IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jfamec/v42y2021i1d10.1007_s10834-020-09676-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Intra-household Bargaining Game on Progression to Third Birth in Iran

Author

Listed:
  • Shahram Moeeni

    (University of Isfahan)

  • Maryam Moeeni

    (Isfahan University of Medical Sciences
    Isfahan University of Medical Sciences)

Abstract

Couples’ bargaining power over reproductive choices can be a key component of the fertility outcome. We analyzed data from a national survey conducted in 2014 to evaluate the association of couples’ bargaining position with their progression from second to third birth in Iran. The sample included 7202 representative rural and urban Iranian families. Intra-household bargaining position was measured through the relative educational qualification of couples at the household level as well as the reversed gender gap score at the province level. The results revealed that the distribution of bargaining power between couples correlated with the progression to third birth. However, intra-household bargaining position did not have the same pattern among rural and urban families. The bargaining position of couples in the rural sample was significantly influenced by the contextual factor of the reversed gender gap. Nevertheless, the bargaining position of couples in the urban sample was influenced by both their relative educational qualification in the household and the province reversed gender gap.

Suggested Citation

  • Shahram Moeeni & Maryam Moeeni, 2021. "The Impact of Intra-household Bargaining Game on Progression to Third Birth in Iran," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 61-72, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jfamec:v:42:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10834-020-09676-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10834-020-09676-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10834-020-09676-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10834-020-09676-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cai:poeine:pope_605_0701 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Mahdi Majbouri, 2019. "Twins, family size and female labour force participation in Iran," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(4), pages 387-397, January.
    3. Pierre-André Chiappori & Monica Costa Dias & Costas Meghir, 2018. "The Marriage Market, Labor Supply, and Education Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(S1), pages 26-72.
    4. Martin Browning & Pierre-André Chiappori & Valérie Lechene, 2006. "Collective and Unitary Models: A Clarification," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-14, March.
    5. George‐Levi Gayle & Andrew Shephard, 2019. "Optimal Taxation, Marriage, Home Production, and Family Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(1), pages 291-326, January.
    6. Joshua R. Goldstein & Michaela Kreyenfeld, 2011. "Has East Germany Overtaken West Germany? Recent Trends in Order‐Specific Fertility," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 37(3), pages 453-472, September.
    7. Rasul, Imran, 2008. "Household bargaining over fertility: Theory and evidence from Malaysia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 215-241, June.
    8. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy & Robert Tamura, 1994. "Human Capital, Fertility, and Economic Growth," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 323-350, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. GholamReza Haddad, 2015. "Gender ratio, divorce rate, and intra-household collective decision process: evidence from iranian urban households labor supply with non-participation," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1365-1394, June.
    10. Koolwal, Gayatri & Ray, Ranjan, 2002. "Estimating the endogenously determined intrahousehold balance of power and its impact on expenditure pattern : evidence from Nepal," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2814, The World Bank.
    11. Kaushik Basu, 2006. "Gender and Say: a Model of Household Behaviour with Endogenously Determined Balance of Power," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(511), pages 558-580, April.
    12. Browning,Martin & Chiappori,Pierre-André & Weiss,Yoram, 2014. "Economics of the Family," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521795395.
    13. Roksana Bahramitash, 2013. "Gender and Entrepreneurship in Iran," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-33923-2.
    14. Matthias Doepke & Fabian Kindermann, 2019. "Bargaining over Babies: Theory, Evidence, and Policy Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(9), pages 3264-3306, September.
    15. Daniele Vignoli, 2006. "Fertility change in Egypt: from second to third birth," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2006-011, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    16. Ebrahim Azimi, 2015. "Intra-Household Resource Allocation and Gender Bias in Iran☆," Research in Labor Economics, in: Gender in the Labor Market, volume 42, pages 131-157, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    17. Daniele Vignoli, 2006. "Fertility change in Egypt," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 15(18), pages 499-516.
    18. Mizuki Komura, 2013. "Fertility and endogenous gender bargaining power," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 943-961, July.
