IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ucdavw/11990.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is It Better To Be A Boy? A Disaggregated Outlay Equivalent Analysis Of Gender Bias In Papua New Guinea

Author

Listed:
  • Gibson, John
  • Rozelle, Scott

Abstract

Discrimination in the allocation of goods between boys and girls within households in Papua New Guinea is examined using Deaton's (1989) outlay-equivalent ratio method. Adding a boy to the household reduces expenditure on adult goods by as much as would a nine-tenths reduction in total outlay per member, but girls have no effect on adult goods expenditure. The hypothesis of Haddad and Reardon (1993) that gender bias is inversely related to the importance of female labour in agricultural production is not supported. There is no evidence of bias against girls in the urban sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Gibson, John & Rozelle, Scott, 2000. "Is It Better To Be A Boy? A Disaggregated Outlay Equivalent Analysis Of Gender Bias In Papua New Guinea," Working Papers 11990, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ucdavw:11990
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.11990
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/11990/files/wp00-023.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.11990?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anne Case & Angus Deaton, 2002. "Consumption, health, gender and poverty," Working Papers 261, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Health and Wellbeing..
    2. Haddad, Lawrence & Kanbur, Ravi, 1990. "How Serious Is the Neglect of Intra-Household Inequality?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(402), pages 866-881, September.
    3. Gibson, John, 2001. "Literacy and Intrahousehold Externalities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 155-166, January.
    4. Ahmad, A. & Morduch, J., 1993. "Identifying Sex Bias in the Allocation of Household Resources: Evidence from Linked Household Surveys from Bangladesh," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1636, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    5. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1986. "On Measuring Child Costs: With Applications to Poor Countries," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 720-744, August.
    6. repec:pri:cheawb:case_deaton_consumption_health_gender is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Deaton, Angus S & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Thomas, Duncan, 1989. "The Influence of Household Composition on Household Expenditure Patterns: Theory and Spanish Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(1), pages 179-200, February.
    8. Christopher Udry, 1997. "Recent Advances in Empirical Microeconomic Research in Poor Countries: An Annotated Bibliography," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 58-75, March.
    9. Rosenzweig, Mark R & Schultz, T Paul, 1982. "Market Opportunities, Genetic Endowments, and Intrafamily Resource Distribution: Child Survival in Rural India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(4), pages 803-815, September.
    10. repec:pri:cheawb:case_deaton_consumption_health_gender.pdf is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Duncan Overfield, 1998. "An Investigation of the Household Economy: Coffee Production and Gender Relations in Papua New Guinea," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(5), pages 52-70.
    12. Deaton, Angus S, 1989. "Looking for Boy-Girl Discrimination in Household Expenditure Data," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 3(1), pages 1-15, January.
    13. repec:pri:rpdevs:case_deaton_consumption_health_gender is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Valero-Gil, Jorge, 2008. "Remittances and the household’s expenditures on health," MPRA Paper 9572, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Koohi-Kamali, Feridoon, 2008. "Intrahousehold inequality and child gender bias in Ethiopia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4755, The World Bank.
    3. Geoffrey Lancaster & Pushkar Maitra & Ranjan Ray, 2008. "Household Expenditure Patterns and Gender Bias: Evidence from Selected Indian States," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(2), pages 133-157.
    4. Nobuhiko Fuwa, 2014. "Pro-girl Bias in Intra-household Allocation in the Rural Philippines: Revisiting the “Adult Goods” Approach," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 727-740, November.
    5. Masahiro Hori & Nahoko Mitsuyama & Satoshi Shimizutani, 2016. "New Evidence on Intra-Household Allocation of Resources in Japanese Households," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 67(1), pages 77-95, March.
    6. John Gibson & Bonggeun Kim, 2018. "Economies of scale, bulk discounts, and liquidity constraints: comparing unit value and transaction level evidence in a poor country," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 21-39, March.
    7. van der Meulen Rodgers, Yana & Kassens, Alice Louise, 2018. "Women's asset ownership and children's nutritional status: Evidence from Papua New Guinea," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 100-107.
    8. O'Donoghue, Cathal & Doorley, Karina & Sologon, Denisa Maria, 2024. "Gender Difference in Household Consumption: Some Convergence over Three Decades," IZA Discussion Papers 16852, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Chen Lin & Yuxin Chen & Jeongwen Chiang & Yufei Zhang, 2021. "Do “Little Emperors” Get More Than “Little Empresses”? Boy-Girl Gender Discrimination as Evidenced by Consumption Behavior of Chinese Households," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 1123-1146, November.
