We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Although fertility is typically regarded as a unitary family decision, a meaningful degree of disagreement in fertility willingness exists within households, especially for having two or more children. As China transitioned from a one-child to multiple-child policy, understanding how such disagreement affects fertility decisions is crucial. Using household data from the 2016 China Labor-force Dynamic Survey, we analyze fertility willingness in married couples. We find that over 10% of families disagree on having two or more children. Disagreement negatively impacts plans to have more children: only the husband wanting two children significantly reduces fertility plans compared to mutual agreement, while only the wife wanting two children does not suppress the plan. This is consistent with the wife's veto power in fertility decisions. Heterogeneity analyses reveal that more equal gender role and higher bargaining power contribute to the wife's veto power, offering insights into the mechanism of intra-household fertility decisions.
Chapter 3 builds a theory of women’s political behavior under conditions of patriarchy and gender inequality. It argues for the defining role of the household in women’s political lives and describes the conditions that would lead to household political cooperation – joint household political decision-making – and hypothesizes its implications for individual women’s political behavior and the structure of political organization more broadly. It then develops a series of expectations about how and when women will become active political citizens, arguing for the importance of women’s autonomy from the household, their social solidarity with each other, and the potential for women’s collective action to transform their political lives.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.