    19. Gary S. Becker & H. Gregg Lewis, 1974. "Interaction between Quantity and Quality of Children," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of the Family: Marriage, Children, and Human Capital, pages 81-90, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Geoffrey Lancaster & Pushkar Maitra & Ranjan Ray, 2008. "Household Expenditure Patterns and Gender Bias: Evidence from Selected Indian States," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(2), pages 133-157.
    21. Djavad Salehi‐Isfahani & M. Jalal Abbasi‐Shavazi & Meimanat Hosseini‐Chavoshi, 2010. "Family planning and fertility decline in rural Iran: the impact of rural health clinics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(S1), pages 159-180, September.
    22. Kamiya, Yusuke, 2011. "Women's autonomy and reproductive health care utilisation: Empirical evidence from Tajikistan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 304-313.
    23. Peter McDonald & Meimanat Hosseini-Chavoshi & Mohammad Jalal Abbasi-Shavazi & Arash Rashidian, 2015. "An assessment of recent Iranian fertility trends using parity progression ratios," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 32(58), pages 1581-1602.
    24. Robert A. Pollak, 2005. "Bargaining Power in Marriage: Earnings, Wage Rates and Household Production," NBER Working Papers 11239, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Natalie Nitsche & Anna Matysiak & Jan Bavel & Daniele Vignoli, 2018. "Partners’ Educational Pairings and Fertility Across Europe," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(4), pages 1195-1232, August.
    26. Benoît Rapoport & Catherine Sofer & Anne Solaz, 2011. "Household production in a collective model: some new results," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 24(1), pages 23-45, January.
    27. Martin Dribe & Maria Stanfors, 2010. "Family life in power couples," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 23(30), pages 847-878.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Safoura Moeeni, 2021. "Married women’s labor force participation and intra-household bargaining power," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 1411-1448, March.
    2. 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).
    3. Kota Ogasawara & Mizuki Komura, 2022. "Consequences of war: Japan’s demographic transition and the marriage market," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 1037-1069, July.
    4. Akira Yakita, 2018. "Fertility and education decisions and child-care policy effects in a Nash-bargaining family model," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 1177-1201, October.
    5. Basu, Bharati, 2021. "Do institutional norms affect behavioral preferences: A view from gender bias in the intra-household expenditure allocation in Iran," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 118-134.
    6. Doepke, Matthias & Kindermann, Fabian, 2014. "Intrahousehold Decision Making and Fertility," IZA Discussion Papers 8726, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Turon, Hélène, 2022. "The Labour Supply of Mothers," IZA Discussion Papers 15312, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Mizuki Komura & Hikaru Ogawa, 2019. "Capital market integration and gender inequality," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 1387-1413, August.
    9. Takuya Obara & Yoshitomo Ogawa, 2020. "Optimal Taxation in an Endogenous Fertility Model with Non-Cooperative Couples," Discussion Paper Series 211, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University, revised Jan 2021.
    10. Takuya Obara & Yoshitomo Ogawa, 2024. "Optimal taxation in an endogenous fertility model with non-cooperative behavior," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 173-197, March.
    11. Caroline Krafft, 2020. "Why is fertility on the rise in Egypt? The role of women’s employment opportunities," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 1173-1218, October.
    12. Zhang, Junsen & Fei, Shulan & Wen, Yanbing, 2023. "How Does the Beauty of Wives Affect Post-Marriage Family Outcomes? Helen's Face in Chinese Households," IZA Discussion Papers 16157, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Doepke, M. & Tertilt, M., 2016. "Families in Macroeconomics," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1789-1891, Elsevier.
    14. Bharati Basu & Pushkar Maitra, 2020. "Intra‐household bargaining power and household expenditure allocation: Evidence from Iran," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 606-627, May.
    15. Hassani Nezhad, Lena, 2020. "Female Employment and Childcare," IZA Discussion Papers 13839, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Helmut Rainer & Geethanjali Selvaretnam & David Ulph, 2011. "Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in a model of fertility choice," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 24(3), pages 1101-1132, July.
    17. Xu, Zeyu, 2007. "A survey on intra-household models and evidence," MPRA Paper 3763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Martha J. Bailey, 2013. "Fifty Years of Family Planning: New Evidence on the Long-Run Effects of Increasing Access to Contraception," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 44(1 (Spring), pages 341-409.
    19. Chris Klaveren & Bernard Praag & Henriette Maassen van den Brink, 2008. "A public good version of the collective household model: an empirical approach with an application to British household data," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 169-191, June.
    20. Strulik, Holger, 2019. "Desire And Development," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(7), pages 2717-2747, October.

    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:kap:jfamec:v:42:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10834-020-09676-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.