to all labor outcomes. Overall, results are consistent with those of other studies of labor force participation. We find that variables customarily used to explain labor force participation are important in determining the odds of participation in each of the four labor force states considered here. As expected, female labor supply and household migration decisions are significantly affected by working time constraints related to the household structure, in particular with respect to children presence which may constitute a constraint on economic choices of the household. Proxies for the wage offers (age, education, number of children, and area of living), and variables for home productivity and tastes (marital status; presence of children, disabled family members) are, for the most part, significantly related to the likelihood of labor force participation.<sup>26</sup> As our variables of interest are concerned, household migration status still has a different effect on women relative to men. Current migrants decrease the likelihood of male self-employment, while the opposite holds for women. Also past migration experience of household members is positively associated with female self-employment while being negatively correlated with female unpaid work. It is worth noting that having direct foreign experience is negatively related to male wage employment, while it decreases unpaid work supply for both men and women.<sup>27</sup> In order to distinguish the ‘behavioral’ effect of migration from the income (remittance) effect, we further include per capita non-labor earnings (both cash and in-kind) as explanatory variables of labor market outcomes, and migration effects are qualitatively similar to those described above. Results in columns 7-9 show that most of unearned international income flows are negatively associated with formal labor market participation in that they are likely to increase the reservation wage. We distinguish between remittances received from core family members currently away, remittances received in the previous 12 months from former migrants either abroad or in Albania, and other non-labor income (e.g. rents, pensions, dividends etc.). Even though these flows are likely to be endogenous to the labor participation choice, it is worth noting that migration variables are robust to the introduction of these additional controls, while the pure gender effect decreases further. This is to say that household migration status has a significant behavioral impact on non-migrants’ labor market outcomes irrespective of, and beyond, the inflow of remittances or other income effects. This is not surprising, as remittances received in cash or in kind are fungible, plus do not account for the money and skills brought back home by returning Albanians, for a season or for good. Thus, considering remittances only may disguise the purposive behavioral impact of migration across household members in terms of benefits and obligations for all of them.

> 25 All forms of migration are equally represented in all Albanian regions included in the regression model (slightly less in mountain urban regions only).

> 26 The model is also estimated excluding the number of children under six in order to account for the potential simultaneity bias due to fertility to labor force decisions jointly determined (Rosenzweig and Wolpin, 1980). Further checks has been done with respect to other potential endogenous variables (such as those related to the household wealth position) but results are consistent with those reported.

> 27 Yet, as we discussed above, the incidence of female past migration is very low in Albania (around 3% in our nationally representative sample), but excluding this control from the model does not change the results.

17