IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/actuec/v82y2006i1p119-153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discrimination sexuelle dans les dépenses des ménages : survol de la littérature et évidences empiriques pour le Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Lefebvre, Pierre

    (Département de sciences économiques)

Abstract

Recent research suggests that the sex of a child has a large and varied impact on parental behaviours and family outcomes. A general finding emerges from this literature: in terms of family choices (marriage, divorce, fertility) and individual behaviours (work, consumption, and non-market activities), there are noteworthy differences between men and women. The empirical findings are consistent with economic models that explain intra-family behaviours as the result of a process of complex negotiations over time allocation and family resources and the sharing of family “surplus” (gains from living with spouse compared to being single). This research approaches this question by analysing family expenditures for consumer goods and services for families that have one or two same-sex children. The empirical analysis tries to uncover gender effect for family expenditures by estimating the impact of children’s sex on a diversity of categorical expenses qualified as family products, such as housing and durable goods. Other types of products are also analyzed (food, medical services, recreation, food purchased from restaurant, personal services, health care services and products, gifts of money and contributions). The analysis uses the public micro-data of Statistics Canada’s Survey of Household Spending for years 1997 and 1998; the only two years where the sex of children aged 0 to 17 years are identified. The results suggest that gender effects are non-systemic and do not stand out. La recherche récente suggère que le sexe d’un enfant a des effets importants et étendus sur les comportements parentaux et les résultats familiaux. Un constat général émerge de cette littérature : en matière de choix de vie familiale (mariage, divorce, fécondité) et de comportements individuels (de travail, de consommation, d’activités non marchandes) il y a des différences notables entre les hommes et les femmes. Les constats empiriques sont cohérents avec les modèles économiques qui expliquent les comportements intrafamiliaux comme le résultat d’un processus complexe de négociations concernant l’allocation du temps et des ressources familiales, et le partage du « surplus » familial et conjugal (dégagé par rapport au fait de vivre seul). Cette recherche aborde la question en examinant le panier des dépenses de consommation des familles qui ont un ou deux enfants du même sexe. L’analyse empirique cherche à identifier s’il y a un effet de « genre » dans les dépenses familiales en estimant l’effet du sexe de l’enfant sur plusieurs catégories de dépenses dont des biens familiaux à caractère public tels que l’habitation et les biens durables. D’autres types de dépenses sont aussi analysés (alimentation, soins médicaux, loisir et divertissement, aliments achetés au restaurant, services personnels, soins de santé et médicaments, dons et contributions). L’analyse utilise les microdonnées des fichiers publics de l’Enquête sur les dépenses des ménages de 1997 et 1998, les deux seules années où Statistique Canada identifie le sexe des enfants de 0-17 ans. Les résultats empiriques suggèrent que les effets sont peu marqués et systémiques.

