The gender division of unpaid care work throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

Jonas Jessen; C. Katharina Spiess; Sevrin Waights; Katharina Wrohlich

doi:10.1515/ger-2022-0003

Published by De Gruyter July 28, 2022

The gender division of unpaid care work throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

Jonas Jessen , C. Katharina Spiess , Sevrin Waights and Katharina Wrohlich

From the journal German Economic Review

https://doi.org/10.1515/ger-2022-0003

Showing a limited preview of this publication:

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic and related closures of day care centres and schools significantly increased the amount of care work done by parents. There has been much speculation over whether the pandemic increased or decreased gender equality in parental care work. Based on representative data for Germany from spring 2020 and winter 2021 we present an empirical analysis that shows that although gender inequality in the division of care work increased to some extent in the beginning of the pandemic, it returned to the pre-pandemic level in the second lockdown almost nine months later. These results suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic neither aggravated nor lessened inequality in the division of unpaid care work among mothers and fathers in any persistent way in Germany.

Keywords: Gender division; domestic work; child care; day care; gender care gap; COVID-19

JEL Classification: D13; J16; J22

Funding source: H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions

Award Identifier / Grant number: 752053

Funding statement: Sevrin Waights acknowledges funding from a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions fellowship under the Horizon 2020 programme of the European Union (Project acronym: PAGE, Grant number: 752053).

Acknowledgment

We are grateful to Claire Samtleben for helpful comments. Andrew Judy and Louisanne Knierim provided excellent research assistance.

Conflict of interest: The authors report no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Figure A1

Division of other tasks among couples with at least one child aged up to 14 years.

Table A1

Regression results: Man does at least half of […].

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	Panel A: Child care (pre-COVID mean: 0.039)

C O V I D 1	0.051**	0.047**	0.033	0.041**	0.018	0.075**
C O V I D 1	(0.020)	(0.021)	(0.021)	(0.021)	(0.027)	(0.032)
C O V I D 2	0.015	0.020	0.029	0.002	0.039	−0.048
C O V I D 2	(0.020)	(0.021)	(0.022)	(0.021)	(0.026)	(0.034)
Combined effect	0.067	0.067	0.062	0.043	0.057	0.026
p-value	0.002	0.006	0.012	0.069	0.060	0.492
Observations	2,194	4,653	4,653	4,653	2,714	1,939
	Panel B: Housework (pre-COVID mean: 0.258)

C O V I D 1	0.034**	0.032*	0.028	0.028*	0.006	0.057**
C O V I D 1	(0.016)	(0.017)	(0.017)	(0.016)	(0.020)	(0.027)
C O V I D 2	0.007	0.007	0.10	0.005	0.023	−0.022
C O V I D 2	(0.016)	(0.018)	(0.018)	(0.017)	(0.022)	(0.017)
Combined effect	0.041	0.040	0.038	0.032	0.029	0.036
p-value	0.020	0.053	0.071	0.094	0.254	0.226
Observations	2,203	4,657	4,657	4,656	2,714	1,942
Sample years	2018/19–2020/21		2012/13–2020/21

Linear time trend	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Control variables			Y
Individual FEs				Y	Y	Y
Respondents	Both	Both	Both	Both	Women	Men

Notes: Table shows results of OLS regressions of the dependent variable on a binary indicator variable for the May–July 2020 survey wave ( C O V I D 1 ) and a binary indicator for both COVID survey waves ( C O V I D 2 ). Column 1 uses a sample of the last three survey waves only. Columns 2–6 use the last six survey waves. Columns 2, 3, and 4 reflect regressions of Equations 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Individual controls: marital status, birth year, sex, indicator for living in East Germany, education dummies and child age dummies. Columns 5 and 6 use the same specification as in column 4 but focusing only on female or male respondents, respectively. Sample weights provided in the pairfam dataset are used. Standard errors clustered at the respondent level in parenthesis. Significance levels: * p < 0.1, ** < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Source: pairfam, waves 2012/13–2021/21 and COVID-19 supplement.

Table A2

Woman for the most part takes care off […].

