ECONOMICS C54H3
ECONOMICS OF THE FAMILY, WOMEN AND WORK
FALL 2006
Prof. Gordon Cleveland
Room 364, Management Building
Regular office hours: Mondays 1-2, Wednesdays 1-2, or by appointment.
Telephone: 416-287-7317
e-mail:
Web site: ~
This is a new course, related to labour economics (ECMC51), but focusing particularly on the family as an economic unit, and on the changing role of women in families and in the labour market. There are three subjects of interest for us: the facts about families, women and children; the economic and social analysis that explains these facts and the design and effectiveness of government and business policies that try to affect the situation of families, women and children in Canada.
Required Text
F.D. Blau, M.A. Ferber and A.E.Winkler. The Economics of Women, Men and Work. 5th edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2005. (Referred in the outline as BFW).
The text is an American one, good on analysis and theoretical explanation, but using U.S. data. We will supplement the text with a considerable amount of Canadian data. You are required to read the readings assigned from this text.
Useful supplementary books and articles are listed in the reading list below. If you are delving into a particular topic for interest or for your essay, you may want to read the articles listed. Many of them will be referred to in class lectures (some of them were even written by your prof…J). Some materials will be made available electronically, either through e-mail or on the web site.
Student Evaluation
Grades will be based on the following:
• a 2-hour midterm test to be held in Week 6 or Week 7.
• two short take-home assignments involving interpretation and use of statistical tables and graphs. These assignments will be due at the beginning of the next class. Late assignments will not be accepted. Assignments to be handed out at lecture in Week 3 and Week 5.
• A 10 page essay due in week 9, providing an assessment of an element of Canadian family policy (a list of 5 possible topics will be provided). You automatically have a one-week grace period of extended time to hand in your paper (to week 10). There will be no extensions granted beyond that. Students will lose 10% of the mark on this essay (not ten percentage points, but 10% of the potential value) for each part or full day that the essay is late (after the one-week automatic grace period). Your essays will be returned to you by the last class of term (week 12). Instructions and topics for the essay will be handed out and discussed in class next week.
• A final exam of 3 hours in length to be written during the December exam period.
The two take-home assignments are worth a total of 10 percentage points.
Students may choose the weighting of the rest of the requirements for the course. The midterm test, the final exam and the essay must sum to 90 percentage points. The default value of these components is this:
#1: Midterm = 20 marks, Essay = 30 marks, Final exam = 40 marks.
The two alternatives available are:
#2: Midterm = 30 marks, Essay = 20 marks, Final exam = 40 marks.
#3: Midterm = 20 marks, Essay = 40 marks, Final exam = 30 marks.
You get to choose which of these marking schemes will apply to you. By the 3rd class of the semester, you must choose either one of marking scheme #1, scheme #2 or marking scheme #3 (send your decision in an e-mail to ). If you do not choose a marking scheme by that time, then marking scheme #1 will apply to you.
Academic Dishonesty
Academic dishonesty is subject to severe penalty at the University of Toronto. Be warned about the possible consequences. I will report for discipline any students I believe have attempted to copy materials from other persons or sources without attribution.
Lesson Plan and Readings
Week 1 (Sept 13) - The Course - Facts, Analysis, Policy
What is this course about and what are the requirements to do well? Start with a statistical look at Canadian families. Examine the changing nature of the family. What is happening? Is it desirable? What concepts and theories might help us explain the observed patterns of behaviour?
▪ BFW. Chapters 1 and 2
▪ Roger Sauvé (2004) Profiling Canada’s Families III a report prepared for the Vanier Institute on the Family by Peoples Pattern Consulting
▪ Statistics Canada (2006) Women in Canada: A Gender-Based Statistical Report (5th edition) Catalogue 89-503-XIE – see Chapters 2 and 5, in particular
•Statistics Canada. (2002). Profile of Canadian Families and Households: Diversification Continues. Statistic Canada Cat. No. 96F0030XIE2002003.
•Statistics Canada. (2002). Changing Conjugal Life in Canada. Statistics Canada Cat. No. 89-576-XIE.
•Rod Beaujot (2000) Earning and Caring in Canadian Families Broadview Press
Week 2 (Sept 20) - Why Do Families Exist?
Specialization, exchange and comparative advantage. Other economic factors. Disadvantages to women of specialization. Transaction cost and bargaining models of the family. Gender and patriarchy. The role of nonmarket work.
