Leaving the Nest or Living with Parents: Evidence from Mexico’s Young Adult Population


What makes adult children live with their parents? This paper examines the extent to which individual and family characteristics are associated with co-residence decisions between adult children and their parents. Using Mexico’s 2011 Social Mobility Survey (EMOVI) retrospective data and focusing on the young adult population in Mexico, we test empirically what parent and adult children characteristics correlate with co-residence status. Marginal effects from a probit regression model show that, after controlling for individual characteristics and retrospective family conditions, adult children’s education and employment status seem to be correlated with co-residence status, although only for males. Marital status, whether or not they have children, and retrospective parents’ home ownership are all correlated with co-residence status. The probability of adult male children staying at their parents’ home is reduced when the father has higher levels of education, while increased when the mother has higher levels of education.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    In practical terms, parents’ budget might not be sufficient to provide this type of assistance to all children.

  2. 2.

    This type of information might suffer from recollection bias or the failure to remember, which can be a serious concern.

  3. 3.

    However, current income does not necessarily predict potential earnings. Researchers typically model the relationship between predicted wages and living arrangements (Cobb-Clark, 2008).

  4. 4.

    The opposite can also be modeled: we can assume that the parent derives some utility from cohabiting with the child, but the child values independence and derives a disutility from cohabiting with the parent. The only requirement is that one individual prefers to live together and the other prefers to live separately.

  5. 5.

    The expenditure system conforms to certain conditions. The first condition is an additively separable function of the form U(x1,x2, …, xn) that can be represented, after a monotonic transformation, as the sum of a set of partial utility functions. Hence, the sum of expenditures of individual goods must equal the total expenditure. The second condition is homogeneity in prices and total expenditure: the sum of income and price elasticities equals zero (Chung, 1994). The third condition is regularity, which implies quasi-concavity of the utility function (Chang & Fawson, 1994).

  6. 6.

    A full description of EMOVI 2011, its survey design, and its methodology, can be found at https://ceey.org.mx/contenido/que-hacemos/emovi/.

  7. 7.

    As noted, marital status is highly correlated with co-residence status, and these might be endogenous to each other- e.g., some young adults might leave the parental home to get married and some might even get married to leave the parental home. This issue would be hard to address in a single equation framework of co-residence status, given the absence of a good instrument to address the endogeneity concerns.

  8. 8.

    The Housing Price Index reports purchase prices instead of rental prices. A rental/leasing price index would be preferable because it seems more likely that, to gain independence, adult children would rent houses or apartments before buying one. Although purchase prices and rental prices should be highly correlated, purchase prices won’t be as accurate as rental prices to proxy for the costs of living independently. For more details see: https://www.gob.mx/shf/documentos/indice-shf-de-precios-de-la-vivienda-en-mexico-2019.

  9. 9.

    Own estimations with data from EMOVI 2011.

  10. 10.

    Originally we included a variable indicating parents’ indigenous background. It did not result statistically significant in any regression and all other results are consistent with the omission of such variable. Parents with indigenous background represent 11% of the sample.


  1. Aassve, A., Billari, F., Mazzuco, S., & Ongaro, F. (2002). Leaving home: A comparative analysis of ECHP data. Journal of European Social Policy, 12(4), 259–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aassve, A., Davia, M., Iacovou, M., & Mazzuco, S. (2007). Does leaving home make you poor? Evidence from 13 European countries. European Journal of Population, 23(3/4), 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ahn, N., & Sánchez-Marcos, V. (2017). Emancipation under the great recession in Spain. Review of Economics of the Household, 15(2), 477–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Aquilino, W., & Supple, K. (1991). Parent-child relationship and parent’s satisfaction with living arrangements when adult children live at home. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53(1), 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Avery, R., Goldscheider, F., & Speare, A. (1992). Feathered nest/gilded cage: Parental income and leaving home in the transition to adulthood. Demography, 29(3), 375–388. https://doi.org/10.2307/2061824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Becker, S., Bentolila, S., Fernandes, A., & Ichino, A. (2010). Youth emancipation and perceived job insecurity of parents and children. Journal of Population Economics, 23(3), 1175–1199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Buck, N., & Scott, J. (1993). She’s leaving home: But why? An analysis of young people leaving the parental home. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55(4), 863–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cameron, L., & Cobb-Clark, D. (2008). Do coresidency and financial transfers from the children reduce the need for elderly parents to works in developing countries? Journal of Population Economics, 21(4), 1007–1033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chang, T., & Fawson, C. (1994). An application of the linear expenditure systems to the pattern of consumer behavior in Taiwan. Utah State University: Economic Research Institute Study Papers, Paper 37.

