IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/4755.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intrahousehold inequality and child gender bias in Ethiopia

Author

Listed:
  • Koohi-Kamali, Feridoon

Abstract

The Rothbarth model of intrahousehold resource allocation has consistently failed to detect child gender bias in many applications over the past two decades. This paper challenges the current consensus that the Rothbarth method is not effective in revealing child gender bias from consumption behavior of adults. It proposes an approach to the Rothbarth model that restricts its application to samples of nuclear households, and employs an index of child gender based on the number of children in the household and related to a specific selective mechanism of discrimination. It demonstrates the effectiveness of this approach with an application to a 2005-06 Ethiopian consumption survey of 21,299 households conducted by Ethiopia's Statistical Authority, covering both urban and rural areas. The paper presents the first clear and extensive evidence of discrimination against girls by all four adult goods employed, and the outcome persists, in various degrees, when reexamined with a lower definition of child age, and with female-headed households. The findings provide support for gender-based policies in child-health and education in Ethiopia.

Suggested Citation

  • Koohi-Kamali, Feridoon, 2008. "Intrahousehold inequality and child gender bias in Ethiopia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4755, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:4755
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2008/10/21/000158349_20081021080752/Rendered/PDF/WPS4755.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Gibson & Scott Rozelle, 2004. "Is it Better to be a Boy? A Disaggregated Outlay Equivalent Analysis of Gender Bias in Papua New Guinea," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 115-136.
    2. Browning, Martin & Francois Bourguignon & Pierre-Andre Chiappori & Valerie Lechene, 1994. "Income and Outcomes: A Structural Model of Intrahousehold Allocation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1067-1096, December.
    3. Kynch, Jocelyn & Sen, Amartya, 1983. "Indian Women: Well-Being and Survival," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(3-4), pages 363-380, September.
    4. Angus Deaton & Christina Paxson, 1998. "Economies of Scale, Household Size, and the Demand for Food," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(5), pages 897-930, October.
    5. Bereket Kebede, 2008. "Intra-Household Allocations In Rural Ethiopia: A Demand Systems Approach," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 54(1), pages 1-26, March.
    6. Lundberg, Shelly & Pollak, Robert A, 1993. "Separate Spheres Bargaining and the Marriage Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 988-1010, December.
    7. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1986. "On Measuring Child Costs: With Applications to Poor Countries," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 720-744, August.
    8. Sonia Bhalotra & Cliff Attfield, 1998. "Intrahousehold resource allocation in rural Pakistan: a semiparametric analysis," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 463-480.
    9. Case, Anne & Lin, I-Fen & McLanahan, Sara, 2000. "How Hungry Is the Selfish Gene?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(466), pages 781-804, October.
    10. Ping Zhang & Arthur van Soest & Xiaodong Gong, 2005. "The effects of the gender of children on expenditure patterns in rural China: a semiparametric analysis," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 509-527.
    11. Siu Fai Leung, 1991. "A Stochastic Dynamic Analysis of Parental Sex Preferences and Fertility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(4), pages 1063-1088.
    12. Martin Browning & Valérie Lechene, 2001. "Caring and Sharing: Tests Between Alternative Models of Intra-household Allocation," Discussion Papers 01-07, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    13. Ahmad, A. & Morduch, J., 1993. "Identifying Sex Bias in the Allocation of Household Resources: Evidence from Linked Household Surveys from Bangladesh," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1636, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    14. Hoddinott, John & Haddad, Lawrence, 1995. "Does Female Income Share Influence Household Expenditures? Evidence from Cote d'Ivoire," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 57(1), pages 77-96, February.
    15. Burgess, Robin & Zhuang, Juzhong, 2000. "Modernisation and son preference," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2115, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Gronau, Reuben, 1988. "Consumption Technology and the Intrafamily Distribution of Resources:," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(6), pages 1183-1205, December.
    17. Deaton, Angus S & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Thomas, Duncan, 1989. "The Influence of Household Composition on Household Expenditure Patterns: Theory and Spanish Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(1), pages 179-200, February.
    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. Hanlon, Charlotte & Whitley, Rob & Wondimagegn, Dawit & Alem, Atalay & Prince, Martin, 2009. "Postnatal mental distress in relation to the sociocultural practices of childbirth: An exploratory qualitative study from Ethiopia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1211-1219, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Gender and Law; Gender and Development; Educational Sciences; Youth and Governance; Population Policies;

    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:wbk:wbrwps:4755. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Roula I. Yazigi). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.