IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/inu/caeprp/2007022.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Multinomial Model of Fertility Choice and Offspring Sex-Ratios in India

Author

Listed:
  • Rubiana Chamarbagwala

    (Indiana University Bloomington)

  • Martin Ranger

    (University of Bonn)

Abstract

Fertility decline in developing countries may have unexpected demographic consequences. Although lower fertility improves nutrition, health, and human capital investments for surviving children, little is known about the relationship between fertility outcomes and female-male offspring sex-ratios. Particularly in countries with a cultural preference for sons, like India and China, fertility decline may deteriorate the already imbalanced sex-ratios. We use the fertility histories of over 90,000 Indian women in the Second National Family and Health Survey to investigate the relationship between fertility choices and offspring sex-ratios in India. Both within- and between-family-size differences in offspring sex-ratios are examined. Our analysis reveals three main findings. First, within-family-size differences show that for our reference household (i.e. non-low-caste Hindus), parental education reduces anti-female bias in survival in large families (three or more children households) but plays no role in small families (one or two children households). While a higher standard of living worsens anti-female bias in survival in both large and small families, it does so to a greater extent in small families. Small families that own land also have lower offspring sex-ratios compared to landless households. Second, between-family-size differences indicate an `intensification' effect, whereby small families have dramatically lower offspring sex-ratios than large families. The intensification effect is greatest for Sikh and non-low-caste Hindu households, followed by low-caste Hindu and Christian households, but does not exist for Muslims. Third, while maternal education and urban residence weaken the intensification effect, paternal education, a higher standard of living, and land ownership strengthen it. Our results suggest that fertility decline, together with economic growth, may worsen India's already imbalanced sex-ratios. Thus, much needed fertility control policies must be supplemented with programs that counter offspring sex-selection in favor of sons. Policies that seek to eradicate son preference by making daughters more economically attractive to parents as well as those that imbibe more gender-equal attitudes within individuals are critically needed as economic growth generates higher levels of education and wealth in India.

Suggested Citation

  • Rubiana Chamarbagwala & Martin Ranger, 2007. "A Multinomial Model of Fertility Choice and Offspring Sex-Ratios in India," CAEPR Working Papers 2007-022, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
  • Handle: RePEc:inu:caeprp:2007022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://caepr.indiana.edu/RePEc/inu/caeprp/caepr2007-022.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paulo Guimaraes & Richard Lindrooth, 2005. "Dirichlet-Multinomial Regression," Econometrics 0509001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Oster, Emily, 2009. "Does increased access increase equality? Gender and child health investments in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 62-76, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Rubiana Chamarbagwala, 2011. "Sibling composition and selective gender-based survival bias," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 24(3), pages 935-955, July.

    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. Silvia Helena Barcellos & Leandro S. Carvalho & Adriana Lleras-Muney, 2014. "Child Gender and Parental Investments in India: Are Boys and Girls Treated Differently?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 157-189, January.
    2. Bratti, Massimiliano & Mendola, Mariapia, 2014. "Parental health and child schooling," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 94-108.
    3. Hai‐Anh Dang & Peter Lanjouw & Elise Vrijburg, 2021. "Poverty in India in the face of Covid‐19: Diagnosis and prospects," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(4), pages 1816-1837, November.
    4. Felipe Barrera-Osorio & Marianne Bertrand & Leigh L. Linden & Francisco Perez-Calle, 2008. "Conditional Cash Transfers in Education Design Features, Peer and Sibling Effects Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Colombia," NBER Working Papers 13890, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Harsh Malhotra, 2022. "Why Healthcare CCTs may not Improve Children's Health:Insights from India's Janani Suraksha Yojana," Working papers 321, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    6. Seema Jayachandran & Ilyana Kuziemko, 2011. "Why Do Mothers Breastfeed Girls Less than Boys? Evidence and Implications for Child Health in India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1485-1538.
    7. Brown,Caitlin Susan & Kandpal,Eeshani & Lee,Jean Nahrae & Williams,Anaise Marie, 2022. "Unequal Households or Communities ? Decomposing the Inequality in Nutritional Status in South Asia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10009, The World Bank.
    8. Lee, Jinkook & Smith, James P., 2014. "Regional disparities in adult height, educational attainment, and late-life cognition: Findings from the Longitudinal Aging Study in India (LASI)," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 26-34.
    9. Bhaskar, Venkataraman & Belot, Michèle & Van de Ven, Jeroen, 2007. "Insidious Discrimination? Disentangling the Beauty Premium on a Game Show," CEPR Discussion Papers 6276, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Brown, Caitlin & Calvi, Rossella & Penglase, Jacob, 2021. "Sharing the pie: An analysis of undernutrition and individual consumption in Bangladesh," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    11. Emla Fitzsimons & Bansi Malde, 2014. "Empirically probing the quantity–quality model," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 27(1), pages 33-68, January.
    12. Ashish Singh, 2011. "Inequality of Opportunity in Indian Children: The Case of Immunization and Nutrition," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 30(6), pages 861-883, December.
    13. Ashlesha Datar & Arkadipta Ghosh & Neeraj Sood, 2007. "Mortality Risks, Health Endowments, and Parental Investments in Infancy: Evidence from Rural India," NBER Working Papers 13649, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. 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).
    15. Orgill-Meyer, Jennifer & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K., 2020. "Improved sanitation increases long-term cognitive test scores," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    16. Bahadır Dursun & Resul Cesur & Inas R. Kelly, 2022. "Mandatory Schooling of Girls Improved Their Children's Health: Evidence from Turkey's 1997 Education Reform," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 824-858, June.
    17. 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.
    18. González, Libertad, 2018. "Sex selection and health at birth among Indian immigrants," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 64-75.
    19. Prashant Kumar Singh, 2013. "Trends in Child Immunization across Geographical Regions in India: Focus on Urban-Rural and Gender Differentials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-11, September.
    20. Jinkook Lee & Regina A. Shih & Kevin Carter Feeney & Kenneth M Langa, 2011. "Cognitive Health of Older Indians Individual and Geographic Determinants of Female Disadvantage," Working Papers 889, RAND Corporation.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Female Disadvantage; Mortality; Son Preference; Fertility; India;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J11 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Demographic Trends, Macroeconomic Effects, and Forecasts
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • 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:inu:caeprp:2007022. 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: Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caeprus.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.