Zagel, Hannah; Khan, Rohan; Kluge, Anna E.; Tamakoshi, Mio; Gädecke, Ma in
A icle — Published Ve sion
Concep ualizing and measu ing s a e egula ion o
ep oduc i e p ocesses: The in e na ional ep oduc ion
policy da abase
Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Zagel, Hannah; Khan, Rohan; Kluge, Anna E.; Tamakoshi, Mio; Gädecke,
Ma in (2025) : Concep ualizing and measu ing s a e egula ion o ep oduc i e p ocesses: The
in e na ional ep oduc ion policy da abase, Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy Jou nal o Eu opean
Social Policy, ISSN 1461-7269, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA, Vol. 35, Iss. 2, pp. 210-221,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/09589287241302962
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/308639.2
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Thema ic Re iew
Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy
2025, Vol. 35(2) 210–221
© The Au ho (s) 2024
A icle euse guidelines:
sagepub.com/jou nals-pe missions
DOI: 10.1177/09589287241302962
jou nals.sagepub.com/home/esp
Concep ualizing and measu ing s a e
egula ion o ep oduc i e p ocesses:
The in e na ional ep oduc ion policy
da abase
Hannah Zagel
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin, Ge many
Rohan Khan
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin, Ge many
Anna E. Kluge
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin, Ge many
Mio Tamakoshi
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin, Ge many
Ma in G¨
adecke
Uni e si y o Ox o d, Ox o d, UK
Abs ac
This a icle c i ically e iews exis ing concep s and measu emen s o how s a es egula e ep oduc i e
p ocesses such as con acep i e use, abo ion and p egnancy, and in oduces a new concep ually-g ounded
in e na ional policy da abase on ep oduc ion policies. Wi h egula ing ep oduc ion, s a es ge in ol ed in
whe he , when and how people en e o a e , ca y ou o end p egnancy and p oc ea ion; and who is
suppo ed in hei ep oduc i e pa hways in he fi s place. Building on compa a i e wel a e s a e schola ship,
we sugges ha s a e egula ion o ep oduc ion is bes unde s ood mul i-dimensionally, dis inguishing
egula o y le els, egula o y ypes, pe missi eness, in-kind gene osi y, and in-cash gene osi y. No leas due
o a lack o da a, p e ious esea ch has mos ly been limi ed o case s udies o o indi idual policy fields, such as
abo ion policy. This e iew summa izes he s a e o compa a i e pe spec i es in his policy domain, and
p esen s he In e na ional Rep oduc ion Policy Da abase (IRPD), which p oposes a no el and comp ehensi e
way o measu e and compa e ep oduc ion policies. IRPD co e s he egula i e s uc u e, pe missi eness,
and gene osi y o s a e-p o ided ep oduc ion policies in 33 middle- and high-income coun ies om 1980 o
Co esponding au ho :
Hannah Zagel, WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Reichpie schu e 50, 10785, Be lin, Ge many.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
2020, ac oss fi e policy fields: sex educa ion, con acep ion, abo ion, medically assis ed ep oduc ion and
p egnancy ca e. The e iew closes wi h an empi ical example om he new da abase and gi es an ou look on
i s esea ch po en ials.
Keywo ds
ep oduc ion policy, policy da a, ep oduc i e igh s, pe missi eness, gene osi y, abo ion
In oduc ion
How s a es egula e ep oduc ion is a mo ally
cha ged subjec ha has been he ocus o much
public and poli ical deba e o many decades
(Hussein e al., 2018). Rep oduc ion conce ns p o-
cesses a ound planning, a oiding, s a ing, ca ying
o ending p egnancy and p oc ea ion, and i s egu-
la ion encompasses a wide ange o issues, including
among o he s he egula ion o abo ion, medically
assis ed ep oduc ion (MAR), and sexuali y educa-
ion. Fo example, s a es define he condi ions unde
which p egnancies may be e mina ed (Johnson
e al., 2018), decide who may access in e ili y
ea men s (Ro hmay Allison and L’Esp´
e ance,
2017), and define how knowledge on ep oduc ion
is p o ided (B ockschmid e al., 2019). Wi h eg-
ula ion ac oss hese di e en policy fields, he s a e
shapes indi iduals’ ep oduc i e ajec o ies ac oss
he li e cou se. Regula ing ep oduc ion is s ongly
embedded in no ms a ound amily and p oc ea ion,
bu also con ibu es o shaping no ms o whose
p oc ea ion and amily o ma ion is desi ed and
whose is no . So a , owing o a lack o sys ema ic
concep ualiza ion and policy measu emen , we know
li le abou he c oss-na ional egula o y pa e ns and
ends o e ime in his policy domain. This is in s a k
con as o mos o he a eas o s a e in ol emen in
indi iduals’wel a e, such as amily policy, which
ha e been ex ensi ely s udied (Daly e al., 2023).
