IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/poprpr/v41y2022i4d10.1007_s11113-022-09710-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sex Selection for Daughters: Demographic Consequences of Female-Biased Sex Ratios

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Kolk

    (Stockholm University
    Stockholm University
    Institute for Futures Studies
    Åbo Akademi)

  • Karim Jebari

    (Institute for Futures Studies)

Abstract

Modern fertility techniques allow parents to carry out preimplantation sex selection. Sex selection for non-medical purposes is legal in many high-income countries, and social norms toward assisted reproductive technology are increasingly permissive and may plausibly become increasingly prevalent in the near future. We explore possible outcomes of widely observed daughter preferences in many high-income countries and explore the demographic consequences of the adoption of sex selection for daughters. While concerns over son preference have been widely discussed, sex selection that favors female children is a more likely outcome in high-income countries. If sex selection is adopted, it may bias the sex ratio in a given population. Male-biased populations are likely to experience slower population growth, which limits the long-term viability of corresponding cultural norms. Conversely, female-biased populations are likely to experience faster population growth. Cultural norms that promote female-biased sex ratios are as a consequence therefore also self-reinforcing. In this study, we explore the demographic consequences of a female-biased sex ratio for population growth and population age structure. We also discuss the technology and parental preferences that may give rise to such a scenario.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Kolk & Karim Jebari, 2022. "Sex Selection for Daughters: Demographic Consequences of Female-Biased Sex Ratios," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(4), pages 1619-1639, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:poprpr:v:41:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11113-022-09710-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s11113-022-09710-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11113-022-09710-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11113-022-09710-w?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. 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.
    2. Ronald Lee & Andrew Mason, 2011. "Lifecycles, support systems, and generational flows: patterns and change," Chapters, in: Ronald Lee & Andrew Mason (ed.), Population Aging and the Generational Economy, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Michael Murphy & Duolao Wang, 2001. "Family-Level Continuities in Childbearing in Low-Fertility Societies," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 17(1), pages 75-96, March.
    4. Gunnar Andersson & Karsten Hank & Marit Rønsen & Andres Vikat, 2006. "Gendering family composition: Sex preferences for children and childbearing behavior in the Nordic countries," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 43(2), pages 255-267, May.
    5. Martin Kolk, 2011. "Deliberate Birth Spacing in Nineteenth Century Northern Sweden [L’espacement volontaire des naissances au 19e siècle dans le Nord de la Suède]," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 27(3), pages 337-359, August.
    6. Leung, Siu Fai, 1994. "Will Sex Selection Reduce Fertility?," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 7(4), pages 379-392, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Martin Kolk & Gunnar Andersson, 2020. "Two Decades of Same-Sex Marriage in Sweden: A Demographic Account of Developments in Marriage, Childbearing, and Divorce," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(1), pages 147-169, February.
    9. Gunnar Andersson & Karsten Hank & Andres Vikat, 2007. "Understanding parental gender preferences in advanced societies: Lessons from Sweden and Finland," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 17(6), pages 135-156.
    10. Karsten Hank & Hans-Peter Kohler, 2000. "Gender Preferences for Children in Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 2(1).
    11. Francisco J. Marco-Gracia & Johan Fourie, 2019. "Missing boys: Explaining South Africa’s unbalanced sex ratio, 1894-2011," Working Papers 804, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    12. Vitor Miranda & Johan Dahlberg & Gunnar Andersson, 2018. "Parents’ Preferences for Sex of Children in Sweden: Attitudes and Outcomes," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 37(3), pages 443-459, June.
    13. Nadia Diamond-Smith & David Bishai, 2015. "Evidence of Self-correction of Child Sex Ratios in India: A District-Level Analysis of Child Sex Ratios From 1981 to 2011," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 52(2), pages 641-666, April.
    14. Andrew Mason & Neil Bennett, 1977. "Sex selection with biased technologies and its effect on the population sex ratio," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 14(3), pages 285-296, August.
    15. Ridhi Kashyap & Francisco Villavicencio, 2016. "The Dynamics of Son Preference, Technology Diffusion, and Fertility Decline Underlying Distorted Sex Ratios at Birth: A Simulation Approach," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 53(5), pages 1261-1281, October.
    16. Christophe Z. Guilmoto, 2009. "The Sex Ratio Transition in Asia," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 519-549, September.
    17. Fengqing Chao & Patrick Gerland & Alex R. Cook & Leontine Alkema, 2019. "Systematic assessment of the sex ratio at birth for all countries and estimation of national imbalances and regional reference levels," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(19), pages 9303-9311, May.
    18. Christophe Z. Guilmoto, 2012. "Son Preference, Sex Selection, and Kinship in Vietnam," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 38(1), pages 31-54, March.
    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. Nur Asbani & Hardev Sandhu & Oscar Liburd & Julien Beuzelin & Ronald Cherry & Gregg Nuessly, 2024. "Sex ratio dynamic of the field population of the sugarcane rust mite Abacarus sacchari (Acari: Eriophyidae)," Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 60(1), pages 89-96.

