IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/14647.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effects of sex preference and social pressure on fertility in changing Japanese families

Author

Listed:
  • Yamamura, Eiji

Abstract

This study explored how social pressure related to parental preference for the sex of their children affects fertility. Pre-war and post-war generations were compared using individual level data previously collected in Japan in 2002. In the pre-war generation, if the first child was a daughter, the total number of children tended to increase regardless of the mother’s sex preference. This tendency was not observed for the post-war generation. Results suggest that social pressure related to giving birth to a son led to high fertility in the pre-war generation; however, fertility was not influenced by social pressure in the post-war generation.

Suggested Citation

  • Yamamura, Eiji, 2009. "Effects of sex preference and social pressure on fertility in changing Japanese families," MPRA Paper 14647, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:14647
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14647/1/MPRA_paper_14647.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yoram Ben-Porath & Finis Welch, 1976. "Do Sex Preferences Really Matter?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(2), pages 285-307.
    2. Wataru Kureishi & Midori Wakabayashi, 2011. "Son preference in Japan," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 24(3), pages 873-893, July.
    3. Greif, Avner, 1994. "Cultural Beliefs and the Organization of Society: A Historical and Theoretical Reflection on Collectivist and Individualist Societies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(5), pages 912-950, October.
    4. Shelly Lundberg, 2005. "Sons, Daughters, and Parental Behaviour," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 21(3), pages 340-356, Autumn.
    5. 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.
    6. Pedro Mira & Namkee Ahn, 2002. "A note on the changing relationship between fertility and female employment rates in developed countries," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 15(4), pages 667-682.
    7. Chu Junhong, 2001. "Prenatal Sex Determination and Sex‐Selective Abortion in Rural Central China," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 259-281, June.
    8. Behrman, Jere R, 1988. "Intrahousehold Allocation of Nutrients in Rural India: Are Boys Favored? Do Parents Exhibit Inequality Aversion?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 32-54, March.
    9. Gordon B. Dahl & Enrico Moretti, 2008. "The Demand for Sons," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(4), pages 1085-1120.
    10. Daiji Kawaguchi & Junko Miyazaki, 2009. "Working mothers and sons’ preferences regarding female labor supply: direct evidence from stated preferences," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 22(1), pages 115-130, January.
    11. Maria Gutiérrez-Domènech, 2008. "The impact of the labour market on the timing of marriage and births in Spain," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 21(1), pages 83-110, January.
    12. Nancy Qian, 2008. "Missing Women and the Price of Tea in China: The Effect of Sex-Specific Earnings on Sex Imbalance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(3), pages 1251-1285.
    13. Yamamura Eiji, 2008. "The Market for Lawyers and Social Capital: Are Informal Rules a Substitute for Formal Ones?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 499-517, December.
    14. Yamamura, Eiji, 2008. "Impact of formal and informal deterrents on driving behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2505-2512, December.
    15. Siu Fai Leung, 1991. "A Stochastic Dynamic Analysis of Parental Sex Preferences and Fertility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1063-1088.
    16. Avraham Ebenstein, 2010. "The "Missing Girls" of China and the Unintended Consequences of the One Child Policy," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 45(1).
    17. Behrman, Jere R & Pollak, Robert A & Taubman, Paul, 1986. "Do Parents Favor Boys?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(1), pages 33-54, February.
    18. Yujiro Hayami, 1998. "Norms and Rationality in the Evolution of Economic Systems: A View from Asian Villages," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 36-53, March.
    19. Avner Greif, 2002. "Institutions and Impersonal Exchange: From Communal to Individual Responsibility," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(1), pages 168-204, March.
    20. Narayan Das, 1987. "Sex preference and fertility behavior: A study of recent Indian data," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 24(4), pages 517-530, November.
    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. Eiji Yamamura, 2016. "Smokers’ Preference for Divorce and Extramarital Sex," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 59(2), pages 44-76.
    2. Gahramanov Emin & Gaibulloev Khusrav & Younas Javed, 2019. "Parental Transfers, Intra-household Bargaining and Fertility Decision," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 19(1), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Tavassoli Nahid, 2021. "The Transition of Son Preference: Evidence from Southeast Asian Countries," Economics, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 43-67, June.
    4. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Sun, Ang & Zhao, Yaohui, 2016. "Divorce, abortion, and the child sex ratio: The impact of divorce reform in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 53-69.
    3. Astghik Mavisakalyan & Anna Minasyan, 2023. "The Role of Conflict in Sex Discrimination: The Case of Missing Girls," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 71(2), pages 443-484.
    4. Zurab Abramishvili & William Appleman & Sergii Maksymovych, 2019. "Parental Gender Preference in the Balkans and Scandinavia: Gender Bias or Differential Costs?," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp643, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    5. 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.
    6. Yamamura, Eiji, 2009. "What Discourages Participation in the Lay Judge System (Saiban’in Seido) of Japan? Interaction between the Secrecy Requirement and Social Networks," MPRA Paper 17197, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Soo Hong Chew & Junjian Yi & Junsen Zhang & Songfa Zhong, 2018. "Risk Aversion and Son Preference: Experimental Evidence from Chinese Twin Parents," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3896-3910, August.
    8. Sun, Ang & Zhao, Yaohui, 2014. "Divorce, Abortion and Children's Sex Ratio: The Impact of Divorce Reform in China," IZA Discussion Papers 8230, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Serhii Maksymovych & William Appleman & Zurab Abramishvili, 2023. "Parental gender preference in the Balkans and Scandinavia: gender bias or differential costs?," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 1-48, December.
    10. Krzysztof Karbownik & Michal Myck, 2017. "Who gets to look nice and who gets to play? Effects of child gender on household expenditures," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 925-944, September.
    11. Zhang, Junsen & Zhang, Jie & Li, Tianyou, 1999. "Gender bias and economic development in an endogenous growth model," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 497-525, August.
    12. Yamamura, Eiji, 2008. "The role of social capital in homogeneous society: Review of recent researches in Japan," MPRA Paper 11385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Michael Leung & Junsen Zhang, 2008. "Gender preference, biased sex ratio, and parental investments in single-child households," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 91-110, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Bao, Xiaojia & Galiani, Sebastian & Li, Kai & Long, Cheryl Xiaoning, 2023. "Where have all the children gone? An empirical study of child abandonment and abduction in China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 95-119.
    16. 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).
    17. Yamamura, Eiji, 2010. "The effect of learning varies according to locality: Micro data analysis of the lawyer market in Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 193-197, August.
    18. Huang, Zibin & Jiang, Xu & Sun, Ang, 2024. "Fertility and delayed migration: How son preference protects young girls against mother–child separation," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    19. Nandi, Arindam & Deolalikar, Anil B., 2013. "Does a legal ban on sex-selective abortions improve child sex ratios? Evidence from a policy change in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 216-228.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fertility; son preference; social pressure; family structure;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination

    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:pra:mprapa:14647. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.