A policy study on eight megacity identifies key pathways to universal childcare amid population decline

A recent study by Lin Li and Han Jiang from the China Institute of Infant and Child Education at East China Normal University (ECNU) analyzed 71 universal childcare policy documents across eight Chinese megacities, highlighting the importance of government responsibility and identifying four representative supply modes.

In the context of continuous fertility decline and accelerating population aging, universal childcare services have become increasingly critical for alleviating family fertility concerns and addressing labor pressure, particularly in megacities. A recently released study, presented at the 2nd academic conference held by the China Institute of Infant and Child Education at ECNU, systematically examined the characteristics of universal childcare policy tools across eight megacities through an analysis of 71 policy texts and provided political implications.

Government Responsibility: State-Led and Family-Supportive Types 

The study found that the eight megacities can be categorized into two types in terms of the positioning of government responsibility. One is the state-led type, represented by Shanghai, where the government assumes primary responsibility by directly providing universal childcare services, investing in multiple ways, and developing a high-level workforce. The other is the family-supportive type, in which the government supports families in meeting their childcare needs through financial subsidies, service guidance, as well as parental leave. All of the cities embody the principle of "government guidance" proposed by the central government, while differing in  responsibility boundaries, implementation intensity, and specific measures.

Supply Modes: Four Policy Tools Pathways 

The study further analyzed the policy texts and identified four types of supply modes according to the policy tool theory.

The first type is the integration of childcare and preschool education within kindergartens. For example, to establish a cooperative system, Guangzhou and Shenzhen clarify the division of responsibilities between the health and the education sectors. Meanwhile, they provide financial support and subsidies for kindergartens to enlarge classes through incentive-based policy tools. 

The second type is community-embedded childcare servicing. In Shanghai, these services are known as "Baobao Wu" (Baby Houses). They are typically located in street-level party and mass service centers, elderly service centers, shopping malls, or industrial park zones, providing flexible, convenient, and free childcare services for families up to 12 times per year. The government sets construction standards and service guidelines through regulatory tools, and reduces stakeholders' costs through direct investment and subsidies.

The third type is employer-involved childcare servicing. For example, the Chengdu government encourages the labor unions at all levels to participate in childcare provision and supervision. A special position, "Health Administrator in Childcare Institutions," has been established, with personnel selected from community health centers and local hospitals to provide professional support. Employers such as public medical institutions, industrial park zones, and public institutions are also encouraged to run nurseries to better meet employees' needs. 

The fourth type is family-supportive childcare services. The eight megacities mainly rely on incentive-based tools to reduce the cost of raising children and stimulate fertility intentions. Specific measures include parental leave policies, tax concessions, and rental concessions.

The research findings provide a comparative reference and practical experience for further optimizing universal childcare policies across regions, and contribute to advancing China's goal of building a high-quality and widely accessible childcare service system.