[K Population Strategy] Warning from a European Social Welfare Expert: "If Korea Does Not Solve Low Birthrate Immediately, the Future Will Be a Disaster"

Professor Esping-Andersen from Oysta, Video Interview with Asia Economy
"Korea's Desperate Efforts Over the Past Decade, Wrong Policy Mix with Cash Welfare"
"Essential: 8-Hour Parental Work, High-Quality Childcare Facilities, and Gender Equality Culture"

"Both parents working within 8 hours, universal and high-quality childcare facilities, and gender equality. If the Korean government does not implement such measures immediately to solve the low birthrate, Korea's future will be disastrous."

Gøsta Esping-Andersen, an honorary professor at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona, Spain, renowned as a master of welfare state research, said this in a recent video interview with Asia Economy. Born in 1947 in Denmark, Professor Esping-Andersen is a world-renowned political sociologist. He authored The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, which classifies welfare states after World War II into types such as Anglo-American liberal, Continental corporatist, and Nordic social democratic. He also established a multi-equilibrium model showing a U-shaped relationship between the level of gender equality and fertility rates.

Regarding Korea's ultra-low birthrate, he said, "The Korean government has desperately tried to raise the birthrate over the past decade but used the wrong policy mix," emphasizing, "They encouraged childbirth through financial incentives, i.e., cash support, but what is important to increase the birthrate is not cash support but service provision."

He also viewed Korea's traditional patriarchal family model and long, fixed working hours as the biggest obstacles to work-family balance. He analyzed, "Korean women typically stop working for an average of three years after childbirth, and after that, their connection to the labor market is severed, so when they return, they enter temporary or low-wage jobs." In fact, Korea is one of the OECD countries with a large gender wage gap. The average income difference between Korean men and women is 31.2%. The OECD average is 12.1%, and Japan's is 21.3%.

Oystein Esping-Andersen, Emeritus Professor. Professor Esping-Andersen warned, "If the Korean government does not implement such measures to address low birth rates immediately, the future of Korea will be a disaster." (Photo source: Pompeu Fabra University website, Barcelona, Spain)

Professor Esping-Andersen pointed out the notorious real estate prices as another 'vicious cycle.' He said, "Especially in the Seoul area, housing prices and living costs are very high," adding, "To purchase appropriate housing for families with children, two incomes are necessary." He continued, "If women quit their jobs after having children, household income decreases, making it harder to maintain a proper living standard," and added, "This link ultimately makes it difficult for women to have children."

The following is a Q&A with Professor Esping-Andersen.

- Where should we look for the possibility of a birthrate rebound?

△ I think there are two logical policies. The most urgent task in Korea is to reduce working hours. It is a very urgent policy if economic growth is desired. Legally, an 8-hour workday is stipulated, but if employers say, "There is too much work, so please work more," people end up working more than 10 hours. If this work culture continues, it will not be easy for women who have higher education and want careers to have children. Therefore, the first policy principle is to create high-quality part-time employment. This policy should be made on the assumption that women who have interrupted their careers for childbirth and parental leave return to work. Birthrate or family policies should not be narrowly considered but expanded to employment and labor market policies. Korea is in a very extreme situation compared to Europe, and providing stronger employment guarantees for women whose careers have been interrupted by childbirth is the most urgent reform.

- What is the second policy?

△ Do not rely on income transfers and financial incentives. Services are needed. Therefore, the second most urgent policy in Korea is to guarantee universal high-quality childcare during the first few years after childbirth. Especially childcare for children under three years old is necessary, and it should include children from three up to six years old. High-quality childcare should be provided for children under three, and the ratio of children per childcare teacher should be low. Otherwise, middle-class and above families will use private childcare facilities, and the public system may lack financial support. The public childcare system must be high-quality so that upper-class families can also entrust their children. This was the logic of the Scandinavian childcare system. I want to emphasize the two words 'high-quality' and 'universal.' High-quality childcare must be guaranteed to all parents.

- According to the Scandinavian model, do all parents leave their children at childcare centers and go to work?

