Gender Bias in Sex Ratio at Birth: The Case of India
AbstractA deeply-rooted preference for sons may decrease the relative number of female births. Though there are variables that may help to erode the couple's preference for sons, these same variables may also increase the availability of means to ensure male births. This is the case of educational achievements. It is not difficult to assume, for example, that a higher level of education helps to erode the couple's preference for sons. However, the effect of an increase in education on female disadvantage at birth is not so straightforward. More education may increase the couple's awareness of the possibility of using prenatal sex detection. We discuss the issue throughout the paper by developing an empirical framework for the case of India.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra in its series Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra with number 0605.
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Campus de Arrosadía - 31006 Pamplona (Spain)
Phone: 34 948 169340
Fax: 34 948 169 721
Web page: http://www.econ.unavarra.es
Postal: Papers are not sent in a centralized mode. You can download them with ftp, or contact the authors.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- P. Bhat & A. Zavier, 2003. "Fertility decline and gender bias in," Demography, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 637-657, November.
- Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-77, May.
- 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 803-15, September.
- Prasanta K. PATTANAIK & Yongsheng XU, 1990. "On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Terms of Freedom of Choice," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1990036, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
- Berik, GUnseli & Bilginsoy, Cihan, 2000. "Type of Work Matters: Women's Labor Force Participation and the Child Sex Ratio in Turkey," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 861-878, May.
- Jinyoung Kim, 2005. "Sex selection and fertility in a dynamic model of conception and abortion," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 41-67, 01.
- Ben-Porath, Yoram & Welch, Finis, 1976. "Do Sex Preferences Really Matter?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 90(2), pages 285-307, May.
- Tjalling C. Koopmans, 1962. "On Flexibility of Future Preference," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 150, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Stephan Klasen & Claudia Wink, 2003. ""Missing Women": Revisiting The Debate," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2-3), pages 263-299.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Javier Puértolas).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.