IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/econjl/v125y2015i587p1227-1261.html

Prenatal Sex Selection and Girls’ Well‐Being: Evidence from India

Author

Listed:
  • Luojia Hu
  • Analía Schlosser

Abstract

In this paper, we study the impact of prenatal sex selection on the well‐being of girls by analyzing changes in children’s nutritional status and mortality during the years since the diffusion of prenatal sex determination technologies in India. We further examine various channels through which prenatal sex selection might affect girls’ outcomes. Using repeated cross‐sections from a comprehensive dataset, we show that high sex ratios at birth reflect the practice of sex selective abortion. We then exploit the large regional and time variations in the incidence of prenatal sex selection to analyze whether changes in girls’ outcomes relative to boys within states and over time are associated with changes in sex ratios at birth. We find that an increase in the practice of prenatal sex selection appears to be associated with a reduction in the incidence of malnutrition among girls. The negative association appears to be stronger for girls born in rural households and at higher birth parities. An examination of the various mechanisms linking between prenatal sex selection and children outcomes shows that prenatal sex selection does not lead to a selection of girls into better endowed families. However, we find that girls are more likely to be born in families with weaker son preferences and we find a larger reduction in family size for girls relative to boys. We also find an increase in girls’ breastfeeding duration suggesting an improvement in parental care and treatment. On the other we do not find a decline in excess female child mortality or a reduction in son preference as reported by mothers in states with increasing incidence of prenatal sex selection.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:econjl:v:125:y:2015:i:587:p:1227-1261
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ecoj.2015.125.issue-587
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hwang, Jisoo & Lee, Chulhee & Lee, Esther, 2019. "Gender norms and housework time allocation among dual-earner couples," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 102-116.
    2. Lídia Farré, 2013. "The Role of Men in the Economic and Social Development of Women: Implications for Gender Equality," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 28(1), pages 22-51, February.
    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. Reshmaan Hussam, 2014. "Marry Rich, Poor Girl: Investigating the Effects of Sex Selection on Intrahousehold Outcomes in India," Harvard Business School Working Papers 18-029, Harvard Business School.
    5. Adriana D. Kugler & Santosh Kumar, 2017. "Preference for Boys, Family Size, and Educational Attainment in India," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 54(3), pages 835-859, June.
    6. Hazan, Moshe & Zoabi, Hosny, 2015. "Sons Or Daughters? Sex Preferences And The Reversal Of The Gender Educational Gap," Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(2), pages 179-201, June.
    7. Friedman-Sokuler, Naomi & Justman, Moshe, 2020. "Gender, culture and STEM: Counter-intuitive patterns in Arab society," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    8. Tafesse, W.;, 2018. "The effect of mandatory iodine fortification on cognitive test scores in rural India," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 18/10, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    9. Daniel Rosenblum, 2013. "The effect of fertility decisions on excess female mortality in India," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 147-180, January.
    10. Milazzo, Annamaria, 2018. "Why are adult women missing? Son preference and maternal survival in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 467-484.
    11. Hazan, Moshe & Zoabi, Hosny, 2009. "Sons or Daughters? Endogenous Sex Preferences and the Reversal of the Gender Educational Gap," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275728, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    12. Shen, Menghan & Li, Linyan, 2020. "Differences in Cesarean section rates by fetal sex among Chinese women in the United States: Does Chinese culture play a role?," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    13. Prashant Bharadwaj & Leah K. Lakdawala, 2013. "Discrimination Begins in the Womb: Evidence of Sex-Selective Prenatal Investments," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 48(1), pages 71-113.
    14. González, Libertad, 2018. "Sex selection and health at birth among Indian immigrants," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 64-75.
    15. Chew, Soo Hong & Yi, Junjian & Zhang, Junsen & Zhong, Songfa, 2017. "Risk Aversion and Son Preference: Experimental Evidence from Chinese Twin Parents," IZA Discussion Papers 10519, IZA Network @ LISER.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • 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
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development

    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:wly:econjl:v:125:y:2015:i:587:p:1227-1261. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.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.