Advertisement

Review of Economics of the Household

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 277–298 | Cite as

Time with sons and daughters

  • Elisabeth Gugl
  • Linda Welling
Article

Abstract

We present a model of parental investment in child quality in which the effectiveness—objectively or as perceived by the parents—of parental childcare depends on the sex of the child. In particular, the time of the same-sex parent is more productive than that of the opposite-sex parent. When parents have equal wages, efficiency considerations dictate that a parent spends more time with a same-sex child than with an opposite-sex child, but parents allocate the same total time to boys and girls, and costs of raising a boy are the same as raising a girl. When wage rates differ, and the mother is the lower-waged parent, it is cheaper to produce child quality of girls than of boys. We show that many of the empirical results in terms of a different time allocation pattern, total amount of time invested in a child, expenditures on child consumption goods, and family size and composition can be explained by this technological difference and the gender wage gap, without relying on parental preferences for girls versus boys. Our analysis is largely diagrammatic.

Keywords

Parents Child quality Childcare time Gender wage gap 

JEL Classification

D13 J13 J16 J22 J24 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the editor of this journal, two anonymous referees, Frances Woolley, and participants in a session at the 2010 annual meetings of the Canadian Economics Association, and in seminars at the University of Victoria, Canada, and the Karl-Franzens University, Graz, Austria for helpful comments. The authors blame all errors on each other.

References

  1. Andersson, G., Hank, K., Ronsen, M., & Vikat, A. (2006). Gendering the family composition: Sex preferences for children and childbearing in the Nordic Countries. Demography, 43(2), 255–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baccara, M., Collard-Wexler, A., Felli, L., & Yariv, L. (2010). Gender and racial biases: evidence from child adoption, CESifo Working Paper 2921.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, R. C., & Baruch, G. K. (1987). Determinants of fathers’ participation in family work. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49(1), 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Behrman, J. R., Pollak, R. A., & Taubman, P. (1986). Do parents favor boys?. International Economic Review, 27(1), 33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bloemen, H., & Stancanelli, E. (2008). How do parents allocate time? The effects of wages and income. IZA Discussion Papers 3679, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).Google Scholar
  6. Chiwaula, L. S., & Kaluwa, B. M. (2008). Household consumption of infant foods in two low-income districts in Malawi. Journal of International Development, 20(5), 686–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Connelly, J., & Kimmell, J. (2009). Spousal influences on parents’ non-market time choices. Review of Economics of the Household, 7(4), 361–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dahl, G. B., & Moretti, E. (2008). The demand for sons. Review of Economic Studies, 75(4), 1085–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Datta Gupta N., Smith, N., & Verner, M. (2008). PERSPECTIVE ARTICLE: The impact of Nordic countries’ family friendly policies on employment, wages, and children. Review of Economics of the Household, 6, 65–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farnham, M., Schmidt, L., & Sevak, P. (2011). House prices and marital stability. American Economic Review: Paper and Proceedings, 101(3), 615–619.Google Scholar
  11. Giuliano, L. (2007). The demand for sons or the Demand for fathers? Understanding the effects of child gender on divorce Rates. University of Miami, Department of Economics wp # 0724.Google Scholar
  12. Gugl, E., & Leroux, J. (2010). Share the gain, share the pain?—almost transferable utility, changes in production possibilities, and bargaining solutions, working paper, University of Victoria.Google Scholar
  13. Gugl, E., & Welling, L. (2010). The early bird gets the worm? Birth order effects in a dynamic family model. Economic Inquiry, 48(3), 690–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gugl, E., Welling, L., & Wang, T. M. (2011). Efficiency of bargaining models with renegotiation: The role of transferable utility across periods. mimeo: University of Victoria.Google Scholar
  15. Haavio-Mannila, E. (1969). The position of Finnish women: Regional and cross-national comparisons. Journal of Marriage and Family, 31(2), 339–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harris, K. M., & Morgan, S. P. (1991). Fathers, sons, and daughters: Differential paternal involvement in parenting. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53(3), 531–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoddinott, J., & Haddad, L. (1995) Does female income share influence household expenditure? Evidence from Cote d’Ivoire. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 57, 77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jacobsen, R., Moller, H., & Engholm, G. (1999). Fertility rates in Denmark in relation to the sexes of preceding children in the family. Human Reproduction, 14(4), 1127–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Landes, D. (2009). Toys"R"Us scolded for gender discrimination, The Local, Published: 6 Oct 09 16:26, http://www.thelocal.se/22504/20091006/.
  20. Lundberg, S. (2005a). Sons, daughters, and parental behaviour. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21(3), 340–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lundberg, S. (2005b). The division of labor by new parents: Does child gender matter?. IZA Discussion Paper 1787.Google Scholar
  22. Lundberg, S., Pollak, R. A., & Wales, T. J. (1997). Do husbands and wives pool their resources? Evidence from the United Kingdom child benefit. Journal of Human Resources, 32(3), 463–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lundberg, S., & Rose, E. (2004). Investments in sons and daughters: Evidence from the consumer expenditure survey. In A. Kalil & T. De Leire (Eds.), Family investments in children resources and behavior that promote success (pp. 163–180). Mahwih: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Lundberg, S., & Rose, E. (2002). The effects of sons and daughters on men’s labor supply and wages. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(2), 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Messner, M. A., & Bozada-Deas, S. (2009). Separating the men from the moms: The making of adult gender segregation in youth sports. Gender & Society, 23(1), 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Olivetti, C., & Petrongolo, B. (2008). Unequal pay or unequal employment? A cross-country analysis of gender gaps. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(4), 621–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Parviainen, S. (2003). Recent trends and future prospects in gender equality, eironline: European industrial relations observatory on-line, FI0310202F, published 28-10-2003, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2003/10/feature/fi0310202f.ht.
  28. Pollak, R. A. (2007). Allocating time: Individuals’ technologies and household technology, revised May 14/07.Google Scholar
  29. Price, J. (2008). Parent-child quality time: Does birth order matter?. Journal of Human Resources, 43(1), 240–265.Google Scholar
  30. Tanaka, R. (2008). The gender-asymmetric effect of working mothers on children’s education: Evidence from Japan. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 22(4), 586–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Williams, M. E. (2010). Shiloh Jolie-Pitt: Preschool gender warrior: Tabloids foam over the famous tot’s attire, showing just how eager we are to narrowly define sex roles, salon.com, published 4 Mar 10 13:05 ET, http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2010/03/04/shiloh_jolie_pitt_hair_drama.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations