Gender Disparity: Its Manifestations, Causes and Implications

Determinants of Sex Ratio
As evident from Table 9(a), three alternative models are chosen for rural areas. The explanatory power of the IVs has come out to be very high for all the models (adjusted R² reaching about 50%). All the coefficients have proved to be highly significant and have the required signs except GGI which is not significant. We prefer to discuss Model III, because in other two models regional dummy and MPCE are taken jointly, whereas the former is identified on the basis of the latter. Note that male literacy and regional dummy have produced significantly negative coefficients. That is, richer regions have doubtless put strong negative pressure on infant sex ratio in rural areas of India. The same is true in urban areas too as revealed from Table 10(b), Model (IX) and (X). What is more shocking, this behaviour of negative role on sex ratio in richer societies is also strongly proved in the pooled data set (1991 and 2001): Model I, II and III in Table 11(a) for rural areas and Model II and III in Table 11(c) for urban areas. Therefore, the most fatal crime against women is done at the time of birth of a girl child in the so-called developed regions in India thereby undermining the natural law of sex selection. We have also tested that inclusion of purchasing power in place of regional dummy produces the same direction of causality; one result is presented in the pooled regression for urban areas. Therefore, atrocity against women is not a static phenomenon in the post-reform period alone, and the richer regions have powerfully acted against the female population both in rural and in urban areas of India. There is no change in our attitude towards girl child even in the family over last one decade.

What is the role of education on sex ratio? Interestingly enough, in rural, urban and pooled data set, women’s education plays a significantly positive role for increasing the sex ratio. In the same vein, work participation rate for women exerts a strong positive impact on sex ratio in both rural and urban areas in 2001. For the pooled set, we had to replace WPR by main workers (MW) female. In all the cases, female work participation plays a significantly positive role except Model III (Table 11c) in pooled urban set. The same direction is true for female agricultural labourers. Therefore, there is hardly any doubt that female education and work participation positively contribute towards sex ratio irrespective of spatial difference between rural and urban areas over last one decade.

Another important issue at discussion is related to the impact of cultural orientation of a society on the preference of a girl child. It is no less than a shock to note that unlike rural India, Sikh, Jain and Hindu societies inflict a significantly negative pressure on sex ratio in urban India. Unlike all the other major cultural groups in India, Buddhist culture, even though it is a minor community now, positively impact on sex ratio in a significant way. This is true in all the combinations from Model (I) to Model (X) in Table 10(a) for urban areas. In one case, Model (IX) in Table 10(a), Muslim orientation exerts strong positive impact on urban sex ratio.¹³ It is argued that men normally outperform women in tasks that require spatial ability, higher muscle power and faster movement (Alington, Leaf and Monaghan, 1992; Rasanen, 1991). In some regions in India which are predominantly agricultural, and in some other regions where rule of law does not have any relevance, demand for men is higher in the household, in the neighbourhood, in the crop field, in the community and in the society. As a result of this, more women are ‘missing’ from these regions. Given such cultural retrogression, unless policies for promoting gender equality is undertaken in a more ‘region specific’ and ‘target based’ way, it is not easy to fulfill the MDGs in India within the deadline.¹⁴

What is the impact of poverty on sex ratio? As discussed in the beginning, poverty in sharp contrast to purchasing power impact upon sex ratio in a significantly positive way in both rural and urban areas. Among the other noteworthy findings, gross gender inequality (GGI) and time dummy are also found to have some role on sex ratio but their impacts are of mixed natures. Finally, economic inequality (LRSR1) positively influences sex ratio in rural areas, though it does not have any impact in urban areas.