IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/poprpr/v26y2007i1p1-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining son preference in rural India: the independent role of structural versus individual factors

Author

Listed:
  • Rohini Pande
  • Nan Astone

Abstract

Much research has been done on demographic manifestations of son preference, particularly girls’ excess mortality; however, there is less research that focuses on son preference itself. This paper analyzes the determinants of son preference in rural India. We separate the independent, relative effects of characteristics of individual women and their households, village opportunities for women and village development, and social norms. We look at both socioeconomic and sociocultural variables. Finally, we examine whether predictors of son preference differ by desired family size. Our data come from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) India, 1992–1993. We use an ordered logit model, with dummy variables for state of residence. Our analysis shows that women’s education, particularly at secondary and higher levels, is consistently and significantly associated with weaker son preference, regardless of desired family size. Once factors measuring social norms, such as marriage customs, caste and religion, are included, economic wealth and women’s employment at household or village levels are not significant. Media access remains significant, suggesting an influence of “modernizing” ideas. Among social factors, caste and religion are associated with son preference but, once state of residence is controlled for, marriage patterns and cultivation patterns are insignificant. The strength and significance for son preference of many determinants differs by desired family size. Our results suggest that policy makers seeking to influence son preference need to identify and target different policy levers to women in different fertility and social contexts, rather than try an approach of one size that fits all. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:poprpr:v:26:y:2007:i:1:p:1-29
    DOI: 10.1007/s11113-006-9017-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11113-006-9017-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11113-006-9017-2?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rachel Murphy, 2003. "Fertility and Distorted Sex Ratios in a Rural Chinese County: Culture, State, and Policy," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 595-626, December.
    2. Fred Arnold & Sunita Kishor & T. K. Roy, 2002. "Sex‐Selective Abortions in India," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 28(4), pages 759-785, December.
    3. Rohini Pande, 2003. "Selective gender differences in childhood nutrition and immunization in rural India: The role of siblings," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 40(3), pages 395-418, August.
    4. Deon Filmer & Lant Pritchett, 2001. "Estimating Wealth Effects Without Expenditure Data—Or Tears: An Application To Educational Enrollments In States Of India," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 38(1), pages 115-132, February.
    5. Lupin Rahman & Vijayendra Rao, 2004. "The Determinants of Gender Equity in India: Examining Dyson and Moore's Thesis with New Data," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 239-268, June.
    6. Vinod Mishra & T. K. Roy & Robert D. Retherford, 2004. "Sex Differentials in Childhood Feeding, Health Care, and Nutritional Status in India," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 269-295, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Filmer, Deon & Pritchett, Lant, 1998. "Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data - or tears : with an application to educational enrollments in states of India," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1994, The World Bank.
    9. Paula Griffiths & Zoë Matthews & Andrew Hinde, 2000. "Understanding the sex ratio in India: A simulation approach," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 37(4), pages 477-488, November.
    10. Peter Kennedy, 2003. "A Guide to Econometrics, 5th Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 026261183x, December.
    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. Robert Jensen & Emily Oster, 2009. "The Power of TV: Cable Television and Women's Status in India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(3), pages 1057-1094.
    2. Tin-chi Lin & Alícia Adserà, 2013. "Son Preference and Children’s Housework: The Case of India," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 32(4), pages 553-584, August.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Choi, Jin Young & Lee, Sang-Hyop, 2006. "Does prenatal care increase access to child immunization? Gender bias among children in India," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 107-117, July.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Anindita Chakrabarti & Kausik Chaudhuri, 2011. "Gender Equality in Fertility Choices in Tamil Nadu," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 6(2), pages 195-212, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Emily Oster, 2006. "Does a Rising Tide Lift All Boats Evenly?Health Investments and Gender Inequality in India," Working Papers id:435, eSocialSciences.
    11. Lopez-Feldman, Alejandro, 2005. "Panel Data Evidence on the Determinants of Non-Timber Forest Products Extraction: The Case of Xate in Mexico," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19410, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. 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.
    13. Pulver, Ariel & Ramraj, Chantel & Ray, Joel G. & O'Campo, Patricia & Urquia, Marcelo L., 2016. "A scoping review of female disadvantage in health care use among very young children of immigrant families," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 50-60.
    14. Tarun Jain, 2014. "Where There Is a Will: Fertility Behavior and Sex Bias in Large Families," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(2), pages 393-423.
    15. Kumar, Vineet & Singh, Kaushalendra Kumar & Kumar, Prakash & Singh, Pragya, 2021. "Does family composition drive future fertility desire and contraceptive use? An evidence based on National Family Health Survey (2015–2016), India," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    16. Patel, Priyanka & Kumar, Kaushalendra & Singh, Mayank & Kumar Yadav, Ajit, 2020. "Sex differentials in under five mortality in India in last two decades: Evidence from pooled NFHS data," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    17. Vinod Mishra & T. K. Roy & Robert D. Retherford, 2004. "Sex Differentials in Childhood Feeding, Health Care, and Nutritional Status in India," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 269-295, June.
    18. Diane Dancer & Anu Rammohan & Murray D. Smith, 2008. "Infant mortality and child nutrition in Bangladesh," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(9), pages 1015-1035, September.
    19. Tasnim Khan & Rana Ejaz Ali Khan & Muhammad Ali Raza, 2015. "Gender Analysis of Malnutrition: A Case Study of School-Going Children in Bahawalpur," Asian Development Policy Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 3(2), pages 29-48, June.
    20. G. Naline & Brinda Viswanathan, 2017. "Predictors of Age-Specific Childhood Mortality in India," Working Papers 2017-167, Madras School of Economics,Chennai,India.

    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:kap:poprpr:v:26:y:2007:i:1:p:1-29. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.