Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T21:30:55.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Time Use, Gender and Disadvantage in Australia: Conventional Income and ‘Full Income’ Approaches to Estimation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

Trish Hill
Trish Hill*
Affiliation:
Social Policy Research Centre, The University of New South Wales
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Conventional poverty and inequality measures, based only on comparisons of financial resources, may underestimate gender differences in living standards. The value of time spent in household work by oneself and partner, and the value of leisure are key elements that need to be considered in measures of living standards. This article develops a method for measuring wellbeing at the level of the individual, rather than the household. Following the tradition of Australian models of ‘full income’, the final measure of wellbeing includes the value of time in leisure and unpaid work along with individual income, the benefits accruing from the social wage and the welfare gains from the ownership and use of assets. The article then compares the conventional income distribution and the ‘full income’ distribution to identify population subgroups disadvantaged on each of these measures. The results show that gender inequalities in living standards may be underestimated by conventional income measures, and that inequalities in personal income and time use contribute most substantially to gender inequality in the full income distribution.

Type
Symposium
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , December 2009 , pp. 13 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aslaksen, I., Koren, C. (1996) ‘Unpaid household work and the distribution of extended income’, Feminist Economics, 2(3), pp. 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1998a) How Australians Use Their Time 1997, Catalogue No. 4153.0, ABS, Canberra.Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1998b) Time Use Survey Users' Guide 1997, Catalogue No. 4150.0, ABS, Canberra.Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2000) Household Expenditure Survey: Users' Guide 1998–99, Catalogue. No. 6527.0, ABS, Canberra.Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2005) Family, Household and Income Unit Variables, 2005, Catalogue No. 1286.0, ABS, Canberra.Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2008) How Australians Use Their Time, 2006, Datacubes, ABS, Canberra.Google Scholar
Becker, G. S. (1965) ‘A theory of the allocation of time’, The Economic Journal, LXXX, pp. 493–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G. S. (1981), A Treatise on the Family, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Berk, R. A., Berk, S. A. (1983) ‘Supply-side sociology of the family: The challenge of the new home economics', Annual Review of Sociology, 9, pp. 375–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, S. M., Milkie, M. A., Sayer, L. C., Robinson, J. P. (2000) ‘Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor’, Social Forces, 79, pp. 191–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittman, M., Wajcman, J. (2000) ‘The rush hour: The character of leisure time and gender equity’, Social Forces, 79, pp. 165–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bojer, H. (2004) Economic capability and the time cost of children, paper presented at the 28th General Conference for the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, Cork, Ireland, 22–28 August.Google Scholar
Chadeau, A. (1985) ‘Measuring household activities: Some international comparisons', Review of Income and Wealth, 31, pp. 237–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, L., Bittman, M. (2008) ‘The incremental time costs of children: An analysis of children's impact on adult time use in Australia’, Feminist Economics, 14(4), pp. 59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M. (2000), The Gender Division of Welfare: The Impact of the British and German Welfare States, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, T. (2004) ‘Time social justice and UK welfare reform’, Economy and Society, 33(3), pp. 335–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folbre, N. (2004a) ‘A theory of the misallocation of time’ in Folbre, N., Bittman, M. (eds) Family Time: The Social Organization of Care, Routledge, London and New York, pp. 7–24.Google Scholar
Folbre, N. (2004b) Valuing parental time: Total expenditures on children in the United States in 2000, paper presented at the workshop, Supporting Children: English-Speaking Countries in International Context, Princeton University, 7–9 January.Google Scholar
Hill, T. (2005) Valuing time for a ‘full income’ measure, paper presented at the International Association for Feminist Economics (IAFFE) Conference on Economics, Washington D.C., 17–19 June.Google Scholar
Himmelweit, S. (2002) ‘Making visible the hidden economy: The case for gender-impact analysis of economic policy’, Feminist Economics, 8(1), pp. 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ironmonger, D. (2000) ‘Household production and the household economy’, Research paper, Department of Economics, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Lewis, J., Guillari, S. (2005) ‘The adult worker model, gender equality and care: The search for new policy principles and the possibilities and problems of a capabilities approach’, Economy and Society, 34(1), pp. 76–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundberg, S. (2005) ‘Men and islands: Dealing with the family in empirical labor economics', Labour Economics, 12(4), pp. 591–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattingly, M. J., Bianchi, S. M. (2003) ‘Gender differences in the quantity and quality of free time: The U.S. experience’, Social Forces, 81(1), pp. 999–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, J., Glendinning, C. (1989) ‘Gender and poverty’, Journal of Social Policy 18 (3), pp. 363–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, J. (1993) ‘Household equivalence scales: Theory versus policy’, Journal of Labor Economics, 11(3), pp. 471–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phipps, S. A., Burton, P. S. (1995) ‘Sharing within families: Implications for the measurement of poverty among individuals in Canada’, Canadian Journal of Economics, XXVIII, pp. 177–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, M. G. (1934), Economics of Household Production, John Riley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Ruspini, E. (1998) ‘Women and poverty dynamics: The case of Germany and Britain’, Journal of European Social Policy, 8, pp. 291–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. (1985), The Standard of Living: The Tanner Lectures, Cambridge University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Travers, P., Richardson, S. (1993), Living Decently: Material Wellbeing In Australia, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar