{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02711323763955343, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004784688995215311, 'mean_word_length': 5.06280193236715, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Allocation of Time and Household-level Consumption Equivalent Welfare: A Case of South Korea

ABSTRACT Using “2014 Time Usage and Quality of Life” of 17th KLIPS (Korean Labour and Income Panel Study), the first and most detailed time use survey of its kind in South Korea, we first document the patterns of time use in market work, nonmarket work (household work), child care, and a variety of definitions in leisure. We find that, while men work longer hours, men’s additional market work is well compensated by more leisure and less hours in nonmarket work and child care. We also find within-household unequal distribution of time use in nonmarket work, child care, and leisure in favour of men. Consistent with the cases of the US and other advanced economies, high-income earners tend to enjoy less hours of leisure while they spend more money on leisure activities. Secondly, we calculate the household-level consumption equivalent measure that considers consumption, leisure, life expectancy, and uncertainty. We find that taking into account non-separable preference over leisure and consumption and the quality of leisure is important and household-level welfare measures based solely on income or consumption are both incomplete and misleading.