The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on gender labor market asymmetries in Germany

Q1 Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Timo Baas
{"title":"The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on gender labor market asymmetries in Germany","authors":"Timo Baas","doi":"10.1016/j.jeca.2024.e00396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The Corona pandemic affected life and working conditions around the world. Some could work from home, some had to risk their lives at the workplace, and some got laid off. The selection of employees to one of these groups, however, was asymmetric about gender. More than 63 percent of employees providing services in Germany are female; females in health professions account for more than 75 percent, and in social professions, including daycare, the share of female employees is at 84 percent. These occupations were in high demand during the pandemic and cannot be practiced at home. Since women do more than 62 percent of housework and childcare, the high demand for female work creates a dilemma. While family obligations increased as childcare facilities and schools closed, women had to decide whether to remain or drop out of the labor market. In this paper’s estimated DSGE model, these choices are addressed by allowing for asymmetries in participation decisions and disutility of effort for male and female workers. While at the beginning of the pandemic, female employment increased relative to male, an increase in disutility drove females out of the labor market during the second lockdown. Instead, predominantly males entered, and females reacted to this increase by staying absent. This pattern resembles previous findings on historical pandemics and, in the literature, is called “the added worker effect.”</div></div>","PeriodicalId":38259,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Asymmetries","volume":"31 ","pages":"Article e00396"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Asymmetries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1703494924000458","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Corona pandemic affected life and working conditions around the world. Some could work from home, some had to risk their lives at the workplace, and some got laid off. The selection of employees to one of these groups, however, was asymmetric about gender. More than 63 percent of employees providing services in Germany are female; females in health professions account for more than 75 percent, and in social professions, including daycare, the share of female employees is at 84 percent. These occupations were in high demand during the pandemic and cannot be practiced at home. Since women do more than 62 percent of housework and childcare, the high demand for female work creates a dilemma. While family obligations increased as childcare facilities and schools closed, women had to decide whether to remain or drop out of the labor market. In this paper’s estimated DSGE model, these choices are addressed by allowing for asymmetries in participation decisions and disutility of effort for male and female workers. While at the beginning of the pandemic, female employment increased relative to male, an increase in disutility drove females out of the labor market during the second lockdown. Instead, predominantly males entered, and females reacted to this increase by staying absent. This pattern resembles previous findings on historical pandemics and, in the literature, is called “the added worker effect.”
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Economic Asymmetries
Journal of Economic Asymmetries Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
50 days
×
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