Estimating intrahousehold allocation in a collective model with household production

  • Thomas Aronsson
  • Sven-Olov Daunfeldt
  • Magnus Wikström
Part of the Population Economics book series (POPULATION)


The purpose of this paper is to estimate the intra-family distribution of income and the individual demand for leisure and household production from Swedish cross-sectional household data. As a basis for the analysis, we use a collective model where each individual is characterized by his or her own utility function and divides total time between leisure, household production and market work. For the purpose of comparison, we also estimate a version that is consistent with a more traditional model of labor supply, the unitary model.


Household Production Sharing Rule Collective Model Female Education Nonlabor Income 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Apps PF, Rees R (1997) Collective Labor Supply and Household Production. Journal of Political Economy 105(1):178-190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker GS (1965) A Theory of the Allocation of Time. Economic Journal 75(299):493-517 Browning M, Bourguignon F, Chiappori PA, Lechene V (1994) Income and Outcomes: A Struc-tural model of Intrahousehold Allocation. Journal of Political Economy 102(6):1067-1096Google Scholar
  3.  Chiappori PA (1988) Rational Household Labour Supply. Econometrica 56(1):63-89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chiappori PA (1992) Collective Labor Supply and Welfare. Journal of Political Economy100(3):437-467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chiappori PA (1997) Introducing Household Production in Collective Models of Labor Supply. Journal of Political Economy 105(1):191-209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiappori PA, Fortin B, Lacroix G (1998) Household Labor Supply, Sharing Rule and the Marriage Market. Paper presented at the Second CILN Conference on Labour Market Institutions and Labour Market Outcomes: International PerspectivesGoogle Scholar
  7. Flood L, Klevmarken NA, Olovsson P (1997) Household Market and Nonmarket Activities, vol 3-6. Uppsala University, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  8. Fortin B, Lacroix G (1997) A Test of the Unitary and Collective Models of Household Labour Supply. Economic Journal 103(443):933-955Google Scholar
  9. Haddad L, Kanbur R (1990) How Serious is the Neglect of Intra-household Inequality. Economic Journal 100(402):866-881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haddad L, Kanbur R (1992) Intrahousehold Inequality and the Theory of Targeting. European Economic Review 36(2/3):372-378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. luster TF, Stafford FP (1991) The Allocation of Time: Empirical Findings, Behavioral Models and Problems of Measurement. Journal of Economic Literature 29(2):471-522Google Scholar
  12. Kawaguchi A (1994) Testing Neoclassical and Non-neoclassical Models of Household LabourSupply. Applied Economics 26(1):9-19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Klevmarken NA, Olovsson P (1993) Household Market and Nonmarket Activities. Procedures and Codes 1984-1991. The Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  14. McElroy MB (1990) The Empirical Content of Nash-Bargained Household Behavior. Journal of Human Resources 25(4):559-583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pollak RA, Wachter ML (1975) The Relevance of Household Production Function and ItsImplication for the Allocation of Time. Journal of Political Economy 83(2):255-277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schultz PT (1990) Testing the Neoclassical Model of Family Labor Supply and Fertility. Journal of Human Resources 25(4):599-634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thomas D (1990) Intra-Household Resource Allocation: An Inferential Approach. Journal of Human Resources 25(4):635-664CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Aronsson
    • 1
  • Sven-Olov Daunfeldt
    • 1
  • Magnus Wikström
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUmeå UniversityUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations