No abstract

Parental bias toward children of a particular gender has been widely observed in many societies. Such bias could be due to pure gender preference or differences in earning opportunities and concern for old-age support. We conduct a high-stakes allocation task (subjects allocate the equivalent of one day's wages between male and female school-aged students) in rural Bangladesh to examine parental attitudes toward male and female children. Parents, either jointly or individually, allocated freely or restricted endowments for the benefit of anonymous girls or boys at a nearby school. We examine whether there is any systematic bias among fathers and mothers and, if so, whether such bias differs when they make the decision individually or jointly. The results suggest (1) bias both for and against boys or girls but no systematic bias by either parent; and (2) no significant differences in individual and joint decisions.

Studies have documented a gender bias in intrahousehold resource allocations in developing countries. Combining a field experiment allocation task and a household survey conducted in Bangladesh, we examine the association between parental gender bias and investment in children’s health and education. The task was designed to circumvent the problem in which children’s education attainment and health status or parents’ expenditure on their children would affect allocation decisions; the outcome did not directly affect the subjects themselves or their own children. The task measures systematic bias arising possibly from sociocultural and religious norms. Biased parents allocate resources in a discriminatory manner. Boy-biased parents are more likely to enrol boys and to spend more on boys’ education. They are less likely to seek formal treatment and to spend less when a girl is sick. Girl-biased parents do not seem to differentiate between sons and daughters with respect to education or health.

No abstract