This chapter examines fertility trends in Greece and their demographic implications. It analyses the family policy landscape, including public spending on family benefits, maternity and parental leave, and early childhood education and care services. It also discusses income support for families with children and considers how these policies shape parents' ability to balance work and family life.
Challenges for Young People in Greece to Reach Financial Independence
Abstract
Supporting family formation and improving work-life balance have become increasingly important policy priorities in Greece, particularly in light of demographic challenges, low fertility rates and the economic pressures faced by younger generations. During the years of the sovereign debt crisis, financial insecurity, high unemployment and limited family support measures contributed to the postponement of parenthood and heightened difficulties in reconciling employment with family responsibilities. While demographic trends remain challenging, recent years have seen a gradual strengthening of family-oriented policies aimed at reducing the economic and practical costs associated with raising children and supporting parents’ participation in the labour market.
Greece’s demographic trends reflect broader European patterns of declining fertility and delayed parenthood. The fertility rate in Greece has fallen dramatically over recent decades, marking one of the lowest rates among OECD countries. The total fertility rate – the average number of children that would be born to each woman over her lifetime at current age‑specific fertility rates – stood at 1.2 children per woman in 2024, below both the OECD average of 1.4 and the population replacement rate of 2.1 (Figure 4.1). While the rate represents a stark decline from 2.4 children per woman in 1970, Greece shows an interesting pattern with a slight increase between 1995 and 2020. The literature suggests that this temporary recovery was primarily due to two factors: a “recuperation effect” of delayed births from the 1980s and 1990s, and the positive association between employment and fertility among highly educated women (Kotzamanis, Baltas and Kostaki, 2017[1]; Bagavos and Tragaki, 2014[2]).
Total fertility rate for 1970, 1995 and 2024, and population replacement rate
Note: The total fertility rate is measured as the average number of children born per woman over a lifetime given current age‑specific fertility rates and assuming no female mortality during reproductive years.
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator SF2.1 Fertility rates, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
Greece also experienced a dramatic shift in the timing of childbearing and a redistribution of fertility rates across age groups. The average age of motherhood reached 32.1 years in 2021, placing Greece at the high end of the ranking, both among OECD countries (average 30.9 years) and among EU countries (average 31.1 years), and marking a significant increase from 29.6 years in 2000 (Figure 4.2). The shift in fertility patterns illustrates a clear transition toward later parenthood, with fertility rates among women aged 30‑34 becoming the peak childbearing age, increasing from 76.9 to 101.5 births per 1 000 women between 2000 and 2021, while rates among younger age groups have declined significantly (Figure 4.3).
Greece’s marriage and fertility patterns remain deeply intertwined, reflecting a persistent traditional approach to family formation despite gradual societal change. While births outside marriage have risen from 4.0% in 2000 to 9.7% in 2023, they remain among the lowest in the OECD, where they often exceed 50% (Figure 4.4). The general marriage rate, focussing on the population aged 15‑49, has remained stable between 10% and 11% over the past three decades (1991-2021). However, the crude marriage rate decreased from 6.0 marriages per 1 000 people in 1995 to 4.2 in 2022 (OECD Family Database, 2025[3]), suggesting changes in the family structure and marriage patterns: 1) women’s age at first marriage has reached historic highs; 2) the proportion of never-married women has increased to 25% among those born around 1980; and 3) couples increasingly opt for civil partnerships rather than traditional marriages (Gavalas, Pavlopoulos and Rontos, 2024[4]). This pattern of delayed marriage and the persistent cultural link between marriage and childbearing leads couples to either postpone parenthood or choose child-free arrangements.
Mean age of women at birth, 1970, 2000 and 2021 or latest available
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator SF2.3 Age mother childbirth, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
Age‑specific fertility rates in Greece, for 2000, 2010 and 2021 or latest available
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator SF2.3 Age mother childbirth, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
Proportion of all births where the mother’s marital status at the time of birth is other than married, 2000 and 2023
Note: Data refer to 2022 for Chile, 2021 for Denmark, 2020 for Switzerland, 2019 for Iceland and Ireland, 2018 for Belgium, and to 2002 instead of 2000 for Chile and Israel.