•BFW. Chapter 3
Weeks 3&4 (Sept 27, Oct 1) - Labour Force Participation And Hours
The basic model explaining labour supply decisions. Effects on participation of changes in nonlabour income, changes in tastes, changes in net hourly wage. Effects on hours of employment of changes in nonlabour income, tastes, wages. Income and substitution effects. Effects of change in number and ages of children, child care subsidies, taxation. Effects of a change in education or health. Household production and labour supply decisions. The decision to stay at home.
• BFW. Chapter 4.
•Claudia Goldin (1990) Understanding the Gender Gap: An Economic History of American Women New York: Oxford University Press
•Nancy Folbre and Julie A. Nelson (2000) “For Love or Money – Or Both?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(4): 123-40.
•Arleen Leibowitz and Jacob Klerman (1995) “Explaining Changes in Married Mothers’ Employment Over Time” Demography 32(3): 365-78.
•OECD Economics Department (2004) “Female Labour Force Participation: Past Trends and Main Determinants in OECD Countries” Study available on Web.
•Statistics Canada (2006) Women in Canada: A Gender-Based Statistical Report (5th edition) Catalogue 89-503-XIE – see Chapter 5 on labour force attachment pages 103-132.
• Applied Research Bulletin (2000) “Labour Force Participation: Women No Longer Playing Catch-Up” Applied Research Bulletin 6(1): 13-14.
Week 5 (Oct 11) – Occupations and Earnings
Occupational differences between men and women. Explanations of occupational differences. Occupational segregation. The male-female earnings ratio. Evidence, potential explanations and trends in the male-female earnings ratio.
• BFW. Chapter 5
•Marie Drolet (2002) “The ‘Who, What, When and Where’ of Gender Pay Differentials” Catalogue 71-584-MIE. Statistics Canada. Available on Web.
•Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn (2000) “Gender Differences in Pay.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 14: 75-99.
•Nicole Fortin and Michael Huberman (2002) “Occupational Gender Segregation and Women’s Wages in Canada: An Historical Perspective.” Canadian Public Policy 28(Supplement 1): S11-S39.
• Applied Research Bulletin (2000) “Occupational Segregation and the Gender Wage Gap” Applied Research Bulletin 6(1): 14-17.
Week 6 (Oct 18) – Human Capital
We explore the Human Capital model as a framework for explaining gender differences in education, job experience, productivity and on-the-job training which affect wages, occupations and employment.
• BFW. Chapter 6.
•Dwayne Benjamin, Morley Gunderson and W. Craig Riddell (2002) Labour Market Economics: Theory, Evidence and Policy in Canada. 5th edition. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson. Chapter 9, pages 244-86.
Week 7 (Oct 25) - Labour Market Discrimination
Empirical evidence. Theories of discrimination. Analysis of the male-female earnings gap by economists. Policies to combat discrimination and their effects.
• BFW. Chapter 7.
•Barbara R. Bergmann (1986)The Economic Emergence of Women New York: Basic Books.
•Dwayne Benjamin, Morley Gunderson and W. Craig Riddell (2002) Labour Market Economics: Theory, Evidence and Policy in Canada. 5th edition. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson. Chapter 12, pages 347-89.
Week 8 (Nov 1) - Concepts, Approaches, Policies and Institutions in Family Policy
By what criteria should family policies be judged? What do efficiency and equity mean? Are they sufficient? What defines the objectives of family policies? Description of key elements of Canada’s current family policies. How does Canada’s approach fit in the context of approaches to family policy in other countries? What are the key current debates about the future direction of family policies?
•Sheila B. Kamerman and Alfred J. Kahn (eds.) (1998) Family Change and Family Policies in Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand and the United States Oxford: Oxford University Press.
•Anne Hélène Gauthier. (2001). “Family Policies and Families’ Well-Being: An International Comparison” in Gordon Cleveland and Michael Krashinsky (eds.) Our Children’s Future: Child Care Policy in Canada Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 251-274.
•Jane Jenson. (2004). Canada’s New Social Risks: Directions for a New Social Architecture. Canadian Policy Research Networks (CPRN) Social Architecture Papers Research Report F 43.
•Pierre Lefebvre and Philip Merrigan. (2003). “Assessing Family Policy in Canada: A New Deal for Families and Children.” Choices vol. 9, no. 5. Institute for Research in Public Policy.
•Kathy O’Hara (1998) Comparative Family Policy: Eight Countries’ Stories. Canadian Policy Research Networks Study No. F04. Ottawa: Renouf Publishing.
•Hadas Mandel and Moshe Semyonov (2005) “Family Policies, Wage Structures, and Gender Gaps: Sources of Earnings Inequality in 20 Countries.” American Sociological Review 70: 949-67.
