IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osp/wpaper/10e010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Endogenous Women's Autonomy and the Use of Reproductive Health Services: Empirical Evidence from Tajikistan

Author

Listed:
  • Yusuke Kamiya

    (Ph.D candidate, Osaka School of International Public Policy (OSIPP))

Abstract

Though gender equity is widely considered to be a key to improving maternal health in developing countries, little empirical evidence has been presented to support this claim. This paper investigates whether or not and how female autonomy within the household affects women's use of reproductive health care in Tajikistan, where the situation of maternal health and gender equity is worse compared with neighbouring countries. Estimation is performed using bivariate probit models in which woman's use of health services and the level of female autonomy are recursively and simultaneously determined. Empirical results reveal that female autonomy measured by women's decision-making on child wellbeing and on economic affairs within the household increases the probability of receiving both antenatal and delivery care. Policymakers need to address women's empowerment in the household in addition to implementing direct health interventions towards improvement of maternal health.

Suggested Citation

  • Yusuke Kamiya, 2010. "Endogenous Women's Autonomy and the Use of Reproductive Health Services: Empirical Evidence from Tajikistan," OSIPP Discussion Paper 10E010, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University.
    • Handle: RePEc:osp:wpaper:10e010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.osipp.osaka-u.ac.jp/archives/DP/2010/DP2010E010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. United Nations Children's Fund UNICEF, 2009. "The State of the World's Children 2009," Working Papers id:1860, eSocialSciences.
    2. Vecino-Ortiz, Andrés Ignacio, 2008. "Determinants of demand for antenatal care in Colombia," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 363-372, May.
    3. Kaushik Basu, 2006. "Gender and Say: a Model of Household Behaviour with Endogenously Determined Balance of Power," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(511), pages 558-580, April.
    4. Anderson, Siwan & Eswaran, Mukesh, 2009. "What determines female autonomy? Evidence from Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 179-191, November.
    5. Sepehri, Ardeshir & Sarma, Sisira & Simpson, Wayne & Moshiri, Saeed, 2008. "How important are individual, household and commune characteristics in explaining utilization of maternal health services in Vietnam?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(6), pages 1009-1017, September.
    6. Pushkar Maitra & Ranjan Ray, 2005. "The Impact Of Intra Household Balance Of Power On Expenditure Pattern: The Australian Evidence," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 15-29, March.
    7. Becker, Stan & Fonseca-Becker, Fannie & Schenck-Yglesias, Catherine, 2006. "Husbands' and wives' reports of women's decision-making power in Western Guatemala and their effects on preventive health behaviors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(9), pages 2313-2326, May.
    8. William H. Greene, 1998. "Gender Economics Courses in Liberal Arts Colleges: Further Results," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 291-300, January.
    9. T. Paul Schultz, 1990. "Testing the Neoclassical Model of Family Labor Supply and Fertility," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 599-634.
    10. Shelah Bloom & David Wypij & Monica Gupta, 2001. "Dimensions of women’s autonomy and the influence on maternal health care utilization in a north indian city," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 38(1), pages 67-78, February.
    11. Geoffrey Lancaster & Pushkar Maitra & Ranjan Ray, 2006. "Endogenous Intra‐household Balance of Power and its Impact on Expenditure Patterns: Evidence from India," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 73(291), pages 435-460, August.
    12. Chiappori, Pierre-Andre, 1988. "Rational Household Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 63-90, January.
    13. Gage, Anastasia J., 2007. "Barriers to the utilization of maternal health care in rural Mali," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(8), pages 1666-1682, October.
    14. Gary S. Becker, 1981. "A Treatise on the Family," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number beck81-1, March.
    15. Magadi, Monica Akinyi & Madise, Nyovani Janet & Rodrigues, Roberto Nascimento, 2000. "Frequency and timing of antenatal care in Kenya: explaining the variations between women of different communities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 551-561, August.
    16. R. Todd Jewell, 2009. "Demand for prenatal health care in South America," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 469-479.