Suggested Citation

  • Lefebvre, Pierre, 2006. "Discrimination sexuelle dans les dépenses des ménages : survol de la littérature et évidences empiriques pour le Canada," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 82(1), pages 119-153, mars-juin.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:82:y:2006:i:1:p:119-153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/013467ar
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rao, Vijayendra, 1993. "The Rising Price of Husbands: A Hedonic Analysis of Dowry Increases in Rural India," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(4), pages 666-677, August.
    2. Jonathan Haughton & Dominique Haughton, 1998. "Are simple tests of son preference useful? An evaluation using data from Vietnam," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 11(4), pages 495-516.
    3. Haddad, Lawrence & Hoddinott, John & Alderman, Harold & DEC, 1994. "Intrahousehold resource allocation : an overview," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1255, The World Bank.
    4. Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Maluccio, John A., 2000. "Intrahousehold allocation and gender relations," FCND discussion papers 84, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Kenneth I. Wolpin & Mark R. Rosenzweig, 2000. "Natural "Natural Experiments" in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(4), pages 827-874, December.
    6. Gordon B. Dahl & Enrico Moretti, 2008. "The Demand for Sons," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(4), pages 1085-1120.
    7. Duncan Thomas, 1990. "Intra-Household Resource Allocation: An Inferential Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 635-664.
    8. Browning, Martin & Francois Bourguignon & Pierre-Andre Chiappori & Valerie Lechene, 1994. "Income and Outcomes: A Structural Model of Intrahousehold Allocation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1067-1096, December.
    9. Fred Arnold & Sunita Kishor & T. K. Roy, 2002. "Sex‐Selective Abortions in India," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 28(4), pages 759-785, December.
    10. Duncan Thomas, 1994. "Like Father, like Son; Like Mother, like Daughter: Parental Resources and Child Height," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 29(4), pages 950-988.
    11. Francine D. Blau & Lawrence M. Kahn, 2000. "Gender Differences in Pay," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 75-99, Fall.
    12. 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.
    13. I-Fen Lin & Anne Case & Sara McLanahan, 1999. "Household Resource Allocation in Stepfamilies: Darwin Reflects on the Plight of Cinderella," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 234-238, May.
    14. Robert Haveman & Barbara Wolfe, 1995. "The Determinants of Children's Attainments: A Review of Methods and Findings," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1829-1878, December.
    15. Subramanian, S. & Deaton, A., 1990. "Gender Effects In Indian Consumption Patterns," Papers 147, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Development Studies.
    16. Schultz, T. Paul, 1993. "Demand for children in low income countries," Handbook of Population and Family Economics, in: M. R. Rosenzweig & Stark, O. (ed.), Handbook of Population and Family Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 349-430, Elsevier.
    17. Bergstrom, Theodore C., 1993. "A survey of theories of the family," Handbook of Population and Family Economics, in: M. R. Rosenzweig & Stark, O. (ed.), Handbook of Population and Family Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 21-79, Elsevier.
    18. Case, Anne & Paxson, Christina, 2001. "Mothers and others: who invests in children's health?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 301-328, May.
    19. Richard Blundell & Alan Duncan & Krishna Pendakur, 1998. "Semiparametric estimation and consumer demand," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 435-461.
    20. Shelly Lundberg & Elaina Rose, 2002. "The Effects Of Sons And Daughters On Men'S Labor Supply And Wages," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 251-268, May.
    21. Duncan Thomas & John Strauss & Maria-Helena Henriques, 1991. "How Does Mother's Education Affect Child Height?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 26(2), pages 183-211.
    22. Jay Teachman & Paul Schollaert, 1989. "Gender of children and birth timing," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 26(3), pages 411-423, August.
    23. Paul Schultz, T., 2001. "Women's roles in the agricultural household: Bargaining and human capital investments," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 383-456, Elsevier.
    24. Behrman, Jere R & Pollak, Robert A & Taubman, Paul, 1986. "Do Parents Favor Boys?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(1), pages 33-54, February.
    25. Stephan Klasen & Claudia Wink, 2002. "A Turning Point in Gender Bias in Mortality? An Update on the Number of Missing Women," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 28(2), pages 285-312, June.
    26. 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.
    27. Thomas, Duncan & Strauss, John & Henriques, Maria-Helena, 1990. "Child survival, height for age and household characteristics in Brazil," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 197-234, October.
    28. Lundberg, Shelly & Rose, Elaina, 2000. "Parenthood and the earnings of married men and women," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(6), pages 689-710, November.
    29. repec:ucp:bknber:9780226740867 is not listed on IDEAS
    30. Rosenzweig, Mark R & Schultz, T Paul, 1982. "Market Opportunities, Genetic Endowments, and Intrafamily Resource Distribution: Child Survival in Rural India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(4), pages 803-815, September.
    31. Shelly Lundberg & Elaina Rose, 2003. "Child gender and the transition to marriage," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 40(2), pages 333-349, May.
    32. Subramaniam, Ramesh, 1996. "Gender-Bias in India: The Importance of Household Fixed-Effects," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(2), pages 280-299, April.
    33. T. Paul Schultz, 1990. "Testing the Neoclassical Model of Family Labor Supply and Fertility," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 599-634.
    34. Deaton, Angus S, 1989. "Looking for Boy-Girl Discrimination in Household Expenditure Data," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 3(1), pages 1-15, January.
    35. Alain Marcoux, 2002. "Sex Differentials in Undernutrition: A Look at Survey Evidence," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 28(2), pages 275-284, June.
    36. 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.
    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. Lefebvre, Pierre, 2006. "Le gradient santé / revenu familial des nouveau-nés québécois de 1998 après quatre ans : faible ou inexistant?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 82(4), pages 523-595, décembre.

