IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/12856.html

Traditional agricultural practices and the sex ratio today

Author

Listed:
  • Giuliano, Paola
  • Alesina, Alberto
  • Nunn, Nathan

Abstract

We study the historical origins of cross-country differences in the male-to-female sex ratio. Our analysis focuses on the use of the plough in traditional agriculture. In societies that did not use the plough, women tended to participate in agriculture as actively as men. By contrast, in societies that used the plough, men specialized in agricultural work, due to the physical strength needed to pull the plough or control the animal that pulls it. We hypothesize that this difference caused plough-using societies to value boys more than girls. Today, this belief is reflected in male-biased sex ratios, which arise due to sex-selective abortion or infanticide, or gender-differences in access to family resources, which results in higher mortality rates for girls. Testing this hypothesis, we show that descendants of societies that traditionally practiced plough agriculture today have higher average male-to-female sex ratios. We find that this effect systematically increases in magnitude and statistical significance as one looks at older cohorts. Estimates using instrumental variables confirm our findings from multivariate OLS analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Giuliano, Paola & Alesina, Alberto & Nunn, Nathan, 2018. "Traditional agricultural practices and the sex ratio today," CEPR Discussion Papers 12856, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:12856
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP12856
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    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. Bhaskar, V. & Li, Wenchao & Yi, Junjian, 2025. "Strategic parental investments in a competitive marriage market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Mbassi, Christophe Martial & Messono, Omang Ombolo, 2023. "Historical technology and current economic development: Reassessing the nature of the relationship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    3. Bao, Xiaojia & Galiani, Sebastian & Li, Kai & Long, Cheryl Xiaoning, 2023. "Where have all the children gone? An empirical study of child abandonment and abduction in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 95-119.
    4. Fenske, James & Gupta, Bishnupriya & Neumann, Cora, 2022. "Missing Women In Colonial India," CEPR Discussion Papers 17189, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. repec:osf:socarx:dk4bc_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Araujo, Rafael & Borges, Bruna & Costa, Francisco & Santos, Kelly, 2025. "Seeds of disparity: The gender land divide from Brazil’s agricultural transition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    7. Goli, Srinivas & Mavisakalyan, Astghik & Rammohan, Anu & Vu, Loan, 2022. "Conflicts and son preference: Micro-level evidence from 58 countries," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    8. Jung, Yeonha, 2020. "The long reach of cotton in the US South: Tenant farming, mechanization, and low-skill manufacturing," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    9. Aditi Dimri & Véronique Gille & Philipp Ketz, 2024. "Measuring sex-selective abortion: How many women abort?," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-04671748, HAL.
    10. Fredriksson, Per G. & Gupta, Satyendra Kumar, 2020. "Irrigation and Culture: Gender Roles and Women’s Rights," GLO Discussion Paper Series 681, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    11. repec:osf:socarx:trjfz_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Fredriksson, Per G. & Gupta, Satyendra Kumar, 2018. "The neolithic revolution and contemporary sex ratios," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 19-22.
    13. An, Jiafu, 2020. "Is there an employee-based gender gap in informal financial markets? International evidence," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    14. Dimri, Aditi & Gille, Véronique & Ketz, Philipp, 2024. "Measuring sex-selective abortion: How many women abort?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    15. Chandan Kumar Jha & Sudipta Sarangi & Ishita Tripathi, 2023. "Do historical agro-ecological factors shape current attitudes towards women’s rights and abilities?," Indian Economic Review, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 87-104, July.
    16. Aditi Dimri & Véronique Gille & Philipp Ketz, 2024. "Measuring sex-selective abortion: How many women abort?," Post-Print hal-04671748, HAL.
    17. Omang Ombolo Messono & Fred EKA & Fabrice Assoumou Zambo, 2025. "Elite quality and the pathway to prosperity: a cross-country mediation analysis," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 5(6), pages 1-43, June.
    18. Jung, Yeonha, 2018. "The Legacy of King Cotton: Agricultural Patterns and the Quality of Structural Change," SocArXiv trjfz, Center for Open Science.
    19. A. Suresh & P. Krishnan & Girish K. Jha & A. Amarender Reddy, 2022. "Agricultural Sustainability and Its Trends in India: A Macro-Level Index-Based Empirical Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, February.
    20. Aparajita Dasgupta & Anisha Sharma, 2021. "Can Legal Bans on Sex Detection Technology Reduce Gender Discrimination?," Working Papers 58, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    21. Fredriksson, Per G. & Gupta, Satyendra Kumar, 2023. "Irrigation and gender roles," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • N00 - Economic History - - General - - - General
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    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:cpr:ceprdp:12856. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.