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	Panel A: Child care (pre-COVID mean: 0.588)

C O V I D 1	−0.133***	−0.124***	−0.110***	−0.115***	−0.137***	−0.086**
C O V I D 1	(0.023)	(0.023)	(0.023)	(0.023)	(0.031)	(0.034)
C O V I D 2	0.066***	0.059**	0.053**	0.072***	0.084**	0.053
C O V I D 2	(0.025)	(0.026)	(0.025)	(0.025)	(0.034)	(0.036)
Combined effect	−0.067	−0.065	−0.056	−0.043	−0.053	−0.033
p-value	0.005	0.013	0.034	0.105	0.120	0.427
Observations	2,194	4,653	4,653	4,653	2,714	1,939
	Panel B: Housework (pre-COVID mean: 0.495)

C O V I D 1	−0.090***	−0.082***	−0.074***	−0.078***	−0.128***	−0.010
C O V I D 1	(0.024)	(0.024)	(0.024)	(0.024)	(0.032)	(0.035)
C O V I D 2	0.087***	0.074***	0.072***	0.079***	0.115***	0.027
C O V I D 2	(0.024)	(0.024)	(0.024)	(0.024)	(0.033)	(0.034)
Combined effect	−0.003	−0.008	−0.003	0.000	−0.014	0.017
p-value	0.896	0.760	0.925	0.992	0.711	0.653
Observations	2,203	4,657	4,657	4,656	2,714	1,942
Sample years	2018/19–2020/21		2012/13–2020/21

Linear time trend		Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Control variables			Y
Individual FEs				Y	Y	Y
Respondents	Both	Both	Both	Both	Women	Men

Notes: Table shows results of OLS regressions of the dependent variable on a binary indicator variable for the May–July 2020 survey wave ( C O V I D 1 ) and a binary indicator for both COVID survey waves ( C O V I D 2 ). Column 1 uses a sample of the last three survey waves only. Columns 2–6 use the last six survey waves. Columns 2, 3, and 4 reflect regressions of Equations 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Individual controls: marital status, birth year, sex, indicator for living in East Germany, education dummies and child age dummies. Columns 5 and 6 use the same specification as in column 4 but focusing only on female or male respondents, respectively. Sample weights provided in the pairfam dataset are used. Standard errors clustered at the respondent level in parenthesis. Significance levels: * p < 0.1, ** < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Source: pairfam, waves 2012/13–2021/21 and COVID-19 supplement.

Table A3

Regression results: Woman (almost) completely takes care of […].

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	Panel A: Shopping (pre-COVID mean: 0.193)

C O V I D 1	0.059***	0.053***	0.047**	0.053***	0.073***	0.026
C O V I D 1	(0.018)	(0.018)	(0.019)	(0.018)	(0.028)	(0.021)
C O V I D 2	−0.053***	−0.038***	−0.041**	−0.047***	−0.059**	−0.028*
C O V I D 2	(0.017)	(0.017)	(0.017)	(0.016)	(0.026)	(0.015)
Combined effect	0.006	0.014	0.006	0.006	0.014	−0.003
p-value	0.721	0.465	0.758	0.756	0.655	0.886
Observations	2,203	4,660	4,660	4,660	2,719	1,914
	Panel B: Repairs (pre-COVID mean: 0.013)

C O V I D 1	0.002	0.002	0.003	0.003	−0.006	0.014
C O V I D 1	(0.006)	(0.007)	(0.008)	(0.007)	(0.011)	(0.010)
C O V I D 2	−0.001	−0.001	−0.001	−0.003	−0.004	−0.000
C O V I D 2	(0.006)	(0.006)	(0.006)	(0.007)	(0.005)	(0.015)
Combined effect	0.001	0.001	0.002	0.000	0.010	0.014
p-value	0.838	0.875	0.848	0.986	0.438	0.324
Observations	2,111	4,495	4,495	4,486	2,600	1,886
	Panel C: Finance (pre-COVID mean: 0.099)

C O V I D 1	0.025*	0.028*	0.022	0.024*	0.041*	0.001
C O V I D 1	(0.015)	(0.014)	(0.015)	(0.014)	(0.022)	(0.015)
C O V I D 2	−0.019	−0.014	−0.012	−0.017	−0.032	−0.006
C O V I D 2	(0.014)	(0.014)	(0.014)	(0.014)	(0.020)	(0.017)
Combined effect	0.006	0.014	0.010	0.008	0.009	0.007
p-value	0.661	0.342	0.507	0.583	0.668	0.683
Observations	2,201	4,655	4,655	4,655	2,718	1,937
Sample years	2018/19–2020/21		2012/13–2020/21

Linear time trend		Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Control variables			Y
Individual FEs				Y	Y	Y
Respondents	Both	Both	Both	Both	Women	Men