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator SF2.4 Share births outside marriage, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
The relationship between education, employment, and fertility in Greece reveals a complex interplay of opportunities and constraints in women’s life choices. Maternal employment rates in Greece (61.2%) lag significantly behind both OECD (73.1%) and EU (74.2%) averages, highlighting a persistent struggle in balancing work and family life among women in Greece. This challenge manifests itself differently across educational levels – while highly educated Greek mothers achieve employment rates of 76.8%, close to OECD average, the rates drop dramatically for those with medium (51.6%) and low education (39.8%) (Figure 4.5). These employment patterns intersect with fertility in unexpected ways: while higher education generally appears to reduce fertility, this relationship reverses among employed women. Notably, employed women with higher education achieve higher fertility rates compared to their non-employed counterparts (Bagavos and Tragiki, 2017[5]), suggesting that better jobs and resources associated with higher education may actually facilitate work-family balance (Kountouris, 2020[6]).
This finding contrasts sharply with men’s fertility patterns, which are primarily influenced by their employment status regardless of their education level. Between 2000 and 2014, employed men consistently had higher fertility rates, while non-employed men had much lower rates. The substantial difference underscores the critical role of employment as a prerequisite for fatherhood in Greece. The economic crises since 2008 therefore had a profound impact on male fertility trends. Before the crisis, rising male total fertility rate was driven by changes in fertility behaviour, while between 2008 and 2014, declining employability became the main factor behind lower fertility rates, despite continued positive fertility behaviour. These patterns highlight the vulnerability of male fertility to economic instability and the essential link between employment and fatherhood (Bagavos and Tragiki, 2017[5]).
While Greece follows the broader European trend where employed women’s fertility rates have surpassed those of non-employed women since 2009, the country’s persistently low maternal employment rates, particularly among less educated women, indicate that improving work-family reconciliation policies could help boost both employment and fertility outcomes across all educational levels.
Employment rates for women (15‑64 year‑olds) with children (0‑14 year‑olds) by level of education, 2021 or latest available year
Note: (a) For Canada and the United States, data refer to children aged 0‑17.
(b) For Australia, women with “at least one child aged 0‑14” are classified as either “wife or partner with children under 15” or “lone parent with children under 15,” with data referring to June months.
(c) For Sweden, data are from 2020; for Bulgaria and the United Kingdom, from 2019; and for Türkiye, from 2013.
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator LMF1.2 Maternal Employment, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
4.3.1. Spending on family policies
The main purpose of family policies is to make life easier for all families, and to avoid gaps in the support they may require. Despite having one of the strongest cultural attachments to the family institution in Europe, as evidenced by Greece’s traditional family formation patterns and restricted births outside marriage (Rontos, 2010[7]; Gavalas, Pavlopoulos and Rontos, 2024[4]), Greece’s total public spending on family benefits remained modest at around 1.7% of GDP in 2021 (Figure 4.6), well below both the EU average (2.7%) and the OECD average (2.3%). This rate places Greece significantly behind high-spending European nations like France (3.4%), Sweden (3.3%), and Denmark (3.1%). Greece’s emphasis on direct cash benefits (1.3% of GDP) over services and tax incentives aligns with other Southern European countries like Spain and Italy (both 1.9%). Recent policy developments and increased spending in the past few years indicate a clear strategic shift towards strengthening family support.
Share of GDP of public spending on family benefits by type of expenditure, 2021 or latest available
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator PF1.1 Public spending on family benefits, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
4.3.2. Parental leave entitlements
One of the most important elements of family support across OECD countries is parental leave, which enables parents to take time off work to care for young children while maintaining employment protection and income security. When comparing the duration of legislated earmarked and shareable paid leave entitlements in Greece with other OECD countries (OECD, 2025[8]),1 Greece stands out with extensive entitlements for mothers: 34.3 weeks in 2024, compared to the OECD average of 25.4 weeks Greek mothers are entitled to a total of 34.3 weeks of effective maternity leave, which is notably higher than the OECD average of about 25.4 weeks (Figure 4.7). This leave entitlement is split into two parts: a 17‑week basic leave paid at 100% of their earnings and a 39‑week special leave paid at the statutory minimum wage of EUR 830 per month (which would be equivalent to approximately 17.3 weeks at full pay).
