View article

There is growing evidence that the household cannot be characterized as one where individuals share the same preferences or pool their resources. New research has shown that the unitary model of the household has been rejected in a variety of country settings in both developed and developing countries (see Strauss and Thomas 1995; Behrman 1997; Haddad et al. 1997 for reviews). Although the unitary model continues to be extremely powerful in explaining many phenomena, the evidence in favor of a model where individuals within the household have different preferences, or maintain control over their own resources, is of interest to researchers and policymakers alike. Indeed, Haddad et al.(1997) argue that using the unitary model of the household as a guideline for policy prescriptions may lead to policy failures. First, the effect of public transfers may differ depending on the identity of the income recipient. Second, the response of nonrecipients of the income transfer must also be considered. If households reallocate resources away from the transfer recipient to compensate for the transfer receipt, the intended effect of the income transfer may not be realized. Third, at the project level, the unitary model predicts that it does not matter to whom policy initiatives are addressed, since information, like other resources within the household, will be shared. Lastly, adherence to a unitary model of the household disables many policy levers that could be brought to bear on development problems. The unitary model predicts that household behavior can be changed only by changes in prices and household incomes. In contrast, the collective model …