Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Is It Better to Be a Boy? A Disaggregated Outlay Equivalent Analysis of Gender Bias in Papua New Guinea

UC Davis Working Paper No. 00-023

30 Pages Posted: 15 Aug 2002  

John Gibson

University of Waikato; Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

Scott Rozelle

University of California, Davis - Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics

Date Written: December 2000

Abstract

Discrimination in the allocation of goods between boys and girls within households in Papua New Guinea is examined using Deaton's (1989) outlay-equivalent ratio method. Adding a boy to the
household reduces expenditure on adult goods by as much as would a nine-tenths reduction in total outlay per member, but girls have no effect on adult goods expenditure. The hypothesis of
Haddad and Reardon (1993) that gender bias is inversely related to the importance of female labour in agricultural production is not supported. There is no evidence of bias against girls in the
urban sector.

Keywords: Boy-girl discrimination, Gender bias, Outlay-equivalent analysis

JEL Classification: D12, J16

Suggested Citation

Gibson, John and Rozelle, Scott, Is It Better to Be a Boy? A Disaggregated Outlay Equivalent Analysis of Gender Bias in Papua New Guinea (December 2000). UC Davis Working Paper No. 00-023. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=320252 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.320252

John Gibson

University of Waikato ( email )

Te Raupapa
Private Bag 3105
Hamilton, 3240
New Zealand

Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

19 Milne Terrace
Island Bay
Wellington, 6002
New Zealand

Scott Rozelle (Contact Author)

University of California, Davis - Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics ( email )

One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
United States
530-752-9897 (Phone)

Paper statistics

Downloads
76
Rank
269,183
Abstract Views
924