Gender Equality and Work-Family Reconciliation – Balancing Market Income and Non-market Production?

  • 706 views
Uploaded on

Slides from Michael Bittman's CRESI seminar on 27 January 2011 …

Slides from Michael Bittman's CRESI seminar on 27 January 2011 http://cresi.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/seminar-gender-equality-and-work-family-reconciliation-balancing-market-income-and-non-market-production/

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
706
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • [Michael] re-read these articles
  • This diagram is shown here with kind permission of Duncan Ironmonger (who we will be hearing from later in the day) and, without wishing to steal his thunder, I show this to demonstrate that in term the sheer number of hours of labour committed to (unpaid) non-market work, actually overshadow the effort expended in the market economy. Note also that raising children – their care and supervision – is the longest of the bars shown here. This diagram, shows up the economic equivalent of the a picture of the dark side of the moon. Time use data enables us to get a glimpse what was formerly unknown. Having seen this new information, some re-interpretation seems, necessary to follow. For example: How much of the ‘economic growth’ is simply an artifact of the women’s labour moving out of the shadows of the non-market economy into the spotlight of paid employment? Given there are only 24 hours in the day, what the consequences for the welfare of children in transferring work hours from the non-market economy to the market economy? Much of what has been written about work/family balance fall into this category.Pigou and illusion of growth?Business cycle and non-market ? Progress and the relative share of the non-market economy.
  • [Michael] re-read this article
  • [Michael] re-read this article
  • The situation for contemporary parents has been described as a matter of “surviving their children’s childhood” (Bäck-Wiklund and Bergsten 1997).
  • Simulated earnings and unpaid hours for Norwegian women with medium education: 1940 – 49 cohortAnother way of looking at it..same information mapped in a different way – childless women’s earnings go up but only aslight variation in unpaid work hours, 1 child women suffer huge timeimpact and only recover around age 42 years but heavy earning penaltypersists. Women with 2 children, in this cohort suffer larger initialearnings penalty and large time penalty but recover at age 42.
  • Proportional large increase (38%) in men’s childcare time off a low base (average 13 mins. in 1983/4) and more involvement in the child’s early years for men. No significant reduction in average minutes (peak on 120 mins.) women spent in childcare but clear evidence of postponement of first birth. Women P/t Men P/t 1983/4 2000/1 Dif. 1983/4 2000/1 Dif. Food preparation, cooking 80 65 -14 *** 22 26 3 ***Set table, wash/put away dishes 31 19 -12 *** 12 10 -1 **Cleaning 39 42 3 ns 9 13 3 ***Laundry, ironing, clothing repair 25 27 1 ns 2 3 2 ***Childcare 43 40 -3 ns 13 19 5 ***purchase goods 38 34 -4 ** 23 22 -2 nsOther unpaid work 44 48 4 *** 48 70 21 *** 
  • Perhaps this is the illustrative cartoon I should have shown.
  • Confusing diagram with too many lines but easily to read than you might first think. This diagram follows cohorts of women using the Australian census (which takes place every five years). The percentage of cohort participating in the paid labour force (vertical axis) is charted for each age (five year) group represented middle of that group (e.g. 17 is the mid-point of the age group 15-19 years). Starting at the bottom the solid black line (with no marker symbol), the earliest cohorts show the combined effect of high fertility (average of 6 live births per woman 1900) and the ‘marriage bar’ style of a quasi-judicial family wage policy in Australia. Women born after 1924 show the post World War II ‘baby boom’ pattern of interrupting paid employment for childbirth, creating the characteristic M-shape in the labour supply curve that filled the textbooks on female labour supply. However over decades the M has been shallower and shallower.
  • Time use resembles Quesnay ‘Tableau économique’ capture the disposition of societies labour resources expressed here in weekly hours of paid work per capita. Note the row labelled person (shaded in pale blue) shows that between 1974 and 1997 in Australia on average all adults aged between 25 and 59 years steadily contributed 27 hours of the 168 hours a week available to them to paid work. However a quick inspection of the rows above that this consistency masks a radical redistribution. Men have reduced their average contribution (by about 9 hours her captia) while women have increased theirs (by around 6 hours per capita).
  • This diagram shows that when simultaneous activities (multi-tasking) is taken into account. The is still something of a ‘double burden’/’second shift’ for women. Women’s child care is often of a supervisory nature, which while constraining) and requiring them to divide their attention, typically accompanies episodes of activities classisied as ‘leisure’ and ‘personal care’.
  • Attitude surveys show a high agreement, regardless of gender in the values of domestic equality (over 80% agreement)Pseudomutuality is a miscarried solution to the problem of a disjunction between belief in domestic equality and actual inequality. - Relationships can be mutual or nonmutual. - Pseudomutuality occurs when the recognition of nonmutuality is forbidden or at least very painful. - It consists of ways of denying nonmutuality or, conversely, of affirming mutuality where none exists - Can be achieved through systemic misapprehension of shares or by discourse re-definitions of ‘equality’ such as - ‘mutual but occasional participation’ - ‘specialisation/optimisation’ - acknowledgement of allegedly different domestic standards - trivialisation and so onA qualitative study do with 65 couples in Sydney showed this to by a relatively stable pattern