Wel a e s a e esea ch has mos ly o e looked
policies ha di ec ly in e ene in ep oduc ion (bu
see (O’Conno , 1993;O’Conno e al., 1999a,
1999b)). B oadly speaking, all wel a e s a e policies
shape he con ex in which indi iduals make deci-
sions abou hei ep oduc i e li es, bu only selec ed
policies add ess he p ocesses o ep oduc ion di-
ec ly. E en amily policy, which is o en ega ded as
a ool o changing e ili y beha iou s (Cook e al.,
2022; e.g. Inglo e al., 2022;Schul z, 2015), is
limi ed o incen i ising ep oduc i e decisions by
changing he social and economic implica ions o
ca e ela ionships once child en a e bo n
(S ohmeie , 2002).
By con as , ep oduc ion policies di ec ly in e -
ene in he biological and social p ocesses simul-
aneously in ol ed in ep oduc ion (Almeling,
2015). Rep oduc ion policies can be defined as in-
s i u ionalized s a emen s (laws, egula ions, guide-
lines) abou wha he s a e o i s execu i e o gans
explici ly in end o enable o obs uc in ega ds o
he p ocesses o whe he , when and how people en e
o a e , ca y ou o end p egnancy and p oc ea ion,
including decisions on who is suppo ed in hei
ep oduc i e pa hways in he fi s place. E alua ing
how s a es suppo people di e en ly in pu suing
hei ep oduc i e p e e ences equi es acknowl-
edging his policy domain concep ually, and sys-
ema ically map i empi ically.
Cu en knowledge abou s a e egula ion o e-
p oduc ion, i s d i e s, and indi idual-le el ou -
comes is agmen ed ac oss a ious esea ch fields,
o en ocusing on specific aspec s. Fo example,
s udies ha e explo ed how public a i udes impac
he egula ion o abo ion and MAR (Somme and
Fo man-Rabino ici, 2021). Rela edly, esea ch has
looked a he ole o medical o ganiza ions and social
mo emen s in he policy-making p ocess o MAR
and abo ion policy (Engeli e al., 2013;G iessle
e al., 2022). In con as , p egnancy ca e policy is
s udied mos ly as a public heal h issue o p egnancy
ou comes, wi h ew excep ions ocusing on unde -
s anding he policy landscape (W ede e al., 2021).
Wel a e s a e schola ship o e s aluable insigh s
o s udying ep oduc ion policy sys ema ically. Fo
example, i sugges s ha policy domains a e
Zagel e al. 211
mul idimensional, and a y in e ms o a ge g oups,
eligibili y ules o le el o gene osi y. I also dem-
ons a es ha egula o y domains may comp ise
policies ha a e cohe en o con adic ing in hei
goals; and ha unde s anding policy e ec s on in-
di iduals o en equi es conside ing policy config-
u a ions a he han single policies (Ye kes e al.,
2022). The ex ensi e empi ical li e a u e on a ious
policy domains o he wel a e s a e emphasizes he
ui ulness o compa a i e designs in iden i ying
mul idimensional a ia ions, explaining policy
changes, and e alua ing policy impac s (Clasen,
2013). This a icle has h ee aims. Fi s , we c i i-
cally e iew exis ing app oaches in ligh o hei
po en ial o in o m sys ema ic c oss-coun y com-
pa ison o ep oduc ion as a policy domain. Second,
we in oduce ou own concep ually-g ounded mea-
su emen app oach in he new In e na ional Rep o-
duc ion Policy Da abase (IRPD), which co e s
egula ions in he fields o sex educa ion, con a-
cep ion, abo ion, medically assis ed ep oduc ion
and p egnancy ca e o 33 high- and middle-income
coun ies be ween 1980 and 2020. Thi d, we gi e an
ou look on how he da abase may be used o com-
plemen exis ing policy and wel a e s a e
schola ship.
