Abstract: In this paper I document how the motherhood employment penalty varies by income in Japan. I use panel data tracking 391 women around first birth. Women in the bottom income quartile are 13 times more likely to quit employment than women in the top quartile. Half of poor women exit two years before birth. Only 4% of wealthy women do. The reason is access to flexible work policies. None of the women who quit had access to flexibility at work. Among women who stayed employed, 58% had access. This explains the income difference. I test other explanations. Poor women were actually more likely to be working before pregnancy, not less. Their husbands work the same hours as wealthy women's husbands. Poor women have shorter commutes, not longer, showing they work in local but low-quality jobs. The results show Japan's motherhood penalty falls mainly on disadvantaged women. Poor women cannot access jobs that accommodate children. Wealthy women can. This pattern differs from Nordic countries where penalties are similar across income groups.
Paper in its early stage can be viewed here, and a quick overview of main results here.
Abstract: In this study I investigate how cognitive and noncognitive skills jointly influence academic performance in Maths and English among Irish secondary school students, with a focus on gender differences. Using data from the Growing Up in Ireland longitudinal study, I apply linear and translog production functions to model these relationships. I find that cognitive skills remain the strongest predictors of academic performance, with slightly stronger effects for boys. However, noncognitive skills, particularly Focused Behaviour and Conscientiousness (TIPI), significantly impact performance (especially for girls in Maths, where skills are substitutes rather than complements (ES > 1)). In contrast, English performance exhibits stronger cognitive dominance and less substitutability between skill types. These results challenge the assumption of a uniform educational production process and highlight the need for gender- and subject-specific educational strategies that develop both cognitive and noncognitive skills in an effective way.
Paper in its early stage can be viewed here, and a quick overview of main results here.
Abstract:In this paper I look at how gender gaps in Maths achievement develop among Irish students, using data from the Growing Up in Ireland study. I examine how factors measured at ages 9 and 13 predict Maths scores in the Leaving Certificate exam taken at age 17/18. Using Oaxaca-Blinder decompositions, I separate the gender gap into two parts: differences in measurable skills and traits (endowments) and differences in how those skills are rewarded (coefficients). I find that boys score 4.4 to 5.2 points higher than girls in Maths on average. When using age 9 predictors, most of the gap comes from differences in returns to skills. By age 13, actual differences in cognitive skills explain most of the gap. Early differences in treatment turn into real skill gaps by the teenage years. Family structure directly affects achievement. Students with absent fathers score lower on average, exactly 13.6 points for boys and 15.2 points for girls. For boys, this comes from both weaker skills and lower returns to family resources. For girls, lower Maths scores link more strongly to mother’s education and household income. These findings point to the need for early interventions to reduce gender disparities in Maths achievement and to address the compounding effects of family disadvantage on educational outcomes.