Advertisement

Demography

, Volume 55, Issue 6, pp 2181–2203 | Cite as

Patrilocal Residence and Female Labor Supply: Evidence From Kyrgyzstan

  • Andreas LandmannEmail author
  • Helke Seitz
  • Susan Steiner
Article

Abstract

Many people live in patrilocal societies, which prescribe that women move in with their husbands’ parents, relieve their in-laws from housework, and care for them in old age. This arrangement is likely to have labor market consequences, in particular for women. We study the effect of coresidence on female labor supply in Kyrgyzstan, a strongly patrilocal setting. We account for the endogeneity of coresidence by exploiting the tradition that youngest sons usually live with their parents. In both OLS and IV estimations, the effect of coresidence on female labor supply is negative and insignificant. This finding is in contrast to previous studies, which found positive effects in less patrilocal settings. We go beyond earlier work by investigating effect channels. In Kyrgyzstan, coresiding women invest more time in elder care than women who do not coreside, and they do not receive parental support in housework.

Keywords

Family structure Coresidence Labor supply Patrilocality Kyrgyzstan 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). It is an output of the project “Gender and Employment in Central Asia—Evidence from Panel Data.” The views expressed are not necessarily those of DFID or IZA. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support received. Andreas Landmann received additional funding from project LA 3936/1-1 of the German Research Foundation (DFG). We thank Kathryn Anderson, Charles M. Becker, Marc Gurgand, Kristin Kleinjans, Patrick Puhani, and participants of conferences in Bishkek, Chicago, Dresden, and Göttingen for helpful and valuable comments. Many thanks in particular to Damir Esenaliev and Tilman Brück for their support.

Supplementary material

13524_2018_724_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (227 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 227 kb)

