IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iik/wpaper/373.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Son Preference in India: Is it a Cultural Bequest?

Author

Listed:
  • Leena Mary Eapen

    (Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode)

Abstract

According to the literature, son preference is more prevalent in South Asian countries like India. The son preference has led to skewed sex ratio and thus “missing” women in India (GOI, 2018). But as per the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) data indicates that the share of the daughters only families has increased from 5.15% to 6.65% from NFHS-1 to NFHS -3. This daughters-only family is more predominant in the southern states of India. In this context, this paper examines whether education and having a paid job has reduced the son preference. Pretested, semi-structured questionnaire-based in-depth interviews were conducted among 300 married women aged between 22 to 55 years in the Indian state of Kerala. As against the general notion that dowry is the root cause for gender discrimination this study finds that the main reason is the perception that boys belong to the family and girls belong to some other family. Chronologically the other factors that contribute son meta-preference are (i) sons take care of parents (ii) bringing up boys is easier than girls (iii) dowry (iv) son maintain family name (v) don’t want to see daughter’s suffering and (vi) pressure from husband’s parents. The working women have less preference towards son in comparison with non-working women irrespective of the educational qualification. The main factor that supports the son preference for nonworking women is the lack of financial freedom, dowry issues, and suffering. This study thus emphasizes the need for financial earnings and a job outside the house and the abolishment of patrilocality as these factors are more important than the educational qualification.

Suggested Citation

  • Leena Mary Eapen, 2020. "Son Preference in India: Is it a Cultural Bequest?," Working papers 373, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    • Handle: RePEc:iik:wpaper:373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iimk.ac.in/websiteadmin/FacultyPublications/Working%20Papers/3191WP_01_Upload.pdf?t=13
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rao, Vijayendra, 1993. "The Rising Price of Husbands: A Hedonic Analysis of Dowry Increases in Rural India," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(4), pages 666-677, August.
    2. Maristella Botticini & Aloysius Siow, 2003. "Why Dowries?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1385-1398, September.
    3. Shireen J. Jejeebhoy & Zeba A. Sathar, 2001. "Women's Autonomy in India and Pakistan: The Influence of Religion and Region," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 27(4), pages 687-712, December.
    4. Rohini Pande & Nan Astone, 2007. "Explaining son preference in rural India: the independent role of structural versus individual factors," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 26(1), pages 1-29, February.
    5. Seema Jayachandran, 2017. "Fertility Decline and Missing Women," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 118-139, January.
    6. Seema Jayachandran, 2015. "The Roots of Gender Inequality in Developing Countries," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 63-88, August.
    7. Waldron, Ingrid, 1983. "Sex differences in human mortality: The role of genetic factors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 321-333, January.
    8. Siwan Anderson, 2003. "Why Dowry Payments Declined with Modernization in Europe but Are Rising in India," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(2), pages 269-310, April.
    9. Seema Jayachandran & Rohini Pande, 2017. "Why Are Indian Children So Short? The Role of Birth Order and Son Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(9), pages 2600-2629, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhalotra, Sonia & Chakravarty, Abhishek & Gulesci, Selim, 2020. "The price of gold: Dowry and death in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Ebert, Cara & Vollmer, Sebastian, 2022. "Girls unwanted – The role of parents’ child-specific sex preference for children’s early mental development," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    3. Asadullah, M. Niaz & Mansoor, Nazia & Randazzo, Teresa & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2021. "Is son preference disappearing from Bangladesh?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    4. Anukriti, S. & Kwon, Sungoh & Prakash, Nishith, 2022. "Saving for dowry: Evidence from rural India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Maristella Botticini & Aloysius Siow, 2003. "Why Dowries?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1385-1398, September.
    6. Astrid Sneyers & Anneleen Vandeplas, 2013. "Girl Power in Agricultural Production: How Much Does it Yield? A Case-Study on the Dairy Sector in India," LICOS Discussion Papers 34113, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    7. Matthew J. Baker & Joyce P. Jacobsen, 2007. "A Human Capital-Based Theory of Postmarital Residence Rules," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 208-241, April.
    8. Daiji Kawaguchi & Soohyung Lee, 2017. "Brides For Sale: Cross-Border Marriages And Female Immigration," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(2), pages 633-654, April.
    9. Momoe Makino, 2021. "Female labour force participation and dowries in Pakistan," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 569-593, April.
    10. Bhalotra, Sonia & Clots-Figueras, Irma & Iyer, Lakshmi, 2021. "Religion and abortion: The role of politician identity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    11. Shrestha, Vinish & Jung, Juergen, 2023. "Healthcare reform and gender specific infant mortality in rural Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    12. Seema Jayachandran, 2023. "Ten Facts about Son Preference in India," Working Papers 2023-12, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    13. Fenske, James & Gupta, Bishnupriya & Neumann, Cora, 2022. "Missing women in Colonial India," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 613, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    14. Calvi, Rossella & Keskar, Ajinkya, 2021. "'Til Dowry Do Us Part: Bargaining and Violence in Indian Families," CEPR Discussion Papers 15696, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Anja Sautmann, 2011. "Partner Search and Demographics: The Marriage Squeeze in India," Working Papers 2011-12, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    16. Baland, Jean-Marie & Cassan, Guilhem & Woitrin, Francois, 2020. "The Stopping Rule and Gender selective mortality: World Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 15128, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Heather Congdon Fors & Annika Lindskog, 2023. "Son preference and education Inequalities in India: the role of gender-biased fertility strategies and preferential treatment of boys," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 36(3), pages 1431-1460, July.
    18. 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.
    19. Lucia Corno & Nicole Hildebrandt & Alessandra Voena, 2020. "Age of Marriage, Weather Shocks, and the Direction of Marriage Payments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(3), pages 879-915, May.
    20. Raj Arunachalam & Trevon Logan, 2016. "On the heterogeneity of dowry motives," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 135-166, January.

    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:iik:wpaper:373. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sudheesh Kumar (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iikmmin.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.