    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. 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.
    2. Xu, Zeyu, 2007. "A survey on intra-household models and evidence," MPRA Paper 3763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Jere R. Behrman & Andrew D. Foster & Mark R. Rosenzweig & Prem Vashishtha, 1999. "Women's Schooling, Home Teaching, and Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 682-714, August.
    4. Chiappori, Pierre-André & Donni, Olivier, 2009. "Non-unitary Models of Household Behavior: A Survey of the Literature," IZA Discussion Papers 4603, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Chiappori, Pierre-André & Donni, Olivier, 2006. "Les modèles non unitaires de comportement du ménage : un survol de la littérature," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 82(1), pages 9-52, mars-juin.
    6. Rubalcava, L. & Thomas, D., 2000. "Family Bargaining and Welfare," Papers 00-10, RAND - Labor and Population Program.
    7. Lépine, Aurélia & Strobl, Eric, 2013. "The Effect of Women’s Bargaining Power on Child Nutrition in Rural Senegal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 17-30.
    8. Robert Pollak, 2003. "Gary Becker's Contributions to Family and Household Economics," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 111-141, January.
    9. Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Otsuka, Keijiro, 2001. "Land Inheritance and Schooling in Matrilineal Societies: Evidence from Sumatra," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 2093-2110, December.
    10. Akresh, Richard, 2005. "Understanding Pareto Inefficient Intrahousehold Allocations," IZA Discussion Papers 1858, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. James Andreoni & Eleanor Brown & Isaac Rischall, 2003. "Charitable Giving by Married Couples Who Decides and Why Does it Matter?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 38(1).
    12. Mariano Rojas, 2008. "Intra-Household Arrangements and Health Satisfaction: Evidence from Mexico," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2008-57, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    13. Nobuhiko FUWA & Seiro ITO & Kensuke KUBO & Takashi KUROSAKI & Yasuyuki SAWADA, 2006. "Introduction To A Study Of Intrahousehold Resource Allocation And Gender Discrimination In Rural Andhra Pradesh, India," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 44(4), pages 375-397, December.
    14. Djebbari, Habiba, 2005. "The Impact on Nutrition of the Intrahousehold Distribution of Power," IZA Discussion Papers 1701, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Goldstein, Marcus, 2004. "Intrahousehold efficiency and individual insurance in Ghana," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6644, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Fuwa, Nobuhiko, 2005. "Intrahousehold Analysis Using Household Consumption Data: Would the Potential Benefit of Collecting Individual-Level Consumption Data Justify Its Cost?," MPRA Paper 23689, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Holvoet, Nathalie, 2003. "Household matters: on the usefulness of an institutional approach for understanding intrahousehold allocation," IOB Discussion Papers 2003.03, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    18. 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).
    19. Frederic Vermeulen, 2002. "Collective Household Models: Principles and Main Results," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 533-564, September.
    20. LaFave, Daniel & Thomas, Duncan, 2017. "Extended families and child well-being," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 52-65.

    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:ris:actuec:v:82:y:2006:i:1:p:119-153. 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: Benoit Dostie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/scseeea.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.