by public bodies or have received substantial public funding. Childcare markets predominate in English speaking nations, including the US (Meyers and Gornick, 2003); Kamerman and Gatenio-Gable, 2007), Canada (Mahon and Philips, 2002) and Australia (Brennan, 2002), as well as on the African continent (Penn, 2008) and the Asia Pacific region (Yuen, 2010).
The alternative position is reflected in the policy rationale employed by a European country such as France (Martin and Le Bihan, 2009), where a state-funded and state-provided ECEC system has existed for some sixty years. In such cases the government considers that there are strong economic grounds for treating ECEC services as ‘public good’, which justifies substantial public investment in the services themselves and in their infrastructure. Both this direct investment in ECEC services and in their infrastructures are seen as key to ensuring equitable and universal access for all children irrespective of their parents’ socioeconomic position, ethnic background, rural or urban location, or health status (Cleveland and Krashinki, 2004; Leseman 2009).
These contrasting policy positions produce different outcomes for the relevant early childhood education and care systems, particularly as the economic environment changes. Childcare markets also generate different consequences for the system’s quality and sustainability, depending on the political and socioeconomic conditions in the localities, regions and nations where they operate. The chapters in this book illustrate the range of impacts and outcomes of childcare markets in different countries.
Further information
Childcare markets – can they deliver an equitable service?
Edited by Eva Lloyd and Helen Penn (Policy Press, £56, ISBN 9781847429339)
