Journal of Population Economics

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 277–308 | Cite as

Crisis at home: mancession-induced change in intrahousehold distribution

  • Olivier BargainEmail author
  • Laurine Martinoty
Original Paper


The Great Recessions was essentially a “mancession” in countries like Spain, the UK, or the USA, i.e., it hist men harder than women for they were disproportionately represented in heavily affected sectors. We investigate how the mancession, and more generally women’s relative opportunities on the labor market, translates into within-household redistribution. Precisely, we estimate the spouses’ resource shares in a collective model of consumption, using Spanish data over 2006–2011. We exploit the gender-oriented evolution of the economic environment to test two original distribution factors: first the regional-time variation in spouses’ relative unemployment risks, and then the gender-differentiated shock in the construction sector (having a construction sector husband after the outburst of the crisis). Both approaches conclude that the resource share accruing to Spanish wives increased by around 7–9% on average, following the improvement of their relative labor market positions. Among childless couples, we document a 5–11% decline in individual consumption inequality following the crisis, which is essentially due to intrahousehold redistribution.


Mancession Intrahousehold allocation Unemployment risk 

JEL Classification

C3 D12 D13 



We thank the two anonymous referees for their many valuable comments and suggestions. We are also grateful to Olivier Donni, Frederic Vermeulen, and participants to the ADRES conference and to seminars at ISER (Essex), THEMA (Cergy-Pontoise), AMSE (Aix-Marseille), and LEO (Orleans) for their helpful suggestions. All errors remain ours.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Anderberg D, Rainer H, Wadsworth J, Wilson T (2015) Unemployment and domestic violence: theory and evidence. The Economic Journal. forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  2. Aparicio-Fenoll A (2016) Returns to education and educational outcomes: the case of the spanish housing boom. J Human Capital 10(2):235–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banks J, Blundell R, Lewbel A (1997) Quadratic Engel Curves and Consumer Demand. Rev Econ Stat 79(4):527–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bargain O, Donni O (2012) The measurement of child costs: a Rothbarth-type method consistent with scale economies and parents bargaining. Eur Econ Rev 56 (2010-30):792–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bargain O, Donni O, Kwenda P (2014) Intrahousehold distribution and poverty: evidence from Côte d’Ivoire. J Dev Econ 107:262–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentolila S, Cahuc P, Dolado JJ, Le Barbanchon T (2012) Two-tier labour markets in the great recession: France versus Spain. Econ J 122(562):155–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blundell R, Robin JM (1999) Estimation in large and dissaggregated demand systems: an estimator for conditionally linear systems. J Appl Econ 14(3):209–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourguignon F, Browning M, Chiappori P-A (2009) Efficient intra-household allocations and distribution factors: implications and identification. Rev Econ Stud 76(2):503–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Browning M, Bourguignon F, Chiappori P-A, Lechene V (1994) Income and outcomes: a structural model of intrahousehold allocation. J Polit Econ 102(6):1067–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Browning M, Chiappori P-A, Lewbel A (2013) Estimating consumption economies of scale, adult equivalence scales, and household bargaining power. Rev Econ Stud 80(4):1267–1303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brugler J (2016) Testing preference stability between couples and singles. Econ Lett 142:15–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cherchye L, De Rock B, Vermeulen F (2012) Economic well-being and poverty among the elderly: an analysis based on a collective consumption model. Eur Econ Rev 56(6):985–1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cherchye L, Demuynck T, De Rock B, Vermeulen F (2017) Household consumption when the marriage is stable. Am Econ Rev 107(6):1507–1534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chiappori P-A (1988) Rational household labor supply. Econometrica 56(1):63–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chiappori P -A, Mazzocco M (2016) Static and intertemporal household decisions. Journal of Economic Literature 55(3):985–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cho Y, Newhouse D (2013) How did the great recession affect different types of workers? Evidence from 17 middle-income countries. World Dev 41:31–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Congregado E, Golpe AA, van Stel A (2011) Exploring the big jump in the Spanish unemployment rate: evidence on an “Added-Worker” effect. Econ Modell 28(3):1099–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Couprie H (2007) Time allocation within the family: welfare implications of life in a couple. Econ J 117(516):287–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Farré L, Fasani F, Mueller H (2015) Feeling useless: the effect of unemployment on mental health in the great recession. IZA Discussion Papers 9235, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)Google Scholar
  20. Gorsuch MM (2016) Decomposing the increase in men’s time on childcare during the great recession. Rev Econ Househ 14(1):53–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heiland F, Price J, Wilson R (2017) Maternal employment and time investments in children. Rev Econ Househ 15(1):53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hoynes H, Miller DL, Schaller J (2012) Who suffers during recessions? J Econ Perspect 26(3):27–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hubner S (2017) Its complicated: a nonparametric test of preference stability between singles and couplesGoogle Scholar
  24. Lacroix G, Radtchenko N (2011) The changing intra-household resource allocation in Russia. J Popul Econ 24(1):85–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Laisney F, Beninger D, Beblo M (2003) Welfare analysis of fiscal reforms: does the representation of the family decision process matter? Evidence for Germany. Technical report, ZEW Discussion PapersGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewbel A (1991) Cost of characteristics indices and household equivalence scales. Eur Econ Rev 35(6):1277–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewbel A (2003) Calculating compensation in cases of wrongful death. J Econ 113(1):115–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lewbel A, Pendakur K (2008) Estimation of collective household models with Engel curves. J Econ 147(2):350–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lise J, Seitz S (2011) Consumption inequality and intra-household allocations. Rev Econ Stud 78(1):328–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lise J, Yamada K (2014) Household sharing and commitment: evidence from panel data on individual expenditures and time use. IFS Working Papers W14/05, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mazzocco M (2007) Household intertemporal behavior: a collective characterization and a test of commitment. Rev Econ Stud 74(3):857–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mazzocco M, Ruiz C, Yamaguchi S (2014) Labor supply and household dynamics. Amer Econ Rev 104(5):354–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morrill MS, Pabilonia SW (2015) What effects do macroeconomic conditions have on the time couples with children spend together? Rev Econ Househ 13(4):791–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pendakur K (1999) Semiparametric estimates and tests of base-independent equivalence scales. J Econ 88(1):1–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pissarides CA (2013) Unemployment in the great recession. Economica 80 (319):385–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pollak RA (1991) Welfare comparisons and situation comparisons. J Econ 50 (12):31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sierminska E, Takhtamanova Y (2010) Job Flows, Demographics and the Great Recession. CEPS/INSTEAD Working Paper Series 2010-41, CEPS/INSTEADGoogle Scholar
  38. Starr MA (2014) Gender, added-worker effects, and the 2007–2009 recession: looking within the household. Rev Econ Househ 12(2):209–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Theloudis A (2015) Wages and family time allocation. Technical report, mimeoGoogle Scholar
  40. Tommasi D, Wolf A (2016) Overcoming weak identification in the estimation of household resource Shares. Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-12, ULB – Universite Libre de BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  41. Vermeulen F (2002) Collective household models: principles and main results. J Econ Surv 16(4):533–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zamora B (2011) Does female participation affect the sharing rule? J Popul Econ 24(1):47–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GREQAM, Château LafargeAix-Marseille School of EconomicsRoute des MillesFrance
  2. 2.LAREFI, Bordeaux UniversityBordeauxFrance
  3. 3.CNRS & EHESS, and IZAAix-Marseille University (Aix-Marseille School of Economics)MarseilleFrance
  4. 4.Centre d’Économie de la SorbonneUniversité Paris 1ParisFrance

Personalised recommendations