Time-use information is preferably obtained from diaries, as this method is considered more reliable than information from questionnaires. Data from the Danish Time Use Survey 2001 thus indicate differences in the level of unpaid work, whereas only minor differences appear for paid work. That is: people reporting many hours of paid work tend to over-report the actual number of hours worked, while those reporting a small number of hours tend to underreport their contribution. For unpaid work, the same pattern appears. Moreover, men are found to be more unreliable than women in evaluating their amount of work on the labour market, while the opposite is the case for the unpaid/household work, with women underreporting their contribution more than men. The implication is that labour supplystudies based on questionnaire-information, i.e. Labour Force Surveys, are less accurate than studies based on diary-information. Copyright Springer 2005methodology for collecting microeconomic data, time allocation and labour supply,

Relative income, Well-being, Happiness, Intra-household allocation, Unitary models, D13, D60, D63, I31,

The division of domestic work bears little resemblance to the ideals of rational specialization espoused in Becker's (1991) theory. Many sociologists explain this as a manifestation of 'doing gender'. We argue that a multiple equilibrium framework can help account for variations in couple specialization. The framework is dynamic, highlights the presence of competing normative regimes, and it helps empirical identification of Pareto optimal and non-optimal couple specialization. To compensate for the lack of longitudinal data, we seek to capture dynamics by analyzing time use data for three countries that represent distinct stages in the ongoing gender revolution, namely Britain, Denmark and Spain. We identify a traditional, egalitarian and unstable family equilibrium and argue that inefficient and inequitable specialization is primarily associated with the lack of clear normative guidance within unstable equilibria. The traditional equilibrium remains dominant in Spain while Denmark has advanced considerably towards an egalitarian equilibrium. In Britain, the traditional equilibrium is now marginal but no egalitarian alternative has yet emerged. Inefficiency in couple behaviour is therefore especially pronounced. Our equity analyses yield surprising results since we find more equity in Britain than in Denmark. Widespread inequity within Danish couples is almost exclusively due to women being advantaged.

No abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent, nonprofit limited liability company (Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung) supported by Deutsche Post World Net. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its research networks, research support, and visitors and doctoral programs. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. The current research program deals with (1) mobility and flexibility of labor, (2) internationalization of labor markets, (3) welfare state and labor market, (4) labor markets in transition countries, (5) the future of labor, (6) evaluation of labor market policies and projects and (7) general labor economics. Terms of use: Documents in D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E SIZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion.Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available on the IZA website (www.iza.org) or directly from the author. [1987][1988][1989][1990][1991]. We find, as in U.S. studies, that housework has negative effects on the wages of women and positive effects on the wages of men, except at the high end of the conditional wage distribution. At the 90th quantile, housework has a positive effect on the wages of women and a negative effect on the wages of men, and in fact, high-wage men receive the largest wage penalty of doing housework. Timing and flexibility of housework turn out to be more important than the level of housework, and women, particularly at the high end of the conditional wage distribution, who time their housework immediately before or after market work or engage in home tasks that require contiguous blocks of time are significantly penalized in terms of lower wages. These findings are even stronger for married and cohabiting couples and for workers on fixed time schedules as opposed to workers with flexible time schedules which are part of a bargain with the employer.JEL Classification: D13, J16

The value of household production is estimated to 40–50 percent of GNP in most western countries, and because the distribution of this income‐in‐kind is different from ordinary income distribution, the concept of economic well‐being may include household production. The monetary value of household production is evaluated by a market alternative principle and an opportunity‐cost principle. In the last case a reservation wage is estimated, and integrated in a modified opportunity principle, which means that household work of non‐working women is evaluated by the reservation wage, and household work of working women and men by their wage‐rate. The conclusions are among others, that the inclusion of household production reduces the inequality, and that the women's contributions—money income and household production—functions as income equalizers.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.

No abstract