IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucd/wpaper/201607.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Employment and the Risk of Domestic Violence: Does the Breadwinner’s Gender Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • César Alonso-Borrego

    (Department of Economics, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)

  • Raquel Carrasco

    (Department of Economics, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)

Abstract

This paper studies the effect on the risk of female victimization of the employment statuses of both partners, conditional on income and a set of sociodemographic characteristics. Using cross-sectional data from the Violence Against Women (VAW) surveys for Spain in 1999, 2002, and 2006, we address the potential endogeneity of employment and income variables using a multivariate probit model. We exploit geographical-level information on employment and unemployment rates by gender and age, and on household income, to identify the parameters of the model. Our estimation results, for which proper account of the endogeneity problem proves critical, show that male partner employment plays a major role in the risk of physical violence, while female employment only lowers the risk of violence when her partner is employed too. The lowest risk of physical abuse appears for more egalitarian couples in which both partners are employed.

Suggested Citation

  • César Alonso-Borrego & Raquel Carrasco, 2016. "Employment and the Risk of Domestic Violence: Does the Breadwinner’s Gender Matter?," Working Papers 201607, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucd:wpaper:201607
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ucd.ie/geary/static/publications/workingpapers/gearywp201607.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2016
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amy Farmer & Jill Tiefenthaler, 1997. "An Economic Analysis of Domestic Violence," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(3), pages 337-358.
    2. Audra J. Bowlus & Shannon Seitz, 2006. "Domestic Violence, Employment, And Divorce," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 47(4), pages 1113-1149, November.
    3. Robert A. Pollak, 2004. "An intergenerational model of domestic violence," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 17(2), pages 311-329, June.
    4. Bhattacharyya, Manasi & Bedi, Arjun S. & Chhachhi, Amrita, 2011. "Marital Violence and Women's Employment and Property Status: Evidence from North Indian Villages," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1676-1689, September.
    5. Becker, Gary S & Landes, Elisabeth M & Michael, Robert T, 1977. "An Economic Analysis of Marital Instability," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(6), pages 1141-1187, December.
    6. Borsch-Supan, Axel & Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A., 1993. "Smooth unbiased multivariate probability simulators for maximum likelihood estimation of limited dependent variable models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 347-368, August.
    7. Farmer, Amy & Tiefenthaler, Jill, 1996. "Domestic Violence: The Value of Services as Signals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 274-279, May.
    8. Becker, Gary S, 1973. "A Theory of Marriage: Part I," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(4), pages 813-846, July-Aug..
    9. Anna Aizer, 2010. "The Gender Wage Gap and Domestic Violence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1847-1859, September.
    10. Dan Anderberg & Helmut Rainer & Jonathan Wadsworth & Tanya Wilson, 2014. "Unemployment and domestic violence," CentrePiece - The Magazine for Economic Performance 411, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. Lorenzo Cappellari & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2003. "Multivariate probit regression using simulated maximum likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(3), pages 278-294, September.
    12. Luke, Nancy & Munshi, Kaivan, 2011. "Women as agents of change: Female income and mobility in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 1-17, January.
    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. Carrasco, Raquel & Alonso-Borrego, César, 2019. "Intimate partner violence and women 's health : the private and social burden," UC3M Working papers. Economics 29029, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    2. Sara Cools & Martin Flatø & Andreas Kotsadam, 2020. "Rainfall shocks and intimate partner violence in sub-Saharan Africa," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(3), pages 377-390, May.
    3. Karine Torosyan & Norberto Pignatti, 2020. "Employment vs. Homestay and the Happiness of Women in the South Caucasus," Working Papers 2020-007, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    4. Bhalotra, Sonia R. & Kambhampati, Uma & Rawlings, Samantha & Siddique, Zahra, 2018. "Intimate Partner Violence and the Business Cycle," IZA Discussion Papers 11274, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Caoimhe Rice & Judit Vall Castelló, 2018. "Hit where it hurts – healthcare access and intimate partner violence," Working Papers 2018/22, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intimate-partner violence; employment; discrete choice; multivariate probit; endogeneity.;

    JEL classification:

    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • D19 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Other
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • C26 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ucd:wpaper:201607. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Geary Tech). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/geucdie.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.