Time is Economically Valuable: Production, Consumption and Transfers of Time by Age and Sex

Abstract

This chapter presents the core of our analysis. Here we discuss our methods and map time transfers between generations and genders. First, we summarize and discuss the existing literature on unpaid family work, non-monetary transfers, and the economic value of time. Second, we describe national Time Use Surveys and harmonized Time Use studies available for the selected countries. Hence, we discuss criteria to assess the economic value of time spent in different activities and use these criteria to identify a set of unpaid activities, in order to define “household production”. Third, we describe and discuss the methods that we developed to estimate time production, consumption, and transfers by age and gender. While time production can be estimated directly from time use surveys, an indirect approach is needed to evaluate profiles of time consumption. Finally, we present our estimates of the life cycle deficits: the differences over the life course in per-capita profiles of household production and consumption, across countries. We observe large gender differences in household production. Profiles are qualitatively similar across countries, but there are relevant differences in levels.

Conclusion

The economic life cycle involves production, consumption, and transfers both monetary and non-monetary in scope. We discussed the need to integrate time use in the assessment of national accounts and other demographic phenomena. Intergenerational monetary transfers have long been studied, and MTUS data now allow us to analyze patterns in time production, consumption, and transfers. There are fundamental differences in how women and men, and individuals across the life cycle, experience time use and activity. We explored some of these trends for a select group of European countries.

The extent of a country’s life cycle deficits is partially determined by a country’s population age structure. Both monetary and non-monetary transfers broadly maintain these deficits. And just as trends at either end of the life cycle may exacerbate fiscal deficits by, for instance, younger individuals taking longer to enter the labor force or older individuals experiencing extended life spans, time transfer deficits may expand as well. Should they continue to grow, sustaining these life cycle deficits will require various market and non-market adaptations. The production of time could become more egalitarian between women and men in order to curtail their current imbalances. Innovative policies can be enacted to encourage increased labor force participation, at both the extensive and intensive margins, while further subsidizing childcare and eldercare, two of the most time-intensive channels of household production. Governments could consider converting some unpaid activity into paid work: recent enacted and proposed legislation in European countries would directly compensate individuals for their household work dedicated to childcare and eldercare. Other unpaid household tasks that meet the traditional third-party criterion could be relinquished to the market.

The gender gap in time production and consumption is influenced by structural, institutional, and cultural factors, and in turn, affects many other demographic processes. Fertility rates, labor market participation, and household composition respond to patterns in household time use in both underlying and proximate ways. Retirement ages differ by country; if home production on the individual and household level change significantly in response to a household’s individual or joint retirement decisions, we might expect cross-country differences in time production to be consistent with cross-country differences in pension and retirement policy. Combining data on time use for partnered households and retirement status to investigate such institutional connections is an interesting area of future research.