  10. Chiuri, M., & Del Boca, D. (2008). Household membership decisions of adult children: Does gender and institution matter? IZA Discussion Paper No. 3546.

  11. Chiuri, M., & Del Boca, D. (2010). Home-leaving decisions of daughters and sons. Review of Economics of the Household, 8, 392–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chun, H., Kim, O., & Lee, I. (2019). Intergenerational living arrangements and labor supply of married woman. In Hosoe et al. (Eds.), Contemporary issues in applied economics (pp. 171–190). Singapore: Springer.

  13. Chung, J. (1994). Utility and production functions: Theory and applications. Oxford and Cambridge: Blackwell.

  14. Cobb-Clark, D. (2008). Leaving home: What economics has to say about the living arrangements of young Australians. IZA Discussion Paper No. 3309.

  15. Connelly, R., Maurer-Fazio, M., & Zhang, D., (2014). The role of co-residency with adult children in the labor force participation decisions of older men and women in China. IZA Discussion Paper No. 8068.

  16. Di Stefano, E. (2019). Leaving your mamma: Why so late in Italy? Review of Economics of the Household, 17, 323–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ermisch, J. (1986). Impacts of policy actions on the family and household. Journal of Public Policy, 6(3), 297–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ermisch, J. (1999). Prices, parents and young people’s household formation. Journal of Urban Economics, 45(2), 47–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Flatau, P., Hendershott, P., James, I., Watson, R., & Gavin, W. (2003). Leaving the parental home in Australia over the 20th century: Evidence from the household income and labor dynamics in Australia. HILDA conference 2003.

  20. Gillespie, B. (2019). Adolescent intergenerational relationship dynamics and leaving and returning to the parental home. Journal of Marriage and Family. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12630.

  21. Goldscheider, F., & Da Vanzo, J. (1989). Pathways to independent living in early adulthood: Marriage, semi-autonomy, and premarital residential independence. Demography, 26, 278–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Goldscheider, F., Thornton, A., & Young-DeMarco, L. (1993). A portrait of the nest-leaving process in early adulthood. Demography, 30(4), 683 https://doi.org/10.2307/2061813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hermisch, J., & Di Salvo, P. (1997). The economic determinants of young people’s household formation. Economica, 64, 627–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lindert, P. (1980). Child cost and economic development. In R. Easterlin (Ed.), Population and economic change in developing countries (pp. 5–80). The University of Chicago Press.

  25. Manacorda, M., & Moretti, E. (2006). Why do most Italian young men live with their parents? Intergenerational transfers and household structure. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4(4), 800–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Monserud, M., & Elder, G. (2011). Household structure and children’s educational attainment: A perspective on coresidence with grandparents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73(5), 981–1000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ogg, J., & Renaut, S. (2006). The support of parents in old age by those born during 1945-1954: A european perspective. Ageing and Society, 26, 723–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Parish, W., & Willis, R. (1993). Daughters, education, and family budgets: Taiwan experiences’. Journal of Human Resources, 28(4), 863–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Reher, D. (1998). Family ties in Western Europe: Persistent contrasts. Population and Development Review, 24(1), 203–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ruggles, S., & Heggeness, M. (2008). Intergenerational coresidence in developing countries. Population and Development Review, 34(2), 253–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schwanitz, K., Mulder, C. H., & Toulemon, L. (2017). Differences in leaving home by individual and parental education among young adults in Europe. Demographic Research, 37, 1975–2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Seltzer, J. A., & Friedman, E. M. (2014). Widowed mothers’ co-residence with adult children. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 69(1), 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Van den Berg, L., Kalmijn, M., & Leopold, T. (2018). Family structure and early home leaving: A mediation analysis. European Journal of Population, 34, 873–900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-017-9461-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Whittington, L., & Peters, H. (1996). Economic incentives for financial and residential independence. Demography, 33(1), 82–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


Adelaido García-Andrés received research support from the Graduate Research Fellowship Program sponsored by ESRU Foundation and the Espinosa Yglesias Research Center (Centro de Estudios Espinosa Yglesias, CEEY).

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adelaido García-Andrés.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information



Table 4

Table 4 Descriptive statistics of sample

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

García-Andrés, A., Martinez, J.N. & Aguayo-Téllez, E. Leaving the Nest or Living with Parents: Evidence from Mexico’s Young Adult Population. Rev Econ Household (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-021-09553-y

Download citation


  • Co-residence
  • Adult children
  • Living arrangements

JEL Classification

  • D1
  • J12
  • J62