兄弟的惩罚:中国农村地区的男孩偏好与女孩健康。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ECONOMICS Health economics Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1002/hec.4833
Yuli Ye, Qinying He, Qiang Li, Lian An
{"title":"兄弟的惩罚:中国农村地区的男孩偏好与女孩健康。","authors":"Yuli Ye,&nbsp;Qinying He,&nbsp;Qiang Li,&nbsp;Lian An","doi":"10.1002/hec.4833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper identifies the health penalty experienced by girls due to having a brother from endogenous sibling gender composition. We propose a girls-to-girls comparison strategy and rule out the confounding effect from the sibship size, birth interval, and birth order. Employing an instrumental variable approach and data from the Chinese Family Panel Studies, we find that girls with a brother are demonstrably shorter and report poorer health. This “brother's penalty” manifests even prenatally. Alternative explanations, such as birth order disadvantages, are carefully addressed and ruled out. The results hold even after excluding gender-neutral ethnic minorities. This observed penalty is likely attributed to unequal resource allocation within families and potential parental neglect. This penalty is amplified in families with lower income and maternal education, implying resource constraints contribute to gender discrimination. Our findings highlight the importance of addressing intrafamily gender bias for ensuring equal opportunities and health outcomes.</p><p><b>Clinical trial registration</b>: Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The brother's penalty: Boy preference and girls' health in rural China\",\"authors\":\"Yuli Ye,&nbsp;Qinying He,&nbsp;Qiang Li,&nbsp;Lian An\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hec.4833\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper identifies the health penalty experienced by girls due to having a brother from endogenous sibling gender composition. We propose a girls-to-girls comparison strategy and rule out the confounding effect from the sibship size, birth interval, and birth order. Employing an instrumental variable approach and data from the Chinese Family Panel Studies, we find that girls with a brother are demonstrably shorter and report poorer health. This “brother's penalty” manifests even prenatally. Alternative explanations, such as birth order disadvantages, are carefully addressed and ruled out. The results hold even after excluding gender-neutral ethnic minorities. This observed penalty is likely attributed to unequal resource allocation within families and potential parental neglect. This penalty is amplified in families with lower income and maternal education, implying resource constraints contribute to gender discrimination. Our findings highlight the importance of addressing intrafamily gender bias for ensuring equal opportunities and health outcomes.</p><p><b>Clinical trial registration</b>: Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4833\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4833","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文从内生的兄弟姐妹性别构成中找出了女孩因有一个哥哥而遭受的健康惩罚。我们提出了一种女孩对女孩的比较策略,并排除了兄弟姐妹人数、出生间隔和出生顺序的混杂效应。利用工具变量方法和中国家庭面板研究的数据,我们发现有兄弟的女孩明显更矮小,健康状况也更差。这种 "兄弟惩罚 "甚至在产前就已显现。我们仔细研究并排除了其他解释,如出生顺序的不利因素。即使排除了不分性别的少数民族,结果仍然成立。这种观察到的惩罚很可能是由于家庭内部资源分配不均和潜在的父母忽视造成的。在收入和母亲受教育程度较低的家庭中,这种惩罚更为严重,这意味着资源限制导致了性别歧视。我们的研究结果凸显了解决家庭内部性别偏见对确保平等机会和健康结果的重要性。临床试验注册:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The brother's penalty: Boy preference and girls' health in rural China

This paper identifies the health penalty experienced by girls due to having a brother from endogenous sibling gender composition. We propose a girls-to-girls comparison strategy and rule out the confounding effect from the sibship size, birth interval, and birth order. Employing an instrumental variable approach and data from the Chinese Family Panel Studies, we find that girls with a brother are demonstrably shorter and report poorer health. This “brother's penalty” manifests even prenatally. Alternative explanations, such as birth order disadvantages, are carefully addressed and ruled out. The results hold even after excluding gender-neutral ethnic minorities. This observed penalty is likely attributed to unequal resource allocation within families and potential parental neglect. This penalty is amplified in families with lower income and maternal education, implying resource constraints contribute to gender discrimination. Our findings highlight the importance of addressing intrafamily gender bias for ensuring equal opportunities and health outcomes.

Clinical trial registration: Not applicable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health economics
Health economics 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems. Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses. Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.
期刊最新文献
The impact of surprise billing laws on emergency services. A welfare analysis of Medicaid and recidivism. The effect of vertical identification card laws on teenage tobacco and alcohol use. How do dental practices respond to changes in scope of practice regulations? Non-classical measurement error in instrumental variables estimation: An application to the medical care costs of obesity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1