Notes: Table shows results of OLS regressions of the dependent variable on a binary indicator variable for the May–July 2020 survey wave ( C O V I D 1 ) and a binary indicator for both COVID survey waves ( C O V I D 2 ). Column 1 uses a sample of the last three survey waves only. Columns 2–6 use the last six survey waves. Columns 2, 3, and 4 reflect regressions of Equations 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Individual controls: marital status, birth year, sex, indicator for living in East Germany, education dummies and child age dummies. Columns 5 and 6 use the same specification as in column 4 but focusing only on female or male respondents, respectively. Sample weights provided in the pairfam dataset are used. Standard errors clustered at the respondent level in parenthesis. Significance levels: * p < 0.1, ** < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Source: pairfam, waves 2012/13–2021/21 and COVID-19 supplement.

Table A4

Regression results: 50/50 division of […].

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	Panel A: Shopping (pre-COVID mean: 0.193)

C O V I D 1	−0.059***	−0.053**	−0.053**	−0.056***	−0.045*	−0.072*
C O V I D 1	(0.021)	(0.022)	(0.022)	(0.022)	(0.026)	(0.038)
C O V I D 2	0.043**	0.040**	0.042**	0.041**	0.027	0.061*
C O V I D 2	(0.020)	(0.020)	(0.020)	(0.020)	(0.023)	(0.034)
Combined effect	−0.016	−0.013	−0.011	−0.016	−0.018	−0.011
p-value	0.453	0.600	0.653	0.512	0.521	0.794
Observations	2,203	4,660	4,660	4,660	2,719	1,914
	Panel B: Repairs (pre-COVID mean: 0.013)

C O V I D 1	−0.012	−0.002	−0.002	−0.017	−0.011	−0.025
C O V I D 1	(0.015)	(0.016)	(0.016)	(0.015)	(0.023)	(0.018)
C O V I D 2	−0.016	−0.020	−0.021	−0.024	−0.025	−0.022
C O V I D 2	(0.015)	(0.015)	(0.015)	(0.015)	(0.021)	(0.019)
Combined effect	−0.028	−0.022	−0.022	−0.041	−0,036	−0.047
p-value	0.054	0.185	0.180	0.014	0.121	0.039
Observations	2,111	4,495	4,495	4,486	2,600	1,886
	Panel C: Finance (pre-COVID mean: 0.099)

C O V I D 1	−0.070***	−0.067***	−0.071***	−0.069***	−0.058**	−0.084***
C O V I D 1	(0.019)	(0.021)	(0.021)	(0.020)	(0.027)	(0.030)
C O V I D 1	0.061***	0.040*	0.045**	0.058***	0.069***	0.041
C O V I D 1	(0.020)	(0.021)	(0.021)	(0.020)	(0.026)	(0.030)
Combined effect	−0.009	−0.027	−0.026	−0.012	0.011	−0.043
p-value	0.647	0.235	0.251	0.595	0.694	0.200
Observations	2,201	4,655	4,655	4,655	2,718	1,937
Sample years	2018/19–2020/21		2012/13–2020/21

Linear time trend		Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Control variables			Y
Individual FEs				Y	Y	Y
Respondents	Both	Both	Both	Both	Women	Men

Notes: Table shows results of OLS regressions of the dependent variable on a binary indicator variable for the May–July 2020 survey wave ( C O V I D 1 ) and a binary indicator for both COVID survey waves ( C O V I D 2 ). Column 1 uses a sample of the last three survey waves only. Columns 2–6 use the last six survey waves. Columns 2, 3, and 4 reflect regressions of Equations 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Individual controls: marital status, birth year, sex, indicator for living in East Germany, education dummies and child age dummies. Columns 5 and 6 use the same specification as in column 4 but focusing only on female or male respondents, respectively. Sample weights provided in the pairfam dataset are used. Standard errors clustered at the respondent level in parenthesis. Significance levels: * p < 0.1, ** < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Source: pairfam, waves 2012/13–2021/21 and COVID-19 supplement.

