IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csa/wpaper/2006-01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What’s love got to do with it ? An experimental test of household models in East Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Vegard Iversen
  • Cecile Jackson
  • Bereket Kebede
  • Alistair Munro
  • Arjan Verschoor

Abstract

We test core theories of the household using variants of a public good game and experimental data from 240 couples in rural Uganda. Spouses do not maximise surplus from cooperation and realise a greater surplus when women are in charge. This violates assumptions of unitary and cooperative models. When women control the common account, they receive less than when men control it; this contradicts standard bargaining models. Women contribute less than men and are rewarded more generously by men than vice versa. This casts doubt on postulates in Sen (1990). While the absence of altruism is rejected, we find evidence for opportunism. The results are put in a socioeconomic context using quantitative and qualitative survey data. Assortative matching and correlates of bargaining power influence behaviour within the experiments. Our findings suggest that a "one-size fits all" model of the household is unlikely to be satisfactory.

Suggested Citation

  • Vegard Iversen & Cecile Jackson & Bereket Kebede & Alistair Munro & Arjan Verschoor, 2006. "What’s love got to do with it ? An experimental test of household models in East Uganda," CSAE Working Paper Series 2006-01, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    • Handle: RePEc:csa:wpaper:2006-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:3d0e358d-f0de-4c90-b6a7-b015c28544dd
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ligon, Ethan, 2002. "Dynamic Bargaining in Households (with application to Bangladesh)," CUDARE Working Papers 25102, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    2. Ligon, Ethan, 2002. "Dynamic bargaining in households (with an application to Bangladesh)," CUDARE Working Paper Series 972, University of California at Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Policy.
    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. Dan Anderberg, 2007. "Inefficient households and the mix of government spending," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 127-140, April.
    2. Steven Stern & Leora Friedberg, 2010. "Marriage, Divorce, and Asymmetric Information," Virginia Economics Online Papers 385, University of Virginia, Department of Economics.
    3. Chen, Natalie & Conconi, Paola & Perroni, Carlo, 2007. "Women’s Earning Power and the “Double Burden” of Market and Household Work," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 800, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    4. Augsburg, Britta & Malde, Bansi & Olorenshaw, Harriet & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2023. "To invest or not to invest in sanitation: The role of intra-household gender differences in perceptions and bargaining power," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    5. James Fenske & Vellore Arthi, 2013. "Labour and Health in Colonial Nigeria," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _114, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    6. Kochar, Anjini & Nagabhushana, Closepet & Sarkar, Ritwik & Shah, Rohan & Singh, Geeta, 2022. "Financial access and women's role in household decisions: Empirical evidence from India's National Rural Livelihoods project," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    7. Leora Friedberg & Steven Stern, 2014. "Marriage, Divorce, And Asymmetric Information," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1155-1199, November.
    8. Del Boca, Daniela & Flinn, Christopher, 2012. "Endogenous household interaction," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 49-65.
    9. Denni Tommasi, 2016. "Household Responses to cash Transfers," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-20, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    10. Shelly Lundberg & Robert Pollak, 2003. "Efficiency in Marriage," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 153-167, September.
    11. Jonathan Heathcote & Kjetil Storesletten & Giovanni L. Violante, 2009. "Quantitative Macroeconomics with Heterogeneous Households," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 319-354, May.
    12. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt, 2019. "Does female empowerment promote economic development?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 309-343, December.
    13. Adam, Christopher & Hoddinott, John & Ligon, Ethan A., 2011. "Dynamic intrahousehold bargaining, matrimonial property law and suicide in Canada," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt4dm5w8v1, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    14. Ngo, Thi Minh-Phuong & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2012. "Microfinance and gender empowerment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 1-12.
    15. Kazianga, Harounan & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2017. "Intra-household resource allocation and familial ties," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 109-132.
    16. 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).
    17. 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.
    18. Castilla, Carolina & Walker, Thomas F., 2012. "Gender Roles and Intra-Household Allocation: Identifying Differences in the Incentives to Hide Money Across Spouses in Ghana," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124923, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Timo Hener, 2010. "Do Couples Bargain over Fertility?: Evidence Based on Child Preference Data," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 323, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:csa:wpaper:2006-01. 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: Julia Coffey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csaoxuk.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.