On the paternal side, Greece provides about 11.5 weeks of father-specific leave, which is slightly below the OECD average of 12.7 weeks. Paternity leave in Greece consists of 2.8 weeks of fully paid paternity leave and additional parental leave and is complemented by roughly 45.9 weeks of shareable leave between parents (most often taken by mothers). Parental leave can be taken continuously or split into periods until the child is eight years old. In an effort to promote gender equality and encourage a more balanced distribution of unpaid work within the household, mothers can transfer up to seven months of their special maternity leave to fathers since April 2024.
Greece’s parental leave policy aims to promote gender equality through transferable maternity leave and extensive shareable leave, which encourages both parents to participate in childcare responsibilities. However, relatively modest payment rates for paternal leave (56.9%) –below the OECD average of 61.6% (OECD, 2024[9]) – along with employment restrictions, limit uptake among fathers. Traditional gender roles and financial factors, such as fathers often earning more than their partners, also contribute to the lower uptake of paternal leave. While policy changes can take time to influence behaviour, evidence from OECD countries suggests that providing fathers with well-paid, non-transferable leave entitlements can increase their use of parental leave and help redistribute childcare responsibilities (OECD, 2023[10]). This observation aligns with Objective 3 on Family support of the National Action Plan for Demography 2025-2035, which examines the possibility of granting non-transferable leave to fathers to strengthen their role in raising children and promote harmonious family life.
Duration of earmarked and shareable family leave entitlements in weeks, 2024
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator PF2.1 Parental leave systems, https://webfs.oecd.org/Els-com/Family_Database/PF2_1_Parental_leave_systems.pdf.
4.3.3. Early Childhood Education and Care
As discussed in the OECD Policy Brief Is Childcare affordable? (OECD, 2020[11]), affordable and high-quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) plays a key role within a country’s family policy system. Because mothers often take on the main share of caregiving duties, access to ECEC can support them in achieving a better balance between work and family life when they return to employment after maternity or parental leave. In Greece, the difference in employment rates between men and women in couples with children is much larger than in European OECD countries on average (OECD, 2020[12]). Beyond promoting labour market participation, ECEC contributes positively to children’s learning and development, helps reduce poverty, and fosters more equal opportunities. It is therefore an essential instrument for advancing family, child well-being, and gender equality goals.
ECEC services include both care for 0‑2 year‑olds and pre‑primary education for 3‑5 year‑olds. Greece has made remarkable progress in expanding ECEC provision for the youngest children in the past two decades, increasing enrolment rates for 0‑2 year‑olds from 14.0% in 2005 to 29.8% in 2024 – a 15.8 percentage points (p.p.) rise (OECD Family Database, 2024[13]). Despite this progress, the country still lags behind OECD (38%) and EU22 averages (39%) and additional investment in ECEC services are needed. The participation rate for this age group in Greece is higher for families in the highest income tertile (47.2%) compared to those in the lowest income tertile (17.9%) (Figure 4.8, Panel A). Informal care remains prominent, for 40% of children aged 0‑2 in Greece, compared to the OECD average of 24% (OECD, 2021[14]).
Notes: For details on methodologies and technical notes see sources.
Panel A: (a) Data for Iceland and the United Kingdom refer to 2018, for Norway to 2020 and for Switzerland to 2021.
Panel B: (b) Data for Belgium, Greece and Portugal (2013 only) refer to ISCED 02 (pre‑primary), while the data for other countries also include ISCED 01 (early childhood educational development). In the case of Greece and Portugal, data for ISCED 01 are not available, while in the case of Belgium, the category ISCED 01 does not apply. (c) Year of reference differs from 2013: 2014 for Estonia, Japan and Türkiye; 2015 for Colombia, Hungary; and 2017 for Ireland.
Source: Panel A: OECD Family Database (2024[13]), Indicator PF3.2 Enrolment childcare preschool; Panel B: OECD (2025[15]), Education at a Glance 2025: OECD Indicators, Chapter B1. “How does the provision of and participation in early childhood education and care vary across countries”, Table B1.2.