Re iew o concep s: s a e egula ion
o ep oduc ion
How ep oduc ion is egula ed by he wel a e s a e is
a ely explici ly concep ualised (O’Conno e al.,
1999a). This is a majo sho coming in ha ep o-
duc i e wel a e is closely ela ed o many o he
wel a e dimensions. P ocesses o planning, a oiding,
s a ing, ca ying o ending p egnancy and p oc e-
a ion di ec ly a ec people’s heal h s a us, eme ging
amily needs, and he po en ial o engage in paid
wo k (Jo e and Reich, 2015). I is hence impo an o
unde s and s a e egula ion o ep oduc ion bo h as a
sepa a e policy domain and in i s in e ac ion wi h
o he policy domains.
The egula ion o ep oduc ion has ea u ed in
di e en esea ch fields, which ha e subs an ially
con ibu ed o unde s anding ep oduc ion as a po-
li icised a ea wi h s ong his o ical and cu en s a e
in ol emen . Ye , exis ing app oaches ha e no
o e ed concep ual ools o sys ema ically analyse
his a ea as a policy domain o he wel a e s a e bo h
in i s own igh and in ela ion o o he domains. This
sec ion e iews h ee concep ual app oaches o s a e
egula ion o ep oduc ion: a) selec ed policies eg-
ula ing ep oduc ion a e subsumed unde a b oade
ca ego y o policies, such as popula ion policy; b)
s a e policies a e ea ed as bu one s uc u al com-
ponen o how ep oduc ion is ‘go e ned’, including
e.g. ac i i ies o he chu ch; c) ins i u ional aspec s o
policies egula ing ep oduc ion a e concep ually
confla ed wi h po en ial ou comes o hose policies,
such as ep oduc i e heal h. In he ollowing, we
discuss s eng hs and weaknesses o hese exis ing
app oaches.
Rep oduc ion policies as a subca ego y
Popula ion policy and mo ali y policy a e wo um-
b ella concep s desc ibing a pa icula class o policy
unde which ep oduc ion policies a e subsumed.
Popula ion policy is o en loosely defined bu
s ongly conno a ed wi h popula ion con ol; i has
been b oadly used o desc ibe a ious policies in-
cluding s e iliza ion laws and China’s one-child
policy, bu also amily policies ha incen i ize
childbea ing (Sackso sky, 2017;Schul z, 2015;
Solinge and Nakachi, 2016). The concep o pop-
ula ion policy is o en employed in c i ical analyses
o he s a e’s ins umen al in ol emen in ep o-
duc i e li es o pu suing na alis and equen ly also
na ionalis agendas. I is pa icula ly use ul o de-
sc ibing go e nmen s’b oade p og amma ic ap-
p oaches owa ds demog aphic issues, bu i does no
p o ide a clea -cu concep ual amewo k o ana-
lysing he na owe domain o ep oduc ion policy.
The mo ali y policy li e a u e also akes a wide
angle, ocusing on policy-making o public issues
ha p o oke alue-loaded conflic s (Euchne , 2019).
Acco dingly, policies ha di ec ly egula e ep o-
duc ion such as abo ion and MAR policies a e
conside ed mo ali y policy (Engeli e al., 2013), bu
also o he policies, such as p os i u ion and d ug
policy (Knill e al., 2015). Viewing ep oduc ion
policy as a subca ego y o mo ali y policy is use ul o
unde s and he na u e o poli ics ha b ing abou
policy change in hese fields. Howe e , besides
212 Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy 35(2)
mainly p o iding a pe spec i e on policy change, by
ocusing on no ma i e conflic s, mo ali y policy
schola ship does no accoun o o he fields o
egula ing ep oduc ion, which seem o ollow di -
e en a ionales, o example con acep ion policy.
Rep oduc ion policies as componen s in
go e nance s uc u e
Ano he class o concep s explici ly discussing he
egula ion o ep oduc ion applies a much b oade
idea o egula ion han is common in compa a i e
wel a e s a e and policy esea ch. Two p ominen
concep s a e ep oduc i e go e nance and ep o-
duc i e ci izenship. The concep o ep oduc i e
go e nance, de eloped in medical an h opology,
e e s o mechanisms h ough which his o ical
configu a ions o (s a e and non-s a e) ac o s p oduce
and con ol ep oduc i e p ocesses and popula ion
p ac ices (Mo gan and Robe s, 2012). Rep oduc i e
go e nance schola s ace changes in poli ical a-
ionali ies di ec ed owa ds ep oduc ion and pop-
ula ion by analysing dominan discou ses building
on Foucauldian heo y (Mo gan and Robe s, 2012).
