The subject of this study is the effect, due to external social factors, of a decline in real income on private households in the Netherlands during the period 1981-1983. There are two main topics considered in the study: firstly, how does a household react to these changes and are there any significant differences between the various household categories, and secondly, how the reactions are to be interpreted. These points are discussed and analysed from a economic/household studies standpoint. Within the framework of the study, the following are of importance: the categories of paid/unpaid labour, financial management and income expenditure. Attention is focussed on the time and money resources of the household. In chapter two, consideration is given to several economic and social developments. They form the framework within which the behavioural changes of the households take place. It has been demonstrated that the early nineteen-eighties (1981-1983) did, in fact, form a period of income decline in real terms for households. The development of both static and dynamic purchasing power amongst private households was, during this period, negative, whilst unemployment in the Netherlands reached 10% and above. The latter is, however, more of a structural nature. In the period following 1983 there is evidence of improving real income levels for those employed in the free market sector, whereas for civil servants and those receiving social benefits, purchasing power remained static or rose less sharply, and in some cases even decreased. The change in both attitude and policy, as well as the developments within the social security area, are dealt with at some length in chapter two. This chapter also considers four social and demographic changes which occurred during the period 1975-1985, i.e. household dilution, development of work within the household, and increase in labour supply, and the economic pessimism of the early 1980's. In chapter three hypotheses are formulated (scheme 1).Scheme 1. An overview of hypothesesExpenditureofincome Hypotheses 1 to 4- In households in the lowest income bracket, economies are made predominantly upon the current expenses.- Especially households in the lowest income bracket purchase fewer consumer durables.- In households in the lowest income bracket, economies are made predominantly on the purchase of consumer durables. - Especially households in the lowest income bracket are more likely to postpone the purchase of consumer durables due to financial circumstances.Paid/unpaidlabour Hypotheses 5 to 7- In a societal situation of an income decrease in real terms, the supply of paid labour will increase.- In a societal situation of an income decrease in real terms, time spent on household activities will increase.- Since unemployment is 'rationed', a household is more likely to opt for economising, rather than seek an additional source of income.Householdeconomicrationality Hypotheses 8 to 11In a household of more than one individual, there will be an increase in the amount of joint discussion on financial matters. An increase in conflict surrounding budget expenditure is to be expected, considering that it is less easy to placate all those involved; discussion of the pros and cons will take place more often. A societal situation of an income decrease in real terms leads to an increase in the household economic rationality. The lower the household income the greater the increase in the amount of household economic rationality.Financialmanagement (including saving and borrowing) Hypotheses 12 to 18- Households in the lower income bracket will change their planning horizon such as may lead to a decrease in the opportunities for saving.- The alternative borrowing of money will appear less than the alternatives economizing and a decrease of savings deposits.- Households in the lower income categories are less likely to draw on their savings deposits than those of other income categories.- Households who have a somewhat pessimistic view of their future financial situation, will have drawn less on their savings deposits than households with a more optimistic view.- Households with a sharp increase in household economic rationality, in comparison with households with only limited increase in household economic rationality, are less likely to draw on their savings deposits.- Households with a sharp increase in household economic rationality do not borrow money for purposes of consumption.- Incidental income can have an alleviating effect on the household financial pressures.In analysing the problem an economic/household studies model has also been developed. The model is based on the following reasoning for the six main alternatives of the household (see appendix to summary): A decline in real income means, in theory, that a household has less money at its disposal. Since a habitual standard of living does not, in the short term, alter along with an income decline, a degree of tension arises between what needs it is actually possible to satisfy, and what it is not. Because the household is accustomed to a certain standard of living, the reaction to income developments will be delayed. From a household economic point of view a reaction will occur. If unanticipated, the event of a real income decline due to external circumstances, has the effect of thwarting a household's financial planning. The household is confronted by increased tension between its desires and the means available to satisfy them. This strain is amplified by individual circumstances. It is assumed that a household attempts to find a happy medium (satisficing behaviour). A limited degree of household economic rationality is assumed. Confronted by the new situation, a household makes decisions. Depending on the situation, a household will either attempt to adapt itself to the new situation or actively seek other sources of assistance, or settle for a combination of both. The areas affected by a real income decline within the household are as follows: income procurement, financial management, income outlay (behaviour as a consumer in the market) and work carried out within the household (household activities). Adaptation may occur in either one or more of