For the age groups 3 to 5, 67% of Greek children were enrolled in primary education (ISCED 02) in 2023, which is considerably below the OECD average of 84%, yet a notable increase from 2013 when 49% of young children in Greece were enrolled. Enrolment rates in Greece increase rapidly with age, reaching near universal enrolment for 4‑year‑olds (98.9%) and 5‑year‑olds (99.5%) as a result of Law 4704/2020, which made pre‑primary education compulsory as of age 4. Many other EU countries, including France, Belgium and Spain, also achieve near universal (>97%) pre‑primary enrolment for 3‑year‑olds, highlighting some room for improvement in Greece (Figure 4.8, Panel B). Informal care also remains important for the age group 3‑5, at 42%, compared to the OECD average of 26% (OECD, 2021[14]).
Part of the reason for the lower ECEC participation rates in Greece for the youngest cohorts is related to the uneven supply of childcare facilities. Greece’s Recovery and Resilience Facility (European Commission, 2021[16]) initially foresaw the creation of more than 20 000 new childcare places, primarily through the construction of new childcare centres and the expansion/renovation of existing nurseries, especially in areas where provision is insufficient. However, the amended plans that were approved by the Council of the European Union in 2025 only mention 1 000 new childcare units (Council of the European Union, 2025[17]).
In addition, average monthly fees for ECEC services for children under 3 in Greece are on the higher end of EU countries, as illustrated in the latest report on Key data on early childhood education and care in Europe of the European Commission, EACEA and Eurydice (2025[18]). To lower the cost of childcare for families, Greece uses a voucher scheme financed by the European Social Fund Plus 2021-2027 programme, which were used by 110 000 families in 2024‑2025 (Matsaganis et al., 2025[19]). These vouchers are directed mainly at low-income households, working mothers, and parents seeking employment.
Taking into account the full range of childcare benefits or rebates as well as the interaction between childcare specific policies and any other tax and benefit policies, calculations based on the OECD Tax and Benefit Model reveal that the net cost of childcare (i.e. “out-of-pocket” costs) in Greece is below the EU and OECD averages. Indeed, while the “typical” gross childcare fee in full-time centre‑based care is relatively high (Figure 4.9, Panel A – shown for families with two children), at 51.0% of average earnings, well above the OECD average of 25.7% and EU average of 20.3%, the net cost after accounting for childcare benefits, rebates, and other tax advantages is much lower (Figure 4.9, Panel B). For a two‑earner couple family in Greece, the out-of-pocket cost is around 8.0% of average earnings, below the OECD average of 13.5% and EU average of 10.8%. The same pattern holds true for single‑parent families in Greece. These calculations suggest that while gross fees are high, the Greek Government provides substantial financial support to help parents manage these costs.
4.3.4. Out-of-school programmes
Out-of-school programmes allow parents to work on a full-time basis and offer care and enriching educational activities for children outside regular school hours. In many developed countries, these programmes are subsidised to help parents manage education costs and ensure accessible options for all. Greek families make frequent use of such programmes compared to other EU and OECD countries, with younger school-age children typically having higher involvement than older groups. In Greece, 42.3% of children aged 6 to 8 and 39.8% of those aged 9 to 11 participate in out-of-school programmes, compared to the EU average of 30.3% for ages 6 to 11 (Figure 4.10). Moreover, Greek children also spend an average of 12 hours per week in centre‑based care, which is higher than the OECD average of 9.5 hours. Access to out-of-school care in Greece is also equitable and not significantly influenced by socio‑economic factors.
Notes: “Full-time” care is defined as care for at least 40 hours per week. Data for countries marked with an * are based on estimates for a specific region or city, rather than for the country as a whole. Average earnings/the average wage refers to the gross wage earnings paid to average workers, before deductions of any kind (e.g. withholding tax, income tax, private or social security contributions and union dues). See the OECD Tax and Benefit Systems website (http://www.oecd.org/els/soc/benefits-and-wages.htm) for more detail on the methods and assumptions used and information on the modelled for each country.
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator PF3.4 Childcare support, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
In 2022, Greece launched a pilot programme that added an extra hour and a half of lessons to the schedule of selected all-day schools, extending their hours until 5.30 pm (Eurydice, 2022[20]). This extended timetable had two main objectives: to support families’ work-life balance and to introduce students to a broader range of activities and skills. Additionally, the pilot programme (foreseen to remain in place until June 2026) provides targeted support for students with learning difficulties through dedicated study sessions in subjects like language and mathematics. Free access to such study sessions is particularly significant, as private tutoring is extremely common in Greece and can represent a substantial financial burden for families. This idea aligns with the National Action Plan for Demography 2025-2035 under Objective 2: Harmonisation of professional and family life, which establishes a “Full day school” programme offering diverse extracurricular activities (sports, artistic, foreign languages) designed to support working parents.