  • Very change in men’s combined time in food preparation and meal cleanup (composed 14% rise in cooking and 8% fall in meal cleanup etc). Large change women’s combined cooking and cleanup time (18% decline in cooking time and 31% fall in time spent setting the table and clearing away and washing dirty crockery, cutlery and cooking implements. Women P/t Men P/t 1983/4 2000/1 Dif. 1983/4 2000/1 Dif. Food preparation, cooking 80 65 -14 *** 22 26 3 ***Set table, wash/put away dishes 31 19 -12 *** 12 10 -1 **Cleaning 39 42 3 ns 9 13 3 ***Laundry, ironing, clothing repair 25 27 1 ns 2 3 2 ***Childcare 43 40 -3 ns 13 19 5 ***purchase goods 38 34 -4 ** 23 22 -2 nsOther unpaid work 44 48 4 *** 48 70 21 ***
  • Examining the results for our variables of interest more closely we can see three process at work -- (1) the effect of appliances (2) spouse’s contribution the effect of appliances and (3) historical change net of effects of changes in household size, family composition, educational attainment, household (paid) labour supply, and investment in domestic appliances.The most remarkable part of this table is the clear pattern showing that domestic technology diffused in 1980s and 1990s – the microwave and dishwasher have significantly reduced time spent in cooking and in meal clean-up. The predicted effect of these technologies on women’s time spent in these activity is 8 minute reduction in cooking time and 5 minute reduction in meal-up time – about 50% of the raw change women’s mean time over this period. Interesting this reduction in time spent preparing and cleaning up after home meals has not come at the cost of a significant increase in women’s time spent shopping. Dishwashers increase mother’s time spent in childcare following the historical trend for less time devoted hygiene and nutrition and more time to face-to-face interaction with children. Freezer seem to significantly increase women’s time other unpaid work which, includes activities like gardening, care-giving to adults and pet care. As demonstrated in an early slide, practically every household had washing machine by the time of the 1983/4 survey who it is not surprising to find that once over changes we have controlled for other changes washing machines has had no effect on time spent in laundry. First we can see that husbands contributions generally have a significant effect on the time women spend in domestic. All other things being equal every minute that a husband spend cooking is associated with a decline of quarter of minutes for the wife. The model predicts if men cook, for say 24 minutes a day, women’s cooking time will reduce by 6 minutes. It is interesting to note that model predicts that husband’s contribution to cleaning, childcare, shopping and (the residual) category of unpaid work is associated with an increase in their wife’s time spent in these activities. For example father’s involvement in parenting predicts mothers will increasing there childcare time by close to 50%. However the model predicts that change in father’s contributions since 1983/4 offsets this the predicted increase so that in 2000/1 for every extra 10 minutes father spent in childcare the mothers 2 minutes extra. Men’s shopping is associated with a large rise in women’s shopping time but there is much smaller effect size for men’s cleaning. Men’s time spent in other unpaid work not only increases women’s time in this work marginally but the net effect of the change in their behaviour since 1983/4 strengthens this trend. After controlling for changes associated with population ageing, changes in the households supply of paid labour, falling household size, falling birth rate and increasing educational attainment, the only significant period effect (change in activity in 2000/1 that remains unexplained) is less than 7 minute reduction in women’s meal clean-up time (effect of take-out food with disposable cutlery and packaging?).
  • Classification of parents activities with children (1) Physical care (2) Interactive care (3) Passive care (4) Transport and managing care.Physical and emotional care/High contact childcare – face-to-face interaction, carrying, holding, cuddling, hugging, soothing, feeding, bathing, dressing and putting children to sleep are all examples of physical and emotional care.Interactive childcare/Developmental childcare – face-to-face parent-child interaction that involves activities believed to be critical for the development of children’s linguistic, cognitive, and social capacities. Examples of interactive childcare activities are teaching, helping children learn, reading, telling stories, playing games, listening to children, talking with and reprimanding children. Passively minding children/Low intensity childcare – which is distinguished from other categories of childcare because parental involvement is less active. Activities included in this minding children category are being an adult presence for children to turn to, maintaining a safe environment, monitoring children playing outside the home, keeping an eye on sleeping children, supervising games and recreational activities such as swimming. This is rarely done as a primary activity (ABS 1993: 27). Travel and communications – which are restricted to cases of journeys and communications associated with childcare activities. In addition to the time spent in motion, travel time includes time spent waiting when taking children to and picking them up from places, such as school, the house of a friend or relative, sports training, music and ballet lessons, parent and teacher nights, meeting trains or buses, etc. Only communications (in person, by telephone or written) centered