Analyses applying he concep p o ide ich de-
sc ip ions o his o ical configu a ions o how e-
p oduc ion is egula ed and amed by di e en
ac o s. Wi h i s wide angle on ac o cons ella ions, i
goes much beyond unde s anding jus he policy
le el. The concep ual bounda ies o ep oduc i e
go e nance also end o be a he loose, which makes
i di ficul o disce n which social, cul u al, and in-
s i u ional ac o s a e impo an o how ep oduc ion
is go e ned and which ones all ou side i s scope.
The concep o ep oduc i e ci izenship has
eme ged om a b anch o ci izenship s udies ocused
on he social and legal condi ions o ep oduc ion
(Richa dson and Tu ne , 2001), and hence also di-
ec ly in o ms knowledge on s a e egula ion o e-
p oduc ion. The concep e eals he cen ali y o
ep oduc ion o wha s a es no ma i ely p omo e as
‘good ci izens’(Roseneil e al., 2013), assuming ha
s a e egula ion o ep oduc ion oge he wi h indi-
idual p ac ices shape na ional membe ship and
belonging. This li e a u e o ks in o se e al s ands,
employing a ange o di e en bu ela ed ci izenship
concep s (e.g. sexual ci izenship, in ima e
ci izenship, gende ed ci izenship). One key insigh
om hese s udies is ha he mechanisms o ex-
clusion o people g oups a e o en inhe en o he
egula ion o ep oduc ion based on bodies, sexuali y
and in ima e ela ionships (e.g. Richa dson, 2017).
Beyond hei heo e ical alue o unde s anding he
egula ion o ep oduc ion as a mul ile el p ocess,
bo h concep s a e pa icula ly use ul o case-s udy
app oaches in e es ed in discu si e pa e ns a ound
policy p ocesses including poli ics, media and
public. Thei in ellec ual genealogies ende hem
less sui able o ope a ionalisa ion in o compa a i e
indica o s o map c oss-coun y pa e ns and ends in
policies egula ing ep oduc ion.
Rep oduc ion policies used wi h ou comes
A hi d ype o concep used o desc ibe coun y
a ia ions in he egula ion o ep oduc ion eme ged
om ad ocacy esea ch and ep oduc i e igh s
ac i ism. He e, concep s a e designed o eflec ideal-
ypical desi ed ou comes o indi iduals such as
igh s, heal h and jus ice, and esea ch e eals ba -
ie s o eaching such ou comes ac oss di e en
coun ies o wi hin coun ies o e ime. P ominen
concep s a e sexual and ep oduc i e heal h and
igh s (SRHR) and ep oduc i e jus ice. SRHR is a
widely used amewo k in in e na ional poli ical
ad ocacy and ad ocacy esea ch (S a s e al., 2018).
Since he In e na ional Con e ence on Popula ion
and De elopmen in Cai o (1994), SRHR ha e
guided amily planning policy s akeholde s and in-
e na ional ag eemen s, emphasizing eedom o
ep oduc i e choice mo e explici ly han du ing he
e a o popula ion con ol (S a s e al., 2018).
Consequen ly, he SRHR concep o en se es as a
basis o c oss-coun y compa isons o selec ed in-
dica o s used as benchma ks o he s a e o SRHR
and need o ac ion in di e en egions. Because i
concep ually includes bo h policies ( igh s) and
ou comes (heal h), i s use o empi ically analysing
policies sepa a ely om i s e ec s is limi ed.
Rep oduc i e jus ice is no only a heo e ical
concep , bu also a powe ul ac i is app oach and an
analy ical amewo k inc easingly used in esea ch.
