Where Has All the Bias Gone? Detecting Gender Bias in the Intrahousehold Allocation of Educational Expenditure
The reliability of the household consumption-based (Engel curve) methodology in detecting gender bias has been called into question because it has generally failed to confirm bias even where it exists. This article seeks to find explanations for this failure by exploiting a data set that has educational expenditure information at the individual level and also, by aggregation, at the household level. I find that, in the basic education age groups, the discriminatory mechanism in education is via differential enrollment rates for boys and girls. Education expenditure, conditional on enrollment, is equal for boys and girls. The Engel curve method fails for two reasons. First, it models a single equation for the two-stage process. Second, even when we make individual- and household-level expenditure equations as similar as possible, the household-level equation still fails to "pick up" gender bias in about one-third of the cases where the individual-level equation shows significant bias. This article concludes that only individual-based data can accurately capture the full extent of gender bias.
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.:
- Sonia Bhalotra & Cliff Attfield, 1998.
"Intrahousehold resource allocation in rural Pakistan: a semi-parametric analysis,"
LSE Research Online Documents on Economics
6679, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- 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.
- Cliff Attfield & Sonia R Bhalotra, 1998. "Intrahousehold Resource Allocation in Rural Pakistan: A Semi-parametric Analysis," STICERD - Development Economics Papers - From 2008 this series has been superseded by Economic Organisation and Public Policy Discussion Papers 11, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
- Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 1997.
"Does the Labour Market Explain Lower Female Schooling in India?,"
STICERD - Development Economics Papers - From 2008 this series has been superseded by Economic Organisation and Public Policy Discussion Papers
01, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
- Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 1998. "Does the labour market explain lower female schooling in India?," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 39-65.
- Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 1997. "Does the labour market explain lower female schooling in India?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6715, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Jean Drèze & Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 2001. "School Participation in Rural India," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 1-24, 02.
- Deaton, A. & Paxson, C., 1997.
"Economies of Scale, Household Size, and the Demand for Food,"
178, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Development Studies.
- Angus Deaton & Christina Paxson, 1998. "Economies of Scale, Household Size, and the Demand for Food," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(5), pages 897-930, October.
- Geeta Gandhi Kingdon & Jeemol Unni, 2001. "Education and Women's Labour Market Outcomes in India," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 173-195.
- Datt, Gaurav & Ravallion, Martin, 1998.
"Why Have Some Indian States Done Better Than Others at Reducing Rural Poverty?,"
London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 65(257), pages 17-38, February.
- Datt, Gaurav & Ravallion, Martin, 1996. "Why have some Indian states done better than others at reducing rural poverty?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1594, The World Bank.
- T. Paul Schultz, 2001.
"Why Governments Should Invest More to Educate Girls,"
836, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
- Paul Schultz, T., 2002. "Why Governments Should Invest More to Educate Girls," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 207-225, February.
- Duraisamy, P., 2002. "Changes in returns to education in India, 1983-94: by gender, age-cohort and location," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 609-622, December.
- Browning, Martin, 1992. "Children and Household Economic Behavior," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 1434-1475, September.
- Elaina Rose, 1999. "Consumption Smoothing and Excess Female Mortality in Rural India," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(1), pages 41-49, February.
- Deaton, Angus S, 1989. "Looking for Boy-Girl Discrimination in Household Expenditure Data," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 3(1), pages 1-15, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:ecdecc:y:2005:v:53:i:2:p:409-51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.