Microsoft Word Socialized Choices 31-12 pod docx

Chapter 2 - Theoretical framework and hypotheses 
41 
state policies would be more effective if they took the concepts of culture and 
care into account. Mothers base their decisions about how much time to work and 
how much care to provide not primarily on economic considerations, but rather 
on dominant cultural norms and values. Mothers ask themselves questions such 
as, ‘who will care for my children when I take up paid employment?’ (Kremer, 
2007, p.22). Among Western countries, there are differences between the 
dominant views of the appropriate level of child care when the mother works. 
Kremer distinguished five cultures of care – full-time motherhood, surrogate 
motherhood, parental sharing, intergenerational care and professional care – that 
can be prevalent in countries and affect women’s employment aspirations in 
various ways. The Netherlands has a strong culture of self-care through parental 
sharing. Professional care is still generally considered to be the ‘cold solution’. 
Dutch mothers in particular continue to be sensitive to this message. However, 
just as with institutional factors, these cultural factors mainly explain differences 
in mothers’ labour participation between countries and not within countries. 
2.4 
Explanations at branch and company level 
The second kind of explanation can be found at the meso level of branches and 
companies. Company policies and cultures, which are often shared at the industry 
level, limit or expand the options for mothers to choose their ideal work pattern. 
Women, especially mothers, predominantly work in education, (health) care and 
other public sectors, which often have family-friendly work arrangements (Hill, 
Martinson, Ferris and Zenger Baker, 2004; Merens et al., 2012; Tausig and 
Fenwick, 2001). Portegijs and Keuzenkamp (2008, also Portegijs et al., 2008b) 
showed that if working schedules were better suited to their private lives, Dutch 
women would be more willing to work (a few) extra hours. Cloïn and Hermans 
(2006) demonstrate that such demands relate in particular to working time and 
location. A previous study of Moen and Dempster-McClain (1987) has indeed 
shown that the presence of ‘flexi-time’ schemes at the company level has a 
positive impact on the participation rate of women. Also other studies have 
shown that the quality or availability of flexible and attractive jobs, as well as 
family-friendly arrangements made by companies, can play a significant role in 
allowing women to choose different employment trajectories (Charles and Harris, 
2007; Haas, 2005; Reynolds, 2003). These meso-level approaches explain why 
there is still a pattern of gender segregation within sectors and occupations. 
However not all mothers choose to work in family-friendly sectors, and 
furthermore within these sectors, there are also variations in the hours worked by 
women.  
2.5 Micro-economic 
explanations 
The third external approach is a micro-economic explanation, and focuses on 
factors at the micro-financial level of the household. This theory posits that 

---

Socialized Choices - Labour Market Behaviour of Dutch Mothers 
42 
rational agents decide how many hours they should work depending on market 
wages. “Individuals constantly face a trade-off between work and leisure as they 
try to allocate their time. If they supply more labour, they have less time to enjoy 
life and if they supply less labour they have less money to enjoy life. There is an 
optimum amount of work that provides individuals with enough compensation for 
them to enjoy their leisure time” (Constant and Otterbach, 2011, p.6). Put 
differently, the optimal number of hours is determined by balancing the marginal 
utility of leisure with the marginal utility of income from work (Becker, 1965). 
Hence, financial circumstances are central to economic theories of labour supply. 
At low-level incomes, people are motivated both to look for employment and to 
work longer hours, in order to increase their income.  When their income 
approaches an (individually perceived) acceptable standard of living, “the pull of 
the income effect reduces, and individuals begin to prioritize ‘free time’ over 
additional earnings” (Fagan, 2001, p.241). The point at which the optimum 
balance of work and leisure is reached therefore depends on personal preferences. 
However, explaining the differences in people’s endogenous preferences is of no 
further interest to micro-economic theorists.  
Within micro-economic theory, the utility of leisure includes the utility of 
taking care of one’s children, which saves money compared to professional paid 
child-care. Along the same lines, it can be argued that if there is a substantial 
difference in earning capacity between husband and wife, a gendered division of 
labour, in which the father has a paid job and the mother stays at home and takes 
care of the children, is optimal. This will then maximise the total utility of the 
household.   
The application of micro-economic theory towards families or households has 
been re-assessed under various other theories, such as the collective model. This 
theory holds that a household consists of several individuals, each with their own 
personal preferences. Accordingly, decisions within a family lead to Pareto-
efficient allocation (Garcia-Mainar, Molina and Montuenga, 2011). Alternatively, 
the resource bargaining theory posits that domestic work is unpleasant and that 
partners will therefore bring their resources to the bargaining table in order to 
“buy themselves out” of domestic work (Wiesmann et al., 2010, p.343). Either 
way, a variety of empirical research has shown that weighing up the costs and 
benefits between partners does play a salient role in women’s labour market 
choices (Cloïn, 2010; Hakim, 2000, 2003 a-d; Kan, 2007; Risman et al., 1999; 
Stähli, Le Goff, Levy and Widmer, 2009; Van Wel and Knijn, 2006). However 
this role is limited and individual preferences and personal attitudes towards 
gender and work play an important role as well (Beets et al., 1997; Bolzendahl 
and Myers, 2004; Hakim, 2000; Hoffnung, 2004; Hooghiemstra, 2000; Marks and 
Houston, 2002a, 2002b; Portegijs et al., 2008b; Risman et al., 1999). 
Most contemporary micro-sociological studies include both income and 
attitudinal factors, in explaining differences in female employment patterns (e.g. 
Cloin, 2010; Kraaykamp, 2012; Steiber and Haas, 2009, 2012). This study builds 

---