IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aejapp/v11y2019i2p266-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cooperation in Polygynous Households

Author

Listed:
  • Abigail Barr
  • Marleen Dekker
  • Wendy Janssens
  • Bereket Kebede
  • Berber Kramer

Abstract

Using a carefully designed series of public goods games, we compare, across monogamous and polygynous households, the willingness of husbands and wives to cooperate to maximize household gains. Compared to monogamous husbands and wives, polygynous husbands and wives are less cooperative, one with another, and co-wives are least cooperative, one with another. The husbands' and wives' behavior in a corresponding series of inter-household games indicates that these differences cannot be attributed to selection of less cooperative people into polygyny. Finally, behavior in polygynous households is more reciprocal and less apparently altruistic.

Suggested Citation

  • Abigail Barr & Marleen Dekker & Wendy Janssens & Bereket Kebede & Berber Kramer, 2019. "Cooperation in Polygynous Households," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 266-283, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aejapp:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:266-83
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/app.20170438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/app.20170438
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gyimah, Stephen Obeng, 2009. "Polygynous marital structure and child survivorship in sub-Saharan Africa: Some empirical evidence from Ghana," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 334-342, January.
    2. Iversen, Vegard & Jackson, Cecile & Kebede, Bereket & Munro, Alistair & Verschoor, Arjan, 2011. "Do Spouses Realise Cooperative Gains? Experimental Evidence from Rural Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 569-578, April.
    3. Abhijit Banerjee & Dean Karlan & Jonathan Zinman, 2015. "Six Randomized Evaluations of Microcredit: Introduction and Further Steps," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, January.
    4. Marito Garcia & Charity M. T. Moore, 2012. "The Cash Dividend : The Rise of Cash Transfer Programs in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2246.
    5. Bezu, Sosina & Holden, Stein T., 2015. "Generosity and sharing among villagers: Do women give more?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 103-111.
    6. Sarah Baird & Francisco H.G. Ferreira & Berk Özler & Michael Woolcock, 2014. "Conditional, unconditional and everything in between: a systematic review of the effects of cash transfer programmes on schooling outcomes," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 1-43, January.
    7. John T. Dalton & Tin Cheuk Leung, 2014. "Why Is Polygyny More Prevalent in Western Africa? An African Slave Trade Perspective," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(4), pages 599-632.
    8. Udry, Christopher, 1996. "Gender, Agricultural Production, and the Theory of the Household," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(5), pages 1010-1046, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Richard Akresh & Joyce J. Chen & Charity T. Moore, 2012. "Productive Efficiency and the Scope for Cooperation in Polygynous Households," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(2), pages 395-401.
    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. McElroy, Marjorie B & Horney, Mary Jean, 1981. "Nash-Bargained Household Decisions: Toward a Generalization of the Theory of Demand," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 22(2), pages 333-349, June.
    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. Guirkinger, Catherine & Gross, Jérémie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 2021. "Are women emancipating? Evidence from marriage, divorce and remarriage in Rural Northern Burkina Faso☆," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    2. D’Exelle, Ben & Lépine, Aurélia & Bakyono, Richard & Tapsoba, Ludovic D.G., 2023. "Fertility and polygyny: Experimental evidence from Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    3. Heath, Rachel & Hidrobo, Melissa & Roy, Shalini, 2020. "Cash transfers, polygamy, and intimate partner violence: Experimental evidence from Mali," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    4. Rajat Deb & Deep Deb & Kiran Sankar Chakraborty, 2022. "Spousal roles in life insurance demands," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 49(1), pages 3-11, March.
    5. Deschênes, Sarah & Dumas, Christelle & Lambert, Sylvie, 2020. "Household resources and individual strategies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    6. Thomas TB Baudin & Bram De Rock & Paula Eugenia Gobbi, 2021. "Economics and Family Structures," Working Papers ECARES 2021-21, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Charlotte Ringdal & Ingrid Hoem Sjursen, 2021. "Household Bargaining and Spending on Children: Experimental Evidence from Tanzania," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 430-455, April.
    8. Abigail Barr & Marlene Dekker & Floyd Mwansa & Tia Linda Zuze, 2020. "Financial decision-making, gender and social norms in Zambia: Preliminary report on the quantitative data generation, analysis and results," Discussion Papers 2020-06, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    9. De Vreyer, Philippe & Nilsson, Björn, 2019. "When solidarity fails: Heterogeneous effects on children from adult deaths in Senegalese households," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 73-94.
    10. Friedson-Ridenour, Sophia & Pierotti, Rachael S., 2019. "Competing priorities: Women’s microenterprises and household relationships," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 53-62.
    11. Huang, Wei & Wang, Yu & Zhao, Xiaojian, 2024. "Motivated Beliefs, Independence and Cooperation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    12. Doux Baraka Kusinza & Catherine Guirkinger, 2024. "Cooperation in Polygamous Households. Experimental Evidence from Northern Benin," DeFiPP Working Papers 2403, University of Namur, Development Finance and Public Policies.
    13. Karimli, Leyla & Lecoutere, Els & Wells, Christine R. & Ismayilova, Leyla, 2021. "More assets, more decision-making power? Mediation model in a cluster-randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of the graduation program on women's empowerment in Burkina Faso," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    14. Cheryl R. Doss & Agnes R. Quisumbing, 2020. "Understanding rural household behavior: Beyond Boserup and Becker," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 47-58, January.
    15. Abbink, Klaus & Islam, Asad & Nguyen, Chau, 2020. "Whose voice matters? An experimental examination of gender bias in intra-household decision-making," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 337-352.
    16. André, Pierre & Dupraz, Yannick, 2023. "Education and polygamy: Evidence from Cameroon," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    17. Hoel, Jessica B. & Hidrobo, Melissa & Bernard, Tanguy & Ashour, Maha, 2021. "What do intra-household experiments measure? Evidence from the lab and field," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 337-350.
    18. Pal, Sumantra, 2018. "Spousal Violence and Social Norms in India's North East," EconStor Preprints 179422, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    19. Matthew Gnagey & Therese Grijalva & Rong Rong, 2020. "Spousal influence and assortative mating on time preferences: a field experiment in the USA," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 461-512, June.

    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. Debosree Banerjee & Stephan Klasen, 2022. "Conditional cash transfers to mothers, intrahousehold allocations: the role of unobservability," International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 275-296, February.
    2. Laurens CHERCHYE & Thomas DEMUYNCK & Bram DE ROCK, 2010. "Noncooperative household consumption with caring," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces10.34, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    3. Hoel, Jessica B. & Hidrobo, Melissa & Bernard, Tanguy & Ashour, Maha, 2017. "Productive inefficiency in dairy farming and cooperation between spouses: Evidence from Senegal:," IFPRI discussion papers 1698, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Kaushik Basu, 1999. "Child Labor: Cause, Consequence, and Cure, with Remarks on International Labor Standards," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(3), pages 1083-1119, September.
    5. Arjan Verschoor & Bereket Kebede & Alistair Munro & Marcela Tarazona, 2019. "Spousal Control and Efficiency of Intra-household Decision-Making: Experiments among Married Couples in India, Ethiopia and Nigeria," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(4), pages 1171-1196, September.
    6. Bereket Kebede & Marcela Tarazona & Alistair Munro & Arjan Verschoor, 2014. "Intra-household Efficiency: An Experimental Study from Ethiopia," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 23(1), pages 105-150.
    7. Bergolo, Marcelo & Galván, Estefanía, 2018. "Intra-household Behavioral Responses to Cash Transfer Programs. Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 100-118.
    8. Anderson, Siwan & Eswaran, Mukesh, 2009. "What determines female autonomy? Evidence from Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 179-191, November.
    9. Harounan Kazianga & Stefan Klonner, 2009. "The Intra-household Economics of Polygyny: Fertility and Child Mortality in Rural Mali," Economics Working Paper Series 0902, Oklahoma State University, Department of Economics and Legal Studies in Business.
    10. Laurens Cherchye & Sam Cosaert & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock, 2020. "Group Consumption with Caring Individuals," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(627), pages 587-622.
    11. Agnes R. Quisumbing & John A. Maluccio, 2003. "Resources at Marriage and Intrahousehold Allocation: Evidence from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and South Africa," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(3), pages 283-327, July.
    12. Miriam Beblo & Denis Beninger, 2017. "Do husbands and wives pool their incomes? A couple experiment," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 779-805, September.
    13. Nicholas Magnan & Abby M. Love & Fulgence J. Mishili & Ganna Sheremenko, 2020. "Husbands’ and wives’ risk preferences and improved maize adoption in Tanzania," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(5), pages 743-758, September.
    14. Yang, Xiaojun & Carlsson, Fredrik, 2012. "Intra-household decisions making on intertemporal choices: An experimental study in rural China," Working Papers in Economics 537, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    15. Christian T. Litchepah & Issidor. Noumba & Mohammadou. Nourou, 2022. "Does reducing violence against women improve children’s health? The case of Cameroon," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 6(6), pages 187-194, June.
    16. Holden, Stein & Bezu, Sosina, 2013. "Joint Land Certification and Intra-household Decision-making:Towards Empowerment of Wives?," CLTS Working Papers 14/13, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 10 Oct 2019.
    17. Iversen, Vegard & Jackson, Cecile & Kebede, Bereket & Munro, Alistair & Verschoor, Arjan, 2011. "Do Spouses Realise Cooperative Gains? Experimental Evidence from Rural Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 569-578, April.
    18. Vegard Iversen et al, 2009. "Does one size fit all? An experimental test of household models in East Uganda," Discussion Papers 09-04, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    19. Thomas, Duncan & Rangel, Marcos, 2020. "Decision-Making in Complex Households," CEPR Discussion Papers 14278, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Marcos A. Rangel & Duncan Thomas, 2019. "Decision-Making in Complex Households," Working Papers 2019-070, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Cooperation in Polygynous Households (American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2019) in ReplicationWiki

    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:aea:aejapp:v:11:y:2019:i:2:p:266-83. 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: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.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.