Effects of family livelihoods on household resource allocation in highly industrialized society

Abstract

This contribution attempts to identify effects of the type of livelihood of rural family households on their economic behaviour. Economic behaviour is understood to be reflected in the total spectrum of income and allocation of household resources. A holistic approach must go beyond activity in the labour and consumer markets and include non‐market (‘informal’) activities of household members, taking into account domestic production of goods and services, interaction within social networks, the use of public and commercial infrastructure, etc. Our study of resource income and allocation as a function of the household's livelihood undertook a comprehensive investigation of both market and non‐market resources of the sample households. Results for full‐ and part‐time farming family households, as well as for employee and self‐employed households in the non‐farm sector were compared. All survey households were comprised of four persons with an ‘intermediate’ level of family income living in disadvantaged rural areas. Apparent, but yet unquantified differences between these socio‐professional groups, e.g. with regard to time‐inputs into gainful activity, to regularity of income, and to joint accounting of the family and the firm/holding in self‐employed households, had lent support to the hypothesis that there are marked differences in resource income and allocation strategies between these socio‐professional groups. Survey results revealed, in quantitative terms, large workloads involved with self‐employment, fringe benefits from dependent employment and, on the other hand, side‐benefits from self‐employment, such as the use of business stocks for private consumption. Compensatory effects of the disposition and use of non‐market resources with regard to lower incomes was observed, as well as considerable differences between the socio‐professional subsamples in strategies for and amounts of capital formation and social security. Furthermore, productive roles within the household, and the household's interaction with its social networks and other public and semi‐public entities differed strongly between the socio‐professional groups. Variance analysis disclosed that the findings on the above described differences in resource income and allocation between the socio‐professional subsamples were statistically highly significant.