Joint Utility or Sub-optimal Outcomes? Household Income Development of Same-Sex and Different-Sex Couples Transitioning to Parenthood in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 FAMILY STUDIES
Maaike van der Vleuten, Marie Evertsson, Ylva Moberg
{"title":"Joint Utility or Sub-optimal Outcomes? Household Income Development of Same-Sex and Different-Sex Couples Transitioning to Parenthood in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden","authors":"Maaike van der Vleuten, Marie Evertsson, Ylva Moberg","doi":"10.1177/0192513x231194305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unequal divisions of paid work and care among new parents contribute to increasing inequalities. One explanation for this is joint utility maximization and the benefits of partners (temporarily) specializing in paid work and care. This paper examines the (dis)advantages of specializing compared to dividing tasks more equally by studying whether differences in specialization between same-sex and different-sex couples lead to differences in household earnings after entering parenthood. Using register data from Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Sweden and examining first-time parents, we show that female couples have a more equal within-couple income development during the transition to parenthood than different-sex couples do. However, we find no differences in household income (including or excluding social transfers) between the two types of couples. Although a more equal task division may be preferred from an individual perspective, our results show no evidence of a “best strategy” when it comes to maximizing household income.","PeriodicalId":48283,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Issues","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Issues","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x231194305","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unequal divisions of paid work and care among new parents contribute to increasing inequalities. One explanation for this is joint utility maximization and the benefits of partners (temporarily) specializing in paid work and care. This paper examines the (dis)advantages of specializing compared to dividing tasks more equally by studying whether differences in specialization between same-sex and different-sex couples lead to differences in household earnings after entering parenthood. Using register data from Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Sweden and examining first-time parents, we show that female couples have a more equal within-couple income development during the transition to parenthood than different-sex couples do. However, we find no differences in household income (including or excluding social transfers) between the two types of couples. Although a more equal task division may be preferred from an individual perspective, our results show no evidence of a “best strategy” when it comes to maximizing household income.
联合效用还是次优结果?丹麦、芬兰、挪威和瑞典同性和异性伴侣过渡到为人父母阶段的家庭收入发展
新父母之间有偿工作和照顾的不平等分工加剧了不平等。对此的一种解释是共同效用最大化和(暂时)专门从事有偿工作和护理的合作伙伴的利益。本文通过研究同性和异性伴侣之间的专业化差异是否会导致成为父母后家庭收入的差异,来检验专业化与更平等地分配任务相比的(非)优势。利用挪威、芬兰、丹麦和瑞典的登记数据,并对首次为人父母的夫妇进行了调查,我们发现,在向为人父母过渡的过程中,女性夫妇的收入发展比异性夫妇更平等。然而,我们发现两类夫妇的家庭收入(包括或不包括社会转移)没有差异。虽然从个人角度来看,更平等的任务分工可能更可取,但我们的研究结果显示,在家庭收入最大化方面,没有证据表明存在“最佳策略”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Family Issues
Journal of Family Issues FAMILY STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: The journal is devoted to contemporary social issues and social problems related to marriage and family life and to theoretical and professional issues of current interest to those who work with and study families.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信