IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v31y2014i25.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the population implications of male preference when the sex probabilities at birth can be altered

Author

Listed:
  • Frank T. Denton

    (McMaster University)

  • Byron G. Spencer

    (McMaster University)

Abstract

Objective: The paper explores the population effects of male preference stopping rules and of alternative combinations of fertility rates and male-biased birth sex ratios. Methods: The ‘laboratory’ is a closed, stable population with five age groups and a dynamic process represented by a compact Leslie matrix. The new element is sex-selective abortion. We consider nine stopping rules, one with no male preference, two with male preference but no abortion, and six with male preference and the availability of abortion to achieve a desired number of male births. We calculate the probability distribution over the number of births and number of male births for each rule and work out the effects at the population level if the rule is adopted by all women bearing children. We then assess the impact of alternative combinations of fertility rates and male-biased sex ratios on the population. Results: In the absence of sex-selective abortion, stopping rules generally have no effect on the male/female birth proportions in the population, although they can alter the fertility rate, age distribution, and rate of growth. When sex-selective abortion is introduced the effect on male/female proportions may be considerable, and other effects may also be quite different. The contribution of this paper is the quantification of effects that might have been predictable in general but which require model-based calculations to see how large they can be. As the paper shows, they can in fact be very large: a population in which sex-selective abortion is widely practised can look quite different from what it would otherwise be.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank T. Denton & Byron G. Spencer, 2014. "Exploring the population implications of male preference when the sex probabilities at birth can be altered," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 31(25), pages 757-778.
  • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:31:y:2014:i:25
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2014.31.25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol31/25/31-25.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2014.31.25?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Bongaarts, 2013. "The Implementation of Preferences for Male Offspring," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 39(2), pages 185-208, June.
    2. Sylvie Dubuc & David Coleman, 2007. "An Increase in the Sex Ratio of Births to India‐born Mothers in England and Wales: Evidence for Sex‐Selective Abortion," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 33(2), pages 383-400, June.
    3. Yadava, R.C. & Kumar, Anup & Srivastava, U., 2013. "Sex ratio at birth: A model based approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 36-39.
    4. Kana Fuse, 2013. "Daughter preference in Japan: A reflection of gender role attitudes?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 28(36), pages 1021-1052.
    5. Kazuo Yamaguchi, 1989. "A formal theory for male-preferring stopping rules of childbearing: sex differences in birth order and in the number of siblings," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 26(3), pages 451-465, August.
    6. Douglas Almond & Lena Edlund & Kevin Milligan, 2013. "Son Preference and the Persistence of Culture: Evidence from South and East Asian Immigrants to Canada," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 39(1), pages 75-95, March.
    7. Quanbao Jiang & Shuzhuo Li & Marcus Feldman, 2011. "Demographic Consequences of Gender Discrimination in China: Simulation Analysis of Policy Options," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 30(4), pages 619-638, August.
    8. Jason Abrevaya, 2009. "Are There Missing Girls in the United States? Evidence from Birth Data," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-34, April.
    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. Xing Li & M. W. Luke Chan & Byron G. Spencer & Wei Yang, 2016. "Does the marriage market sex ratio affect parental sex selection? Evidence from the Chinese census," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(4), pages 1063-1082, October.
    2. Frank Trevor Denton & Byron Grant Spencer, 2017. "Immigration and the rate of population mixing: explorations with a stylized model," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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. Alexander Stimpfle & David Stadelmann, 2016. "Does Central Europe Import the Missing Women Phenomenon?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2016-04, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    2. Eleanor Jawon Choi & Jisoo Hwang, 2020. "Transition of Son Preference: Evidence From South Korea," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(2), pages 627-652, April.
    3. Sehar Ezdi & Ahmet Melik Baş, 2020. "Gender preferences and fertility: Investigating the case of Turkish immigrants in Germany," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 43(3), pages 59-96.
    4. Sivadasan, Jagadeesh & Xu, Wenjian, 2021. "Missing women in India: Gender-specific effects of early-life rainfall shocks," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    5. Luojia Hu & Analía Schlosser, 2015. "Prenatal Sex Selection and Girls’ Well‐Being: Evidence from India," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(587), pages 1227-1261, September.
    6. Francine D. Blau & Lawrence M. Kahn & Peter Brummund & Jason Cook & Miriam Larson-Koester, 2020. "Is there still son preference in the United States?," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 709-750, July.
    7. Seik Kim & Sam-Ho Lee, 2020. "Son Preference and Fertility Decisions: Evidence From Spatiotemporal Variation in Korea," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(3), pages 927-951, June.
    8. González, Libertad, 2018. "Sex selection and health at birth among Indian immigrants," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 64-75.
    9. Yigit Aydede & Marie-Claire Robitaille, 2022. "Speeding Up for a Son Among Immigrants in Canada," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(5), pages 2233-2265, October.
    10. Almond, Douglas & Cheng, Yi, 2021. "Perinatal health among 1 million Chinese-Americans," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    11. Neeraj Kaushal & Felix M. Muchomba, 2018. "Missing time with parents: son preference among Asians in the USA," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(2), pages 397-427, April.
    12. S. Anukriti, 2013. "The Fertility-Sex Ratio Tradeoff: Unintended Consequences of Financial Incentives," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 827, Boston College Department of Economics.
    13. Ana Ferrer & Alicia Adsera, 2016. "Speeding up for a son? Fertility transitions among Migrants to Canada," Working Papers 1602, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2016.
    14. Adserà, Alícia & Ferrer, Ana M., 2016. "Speeding up for a son? Fertility transitions among Asian migrants to Canada," CLEF Working Paper Series 1, Canadian Labour Economics Forum (CLEF), University of Waterloo.
    15. Eleonora Mussino & Vitor Miranda & Li Ma, 2019. "Transition to third birth among immigrant mothers in Sweden: Does having two daughters accelerate the process?," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 81-109, June.
    16. Duan Huiqiong & Hicks Daniel L., 2020. "New evidence on son preference among immigrant households in the United States," IZA Journal of Development and Migration, Sciendo & Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, January.
    17. Sonia Bhalotra & Abhishek Chakravarty & Dilip Mookherjee & Francisco J. Pino, 2019. "Property Rights and Gender Bias: Evidence from Land Reform in West Bengal," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 205-237, April.
    18. Michael Baker & Kevin Milligan, 2016. "Boy-Girl Differences in Parental Time Investments: Evidence from Three Countries," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(4), pages 399-441.
    19. Douglas Almond & Lena Edlund & Kevin Milligan, 2009. "O Sister, Where Art Thou? The Role of Son Preference and Sex Choice: Evidence from Immigrants to Canada," NBER Working Papers 15391, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Bhalotra, Sonia & Chakravarty, Abhishek & Gulesci, Selim, 2020. "The price of gold: Dowry and death in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sex ratio; male preference; stopping rules; selective abortion; population effects;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:dem:demres:v:31:y:2014:i:25. 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: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    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.