Intra-household Work Time Synchronization: Togetherness or Material Benefits?
AbstractIf partners derive utility from joint leisure time, it is expected that they will coordinate their work schedules in order to increase the amount of joint leisure. In order to control for differences in constraints and selection effects, this paper uses a new matching procedure, providing answers to the following questions: (1) Do partners coordinate their work schedules and does this result in work time synchronization?; (2) which partners synchronize more work hours?; and (3) is there a preference for togetherness? We find that coordination results in more synchronized work hours. The presence of children in the household is the main cause why some partners synchronize their work times less than other partners. Finally, partners coordinate their work schedules in order to have more joint leisure time, which is evidence for togetherness preferences.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Tinbergen Institute in its series Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers with number 05-095/3.
Date of creation: 19 Oct 2005
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tinbergen.nl
Time Allocation; Leisure Time; Togetherness; Work Hours;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
- I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
- J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
- J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Jenkins, Stephen P. & Osberg, Lars, 2003.
"Nobody to Play With? The Implications of Leisure Coordination,"
IZA Discussion Papers
850, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Stephen P. Jenkins & Lars Osberg, 2003. "Nobody to Play with?: The Implications of Leisure Coordination," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 368, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
- Hallberg, Daniel, 2002.
"Synchronous Leisure, Jointness and Household Labor Supply,"
Working Paper Series, Uppsala University, Department of Economics
2002:11, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
- Hallberg, Daniel, 2003. "Synchronous leisure, jointness and household labor supply," Labour Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 185-203, April.
- Hamermesh, Daniel S., 2000.
"Timing, Togetherness and Time Windfalls,"
IZA Discussion Papers
173, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Hamermesh, Daniel S, 1999. "The Timing of Work over Time," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(452), pages 37-66, January.
- Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2000. "Togetherness: Spouses' Synchronous Leisure, and the Impact of Children," NBER Working Papers 7455, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Antoine Maartens (+31 626 - 160 892)).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.