We examine the effects of child policies on both transitional dynamics and long-term demo-economic outcomes in an overlapping-generations neoclassical growth model à la Chakraborty (J Econ Theory 116(1):119–137, 2004) extended with endogenous fertility under the assumption of weak altruism towards children. The government invests in public health, and an individual’s survival probability at the end of youth depends on health expenditure. We show that multiple development regimes can exist. However, poverty or prosperity does not necessarily depend on the initial conditions, since they are the result of how a child policy is designed. A child tax, for example, can be used effectively to enable those economies that were entrapped in poverty to prosper. There is also a long-term welfare-maximising level of the child tax. We show that a child tax can be used to increase capital accumulation, escape from poverty and maximise long-term welfare also when (a) a public pay-as-you-go pension system is in place and (b) the government issues an amount of public debt. Interestingly, there also exists a couple child tax–health tax that can be used to find the second-best optimum optimorum. In addition, we show that results are robust to the inclusion of decisions regarding the child quantity–quality trade-off under the assumption of impure altruism. In particular, there exists a threshold value of the child tax below (resp. above) which child quality spending is unaffordable (resp. affordable) and different scenarios are in existence.

Endogenous fertility, endogenous lifetime and economic growth: the role of child policies

Luciano Fanti;Luca Gori
2014-01-01

Abstract

We examine the effects of child policies on both transitional dynamics and long-term demo-economic outcomes in an overlapping-generations neoclassical growth model à la Chakraborty (J Econ Theory 116(1):119–137, 2004) extended with endogenous fertility under the assumption of weak altruism towards children. The government invests in public health, and an individual’s survival probability at the end of youth depends on health expenditure. We show that multiple development regimes can exist. However, poverty or prosperity does not necessarily depend on the initial conditions, since they are the result of how a child policy is designed. A child tax, for example, can be used effectively to enable those economies that were entrapped in poverty to prosper. There is also a long-term welfare-maximising level of the child tax. We show that a child tax can be used to increase capital accumulation, escape from poverty and maximise long-term welfare also when (a) a public pay-as-you-go pension system is in place and (b) the government issues an amount of public debt. Interestingly, there also exists a couple child tax–health tax that can be used to find the second-best optimum optimorum. In addition, we show that results are robust to the inclusion of decisions regarding the child quantity–quality trade-off under the assumption of impure altruism. In particular, there exists a threshold value of the child tax below (resp. above) which child quality spending is unaffordable (resp. affordable) and different scenarios are in existence.
2014
Fanti, Luciano; Gori, Luca
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Fanti and Gori 2014 JOPE.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Versione finale editoriale
Licenza: NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 897.39 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
897.39 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
JOPE_Post_Print.pdf

Open Access dal 01/05/2015

Tipologia: Documento in Post-print
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 965.03 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
965.03 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/282741
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 25
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 22
social impact