IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v46y1994i3p445-58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Better Off Households More Unequal or Less Unequal?

Author

Listed:
  • Kanbur, Ravi
  • Haddad, Lawrence

Abstract

The object of this paper is to investigate the implications of intrahousehold bargaining models for the behavior of intrahousehold inequality as a function of total household resources. The authors find theoretical support for Kuznets effects, i.e., a systematic pattern of inequality change as the total household resources increase. The paper also discusses some policy implications of this relationship. In particular, the authors find that bargaining models tend to lead to a greater emphasis on targeting to disadvantaged members of a household. Copyright 1994 by Royal Economic Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanbur, Ravi & Haddad, Lawrence, 1994. "Are Better Off Households More Unequal or Less Unequal?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 445-458, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:46:y:1994:i:3:p:445-58
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-7653%28199407%292%3A46%3A3%3C445%3AABOHMU%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4&origin=bc
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    2. Manser, Marilyn & Brown, Murray, 1980. "Marriage and Household Decision-Making: A Bargaining Analysis," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 21(1), pages 31-44, February.
    3. Haddad, Lawrence & Kanbur, Ravi, 1990. "How Serious Is the Neglect of Intra-Household Inequality?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(402), pages 866-881, September.
    4. John Sutton, 1986. "Non-Cooperative Bargaining Theory: An Introduction," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 53(5), pages 709-724.
    5. Behrman, Jere R. & Deolalikar, Anil B., 1988. "Health and nutrition," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 631-711, Elsevier.
    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. Haddad, L. & Kanbur, R., 1989. "Are Better Off Households More Unequal or Less Unequal? A Bargaining Theoritic Approach to "Kuznets Effects" at the Micro Level," Papers 99, Warwick - Development Economics Research Centre.
    2. Jere R. Behrman, 1994. "Intra-family Distribution in Developing Countries," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 253-296.
    3. Kato, Hironori & Matsumoto, Manabu, 2009. "Intra-household interaction in a nuclear family: A utility-maximizing approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 191-203, February.
    4. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2859-2939 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Berninghaus, Siegfried & Seifert-Vogt, Hans G., 1987. "A game theoretical analysis of household migration decisions in a static and deterministic world," Discussion Papers, Series II 29, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
    6. Shelly Lundberg & Robert A. Pollak, 1996. "Bargaining and Distribution in Marriage," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 139-158, Fall.
    7. Olivier Bargain & Prudence Kwenda & Miracle Ntuli, 2017. "Gender bias and the intrahousehold distribution of resources: Evidence from African nuclear households in South Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series 071, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Dipankar Purkayastha, 1999. "Patriarchal Monopoly and Economic Development," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 61-78.
    9. Jeremy Lise & Shannon Seitz, 2011. "Consumption Inequality and Intra-household Allocations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(1), pages 328-355.
    10. Mumcu, Ayse & Saglam, Ismail, 2006. "Marriage and Divorce in a Model of Matching," MPRA Paper 1907, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. David E. Sahn & Stephen D. Younger, 2009. "Measuring intra‐household health inequality: explorations using the body mass index," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(S1), pages 13-36, April.
    12. Higgins, Paul A & Alderman, Harold & DEC, 1992. "Labor and women's nutrition : a study of energy expenditure, fertility, and nutritional status in Ghana," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1009, The World Bank.
    13. Lundberg, Shelly & Pollak, Robert A, 1993. "Separate Spheres Bargaining and the Marriage Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 988-1010, December.
    14. Kapeller, Jakob & Steinerberger, Stefan, 2017. "Stability, fairness and random walks in the bargaining problem," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 488(C), pages 60-71.
    15. Jaime Andrés Sarmiento Espinel, 2012. "Parental investment in their children’s education," Serie documentos de trabajo del Centro de Estudios Económicos 2012-09, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos.
    16. Amartya Sen, 1987. "Africa and India: What Do We Have to Learn from Each Other?," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-1987-019, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    17. Feltovich, Nick & Swierzbinski, Joe, 2011. "The role of strategic uncertainty in games: An experimental study of cheap talk and contracts in the Nash demand game," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 554-574, May.
    18. Gillian Hewitson, 2001. "A Survey of Feminist Economics," Working Papers 2001.01, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    19. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock, 2013. "Nash‐Bargained Consumption Decisions: A Revealed Preference Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123, pages 195-235, March.
    20. Quisumbing, Agnes R. & McClafferty, Bonnie, 2006. "Using gender research in development: food security in practice," Food security in practice technical guide series 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    21. Suchan Chae & Seho Kim, 2019. "The effects of third-party transfers in sequential anchored bargaining," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(1), pages 143-155, March.

    More about this item

    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:oup:oxecpp:v:46:y:1994:i:3:p:445-58. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oep .

    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.