Does Administrative Burden Influence Support for a Low-Income Child Care Supplement? Evidence from a Survey Experiment
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6237670 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Yang (0000-0002-9787-5617), Yang Yang (0000-0002-3705-7612), Vincent Hopkins (0000-0001-7326-1808) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 899-912 |
| Publication date | 2024-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Canadian Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0008-4239 • E-ISSN: 1744-9324 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0008423924000350 |
| OpenAlex | W4407110074 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 27 |
The Canada-wide Early Learning and Child Care Plan promises to help low-income parents, especially women, participate in the economy. But even under this plan, care will be too expensive for many families. Several provinces offer targeted subsidies to reduce fees—unfortunately, these benefits are often hard to access and their popularity with voters is unclear. Using a pre-registered survey experiment (N=821), this research note investigates support for a hypothetical child care supplement to help low-income families. Overall, we find strong support for such an initiative, but little enthusiasm to pay for it through new income taxes. We then manipulate the ease of accessing this benefit. We find little evidence that burdensome child care benefits are more popular than easily accessible benefits. If anything, burdensome benefits reduce support. We then briefly consider how partisanship influences support. We conclude with timely recommendations for government and discuss the need for accessible child care benefits
Business · Child care · Demographic economics · Economics · Low income · Public economics · Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics · Global Health Care Issues · Healthcare Policy and Management · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology
How Does Corruption Control Shape Administrative Burden on Businesses? The Moderating Role of Political Attention and Digital Government
Do third parties matter for citizens’ public programme participation? Evidence from an administrative burden perspective
Citizens’ engagement in coproduction through digital platforms
Administrative Burden Revisited
Changing politics of Canadian social policy
Administrative burden, social construction, and public support for government programs
Administrative Burden
Theories of the Policy Process
Comparing Child Care Policy in the Canadian Provinces
Why Are There No Universal Social Programs in the United States?
The Oxford Handbook of the Social Science of Poverty
Understanding Universality within a Liberal Welfare Regime
When political values and perceptions of deservingness collide
Making the difference in social Europe
The Effect of Administrative Burden on Bureaucratic Perception of Policies
The three worlds of welfare capitalism
Polarization Eh? Ideological Divergence and Partisan Sorting in the Canadian Mass Public
Does Administrative Burden Influence Public Support for Government Programs? Evidence from a Survey Experiment
The Intersectionality of Deservingness for State Support
Shared Membership Beyond National Identity
Public opinion on welfare state recalibration in times of austerity
Who Cares If They Need Help? The Deservingness Heuristic, Humanitarianism, and Welfare Opinions
Public Attitudes Toward Social Spending in the United States
Race, “Deservingness,” and Social Spending Attitudes
Who should get what, and why? On deservingness criteria and the conditionality of solidarity among the public
Administrative Burden
The Urban-Rural Divide in Canadian Federal Elections, 1896–2019
Growing Apart? Partisan Sorting in Canada, 1992–2015
Affective Polarization in the Canadian Party System, 1988–2021
The Deservingness Heuristic and the Politics of Health Care
Public opinion, prejudice and the racialization of welfare in Canada
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 4 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |