SIAS 6 Papeles de Trabajo de Auditoría

As stated previously, recent studies have highlighted a significant increase in cohabitation in Latin American societies beginning in the 1970s. This increase is sharper among social groups and in countries where this type of union was never traditional, such as among higher educated women in the most (recently)

developed countries of the Southern Cone (Arriagada, 2002; Vignoli-Rodríguez, 2005). This is the case with countries whose current population largely consists of European descendants, such as Argentina and Uruguay (Binstock & Cabella, 2011;

Cabella et al., 2004; Quilodrán-Salgado, 2011). Cohabitation among higher educated groups is considered ‘modern’ because it is related to women’s increasing autonomy and ideational changes in the direction of post-modern values, such as equality and freedom (e.g. Inglehart & Baker, 2000; Inglehart & Welzel, 2010). To date, modern cohabitations are reported in regions where economic development is in a more advanced stage in comparison to other Latin American societies (Binstock & Cabella, 2011; Binstock, 2010).

Combined with socioeconomic development, the normative context plays an important role in family formation processes. As stated previously, according to the SDT framework, socioeconomic advantage is not an enough of a condition to drive social change. The new behavior must be culturally accepted. Some of the ideational changes related to the SDT are observed in Latin American countries. A study conducted by Esteve and colleagues suggests that the tolerance to various types of non-conformist behavior is increasing in three Latin American countries, i.e. Argentina, Brazil and Chile (Esteve et al., 2012a). Correspondingly, the value system in these countries is evolving toward post-materialist values prevalent in most Western developed societies. This situation raises the macro-level research questions of this study, which are addressed in Chapter 3:

(RQ1) Is socioeconomic development related to the incidence of a modern type of cohabitation in Latin America and developed nations? More specifically,

(RQ1.1) To what extent are modern types of cohabitation present in Latin America?

(RQ1.2) Are these modern consensual unions associated with socioeconomic development, women’s empowerment and post-materialist values in Latin America and developed countries?

Considering the level of socioeconomic inequality and cultural variety in Latin America, it is important to distinguish the social context in which consensual unions take place, from individual level correlates of living in a cohabiting union or being married. Accordingly, in order to understand who these couples are and where they live, it seems crucial to look closely at contextual- and individual-level socioeconomic characteristics of couples living in cohabitation instead of in marriage.

Brazil is an ideal case study for examining the socioeconomic and cultural dimensions of nuptial behavior in Latin America: each Brazilian state has its own colonization history, ethnic and religious composition and economic development stage (ranging from very industrialized to quite rural). Besides, Brazilian features reflect the Latin American reality very well: it presents accentuated regional and social inequalities as well as cultural differences. In addition, the Brazilian census provides rich individual level information to the study of cohabitation, such as self-declared religious orientation and family income. Therefore, the first study of this thesis which explores individual and contextual features of cohabitation in Latin America uses Brazilian data. The following research questions are addressed in Chapter 4:

(RQ2) What are the socioeconomic and cultural factors related to the choice of living in a consensual union or being married in Brazil?

(RQ2.1) To what extent is cultural context related to a couples’ probability of being married on the one hand or cohabiting on the other?

(RQ2.2) Is cohabitation in Brazil related to secularization?

(RQ2.3) To what extent is cohabitation related to social class in Brazil?

(RQ2.4) How does childbearing within cohabitating unions relate to status in social class?

While consensual unions among the lower and less educated classes are considered traditional in Latin America, cohabitation among the upper and higher educated strata is surely novel in the region. Some studies, using data from metropolitan

regions in some of the more developed countries, have suggested that the modern type of cohabitation is different from the traditional type in form and meaning (e.g.

Binstock & Cabella, 2011; Cabella et al., 2004; Laplante & Street, 2009; Parrado &

Tienda, 1997). Parrado and Tienda used data from the 1990s to compare nuptial behavior of two cohorts in Caracas, Venezuela. In order to distinguish the traditional from the modern type of cohabitation they include an interaction term between young cohort membership and years of education. Their results show that, while the traditional cohabitation was found to be a substitute to marriage, it also showed that couples in traditional cohabitation were likely to have more children than couples in official marriages. At the same time, modern cohabitation, among higher educated and younger cohorts, was observed to be quite similar to that found in developed countries, meaning an alternative to singlehood or a trial period before marriage. These modern unions had lower fertility rates and were less stable than traditional ones (Parrado & Tienda, 1997). At the same time, none of the previously reported studies were able to empirically differentiate the traditional from the modern types of cohabitation in Latin America. This research gap drives research questions addressed in the Chapter 5 of this thesis:

(RQ3) What are the main differentiating factors of diverse types of cohabitation in Latin America? Expressly,

(RQ3.1) Is it possible to differentiate types of cohabitation through information on relationship context at union formation and outcomes in terms of childbearing in Latin America? If yes,

(RQ3.2) How do these types develop over time?