Centre‑based OSH service participation rates among 6‑11 year‑olds during a typical week, by age group, 2019 or latest available data
Source: OECD Family Database, Indicator PF4.3 Out of school hours care, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html.
4.3.5. Income support for working families
Family benefits play a crucial role in social protection systems by reducing poverty, supporting child development, and fostering economic stability. They help families meet basic needs, improve access to education and healthcare, and balance work and family responsibilities through measures like parental leave and childcare subsidies. This section presents income support specifically targeted on working young families in Greece and analyses its effects on their disposable income, one of the most important factors in the decision of living independently and having children.
In Greece, in addition to the child-related components of GMI and the unemployment benefits (described in Section 3.3), families receive targeted income support through the Child Allowance, the Housing Benefit and the Employment and Pension Tax Credit (see Box 4.1). Additionally, specific programmes assist families with childcare and school-related expenses and one‑off payments are put in place (see Box 4.1). The Greece’s National Action Plan for Demography 2025-2035 explicitly acknowledges the importance of appropriate income support for families. In its Objective 3, the Action Plan considers the redefinition of the equivalised household income in case of single mothers with more than one child and an increase in the amount of the child benefit.
The child benefit paid for the third child is double than that paid for each of the first two children. In a country with very low fertility rates and a high proportion of women without children, the rationale behind this design of child allowances is questionable. The reason behind this stark increase per child after the second child is not clear and is not easily motivated either on the grounds of the marginal costs associated with raising additional children, nor incentives for larger families. Even if with lesser impact on families’ income, the birth bonus also has an increasing payment schedule. Aside from the lack of international evidence on the effectiveness of birth bonuses, the motivation for the increasing payment schedule is not clear.
Families receive targeted income support through several programmes. The main schemes providing income support on a regular basis are the Child Allowance, the Housing Benefit and the Employment and Pension Tax Credit.
Child Allowance
The primary Child Allowance is a non-taxable benefit granted to families with annual income below EUR 15 000 for every child up to 18 years old or 19 years old if enrolled in secondary education (up to 24 years old if in higher education or if they have an invalidity of at least 67%). The means test defines three ranges of income: from 0 to EUR 6 000 (category 1), from EUR 6 001 to EUR 10 000 (category 2), and from EUR 10 001 to EUR 15 000 (category 3). The monthly benefit amount depends on the household’s income and on the number of dependent children:
For families in category 1, it is of EUR 70 for the first and second child, and EUR 140 for the third and every other dependent child beyond the third.
For families in category 2, it is of EUR 42 for the first and second child, and EUR 84 for the third and every other dependent child beyond the third.
For families in category 3, it is of EUR 28 for the first and second child, and EUR 56 for the third and every other dependent child beyond the third.
Housing Benefit
The Housing Benefit is a welfare programme aiming to help low-income households who live in rented primary residences to meet their housing costs. The programme is non-contributory, means-tested and not taxable. The benefit is awarded to households whose annual income does not exceed EUR 7 000 for a single person, increased of EUR 3 500 for each additional household member. Multi-person households include adult children up to 25 years of age attending school, university, or an institution for vocational education and training, regardless of their place of residence. The monthly amount of the Housing Benefit is EUR 70 for single person households, increased by EUR 35 for each additional household member with the maximum of EUR 210. As for GMI, the benefit is paid for six months from the date of first payment. After the lapse of the above period, the beneficiary is required to resubmit an application, which will be reassessed.
Childbirth Benefit
Since the 1st of January 2021, Greece has also put in place a Childbirth Benefit, whereby families whose annual income falling below EUR 40 000 are granted a one‑off payment for each new child born. The amount is increasing in the number of children such that families receive EUR 2 400 for the birth of a first child, EUR 2 700 for a second child, EUR 3 000 for a third child, and EUR 3 500 for a fourth child and every other child beyond the fourth.