Week 9 (Nov 8) - Child Care Policy I. Current Policies
Discussion will focus on four main components to early learning and child care policy in Canada – child care subsidies, the child care expense deduction in the tax system, maternity and parental leave and benefits, and public provision of kindergarten. Examination of some of the key facts about child care use and expenditure in Canada. Discussion of institutional details of four elements of policy. Discussion of the objectives, rationale and effects of these elements of policy.
•David M. Blau (2000) “Child Care Subsidy Programs” National Bureau of Economic Research Paper No. 7806.
•Gordon Cleveland and Douglas Hyatt (1997) “Assessing Federal Child Care Policy: Does the Arrow Reach Its Target?” Policy Options 18(1): 20-24. Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy.
•Katherine Marshall. (1999). Employment after childbirth. Perspectives on Labour and Income 11(3): 18-25. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
•Katherine Marshall (2003). Parental leave: more time off for baby. Canadian Social Trends 71: 13-18.
•Shelley Phipps. (2006). “Working for Working Parents: The Evolution of Maternity and Parental Benefits in Canada.” Choices vol. 12, no. 2. Montreal: Institute for Research in Public Policy.
•Pierre Lefebvre and Philip Merrigan (2005) “Low-fee ($5/day/child) Regulated Childcare Policy and the Labor Supply of Mothers with Young Children: a Natural Experiment from Canada.” Working Paper 05-08, Centre interuniversitaire sur le risqué, les politiques economiques et l’emploi. Available on the Web.
•Jacob Alex Klerman and Arleen Leibowitz (1997) “Labour Supply Effects of State Maternity Leave Legislation” in Francine D. Blau and Ronald G. Ehrenberg (eds.) Gender and Family Issues in the Workplace New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pages 65-85.
Week 10 (Nov 15) - Child Care Policy II. What Can Be Done?
Alternative approaches to future of Canada’s early learning and child care policy. Different countries and their approaches – OECD reports. Quebec’s child care reforms. The Fraser Institute. John Richards. Cleveland and Krashinsky. What are the rationales and evidence for different policy approaches?
•Gordon Cleveland and Michael Krashinsky (1998) The Benefits and Costs of Good Child Care: The Economic Rationale for Public Investment in Young Children - A Policy Study ISBN 1-896051-03-0. Published by the Childcare Resource and Research Unit, Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto.
•Jenson, Jane. 2006. “Early Childhood Learning and Care: The Route to Meeting the Major Policy Challenges.” Policy Options, Institute for Research in Public Policy.
•John Richards and Matthew Brzozowski (2006) “Let’s Walk Before We Run: Cautionary Advice on Childcare.” Commentary No. 237 The Education Papers. Montreal: C.D. Howe Institute. Available on the Web.
• Gordon Cleveland (2004) “Family Policy and Preschool Child Care” Policy Options March issue, pp. 42-45 Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP) Montreal.
Week 11 (Nov 22) - Work–Family Conflict and Policies to Reconcile Work and Family Life
A modern focus of concern is the set of potential conflicts between employment for all adults and the time needed to care for children and other family members. We discuss research findings and policy alternatives affecting the conflict between work and family.
•Joan Williams. 2000. Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work conflict and What to Do About It. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
•Richard P. Chaykowski. 2006. “Toward Squaring the Circle: Work-Life Balance and the Implications for Individuals, Firms and Public Policy.” Choices vol. 12, no. 3. Institute for Research in Public Policy.
•Web site on work-life balance. HRSDC. Human Resources and Social Development Canada. http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/spila/wlb/06worklife_balance.shtml
•Carole Vincent and Frances Wooley (2000) “Taxing Canadian Families” Choices vol. 6, no. 5. Institute for Research in Public Policy.
•Cleveland, Gordon and Michael Krashinsky (1999) Tax Fairness for One-Earner and Two-Earner Families: An Examination of The Issues. Published by Canadian Policy Research Networks as CPRN Discussion Paper no. F07. Part of the Best Policy Mix for Children Research Series.
•M. Perry-Jenkins, R. L. Repetti, and A.C. Crouter (2000) “Work and Family in the 1990’s.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 62: 981-98.
•Janet C. Gornick and Marcia K. Meyers (2003) Families That Work: Policies for Reconciling Parenthood and Employment New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
•Jerry A. Jacobs and Kathleen Gerson (2004) The Time Divide: Work, Family and Gender Inequality Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Week 12 (Nov 29) - Recent Developments in the Evolution of the Family
And preparation for the final exam.
7