[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/glodps/961.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding inequality within households

Author

Listed:
  • Almås, Ingvild
  • Ringdal, Charlotte
  • Hoem Sjursen, Ingrid
Abstract
To describe and understand the economic inequality in a given so- ciety, it is necessary to understand intra-household inequality. House- holds can hide important inequalities, but can also be essential units for redistribution in society. This paper gives an overview of within- household distributions in different settings, both between the adults and also between adults and children. It documents that there are sub- stantial inequalities within households in some contexts and that these often, but not always, disfavor women and children. The paper also discusses the importance of intra-household allocations for poverty and inequality measurement. Methods that assign each household member a per-adult share of household consumption leads to underestimation of inequalities and miss-classification of poverty. In comparison, struc- tural models seem to do better in predicting individual poverty when disaggregated data on allocation within households are not available. Main determinants of power in household decision-making are also discussed, and relatedly, so are two important policy questions: Are targeted transfers to women good for female empowerment? And, are targeted transfers to mothers good for child outcomes? The empirical evidence is clearly pointing to targeting being beneficial for female empowerment, but the evidence is less clear when it comes to child outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Almås, Ingvild & Ringdal, Charlotte & Hoem Sjursen, Ingrid, 2021. "Understanding inequality within households," GLO Discussion Paper Series 961, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:glodps:961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/243298/1/GLO-DP-0961.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Duncan Thomas, 1990. "Intra-Household Resource Allocation: An Inferential Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 635-664.
    2. Ingvild Almås & Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden, 2020. "Cutthroat Capitalism versus Cuddly Socialism: Are Americans More Meritocratic and Efficiency-Seeking than Scandinavians?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(5), pages 1753-1788.
    3. Esther Duflo, 2003. "Grandmothers and Granddaughters: Old-Age Pensions and Intrahousehold Allocation in South Africa," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 17(1), pages 1-25, June.
    4. Marion Goussé & Nicolas Jacquemet & Jean‐Marc Robin, 2017. "Marriage, Labor Supply, and Home Production," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85(6), pages 1873-1919, November.
    5. Alex Armand & Orazio Attanasio & Pedro Carneiro & Valérie Lechene, 2020. "The Effect of Gender-Targeted Conditional Cash Transfers on Household Expenditures: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(631), pages 1875-1897.
    6. Anthony B. Atkinson & Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2011. "Top Incomes in the Long Run of History," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 3-71, March.
    7. Valérie Lechene & Krishna Pendakur & Alexander Wolf, 2020. "OLS estimation of the intra-household distribution of expenditure," IFS Working Papers W20/6, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    8. Geoffrey R. Dunbar & Arthur Lewbel & Krishna Pendakur, 2013. "Children's Resources in Collective Households: Identification, Estimation, and an Application to Child Poverty in Malawi," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 438-471, February.
    9. Jeremy Lise & Ken Yamada, 2019. "Household Sharing and Commitment: Evidence from Panel Data on Individual Expenditures and Time Use," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(5), pages 2184-2219.
    10. Akresh,Richard & De Walque,Damien B. C. M. & Kazianga,Harounan, 2016. "Evidence from a randomized evaluation of the household welfare impacts of conditional and unconditional cash transfers given to mothers or fathers," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7730, The World Bank.
    11. Martin Browning & Pierre-André Chiappori & Arthur Lewbel, 2013. "Estimating Consumption Economies of Scale, Adult Equivalence Scales, and Household Bargaining Power," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(4), pages 1267-1303.
    12. Alex Armand & Orazio Attanasio & Pedro Carneiro & Valérie Lechene, 0. "The Effect of Gender-Targeted Conditional Cash Transfers on Household Expenditures: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(631), pages 1875-1897.
    13. Chinhui Juhn & Kristin McCue, 2017. "Specialization Then and Now: Marriage, Children, and the Gender Earnings Gap across Cohorts," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(1), pages 183-204, Winter.
    14. Pierre-Andre Chiappori & Bernard Fortin & Guy Lacroix, 2002. "Marriage Market, Divorce Legislation, and Household Labor Supply," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(1), pages 37-72, February.
    15. Shelly J. Lundberg & Robert A. Pollak & Terence J. Wales, 1997. "Do Husbands and Wives Pool Their Resources? Evidence from the United Kingdom Child Benefit," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 32(3), pages 463-480.
    16. Philippe De Vreyer & Sylvie Lambert, 2021. "Inequality, Poverty, and the Intra-Household Allocation of Consumption in Senegal," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 35(2), pages 414-435.
    17. Orazio Attanasio & Valerie Lechene, 2002. "Tests of Income Pooling in Household Decisions," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(4), pages 720-748, October.
    18. Browning,Martin & Chiappori,Pierre-André & Weiss,Yoram, 2014. "Economics of the Family," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521795395.