Employment and pension tax credit
The income tax for employers and pensioners is reduced for those whose annual income is below EUR 12 001, according to the number of dependent children. The amount of the reduction is.
EUR 777 for those with no dependent children,
EUR 900 for those with one dependent child,
EUR 1 120 for those with two dependent children,
EUR 1 340 for those with three dependent children,
EUR 1 580 for those with four dependent children,
For each additional dependent child after the fifth, the tax deduction increases by EUR 220. For annual income exceeding EUR 12 000, the tax credit is reduced by EUR 20 for every EUR 1 000 of taxable income above EUR 12 000.
Source: Country Note for Greece, OECD Tax-benefits system, see (OECD, 2025[21]).
The OECD has developed a specific indicator for the needs of this report. The Family Indicator quantifies the relative impact of children on household net income within a specific country’s tax-benefit system. It compares the net income of a hypothetical household with children to the same household with no children, all else constant, broken down by the number of children (see Annex A for methodological details). The analysis presented here focusses on the effects of the child allowances, housing benefits, in-work benefits and minimum income benefits on the net income of young couples when the number of children increases.2
The support provided for families with children in Greece is lower than in other European countries. Figure 4.11 shows the change in 30‑year‑old one‑earner couples’ net income as percentage of the net income of a couple of similar characteristics but without children. As in all countries, income support for Greek families has a positive impact in their net income as the number of children increases. For low-income families (Panel A), regardless of the number of children, this relative increase in Greece is close to the increase observed in France and Spain and much lower than in Germany and Poland. For average‑income families, the relative increase provided to families by the Greek system is lower than in all other countries selected for comparison (Panel B).
While income support provided to low-income families for an extra child represents a low, but important increase of their net income, for middle class families (i.e. working at the average wage) it is very low in relative terms and does not make a real difference in their net income.
For Greek low-income couples (Figure 4.11, Panel A) the presence of one – respectively two – children leads to a net income 10% – respectively 19% – higher than the net income of the same couple without children (a third child raises the net income of 37%). These positive changes are explained by the family allowance and, to a much lesser extent, by refundable tax credits. Measured in relative terms, family income support in Greece is low compared to other countries, e.g. in Poland the change in net income for a similar couple is 27%, 69% and 107% (for one, two and three children respectively). However, in absolute terms, this represents valuable support for low-income families; for example, a Greek couple with no children increases its annual net income of EUR 909 with the arrival of the first child.
Change in families’ net income with children as a percentage of the net income when the couple has no children, by family type
Reading note: In Poland, a couple working at the minimum wage with no children (Panel A) would increase their net income of 27% with the arrival on a first child, a second child would increase their net income of 69% relative to the net income without children, and a third child would lead to a net income 107% higher than the net income with no children.
Note: Family Indicator values are calculated for a one‑earner 30‑year‑old couple where the main earner is working full-time at the specified wage level, minimum wage in Panel A and average wage in Panel B. The ages of children are 2, 3, and 5 years old. The following benefits are modelled: social assistance, family benefits, housing benefits, and in-work benefits. Childcare costs and benefits, unemployment benefits, and temporary into-work benefits are excluded from the analysis. Childcare costs and benefits are excluded because the partner is out-of-work and in TaxBEN it is assumed both parents need to work full-time to be eligible to childcare benefits. The policy reference date is 1 January 2024.
Source: OECD calculations based on output from the OECD tax-benefit model (TaxBEN 2.7.0).
For middle‑income couples (Figure 4.11, Panel B), as expected, relative changes in net income are lower because of the higher earnings from work. In Greece, a one earner couple working at the average wage with two children has a net income only 5.4% higher than a similar couple without children (a net increase of EUR 1 015 per year). For a middle‑class family, such a low level of support makes little or no difference and cannot be seen as an incentive to have children. In other countries, income support for middle‑income families is higher; for example, in Germany a couple with two children has a net income around 14% higher than a similar couple without children (a net increase of EUR 6 272); in Poland, the difference is 38% (a net increase of PLN 27 424, approximately EUR 6 526).
Since each child represents a significant additional expense, the positive impact of income support for families is overall limited and of little help to young Greek couples who decide to have children, and who are often more exposed to precarious work and poverty.