on the care of children, are included in this category. This includes discussions with a spouse, other family members, friends, teachers and child workers, when the conversation was about the child. Although these activities are not usually active interactions with children, they require a parent’s full attention, and cannot, unlike low intensity childcare, be combined with other activities.The shallow slope of the line (coefficient) suggests that the effect of using up to 30 hours of a ‘substitute’ carer reduces parents’ time spent in physical care by 1 ½ hours a week. Any hours of any form of non-parental care (formal, informal and mixed) do not affect parents’ time in interactive, passive care or transport and managing care and have only small effects on physical careNon-parental care, work schedules and time shifting?Parents still seem eager to preserve interactive with kids but use non-parental care to shift the scheduling of this contact with their kids to later in the evening and earlier in the day (see Lyn Craig’s work on this).
  • Classification of parents activities with children (1) Physical care (2) Interactive care (3) Passive care (4) Transport and managing care.Physical and emotional care/High contact childcare – face-to-face interaction, carrying, holding, cuddling, hugging, soothing, feeding, bathing, dressing and putting children to sleep are all examples of physical and emotional care.Interactive childcare/Developmental childcare – face-to-face parent-child interaction that involves activities believed to be critical for the development of children’s linguistic, cognitive, and social capacities. Examples of interactive childcare activities are teaching, helping children learn, reading, telling stories, playing games, listening to children, talking with and reprimanding children. Passively minding children/Low intensity childcare – which is distinguished from other categories of childcare because parental involvement is less active. Activities included in this minding children category are being an adult presence for children to turn to, maintaining a safe environment, monitoring children playing outside the home, keeping an eye on sleeping children, supervising games and recreational activities such as swimming. This is rarely done as a primary activity (ABS 1993: 27). Travel and communications – which are restricted to cases of journeys and communications associated with childcare activities. In addition to the time spent in motion, travel time includes time spent waiting when taking children to and picking them up from places, such as school, the house of a friend or relative, sports training, music and ballet lessons, parent and teacher nights, meeting trains or buses, etc. Only communications (in person, by telephone or written) centered on the care of children, are included in this category. This includes discussions with a spouse, other family members, friends, teachers and child workers, when the conversation was about the child. Although these activities are not usually active interactions with children, they require a parent’s full attention, and cannot, unlike low intensity childcare, be combined with other activities.The shallow slope of the line (coefficient) suggests that the effect of using up to 30 hours of a ‘substitute’ carer reduces parents’ time spent in physical care by 1 ½ hours a week. Any hours of any form of non-parental care (formal, informal and mixed) do not affect parents’ time in interactive, passive care or transport and managing care and have only small effects on physical careNon-parental care, work schedules and time shifting?Parents still seem eager to preserve interactive with kids but use non-parental care to shift the scheduling of this contact with their kids to later in the evening and earlier in the day (see Lyn Craig’s work on this).
  • Classification of parents activities with children (1) Physical care (2) Interactive care (3) Passive care (4) Transport and managing care.Physical and emotional care/High contact childcare – face-to-face interaction, carrying, holding, cuddling, hugging, soothing, feeding, bathing, dressing and putting children to sleep are all examples of physical and emotional care.Interactive childcare/Developmental childcare – face-to-face parent-child interaction that involves activities believed to be critical for the development of children’s linguistic, cognitive, and social capacities. Examples of interactive childcare activities are teaching, helping children learn, reading, telling stories, playing games, listening to children, talking with and reprimanding children. Passively minding children/Low intensity childcare – which is distinguished from other categories of childcare because parental involvement is less active. Activities included in this minding children category are being an adult presence for children to turn to, maintaining a safe environment, monitoring children playing outside the home, keeping an eye on sleeping children, supervising games and recreational activities such as swimming. This is rarely done as a primary activity (ABS 1993: 27). Travel and communications – which are restricted to cases of journeys and communications associated with childcare activities. In addition to the time spent in motion, travel time includes time spent waiting when taking children to and picking them up from places, such as school, the house of a friend or relative, sports training, music and ballet lessons, parent and teacher nights, meeting trains or buses, etc. Only communications (in person, by telephone or written) centered on the care of children, are included in this category. This includes discussions with a spouse, other family members, friends, teachers and child workers, when the conversation was about the child. Although these activities are not usually active interactions with children, they require a parent’s full attention, and cannot, unlike low intensity childcare, be combined with other activities.The shallow slope of the line (coefficient) suggests that the effect of using up to 30 hours of a ‘substitute’ carer reduces parents’ time spent in physical care by 1 ½ hours a week. Any hours of any form of non-parental care (formal, informal and mixed) do not affect parents’ time in interactive, passive care or transport and managing care and have only small effects on physical careNon-parental care, work schedules and time shifting?Parents still seem eager to preserve interactive with kids but use non-parental care to shift the scheduling of this contact with their kids to later in the evening and earlier in the day (see Lyn Craig’s work on this).