References

Allmendinger, J. 2020. “Zurück in alte Rollen. Corona bedroht die Geschlechtergerechtigkeit.” WZB Mitteilungen 168:45–47. Search in Google Scholar

Alon, T., M. Doepke, J. Olmstead-Rumsey, and M. Tertilt. 2020. “The Impact of COVID-19 on Gender Equality.” NBER Working Paper 26947. https://doi.org/10.3386/w26947. 10.3386/w26947Search in Google Scholar

Andersson, G., M. Kreyenfeld, and T. Mika. 2014. “Welfare State Context, Female Labour-market Attachment and Childbearing in Germany and Denmark.” Journal of Population Research 31:287–316. 10.1007/s12546-014-9135-3Search in Google Scholar

Andrew, A., S. Cattan, M. Costa Dias, C. Farquharson, L. Kraftman, S. Krutikova, A. Phimister, and A. Sevilla. 2020. “The Gendered Division of Paid and Domestic Work Under Lockdown.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 13500. 10.2139/ssrn.3654937Search in Google Scholar

Bach, S., B. Fischer, P. Haan, and K. Wrohlich. 2020. “Reform Proposal for Marriage Taxation in Germany: De Facto Income Splitting with a Low Transferable Amount.” DIW Weekly Report 41/42:424–432. Search in Google Scholar

Becker, G. 1981. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Search in Google Scholar

Bertrand, M., E. Kamenica, and J. Pan. 2015. “Gender Identity and Relative Income Within Households.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 130(2): 571–614. 10.3386/w19023Search in Google Scholar

Biroli, P., S. Bosworth, M. Della Giusta, A. Di Girolamo, S. Jaworska, and J. Vollen. 2020. “Family Life in Lockdown.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 13398. 10.2139/ssrn.3636627Search in Google Scholar

Borra, C., M. Browning, and A. Sevilla. 2021. “Marriage and Housework.” Oxford Economic Papers 73(2): 479–508. 10.1093/oep/gpaa026Search in Google Scholar

Brüderl, J., S. Drobnič, K. Hank, F. J. Neyer, S. Walper, P. Alt, C. Bozoyan, C. Finn, R. Frister, M. Garrett, T. Gonzalez, A. H. Greischel, N. Gröpler, K. Hajek, M. Herzig, B. Huyer-May, R. Lenke, L. Minkus, T. Peter, J. Reim, C. Schmiedeberg, P. Schütze, N. Schumann, C. Thönnissen, M. Wetzel, and B. Wilhelm. 2020. “The German Family Panel (pairfam).” GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5678 Data File Version 11.0.0. https://doi.org/10.4232/pairfam.5678.11.0.0. Search in Google Scholar

Boll, C., D. Müller, and S. Schüller. 2021. “Neither Backlash Nor Convergence: Dynamics of Intracouple Childcare Division After the First COVID-19 Lockdown and Subsequent Reopening in Germany.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 14375. 10.2139/ssrn.3851051Search in Google Scholar

Charles, P., J. Spielfogel, D. Gorman-Smith, M. Schoeny, D. Henry, and P. Tolan. 2018. “Disagreement in Parental Reports of Father Involvement.” Journal of Family Issues 39(2): 328–351. 10.1177/0192513X16644639. Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, P., and T. Hsu. 2020. “Pandemic Could Scar a Generation of Working Mothers.” The New York Times. Retrieved June 4, 2021, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/business/economy/coronavirus-working-women.html. Search in Google Scholar

Craig, L., and B. Churchill. 2021. “Dual-earner Parent Couples’ Work and Care During COVID-19.” Gender, Work & Organization 28:66–79. 10.1111/gwao.12497Search in Google Scholar

Dearing, H., H. Hofer, C. Lietz, R. Winter-Ebmer, and K. Wrohlich. 2007. “Why Are Mothers Working Longer Hours in Austria than in Germany?” A Comparative Microsimulation Analysis. Fiscal Studies 28(4): 463–495. 10.1111/j.1475-5890.2007.00064.xSearch in Google Scholar

Del Boca, D., N. Oggero, P. Profeta, and M. C. Rossi. 2020. “Women’s Work, Housework and Childcare, Before and During COVID-19.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 13409. 10.2139/ssrn.3636638Search in Google Scholar

Del Boca, D., N. Oggero, P. Profeta, and M. C. Rossi. 2021. “Household Division of Labor During Two Waves of COVID-19 in Italy.” Covid Economics 60. Search in Google Scholar

Dyer, W. J., R. D. Day, and J. M. Harper. 2014. “Father Involvement: Identifying and Predicting Family Members’ Shared and Unique Perceptions.” Journal of Family Psychology 28(4): 516–528. 10.1037/a0036903. Search in Google Scholar

Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 10.1177/095892879100100108Search in Google Scholar

Farré, L., Y. Fawaz, L. González, and J. Graves. 2020. “How the COVID-19 Lockdown Affected Gender Inequality in Paid and Unpaid Work in Spain.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 13434. 10.2139/ssrn.3643198Search in Google Scholar