Greece’s fertility trends reveal a significant demographic shift, with the total fertility rate dropping from 2.4 children per woman in 1970 to 1.2 in 2024 – well below both the OECD average of 1.6 and the population replacement rate of 2.1. This trend reflects profound changes in childbearing patterns, with a clear shift towards later parenthood – most women now have children in their early thirties (30‑34 age group). Marriage and fertility patterns remain deeply intertwined, reflecting a persistent traditional approach to family formation despite gradual societal change. While births outside marriage have risen from 4.0% in 2000 to 9.7% in 2023, they remain among the lowest in the OECD, where they often exceed 50%. Employment is a key determinant of fertility for both genders, but low maternal employment suggests that balancing work and family life is challenging for many families.
The low fertility rates and changing childbearing patterns are situated within a family policy landscape that faces significant challenges. Public spending on family benefits, at 1.7% of GDP in 2021, was below the EU and OECD averages, reflecting the fiscal consolidation Greece undertook over the past decade. As fiscal space recovers, spending has been rising, including the 2026 tax package for families with children and the increase in the birth benefit to EUR 3 500 per child in 2024.
A central element of the family policy effort has been the expansion of parental protection and income support measures. Maternity leave and the associated maternity benefit in the private sector have been extended from six to nine months, while coverage has been expanded to include self-employed women, farmers and foster mothers. At the same time, the parental leave allowance has been granted a tax-exempt, non-seizable and non-transferable status, strengthening income security during periods of caregiving. Recent reforms also aim to promote gender equality in childcare responsibilities through expanded parental leave options. These reforms represent a significant enhancement of family support compared with the crisis period and aim to reduce some of the labour market penalties traditionally associated with parenthood, particularly for women. Compared with other OECD countries, maternity leave provisions are relatively generous at 34.3 weeks, yet low payment rates for father-specific leave limit their effective uptake.
In addition, policy interventions have increasingly focused on improving access to childcare services and facilitating the reconciliation of work and family life. Greece has achieved notable progress in expanding ECEC provision – increasing enrolment rates for 0‑2 year‑olds by 17.6 p.p. since 2005 – and reducing out-of-pocket childcare costs – the number of beneficiary children in the childcare voucher programme increased from approximately 141 000 in 2019-2020 to more than 169 000 in 2025–2026. Even so, enrolment rates for the youngest cohort remain below OECD average, with informal care arrangements being significantly more common in Greece. Expanding affordable and accessible ECEC services therefore continues to be a policy priority, to allow parents to combine work and childcare responsibilities and enforce children’s learning, development and well-being while advancing equal opportunities.
The “Neighbourhood Nannies” programme was introduced as an innovative childcare initiative designed to provide families with greater flexibility in accessing certified childcare services for young children. By supporting home-based childcare arrangements, the programme seeks to address practical barriers faced by working parents, particularly in areas where formal childcare provision may be limited or where working schedules are difficult to accommodate within conventional childcare structures. Such measures are intended to strengthen labour market participation while easing some of the constraints associated with early parenthood. Also out-of-school programmes for older children show particular success, with participation rates exceeding EU averages and equitable access across socio‑economic groups. Additionally, recent initiatives like the pilot programme extending school hours until 5.30 pm mark a significant step towards improving work-life balance and expanding educational opportunities.
As in all countries, income support for families has a positive impact in their net income as the number of children increases. However, the support provided by the Greek tax-benefit system to working families with children in Greece is lower than in other European countries. While income support to low-income families provided for an extra child represents a low but important increase of their net income, for middle class families (i.e. working at the average wage) it is very low in relative terms and does not make a real difference in their net income. Additionally, the benefit structure is uneven, with support for a third child being double that of the first two, a design whose rationale is unclear given the country’s low fertility rates.
References
[2] Bagavos, C. and A. Tragaki (2014), “Male fertility in Greece: Trends and differentials by education level and employment status”, Demographic Research, Vol. 31/6, pp. 137-160, https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2014.31.6.
[5] Bagavos, C. and A. Tragiki (2017), “The compositional effects of education and employment on Greek male and female fertility rates during 2000–2014”, Demographic Research, Vol. 36/47, pp. 1435-1452, https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2017.36.47.
[17] Council of the European Union (2025), Council implementing decision approving the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Greece, https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-17055-2024-ADD-1/en/pdf.
