(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Inside the Black Box: Intra-household Inequality and a Gendered Pandemic
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lis/liswps/797.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inside the Black Box: Intra-household Inequality and a Gendered Pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Deepak Malghan
  • Hema Swaminathan

Abstract

Emerging evidence suggests that COVID-19 has amplified existing gender divisions that disadvantage women. What is the appropriate unit of analysis to study the gendered impact of a pandemic? The study of gendered inequality – especially labor market opportunities and outcomes – has for the large part relied on population wide differences between men and women. Using over four decades of global data (n =2.85 million couple units, from 45 countries in the LIS repository) we show that intra-household earnings inequality within a household is systemic, prevalent across disparate societies, and across the entire earnings distribution. Our analysis shows why accounting for intra-household gender inequality is crucial to ameliorating the pandemic’s gendered impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Deepak Malghan & Hema Swaminathan, 2020. "Inside the Black Box: Intra-household Inequality and a Gendered Pandemic," LIS Working papers 797, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    • Handle: RePEc:lis:liswps:797
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lisdatacenter.org/wps/liswps/797.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henrik Kleven & Camille Landais & Jakob Egholt Søgaard, 2019. "Children and Gender Inequality: Evidence from Denmark," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 181-209, October.
    2. Bhattacharyya, Manasi & Bedi, Arjun S. & Chhachhi, Amrita, 2011. "Marital Violence and Women's Employment and Property Status: Evidence from North Indian Villages," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1676-1689, September.
    3. Gustavo J. Bobonis, 2009. "Is the Allocation of Resources within the Household Efficient? New Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(3), pages 453-503, June.
    4. Henrik Kleven & Camille Landais & Johanna Posch & Andreas Steinhauer & Josef Zweimüller, 2019. "Child Penalties across Countries: Evidence and Explanations," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 109, pages 122-126, May.
    5. Anderson, Siwan & Eswaran, Mukesh, 2009. "What determines female autonomy? Evidence from Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 179-191, November.
    6. Kate Bahn & Jennifer Cohen & Yana van der Meulen Rodgers, 2020. "A feminist perspective on COVID‐19 and the value of care work globally," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(5), pages 695-699, September.
    7. Vijaya, Ramya M. & Lahoti, Rahul & Swaminathan, Hema, 2014. "Moving from the Household to the Individual: Multidimensional Poverty Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 70-81.
    8. Claudia Goldin, 2014. "A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1091-1119, April.
    9. Allendorf, Keera, 2007. "Do Women's Land Rights Promote Empowerment and Child Health in Nepal?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1975-1988, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deepak Malghan & Hema Swaminathan, 2021. "Intra-household Gender Inequality, Welfare, and Economic Development," LWS Working papers 34, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    2. Malghan, Deepak & Swaminathan, Hema, 2021. "Global trends in intra-household gender inequality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 515-546.
    3. Barigozzi, Francesca & Cremer, Helmuth & Roeder, Kerstin, 2020. "Having it all, for all: Child-care subsidies and income distribution reconciled," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 188-211.
    4. Henrik Kleven & Camille Landais & Johanna Posch & Andreas Steinhauer & Josef Zweimüller, 2024. "Do Family Policies Reduce Gender Inequality? Evidence from 60 Years of Policy Experimentation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 110-149, May.
    5. Berniell, Inés & Berniell, Lucila & Mata, Dolores de la & Edo, María & Marchionni, Mariana, 2021. "Gender gaps in labor informality: The motherhood effect," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    6. Berniell, Inés & Berniell, Lucila & de la Mata, Dolores & Edo, María & Marchionni, Mariana, 2023. "Motherhood and flexible jobs: Evidence from Latin American countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    7. Petrongolo, Barbara & Ronchi, Maddalena, 2020. "Gender gaps and the structure of local labor markets," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    8. Hannah Illing & Johannes Schmieder & Simon Trenkle, "undated". "The Gender Gap in Earnings Losses After Job Displacement," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2022_381, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    9. Strittmatter, Anthony & Wunsch, Conny, 2021. "The Gender Pay Gap Revisited with Big Data: Do Methodological Choices Matter?," Working papers 2021/05, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    10. Anja Roth, 2020. "How the provision of childcare affects attitudes towards maternal employment," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 156(1), pages 1-30, December.
    11. Estefanía Galván & Cecilia García-Peñalosa, 2021. "Interactions amongst gender norms: Evidence from US couples," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 21-15, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    12. Doerr, Annabelle, 2022. "Vocational Training for Female Job Returners - Effects on Employment, Earnings and Job Quality," Working papers 2022/02, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    13. Danielle Sandler & Nichole Szembrot, 2019. "Maternal Labor Dynamics: Participation, Earnings, and Employer Changes," Working Papers 19-33, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    14. Ahrsjö, Ulrika & Niknami, Susan & Palme, Mårten, 2021. "Wage Inequality, Selection and the Evolution of the Gender Earnings Gap in Sweden," Research Papers in Economics 2021:3, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
    15. Zhang, Mingxue & Wang, Yue & Hou, Lingling, 2024. "Gender norms and the child penalty in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 277-291.
    16. repec:cge:wacage:518 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Jessen, Jonas, 2022. "Culture, children and couple gender inequality," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    18. Doerr, Annabelle, 2022. "Vocational training for female job returners - Effects on employment, earnings and job quality," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    19. Menzel, Andreas & Woodruff, Christopher, 2021. "Gender wage gaps and worker mobility: Evidence from the garment sector in Bangladesh," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    20. Lucifora, Claudio & Meurs, Dominique & Villar, Elena, 2021. "The “mommy track” in the workplace. Evidence from a large French firm," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    21. Chu, Yu-Wei Luke & Cuffe, Harold E. & Doan, Nguyen, 2020. "Motherhood Employment Penalty and Gender Wage Gap Across Countries: 1990–2010," MPRA Paper 99866, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lis:liswps:797. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Piotr Paradowski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lisprlu.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.