    19. Orazio Attanasio & Valérie Lechene, 2010. "Conditional cash transfers, women and the demand for food," IFS Working Papers W10/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    20. Orazio P. Attanasio & Valérie Lechene, 2014. "Efficient Responses to Targeted Cash Transfers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(1), pages 178-222.
    21. Lewbel, Arthur & Pendakur, Krishna, 2008. "Estimation of collective household models with Engel curves," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 350-358, December.
    22. Ms. Era Dabla-Norris & Ms. Kalpana Kochhar & Mrs. Nujin Suphaphiphat & Mr. Franto Ricka & Ms. Evridiki Tsounta, 2015. "Causes and Consequences of Income Inequality: A Global Perspective," IMF Staff Discussion Notes 2015/013, International Monetary Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beltramo, Theresa P. & Calvi, Rossella & De Giorgi, Giacomo & Sarr, Ibrahima, 2023. "Child poverty among refugees," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Donni, Olivier & Molina, José Alberto, 2018. "Household Collective Models: Three Decades of Theoretical Contributions and Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 11915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. So Yoon Ahn & Yu Kyung Koh, 2022. "Spousal Bargaining Power and Consumption of Married Couples in the US: Evidence from Scanner Data," Working Papers 2022-010, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    3. Chiappori, Pierre-André & Gimenez-Nadal, José Ignacio & Molina, José Alberto & Theloudis, Alexandros & Velilla, Jorge, 2020. "Intrahousehold Commitment and Intertemporal Labor Supply," IZA Discussion Papers 13545, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Tommasi, Denni, 2019. "Control of resources, bargaining power and the demand of food: Evidence from PROGRESA," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 265-286.
    5. Ibarra, Helena & Velilla, Jorge, 2021. "Oferta laboral familiar y negociación intrafamiliar en España: Un test del modelo colectivo [Household labor supply and intrahousehold bargaining: An empirical test of the collective model]," MPRA Paper 108080, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Chiappori, Pierre-André & Molina, José Alberto & Gimenez-Nadal, José Ignacio & Velilla, Jorge, 2019. "Intertemporal Labor Supply and Intra-Household Commitment," IZA Discussion Papers 12353, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Echeverría, Lucía, 2020. "Modelos colectivos de consumo y distribución intra-hogar. Teoría y aplicaciones," Nülan. Deposited Documents 3832, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    8. Charlotte Ringdal & Ingrid Hoem Sjursen, 2021. "Household Bargaining and Spending on Children: Experimental Evidence from Tanzania," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 430-455, April.
    9. José Alberto Molina & Jorge Velilla & Helena Ibarra, 2023. "Intrahousehold Bargaining Power in Spain: An Empirical Test of the Collective Model," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 84-97, March.
    10. Klein, Matthew J. & Barham, Bradford L., 2018. "Point Estimates of Household Bargaining Power Using Outside Options," Staff Paper Series 590, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    11. Ringdal, Charlotte & Sjursen, Ingrid Hoem, 2017. "Household bargaining and spending on children: Experimental evidence from Tanzania," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 19/2017, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    12. Senay Sokullu & Christine Valente, 2022. "Individual consumption in collective households: Identification using repeated observations with an application to PROGRESA," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 286-304, March.
    13. De Rock, Bram & Cherchye, Laurens & Chiappori, Pierre-André & Ringdal, Charlotte & Vermeulen, Frederic, 2021. "Feed the children," CEPR Discussion Papers 16482, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Laurens CHERCHYE & Thomas DEMUYNCK & Bram DE ROCK, 2010. "Noncooperative household consumption with caring," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces10.34, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    15. Almås, Ingvild & Somville, Vincent & Vandewalle, Lore, 2020. "The Effect of Gender-Targeted Transfers: Experimental Evidence From India," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 16/2020, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    16. Alexandros Theloudis & Jorge Velilla & Pierre-André Chiappori & J. Ignacio Gimenéz-Nadal & José Alberto Molina, 2022. "Commitment and the Dynamics of Household Labor Supply," Working Papers 2022-042, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    17. Casco José L., 2022. "Intra-household Resource Shares under Poverty Transfers: Evidence from Ecuador," Working Papers 2022-03, Banco de México.
    18. Alexandros Theloudis & Jorge Velilla & Pierre-André Chiappori & J. Ignacio Gimenéz-Nadal & José Alberto Molina, 2022. "Commitment and the Dynamics of Household Labor Supply," Working Papers 2022-042, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    19. José L. Casco, 2024. "Intra-household resource shares under poverty transfers: evidence from Ecuador," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 1243-1274, September.
    20. Robert A. Pollak, 2019. "How Bargaining in Marriage Drives Marriage Market Equilibrium," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 297-321.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Within-household resource allocation; inequality; measurement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:glodps:961. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/glabode.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.