Redacción HC
12/06/2024
In the ongoing global pursuit of equity, universal early childhood education and care (ECEC) has emerged as a promising solution. But can programs that are open to all truly serve as equalizers, especially for children from low-income families? This question lies at the heart of a recent systematic review and meta-analysis by Rita Schmutz, published in Research in Social Stratification and Mobility.
By synthesizing evidence from over a decade of research, Schmutz tackles the long-standing debate: Does universal ECEC reduce or reproduce social inequalities?
Universal ECEC refers to early learning and care systems that are publicly accessible to all children, regardless of socioeconomic background. These programs differ from targeted interventions that focus solely on disadvantaged groups.
Schmutz's work is timely. With rising inequality, especially exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, governments around the world are reevaluating strategies to level the playing field. Universal ECEC is frequently proposed—but evidence on its equitable impact has been mixed, until now.
"The question isn't just whether universal care helps children," explains Schmutz. "It's whether it helps those who need it the most."
The study systematically reviewed and analyzed quasi-experimental studies published after 2010. These studies exploited exogenous variation—such as policy changes or regional rollout differences—that mimicked randomized trials.
Key features of the meta-analysis:
Despite variation in study designs and contexts, a clear pattern emerged: Universal ECEC disproportionately benefits disadvantaged children, particularly in the development of non-cognitive skills such as adaptability and emotional regulation.
Children from low-SES backgrounds consistently saw larger improvements across multiple outcomes. These included language development, social skills, and emotional well-being.
Starting universal ECEC before age 3 significantly boosted outcomes, especially among vulnerable children. Early years are a sensitive period for brain development, making this timing critical.
Contrary to fears that expanding access would reduce program effectiveness, Schmutz found that universal coverage amplified benefits for disadvantaged children. Instead of leveling down, it leveled up.
Programs in Europe showed stronger equity effects, likely due to higher quality standards, broad access, and robust social infrastructure.
The implications for policymakers are substantial. Schmutz's findings support public investment in high-quality, universal ECEC as a powerful tool for reducing social inequality.
"High-quality care benefits everyone, but it transforms the lives of those who start with less," Schmutz notes.
ECEC is more than a personal investment—it's a societal one. By improving school readiness, it leads to better educational trajectories, higher employment rates, and reduced public spending on remedial education and welfare.
Studies from Canada's universal childcare program (e.g., Quebec's CA$5/day model) reinforce these conclusions, showing long-term social and economic gains.
While the review mainly draws on European evidence, its lessons are highly relevant for Latin America and other regions with uneven access to early education.
In countries like Peru, Brazil, and Mexico, universalizing ECEC could help close cognitive and social gaps between urban and rural or Indigenous populations.
International bodies like the OECD and UNICEF also advocate universal ECEC as a pillar of social equity and sustainable development.
This research dispels the myth that universal programs cater mostly to the middle class. Instead, it shows that when well-designed and inclusive, universal ECEC can act as a social equalizer—raising outcomes for all, and lifting up those with the least.
"Universalism doesn't mean sameness," Schmutz writes. "It means fairness—starting from where people are, not where we wish they were."
The evidence is clear: Early childhood education is not just about preparing for school—it's about shaping a more just society.
Governments, donors, and civil society should view ECEC as a strategic investment, not a luxury. The earlier we act, the greater the return—not just in dollars, but in dignity and opportunity.
Topics of interest
EducationReferencia: Schmutz R. Is universal early childhood education and care an equalizer? A systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence. Res Soc Stratif Mobil [Internet]. 2023;89:100859. Available on: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2023.100859.