Brain versus brawn: the realization of women's comparative advantage
This paper examines the evolution of women in the labor market, specifically their post-World War II employment, wages and education, by assessing the role of technology changing labor demand requirements, as a driving force. The empirical results in the United Sates data show that job requirements have shifted from more physical to more intellectual attributes. Moreover, women have always worked in occupations with relatively low physical requirements and, traditionally, also worked in occupations with lower intellectual requirements than men. However, the later trend has been reversed over time with women overtaking men in college education by the mid 1980s. This paper uses a model in which agents make work and education decisions to account for the importance of technological shifts in women’s labor market experience. The key feature of the model is that individuals are heterogenous in their innate brain and brawn abilities, and women have on average less brawn than men. This is the main source for the employment, wage and education gaps in the 1950s between men and women. Thengeneral equilibrium model is simulated to account for the quantitative implications ofnbrain biased technical change (BBTC), which is modeled as a rise in the share parameternon the brain factor in a CES production function, from 1950 to 2005. In particular, asnBBTC favors women’s comparative advantage in brain over brawn, the model is able to generate a large rise in female participation, closing gender wage and education gaps, innaddition to a rising college premium. These results suggest that labor demand changesnand multidimensional skill attributes are important in explaining the radical evolutionnof women’s labor market participation, wages and education.
|Date of creation:||Sep 2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Schönberggasse 1, CH-8001 Zürich|
Phone: +41-1-634 21 37
Fax: +41-1-634 49 82
Web page: http://www.econ.uzh.ch/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Black, Sandra E. & Spitz-Oener, Alexandra, 2007.
"Explaining Women's Success: Technological Change and the Skill Content of Women's Work,"
ZEW Discussion Papers
07-033, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
- Sandra E. Black & Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2010. "Explaining Women's Success: Technological Change and the Skill Content of Women's Work," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 187-194, February.
- Black, Sandra E. & Spitz-Oener, Alexandra, 2007. "Explaining Women’s Success: Technological Change and the Skill Content of Women’s Work," IZA Discussion Papers 2803, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Sandra E. Black & Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2007. "Explaining Women's Success: Technological Change and the Skill Content of Women's Work," NBER Working Papers 13116, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Galor, Oded & Weil, David, 1995.
"The Gender Gap, Fertility and Growth,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
1157, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Stefania Albanesi & Claudia Olivetti, 2007.
"Gender Roles and Technological Progress,"
NBER Working Papers
13179, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Albanesi, Stefania & Olivetti, Claudia, 2007. "Gender Roles and Technological Progress," CEPR Discussion Papers 6352, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Stefania Albanesi & Claudia Olivetti, 2006. "Gender roles and technological progress," 2006 Meeting Papers 411, Society for Economic Dynamics.
- Stefania Albanesi & Claudia Olivetti, 2007. "Gender Roles and Technological Progress," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2007-029, Boston University - Department of Economics.
- Per Krusell & Lee E. Ohanian & Jose-Victor Rios-Rull & Giovanni L. Violante, 1997.
"Capital-skill complementarity and inequality: a macroeconomic analysis,"
239, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Per Krusell & Lee E. Ohanian & JosÈ-Victor RÌos-Rull & Giovanni L. Violante, 2000. "Capital-Skill Complementarity and Inequality: A Macroeconomic Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1029-1054, September.
- Francine D. Blau, 1997.
"Trends in the Well-Being of American Women, 1970-1995,"
NBER Working Papers
6206, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Francine D. Blau, 1998. "Trends in the Well-Being of American Women, 1970-1995," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 112-165, March.
- L Yuetyee Wong, 2006. "Women's Economic Progress and Inequality," 2006 Meeting Papers 477, Society for Economic Dynamics.
- Larry E. Jones & Rodolfo E. Manuelli & Ellen R. McGrattan, 2003.
"Why are married women working so much?,"
317, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Claudia Olivetti, 2006.
"Changes in Women's Hours of Market Work: The Role of Returns to Experience,"
Review of Economic Dynamics,
Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 9(4), pages 557-587, October.
- Claudia Olivetti, 2005. "Changes in Women's Hours of Market Work: The Role of Returns to Experience," Boston University - Department of Economics - Macroeconomics Working Papers Series WP2005-008, Boston University - Department of Economics, revised Jun 2006.
- Chinhui Juhn & Sandra E. Black, 2000. "The Rise of Female Professionals: Are Women Responding to Skill Demand?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 450-455, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zur:iewwpx:491. 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: (Marita Kieser)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.