IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/igdrpp/igdr-04-2016-0018.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender bias in household education expenditure: the case of West Bengal

Author

Listed:
  • Amita Majumder
  • Chayanika Mitra

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to detect gender bias in education expenditure on “students”, who are children and young adults, in a household in the rural and the urban sectors of West Bengal. Outlay equivalent ratios have been calculated using the Engel curve approach, where the budget share function is log quadratic in income, to identify items relating exclusively to education of school/college going students. Heckman’s (1979) two-step procedure is used for estimation to address selection bias The 68th round (July 2011 to June 2012) household level consumption expenditure survey data of the National Sample Survey Organisation have been used for the analysis. Design/methodology/approach - Engel curve approach is used to capture parental preference for student’s welfare and to find the existence of male student favouritism in the field of education. In case of exclusive adult goods, the addition of a student will reduce the resource allocated for adult goods leading to negative income effect. If a household favours males over females, then that household is likely to sacrifice more for a male student’s education than that for a female student. To address selection bias, Heckman’s two-step procedure has been used. Findings - The authors find that not all education items relate exclusively to students of a household. Expenditure on books is not exclusively for students, whereas other educational items, such as stationary and photocopy charges, tuition fees and private coaching fees, are found to be students’ items only. Transport cost is found to be an adult good. Further, we find evidence of pro male bias in expenditure on educational items, and the extent of gender bias is more in the urban sectors compared to the rural sectors in West Bengal. Originality/value - The objective of this paper is to identify the educational items exclusively for “students” and to test the difference in the allocation of resources in education, with respect to these items, between a male student and a female student for both sectors in West Bengal, using the outlay equivalent ratios.

Suggested Citation

  • Amita Majumder & Chayanika Mitra, 2016. "Gender bias in household education expenditure: the case of West Bengal," Indian Growth and Development Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(2), pages 129-150, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:igdrpp:igdr-04-2016-0018
    DOI: 10.1108/IGDR-04-2016-0018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IGDR-04-2016-0018/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IGDR-04-2016-0018/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/IGDR-04-2016-0018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Education expenditure; Gender bias; Heckman’s two-step method; Outlay equivalent ratio; West Bengal; D14; C13; J15;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D14 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Saving; Personal Finance
    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • J15 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Minorities, Races, Indigenous Peoples, and Immigrants; Non-labor Discrimination

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:igdrpp:igdr-04-2016-0018. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.