    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. 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.
    2. Myck, Michal & Oczkowska, Monika & Wowczko, Izabela, 2021. "Gender Preferences in Central and Eastern Europe as Reflected in Partnership and Fertility Outcomes," IZA Discussion Papers 14244, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    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. Valentine Becquet & Nicolás Sacco & Ignacio Pardo, 2022. "Disparities in Gender Preference and Fertility: Southeast Asia and Latin America in a Comparative Perspective," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(3), pages 1295-1323, June.
    5. Ewa Cukrowska-Torzewska & Magdalena Grabowska, 2023. "The sex preference for children in Europe: Children’s sex and the probability and timing of births," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 48(8), pages 203-232.
    6. Anna‐Maria Aksan, 2022. "Son preference and the demographic transition," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 32-56, February.
    7. 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.
    8. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    9. Nahid Tavassoli, 2021. "The Gender-Biased Fertility Behavior: Evidence from Southeast Asian Countries," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 2, pages 235-261, July.
    10. Aradhana Kumari & Srinivas Goli, 2022. "Skewed child sex ratios in India: a revisit to geographical patterns and socio-economic correlates," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 45-72, March.
    11. Ankita Mishra & Jaai Parasnis, 2022. "Intentions for a third child: The role of parental sex composition preferences," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(3), pages 472-487, August.
    12. Zhen Zhang & Qiang Li, 2020. "Population aging caused by a rise in the sex ratio at birth," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 43(32), pages 969-992.
    13. Sam Hyun Yoo & Sarah R. Hayford & Victor Agadjanian, 2017. "Old Habits Die Hard? Lingering Son Preference in an Era of Normalizing Sex Ratios at Birth in South Korea," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 36(1), pages 25-54, February.
    14. Yang, Wei & Spencer, Byron G, 2022. "Kinship and fertility: Brother and sibling effects on births in a patrilineal system," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 158-170.
    15. Fengqing Chao & Christophe Z Guilmoto & Samir K. C. & Hernando Ombao, 2020. "Probabilistic projection of the sex ratio at birth and missing female births by State and Union Territory in India," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Sarah Carol & Karsten Hank, 2020. "Natives’ and Immigrants’ Gender Preferences for Children in Germany," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 36(2), pages 235-246, April.
    17. Gunnar Andersson & Karsten Hank & Andres Vikat, 2006. "Understanding parental gender preferences in advanced societies: lessons from Sweden and Finland," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2006-019, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    18. Sara Tafuro, 2020. "An Economic Framework for Persisting Son Preference: Rethinking the Role of Intergenerational Support," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 39(6), pages 983-1007, December.
    19. Briole, Simon & Le Forner, Hélène & Lepinteur, Anthony, 2020. "Children’s socio-emotional skills: Is there a quantity–quality trade-off?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    20. Karsten Hank & Hans-Peter Kohler, 2002. "Gender preferences for children revisited: new evidence from Germany," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2002-017, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.

    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:41:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11113-022-09710-w. 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.