MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415915153 · doi:10.16995/rhetm.20252

Oli Hawrylyshyn’s Contribution to the Economic Valuation of Unpaid Domestic Work

2025· article· en· W4415915153 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Etienne Martinier

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of the history of economic thought and methodology. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnpaid workWork (physics)Valuation (finance)Economic analysisDomestic work

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is an accepted article with a DOI pre-assigned that is not yet published.Oli Hawrylyshyn (1943-2020) played an important role in recognizing unpaid domestic work as part of the national production. He suggested ways to include it in national accounting. While Gary Becker (1965) studied how people divide their time between paid and unpaid activities, Hawrylyshyn (1977) focused on measuring the economic value of domestic work. Hawrylyshyn was a Canadian economist who studied at MIT under Evsey Domar and first specialized in migration and economics. In the 1970s, he shifted to researching unpaid household work, responding to growing criticism of GDP measures, especially from feminist movements that argued for recognizing unpaid labor. As part of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, he developed methods to estimate the value of domestic work and showed why it should be included in national statistics. Hawrylyshyn disagreed with Becker’s strict use of opportunity cost to measure domestic work, arguing that it overestimated the economic value of unpaid work. He introduced a key distinction between direct utility (personal satisfaction from doing a task) and indirect utility (the economic value of the service provided). He showed that some household tasks cannot be outsourced without reducing well-being. One of his most important contributions is the so-called third-person criterion: a task is considered an economic activity if someone else could be paid to do it without reducing its value to the household. This helped determine which domestic tasks should be counted in national income. He compared studies on domestic work from different countries and found that the results varied based on the method used for estimation. He identified three main approaches: opportunity cost (which gave the highest estimates), housekeeper wages (which gave moderate values), and market pricing of services (which gave the lowest values). He also noted that factors like family size, women’s employment status, and the age of the youngest child affected these estimates. Hawrylyshyn criticized GDP for not including unpaid work, especially by women. He argued for better data collection, such as time-use surveys and wage comparisons, to better value domestic labor. His approach, which combined theory and data, continues to influence efforts to include unpaid household work in national accounts. By combining theory with practical methods, Hawrylyshyn made unpaid domestic work more visible in national accounting and economic policy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of the history of economic thought and methodology.Same topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207