  • The Women's Health Australia Study is a three age-cohort, twenty-year study involving 42,000 women at baseline (1996) when their ages were 18-23, 45-50 and 70-75 years. Multiple measures of health are used, including the very popular SF36. Information is also gathered on other conditions including those identified as 'major' conditions (e.g. asthma, coronary heart disease, cancer, diabetes, hypertension,) and those taken to be more 'minor' (e.g. back pain, tiredness, headaches/migraine, sinusitis, perceived stress). Repeated studies have shown that self-rated health, and the SF36 in particular, closely is closely associated with clinical assessments of health.Perfect health is indicated by SF36 score of 100 and 0 represent the poorest state of health other than death. The Women’s Health Australia study used the same questions of on time-pressure as the ABS Time Use survey, expect that the response categories are expressed as ‘Every day; ‘A few times a week’; ‘About once a week’; ‘About once a month’; ‘’Never’. With a few assumption these responses can be expressed as ratio/interval variable of ‘frequency’ in a thirty day period.The remarkable features of this diagram is the almost linear does-response curve – as time pressure increases, self-rated health deteriorates progressively. Those who rarely experience time-pressure enjoyed around ten percentage points better health than those who experience being rushed/pressured or pressed for time every day, regardless of cohort..
  • Regression analysis: subjective time-pressureData comes the most recent ABS Time Use Survey (1997), limited to prime working age (20-54 years) Australian couplesDependent Variable is perceived time pressure as measured by the question “How Often do you feel rushed or pressed for time?” . *NB, Response categories are are ‘never’, rarely’, ‘sometimes’, ‘often’ and ‘always’ which are scored 1 (for rarely) through to 5 for (for always) and show on vertical axis of the diagram above.Independent variables of interest are - Family composition, Household type (NB new long hours type – women over 48 h/w) and GenderControl variables – Age, Household income, Husband working 49 or more hoursReference categories are Wednesday, female, age 35-39years,university educated, in 1 ½ earner household, with 1 pre-school aged child, using informal care onlyNB Rise, followed by plateau, followed by another rise suggests that :Only complete specialization by gender lowers perceived time pressure and and very long hours of market work increase the time pressure but female part-time market work offers no relief compared to standard full-time participation.*Gender and household type interaction not significant, dropped from model
  • Regression analysis: subjective time-pressureData comes the most recent ABS Time Use Survey (1997), limited to prime working age (20-54 years) Australian couplesDependent Variable is perceived time pressure as measured by the question “How Often do you feel rushed or pressed for time?” . *NB, Response categories are are ‘never’, rarely’, ‘sometimes’, ‘often’ and ‘always’ which are scored 1 (for rarely) through to 5 for (for always) and show on vertical axis of the diagram above.Independent variables of interest are - Family composition, Household type (NB new long hours type – women over 48 h/w) and GenderControl variables – Age, Household income, Husband working 49 or more hoursReference categories are Wednesday, female, age 35-39years,university educated, in 1 ½ earner household, with 1 pre-school aged child, using informal care onlyNB Rise, followed by plateau, followed by another rise suggests that :Only complete specialization by gender lowers perceived time pressure and and very long hours of market work increase the time pressure but female part-time market work offers no relief compared to standard full-time participation.*Gender and household type interaction not significant, dropped from model
  • Time use surveys provide the most accurate window on the otherwise invisible world of domestic work and childcare. Non-market production is real and important to the welfare of society.Failure in reconciling work and family life often stems from relying on assumptions about the relationship between market and non-market production.Questionable presupposition underlying the conventional ‘reconciliation of work and family life’ policy agendaHousehold income not individual income matters – hence belief that women’s part-time work relieves work-family strain without any other consequences.Market or state can socialize many services provided by non-market – could work for food preparation but has unanticipated effect on childcare.Failure to recognise that long hours employment is inimical to non-market production. Since time a major input into the non-market economy is time more thought needs to be given to treating time poverty, perhaps a system of time –transfers ( e.g. using policies like paid parental leave to smooth peaks in time demand). There may be more serious approach to increasing welfare through addressing gender inequality.

