本研究利用財政部財政資訊中心的所得、行政與勞保資料，探討生育第一胎對父母參與外送平台零工經濟之影響。為解決交錯處置時間在傳統雙向固定效果模型中可能產生的偏誤，本研究採用Callaway 與Sant’Anna (2021) 提出之動態雙重差分估計式（CSDID），以「尚未處置者」作為控制組，並從區域平台滲透率、家庭結構、個人生育前所得、小孩另一方生父母之所得，以及產業工作彈性等五個維度進行異質性分析。

研究發現，台灣存在顯著且具性別不對稱性之生育懲罰：母親生育後具薪資所得之機率下降約9.6 個百分點、實質總薪資所得下降約25.4%；父親之實質總薪資所得則僅小幅下降約5.9%。儘管如此，父母在生育後皆增加其外送平台之參與，但兩性之調整模式可能不同——母親之模式較符合「以零工取得時間彈性」之邏輯，父親之模式則較符合「以零工補充家庭收入」之邏輯。異質性分析進一步顯示，外送參與之增加主要集中於低所得、小孩另一方生父母所得較低，以及任職於低彈性產業之父母，與「平台工作對傳統雇用缺乏彈性者最具價值」之假設一致。然而，外送所得之性別差距在本研究情境中仍持續存在，顯示平台工作雖能部分緩衝生育衝擊，仍難以完全消除因生育產生之勞動市場性別差距。

This study uses Taiwanese administrative tax and labor records to examine how first childbirth affects parents’ participation in the platform-based gig economy, with a focus on the food delivery sector. To address potential biases associated with staggered treatment timing in traditional Two-Way Fixed Effects models, the analysis employs the dynamic difference-in-differences estimator of Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021), using not-yet-treated
parents as the control group, and investigates heterogeneity along five dimensions: regional platform penetration, family structure, individual pre-birth income, the co-parent’s pre-birth income, and pre-birth industry flexibility.

The analysis finds a substantial and gender-asymmetric child penalty in Taiwan: mothers experience a 9.6 percentage point decline in the probability of having salary income and a 25.4% drop in real total earnings, while fathers experience only a modest 5.9% decline. Despite this, both parents increase their food delivery platform participation following child-birth, although the patterns suggest different margins of adjustment by gender—mothers’
response is consistent with a flexibility-seeking adjustment to accommodate caregiving demands, while fathers’ response is consistent with an income-smoothing interpretation in which platform work serves as a supplementary, albeit partial, adjustment margin. The post-birth increase in gig participation is concentrated among low-income parents, parents with lower-income co-parents, and parents in low-flexibility industries, consistent with the view that platform work is most valuable to those whose primary employment cannot accommodate post-birth caregiving demands. Nevertheless, a gender gap in delivery earnings persists, suggesting that platform work alone is unlikely to eliminate the gender labor market inequalities generated by childbirth.

Abraham, K. G., J. C. Haltiwanger, K. Sandusky, and J. R. Spletzer (2018). Measuring the gig economy: Current knowledge and open issues. Working Paper 24950, National Bureau of Economic Research.

Callaway, B. and P. H. C. Sant’Anna (2021). Difference-in-differences with multiple time periods. Journal of Econometrics 225(2), 200–230.

Chen, M. K., J. A. Chevalier, P. E. Rossi, and E. Oehlsen (2019). The value of flexible work: Evidence from Uber drivers. Journal of Political Economy 127(6), 2735–2794.

Cook, C., R. Diamond, J. V. Hall, J. A. List, and P. Oyer (2021). The gender earnings gap in the gig economy: Evidence from over a million rideshare drivers. The Review of Economic Studies 88(5), 2210–2238.

Cortés, P. and J. Pan (2023). Children and the remaining gender gaps in the labor market. Journal of Economic Literature 61(4), 1359–1409.

Coudin, E., S. Maillard, M. Tô, and J. Tréguier (2026). Mothers’ sorting into lower-paying firms: The gendered firm premium differentials after childbirth in the French labor market. The Journal of Human Resources. Advance online publication.

Goldin, C. (2014). A grand gender convergence: Its last chapter. American Economic Review 104(4), 1091–1119.

Goodman-Bacon, A. (2021). Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing. Journal of Econometrics 225(2), 254–277.

Hall, J. V. and A. B. Krueger (2018). An analysis of the labor market for Uber’s driver-partners in the United States. ILR Review 71(3), 705–732.

Jackson, E. (2022). Availability of the gig economy and long run labor supply effects for the unemployed. SOI working paper, Internal Revenue Service Statistics of Income Division. Revise and Resubmit at the Review of Economics and Statistics.

Kleven, H., C. Landais, and J. E. Søgaard (2019). Children and gender inequality: Evidence from Denmark. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 11(4), 181–209.

Mas, A. and A. Pallais (2017). Valuing alternative work arrangements. American Economic Review 107(12), 3722–3759.

Ministry of Labor, Taiwan (2024). Annual total working hours statistics. Available at: https://statfy.mol.gov.tw/index17.aspx. Accessed June 2026.

Ministry of Labor, Taiwan (2025a). Constructing a family-friendly workplace. Available at: https://www.mol.gov.tw/1607/28162/28166/28284/nodelist. Accessed June 2026.

Ministry of Labor, Taiwan (2025b). Q&A on flexible parental leave. Available at: https://www.mol.gov.tw/1607/28162/28166/28284/28294/84873/post. Accessed June 2026.

Roth, J., P. H. C. Sant’Anna, A. Bilinski, and J. Poe (2023). What’s trending in difference-in-differences? A synthesis of the recent econometrics literature. Journal of Economet-rics 235(2), 2218–2244.

Social and Family Affairs Administration, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan (2025). Childcare allowance and quasi-public childcare section. Available at: https://www.sfaa.gov.tw/sfaa/list/5d3. Accessed June 2026.

Stephens, Melvin, J. (2002). Worker displacement and the added worker effect. Journal of Labor Economics 20(3), 504–537.

Sun, L. and S. Abraham (2021). Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects. Journal of Econometrics 225(2), 175–199.

Yang, T.-C. (2024). 以財稅資料分析外送服務平臺於餐飲業之影響. 財稅研究53(4), 74–108.