Essays in LGBTQ+ Economics

Abstract

This dissertation explores the intersections of gender identity, sexual orientation, and economic outcomes through three empirical essays that examine the effects of policy and identity on labor markets, household dynamics, and well-being. Using large-scale, nationally representative data from the United States and Latin America, each chapter offers new evidence on the economic experiences of sexual and gender minorities—populations historically underrepresented in economic research. The first chapter investigates the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) and its impact on same-sex partnership formation and economic outcomes among U.S. military personnel and their families. Leveraging the exogenous policy change and using a difference-in-differences framework, the analysis reveals that the repeal significantly increased partnership formation among women in the military and improved health insurance coverage for their civilian partners. The second chapter shifts focus to Latin America and provides the first nationally representative estimates of labor market and socioeconomic disparities for non-cisgender individuals in the region. Using Chilean survey data, the paper documents significant employment gaps and poverty disparities by gender identity, highlighting the economic marginalization faced by gender minorities in developing country contexts. The third chapter turns to the U.S. and uses new data from the Household Pulse Survey to quantify the economic vulnerabilities of transgender and gender-diverse individuals. The findings show marked disparities in employment, poverty, health insurance coverage, and food insecurity—especially for non-cisgender Black individuals—underscoring the compounded effects of gender identity and race. Together, these essays provide new evidence on the role of policy, identity, and structural inequality in shaping the economic lives of LGBTQ+ populations. The findings contribute to ongoing debates in labor economics, public policy, and the economics of discrimination, and offer empirical foundations for more inclusive policy design.