IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pes/ierequ/v6y2011i3p85-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender Features Of Time Allocation, Gender Stereotypes And Labour Supply

Author

Listed:
  • Tamila Arnania-Kepuladze

    (Akaki Tsereteli State University, Georgia)

Abstract

Securing the well-being, protection of human rights and equality on the ground of age, gender, race, nationality etc along with sustainable economic development becomes the most important goal for any country. Gender differences in labor market are a problem of many countries. Being a larger demographic group, women have played a vital role in employment and economic development. Despite longstanding striving for gender equality, the inequality manifests itself in labor markets around the world. There is no common opinion on the reasons of the existence of gender differences in economic literature. After decades of research most investigators would agree that there can be no single-factor explanation for gender inequality in the labor market. One of the conventional explanations of gender gap in employment sphere includes the differences in men’s and women’s preferences in working hours due their stereotypical roles in the private and public life. This paper is focused on the study of gender feature of time allocation and its impact on the labor supply by men and women. For this purpose, based on the different types of activity, particular: income getting or in¬co¬me increasing promote activity, non-monetary inco¬me obtain activity, income-make activity, non-income-make activity, indirect-receipts activity, the author introduces the time allocation model which includes parameters such as working time, leisure, non-working time, using time, free time and time for satisfying an individual’s physiological needs. For the attribution of different types of practice to certain kinds of activity the “principle of dominant purpose of activity” was offered. According to given time allocation model, the pattern of features of labor supply by men and women is offered in the paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Tamila Arnania-Kepuladze, 2011. "Gender Features Of Time Allocation, Gender Stereotypes And Labour Supply," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 6(3), pages 85-101, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:pes:ierequ:v:6:y:2011:i:3:p:85-101
    DOI: 10.12775/EQUIL2011.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/EQUIL2011.022
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.12775/EQUIL2011.022?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
    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. Dionne, G. & Doherty, N., 1991. "Adverse Selection In Insurance Markets: A Selective Survey," Cahiers de recherche 9105, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    2. Gordon Cordina, 2004. "Economic Vulnerability And Economic Growth: Some Results From A Neo-Classical Growth Modelling Approach," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 29(2), pages 21-39, December.
    3. Serrao, Amilcar & Coelho, Luis, 2004. "Cumulative Prospect Theory: A Study Of The Farmers' Decision Behavior In The Alentejo Dryland Region Of Portugal," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20245, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Raj Chetty, 2004. "Consumption Commitments, Unemployment Durations, and Local Risk Aversion," NBER Working Papers 10211, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Dagsvik, John K., 2015. "Stochastic models for risky choices: A comparison of different axiomatizations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 81-88.
    6. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    7. Robert S. Chirinko & Edward P. Harper, 1993. "Buckle up or slow down? New estimates of offsetting behavior and their implications for automobile safety regulation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(2), pages 270-296.
    8. David Cantalá, 2007. "Preferences for Shifts in Probabilities and Expected Utility Theory," Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos, vol. 22(1), pages 99-109.
    9. Z. Bar‐Shira & R.E. Just & D. Zilberman, 1997. "Estimation of farmers' risk attitude: an econometric approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(2-3), pages 211-222, December.
    10. Richard O. Zerbe, 1998. "Is cost-benefit analysis legal? Three rules," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 419-456.
    11. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Segal, Uzi, 2014. "Transitive regret over statistically independent lotteries," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 237-248.
    12. Basieva, Irina & Khrennikova, Polina & Pothos, Emmanuel M. & Asano, Masanari & Khrennikov, Andrei, 2018. "Quantum-like model of subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 150-162.
    13. Finkelshtain, Israel & Feinerman, Eli, 1997. "Framing the Allais paradox as a daily farm decision problem: tests and explanations," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 155-167, January.
    14. Starmer, Chris, 1999. "Experimental Economics: Hard Science or Wasteful Tinkering?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 5-15, February.
    15. Alexander Galetovic & Ángel Cabrera, "undated". "Tópicos en la Economía de la Investigación Tecnológica," Documentos de Trabajo 121, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    16. Bruno S. Frey, 1991. "Demand for, and Supply of, Institutions," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(2), pages 258-260, April.
    17. Riddel, Mary C. & Shaw, W. Douglass, 2006. "A Theoretically-Consistent Empirical Non-Expected Utility Model of Ambiguity: Nuclear Waste Mortality Risk and Yucca Mountain," Pre-Prints 23964, Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    18. Machina Mark J. & Schmeidler David, 1995. "Bayes without Bernoulli: Simple Conditions for Probabilistically Sophisticated Choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 106-128, October.
    19. Toman, Michael, 1998. "Sustainable Decisionmaking: The State of the Art from an Economics Perspective," RFF Working Paper Series dp-98-39, Resources for the Future.
    20. Yang, Jiping & Qiu, Wanhua, 2005. "A measure of risk and a decision-making model based on expected utility and entropy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(3), pages 792-799, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    gender; time allocation; labor supply;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D10 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - General
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply

    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:pes:ierequ:v:6:y:2011:i:3:p:85-101. 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: Adam P. Balcerzak (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ibgtopl.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.