The distributive consequuences of machismo: A simulation analysis of intrahousehold allocation

Cuesta, Jose (2006): The distributive consequuences of machismo: A simulation analysis of intrahousehold allocation. Published in: Journal of International Development , Vol. 18, (2006): pp. 1065-1080.

Abstract

Empirical evidence questions the unitary allocation model of the household that underpins the standard measurement of monetary poverty and inequality. Intra-household gender discrimination has been widely shown to shape expenditure decisions, nutrition status, and human capital accumulation of household members. However, conventional poverty and inequality analyses are conducted for the household as a whole, which might lead to different conclusions compared with studies based on individuals. Using recent developments in intrahousehold bargaining modelling, this paper constructs non-cooperative allocation rules dominated by gender discrimination among household members. Estimates for Chile show a substantial worsening of poverty and inequality under such allocation rules. This suggests that intra-household discrimination deserves some of the attention typically directed to extrahousehold discrimination in labour markets, access to public services or political participation.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: discrimination; gender; poverty; inequality; intrahousehold allocation; bargaining; simulation; Chile
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D1 - Household Behavior and Family Economics > D13 - Household Production and Intrahousehold Allocation; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I3 - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty > I32 - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

References

Ashenfelter O, Heckman JJ. 1974. The estimation of incomes and substitution effects in a model of family labour supply. Econometrica 42(1): 73–85.

Atkinson AB. 1970. On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory 2: 244–263.

Behrman JR. 1997. Intra-household distribution and the family. In Handbook of Population and Family Economics (Vol. 1a), Rosenzweig MR, Stark O (eds). North-Holland Publishing Company: Amsterdam.

Bergstrom T. 1997. A survey of theories of the family. In Handbook of Population and Family Economics (vol 1a), Rosenzweig MR, Stark O (eds). North-Holland Publishing Company:Amsterdam.

Blumberg RL. 1988. Income under female versus male control: hypothesis from a theory of gender stratification and data from the Third World. Journal of Family Issues 9(1): 51–84.

Blumberg RL, Coleman MT. 1989. A theoretical look at the gender balance of power in the American couple. Journal of Family Issues 10(2): 225–250.

Blundell RW, MaCurdy TE. 1999. Labour supply: a review of alternative approaches. In Handbook of Labour Economics (Vol 3A), AshenfelterO, CardD (eds). North-Holland: New York.

Browning M, Bourguignon F, Chiappori PA, Leche´ne V. 1994. Income and outcomes: a structural model of intra-household allocation. Journal of Political Economy 102(6): 1067–1096.

Casique M. 2000. Mexican married women’s autonomy and power within the household. Paper presented at the Latin American Studies Association, Rio de Janeiro, January.

Chiappori PA. 1992. Collective labour supply and welfare. Journal of Political Economy 100(3): 437–467.

Coady D, Skoufias E. 2004. On the targeting and redistributive efficiencies of alternative transfer instruments. Review of Income and Wealth 50(1): 11–27.

Contreras D, Ca´ceres J. 1999. Reasignacio´n de recursos en los hogares pobres de Chile. Cuadernos de Economı´a 36: 727–780.

Cuesta J. 2004. Social transfers as a determinant of intra-household distribution: the case of Chile. Journal of Income Distribution 13(1/2): 76–104.

Deaton A, Muellbauer J. 1980. Economics and Consumer Behaviour. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Doss C. 1996. Testing among models of intrahousehold resource allocation. World Development 24(10): 1597–1609.

Engel E, Galetoviz A, Raddatz C. 1999. Taxes and income distribution in Chile: some unpleasant redistribution arithmetics. Journal of Development Economics 59(1): 155–192.

Gideon J. 1999. Looking at economies as gendered structures: an application to Central America. Feminist Economics 5: 1–28.

Haddad L, Hoddinott J. 1990. Women’s income and boy-girl anthropometric status in the Coˆte d’Ivoire. World Development 22(4): 543–33.

