The Missing Link Between Parents’ Preferences and Daughters’ Survival: The Moderator Effect of Societal Discrimination

Abstract

The missing link between parents' preferences and daughters' survival: the moderator effect of societal discrimination. World Development, 78, pp. 372-385. (doi:10.1016Development, 78, pp. 372-385. (doi:10. /j.worlddev.2015 This is the author's final accepted version.There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/111477/

Difference in the Sexual and Reproductive Health of Only-Child Students and Students With Siblings, According to Sex and Region: Findings From the National College Student Survey

“…Besides, as a predominantly patriarchal society, and despite social revolutions over the recent decades, son preference still exists in China today. Therefore, male-biased parents with multiple children may allocate more resources to sons than daughters ( 33 ). However, in one-child families, females may be more similarly treated as to males because they are an only-child ( 26 , 34 ).…”

Aspirations and women's empowerment: Evidence from Kyrgyzstan

“…Many development interventions provide the poor with resources, but individuals with low aspirations may underutilize the opportunities these provide (Bernard et al, , 2015. Having low aspirations is thus associated with lower earnings (Azmat & Ferrer, 2017;Zax & Rees, 2002), less educational attainment (Avitabile & De Hoyos, 2018;Beaman et al, 2012;Sánchez & Singh, 2018;Wantchekon et al, 2014;Wydick et al, 2013), worse health outcomes (Echávarri & Husillos, 2016) and a lower likelihood of blaming government for inequality and poverty (Healy et al, 2017). We posit that raising women's aspirations may empower them to demand decisionmaking authority in the household and to marry husbands who support this demand.…”

Missing female births and girls in India

“…Table 5 provides the OLS estimates for a modified Equation (1). That is, the specification does not include mother fixed effects, α m , but controls for state and state-trend fixed effects, and for observable child-order invariant characteristics highlighted as determinants of excess female mortality in childhood in previous literature, such as mother's years of education (Oster, 2009), wealth measured by household facilities (Echavarri and Husillos, 2016;Nandi, 2015;Oster, 2009), having a brother as the eldest sibling (Bhalotra et al, 2018;Rosenblum, 2013), number of siblings (Echavarri and Husillos, 2016;Nandi, 2015;Pande, 2003), and whether the family belongs to a main religion (Bhalotra et al, 2010). Table 5 shows the estimated coefficient of the interaction term between female and SRB for the sample of all children born between 2001 and 2011 (row Full sample), the sub-sample of firstborns (row First child), the sub-sample of second children (row Second child) and the sub-sample of children born in the third or higher order (row Third or higher order).…”

“…Identifying societal effects on individual decisions is critical for the design of public policies to prevent more missing girls and female births. Echavarri and Husillos (2016) warn that parental willingness to care for girls does not necessarily translate into greater survival rates for girls in scenarios of wellrooted sex-based discrimination. Their paper does not control for omitted characteristics of families, but the results in this study point in the same direction after controlling for omitted variable bias.…”