I is used o unde s anding in e sec ing inequali ies
o ace, class and gende in he ep oduc i e ealm,
Zagel e al. 213
and o ad oca ing agains such inequali ies (Luna
and Luke , 2013). In oduced in 1994 by a collec i e
o women o colou in he Uni ed S a es, no leas in
esponse o he women’s igh s mo emen being
domina ed by (a choice- ocused agenda o ) whi e
middle-class women (Ross e al., 2017), ep oduc i e
jus ice comp ises he demands o he igh o ha e
child en, he igh no o ha e child en, and he igh
o pa en one’s child en in sa e and sus ainable
communi ies (Ross and Solinge , 2017). A key as-
sump ion is ha ep oduc i e ‘choice’is o en no
possible when he ci cums ances in which ep o-
duc ion akes place a e de imen al, o example in
e ms o housing o social wel a e. Wi h his, he
concep o ep oduc i e jus ice add esses he com-
plex dynamics be ween indi idual ep oduc i e ex-
pe iences and con ex ual ac o s such as communi y,
poli ics and egula ions. I has become an impo an
amewo k in ep oduc i e igh s ad ocacy and
esea ch and is use ul o o mula ing no ma i ely
desi able ‘jus ’ou comes o which he s a us quo can
be empi ically compa ed. Concep ually, ep oduc i e
jus ice e e s o a s a us on bo h ends, he indi idual
and he egula o y le el. Tha means, simila o
SRHR, de e mining he deg ee o which ep oduc i e
jus ice is g an ed in ce ain con ex s necessi a es
analysis o policies as well as indi idual ep oduc i e
expe iences. Because analysis o he la e ends o be
small-scale, a comp ehensi e o e iew o ep o-
duc i e jus ice o whole coun ies o compa a i ely
is di ficul o a ain.
Concep ualising ep oduc ion policy
Ou own concep ual app oach o ep oduc ion policy
builds on he ich insigh s o hese p e ious con-
cep ualiza ions. Con a y o p e ious app oaches and
in line wi h compa a i e wel a e s a e and policy
esea ch, we p opose a ocus on he ins i u ional le el
o s a u o y policies. We ocus on policies by which
s a es di ec ly in e ene in he biological and social
p ocesses simul aneously in ol ed in ep oduc ion
up un il bi h, he eby excluding policies ha only
ela e o ei he social o biological p ocesses o o
hose ha occu a e bi h. Fi s , we exclude egu-
la ions on pa ne ship, ma iage and di o ce because,
while shaping social con ex s o ela ionships,
hese policies a ec biological ep oduc ion only
indi ec ly. Simila ly, we exclude cus ody law and
adop ion policy, which egula e he possibili y o
ha e child en wi hou own bodily ma e ial. Sec-
ond, amily policy is o en conside ed ele an o
whe he people p oc ea e (Neye and Ande sson,
2008), bu may me ely ha e an indi ec e ec on
ep oduc ion by se ing incen i es o ha ing
child en, which also applies o social policies mo e
b oadly. Thi d, we exclude se e al heal h aspec s
ha a e included unde he umb ella o SRHR
(e.g., cance in he ep oduc i e sys em) (S a s
e al., 2018), because hey p ima ily conce n bi-
ological condi ions o bu no he p ocesses in-
ol ed in ep oduc ion. Finally, ou concep o
ep oduc ion policy excludes neona al ca e, be-
cause i conce ns pos -bi h p ocesses and hence is
beyond ou ocused phase o ep oduc ion.
In a nu shell, we define ep oduc ion policy as
ins i u ionalized s a emen s (including laws, egula-
ions, guidelines) abou wha he s a e o i s execu i e
o gans in end o enable o obs uc in ega ds o he
p ocesses o whe he , when and how people en e o
a e , ca y ou o end p egnancy and p oc ea ion,
including who is suppo ed in hei ep oduc i e
pa hways in he fi s place. We con end ha ep o-
duc ion policy p oduces di e en le els o ep o-
duc i e wel a e by using di e en egula o y
echniques such as se ing legal bounda ies and
p o iding medical and financial esou ces o indi-
iduals o pu sue hei desi ed ep oduc i e pa h-
ways. Op imal ep oduc i e wel a e can be
unde s ood as ull access o ep oduc i e op ions and
esou ces ha con ibu e o indi iduals’ ep oduc i e
wellbeing in e ms o physical, emo ional and social
aspec s, ega dless o membe ship in pa icula social
g oups defined, o example, by gende , sexuali y,
e hnici y, ace, age, o socio-economic s a us.
Pa alleling a his o ical ins i u ionalis app oach
(Palie , 2010) and ac o ing in p e ious con-
cep ualisa ions o policies egula ing ep oduc ion
(Engeli and Ro hmay , 2016), we desc ibe di e -
ences in wel a e s a es’p o ision o ep oduc i e
wel a e on fi e dimensions: egula o y le els, eg-
ula o y ypes,pe missi eness,in-kind gene osi y and
in-cash gene osi y. Fi s , he dimension o egula o y
le els desc ibes di e ences in whe he egula ion is
214 Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy 35(2)
na ional, subna ional, egional o o ganisa ion-based.
Second, he dimension o egula o y ypes cap u es
whe he egula ion is h ough laws, cu icula, med-
ical guidelines, and so on. Bo h dimensions a e in-
e wined wi h he deg ee o which ep oduc ion
policy making is cen alised wi hin a coun y, and
wi h which policy-making p ocedu es and ac o s a e
in ol ed.
Thi d, pe missi eness o ep oduc ion policy is
defined as access o se ices and p ocedu es ha a e
conduci e o ep oduc i e wellbeing. Access esul s
om bo h: he deg ee o which s a es allow di e en
p ocedu es and echnologies o ep oduc ion, and
he es ic ions hey impose on accessing hem.
1
This
means, access es ic ions depend on whe he
some hing is legalized (like abo ion), made ou ine
(like p egnancy sc eenings) o compulso y (like sex
educa ion) in he fi s place. Pe missi eness u -
he mo e conce ns whe he access is es ic ed along
eligibili y c i e ia such as age, ma i al s a us o o he
social condi ions.
Fou h, in-kind gene osi y is defined as he deg ee
o which s a es p o ide di e en ep oduc i e se -
ices. Fi h, in-cash gene osi y is defined as he
deg ee o which s a es co e cos s o se ices and
ep oduc i e echnologies. In compa ison o pe -
missi eness, gene osi y e e s o a ailable op ions
a he han eligibili y. Tha also means, ha es ic-
i e ep oduc ion policy can s ill be gene ous, e.g. in
p o iding many di e en op ions o some social
g oups o co e age o cos s o a pa icula se ice o
echnology; and pe missi e ep oduc ion policy may
well show low deg ees o gene osi y.
Wel a e s a es p o ide ep oduc i e wel a e
h ough a ange o di e en policies, add essing
indi iduals’ ep oduc i e p ocesses a di e en
li e cou se s ages. We define ep oduc ion policy
as co e ing fi e policy fields, which di ec ly
in e ene in he biological and social p ocesses o
ep oduc ion, and a e he mos ele an in e ms
o egula o y scope.
2
S a es egula e: 1) he
knowledge based on which ep oduc i e plan-
ning and decisions a e made (sex educa ion), 2)
he means o a e ing o planning p egnancy and
p oc ea ion (con acep ion), 3) he possibili y o
e mina ing p egnancies (abo ion), 4) he use o
and access o ep oduc ion echnologies as in e ili y
ea men o means o p oc ea ion o singles o same-
sex pa ne s (medically assis ed ep oduc ion), and 5)
main aining p egnancy and gi ing bi h (p egnancy
ca e).
Measu ing ep oduc ion policy
The e a e wo ypes o exis ing measu emen ap-
p oaches o s a e egula ion o ep oduc ion. The
fi s one consis s o da ase s benchma king a la ge
numbe o coun ies in specificfields o egula ing
ep oduc ion (EPF, 2021,2023;EPF and IPPF,
2021;Johnson e al., 2018). This app oach p o-
ides a snapsho o e iew o di e ences in e-
p oduc ion policies, bu does no allow o compa e
di e en policy fields o analyse ends o e ime.
The second measu emen app oach is implemen ed
in empi ical s udies ocusing on he de elopmen
o pa icula egula o y fields (e.g., Engeli and
Ro hmay , 2016;Johnson e al., 2018;Somme
and Fo man-Rabino ici, 2021). This app oach
cap u es longe - e m ajec o ies o ep oduc ion
policies, bu does no p o ide la ge c oss-coun y
compa isons no comp ehensi e analyses ac oss
di e en fields o ep oduc ion egula ion based on
la ge-scale da a.
Ou p oposed app oach o measu ing ep oduc-
ion policy in he In e na ional Rep oduc ion Policy
Da abase (IRPD) accoun s o he mul idimension-
ali y and ime-dependen na u e o he policy do-
main, and conside s he di e en policy fields in
which s a es egula e ep oduc ion ac oss di e en
s ages o he li e cou se. The da abase is concep ually
ancho ed in he abo e-ou lined app oach, measu ing
he fi e dimensions o egula o y le el and ypes,
pe missi eness, in-kind and in-cash gene osi y,
which allows o c oss-field compa ison. Fo each o
he concep ual dimensions IRPD p o ides na ional-
le el indica o s ha can be used o measu e egu-
la ions in he policy fields ac oss coun ies o e ime
( o a summa y o he measu ed egula ions see Table
A1 in Appendix). The ocus on na ional-le el eg-
ula ion has wo main implica ions. Fi s , i pu s
emphasis on policy esponsibili y o cen al go -
e nmen s o ep oduc i e wel a e ( a he han sub-
na ional adminis a i e le els o o ganisa ions).