these areas. A household can economise, draw on savings, borrow money, take on additional paid employment and spend more time on household activities, or it can alter its household economic rationality strongly. These are the dependent variables in the model. Whether a household alters its behaviour in any of these areas is dependent, on the one hand, on its behaviour in other areas, and on the other hand, on circumstances and other interventional variables. Situational independent variables include, among others, the size of the household, the number of financially dependent children and net wealth. These are variables which can either increase or decrease tensions within the private household. Interventional independent variables are comprised of both a situational and behavioural element. The model is made up of measured variables (see appendix to summary). To test the hypotheses and the model for the main alternatives, and subsequently to adjust the model accordingly, interviews of 275 private households were used. The interviews took place in the spring of 1983, and relate to the period 1981-1983. The sample was formulated by the 'snowball method' and, as far as was possible, should be representative in both household type and degree of urbanisation. In respect of income distribution, the sample should provide sufficient contrast. The sample is not representative with respect to household type, property ownership and household size. The sample is fairly representative with respect to the number of children still living at home. The sample is representative with respect to the degree of urbanisation. When interpreting the data it should be borne in mind that within the category household type, families with children and one parent families are over-represented, and households made up of one individual only, are under-represented. The latter usually have a lower income and a wider distribution than other types of household. Coupled with the fact that there are a relatively large number of home owners in the sample, the impression is formed that middle income groups are under-represented. Considering the contrast aimed at in the study, there is no objection to this. The interviews were conducted with emergent and bilateral target questions on the household, as well as with questions directed at each individual. Because of the unreliability, questions were not asked about specific amounts of money involved in the separate areas (discrete variables). Chapter five tests the hypotheses. The results of the test discussed in chapter five are as follows: households apportion the budget into current and non-current expenses. The analysis in chapter five leads to the confirmation of fifteen out of the eighteen hypotheses and the rejection of the numbers 14, 16 and 18. In addition to the hypotheses, a model for the six main alternatives has been developed and tested. The loglinear procedure of backward elimination has been used in order to reduce the number of variables. Additionally, a comparison of various models has also resulted in reducing the number of variables. The logit technique has been used to estimate the probability ratios (relative effects). Variables are, as much as possible, dichotomised. Within each category of situational, behavioural and intervential independent variables the probability ratios should be interpreted within each category. The most important conclusions from this logit analysis of the model with the six main alternatives are as follows: by the variable economising in the context of situational variables, the dichotomised net household income variable is less significant than the variable economically non-active main breadwinner. Other independent variables which have been estimated for the categories situational, behavioural and interventional, and which have a significant probability ratio are: being confronted by unexpectedly high expenses, having financially dependent children, a high level of fixed costs (more than 34% of net houshold income). From a theoreticalpoint of view, the first variable is most marked. Instead of the all-knowing 'homo economicus', we see households reacting, in terms of expenditure, to events which thwart established customs and habits, whether planned for or otherwise. From amongst the behavioural variables, a sharp increase in the level of household economic rationality provides an increased likelihood ofeconomising. The relationship is a simultaneous one. Some degree of causality can, however, be induced by purporting that when households wish to economise on expenditure, it may be assumed that: quality/price awareness, more price awareness, information gathering, becoming more economically and appraisal of the pros and cons, are absolutely essential considerations. An internal expenditure shift, by economising in some areas to be able to actualise others, gives rise to a chance of economising.If the savings deposits have been diminished, there is a good chance that economising has taken place either. This implies that it is not simply a question of a trade-off, but that economising and drawing on savings often go hand in hand. Households, that for financial reasons spend more time on household activities, economise more often. From amongst the interventional variables, an income decline appears to accompany economising. Furthermore, households which stated their minimum required household income to be more than 80% of net household income, appear to economise more often. This depends partly on the level offixed costs (as a percentage of net household income). Strong consumption orientation appears not to have any significant influence on the tendency to economise. In the logit analysis, the most noticeable of the variable spending more time on household activities, is the lack of any significant connection with the other dependent variables in the model. No situationalvariable whatsoever appears to be of any significant influence. Only one behavioural variable i.e. do it yourself (DIY) remains.Being confronted by unexpectedly high expenses not only makes economising more likely, but also makes drawing on savings (diminished savings deposits) more probable. Other situational variables appear to have no obvious influence. An internal expenditure shift enabling consumption of particular commodities and services does not lead to a diminished savings deposit. A trade-off between, on the one hand an increase in paid employment for financial reasons, changing assetts into cash inorder to pay daily expenses, borrowing money, opportunity for saving and on the other hand, a decrease in the savings deposit, cannot be established. The complementary relation between economising and diminished savings deposits also applies here. Closely related to the above is the clear connection between a decrease in the savings deposits and a sharp increase inhousehold economic rationality. The variables being in arrears with payments and opportunity for saving appears, along with a sharp increase in household economic rationality, of no significant influence. Borrowing money or, in other words, making use of consumer credit, is found less amongst households with a high net wealth. The other situational variables have no obvious influence here. Trade-off with economising, drawing on savings and sharp increase in household economic rationality, is not to be found here. The lower employment status level of the main breadwinner makes the variable taking on additional paid employment for financial reasons more likely. The stimulus to do this is stronger amongst the lower employment status levels.After further analysing mutual relationships, the other situational variables appear to have no obvious influence. Furthermore, thevariable sharp increase in household economic rationality and internal expenditure shift, give a relative probability. This is also valid for households that experienced a worsening of their financial situation in the period, and for households where minimum required household income is more than 80% of net household income. The variable sharp increase in household economic rationality shows a logic of mutual connection with other variables: to have economised, not having borrowed money and drawing on savings (decrease on savings deposits), provide, just as a pessimistic view on the financial situation, a greaterchance of a sharp increase in household economic rationality. Amongst the situational variables relative effects are to be found amongst the low educational levels. The results of the model analysis of the six main alternative choices mean modifying and refining the analysis model of chapter three. A complementary relation exists between the dependent variables economising, sharp increase in household economic rationality and decrease in saving deposits. There is no connection between the variabels spending more time on household activities and economising. There is a complementary relation between economising and spending more time on household activities for financial reasons. Negative change in income (in real terms) or financial situation,as an independent variable, has an influence on five of the six dependent variables. Borrowing money is the exception. Changes in budget management (spending money in a different way, internal expenditure shift) have as an independent variable, influence on the dependent variables: economising, firm increase in household economic rationality, and an increase in paid employment for financial reasons. The situational variable being confronted by unexpectedly high expenses influences the dependent ariables economising and decrease in savings deposits. The level of net household income or variables connected with household income such as educational level, employment status and economic non-activity of main breadwinner, are connected to four out of the six dependent variables. The exception here is the dependent variable, spending more time on household activities, which is explained the least by the model. Additionally, logit analysis was made of several areas of current expenses (food and other daily necessities, clothing, car running costs, eating out and personal care) and of non-current expenses (furniture, car purchase,audio/video, domestic textiles, going on holiday), by means of the dependent variables in the model in chapter three. There is no connection in the variable: being confronted by unexpectedly high expenses at this level of analysis. The results are disappointing in the relative effects of postponing the purchase of consumer durables for financial reasons. This is valid to a lesser extent for the explanation of economising on purchases. However, this conclusion does not hold for the relative effects of purchase of one of the five non-current expenses. By the purchase, depending on the product, the household income or the main breadwinner being economically active, give rise to frequently occurring relative effects. The data suggest that households are neither willing nor find it easy to admit that purchases cannot be made for financial reasons. Probably most households have some vague plan in mind, the carrying out of which depends to a large extent on whether other events take place or not. Other conclusions are: when economising on food and other daily necessities it is striking that the level of net household income is of no consequence. The chance of economising on food and other daily necessities is rather more dependent on a decrease in household income. This is most obvious in those households where one of the members became unemployed during the research period. The larger the household, as well as the presence of financially dependent children or higher fixed costs, the higher the chance that food and other daily necessities are economised on. Amongst those households whose main breadwinner is economically non- active, the chance of economising is high. From amongst the behavioural variables, only that of sharp increase in household economic rationality reinforces the chance of economising on food and other daily necessities. This probably indicates that economising on food and other daily necessities is brought about mostly by an adjustment in the price or the price/quality relationship of the items purchased, rather than economising on quantity. Households where minimum required household income is more than 80% of net household income are also more likely