IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nav/ecupna/0605.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gender Bias in Sex Ratio at Birth: The Case of India

Author

Abstract

A 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebeca A. Echávarri, 2006. "Gender Bias in Sex Ratio at Birth: The Case of India," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 0605, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    • Handle: RePEc:nav:ecupna:0605
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.unavarra.es/gesadj/depEconomia/repec/DocumentosTrab/DT0605.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yoram Ben-Porath & Finis Welch, 1976. "Do Sex Preferences Really Matter?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(2), pages 285-307.
    2. Tjalling C. Koopmans, 1962. "On Flexibility of Future Preference," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 150, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. 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.
    4. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-577, May.
    5. P. Bhat & A. Zavier, 2003. "Fertility decline and gender bias in," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 40(4), pages 637-657, November.
    6. 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).
    7. Stephan Klasen & Claudia Wink, 2003. ""Missing Women": Revisiting The Debate," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2-3), pages 263-299.
    8. 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.
    9. Jinyoung Kim, 2005. "Sex selection and fertility in a dynamic model of conception and abortion," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 18(1), pages 41-67, January.
    10. Chu Junhong, 2001. "Prenatal Sex Determination and Sex‐Selective Abortion in Rural Central China," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 259-281, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    2. Sun, Ang & Zhao, Yaohui, 2016. "Divorce, abortion, and the child sex ratio: The impact of divorce reform in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 53-69.
    3. Alexander Stimpfle & David Stadelmann, 2016. "Does Central Europe Import the Missing Women Phenomenon?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2016-04, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    4. Nancy Qian, 2008. "Missing Women and the Price of Tea in China: The Effect of Sex-Specific Earnings on Sex Imbalance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(3), pages 1251-1285.
    5. Sun, Ang & Zhao, Yaohui, 2014. "Divorce, Abortion and Children's Sex Ratio: The Impact of Divorce Reform in China," IZA Discussion Papers 8230, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Tin-chi Lin & Alícia Adserà, 2013. "Son Preference and Children’s Housework: The Case of India," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 32(4), pages 553-584, August.
    7. Rebeca A. Echávarri, 2007. "The impact of sex-selective abortion technology on the evolution of postnatal gender-bias conventions," Working Papers 78, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    8. AR. Arlegi & AR. M. Besada & J. Nieto & AR. C. Vázquez, 2006. "Freedom of Choice: The Leximax Criterion in the Infinite Case," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 0608, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    9. Rebeca Echávarri & Roberto Ezcurra, 2010. "Education and gender bias in the sex ratio at birth: Evidence from India," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 47(1), pages 249-268, February.
    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. Klaus Nehring, 2003. "Preference for Flexibility and Freedom of Choice in a Savage Framework," Working Papers 51, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    12. Archana Patel & Neetu Badhoniya & Manju Mamtani & Hemant Kulkarni, 2013. "Skewed Sex Ratios in India: “Physician, Heal Thyself”," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 50(3), pages 1129-1134, June.
    13. Antoinette Baujard, 2006. "Conceptions of freedom and ranking opportunity sets. A typology," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200611, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    14. Nandi, Arindam & Deolalikar, Anil B., 2013. "Does a legal ban on sex-selective abortions improve child sex ratios? Evidence from a policy change in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 216-228.
    15. Luojia Hu & Analía Schlosser, 2015. "Prenatal Sex Selection and Girls’ Well‐Being: Evidence from India," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(587), pages 1227-1261, September.
    16. Yamamura, Eiji, 2013. "Effects of sex preference and social pressure on fertility in changing Japanese families," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 97-104.
    17. Rossi, Pauline & Rouanet, Léa, 2015. "Gender Preferences in Africa: A Comparative Analysis of Fertility Choices," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 326-345.
    18. Jimena Galindo & Levent Ülkü, 2020. "Diversity relations over menus," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(2), pages 229-242, August.
    19. Astghik Mavisakalyan & Anna Minasyan, 2023. "The Role of Conflict in Sex Discrimination: The Case of Missing Girls," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 71(2), pages 443-484.
    20. Scott South & Katherine Trent & Sunita Bose, 2014. "Skewed Sex Ratios and Criminal Victimization in India," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 51(3), pages 1019-1040, June.

    More about this item

    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:nav:ecupna:0605. 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: Javier Puértolas (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.unavarra.es/departamento-economia .

    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.