△ Yes. The Scandinavian model is that parents typically leave their children at childcare centers on the way to work and pick them up on the way home. But working hours are 8 hours, not 10 or 12 hours. That is why I said it is urgent for Korea to implement an 8-hour workday system.

- It is a reality that smaller businesses find it difficult to leave work on time.

△ That is a legislative issue. The 8-hour workday can be legislated or achieved through collective bargaining. Korea's labor unions are not strong enough to enforce the 8-hour workday as a standard. Therefore, the government must legislate the 8-hour workday. Also, hours exceeding 8 should be generously compensated.

To emphasize again, the first is employment contracts and labor market, the second is childcare, and the third is gender equality. Korean women hesitate to marry assuming men will play very traditional male roles. They think women must do cleaning, cooking, childcare, and housework. This means their careers are interrupted, and if they have to take care of children 100% alone, building a career is impossible. Therefore, in Korea, many women are more educated than men but do not work. This is a waste of human resources. Economists estimate that if Korea's female employment rate increases to about 80%, the level of Scandinavia, Korea's GDP would increase by 15-20%.

Professor Emeritus Esping-Andersen. (Photo by Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain)

- How can this be made possible in reality?

△ Let me give the example of Denmark. My hometown Denmark was very traditional in gender roles in the 1960s and 1970s. Women did all the housework, and men did nothing. But now Danish men do 43% of all housework. Thirty percent of Danish men do more housework than women. How did Denmark achieve gender equality? Denmark introduced the 8-hour workday, and women started building careers from the 1970s and 1980s. Women entered the labor market on a large scale, and childcare services were guaranteed. So it became standard for women to work full-time. As women worked full-time, they had less time for housework, and men had to help. That was one reason. In other Scandinavian countries, the motivation for men to become more gender-equal was related to parental leave. A large part of paid parental leave was allocated to fathers. So men stopped working for several months and took care of children at home. Men started learning cooking, cleaning, dishwashing, and laundry at home. Gradually, they began to accept sharing housework 50-50. This was possible because both men and women worked 8 hours a day. Gender equality is not achieved just by telling men to "act more gender-equal." Men will only act that way when necessary. Therefore, Korea's third highest priority gender equality policy needs to make men participate in housework and childcare. This means motivation and necessity, starting with reforming the parental leave system. Parental leave should be well guaranteed and shared between fathers and mothers so that men start taking care of babies in the first year after childbirth.

- What if the government does not implement these policies?

△ The world’s lowest birthrate will continue. In 50 years, there will be no young generation to support the elderly population. Highly productive young people will not financially support the system. From an economic perspective, this is a long-term disaster. Population decline has already begun, and by the end of the century, the population size will be reduced to half of the current level.

- Conservative governments tend to reduce public spending on social welfare. What do you think about this?

△ Whether conservative or progressive governments, they must understand what is at risk. Korea must understand the long-term consequences if it continues its current approach to gender roles, early childcare, and women's careers. If the aforementioned issues are not reformed, Korea's future will be very bleak. Korea has a serious problem with its neighbor North Korea. As population decline and aging progress, there will be a shortage of men needed for the military, and economic growth will slow. Therefore, there will also be a lack of financial means to maintain advanced military equipment, economy, and society. Whether conservative or progressive governments, young social scientists, policymakers, and journalists in Korea must persuade the current or next government. This is a very urgent issue. The current birthrate being close to zero is an unbelievably low figure. Cash policies only slightly advance the timing of childbirth. To increase the birthrate, conditions must be created so that families can build careers while raising children.

- Can immigration be one of the policies?

△ It depends on which countries immigrants come from. Immigrants from Japan would have no effect on the birthrate. But if they come from countries with high fertility rates, it would have an effect, but I think it would be limited. When immigrants arrive in Korea, they initially have more children than Koreans, but the next generations behave like Koreans. Immigrant populations converge with the local population in terms of fertility rates within one generation, so the effect is very minimal. Immigration is not a solution.

Interview advisory = Professor Jaewon Lee, Department of Social Welfare, Inha University