IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/inq/inqwps/ecineq2007-78.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The impact of sex-selective abortion technology on the evolution of postnatal gender-bias conventions

Author

Listed:
  • Rebeca A. Echávarri

    (Universidad Pública de Navarra)

Abstract

A substantial body of research presents the absence of control on the family sex-composition as one of the main reasons for raising neglected young girls in context of rooted son preference. Therefore, one expects that egalitarian intra-family distributions of survival resources are more welcomed with the control of family sex-composition. In this paper, we model the (possible) relationship between the expansion in the use of the sex-selective abortion technology and the intra-family allocation of survival resources. The model allows us to find features of the environment that might prevent the expected trade-off between the acceptation of both behavioural traits: the control of the family sex-composition and the unequal allocation of survival resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebeca A. Echávarri, 2007. "The impact of sex-selective abortion technology on the evolution of postnatal gender-bias conventions," Working Papers 78, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    • Handle: RePEc:inq:inqwps:ecineq2007-78
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ecineq.org/milano/WP/ECINEQ2007-78.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Young, H Peyton, 1993. "The Evolution of Conventions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 57-84, January.
    2. S. Sudha & S. Irudaya Rajan, 1999. "Female Demographic Disadvantage in India 1981–1991: Sex Selective Abortions and Female Infanticide," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 30(3), pages 585-618, July.
    3. Kandori, Michihiro & Mailath, George J & Rob, Rafael, 1993. "Learning, Mutation, and Long Run Equilibria in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 29-56, January.
    4. Shelley Clark, 2000. "Son preference and sex composition of children: Evidence from india," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 37(1), pages 95-108, February.
    5. Bisin, Alberto & Verdier, Thierry, 2001. "The Economics of Cultural Transmission and the Dynamics of Preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 298-319, April.
    6. Stephan Klasen & Claudia Wink, 2003. ""Missing Women": Revisiting The Debate," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2-3), pages 263-299.
    7. Chu Junhong, 2001. "Prenatal Sex Determination and Sex‐Selective Abortion in Rural Central China," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 259-281, June.
    8. Srinivasan, Sharada, 2005. "Daughters or dowries? The changing nature of dowry practices in south India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 593-615, April.
    9. Ono, Hiroshi, 2004. "Are sons and daughters substitutable?: Allocation of family resources in contemporary Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 143-160, June.
    10. Tim Dyson, 2001. "The Preliminary Demography of the 2001 Census of India," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 341-356, June.
    11. Samuel Bowles, 1998. "Endogenous Preferences: The Cultural Consequences of Markets and Other Economic Institutions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 75-111, March.
    12. Rosenzweig, Mark R & Schultz, T Paul, 1982. "Market Opportunities, Genetic Endowments, and Intrafamily Resource Distribution: Child Survival in Rural India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(4), pages 803-815, 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. Nandi, Arindam & Deolalikar, Anil B., 2013. "Does a legal ban on sex-selective abortions improve child sex ratios? Evidence from a policy change in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 216-228.
    2. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Wu, Jiabin, 2018. "The interplay of cultural intolerance and action-assortativity for the emergence of cooperation and homophily," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1-18.
    3. Sun, Ang & Zhao, Yaohui, 2016. "Divorce, abortion, and the child sex ratio: The impact of divorce reform in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 53-69.
    4. Marianna Belloc & Samuel Bowles, 2009. "International Trade, Factor Mobility and the Persistence of Cultural-Institutional Diversity," Working Papers in Public Economics 126, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Economics and Law.
    5. Nancy Qian, 2008. "Missing Women and the Price of Tea in China: The Effect of Sex-Specific Earnings on Sex Imbalance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(3), pages 1251-1285.
    6. Levine, David K. & Modica, Salvatore, 2022. "Survival of the Weakest: Why the West Rules," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 394-421.
    7. Scott South & Katherine Trent & Sunita Bose, 2014. "Skewed Sex Ratios and Criminal Victimization in India," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 51(3), pages 1019-1040, June.
    8. Ok, Efe A. & Sethi, Rajiv & Kockesen, Levent, 1997. "Interdependent Preference Formation," Working Papers 97-18, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    9. Calabuig, Vicente & Olcina, Gonzalo, 2009. "Cooperation and cultural transmission in a coordination game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 188-201, October.
    10. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    11. Rebeca A. Echávarri, 2006. "Gender Bias in Sex Ratio at Birth: The Case of India," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 0605, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    12. Deb, Surajit, 2015. "Gender Roles in Family Decision Making: Results from Indian States," Conference papers 332635, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    13. Qian, Nancy & Lin, Ming-Jen & Liu, Jin-Tan, 2008. "More Women Missing, Fewer Girls Dying: The Impact of Abortion on Sex Ratios at Birth and Excess Female Mortality in Taiwan," CEPR Discussion Papers 6667, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Kets, Willemien & Sandroni, Alvaro, 2015. "Challenging Conformity: A Case for Diversity," MPRA Paper 68166, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Willemien Kets & Alvaro Sandroni, 2021. "A Theory of Strategic Uncertainty and Cultural Diversity," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(1), pages 287-333.
    16. MATTHEW McCARTNEY & AISHA GILL, 2007. "From South Asia to Diaspora: Missing Women and Migration," Working Papers 152, Department of Economics, SOAS University of London, UK.
    17. Sun, Ang & Zhao, Yaohui, 2014. "Divorce, Abortion and Children's Sex Ratio: The Impact of Divorce Reform in China," IZA Discussion Papers 8230, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Portner, Claus C, 2015. "Sex-selective abortions, fertility, and birth spacing," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7189, The World Bank.
    19. Edgar Carrera, 2012. "Imitation and evolutionary stability of poverty traps," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-20, April.
    20. Scott South & Katherine Trent & Sunita Bose, 2012. "India’s ‘Missing Women’ and Men’s Sexual Risk Behavior," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 31(6), pages 777-795, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Evolution of conventions; cultural transmission; conformism; gender inequality.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D1 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    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:inq:inqwps:ecineq2007-78. 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: Maria Ana Lugo (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecineea.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.