Unitary Versus Collective Models of the Household: Is It Time to Shift the Burden of Proof?

Alderman, Harold; Chiappori, Pierre‐André; Haddad, Lawrence; Hoddinott, John; Kanbur, Ravi

doi:10.1093/wbro/10.1.1

Cited by 411 publications

(225 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

209

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Di erential borrowing capacities within households are just reinforcing this persistent inequality. Our ndings thus con rm that poor households should not be seen as unitary models but as spaces of cooperation and con ict where members have not only their own preferences and constraints, but also an unequal control over resources (Alderman et al, 1995;Sen, 1990). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Child gender and parental borrowing: Evidence from India

Agier¹,

Szafarz

2012

Economics Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The unequal treatment of children is not gender neutral from the parent side. Our results show that women try to compensate through debt for the unbalanced situation faced by their daughters compared to their sons. However, the lack of symmetry between mothers' and fathers' financial situations leads to the perpetuation of gender inequality through generations.Keywords: Gender, discrimination, borrowing, debt, children, mother, father AbstractThe unequal treatment of children is not gender neutral from the parent side. Our results show that women try to compensate through debt for the unbalanced situation faced by their daughters compared to their sons. However, the lack of symmetry between mothers' and fathers' nancial situations leads to the perpetuation of gender inequality through generations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Child gender and parental borrowing: Evidence from India

Agier¹,

Szafarz

2012

Economics Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As an example, household willingness to pay might be a simple average of the individual willingness to pay figures for the adults within the household, in which case a random selection of subject would provide a consistent estimate of household wtp. 2 The evidence to date is mixed on the most appropriate model of the household, but it is largely against the unitary model of the household and income pooling. For instance, using the natural experiment provided by a reform of the UK tax and benefit system, Lundberg et al [23] reject income pooling, showing instead that expenditure on goods such as men's and women's clothing are sensitive to the source of household income.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Their results are supported by Browning and Chiappori, [10] and Phipps and Burton [26] where family expenditure data is used to show the influence of the source of income on expenditure shares for consumer goods. 3 However, a problem with interpreting the significance of this work lies in the limitations of the underlying 2 Alternatively, the balance of power within households may not be sensitive to small changes in the source of income, in which case for consumption changes of low value, the household may exhibit behaviour which is largely indistinguishable from that predicted by income pooling. 3 Browning and Chiappori, [10], reject the unitary model in favour of the cooperative or Paretian alternative, which does not predict income pooling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Household Versus Individual Valuation: What’s the Difference?

Bateman

Munro

2009

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Standard practice in stated preference typically blurs the distinction between household and individual responses, but without a clear theoretical or empirical justification for this approach. To date there have been no empirical tests of whether values for say a two adult household elicited by interviewing one randomly selected adult are the same as the values generated by interviewing both adults simultaneously. Using cohabiting couples, we conduct a choice experiment field study valuing reductions in dietary health risks. In one treatment a random individual is chosen from the couple and interviewed alone; in the other treatment, both partners are questioned jointly. We find significant differences in household values calculated from joint as opposed to individual responses, with further variation between the values elicited from men and women. Our results question the assumption, implicit in common practice, that differences between individually and jointly elicited estimates of household values can effectively be ignored.

show abstract

“…Better understanding of food distribution within impoverished families in poor countries has great promise for strengthening policies and programs, when allocation of household resources does not protect the nutritional status of women and children (Haddad, 1994a;Alderman et al, 1994;Rogers, 1990).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intrahousehold allocation of energy intake among children under five years and their parents in rural Bangladesh

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study assesses intrahousehold allocation of energy in rural Bangladesh and tests the hypothesis that, when daily energy intake is adjusted for energy expenditure, no age or gender bias will be apparent in intrahousehold energy allocation. Design: Data were collected at two-month intervals over a one year study. Setting: Four villages in Matlab Thana, rural Bangladesh. Subjects: Two hundred and seven children up to 5 y of age and their 145 mothers and 123 fathers. Interventions: Data included six measurements of observed 24 h dietary energy intake and physical activity recorded from waking to sleeping. Total daily energy expenditure was derived using the factorial method. Results: Women's energy intake ranged from 75±88% of the FAO/WHO recommended energy intake over the six periods of data collection, signi®cantly less (P`0.0001) than the men's (range 89±114%). Although the women had moderate levels of physical activity, frequent pregnancies and long lactation periods increased their energy needs. Among children no longer breast fed, energy consumption, unadjusted for energy expenditure, provided 86±108% of the FAO/WHO recommended energy intake by weight. Conclusions: Women consistently received less of their energy requirements than either their children or their husbands. Sponsorship: This work was supported in part by the Stare Nutrition Education Fund at the Harvard School of Public Health.

show abstract

Unitary Versus Collective Models of the Household: Is It Time to Shift the Burden of Proof?

Cited by 411 publications

References 42 publications

Child gender and parental borrowing: Evidence from India

Child gender and parental borrowing: Evidence from India

Household Versus Individual Valuation: What’s the Difference?

Intrahousehold allocation of energy intake among children under five years and their parents in rural Bangladesh

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About