Search

Son preference is widespread in a number of developing countries despite substantial improvements in education levels and economic development. One potential explanation for the persistence of this phenomenon is that individual household members like the mother derive large non-monetary benefits from giving birth to a son and therefore prefer boys to girls. Qualitative evidence suggests that such benefits exist and may depend on the child’s age. This paper uses large nationally representative datasets from India and tests whether having a son leads to higher decision-making powers for mothers than having a daughter. Since the number and gender composition of children is likely to be non-random for families that want a son, I focus on first-born children for whom the sex ratio of girls relative to boys is normal. The main analysis also focuses on young children of up to six months, which gives parents little time to adjust desired birth-spacing intervals that could be systematically correlated with decision-making powers and child gender. The results show little evidence of consistently large female benefits shortly after birth, and any positive impacts of having a son disappear after the first six months. There are also no large benefits for adult sons. These empirical patterns do not support qualitative evidence suggesting that women benefit from the birth of a son through larger decision-making powers in the household because of increased respect by other household members. The benefits also do not heavily depend on the child’s age, which is not consistent with a channel predicting a better bargaining position for women with adult sons who start taking over the running of the household. Overall, these results extend our understanding of individual-specific incentives for son preference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The impact of rainfall shocks on school enrollment has changed in the past 30 years. • By 2007, positive rainfall shocks lead to a decrease in school enrollment. • School enrollment rises after a negative rainfall shock. • These effects are more pronounced for girls and older children. Despite long-standing international agreements like the Millennium Development Goals, 264 million children in developing countries are not enrolled in school, and children in rural areas remain twice as likely to be out of school as children in urban areas. One potential explanation for this pattern is that children's education in rural areas is vulnerable to weather shocks, but there is no consensus about whether rainfall shocks help or harm school enrollment in the existing literature. This paper explores whether changes in the relationship between rainfall shocks and schooling outcomes over time can explain the different results in the literature by using household survey data from India across three decades. My study finds that adverse rainfall shocks have an increasingly stronger positive impact on school enrollment over time, whereas enrollment is increasingly falling after positive rainfall shocks. This effect is stronger for girls than for boys, more pronounced for older children, and is consistent with an increase in the importance of opportunity costs of a child's time in more recent years. Children may have to drop out of school when employment opportunities are more readily available after a positive rainfall shock, but are able to go to school when jobs are scarce. These results offer a potential explanation for the different results in the literature, where studies on countries with higher economic development tend to find results consistent with an opportunity cost story, whereas this is not the case for studies on countries with a lower level of development. The results suggest that policymakers need to pay close attention to the obstacles faced by girls and older children to make access to education universal, and should develop policy tools that incentivize households to send their children to school even when employment opportunities are readily available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]