IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/femeco/v8y2002i3p77-97.html

Gender-Based Advantage: A Model of Emerging and Constructed Opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Scott Steele

Abstract

This paper seeks to analyze the emergence of gender-based differential advantage in an abstract evolutionary model. This model helps to explain how the social convention of favoring one gender in the distribution of household surplus could emerge over time and suggests that gender-based advantage could emerge in a society without purposeful intent. It also provides insights into intra-household gender relations and the possible effects of reference groups on intra-household relations. In addition, it lays the groundwork for some interesting empirical or experimental research.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Steele, 2002. "Gender-Based Advantage: A Model of Emerging and Constructed Opportunities," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 77-97.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:8:y:2002:i:3:p:77-97
    DOI: 10.1080/13545700210156398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13545700210156398
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13545700210156398?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hilde Bojer, 2000. "Children and Theories of Social Justice," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 23-39.
    2. Charles F. Manski, 2000. "Economic Analysis of Social Interactions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 115-136, Summer.
    3. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2000. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 159-181, Summer.
    4. Chiappori, Pierre-Andre, 1988. "Rational Household Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 63-90, January.
    5. Schaffner, Julie Anderson, 1995. "Attached farm labor, limited horizons and servility," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 241-270, August.
    6. Bina Agarwal, 1997. "''Bargaining'' and Gender Relations: Within and Beyond the Household," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1-51.
    7. Elissa Braunstein & Nancy Folbre, 2001. "To Honor and Obey: Efficiency, Inequality, and Patriarchal Property Rights," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 25-44.
    8. Gary S. Becker, 1981. "A Treatise on the Family," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number beck81-1, August.
    9. Frances Woolley, 2000. "Degrees of Connection: A Critique of Rawls's Theory of Mutual Disinterest," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 1-21.
    10. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Marjorie B. McElroy, 1990. "The Empirical Content of Nash-Bargained Household Behavior," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 559-583.
    13. Jean-Paul Chavas & Jay Coggins, 2003. "On fairness and welfare analysis under uncertainty," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 20(2), pages 203-228, March.
    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. Malapit, Hazel Jean L., 2012. "Why do spouses hide income?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 584-593.
    2. Fafchamps, Marcel, 1998. "Efficiency In Intrahousehold Resource Allocation," FCND Discussion Papers 94856, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Jean-Paul Chavas & Eleonora Matteazzi & Martina Menon & Federico Perali, 2022. "(In)Efficient Bargaining in the Family," Working Papers 2, SITES.
    4. Jean-Paul Chavas & Eleonora Matteazzi & Martina Menon & Federico Perali, 2021. "Bargaining in the Family," CHILD Working Papers Series 88 JEL Classification: D1, Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic Economics (CHILD) - CCA.
    5. 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.
    6. Holger Seebens & Johannes Sauer, 2007. "Bargaining power and efficiency-rural households in Ethiopia," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(7), pages 895-918.
    7. Xu, Zeyu, 2007. "A survey on intra-household models and evidence," MPRA Paper 3763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Udry, Christopher & Hoddinott, John & Alderman, Harold & Haddad, Lawrence, 1995. "Gender differentials in farm productivity: implications for household efficiency and agricultural policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 407-423, October.
    9. Anyck Dauphin & Bernard Fortin & Guy Lacroix, 2018. "Is consumption efficiency within households falsifiable?," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 737-766, September.
    10. 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.
    11. Rubalcava, L. & Thomas, D., 2000. "Family Bargaining and Welfare," Papers 00-10, RAND - Labor and Population Program.
    12. Thomas, Duncan & Contreras, Dante & Frankerberg, Elizabeth, 2002. "Distribution of power within the household and child health," MPRA Paper 80075, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Mar 2002.
    13. Gerhard Sichelstiel & Fritz Söllner, 2004. "„Gleich und gleich gesellt sich gern”–ökonomische Ansätze zur Partnerwahl," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 5(3), pages 249-270, August.
    14. 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.
    15. Jérôme De Henau, 2008. "Asymetric power within couples: the gendered effect of children and employment on entitlement to household income," Brussels Economic Review, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 51(2/3), pages 269-290.
    16. Robert A. Pollak, 2019. "How Bargaining in Marriage Drives Marriage Market Equilibrium," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 297-321.
    17. Julio Cáceres & Dante Contreras, 1999. "Asignación de Recursos en los Hogares Pobres de Chile," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 36(108), pages 727-760.
    18. Bina Agarwal, 1997. "''Bargaining'' and Gender Relations: Within and Beyond the Household," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1-51.
    19. Klein, Matthew J. & Barham, Bradford L., 2018. "Point Estimates of Household Bargaining Power Using Outside Options," Staff Paper Series 590, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    20. Grossbard, Shoshana, 2025. "Spouses as home health workers, childcare workers and cooks: Insights for applied research," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:taf:femeco:v:8:y:2002:i:3:p:77-97. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFEC20 .

    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.