    17. Anne Pebley & Noreen Goldman & Germán Rodríguez, 1996. "Prenatal and delivery care and childhood immunization in guatemala: Do family and community matter?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 33(2), pages 231-247, May.
    18. Navaneetham, K. & Dharmalingam, A., 2002. "Utilization of maternal health care services in Southern India," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(10), pages 1849-1869, November.
    19. Anson, Ofra, 2004. "Utilization of maternal care in rural HeBei Province, the People's Republic of China: individual and structural characteristics," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 197-206, November.
    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. Xu, Zeyu, 2007. "A survey on intra-household models and evidence," MPRA Paper 3763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Clémentine Sadania, 2016. "Working and Women’s Empowerment in the Egyptian Household: The Type of Work and Location Matter," Working Papers halshs-01525220, HAL.
    3. Donni, Olivier & Molina, José Alberto, 2018. "Household Collective Models: Three Decades of Theoretical Contributions and Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 11915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Pierre-André Chiappori & José Alberto Molina, 2019. "The intra-spousal balance of power within the family: cross-cultural evidence," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 983, Boston College Department of Economics.
    5. Seth R. Gitter & Bradford L. Barham, 2008. "Women's Power, Conditional Cash Transfers, and Schooling in Nicaragua," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 22(2), pages 271-290, May.
    6. Bharati Basu & Pushkar Maitra, 2020. "Intra‐household bargaining power and household expenditure allocation: Evidence from Iran," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 606-627, May.
    7. Sharmistha Self & Richard Grabowski, 2018. "Factors influencing maternal health care in Nepal: the role of socioeconomic interaction," Asia-Pacific Sustainable Development Journal, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), vol. 25(2), pages 53-75, December.
    8. Mistry, Ritesh & Galal, Osman & Lu, Michael, 2009. "Women's autonomy and pregnancy care in rural India: A contextual analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 926-933, September.
    9. Patricia Apps & Ray Rees, 2007. "Household Models: An Historical Perspective," CESifo Working Paper Series 2172, CESifo.
    10. Guliani, Harminder & Sepehri, Ardeshir & Serieux, John, 2012. "What impact does contact with the prenatal care system have on women’s use of facility delivery? Evidence from low-income countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(12), pages 1882-1890.
    11. Kota Ogasawara & Mizuki Komura, 2022. "Consequences of war: Japan’s demographic transition and the marriage market," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 1037-1069, July.
    12. LaFave, Daniel & Thomas, Duncan, 2017. "Extended families and child well-being," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 52-65.
    13. Lee, Jungmin, 2004. "Observable and Unobservable Household Sharing Rules: Evidence from Young Couples' Pocket Money," IZA Discussion Papers 1250, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. James Fenske & Vellore Arthi, 2013. "Labour and Health in Colonial Nigeria," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _114, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    15. Raymond B. Frempong & David Stadelmann, 2017. "Does Female Education have a Bargaining Effect on Household Welfare? Evidence from Ghana and Uganda," CREMA Working Paper Series 2017-08, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    16. Agnes R. Quisumbing & John A. Maluccio, 2003. "Resources at Marriage and Intrahousehold Allocation: Evidence from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and South Africa," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(3), pages 283-327, July.
    17. Francesconi, Marco & Muthoo, Abhinay, 2003. "An Economic Model of Child Custody," IZA Discussion Papers 857, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Holger Seebens & Johannes Sauer, 2007. "Bargaining power and efficiency-rural households in Ethiopia," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(7), pages 895-918.
    19. Safoura Moeeni, 2021. "Married women’s labor force participation and intra-household bargaining power," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 1411-1448, March.
    20. Patricia Apps & Ray Rees, 2022. "Inequality measurement and tax/transfer policy," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 29(4), pages 953-984, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Female autonomy; Antenatal care; Delivery care; Reproductive health services; Tajikistan; Bivariate probit model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osp:wpaper:10e010. 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: Akiko Murashita (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iposujp.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.