IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bba/j00001/v3y2024i4p186-221d304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Family Rules, Employment, Fertility and Women’s Empowerment: Evidence from a Developing Country

Author

Listed:
  • Safdar Ullah Khan

    (Bond Business School, Bond University, Australia)

  • Arthur H. Goldsmith

    (The Williams School of Commerce, Economics and Politics, Washington and Lee University, US)

  • Gulasekaran Rajaguru

    (Bond Business School, Bond University, Australia)

  • Ahmad M Khalid

    (School of Business and Economics, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Gadong, Brunei Darussalam)

Abstract

This research investigates the determinants of women's empowerment within households in a developing country. The investigation specifically focuses on the impact of employment and fertility, considering constraints imposed by family rules that play a pivotal role in shaping women's empowerment. The theoretical framework outlined in this study posits a simplistic model demonstrating that, within the prevailing family structure and household composition, earned income and fertility may bear significant relevance. Utilizing data extracted from the Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey, we engage in estimating the level of female empowerment, operationalized as the extent of female authority over household expenditures. Notably, our empirical approach accounts for the endogeneity of employment and fertility through a two-stage estimation process. This involves leveraging information on family rules—representative of a family's cultural norms—pertaining to work and childbearing. Our empirical findings affirm the viability of family-specific rules as instruments to estimate and subsequently predict employment and fertility. Importantly, the evidence gleaned underscores the critical role of selecting valid threat options in theoretical analyses of women's empowerment.

Suggested Citation

  • Safdar Ullah Khan & Arthur H. Goldsmith & Gulasekaran Rajaguru & Ahmad M Khalid, 2024. "Family Rules, Employment, Fertility and Women’s Empowerment: Evidence from a Developing Country," Journal of Economic Analysis, Anser Press, vol. 3(4), pages 186-221, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bba:j00001:v:3:y:2024:i:4:p:186-221:d:304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.anserpress.org/journal/jea/3/4/84/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.anserpress.org/journal/jea/3/4/84
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaushik Basu, 2006. "Gender and Say: a Model of Household Behaviour with Endogenously Determined Balance of Power," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(511), pages 558-580, April.
    2. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    3. Toseef Azid & Muhammad Aslam & Muhammad Omer Chaudhary, 2001. "Poverty, Female Labour Force Participation, and Cottage Industry: A Case Study of Cloth Embroidery in Rural Multan," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 40(4), pages 1105-1118.
    4. 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.
    5. Bhatti, Lubna Ishaq & Fikree, Fariyal F. & Khan, Amanullah, 1999. "The quest of infertile women in squatter settlements of Karachi, Pakistan: a qualitative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 637-649, September.
    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. Lee, Jungmin, 2004. "Observable and Unobservable Household Sharing Rules: Evidence from Young Couples' Pocket Money," IZA Discussion Papers 1250, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Arthi, Vellore & Fenske, James, 2016. "Intra-household labor allocation in colonial Nigeria," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 69-92.
    3. Sofia Amaral & Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay & Rudra Sensarma, 2015. "Public Work Programs and Gender-based Violence: The Case of NREGA in India," Discussion Papers 15-09, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    4. Alidou, Sahawal & Verpoorten, Marijke, 2019. "Only women can whisper to gods: Voodoo, menopause and women’s autonomy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 40-54.
    5. Man Si, 2015. "Intrafamily bargaining and love," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 771-789, December.
    6. Shelly Lundberg & Robert Pollak, 2003. "Efficiency in Marriage," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 153-167, September.
    7. Doepke, M. & Tertilt, M., 2016. "Families in Macroeconomics," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1789-1891, Elsevier.
    8. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt, 2019. "Does female empowerment promote economic development?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 309-343, December.
    9. Hassani Nezhad, Lena, 2020. "Female Employment and Childcare," IZA Discussion Papers 13839, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Martin Browning & Pierre-André Chiappori & Valérie Lechene, 2006. "Collective and Unitary Models: A Clarification," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-14, March.
    11. Francesconi, Marco & Muthoo, Abhinay, 2003. "An Economic Model of Child Custody," IZA Discussion Papers 857, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Akira Yakita, 2018. "Fertility and education decisions and child-care policy effects in a Nash-bargaining family model," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 1177-1201, October.
    13. Tümer Kapan, 2010. "Property Division Laws: The Effects on Labor Supply and Household Bargaining," 2010 Meeting Papers 1127, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Marie Christine Apedo-Amah & Habiba Djebbari & Roberta Ziparo, 2019. "Gender, information and the efficiency of household production decisions: An experiment in rural Togo," Working Papers halshs-02462673, HAL.
    15. Pamela Giustinelli, 2016. "Group Decision Making With Uncertain Outcomes: Unpacking Child–Parent Choice Of The High School Track," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 57(2), pages 573-602, May.
    16. Catherine Bros & Véronique Gille & François Maniquet, 2023. "Female labour, status and decision power," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(358), pages 453-476, April.
    17. Ngo, Thi Minh-Phuong & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2012. "Microfinance and gender empowerment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 1-12.
    18. Wang, Shing-Yi, 2014. "Property rights and intra-household bargaining," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 192-201.
    19. Xu, Zeyu, 2007. "A survey on intra-household models and evidence," MPRA Paper 3763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Jean-Marie Baland & Roberta Ziparo, 2017. "Intra-household bargaining in poor countries," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    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:bba:j00001:v:3:y:2024:i:4:p:186-221:d:304. 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: Ramona Wang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.anserpress.org .

    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.