(RQ3.3) Are these types comparable across different Latin American contexts?

(RQ3.4) Does the prevalence of different types of consensual union vary across countries, family contexts, age and educational groups?

Evidence on union formation and childbearing are important to define the types of cohabitation in Latin America. However, it is not enough to plainly differentiate

them. More research on this topic needs to be undertaken before romantic relationships in Latin America are more clearly understood. Information about gender relations, partners, women’s economic independence and empowerment, as well as about the context where these couples live will help the better understanding of the Latin American types of cohabitation as well as their difference in comparison to marriage. The last two chapters of this thesis address this need.

Symmetrical gender relations is one of the expected outcomes of the SDT.

Current socioeconomic indicators show an increasing gender balance in Latin American countries, mainly in terms of education and participation in the labor market. However, as demonstrated in the introductory Chapter, significant dissimilarity can be observed over the region. It happens because changes in gender roles do not take place at the same rhythm or in all spheres of a society (McDonald, 2000). For instance, while improvements in women’s status are visible in terms of educational attainment and participation in the labor market, the division of household tasks and family decision making are still largely influenced by traditional gender norms and expectations, mainly among the lower social strata (for a literature review on developed countries see Esping-Andersen, 2009, pp. 19–

54; for Latin American evidence see Arriagada, 2002; Soares, 2008; Sorj et al., 2007).

Within a context of higher equity in the job market than in family life, modern types of cohabitation can be an option for higher educated Latin American women. Likewise, considering that gender equality is an important feature of modern family relations, and that couples’ decision making is a good proxy for measuring it, the following research questions are addressed in Chapter 6:

(RQ4) Is it possible to differentiate types of gender relations in terms of decision making based on Latin American DHS questions? If yes,

(RQ4.1) Is the latent variable of ‘couples’ decision making’ comparable across Latin American countries?

(RQ4.2) Do these types of gender relations differ in terms of women’s age, education and type of union?

Along with couples’ decision making, information about partners, women’s economic independence and about the environmental context where these couples live will help to disentangle Latin American types of cohabitation as well as their differences in comparison to marriage. Comparable to socioeconomic heterogeneity, the cultural environment of Latin American countries also presents significant variations between and within countries, which can be illustrated in terms of religious denomination, values and ethnic composition. This scenario drives the last research questions of this thesis, which are handled in the Chapter 7.

(RQ5) To what extent do romantic relationships (marriage and the different types of cohabitation) in Latin America differ in terms of gender symmetry and contextual influences?

(RQ5.1) To what extent do Latin American relationships (cohabitations and marriage) differ with regard to gender symmetry?

(RQ5.2) To what degree does the probability of a couple living in cohabitation or being married vary according to socioeconomic development in Latin America? And

(RQ5.3) To what extent does the probability of a couple living in different types of cohabitation or being married vary according to contextual ethnic composition and religious values and denomination in Latin America?

The research questions are answered by means of several sources of cross-sectional data. Among them, the Brazilian Census as well as the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) and the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) are used. The Brazilian census was chosen because it provides rich individual level information to the study of the socioeconomic and ideational features of cohabitants, such as self-declared religious orientation and family income. Census data from IPUMS is used to show the evolution of the incidence of cohabitation over time. IPUMS data are harmonized across countries and over time, which facilitates and validates comparative research (Minnesota Population Center, 2011).

Finally, the DHS is a nationally representative survey which collects comparable

data on demographic and health issues in developing countries. Consistent data about timing and type of first unions, complete childbearing histories, as well as gender relations are available in the DHS (Rutstein & Rojas, 2003), which makes it a useful source of information to understand the different types of cohabitation in Latin America. Details about data sources, as well as their limitations are included in each chapter.

3. Cohabitation and social class in Latin America and