Financial Solidarity or Autonomy? How Gendered Wealth and Income Inequalities Influence Couples’ Money Management

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Agnieszka Althaber, Kathrin Leuze, Ramona Künzel
{"title":"Financial Solidarity or Autonomy? How Gendered Wealth and Income Inequalities Influence Couples’ Money Management","authors":"Agnieszka Althaber, Kathrin Leuze, Ramona Künzel","doi":"10.17645/si.v11i1.6005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is well established that women have lower income and wealth levels than men. These inequalities are most pronounced within heterosexual couples and grow once partners get married and have children. Nevertheless, equality in controlling money within couples is highly valued and might ameliorate women’s disadvantages in income and wealth ownership. Previous research has focused on explaining gender wealth inequalities at the household level; less is known about the possible consequences of these inequalities on how couples manage their money. In this article, we investigate how income and wealth inequalities among couples are associated with joint or independent money management. In theoretical terms, we perceive money management systems as representing two different norms of reciprocity within couples for buffering income and wealth inequalities between partners, depending on the transferability of resources and their institutional regulation. We apply pooled logistic regression models to data from the German Socio‐Economic Panel Study. Our findings confirm that income and wealth are relevant but have opposite associations with couples’ money management strategies. While couples with unequal income constellations tend to pool their money, couples with unequal wealth constellations manage their money independently. Accordingly, couples seem to use labour income to buffer gender inequalities by sharing resources, thereby following the norm of partnership solidarity. In contrast, gender wealth inequalities are reproduced by keeping resources separate, thus representing the norm of financial autonomy.","PeriodicalId":37948,"journal":{"name":"Social Inclusion","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Inclusion","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v11i1.6005","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

It is well established that women have lower income and wealth levels than men. These inequalities are most pronounced within heterosexual couples and grow once partners get married and have children. Nevertheless, equality in controlling money within couples is highly valued and might ameliorate women’s disadvantages in income and wealth ownership. Previous research has focused on explaining gender wealth inequalities at the household level; less is known about the possible consequences of these inequalities on how couples manage their money. In this article, we investigate how income and wealth inequalities among couples are associated with joint or independent money management. In theoretical terms, we perceive money management systems as representing two different norms of reciprocity within couples for buffering income and wealth inequalities between partners, depending on the transferability of resources and their institutional regulation. We apply pooled logistic regression models to data from the German Socio‐Economic Panel Study. Our findings confirm that income and wealth are relevant but have opposite associations with couples’ money management strategies. While couples with unequal income constellations tend to pool their money, couples with unequal wealth constellations manage their money independently. Accordingly, couples seem to use labour income to buffer gender inequalities by sharing resources, thereby following the norm of partnership solidarity. In contrast, gender wealth inequalities are reproduced by keeping resources separate, thus representing the norm of financial autonomy.
财政团结还是自治?性别财富和收入不平等如何影响夫妻的理财
众所周知,女性的收入和财富水平低于男性。这些不平等在异性恋夫妇中最为明显,一旦伴侣结婚生子,这种不平等就会加剧。然而,夫妻之间在控制金钱方面的平等受到高度重视,可能会改善妇女在收入和财富所有权方面的不利地位。以前的研究侧重于解释家庭一级的性别财富不平等;人们对这些不平等对夫妻理财方式可能产生的后果知之甚少。在这篇文章中,我们调查了夫妻之间的收入和财富不平等如何与共同或独立的金钱管理联系在一起。从理论上讲,我们认为货币管理系统代表了夫妻之间两种不同的互惠准则,以缓冲伴侣之间的收入和财富不平等,这取决于资源的可转移性及其制度监管。我们将混合逻辑回归模型应用于德国社会经济小组研究的数据。我们的研究结果证实,收入和财富是相关的,但与夫妇的理财策略有相反的关联。收入不平等星座的夫妇往往会把钱集中起来,而财富不平等的夫妇则会独立管理他们的钱。因此,夫妻似乎利用劳动收入通过共享资源来缓冲性别不平等,从而遵循伙伴关系团结的规范。相比之下,两性财富不平等是通过将资源分开来再现的,因此代表了财政自主的规范。
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
Social Inclusion
Social Inclusion Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
114
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Inclusion is a peer-reviewed open access journal, which provides academics and policy-makers with a forum to discuss and promote a more socially inclusive society. The journal encourages researchers to publish their results on topics concerning social and cultural cohesiveness, marginalized social groups, social stratification, minority-majority interaction, cultural diversity, national identity, and core-periphery relations, while making significant contributions to the understanding and enhancement of social inclusion worldwide. Social Inclusion aims at being an interdisciplinary journal, covering a broad range of topics, such as immigration, poverty, education, minorities, disability, discrimination, and inequality, with a special focus on studies which discuss solutions, strategies and models for social inclusion. Social Inclusion invites contributions from a broad range of disciplinary backgrounds and specializations, inter alia sociology, political science, international relations, history, cultural studies, geography, media studies, educational studies, communication science, and language studies. We welcome conceptual analysis, historical perspectives, and investigations based on empirical findings, while accepting regular research articles, review articles, commentaries, and reviews.
×
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