References

  1. Akiner, S. (1997). Between tradition and modernity: The dilemma facing contemporary central Asian women. In M. Buckley (Ed.), Post-Soviet women: From the Baltic to central Asia (pp. 261–304). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, K., Esenaliev, D., & Lawler, E. (2015, October). Gender earnings inequality after the 2010 revolution: Evidence from the life in Kyrgyzstan surveys, 2010–2013. Paper presented at the Life in Kyrgyzstan Conference, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, K. H., & Pomfret, R. (2002). Relative living standards in new market economies: Evidence from Central Asian household surveys. Journal of Comparative Economics, 30, 683–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker, M. J., & Jacobsen, J. P. (2007). A human capital-based theory of postmarital residence rules. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 23, 208–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauer, A., Green, D., & Kuehnast, K. (1997). Women and gender relations: The Kyrgyz Republic in transition. Mandaluyong, Philippines: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, C. M., Mirkasimov, B., & Steiner, S. (2017). Forced marriage and birth outcomes. Demography, 54, 1401–1423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brück, T., Esenaliev, D., Kroeger, A., Kudebayeva, A., Mirkasimov, B., & Steiner, S. (2014). Household survey data for research on well-being and behavior in central Asia. Journal of Comparative Economics, 42, 819–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chu, C. C., Kim, S., & Tsay, W.-J. (2014). Coresidence with husband’s parents, labor supply, and duration to first birth. Demography, 51, 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Compton, J. (2015). Family proximity and the labor force status of women in Canada. Review of Economics of the Household, 13, 323–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Compton, J., & Pollak, R. A. (2014). Family proximity, childcare, and women’s labor force attachment. Journal of Urban Economics, 79, 72–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ebenstein, A. (2014). Patrilocality and missing women. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.Google Scholar
  12. Ettner, S. L. (1996). The opportunity costs of elder care. Journal of Human Resources, 31, 189–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fletcher, J. F., & Sergeyev, B. (2002). Islam and intolerance in central Asia: The case of Kyrgyzstan. Europe-Asia Studies, 54, 251–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. García-Morán, E., & Kuehn, Z. (2017). With strings attached: Grandparent-provided child care and female labor market outcomes. Review of Economic Dynamics, 23, 80–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Giddings, L., Meurs, M., & Temesgen, T. (2007). Changing preschool enrolments in post-socialist central Asia: Causes and implications. Comparative Economic Studies, 49, 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Giovarelli, R., Aidarbekova, C., Duncan, J., Rasmussen, K., & Tabyshalieva, A. (2001). Women’s rights to land in the Kyrgyz Republic. Retrieved from http://landwise.resourceequity.org/records/2426
  17. Grogan, L. (2013). Household formation rules, fertility and female labour supply: Evidence from post-communist countries. Journal of Comparative Economics, 41, 1167–1183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ibraeva, G., Moldosheva, A., & Niyazova, A. (2011). Gender equality and development: Kyrgyz country case study (World Development Report 2012 Background Paper). Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  19. Institute for Management Research, Radboud University. (2017). Global data lab [Database]. Retrieved from https://globaldatalab.org/
  20. Kolodinsky, J., & Shirey, L. (2000). The impact of living with an elder parent on adult daughter’s labor supply and hours of work. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 21, 149–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuehnast, K. (2004). Kyrgyz. In C. R. Ember & M. Ember (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sex and gender: Men and women in the world’s cultures (pp. 592–599). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.Google Scholar
  22. Lilly, M. B., Laporte, A., & Coyte, P. C. (2007). Labor market work and home care’s unpaid caregivers: A systematic review of labor force participation rates, predictors of labor market withdrawal, and hours of work. Milbank Quarterly, 85, 641–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ma, S., & Wen, F. (2016). Who coresides with parents? An analysis based on sibling comparative advantage. Demography, 53, 623–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maurer-Fazio, M., Connelly, R., Chen, L., & Tang, L. (2011). Childcare, eldercare, and labor force participation of married women in urban China, 1982–2000. Journal of Human Resources, 46, 261–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mincer, J. (1958). Investment in human capital and personal income distribution. Journal of Political Economy, 66, 281–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ministry of Labour and Social Development. (2017). Sotsialnye utschreschdeniya [Social institutions]. Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan: Ministry of Labour and Social Development. Retrieved from http://www.mlsp.gov.kg/?q=ru/sotsuchrejdeniya
  27. Murdock, G. P. (1967). Ethnographic atlas. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  28. Nedoluzhko, L., & Agadjanian, V. (2015). Between tradition and modernity: Marriage dynamics in Kyrgyzstan. Demography, 52, 861–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oishi, A. S., & Oshio, T. (2006). Coresidence with parents and a wife’s decision to work in Japan. Japanese Journal of Social Security Policy, 5(1), 35–48. Retrieved from http://www.ipss.go.jp/webj-ad/WebJournal.files/SocialSecurity/2006/jun/oishi&oshio.pdf
  30. Paci, P. (2002). Gender in transition (Departmental Working Paper No. 24617). Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  31. Posadas, J., & Vidal-Fernández, M. (2013). Grandparents’ childcare and female labor force participation. IZA Journal of Labor Policy, 2(article 14), 1–20.  https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-9004-2-14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rubinov, I. (2014). Migrant assemblages: Building postsocialist households with Kyrgyz remittances. Anthropological Quarterly, 87, 183–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sasaki, M. (2002). The causal effect of family structure on labor force participation among Japanese married women. Journal of Human Resources, 37, 429–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schwegler-Rohmeis, W., Mummert, A., & Jarck, K. (2013). Labour market and employment policy in the Kyrgyz Republic: Identifying constraints and options for employment development (Technical report produced in conjunction with the GIZ Programme Vocational Education & Training and Employment Promotion in Kyrgyzstan). Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). Retrieved from http://zentralasien.ahk.de/uploads/media/20130301_KIRG_Study_on_Labour_Market_policy_EN.pdf
  35. Shen, K., Yan, P., & Zeng, Y. (2016). Coresidence with elderly parents and female labor supply in China. Demographic Research, 35(article 23), 645–670.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2016.35.23 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Staiger, D., & Stock, J. H. (1997). Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica, 65, 557–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Takagi, E., Silverstein, M., & Crimmins, E. (2007). Intergenerational coresidence of older adults in Japan: Conditions for cultural plasticity. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 62, S330–S339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thieme, S. (2014). Coming home? Patterns and characteristics of return migration in Kyrgyzstan. International Migration, 52(5), 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. UNICEF. (2017). TransMonEE [Database]. Florence, Italy: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. Retrieved from http://www.transmonee.org

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Landmann
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Helke Seitz
    • 3
    • 4
  • Susan Steiner
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.Georg-August-Universität GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  2. 2.Center for Evaluation and Development (C4ED)MannheimGermany
  3. 3.German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin)BerlinGermany
  4. 4.Leibniz Universität HannoverHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations