IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/scandj/v117y2015i1p220-247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender Power, Fertility, and Family Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Kemnitz
  • Marcel Thum

Abstract

The birth of children often shifts the balance of power within a family. If family decisions are made according to the welfare function of the spouses, this shift in power might cause a time-consistency problem. In a model of cooperative family decision-making, we show that this problem can lead to a systematic downward bias in fertility. By keeping fertility low, spouses mitigate the ex ante undesired shift in the balance of power that results from the presence of children. This provides scope for welfare-enhancing policy intervention. We discuss to what extent existing family policy measures are suitable for overcoming the bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Kemnitz & Marcel Thum, 2015. "Gender Power, Fertility, and Family Policy," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 117(1), pages 220-247, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:scandj:v:117:y:2015:i:1:p:220-247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/sjoe.12086
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to 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. Timo Hener, 2010. "Do Couples Bargain over Fertility? Evidence Based on Child Preference Data," ifo Working Paper Series 92, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    2. Elisabeth Gugl, 2009. "Income splitting, specialization, and intra‐family distribution," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(3), pages 1050-1071, August.
    3. Iyigun, Murat & Walsh, Randall P., 2007. "Endogenous gender power, household labor supply and the demographic transition," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 138-155, January.
    4. Robert Fenge & Volker Meier, 2005. "Pensions and fertility incentives," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 38(1), pages 28-48, February.
    5. Cigno, Alessandro & Luporini, Annalisa & Pettini, Anna, 2003. "Transfers to families with children as a principal-agent problem," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(5-6), pages 1165-1177, May.
    6. Volker Meier & Matthias Wrede, 2013. "Reducing the excess burden of subsidizing the stork: joint taxation, individual taxation, and family tax splitting," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 1195-1207, July.
    7. Moshe Hazan & Hosny Zoabi, 2015. "Do Highly Educated Women Choose Smaller Families?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(587), pages 1191-1226, September.
    8. Kai A. Konrad & Kjell Erik Lommerud, 2000. "The bargaining family revisited," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 471-487, May.
    9. Sinn, Hans-Werner, 1997. "The Value of Children and Immigrants in a Pay-As-You-Go Pension System: A Proposal For a Partial Transition to a Funded System," CEPR Discussion Papers 1734, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Patricia Apps & Ray Rees, 2004. "Fertility, Taxation and Family Policy," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(4), pages 745-763, December.
    11. Rasul, Imran, 2008. "Household bargaining over fertility: Theory and evidence from Malaysia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 215-241, June.
    12. Matthias Wrede, 2003. "The Income Splitting Method: Is it Good for Both Marriage Partners?," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 4(2), pages 203-216, May.
    13. Robert A. Pollak, 2005. "Bargaining Power in Marriage: Earnings, Wage Rates and Household Production," NBER Working Papers 11239, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. 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.
    15. Lechene, Valérie & Preston, Ian, 2011. "Noncooperative household demand," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 504-527, March.
    16. Cigno, Alessandro, 1992. "Children and Pensions," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 5(3), pages 175-183, August.
    17. Raphaela Hyee & Julio R. Robledo, 2009. "Specialization in the Bargaining Family," Working Papers 640, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    18. Shelly J. Lundberg & Robert A. Pollak & Terence J. Wales, 1997. "Do Husbands and Wives Pool Their Resources? Evidence from the United Kingdom Child Benefit," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 32(3), pages 463-480.
    19. Chiappori, Pierre-Andre, 1992. "Collective Labor Supply and Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(3), pages 437-467, June.
    20. Raphaela Hyee & Julio R. Robledo, 2009. "Specialization in the Bargaining Family," Working Papers 640, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    21. Shelly Lundberg & Robert Pollak, 2003. "Efficiency in Marriage," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 153-167, September.
    22. repec:bla:scandj:v:97:y:1995:i:4:p:581-601 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Matthias Wrede, 2000. "Income Splitting – is it Good for Both Partners in the Marriage?," CESifo Working Paper Series 391, CESifo.
    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. Volker Meier & Matthew D. Rablen, 2024. "Political economy of redistribution between traditional and modern families," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 31(4), pages 980-1008, August.
    2. Volker Meier & Helmut Rainer, 2017. "Daddy months," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 30(3), pages 875-892, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Fabian Kindermann & Matthias Doepke, 2014. "Bargaining over Babies," 2014 Meeting Papers 670, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    5. Schaubert, Marianna, 2018. "Do Alimony Regulations Matter inside Marriage? Evidence from the 2008 Reform of the German Maintenance Law," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181508, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    6. Gerhard Glomm & Volker Meier, 2020. "Efficient child care subsidies: any need for cash for care?," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 773-793, September.
    7. Takuya Obara & Yoshitomo Ogawa, 2024. "Optimal taxation in an endogenous fertility model with non-cooperative behavior," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 173-197, March.
    8. Linda Cohen & Amihai Glazer, 2017. "Bargaining within the family can generate a political gender gap," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1399-1413, December.
    9. Nicolas Abad & Johanna Etner & Natacha Raffin & Thomas Seegmuller, 2024. "New fertility patterns: The role of human versus physical capital," AMSE Working Papers 2416, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    10. Elisabeth Gugl & Linda Welling, 2017. "Efficiency of Family Bargaining Models with Renegotiation: The Role of Transferable Utility across Periods," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 5(1), pages 53-83, June.
    11. Marianna Schaubert, 2023. "Do Alimony Regulations Matter Inside Marriage? Evidence from the 2008 Reform of the German Maintenance Law," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 145-178, June.
    12. Wang, Ruiting & Xu, Gang, 2020. "Can child allowances improve fertility in a gender discrimination economy?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 162-174.
    13. Doepke, Matthias & Kindermann, Fabian, 2014. "Intrahousehold Decision Making and Fertility," IZA Discussion Papers 8726, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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. Mizuki Komura, 2013. "Fertility and endogenous gender bargaining power," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 943-961, July.
    2. Takuya Obara & Yoshitomo Ogawa, 2020. "Optimal Taxation in an Endogenous Fertility Model with Non-Cooperative Couples," Discussion Paper Series 211, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University, revised Jan 2021.
    3. 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.
    4. Donni, Olivier & Molina, José Alberto, 2018. "Household Collective Models: Three Decades of Theoretical Contributions and Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 11915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Takuya Obara & Yoshitomo Ogawa, 2024. "Optimal taxation in an endogenous fertility model with non-cooperative behavior," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 173-197, March.
    6. Walther, Selma, 2018. "Noncooperative decision making in the household: Evidence from Malawi," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 428-442.
    7. Mizuki Komura, 2013. "Tax reform and endogenous gender bargaining power," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 175-192, June.
    8. Elisabeth Gugl & Linda Welling, 2017. "Efficiency of Family Bargaining Models with Renegotiation: The Role of Transferable Utility across Periods," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 5(1), pages 53-83, June.
    9. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt, 2019. "Does female empowerment promote economic development?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 309-343, December.
    10. Volker Meier & Helmut Rainer, 2017. "Daddy months," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 30(3), pages 875-892, July.
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    13. Doepke, Matthias & Kindermann, Fabian, 2014. "Intrahousehold Decision Making and Fertility," IZA Discussion Papers 8726, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Iyigun, Murat, 2009. "Marriage, Cohabitation and Commitment," IZA Discussion Papers 4341, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Kota Ogasawara & Mizuki Komura, 2022. "Consequences of war: Japan’s demographic transition and the marriage market," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 1037-1069, July.
    16. 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.
    17. Malapit, Hazel Jean L., 2012. "Why do spouses hide income?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 584-593.
    18. 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.
    19. Francesconi, Marco & Muthoo, Abhinay, 2003. "An Economic Model of Child Custody," IZA Discussion Papers 857, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Tümer Kapan, 2010. "Property Division Laws: The Effects on Labor Supply and Household Bargaining," 2010 Meeting Papers 1127, Society for Economic Dynamics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D13 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Production and Intrahouse Allocation
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household

    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:bla:scandj:v:117:y:2015:i:1:p:220-247. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-9442 .

    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.