Second, i allows o mo e cohe en c oss-na ional
Zagel e al. 215
compa ison, bu dis ega ds po en ial sub-na ional
a ia ion.
Da a collec ion
We collec ed da a on na ional policies in 33 middle- and
high-income coun ies,
3
spanning o e 41 yea s, om
1980 o 2020. Da a collec ion was h ough a s anda dised
online ques ionnai e asking abou he design o ep o-
duc ion policies ha we e in place in each yea . The
ques ionnai e was p e- es ed wi h in e na ional academic
expe s in he fi e espec i e policy fields. Feedback by
he field expe s ega ding he ele ance and cla i y o
included i ems was implemen ed o imp o e he in-
s umen , and addi ional i ems we e added whe e con-
side ed necessa y. Fo he ask o filling ou he final
ques ionnai e, we ec ui ed one expe pe coun y,
mainly om academia o ep oduc i e igh s o ganisa-
ions, who was esponsible o ga he ing na ional policy
in o ma ion. Coun y expe s we e selec ed based on hei
ex ensi e expe ise in a leas one o he policy fields, and
good connec ions o po en ial da a sou ces such as
minis ies. Expe ec ui men was h ough ou own
ne wo k, online sea ches and snowballing. Fo maximal
anspa ency and eplicabili y, and o ensu e he ocus on
s a e egula ion, he expe s we e equi ed o ely on
policy documen s such as legal ex s, o ficial guidelines
o cou decisions, and o p o ide said sou ces as links o
files. The da a was ho oughly checked by ou esea ch
eam, and al hough i was no possible o e i y he policy
da a p o ided by he expe s in de ail due o he la ge
scope in ime, egions and languages, inconsis encies
we e de ec ed and cla ified in close communica ion wi h
he expe s. Sou ce documen s a e s o ed wi h he da ase
o po en ial ollow-up in es iga ions. A e da a p epa-
a ion and coding, we p o ide he no el and de ailed
da ase including hund eds o indica o s h ough an
online da a a chi e o he esea ch communi y (Zagel
e al., 2025).
Ope a ionalisa ion
IRPD includes a wide ange o indica o s, which may
be used o a ious ypes o esea ch ques ions and
o ope a ionalising he fi e concep ual dimensions
o ep oduc ion policy in oduced abo e. Table 1
gi es an o e iew o he ca ego ies o indica o s
measu ed in each policy field, o de ed by dimension
(see Table A1 in he Appendix o a mo e de ailed
o e iew).
Fi s , he dimension o egula o y le el is ope -
a ionalized wi h indica o s on whe he each field is
egula ed on he na ional o sub-na ional le el.
Second, he dimension o egula o y ypes is ope -
a ionalized wi h indica o s on which kinds o egu-
la ions, such as laws, cu icula and medical
guidelines, a e used o egula e each field. Thi d, he
dimension o pe missi eness is ope a ionalized wi h
indica o s on whe he di e en ep oduc i e p oce-
du es and echnologies a e legal, such as abo ion,
su ogacy and con acep i e counselling. Fu he -
mo e, his dimension cap u es whe he he s a e
decla es specific ep oduc i e se ices manda o y o
indi iduals, o example school-based sex educa ion
o ou ine checks in p egnancy ca e. I also con ains
indica o s whe he he e a e cons aining measu es
on access o a ailable se ices, and whe he he e a e
eligibili y c i e ia ha es ic he access only among
ce ain g oups. Fou h, he dimension o in-kind
gene osi y is ope a ionalized wi h indica o s o
he ex en o a ailable op ions o ep oduc i e
se ices; i is measu ed, o example, by he com-
p ehensibili y o sex educa ion cu icula, a ious
ypes o con acep i es and me hods o MAR
ea men ha a e a ailable, and access o in o ma-
ion on abo ion. Finally, he dimension o in-cash
gene osi y is ope a ionalized wi h indica o s whe he
cos s o hese se ices a e co e ed by public heal h
insu ance, excep o he field o school-based sex
educa ion, o which he cos co e age does no
apply.
