Chapter 34 Human resources: Empirical modeling of household and family decisions

Strauss, John S.; Thomas, Duncan

doi:10.1016/s1573-4471(05)80006-3

Cited by 663 publications

(627 citation statements)

References 251 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

591

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2 Thus, for instance, Birdsall (1988) in her review on economic approaches to population growth cites several studies that find that men and women express different targets for total fertility and the more educated is the woman the more effectively she is able to bargain within the household so that fertility outcomes are closer to her preference. Similarly, Strauss and and Thomas (1995) in their survey of the literature find that additional income in hands of the mother is likely to lead to significantly larger increase in children's nutrition and education than a similar increase in income in the hands of the father.…”

Section: The Livelihood Approach As An Organizing Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Within the livelihood approach, a "household" has been described as "a site in which particularly intense social and economic interdependencies occur between a group of individuals" (Ellis, 2000, p.18). To be sure, the idea of a unitary household decision-making unit can be problematic-there is striking empirical evidence, for example, that gender and age differences within the household lead to divergent preferences in such critical areas as fertility and investments in children's health and education (Birdsall, 1988;Wilk, 1990;Strauss and Thomas, 1995). 2 However, such intrahousehold processes appear not to have been explicitly examined in the literature linking household demographics and environment.…”

Section: The Livelihood Approach As An Organizing Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment

Sherbinin¹,

VanWey²,

McSweeney³

et al. 2008

Global Environmental Change

345

217

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews and synthesizes findings from scholarly work on linkages among rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment. Using the livelihood approach as an organizing framework, we examine evidence on the multiple pathways linking environmental variables and the following demographic variables: fertility, migration, morbidity and mortality, and lifecycles. Although the review draws on studies from the entire developing world, we find the majority of micro-level studies have been conducted in either marginal (mountainous or arid) or frontier environments, especially Amazonia. Though the linkages are mediated by many complex and often context-specific factors, there is strong evidence that dependence on natural resources intensifies when households lose human and social capital through adult morbidity and mortality, and qualified evidence for the influence of environmental factors on household decision-making regarding fertility and migration. Two decades of research on lifecycles and land-cover change at the farm level have yielded a number of insights about how households make use of different land-use and natural resource management strategies at different stages. A thread running throughout the review is the Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. NIH Public Access

show abstract

Section: The Livelihood Approach As An Organizing Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: The Livelihood Approach As An Organizing Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment

Sherbinin¹,

VanWey²,

McSweeney³

et al. 2008

Global Environmental Change

345

217

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The health production model, in which health capital is conceived as the output of a multivariate production process (Grossman, 1972;Behrman and Deolalikar, 1988;Liebowitz and Friedman, 1979;and Strauss and Thomas, 1994), provides the basis for our empirical modelling. Brie y, in this model it is assumed that the individual inherits an initial stock of health that depreciates over time, but also that the individual may positively in uence the stock of health capital via gross investments.…”

Section: Household Production Of Child Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Child health and the income gradient: Evidence from Australia

Khanam

Nghiem

Connelly

2009

Journal of Health Economics

120

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, poor households are often found to be more sensitive to prices of services (Strauss and Thomas, 1995), so we might anticipate that fee increases, at least in the absence of significant quality improvements, would lead to a less pro-poor pattern of utilization of these services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Distribution of Education and Health Services in Madagascar over the 1990s: Increasing Progressivity in an Era of Low Growth

Glick

Razakamanantsoa

2006

Journal of African Economies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While a number of benefit incidence studies of public expenditures have been carried out for African countries, there are very few studies that look at how the incidence of such expenditures has been changing over time. We analyze three rounds of nation-wide household surveys in Madagascar over the 1990s, a period of weak economic growth but significant changes in social sector organization and budgets. Education and health services for the most are distributed more equally than household expenditures, hence they serve to redistribute welfare from the rich to the poor. By stricter standards of progressivity, however, public services do poorly. Few services other than primary schooling accrue disproportionately to the poor in absolute terms. When further adjusted for differences in the numbers of potential beneficiaries in different expenditure quintiles (e.g., school-age children), none of the education or health benefits considered appear to target the poor while several target the non-poor. With regard to changes over the decade, however, primary enrollments not only rose sharply but also became significantly more progressive; since the country experienced little or no growth in household incomes during the period, this reflects supply rather than demand side factors. The improvement in equity in public schooling occurred in part because the enrollment growth was in effect regionally targeted: it occurred only in rural areas, which are poorer.3

show abstract

Chapter 34 Human resources: Empirical modeling of household and family decisions

Cited by 663 publications

References 251 publications

Rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment

Rural household demographics, livelihoods and the environment

Child health and the income gradient: Evidence from Australia

The Distribution of Education and Health Services in Madagascar over the 1990s: Increasing Progressivity in an Era of Low Growth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About