Article content continued

This result spawned several subsequent studies as other researchers checked to see if they could reproduce Baker, et al.’s results (they did). The goal of Baker, et al.’s latest study was to see if the negative effects they had identified earlier had persisted (they did). This is only the most recent in a series of studies that all find a statistical link between the introduction of Quebec’s universal daycare program and the worsening of non-cognitive outcomes.

A popular counter-argument involves pointing to the equally uncontested statistical link between the implementation of universal daycare in Quebec and an increase in female labour-market participation rates: lower daycare costs have led to more women in the labour force. To the extent that this was the goal of the program, it succeeded. Supporters of universal daycare often go on to point to how more women in the workforce results in higher levels of income, output and gross domestic product (GDP). Universal daycare, they say, is simply good economic policy.

Well, it might be, but not because it increases GDP. Here I am put in the unfamiliar position of an economist being obliged to point out that GDP is not a measure of social welfare, and that increasing GDP doesn’t necessarily make us better off. (Usually this exchange goes the other way.) Just because more people are working doesn’t mean they’re happy about it.

In making the decision of whether to stay home or work outside the home — and it is still almost always the mother who is confronted with this choice — the stakes are high: both choices involve high levels of stress, foregone opportunities and financial costs. The most important financial cost of working outside the home is the cost of daycare, and Quebec’s universal daycare reduces those costs. Everything else held equal, subsidized daycare tips the cost-benefit balance towards working outside the home, so no one should be surprised that more Quebec women would choose that option.