Transcript

  • 1. Michael Bittman
    Gender Equality and
    Work-Family Reconciliation –
    Balancing Market Income and Non-market Production?
    Centre for Time Use Research, University of Oxford
  • 2. Esping-Andersen’s 3 pillars of welfare

  • 3. Relative size of the non–market economy Australia 1997 - millions of hours per week (D.S. Ironmonger)
  • 4. Gender and the allocation of non-market work
    Nothing other life course phase and gender affects the predicted hours of unpaid work by an individual
    Usual sociological suspects - income, education, ethnicity, etc– don’t have straightforward influences (more later)
    Women do over two-thirds of all hours devoted to non-market production, even by the most generous count.
    Women’s unpaid work highly sensitive to every life course transition (most leisure if they survive their spouse)
    Men – little unpaid work in family of origin, increases on leaving parental home, remains remarkably constant through the life course unless they survive their spouse (which leads to massive increases in unpaid work)

  • 5.
  • 6. Couples’ time spent in unpaid work (as a primary activity) by age and number of children
  • 7. Gender breakdown of couples’ time spent in unpaid work (as a primary activity)
  • 8. Simulated earnings and unpaid hours for Norwegian women with medium education: 1940-1949 cohort
  • 9. Time spent in childcare UK 1983/4 and 2000/1
  • 10.
  • 11. Cohort analysis of female labour force participation

  • 12. Per capita hours of paid work in Australia –population aged 25-59 years

  • 13. Total work (market + non-market) in two child households
  • 14. Proposed policy solutions for reconciling (paid) work and family life
    Value change
    - The problem of ‘pseudomutuality’
    - Does increased income lead to greater bargaining
    Money transfers
    - Family allowances or tax concessions for parents
    Access to substitutes (for family care)
    - Public or private provision
    Employment and workplace measures
    - Flexible working schedules
    - Part-time employment
    - Parental leave

