Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T04:00:34.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AN ANALYSIS OF FEMALE LABOR SUPPLY, HOME PRODUCTION, AND HOUSEHOLD CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2018

Kellie Forrester  and
Jennifer Klein
Kellie Forrester*
Affiliation:
California State Polytechnic University
Jennifer Klein
Affiliation:
University of Colorado Boulder
*
Address correspondence to: Kellie Forrester, California State Polytechnic University Pomona, 3801 West Temple Ave., Pomona, CA 91768, USA; e-mail: kforrester@cpp.edu.
Get access

Abstract:

The United States saw a rapid transformation of its labor market when the female employment to population ratio nearly doubled from 1950 to 2000. As women shift their hours from the home sector to the market sector, goods that were previously produced in the home may be replaced by market services. This paper uses the Panel Study for Income Dynamics, Consumer Expenditure Survey, and the American Time Use Survey to analyze the extent to which households replace home production with purchased market services, and how the relationship between men’s and women’s labor supplies affects these decisions. We show that women who are employed spend less time on home production activities that have close market alternatives than women who are not employed. Additionally, expenditures on market services that can replace home production are higher for married households in which the woman is employed compared to those with nonworking women.

Keywords

J16J22D12D13
Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Demographic Economics , Volume 84 , Issue 3 , September 2018 , pp. 257 - 307
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aguiar, Mark and Hurst, Erik (2005) Consumption versus expenditure. Journal of Political Economy 113, 919–948.Google Scholar
Akbulut, Rahşan (2011) Sectoral changes and the increase in women’s labor force participation. Macroeconomic Dynamics 15, 240–264, URL: http://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/macdyn/v15y2011i02p240-264_00.html.Google Scholar
Albanesi, Stefania and Olivetti, Claudia (2016) Gender roles and medical progress. Journal of Political Economy 124, 650–695, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/686035.Google Scholar
Baxter, Marianne and Rotz, Dana (2009) Detecting Household Production. University of Boston.Google Scholar
Becker, Gary Stanley (1965) A theory of the allocation of time. The Economic Journal 75, 493–517.Google Scholar
De Ruijter, Esther, Treas, Judith K. and Cohen, Philip N. (2005) Outsourcing the gender factory: Living arrangements and service expenditures on female and male tasks. Social Forces 84, 305–322.Google Scholar
Forrester, Kellie (2017) Home to market: Implications for the consumption to output ratio. Macroeconomic Dynamics 1–31, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1365100517000025.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Irwin, Haveman, Robert and Betson, David (1978) Earnings capacity and its utilization. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 375–385.Google Scholar
Greenwood, Jeremy, Seshadri, Ananth and Yörükoğlu, Mehmet (2005) Engines of liberation. Review of Economic Studies 72, 109–133.Google Scholar
Guner, Nezih, Kaygusuz, Remzi and Ventura, Gustavo (2014) Childcare Subsidies and Household Labor Supply. IZA discussion paper 8303.Google Scholar
Heckman, James J. (1979) Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 153–161.Google Scholar
House, Christopher, Laitner, John and Stolyarov, Dmitriy (2008) Valuing lost home production of dual earner couples. International Economic Review 49, 701–736.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Eva, Shipp, Stephanie and Brown, Gregory (1989) Families of working wives spending more on services and nondurables. Monthly Labor Review 15–23.Google Scholar
Kinsey, Jean (1983) Working wives and the marginal propensity to consume food away from home. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 65, 10–19.Google Scholar
Lundberg, Shelly and Pollak, Robert A. (1993) Separate spheres bargaining and the marriage market. Journal of Political Economy 988–1010.Google Scholar
Nickols, Sharon Y. and Fox, Karen D. (1983) Buying time and saving time: Strategies for managing household production. Journal of Consumer Research 10, 197–208.Google Scholar
PSID (2012) Panel study of income dynamics restricted use dataset. Produced and distributed by the Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Ramey, Valerie A. and Francis, Neville (2009) A century of work and leisure. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 1, 189–224, URL: https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aejmac/v1y2009i2p189-224.html.Google Scholar
Ribar, David C. (1995) A structural model of child care and the labor supply of married women. Journal of Labor Economics 13, 558.Google Scholar
Soberon-Ferrer, Horacio and Dardis, Rachel (1991) Determinants of household expenditures for services. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 385–397.Google Scholar
United States Department of Labor (2012) American Time Use Survey (ATUS). Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Labor Statistics.Google Scholar
United States Department of Labor (2013) Consumer Expenditure Survey: Interview Survey and Detailed Expenditure Files. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Labor Statistics.Google Scholar
Van der Lippe, Tanja, Tijdens, Kea, and De Ruijter, Esther (2004) Outsourcing of domestic tasks and time-saving effects. Journal of Family Issues 25, 216–240.Google Scholar
Yen, Steven T. (1993) Working wives and food away from home: The Box–Cox double hurdle model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75, 884–895, URL: http://ajae.oxfordjournals.org/content/75/4/884.abstract, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1243976.Google Scholar