IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cgd/wpaper/426.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Population Policy: Abortion and Modern Contraception are Substitutes - Working Paper 426

Author

Listed:
  • Grant Miller and Christine Valente

Abstract

There is longstanding debate in population policy about the relationship between modern contraception and abortion. Although theory predicts that they should be substitutes, the existing body of empirical evidence is difficult to interpret. What is required is a large-scale intervention that alters the supply (or full price) of one or the other – and importantly, does so in isolation (reproductive health programs often bundle primary health care and family planning – and in some instances, abortion services). In this paper, we study Nepal’s 2004 legalization of abortion provision and subsequent expansion of abortion services, an unusual and rapidly-implemented policy meeting these requirements. Using four waves of rich individual-level data representative of fertile-age Nepalese women, we find robust evidence of substitution between modern contraception and abortion. This finding has important implications for public policy and foreign aid, suggesting that an effective strategy for reducing expensive and potentially unsafe abortions may be to expand the supply of modern contraceptives.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant Miller and Christine Valente, 2016. "Population Policy: Abortion and Modern Contraception are Substitutes - Working Paper 426," Working Papers 426, Center for Global Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cgdev.org/publication/population-policy-abortion-and-modern-contraception-are-substitutes
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nuevo-Chiquero, Ana & Pino, Francisco J., 2019. "To Pill or Not to Pill? Access to Emergency Contraception and Contraceptive Behaviour," IZA Discussion Papers 12076, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Amanda J. Felkey & Kristina M. Lybecker, 2018. "Do Restrictions Beget Responsibility? The Case of U.S. Abortion Legislation," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 63(1), pages 59-70, March.
    3. Catia Nicodemo & Sonia Oreffice & Climent Quintana-Domeque, 2022. "Correlates of repeat abortions and their spacing: Evidence from registry data in Spain," Papers 2208.05567, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    4. Sonia Bhalotra & Damian Clarke & Joseph Flavian Gomes & Atheendar Venkataramani, 2023. "Maternal Mortality and Women’s Political Power," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(5), pages 2172-2208.
    5. Bhalotra, Sonia R. & Clarke, Damian & Gomes, Joseph & Venkataramani, Atheendar, 2018. "Maternal Mortality and Women's Political Participation," IZA Discussion Papers 11590, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. David A Sánchez-Páez & José Antonio Ortega, 2019. "Reported patterns of pregnancy termination from Demographic and Health Surveys," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-25, August.
    7. David A. Sánchez-Páez & José Antonio Ortega, 2021. "Has contraceptive use at pregnancy an effect on the odds of spontaneous termination and induced abortion? Evidence from Demographic and Health Surveys," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(37), pages 879-898.
    8. Bhalotra, Sonia R. & Clarke, Damian & Mühlrad, Hanna & Fernandez Sierra, Manuel, 2021. "US Presidential Party Switches Are Mirrored in Global Maternal Mortality," IZA Discussion Papers 14915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Abortion; Contraception; Nepal.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • N35 - Economic History - - Labor and Consumers, Demography, Education, Health, Welfare, Income, Wealth, Religion, and Philanthropy - - - Asia including Middle East

    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:cgd:wpaper:426. 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: Publications Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgdevus.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.