    10. Laura Zimmermann, 2012. "Reconsidering Gender Bias in Intrahousehold Allocation in India," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(1), pages 151-163, September.
    11. Lee, Yiu-fai Daniel, 2008. "Do families spend more on boys than on girls? Empirical evidence from rural China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 80-100, March.
    12. Getachew Yirga Belete & Martina Menon & Federico Perali, 2022. "Children’s Resources and Poverty: A Collective Consumption Evidence from Ethiopia," Working Papers 1, SITES.
    13. Nhate, Virgulino & Ardnt, C. & van den Broeck, K., 2006. "Orphans and Discrimination in Mozambique: An Outlay Equivalence Analysis," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25373, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Monazza Aslam & Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 2008. "Gender and household education expenditure in Pakistan," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(20), pages 2573-2591.
    15. Maldonado, Javier, 2019. "Detecting Gender Discrimination in Intrahousehold Resource Allocation," DES - Working Papers. Statistics and Econometrics. WS 28146, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Estadística.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haddad, Lawrence James & Peña, Christine & Nishida, Chizuru & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Slack, Alison T., 1996. "Food security and nutrition implications of intrahousehold bias," FCND discussion papers 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Sonia Bhalotra & Cliff Attfield, 1998. "Intrahousehold resource allocation in rural Pakistan: a semiparametric analysis," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 463-480.
    3. Monazza Aslam & Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 2008. "Gender and household education expenditure in Pakistan," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(20), pages 2573-2591.
    4. Nobuhiko Fuwa, 2014. "Pro-girl Bias in Intra-household Allocation in the Rural Philippines: Revisiting the “Adult Goods” Approach," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 727-740, November.
    5. Koohi-Kamali, Feridoon, 2008. "Intrahousehold inequality and child gender bias in Ethiopia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4755, The World Bank.
    6. Fuwa, Nobuhiko, 2005. "Intrahousehold Analysis Using Household Consumption Data: Would the Potential Benefit of Collecting Individual-Level Consumption Data Justify Its Cost?," MPRA Paper 23689, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Lee, Yiu-fai Daniel, 2008. "Do families spend more on boys than on girls? Empirical evidence from rural China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 80-100, March.
    8. John Gibson, 1997. "Testing for boy-girl discrimination with household expenditure data: results for Papua New Guinea," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(10), pages 643-646.
    9. Vellore Arthi & James Fenske, 2018. "Polygamy and child mortality: Historical and modern evidence from Nigeria’s Igbo," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 97-141, March.
    10. Ueyama, Mika, 2007. "Income growth and gender bias in childhood mortality in developing countries:," IFPRI discussion papers 739, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Jere R. Behrman, 1994. "Intra-family Distribution in Developing Countries," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 253-296.
    12. Hina Nazli & Shahnaz Hamid, 1999. "Concerns of Food Security, Role of Gender and Intra-household Dynamics in Pakistan," PIDE Research Report 1999:3, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
    13. Garcia-Diaz Rocio, 2012. "Demand-Based Cost-of-Children Estimates and Child Poverty," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-32, January.
    14. World Bank, 2000. "Papua New Guinea : Poverty and Access to Public Services," World Bank Publications - Reports 14973, The World Bank Group.
    15. Rodríguez, Laura, 2016. "Intrahousehold Inequalities in Child Rights and Well-Being. A Barrier to Progress?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 111-134.
    16. Robin Burgess & Juzhong Zhuang, 2000. "Modernisation and Son Preference," STICERD - Development Economics Papers - From 2008 this series has been superseded by Economic Organisation and Public Policy Discussion Papers 29, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    17. Chen, Susan E. & Bhagowalia, Priya & Shively, Gerald, 2011. "Input Choices in Agriculture: Is There A Gender Bias?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 561-568, April.
    18. Nobuhiko FUWA & Seiro ITO & Kensuke KUBO & Takashi KUROSAKI & Yasuyuki SAWADA, 2006. "Introduction To A Study Of Intrahousehold Resource Allocation And Gender Discrimination In Rural Andhra Pradesh, India," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 44(4), pages 375-397, December.
    19. Nobuhiko FUWA & Seiro ITO & Kensuke KUBO & Takashi KUROSAKI & Yasuyuki SAWADA, 2006. "Gender Discrimination, Intrahousehold Resource Allocation, And Importance Of Spouses’ Fathers: Evidence On Household Expenditure From Rural India," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 44(4), pages 398-439, December.
    20. Valérie Lechene, 1993. "Une revue de la littérature sur les échelles d'équivalence," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 110(4), pages 169-182.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Labor and Human Capital;

    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:ags:ucdavw:11990. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/daucdus.html .

    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.