time transfers within households along the lifecycle: a nta and gender perspective

Time transfers within households along the lifecycle: a NTA and gender perspective

Anne Solaz (Ined) Elena Stancanelli (Paris 1)

Time spend on unpaid work along the lifecycle ANXO D., MENCARINI L., PAILHE A., SOLAZ A, TANTURRI M-L., FLOOD L. 2010, "Gender differences in time-use over the life-course. A comparative analysis of France, Italy, Sweden and the United States ", Feminist Economics vol 17 (3), 159-195.

Time spent on total housework, hours par week, USA 2003-2004

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

single <36 withparents

single <36 ontheir own

couple <46 nochildren

couple children0-5

couple children6-15

couple children16-25

empty nest 45-59

couple 60 + single 60 +

Men

Women

Time spent on total housework , FRANCE 1998-1999

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Singles withParents <36

Singles <36on their own

Couples < 45no children

Coupleschildren 0-5

Coupleschildren 6-15

Coupleschildren 16-25

Couplesempty nestage 45-59

Older retiringcouples >59

Older singles>59

HOUR

S/W

EEK

MenWomen

Time spent on total housework hours per week, SWEDEN 2000

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Singles withParents<36

Singles <36on their own

Couples < 45no children

Couples,children 0-4



Couplesempty nestage 45-59

Older retiringcouples >59

Older singles>59

HOUR

S/W

EEK

MenWomen

Time spent on total housework, hours per week, ITALY 2002-2003

Singles <36 on their own Couples <45,

no children Couples, children 0-5 Couples,

children 6-15 Couples, children 16-25 Couples

empty-nest, age 45-59

Older retiring couples >59 Older singles

>59

Men Women

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 Single <36 with parents

Italie Etats-Unis

SuèdeFrance

http://www.ined.fr/fichier/t_telechargement/29910/telechargement_fichier_en_anxomencarinipailh.solaztanturrilennart2010.pdf










Non monetary transfers between generations and sex, invisible for NA, but have an economic value.

Same methodology (NTA): National domestic production (spend by household

members on domestic work) Production is then allocated to groups (age, sex) who

benefit from = National domestic consumption (used by households members)

Unit: time in minutes (might be valued in monetary terms) Life-cycle deficit (Age-specific profiles)

Adding gender and time use in NTA

1985-1986 1998-1999 2010-2011

Survey design 1 daily booklet 5mn 1 daily 10mn 1 or 2 daily (week+week-end) 10mn

Respondents ? Max 2 , if teenager or parental couple

All household members >15

Max 2, Kisk> 11 and possible partner

N households 10373 8186 12069

N individuals 29723 20370 29029

N individuals >18 21464 15569 21853

N daily booklet 16037 15426 27903 (16242 indiv)

N complete households 6407 7452 8210

Individuals in complete household

15087 18075 17456

Comments Sub-representation of complex households

3 French time-use surveys to be compared

Two criterias • Not counted in national accounts = unpaid,

not linked to a market transaction. • Household production= goods and services

which have a value. The activity could be done by someone else if you pay (marketable substitute)

Identifying Unpaid work

Primary activities (secondary ones are of bad quality)• housework Cleaning, laundry, cooking, good and services

purchasing, household managementAnd also “half-leisure” activities such as maintenance

and repairs, garden care, pet care …to be discussed• Childcare :active childcare, including children transport• Care for elderly (adult care)

Definition of unpaid work

Include all activities that concern home production of the current household

Question : What about domestic activities- for other household? other home production- volunteering activities? unpaid work but not home

production not always possible to isolate (1999 survey only), very small amount of time except for care for elderly Adultcare might be for adult outside the household

Question 1 :Definition of unpaid work

• Respondents who filled the daily booklet have a weight

• Children have no individual weight (but have household weight)

« Less worse » solution? - household weights for everybody- average of individual adults weights- Building self weight using census age distributions

Question 2: Which weight do we need to use?