  • 15. Pseudomutuality - new values, same behaviour
    Attitude surveys show a high agreement, regardless of gender in the values of domestic equality (over 80% agreement)
    Pseudomutuality is a miscarried solution to the problem of a disjunction between belief in domestic equality and actual inequality.
    - Relationships can be mutual or nonmutual.
    - Pseudomutuality occurs when the recognition of nonmutuality is forbidden or at least very painful.
    - It consists of ways of denying nonmutuality or, conversely, of affirming mutuality where none exists
    - Can be achieved through systemic misapprehension of shares or by discourse re-definitions of ‘equality’ such as
    - ‘mutual but occasional participation’
    - ‘specialisation/optimisation’
    - acknowledgement of allegedly different standards
    - trivialisation and so on
    A qualitative study do with 65 couples in Sydney showed this to be a relatively stable pattern

  • 16. Value change- liberal feminist solution, bargaining power grows out of labour market income

  • 17. Money transfers– family allowance
    This policy instrument is meant to compensate for extra expenditure associated with children.
    -sometimes seen as ‘middle class’ welfare
    - at best it is seen as a partial contribution to direct expenditure on children – cots, nappies, children’s clothing and schooling expenses
    -it does not compensation for indirect costs (i.e. loss of income through breaks in employment and reduced hours
    - it is typically associated with what Esping-Andersen calls ‘familistic’ welfare regimes and is often paid to fathers
    - unpopular with the OECD because, unlike maternity leave, it not contingent on mothers returning to paid employment and, therefore, does not meet the OECD twin aims of (1) minimizing future labour shortages due to the structural ageing of the populations and (2) providing a second line of defence against children growing up in poverty

  • 18. Successful substitution? UK women’s home meal preparation

  • 19.
  • 20. Percent of UK household owing appliances
    .

  • 21. Results for variables of interest – women
  • 22. Less Successful substitution? Australian women’s time spent in childcare

  • 23. Women’s perceptions of being rushed

  • 24. Always
    Often
    Sometimes
    Rarely
    Never
    Perceived time pressure by hours of non-parental care

  • 25. Time pressure gradient in health scores

  • 26. An increase in time pressure leads to a lower health score
    • In longitudinal analysis, controlling for initial level of time pressure and state of health, changes in (and initial level of) stress, smoking, alcohol intake, diet, exercise, weight, pregnancy, education, hours of employment, financial stress, family status, traumatic events, caring responsibilities. Crude first difference model also shows that increasing time pressure is associated with a significant deterioration health

  • 27. Employment and workplace measures
    Flexible hours – the results of the effects of non-parental care on parents time with children suggest rather than substituting for parent care they allow parents to meet employers schedules. Non-parental childcare creates its own scheduling imperatives, as reveal in qualitative research.
    Parental leave – has the advantage of offering the time-poor and sleep deprived parents of very young children time (and money) to spend with their developing new-born children. The analysis of time use data shows this a period of peak time demand. Parental leave is a way of smooth peaks in demands on time and can be financed on a social insurance basis like health, unemployment or retirement benefits are used to smooth troughs in income. Gornick and Meyers argue that long leaves increase the ‘motherhood penalty’ for future earnings. Getting men to take parental leave has been a challenge.
    .

  • 28. Part-time work? Total mean workload for Crompton’s household types

  • 29. Part-time work? Perceived time pressure results for Crompton’s household types

    Always
    Often
    Sometimes
    Rarely
    Never
  • 30. Dual part-time work, a policy ideal?

  • 31. Issues arising this research
    • Time use surveys provide the most accurate window on the otherwise invisible world of domestic work and childcare. Non-market production is real and important to the welfare of society.
    • 32. Failure in reconciling work and family life often stems from relying on assumptions about the relationship between market and non-market production.
    • 33. Questionable presupposition underlying the conventional ‘reconciliation of work and family life’ policy agenda
    • 34. Household income not individual income matters – hence belief that women’s part-time work relieves work-family strain without any other consequences.
    • 35. Market or state can socialize many services provided by non-market – could work for food preparation but has unanticipated effect on childcare.
    • 36. Failure to recognise that long hours employment is inimical to non-market production.
    • 37. Since time a major input into the non-market economy is time more thought needs to be given to treating time poverty, perhaps a system of time –transfers.
    • 38. This approach to increasing welfare through addressing gender inequality and non-market economy my be more successful .