A Collective Labor Supply Model
Identification and Estimation in the Presence of Externalities By Means of Panel Data
The authors study labor supply of elderly couples by means of a collective model. The model allows individuals to enjoy leisure more (or less) in company of their spouse (complementarity/ externalities in leisure). Preferences and the intra-household bargaining process are identified by using panel data through the dissolution of the household due to the death of one of the partners. The model does not only look at the extensive margin (working versus being retired), but also at the intensive margin (how many hours are worked). They apply the model to American households coming from the first six waves of the Health and Retirement Study. They compare model simulations with those from a standard unitary model for a set of policy reforms; such as the widely discussed proposals to eliminate the earnings test and the replacement of the spouse benefit with a past earnings sharing mechanism.
- Copyright: RAND Corporation
- Availability: Web-Only
- Pages: 34
- Document Number: WR-406
- Year: 2006
- Series: Working Papers
The research described in this report was performed under the auspices of RAND Labor and Population.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers' latest findings and to solicit informal peer review. They have been approved for circulation by RAND but may not have been formally edited or peer reviewed.
Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.