Advertisement

Gender Differences in Home Production and Consumption in Uruguay

  • Marisa BucheliEmail author
  • Cecilia González
  • Cecilia Lara
Chapter

Abstract

The aim of the chapter is to analyze home production of women and men by age for Uruguay using a Time Use Survey carried out in 2013. We begin by introducing the main gendered socio-economic traits of the country, focusing on the demographic transition and gender differences in educational and labor market outcomes. Then, we describe the source of information and the main procedures used to estimate the data. Finally we present and analyze our findings that encompass four issues: (a) an overall picture of home production profile by age showing the gaps between women and men, (b) an analysis of the profiles of household services consumption and net time transfers by age and sex; c) an analysis of the age profile of gender gap by educational level and, (c) a study of the gender gap by household type.

Keywords

Gender Home production National Time Transfers Accounts Time use Unpaid housework Uruguay Gendered economy Gender segregation 

References

  1. Amarante, V., & Perazzo, I. (2009). Determinantes de la fecundidad en Uruguay. 1996–2006 (Working paper DT08/09). Instituto de Economía, Universidad de la República, Uruguay.Google Scholar
  2. Anxo, D., Mencarini, L., Pailhé, A., Solaz, A., Tanturri, M. L., & Flood, L. (2011). Gender differences in time use over the life course in France, Italy, Sweden, and the US. Feminist Economics, 17(3), 159–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Billari, F. (2001). The analysis of early life courses: Complex descriptions of the transition to adulthood. Journal of Population Research, 18(2), 119–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bloemen, H. G., Pasqua, S., & Stancanelli, E. G. F. (2010). An empirical analysis of the time allocation of Italian couples: Are they responsive? Review of Economics of the Household, 8(3), 345–369.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-009-9083-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borraz, F., & Robano, C. (2010). Brecha salarial en Uruguay. Revista de Análisis Económico, 25(1), 49–77.Google Scholar
  6. Bucheli, M., & Vigorito, A. (2017). Separation, child support and well-being in Uruguay (Working Paper 3/17). Departamento de Economía, Universidad de la República, Uruguay.Google Scholar
  7. Bucheli, M., Vigorito, A., & Miles, D. (2000). Un análisis dinámico de la toma de decisiones de los hogares en América Latina. Revista de Economía, 7(2), 5–56.Google Scholar
  8. Cabella, W. (2009). Dos décadas de transformaciones de la nupcialidad uruguaya, La convergencia hacia la segunda transición demográfica. Estudios Demográficos y Urbanos, 24(2), 389–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chackiel, J. (2000). El envejecimiento de la población latinoamericana: ¿hacia una relación de dependencia favorable? Serie Población y Desarrollo N°4, CELADE, CEPAL.Google Scholar
  10. De Laat, J., & Sevilla-Sanz, A. (2011). The fertility and women’s labor force participation puzzle in OECD countries: The role of men’s home production. Feminist Economics, 17(2), 87–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Donehower, G. (2014). Incorporating gender and time use into NTA: National time transfer accounts methodology. Retrieved July 2017. http://www.ntaccounts.org/web/nta/show/Gender,%20Time%20use
  12. Espino, A. (2013). Brechas salariales en Uruguay: género, segregación y desajustes por calificación. Problemas del desarrollo, 44(174), 89–117.Google Scholar
  13. Espino, A., Isabela, F., Leites, M., & Machado, A. (2014a). Diferencias de género en la elasticidad intertemporal y no compensada de la oferta laboral. Pruebas para el caso uruguayo. El trimestre económico, 81(322), 479–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Espino, A., Salvador, S., & Azar, P. (2014b). Desigualdades persistentes: mercado de trabajo, calificación y género. Montevideo: PNUD Uruguay.Google Scholar
  15. Furstenberg, F., Kennedy, S., Mcloyd, V., Rumbaut, R., & Settersten, R. (2004). Growing up is harder to do. Contexts, 3(3), 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. (2013a). Encuesta de Uso del Tiempo: microdata 2013. Retrieved June 2017. http://www.ine.gub.uy/encuesta-de-uso-del-tiempo-eut-.
  17. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. (2013b). Encuesta Continua de Hogares: microdata 2013. Retrieved June 2017. http://ine.gub.uy/web/guest/encuesta-continua-de-hogares1
  18. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. (2013c). Estimaciones y proyecciones de población. Retrieved June 2017. http://www.ine.gub.uy/web/guest/estimaciones-y-proyecciones
  19. Jiménez-Fontana, P. (2014). Analysis of non-remunerated production in Costa Rica. The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, 5, 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jiménez-Fontana, P. (2016). Retos para materializar el dividendo de género perfiles de uso de tiempo en Costa Rica. Población y Salud en Mesoamérica, 13(2), 1–23.Google Scholar
  21. Kimmel, J., & Connelly, R. (2007). Mothers’ time choices caregiving, leisure, home production, and paid work. Journal of Human Resources, 42(3), 643–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nathan, M. (2005). La creciente heterogeneidad en la edad al primer hijo en el Uruguay: un análisis de las cohortes de 1951 a 1990. Notas de Población, 100, 35–60.Google Scholar
  23. Nathan, M. (2015). La lenta transición hacia un régimen de fecundidad tardía en Uruguay: los cambios en la edad al primer hijo entre 1978 y 2011. Revista Latinoamericana de Población, 9(17), 37–60.Google Scholar
  24. Phananiramai, M. (2011). Incorporating time into the National Transfer Accounts: The case of Thailand. In R. Lee & A. Mason (Eds.), Population aging and the generational economy: A global perspective (pp. 528–541). Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  25. Ravanera, Z., & Rajulton, F. (2006). Social status polarization in the timing and trajectories to motherhood. Canadian Studies in Population, 33(2), 179–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rendall, M., Aracil, E., Bagavos, C., Couet, C., DeRose, A., DiGiulio, P., Lappegard, T., Robert-Bobée, I., Rønsen, M., Smallwood, S., & Verropoulou, G. (2010). Increasingly heterogeneous ages at first birth by education in Southern-European and Anglo-American family-policy regimes: A seven-country comparison. Population Studies, 64(3), 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. van der Lippe, T., de Ruijter, J., de Ruijter, E., & Raub, W. (2011). Persistent inequalities in time use between men and women: A detailed look at the influence of economic circumstances, policies, and culture. European Sociological Review, 27(2), 164–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Varela Petito, C. (2008). Demografía de una sociedad en transición: la población uruguaya a inicios del siglo XXI. UNFPA, Uruguay. Retrieved June 2017. http://mides.fic.edu.uy:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/370
  29. Zagheni, E., & Zannella, M. (2013). The life cycle dimension of time transfers in Europe. Demographic Research, 29(35), 937–948.  https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2013.29.35. http://www.demographic-research.org/Volumes/Vol29/35/
  30. Zagheni, E., Zannella, M., Movsesyan, G., & Wagner, B. (2015). A comparative analysis of time transfers between generations and genders (Springer briefs in population studies). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marisa Bucheli
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cecilia González
    • 1
  • Cecilia Lara
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Economics, Faculty of Social SciencesUniversidad de la RepúblicaMontevideoUruguay
  2. 2.Institute of Economics, Faculty of Management and EconomicsUniversidad de la RepúblicaMontevideoUruguay

Personalised recommendations