IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ese/iserwp/2000-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The impact of cohabitation and divorce on partners’ labour force participation: comparing Britain with Flanders

Author

Listed:
  • Ghysels, Joris

Abstract

In this paper we look into the possible impact on labour force participation of two demographic variables that have undergone considerable changes in the past few decades: divorce and cohabitation. More specifically we analyse the labour force participation probabilities of men and women currently living with a partner and study the impact of a previous divorce or separation and current non-marital cohabitation. We use seven waves of data of the BHPS and the PSBH to compare British results with results of Flemish individuals. Estmates suggest that cohabitation implies significantly higher labour force participation for women, especially for the older cohorts. A divorce experience is generally found to be insignificant, except for British men who are less likely to be in the labour force after experiencing a divorce or separation than without this experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghysels, Joris, 2000. "The impact of cohabitation and divorce on partners’ labour force participation: comparing Britain with Flanders," ISER Working Paper Series 2000-25, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:ese:iserwp:2000-25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/files/working-papers/iser/2000-25.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alderman, Harold, et al, 1995. "Unitary versus Collective Models of the Household: Is It Time to Shift the Burden of Proof?," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Wiji Arulampalam, 1999. "A Note on Estimated Coefficients in Random Effects Probit Models," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(4), pages 597-602, November.
    3. Ermisch,John F., 1991. "Lone Parenthood," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521412438, January.
    4. Chiappori, Pierre-Andre & Haddad, Lawrence & Hoddinott, John & Kanbur, Ravi, 1993. "Unitary versus collective models of the household : time to shift theburden of proof?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1217, The World Bank.
    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. Frederic Vermeulen, 2002. "Collective Household Models: Principles and Main Results," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 533-564, September.
    2. Maggs, Philip & Hoddinott, John, 1999. "The impact of changes in common property resource management on intrahousehold allocation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 317-324, May.
    3. Hoddinott, John F., 1997. "Water, health, and income: a review," FCND discussion papers 25, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Jaime Andrés Sarmiento Espinel, 2012. "Parental investment in their children’s education," Serie documentos de trabajo del Centro de Estudios Económicos 2012-09, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos.
    5. Adam, Christopher & Hoddinott, John & Ligon, Ethan, 2011. "Dynamic intrahousehold bargaining, matrimonial property law and suicide in Canada," CUDARE Working Papers 120422, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    6. Lucia Mangiavacchi & Luca Piccoli, 2009. "Child welfare and intra-household inequality in Albania," Working Papers 149, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    7. Orsini, Kristian & Spadaro, A., 2005. "Sharing resources within the household: a multi-country microsimulation analysis of the determinants of intrahousehold ‘strategic weight’ differentials and their distributional outcomes," EUROMOD Working Papers EM3/05, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    8. Robert Breunig & Indraneel Dasgupta, 2003. "Are People Ashamed of Paying with Food Stamps?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 203-225, July.
    9. Chiuri, Maria Concetta, 2000. "Individual decisions and household demand for consumption and leisure," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 277-324, September.
    10. David Stifel & Harold Alderman, 2006. "The "Glass of Milk" Subsidy Program and Malnutrition in Peru," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(3), pages 421-448.
    11. Munro, Alistair & Bateman, Ian J. & McNally, Tara, 2008. "The family under the microscope: an experiment testing economic models of household choice," MPRA Paper 8974, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. M. Fafchamps & A. R. Quisumbing, 2002. "Control and Ownership of Assets Within Rural Ethiopian Households," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 47-82.
    13. Kanbur, Ravi, 2009. "Poverty and Distribution: Twenty Years Ago and Now," Working Papers 48918, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    14. Tim Hinks & Simon Davies, 2008. "Life satisfaction in Malawi and the importance of relative consumption, polygamy and religion," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(7), pages 888-904.
    15. Behrman, Jere R. & Hoddinott, John F., 2001. "An evaluation of the impact of PROGRESA on preschool child height," FCND briefs 104, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    16. Helen Pushkarskaya & Maria Marshall, 2010. "Family Structure, Policy Shocks, and Family Business Adjustment Choices," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 414-426, December.
    17. Zvi Eckstein & Osnat Lifshitz, 2011. "Dynamic Female Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(6), pages 1675-1726, November.
    18. Haddad, Lawrence J. & Peña, Christine & Nishida, Chizuru & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Slack, A., 1996. "Food security and nutrition implications of intrahousehold bias: a review of literature," FCND discussion papers 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Frederic Vermeulen, 2001. "And the winner is...: an Empirical Evaluation of Two Competing Approaches to Household Labour Supply," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven 500566, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    20. David Sahn & Ari Gerstle, 2004. "Child allowances and allocative decisions in Romanian households," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(14), pages 1513-1521.

    More about this item

    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:ese:iserwp:2000-25. 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: Jonathan Nears (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rcessuk.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.