Institutions, Social Norms, and Bargaining Power: An Analysis of Individual Leisure Time in Couple Households



Also possibly obscuring the results may be differential relations by employment status
or household composition. The baseline specification reported in Table 2 controls for own
work status on the diary day but not for own labor force participation or for the employment
status of the partner. The effect of our power measure which is based on education may differ
depending on each partners’ employment status. For example, a partner with higher earnings
power (higher education) who is not employed may not have as much power as a partner with
higher earnings power who is employed. Already, we observed that the impact of power on
leisure time seemed to be centered on non-work days. We distinguish here between dual
earner, single self-earner, and single partner-earner households, continuing to distinguish
between work and non-work days (though there are necessarily no work days for respondents
in single partner-earner households). Results for the leisure time equations are presented first,
then those for the housework time equations. Sample sizes are reported below. Results are
presented only for samples of more than 100 persons. Small sample sizes pose a particular
problem for the Danish sample.

Results controlling for employment status from the US continue to show a positive
association between power and leisure time, with only one of ten estimated coefficients
slightly negative and that one being statistically insignificant. Interestingly, the relation is
particularly significant for women who rely on their husbands for income, belying our
expectations that a power measure based on education may not be as important for such
individuals. The relation is also large for men who rely on their wives’ income in the US,
though not statistically significant. Instead it is US men who are sole earners who are able to
enjoy more leisure on work days. In the Danish samples, power and leisure time remain
positively associated for all individuals on non-work days but the relation is significant only

21



More intriguing information

1. Conservation Payments, Liquidity Constraints and Off-Farm Labor: Impact of the Grain for Green Program on Rural Households in China
2. The name is absent
3. Meat Slaughter and Processing Plants’ Traceability Levels Evidence From Iowa
4. Unemployment in an Interdependent World
5. SLA RESEARCH ON SELF-DIRECTION: THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL ISSUES
6. The name is absent
7. Implementation of the Ordinal Shapley Value for a three-agent economy
8. Spatial Aggregation and Weather Risk Management
9. Benchmarking Regional Innovation: A Comparison of Bavaria, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland
10. Endogenous Determination of FDI Growth and Economic Growth:The OECD Case
11. SAEA EDITOR'S REPORT, FEBRUARY 1988
12. The Impact of Hosting a Major Sport Event on the South African Economy
13. Effects of red light and loud noise on the rate at which monkeys sample the sensory environment
14. The name is absent
15. THE WELFARE EFFECTS OF CONSUMING A CANCER PREVENTION DIET
16. IMMIGRATION POLICY AND THE AGRICULTURAL LABOR MARKET: THE EFFECT ON JOB DURATION
17. The name is absent
18. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: THE LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY AGENDA
19. Insecure Property Rights and Growth: The Roles of Appropriation Costs, Wealth Effects, and Heterogeneity
20. EU enlargement and environmental policy