[16] European Commission (2021), Greece’s recovery and resilience plan, https://reforms-investments.ec.europa.eu/recovery-and-resilience-facility-1/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en?prefLang=es.
[18] European Commission / EACEA / Eurydice (2025), Key data on early childhood education and care in Europe - 2025, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/publications/key-data-early-childhood-education-and-care-europe-2025.
[20] Eurydice (2022), National reforms in school education, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/greece/national-reforms-school-education.
[4] Gavalas, V., D. Pavlopoulos and K. Rontos (2024), “Redefining family structures: Births out of wedlock in 21st century Greece”, Population, Space and Place, Vol. 30/8, p. e2806, https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2806.
[1] Kotzamanis, B., P. Baltas and A. Kostaki (2017), “The Trend of Period Fertility in Greece and Its Changes During the Current Economic Recession”, Population Review, Vol. 56/2, pp. 30-48, https://doi.org/10.1353/prv.2017.0006.
[6] Kountouris, Y. (2020), “Higher education and fertility: Evidence from reforms in Greece”, Economics of Education Review, Vol. 79, p. 102059, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2020.102059.
[19] Matsaganis, M. et al. (2025), “Reducing the Motherhood Penalty in Greece: Lessons from Norway”, Working Paper, No. 132, Helenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy, https://www.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Working-paper-132-final-1.pdf.
[15] OECD (2025), Education at a Glance 2025: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1c0d9c79-en.
[21] OECD (2025), OECD - Tax-Benefit Database: Description of policy rules for Greece 2025, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/incomes-support-redistribution-and-work-incentives/TaxBEN-Greece-latest.pdf.
[8] OECD (2025), Paid leave for fathers: Recent OECD policy trends, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2025/10/paid-leave-for-fathers_f7302e2e/07442bed-en.pdf.
[9] OECD (2024), Parental leave replacement rates., https://webfs.oecd.org/Els-com/Family_Database/PF2_1_Parental_leave_systems.pdf.
[10] OECD (2023), Paid parental leave: Big differences for mothers and fathers., https://www.oecd.org/en/blogs/2023/01/Paid-parental-leave--Big-differences-for-mothers-and-fathers.html.
[14] OECD (2021), PF3.3 Informal childcare arrangements, https://webfs.oecd.org/Els-com/Family_Database/PF3-3-Informal-childcare-arrangements.pdf.
[11] OECD (2020), Is Childcare Affordable?, OECD, Paris, https://web-archive-storage.oecd.org/aemint-web-archive-prod/web-archive/4b/4bda28da8febd677c0fb13407f2d2807e6593d725434aa282501e137e307f2cb.pdf.
[12] OECD (2020), OECD Economic Surveys: Greece 2020, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b04b25de-en.
[3] OECD Family Database (2025), SF_3.1 Marriage and divorce rates, https://webfs.oecd.org/Els-com/Family_Database/SF_3_1_Marriage_and_divorce_rates.pdf.
[13] OECD Family Database (2024), PF3.2 Enrolment in childcare and pre-school, https://webfs.oecd.org/Els-com/Family_Database/PF3_2_Enrolment_childcare_preschool.pdf.
[7] Rontos, K. (2010), “Demographic trends, young people’s attitudes towards marriage and socio-economic changes related to family formation in Greece and in selected European Countries: A comparative analysis based on official and survey research data.”, International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory, Vol. 3/2, pp. p.543-562, https://ijcst.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/ijcst/article/view/31105.
← 1. Child-related leave systems vary across OECD countries but are typically classified as maternity, paternity, parental and home care leave. However, the distinction between these types of leave has become increasingly blurred across OECD countries. An alternative way to classify paid leave entitlements is by distinguishing between periods earmarked for mothers, periods earmarked for fathers, and a shareable portion that can be used by either parent (OECD, 2025[8]). More details on the calculation can be found in the OECD Family Database, Indicator PF2.1. Key characteristics of parental leave systems: https://webfs.oecd.org/Els-com/Family_Database/PF2_1_Parental_leave_systems.pdf.
← 2. Family Indicator figures for Greece are compared with selected European countries. The selection of these “reference” countries covers different social protection systems and geographical zones.