Journal Press India^®

Author Details ( * ) denotes Corresponding author

Gender discrimination through a strong preference for male child is pervasive in Indian families which leads to biases in household allocation of resources and opportunities. This paper aims to examine the determinants of son preference in India through an empirical analysis. NFHS-4 state-level data is used to understand the causal factors of maternal son preference at different levels. Using multiple linear regression models, it is concluded that factors like belonging to a specific religion, female employment, and mother’s education are statistically significant and a rise in them is seen to lower maternal son preference. However, it is seen that higher the population falls in the lowest wealth quintile, higher they exhibit maternal son preference. The study gives policy implications for task-specific training along with female employment generation schemes and technical skill development along with education. The government should introduce developmental schemes to uplift people from the depths of poverty.

Keywords

Son preference; Gender inequality; Employment; Education; Wealth.

1. Afridi, F., Mukhopadhyay, A., & Sahoo, S. (2016). Female labor force participation and child education in India: Evidence from the national rural employment guarantee scheme. IZA Journal of Labor & Development, 5(1), 1-27.
2. Arnold, F., Choe, M. K., & Roy, T. K. (1998). Son preference, the family-building process and child mortality in India. Population Studies, 52(3), 301-315.
3. Arora, R. U. (2012). Gender inequality, economic development and globalization: A state level analysis of India. The Journal of Developing Areas, 46, 147-164.
4. Behrman, J., & Duvisac, S. (2017). The relationship between women’s paid employment and women’s stated son preference in India. Demographic Research, 36, 1601-1636.
5. Bhattacharya, P. C. (2006). Economic development, gender inequality, and demographic outcomes: Evidence from India. Population and Development Review, 32(2), 263-292.
6. Bose, S. (2012). A contextual analysis of gender disparity in education in India: The relative effects of son preference, women's status, and community. Sociological perspectives, 55(1), 67-91.
7. Clark, S. (2000). Son preference and sex composition of children: Evidence from India. Demography, 37(1), 95-108.
8. Dabla-Norris, M. E., Kochhar, M. K., Suphaphiphat, M. N., Ricka, M. F., & Tsounta, M. E. (2015). Causes and consequences of income inequality: A global perspective. (IMF Staff discussion note No. 15/13). Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund..
9. Das, R. J. (2001). The spatiality of social relations: An Indian case-study. Journal of Rural Studies, 17(3), 347–362.
10. Derné, S. (1994). Hindu men talk about controlling women: Cultural ideas as a tool of the powerful. Sociological Perspectives, 37(2), 203-227.
11. Dyson, T., & Moore, M. (1983). On kinship structure, female autonomy, and demographic behavior in India. Population and Development Review, 9(1), 35-60.
12. Gaudin, S. (2011). Son preference in Indian families: Absolute versus relative wealth effects. Demography, 48(1), 343-370.
13. International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) & ICF. (2017). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), 2015-16: India. Mumbai: IIPS.
14. Katiyar, S. P. (2016). Gender disparity in literacy in India. Social Change, 46(1), 46-69.
15. Larsen, M., & Kaur, R. (2013). Signs of change? Sex ratio imbalance and shifting social practices in Northern India. Economic and Political Weekly, 48(35), 45-52.
16. Lin, T. C., & Adserà, A. (2013). Son preference and children’s housework: The case of India. Population Research and Policy Review, 32(4), 553-584.
17. Ludden, D. (2012). Empire meets globalisation: Explaining historical patterns of inequity in South Asia. Economic and Political Weekly, 47(30), 213-221.
18. Mehrotra, S., & Sinha, S. (2019). Towards higher female work participation in India: what can be done?. (CSE Working Paper. 2019-02)
19. Pande, R. P., & Astone, N. M. (2007). Explaining son preference in rural India: The independent role of structural versus individual factors. Population Research and Policy Review, 26(1), 1-29.
20. Patel, T. (2004). Missing girls in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 39(9), 887-889.
21. Pathak, S., & Gupta, A. (2013). Status of women in India with particular reference to gap in male female literacy rate in India. International Journal of Environmental Engineering and Management, 4(6), 549-552.
22. Phillip, M. & Bagchi, K. S. (1995). The endangered half. Upalabdhi, trust for development initiatives, New Delhi.
23. Sahoo, S. (2017). Intra-household gender disparity in school choice: Evidence from private schooling in India. The Journal of Development Studies, 53(10), 1714-1730.
24. Schmidt, R. (2005). Poverty-reducing growth strategy in poor countries. Revista Latinoamericana de Desarrollo Económico, 5, 103-134.
25. Sekher, T. V., & Hatti, N. (2010). Disappearing daughters and intensification of gender bias: Evidence from two village studies in South India. Sociological Bulletin, 59(1), 111-133.
26. Sen, A. (2001). Gender equity and the population problem. International Journal of Health Services, 31(3), 469–474. doi: 10.2190/9EPF-CWCM-DHE5-KA68.
27. Sen, A. (2003). Missing women-revisited. British Medical Journal, 327, 1297-1298.
28. Singh, P. K., & Chudasama, H. (2020). Evaluating poverty alleviation strategies in a developing country. PloS one, 15(1), e0227176.