Geist, C. 2010. “Men’s and Women’s Reports About Housework.” 1st ed. In Dividing the Domestic. Men, Women & Household Work in Cross-National Perspective, edited by J. Treas and S. Drobnic, 217–240. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 10.11126/stanford/9780804763578.003.0011Search in Google Scholar

Geyer, J., P. Haan, and K. Wrohlich. 2015. “The Effects of Family Policy on Maternal Labor Supply: Combining Evidence from a Structural Model and a Quasiexperimental Approach.” Labour Economics 36(C): 84–98. 10.1016/j.labeco.2015.07.001. Search in Google Scholar

Hank, K., and A. Steinbach. 2021. “The Virus Changed Everything, Didn’t It? Couples’ Division of Housework and Childcare Before and During the Corona Crisis.” Journal of Family Research 33(1): 99–114. 10.20377/jfr-488. Search in Google Scholar

Hipp, L., and M. Bünning. 2021. “Parenthood as a Driver of Increased Gender Inequality During COVID-19? Exploratory Evidence from Germany.” European Society 23(1): 658–673. 10.1080/14616696.2020.1833229. Search in Google Scholar

Huebener, M., A. Pape, N. Danzer, C. K. Spiess, N. A. Siegel, and G. G. Wagner. 2022. “Cracking Under Pressure? Gender Role Attitudes Toward Maternal Employment During COVID-19. Wiesbaden: Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung.” BiB Working Paper 4/2022. Search in Google Scholar

Huinink, J., J. Brüderl, B. Nauck, S. Walper, L. Castiglioni, and M. Feldhaus. 2011. “Panel Analysis of Intimate Relationships and Family Dynamics (pairfam): Conceptual Framework and Design.” Journal of Family Research 23(1): 77–100. 10.20377/jfr-235Search in Google Scholar

Hupkau, C., and B. Petrongolo. 2020. “Work, Care and Gender During the COVID-19 Crisis.” Fiscal Studies 41(3): 623–651. 10.1111/1475-5890.12245. Search in Google Scholar

Kamo, Y. 2000. “‘He Said, She Said’: Assessing Discrepancies in Husbands’ and Wives’ Reports in the Division of Household Labor.” Social Science Research 29(4): 459–476. 10.1006/ssre.2000.0674. Search in Google Scholar

Kohlrausch, B., and A. Zucco. 2020. “Corona Trifft Frauen Doppelt – Weniger Erwerbseinkommen und Mehr Sorgearbeit.” WSI Policy Brief No. 40. Search in Google Scholar

Langmeyer, A., A. Guglhör-Rudan, T. Naab, M. Urlen, and U. Winkelhöfer. 2020. “Kind sein in Zeiten von Corona.” Ergebnisbericht zur Situation von Kindern während des Lockdowns im Frühjahr 2020. Deutsches Jugendinstitut. Search in Google Scholar

Lewis, H. 2020. “The Coronavirus is a Disaster for Feminism.” The Atlantic. Retrieved June 4, 2021, from https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/feminism-womens-rights-coronavirus-covid19/608302/. Search in Google Scholar

Lundberg, S., and R. A. Pollak. 1996. “Bargaining and Distribution in Marriage.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 10(4): 139–158. 10.4324/9780203441336.pt1Search in Google Scholar

Mangiavacchi, L., L. Piccoli, and L. Pieroni. 2021. “Fathers Matter: Intrahousehold Responsibilities and Children’s Wellbeing During the COVID-19 Lockdown in Italy.” Economics & Human Biology 101016. 10.1016/j.ehb.2021.101016Search in Google Scholar

Mikelson, K. S. 2008. “He Said, She Said: Comparing Mother and Father Reports of Father Involvment.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 70(3): 613–624. 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00509.x. Search in Google Scholar

Möhring, K., E. Naumann, M. Reifenscheid, A. G. Blom, A. Wenz, T. Rettig, R. Lehrer, U. Krieger, S. Juhl, S. Friedel, M. Fikel, and C. Cornesse. 2020. “Die Mannheimer Corona-Studie: Schwerpunktbericht zu Erwerbstätigkeit und Kinderbetreuung.” Search in Google Scholar

Müller, K.-U., C. Samtleben, J. Schmieder, and K. Wrohlich. 2020. “Corona-Krise erschwert Vereinbarkeit von Beruf und Familie vor allem für Mütter – Erwerbstätige Eltern sollten entlastet werden.” DIW Wochenbericht 19:331–340. 10.18723/diw_wb:2020-19-1. Search in Google Scholar