• Complete households? All members have filled the booklet

Advantages : -the equality between C and P is true at the micro-level-total household production might be allocate to different

consumers within household

Drawback: loose of representativeness (for 2010), reduction of sample sizebut we can impute for adults who have not filled time diary

Question 3: Which households to be kept?

• How much time each individual according to age and gender spend on housework production, childcare and adultcare?

Remark: child participation to domestic workload highly dependant of survey design

(interviewed from 15 in 1985 and 1999, from 11 in 2010 )Before this age: no activities reported

1. Production

Daily (mn) domestic work production 1985

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 900

60

120

180

240

300

360

h85fchild85f

adul85fh85h

child85hadul85h


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 900

60

120

180

240

300

360

h85fchild85fadul85fh85hchild85hadul85h


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 950

60

120

180

240

300

360

h10fchild10fadul10fh10hchild10hadul10h

Daily(mn) domestic work production 1985, 1999 and 2010

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000

60

120

180

240

300

360

420 domcare85f

domcare99f

domcare10f

domcare85h

domcare99h

domcare10h

Gender gap in domestic production

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

-60

0

60

120

180

240

diff 85

diff 99

diff 10

Men Women

Home production by birth cohort

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 900

60

120

180

240

300

36082-8681-7772-7667-7162-6657-6152-5647-5142-4637-4132-3627-3122-2617-2112-16

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 900

60

120

180

240

300

360

Housework benefit to all household members (cleanness, meals, laundry )

Total domestic time spent by all members divided by number of beneficiers

Childcare benefit to all childrenTotal childcare time divided by number of children

(<18, less?) …to be discussedAdultcare Not enough on a daily reporting basis in

France to allocate it to dependent adults

2. Definition of consumption of housework

Daily(mn) domestic work consumption 1985, 1999 and 2010

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1000

60

120

180

240

300

360 benefit85fbenefit99fbenefit10fbenefit85hbenefit99hbenefit10h

3. Lifecycle deficit

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90-300

-240

-180

-120

-60

0

60

120

180

240

300

net85f net99fnet10f net85hnet99h net10h

Men Women

Lifecycle deficit by cohort and sex

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90-240

-180

-120

-60

0

60

120

180

24082-86

81-77

72-76

67-71

62-66

57-61

52-56

47-51

42-46

37-41

32-36

27-31

22-26

17-21

12-160 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

-240

-180

-120

-60

0

60

120

180

240

Method 1: On each type of activities (cleaning, laundry, cooking, household maintenance and repair, ….) find an average hourly wage of the similar profession obtained from national employment surveys (ex: nannies wage for childcare).

Method 2 : Minimum wage

Method 3 : Opportunity cost ( same time = different monetary evaluation)

4. Monetary evaluation of unpaid work

• High levels of gender specialization that tend to decrease but slowly, thanks to the decrease in female home production rather than an increase in male home production.

• Time cost of childbearing is visible. A key period between 30 and 45 for women and to a lesser extend for men, (later than in 80’s because of the delay in parenthood) that corresponds to the middle of carreer and might participate to explain the gender wage gap (Hersch and Stratton, 1994).

• Birth cohort approach confirm cross-sectionnal approach. It does not predict any change for men participation.

Conclusion

Smoothing with stata (different methods)0

100

200

300

400

dom

care

99f

20 40 60 80 100Age de l'individu l'année d'enquête

kernel = epanechnikov, degree = 0, bandwidth = .84

Local polynomial smooth

010

020

030

040

0do

mca

re99

f


kernel = biweight, degree = 0, bandwidth = 1.23


010

020

030

040

0do

mca

re99

f


kernel = gaussian, degree = 2, bandwidth = 1.75


010

020

030

040

0do

mca

re99

f


kernel = epanechnikov, degree = 0, bandwidth = 3


time transfers within households along the lifecycle: a nta and gender perspective

Documents