IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v92y2025i4p2303-2329..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Economic Origins of Concerns Over Women’s Chastity

Author

Listed:
  • Anke Becker

Abstract

This article studies the origins and function of customs and norms that intend to keep women from being promiscuous. Using large-scale survey data from more than 100 countries, I test the anthropological theory that a particular form of pre-industrial subsistence—pastoralism—favoured the adoption of such customs and norms. Pastoralism was characterized by frequent and often extended periods of male absence from the settlement, implying difficulties in monitoring women’s behaviour and larger incentives to imposing restrictions on women’s promiscuity. The article shows that women from historically more pastoral societies (i) are subject to stronger anti-abortion attitudes; (ii) are more likely to have undergone infibulation, the most invasive form of female genital cutting; (iii) are more restricted in their freedom of mobility; and (iv) adhere to more restrictive norms about women’s promiscuity. At the historical society level, pastoralism predicts patrilocality, the custom of living close to the husband’s family after marriage, allowing them to monitor the bride. Instrumental variable estimations that make use of the ecological determinants of pastoralism support a causal interpretation of the results. I also provide evidence that the mechanism behind these patterns is male absence, rather than male dominance, per se, or historical economic development.

Suggested Citation

  • Anke Becker, 2025. "On the Economic Origins of Concerns Over Women’s Chastity," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 92(4), pages 2303-2329.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:92:y:2025:i:4:p:2303-2329.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/restud/rdae084
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:oup:restud:v:92:y:2025:i:4:p:2303-2329.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/restud .

    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.