Müller, K.-U., and K. Wrohlich. 2020. “Does Subsidized Care for Toddlers Increase Maternal Labor Supply? Evidence from a Large-scale Expansion of Early Childcare.” Labour Economics 62, 101776. 10.1016/j.labeco.2019.101776. Search in Google Scholar

Naujoks, T., M. Kreyenfeld, and S. Dummert. 2022. “The Division of Child Care During the Coronavirus Crisis in Germany: How Did Short-time Work Affect Fathers’ Engagement?” Journal of Family Research 34(1): 67–98. 10.20377/jfr-717Search in Google Scholar

OECD. 2017. The Pursuit of Gender Equality. An Uphill Battle. Paris: OECD Publishing. Search in Google Scholar

Sánchez, A. R., A. E. Fasang, and S. Harkness. 2021. “Gender Division of Housework During the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Demographic Research 45:1297–1316. 10.4054/DemRes.2021.45.43Search in Google Scholar

Samtleben, C., C. Schäper, and K. Wrohlich. 2019. “Elterngeld und Elterngeld Plus: Nutzung durch Väter gestiegen, Aufteilung zwischen Müttern und Vätern aber noch sehr ungleich.” DIW Wochenbericht 35:608–613. 10.18723/diw_wb:2019-35-1. Search in Google Scholar

Sevilla, A., and S. Smith. 2020. “Baby Steps: the Gender Division of Childcare During the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 36:169–186. 10.1093/oxrep/graa027Search in Google Scholar

Shafer, K., C. Scheibling, and M. A. Milkie. 2020. “The Division of Domestic Labor Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Canada: Stagnation Versus Shifts in Fathers’ Contributions.” Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie 57(4): 523–549. 10.1111/cars.12315. Search in Google Scholar

Sullivan, O. 2021. “The Gender Division of Housework and Child Care.” In Research Handbook on the Sociology of the Family, 342–354. 10.4337/9781788975544.00033Search in Google Scholar

Yerkes, M. A., S. C. André, J. W. Besamusca, P. M. Kruyen, C. L. Remery, R. van der Zwan, D. G. J. Beckers, and S. A. Geurts. 2020. “‘Intelligent’lockdown, Intelligent Effects? Results from a Survey on Gender (in) Equality in Paid Work, the Division of Childcare and Household Work, and Quality of Life Among Parents in the Netherlands During the Covid-19 Lockdown.” PloS one 15(11), e0242249. 10.1371/journal.pone.0242249Search in Google Scholar

Walper, S., B. Sawatzki, P. Alt, J. Reim, C. Schmiedeberg, C. Thönnissen, and M. Wetzel. 2020a. “The Pairfam COVID-19 Survey: Design and Instruments.” pairfam Technical Paper 15. LMU Munich. Search in Google Scholar

Walper, S., B. Sawatzki, P. Alt, J. Reim, C. Schmiedeberg, C. Thönnissen, and M. Wetzel. 2020b. “The Pairfam COVID-19 Survey.” GESIS Data Archive. ZA5959 Data File Version 1.0.0. https://doi.org/10.4232/pairfam.5959.1.0.0. Search in Google Scholar

West, C., and D. H. Zimmermann. 1987. “Doing Gender.” Gender & Society 1(2): 125–151. 10.1177/0891243287001002002Search in Google Scholar

Zamarro, G., and M. J. Prados. 2021. “Gender Differences in Couples’ Division of Childcare, Work and Mental Health During COVID-19.” Review of Economics of the Household 19(1): 11–40. 10.1007/s11150-020-09534-7. Search in Google Scholar

Zinn, S., M. Kreyenfeld, and M. Bayer. 2020. “Kinderbetreuung in Corona-Zeiten: Mütter tragen die Hauptlast, aber Väter holen auf.” DIW Aktuell 51. Search in Google Scholar

Zoch, G., A.-C. Bächmann, and B. Vicari. 2020. “Who Cares When Care Closes? Care-arrangements and Parental Working Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany.” European Societies. 23(51): 576–588. 10.1080/14616696.2020.1832700. Search in Google Scholar

Supplemental Material

The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/ger-2022-0003).

Published Online: 2022-07-28

Published in Print: 2022-12-31

The gender division of unpaid care work throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

Abstract

Acknowledgment

References

Supplemental Material

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same Issue