to economise on food and other daily necessities. For these households the free choice of how to budget is likely to be heavily restricted by high fixed costs. An income decline strengthens the effect of economising on food and other daily necessities. The probability of economising on clothing depends on the size of household or the presence of financially dependent children and the household income or main breadwinner being economically non-active. Economising on clothing is also to be found amongst those who are less consumption oriented. One of the household members becoming unemployed is also likely to result in economising on clothing. A household where the minimum required household income is, in fact, more than 80% of net household income, also economises on clothing more readily. The fact that here households also make adjustments in price rather than quantity can be seen from the results of the variable sharp increase in household economic rationality, and the variable spending more time on household activities for financial reasons. A decline in household income leads to economising on eating out of the respondent. Time/money substitution is relevant to this latter category. The picture presented of economising on personal care goes virtually hand in hand with that of clothing. The influence of the variable payment arrears is striking. The purchasing of a car and audio/video installations increases where there is an incidental income. A high consumption orientation is only of importance to the purchasing of audio/video installations. Those households with a low income and where the main breadwinner is economically nonactive, do not go away on holiday. The influence of a sharp increase in household economic rationality can be seen in some probability ratios, but the picture is not particularly uniform; sometimes it leads to not making a purchase at all, for example, of a car; sometimes to postponing the purchase (furniture), and sometimes to economising (audio/video installations). The probability ratios of the variables suggest that economising on making purchases and postponing the purchase of consumer durables for financial reasons come strongly to the fore where there are serious financial problems. Chapter seven presents a final reflection. Main results of the study are summarized. Two particularly interesting results of this study, sharp increase in household economic rationality and being confronted by unexpectedly high expenses, are dealt with at some length. The increase of household economic rationality pays attention to management within the household. Increase in scarcity of financial resources will lead to an increase in this rationality and will also lead to an extended decision making process. In their adaptation households may have become more rational calculating subjects. The scarcity ratio of time/money is, then, of particular interest. Bad calculations, however, are possible. Neither does the household take on the full characteristics of a small firm. Being confronted by unexpectedly high expenses can be placed into a wider perspective. At any moment, a household may be confronted by internal and external events which interfere un the regularity and its existence. Regarding these external events, the following maxime holds: if government policies or the market push households in an unwanted direction, they will push back. The opportunities of the pushing back, however, are unevenly distributed. The results of this study may be used to trace 'vulnerable households'. For these vulnerable households a cumulation of characteristics: low household income or economically non-active breadwinner, high proportion of fixed costs, confrontation with unexpectedly high expenses and lack of financial success, the policy towards reducing the unemployment level and towards the social security system are of particular importance. The permanence of a situation is of particular interest. A permanent stay in the lower income bracket leads to a deterioration of existing stock of (consumer) durables and/or financial means. Problems of daily care may be more acute.APPENDIX TO SUMMARY: AN OUTLAY OF THE MODELThe model consists of the following dependent variables: economising, drawing on savings (decrease in savings deposits), borrowing money, taking on additional paid employment, spending more time on household activities and a sharp increase in household economic rationality. The independent variables consist of situational, behavioural and interventional. The standard set of independent variables consists of the following: a.situationalindependentvariables , household size or number of financially dependent children, proportion of fixed costs of net household income, net wealth, being confronted with unexpectedly high expenses, stage of household development, net household income or economically (non)active main breadwinner; b.behaviouralvariables , economising, spending more time on household activities, internal shift of expenses, being in arrears with payment, changing assets into cash to pay daily expenses, taking on additional paid employment, sharp increase in household economic rationality, drawing on savings (decrease in savings deposits), borrowing money, regularly borrowing or drawing on savings more than fl. 500,- for daily living expenses; c.interventionalvariables , change in household composition, opinion on-decrease in real household income, minimum required household income more than 80% of net household income, more than fl. 1000,- incidental income, minimum required amount of savings in relation to household income, loss of job of member(s) of household, strong (or luxury) consumption orientation, loss of income due to combination of reduction in work schedule and fewer opportunities to work overtime, mean that the financial situation is worsened (or will worsen). The dependent variable is not to be explained by the same variable as the independent variable. Beside the standard set some additional variables are analysed for the six dependent variables (see appendix I of the Dutch text). Most of these variables were not significantly connected with the dependent variables. The exceptions are included in the summary.