Empi ical example and
esea ch a enues
The In e na ional Rep oduc ion Policy Da abase
(IRPD) (Zagel e al., 2025) o he fi s ime allows o
map he domain o ep oduc ion policy comp e-
hensi ely in e ms o in e na ional pa e ns and
ends. As wi h any da ase , IRPD has limi a ions. I
was no possible o add ess all issues o alidi y and
eliabili y (Adcock and Collie , 2001) because e-
sou ces o da a collec ion we e limi ed. Fu he ,
assessing he alidi y o he measu es is di ficul
216 Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy 35(2)
because he field o compa a i e ep oduc ion policy
is no e y ad anced and o he comp ehensi e da ase s
needed o compa ison a e no a ailable (Helbling
e al., 2017). Compa isons wi h measu es om da a-
se s ha pa ly o e lap wi h IRPD by measu ing spe-
cific aspec s o ep oduc ion policy, such as abo ion
policy (Johnson e al., 2018), gi e us confidence ha
ou indica o s a e alid measu emen s. O e all, we a e
con inced ha p o iding IRPD o he esea ch com-
muni y significan ly ad ances he esea ch field, and
ha we ha e laid he basis o a ious esea ch a enues
bywhich oex end hecu en bodyo knowledge,
deepen p io e idence, and pionee new ealms o
inqui y. In his sec ion, we showcase an empi ical
example ha unde sco es he u ili y o IRPD.
To illumina e he po en ial o he da abase, we
p o ide an exempla y figu e ha plo s one concep ual
dimension o ep oduc ion policy. We picked in-kind
gene osi y, he deg ee o which s a es p o ide di e en
ep oduc i e se ices, o gi e a fi s insigh in o coun y
di e ences and ime ends in wha may be conside ed
an in as uc u al aspec o ep oduc ion policy.
Figu e 1 shows field-specific ime ends in in-kind
gene osi y by coun y 1980–2020.
4
Fo each indi idual
policy field, we c ea ed addi i e indices composed o
mul iple indica o s o in-kind gene osi y: opics co -
e ed in sex educa ion cu icula; a ailable con acep i e
me hods; acili ies, p esc ip ion p o ide and in o -
ma ion p o ision o abo ion; a ailable MAR ea -
men s wi h di e en biological ma e ials; and
p egnancy ca e se ices included in he p e en i e ca e
p og amme.
5
We no malize ou indices o a ange
be ween 0 and one employing min-max no maliza ion,
in o de o make hem compa able. Due o ou ocus on
na ional egula ion, we coded indica o s as 0 whe e
policies we e subna ionally egula ed. The shown in-
kind gene osi y hence e ec i ely eflec s he espon-
sibili y ha cen al go e nmen s ake on in p o iding
ep oduc i e wel a e. Po en ial di e ences in subna-
ional in-kind gene osi y a e no cap u ed.
Table 1. Measu ed ca ego ies in IRPD ac oss concep ual dimensions and policy fields.
Sex educa ion Con acep ion Abo ion MAR P egnancy ca e
Regula o y
le el
Na ional o
subna ional
Na ional o
subna ional
Na ional o
subna ional
Na ional o
subna ional
Na ional o
subna ional
Regula o y
ypes
Cu icula Laws, medical
guidelines
Laws, medical
guidelines
Laws, medical
guidelines
Laws, medical
guidelines
Pe missi eness S ipula ion o
school-based
sexuali y
educa ion
Legali y o
con acep i es
Legali y o abo ion
me hods
Legali y and
es ic ions o
MAR me hods
S ipula ion o
p e en i e
ca e
Op -ou op ions Access condi ions o
con acep i es, and
p esc ip ion
G ounds and
condi ions o
access abo ion
Access
condi ions o
MAR me hods
Access o
ou ine- and
bi h ca e
In-kind
gene osi y
Topics co e ed in
(compulso y)
cu iculum and
eache aining
A ailabili y o
con acep i e
me hods and
counselling
Facili ies o
abo ion,
a ailabili y o
medica ion
abo ion and
in o ma ion
p o ision
A ailabili y o
di e en MAR
me hods
Rou ine- and
bi h ca e
p o ision
In-cash
gene osi y
–Ex en o and
condi ions o
public heal h ca e
co e age o
con acep ion
Ex en o and
condi ions o
public heal h
ca e co e age o
abo ion se ices
Ex en o and
condi ions o
public heal h
ca e co e age
o MAR
Ex en o and
condi ions o
public heal h
ca e co e age
o p egnancy
ca e
No e: own concep ualiza ion.
Zagel e al. 217
