Unequal access to childcare in cities: Is equal public funding sufficient?

Anyone who has children knows how important and time-consuming it is to find the ‘right’ childcare centre for their child. Whereas in rural areas you have to be lucky if there is any institutional childcare nearby, in urban areas there is often a myriad of different childcare options, and you may be spoilt for choice between religious, public, commercial and non-profit providers – at least in the neighbourhood where the authors live as educated, affluent parents. But is this the case everywhere in our city?

Early childhood education is getting much attention these days. The expansion of quality childcare is high on the agenda in many countries, not least because early childhood education can help to reduce social inequalities. Research shows that childcare services provided by public and non-profit providers help to ensure that all children can benefit, in contrast to market-based services provided by for-profit providers.

In our home city Vienna, however, the situation is somewhat paradoxical. Although Vienna has a universal, tax-funded childcare system with no for-profit providers, there are inequalities in the spatial accessibility of childcare within the city. In high socio-economic status areas, we find more places available per child than in areas of low socio-economic status. To better understand what is going on, our research analyses which providers are causing this disparity and why.

What we find is that it is particularly independent (many of them operating only one centre) and church-related non-profit providers that tend to locate in high socio-economic status neighbourhoods, leading to unequal access to services. Public providers, on the other hand, are more frequently located in neighbourhoods with a lower status and thus have a balancing effect. This is illustrated in Figure 1, where we compare accessibility to childcare services between high-status and low-status neighbourhoods. A ratio of 1.20 for all providers indicates 20% more childcare places per child in high-status areas. Independent and church-related non-profit providers contribute to this inequality by providing around twice as many childcare places in high-status neighbourhoods, while public provides (with a ratio lower than one) reduce this inequality.

But why is this the case? We reveal that childcare centres in high-status neighbourhoods are more likely to offer special services such as bilingual education or alternative pedagogy. These services are particularly demanded by parents in these neighbourhoods. Moreover, childcare centres in high-status neighbourhoods are more likely to demand more financial and human resources from parents (by charging higher prices and requiring volunteer work) – and they find these additional resources more easily in more affluent neighbourhoods.

Based on these findings, it is clear that a more nuanced understanding of childcare provision is needed, going beyond the crude distinction between public, for-profit and not-for-profit providers. At the same time, our findings give us some concrete starting points for reducing inequalities in access to childcare in the city. This could be done by increasing public funding, especially for small providers. Alternatively, we could vary funding by neighbourhood, so that childcare centres in low-status neighbourhoods get more and locating there becomes more attractive. Our study shows that public regulators have to consider many aspects in order to ensure equal access to childcare. How much childcare should be provided publicly? Which (other) providers should be allowed on the market, how is childcare funded and is the parents’ demand satisfied by the offered services? While we analyse the case of Vienna, the findings of this study can help policymakers in other urban settings to ensure that everyone has access to childcare.

Read the full article on Urban Studies OnlineFirst here.