Open Access Peer-reviewed Research Article

Nordic childcare policies and their implications for South Korea: A documentary analysis

Main Article Content

Eon Ha Park corresponding author


Korea has experienced several decades of low birth rates, contributing to an aging population. The government has unsuccessfully attempted several policies to develop and maintain childbirth and childcare that would mitigate the reduction of the productive workforce. Korean policy makers consider the Nordic countries the benchmark for the development and implementation of social welfare programs, but they have been unable to achieve similar levels of success in reversing low fertility. Using documentary research, this study explores the nature and impact of childcare policies in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, and Korea to gain insights that could help optimize childcare policies in Korea. Based on this analysis, this study recommends that Korea adopt childcare policies that focus on defamiliarization, decommodification, gender integration, and a child-centered approach.

childcare costs, social welfare, gender equality, child-centered approach, labor

Article Details

How to Cite
Park, E. H. (2021). Nordic childcare policies and their implications for South Korea: A documentary analysis. Social Work and Social Welfare, 3(1), 91-101.


  1. Atoh M. Very low fertility in Japan and value change hypothesis. Review of Population and Social Policy, 2001, 10(1): 1-21.
  2. Lee S. Low fertility and policy responses in Korea. The Japanese Journal of Population, 2009, 7(1): 57-70.
  3. Sobotka T. Post-transitional fertility: Childbearing postponement and the shift to low and unstable fertility levels. Journal of Biosocial Science, 2017, 49(S1): 20-45.
  4. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Strengthening social cohesion in Korea, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2013.
  5. McDonald P. Very low fertility: Consequences, causes and policy approaches. The Japanese Journal of Population, 2008, 6(1): 19-23.
  6. Statistics Korea, 2019.
  7. Chung, SH. Policy responses to low fertility and its problems. Korean Journal of Population Studies, 2015, 38(2): 113-134.
  8. Lee S and Choi H. Lowest-low fertility and policy responses in South Korea, in Low and Lower Fertility, Springer, Cham, 2015: 107-123.
  9. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Family database, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2014.
  10. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Starting strong IV: Monitoring quality in early childhood education and care, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2015.
  11. Kim WS. Korean growth-oriented welfare model based on government expenditures of Northern European countries. The Korean Association of Public Finance, 2014: 1-23.
  12. Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2013.
  13. Partanen A. The Nordic Theory of Everything: in Search of a Better Life, Seoul, Wonderbox, 2017.
  14. Shin DJ. Early childhood education and care system in Nordic countries: Norway, Finland and Sweden. The Korean Society for Early Childhood Teacher Education, 2015, 19(5): 73-99.
  15. Yoon HS. The differences and similarity of family policies in Nordic countries: Childcare and parental leave. Korean Journal of Social Welfare, 2007, 59(2): 327-354.
  16. Lewis J. Work-family balance policies, Massachusetts: Edward Elgar, 2009.
  17. Gilbert N and Terrell P. Theory of social welfare policy: Analysis framework and selection. Seoul: Nanumbook, 2007.
  18. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Starting strong II: Early childhood education and care data country note, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2006.
  19. Wennemo I. Sharing the costs of children: Studies on the development of family support in the OECD countries. Stockholm: Swedish Institute for Social Research, 1994.
  20. Eydal GB and Rostgaard T. Caring family-policies and practices in Nordic countries: Challenges for future family policy in Nordic countries, Copenhagen: SFI, 2013.
  21. Na Y and Lamblin M. Slow life of Finland, Seoul: Miraebook, 2015.
  22. Kremer M. How welfare states care: Culture, gender and parenting in Europe, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2007.
  23. Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Child and family policy in Finland, Helsinki, 2013.
  24. Duvander AZ and Johansson M. For which fathers do reforms matter? A study of the impact of three Swedish parental leave reforms, Stockholms Universitet, 2014.
  25. Røstgaard T and Lausten M. The coming and going of the father’s quota in Denmark: Consequences for fathers’ parental leave take-up, in Fatherhood in the Nordic welfare states-Comparing care policies and practice, Bristol: Policy Press, 2014: 277-302.
  26. Rostgaard T. Setting time aside for the father: Father’s leave in Scandinavia. Community, Work and Family, 2002, 5(3): 343-364.
  27. Lee YJ. Nursery policy in Finland, Korea Institute of Child Care and Education, 2016, 49: 34-45.
  28. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Parental leave: Where are the fathers? OECD policy brief. OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016.
  29. Nuffield Foundation. Early childhood education and care. London, 2017. education_and_childcare_Nuffield_FINAL.pdf
  30. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Nurture policy in Korea. Sejong, 2017.
  31. Ministry of Employment and Labor. Childcare leave and childcare allowances. Sejong, 2017.