Haddad L, Hoddinott J, Alderman H (eds.). 1997. Intra-household Resource Allocation in Developing Countries: Methods, Models, and Policy. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, for the International Food Policy Research Institute.

Jejeebhoy SJ. 1995. Women’s Education, Autonomy, Reproductive Behaviour: Experience from Developing Countries. Clarendon Press: Oxford.

Klasen S. 1998. Marriage, bargaining and intra-household resource allocation: excess female mortality among adults during early German development. Journal of Economic History 58(2): 432–467.

Larran˜aga O. 1999. Distribucio´n y crecimiento econo´mico en Chile. Documento LC/L.1226. ECLAC, Santiago de Chile. Licona GH. 1997. Oferta laboral familiar y desempleo en Me´xico. Los efectos de la pobreza. El Trimestre Econo´mico 64: 531–568.

Lundberg S, Pollak RA. 1993. Separate spheres bargaining and the marriage market. Journal of Political Economy 101(6): 988–1010.

Lundberg S, Pollak RA,Wales TJ. 1997. Do husbands and wives pool their resources? Evidence from the United Kingdom Child Benefit. Journal of Human Resources 32(3): 463–480.

McElroy M. 1990. The empirical content of Nash-bargained household behaviour. Journal of Human Resources 25: Fall: 559–583.

McElroy M, Horney M. 1981. Nash-bargained household behaviour. Toward a generalization of the theory of demand. International Economic Review 22(2): 333–349.

Ministerio de Desarrollo y Planificacio´n (Mideplan). 1996. Encuesta de Hogares CASEN. Ministerio de Desarrollo y Planificacio´n de la Repu´blica de Chile, Santiago de Chile.

Ministerio de Desarrollo y Planificacio´n (Mideplan). 1999. Pobreza y distribucion del ingreso en Chile, 1990–1998. Ministerio de Desarrollo y Planificacio´n de la Repu´blica de Chile, Santiago de Chile.

Mizala A, Romaguera P. 2001. La legislacio´n laboural y el mercado del trabajo en Chile: 1975–2000. Documentos de Trabajo Centro Economı´a Aplicada No. 114. Universidad de Chile Santiago de Chile.

Pahl J. 1989. Money and Marriage. Macmillan: London. Quisumbing A (ed.). 2003. Household Decisions, Gender and Development. A Synthesis of Recent Research. International Food Policy Research Institute: Washington DC.

Quisumbing A, Maluccio J. 2003. Resources at marriage and intra-household allocation: evidence from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Indonesia and South Africa. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 65(3): 283–327.

Rao V. 1997. Wife-beating in rural South India: a qualitative and econometric analysis. Social Science and Medicine 44(8): 1169–1180.

Rolda´n M. 1987. Renegociating the marital contract. Intra-household patterns of money allocation and women’s subordination among domestic outworkers in Mexico City. In A House Divided: Women and Income in the Third World, Dwyer D, Bruce J (eds). Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA.

Rubalcava L, Contreras D. 2000. Does gender and birth matter when parents specialize on child’s nutrition? Evidence from Chile. Journal of Applied Economics 3(2): 353–386.

Strauss JA, Thomas D. 1995. Human resources: empirical modeling of household and family decisions. In Handbook of Development Economics, Srinivasan TN, Behrman J (eds). North Holland: Amsterdam.

Thomas D. 1994. Like father, like son; like mother, like daughter. Parental resources and child height. Journal of Human Resources 29(4): 950–988.

Thomas D, Contreras D, Frankenberg E. 1997. Child health and the distribution of household resources at marriage. RAND, Santa Monica, CA (unpublished).

World Bank. 2000. Manual de Estrategias de Reduccio´n de la Pobreza.World Bank:Washington DC.

World Bank. 1997. Chile: Poverty and Income Distribution in a High-Growth Economy: 1987–1995.

World Bank Report No. 16377-CH, Vol. 2, World Bank: Washington DC.