Working Paper: NBER ID: w17781
Authors: Silvia H. Barcellos; Leandro Carvalho; Adriana Lleras-Muney
Abstract: Although previous research has not always found that boys and girls are treated differently in rural India, son-biased stopping rules imply that estimates of the effect of gender on parental investments are likely to be biased because girls systematically end up in larger families. We propose a novel identification strategy for overcoming this bias. We document that boys receive significantly more childcare time than girls. In addition boys are more likely to be breastfed longer, and to be given vaccinations and vitamin supplementation. We then present suggestive evidence that the differential treatment of boys is neither due to their greater needs nor to the effect of anticipated family size.
Keywords: child gender; parental investments; India; gender discrimination; childcare
JEL Codes: I15; J16
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| child gender (J13) | parental investments (J13) |
| boys (Y70) | childcare time (J13) |
| one child under six (J13) | childcare time for boys (J13) |
| boys (Y70) | breastfeeding duration (C41) |
| boys (Y70) | vaccinations (I19) |
| boys (Y70) | vitamin A supplementation (Q16) |
| anticipated family size (J13) | parental investments (J13) |
| family size (J12) | timing of parental investments (D15) |