Conditional Cash Transfer and Educational Gender Gaps: Insights from Bangladeshi households

Transcription

1 Conditional Cash Transfr and Gndr Gaps: Insights from Bangladshi housholds Mohammad Niaz Asadullah 12 Nazmul Chaudhury 3 First vrsion: April 2006 This vrsion: August : Dpartmnt of Economics, Univrsity of Rading, UK 2: ESRC Cntr on SKOPE, Oxford Univrsity, UK 3: Th World Bank Abstract This papr documnts a rvrs gndr gap in scondary schooling outcoms in Bangladsh drawing upon nationally rprsntativ houshold survy data. In trms of nrolmnt status and yars of schooling compltd, boys ar found to lag bhind girls in th rural as wll as in th urban ara. Ths findings ar robust to xtnsiv control for dmand and supply-sid dtrminants of schooling and common family unobsrvabls. W tst to what xtnt th rvrsal of gndr gap in scondary school outcoms in urban ara is drivn by a conditional cash transfr program fmal scondary school stipnd program. Whilst boys rsiding in th program ara hav mor ducation compard to thos in th non-program ara, thy far poorly whn compard to girls. Boys ar also mor likly to b in mploymnt in th program ara. Consquntly urban gndr gap is widst in th intrvntion ara. W considr a numbr of hypothss to rconcil ths findings. JEL classification: I21; J16; O12 Ky words: cash transfr; gndr quity; fmal schooling Manuscript word count: 8760 This study dos not ncssarily rprsnt th viws of Th World Bank or Govrnmnts thy rprsnt. An arlir vrsion of th papr was prsntd at th World Bank. Contact author: Mohammad Niaz Asadullah (mohammad.asadullah@ conomics.ox.ac.uk) 1

2 Conditional Cash Transfr and Gndr Gaps: Insights from Bangladshi housholds I Introduction Acknowldging th socio-conomic importanc of fmal ducation, th UN Millnnium Dvlopmnt Goals (MDGs) projct has st a targt of liminating gndr disparitis in primary and scondary ducation at all lvls by For a varity of micro- and macroconomic rasons, promoting gndr quality and mpowring womn mattrs for conomic dvlopmnt. Incras in fmal ducation rducs spousal gaps in schooling and ag thrby improving th balanc of powr within th family. This in turn lowrs frtility and improvs wlfar of both boys and girls masurd in trms of rducd mortality, stunting, wasting and gratr school participation and attainmnt. Education of girls has substantial macroconomic rturns too. Low lvls of fmal nrollmnt in school and gndr imbalanc in school nrollmnt ar harmful to conomic growth (Knowls t al, 2002; Klasn, 2002). Yt, in most dvloping countris, girls lag markdly bhind boys in ducation. Govrnmnts in ths countris should favor girls whn invsting in ducation bcaus social rturns, in trms of child halth and frtility, ar highr from girls than from boys ducation (Schultz, 2002). Rcognizing this, th govrnmnt of Bangladsh has introducd a numbr of rform programs ovr th last two dcads to rmov various supply- and dmand-sid constraints to fmal ducation. Stratgis to improv girls ducational participation hav includd two broad policy intrvntions: (a) social transfrs and (b) ducational invstmnts on th supply sid -- building mor schools, providing girl-frindly facilitis, rcruiting mor womn tachrs tc. Growth in fmal nrolmnt in Bangladsh has bn phnomnal sinc th introduction of th fmal scondary stipnd (FSS) program in Analysis of school-lvl data shows that boys nrolmnt has suffrd in coducational schools, howvr (Khandkr t al., 2003) which ar attndd by th vast majority of Bangladshi childrn i. Similar conclusions wr rachd by Arnds-Kunning and Amin (2004a) who xamind th impact of th scondary-school fmal stipnd schm. Using longitudinal data on housholds, thy documnt a gndr-diffrntiatd incras in school participation rats btwn 1992 and Thir findings suggst that adolscnt boys wr lss likly to rmain in school and mor likly to do wag work following th introduction of th stipnd schm. Th authors conjctur that parnts may hav dcidd to snd adolscnt girls to school and adolscnt boys to work in rspons to th incntivs. Ths two pics of vidnc rlativ fall in nrolmnt of boys in co-ducational schools and within houshold sx inquality suggst that th program aidd th procss of closing gndr gap not solly by raising fmal nrolmnt but also in an unintndd way: cutting back participation of boys in scondary school. Findings from ths two studis ar difficult to gnraliz, howvr. Data usd in th scond study com from just two villags limiting its us for policy. Turning to school data-basd vidnc, undr-nrolmnt of boys in co-ducational schools could aris purly du to unanticipatd changs in school policis inducd by th fmal incntiv 2

3 program. Clarly, non of th xisting studis provid a systmatically account of th ffct of th FSS program on boys ducation. Nithr is th natur and xtnt of gndr parity in scondary schooling wll-documntd using nationally rprsntativ houshold survy data. Knowldg about any spill-ovr ffcts of th program on boys is important for similar intrvntions ar ithr in plac or undr considration in a numbr of dvloping countris ii. Mor importantly, ngativ impact on boys schooling, if tru, is likly to undrmin prsnt fforts of th govrnmnt to mt th MDG targt of achiving gndr parity by This papr sts out to systmatically documnt gndr imbalanc in primary and scondary school ag population using rcnt national houshold survy data. W assss whthr a gap favoring girls xists at th houshold lvl and if so, how it varis by program xposur. Whilst th program covrd all of rural Bangladsh, only a part of th urban ara has bnfitd from it -- housholds in mtropolitan aras hav rmaind unxposd. Thrfor, comparison of outcoms by gndr across mtropolitan and nonmtropolitan aras yilds crud stimat of th program s impact on gndr gap in schooling and child labor outcoms for th urban population. As a by-product, this study provids a comprhnsiv dscription of th dtrminants of housholds ducational choics by gndr with a focus on sibling composition and school quality and availability in Bangladsh. W invstigat this for a numbr of outcoms (such as child labour, currnt nrolmnt status, and grad ) and input (individual lvl ducational xpnditur). By focusing on th lattr, w also contribut to th xisting litratur on sx-bias in intra-houshold allocations in Bangladsh. W xplain background of th study in th nxt sction. In sction 3, w dscrib data and mthodology. In sction 4, w prsnt rgrssion rsults on th dtrminants of ducational outcoms, child labour and ducational xpnditur by gndr. In sction 5 w conclud by discussing th implications of our findings. II Background: Fmal stipnd program and girl s schooling in Bangladsh Significant gndr imbalancs prvaild in ducational outcoms in Bangladsh in th arly 1980s. Substantial progrss has bn mad in rcnt yars, howvr. Btwn 1990 and 2000, Bangladsh has sn stp ris in girls gross primary nrollmnt ratio from 64 to 98 prcnt rspctivly. Whil only 65 prcnt of childrn who nroll in primary school mak it to fifth grad, th proportion has improvd significantly sinc 1990 whn it was only 47 prcnt (UNESCO, 2006). Similar progrss has bn mad at th scondary lvl. Two incntiv programs hav bn cntral in th ducational xpansion, namly th fmal scondary school stipnd (FSS) schm and th Food for Education (FFE) program iii. Privat rturns to ducation njoyd by fmals in Bangladsh ar substantially highr than thos for mals iv. Dspit this, housholds may undr-invst in girls for a numbr of rasons. For instanc, if thr s sx-discrimination in th labour markt, housholds would rationally undr-invst in girl s schooling. Intra-houshold diffrncs may also mrg dspit qual tratmnt of childrn if thr s sx-prfrnc in frtility so that 3

4 girls ar ovr-rprsntd in largr familis. In such stting, conditional cash transfr (CCT) can crat incntivs for housholds to adjust thir invstmnt bhavior toward matching th social optimum optimum (Janvry and Sadoult, 2004). Th girl-spcific stipnd intrvntion can rduc th cost/bnfit ratio at th lvl of th houshold mor for girls than boys thrby boosting ducation of th formr v. Th FSS schm is ssntially a CCT intrvntion launchd by th Bangladsh Govrnmnt in 1994 with th assistanc from th World Bank and othr donor agncis. Graduats of primary schools who nroll in grad 6 in a junior/high school ar automatically ligibl for th stipnd. Th program spans all rural and non-mtropolitan scondary schools (scular or rligious) that ar rcognizd by th govrnmnt. All ligibl fmal studnts ar awardd stipnds undr th following conditions: (i) Th girl studnts must attnd at last 85% of th classs in an acadmic yar; (ii) Thy must obtain, on an avrag 45% marks at th half yarly/annual xamination; (iii) Thy must rmain unmarrid until passing th SSC xamination. Studnts fulfilling all thr critria rciv stipnds up to grad 10. Stipnds covr full tuition and othr rlatd costs (.g. xamination, school fs, txtbooks, school supplis, uniforms tc.), total stipnd amount rcivd bing progrssiv across grads. Th tuition part of th stipnd is paid dirctly to th school and th rst of th stipnd is dirctly dpositd in two installmnts annually to th saving account of th studnt in a commrcial bank. Th FSS schm, apart from bing a form of social transfr targtd at girls, includs a numbr of important supply-sid innovations. Othr non-incntiv aspcts of th program ar: (i) improvmnt in school quality; (ii) dlibrat fforts to incras th numbr of fmal tachrs vi ; (iii) pluralistic ducational provision -- significant growth in scular and rligious co-ducational schools (Asadullah and Chaudhury, 2006). Thrfor, th nt impact of th program on sx-parity dpnds on th lasticity of girls and boys schooling with rspct to stipnd and provision of ducational facilitis. On th dmand sid, xtant vidnc in support of gndr discrimination in intrahoushold allocations in Bangladsh is wak or non-xistnt (Ahmad and Murdoch, 2002). And obsrvd intra-houshold disadvantags suffrd by girls in schooling outcoms ar attributd to non-discriminatory bhavior of th parnts.g. pr-natal son prfrnc which lads to mor siblings for girls (Jnsn, 2002). In this contxt, sxspcific distortions of school pric rstors gndr parity in ducational outcoms within th houshold in favor of girls by offstting th disadvantag of largr family or sib-ship siz. Nt ffct of th stipnd schm on gndr parity is furthr subjct to rlativ lasticity of girl s schooling to supply-sid rforms. Glww and Krmr (2005) argu that th lasticity of dmand for schooling may b highr for girls than for boys, so that vn programs that do not xclusivly targt girls may rsult in gratr incrass in school participation for girls than for boys. Thr is ampl mpirical vidnc using South Asian data in support of gratr lasticity of girl s schooling to changs in ducational supplis. Compard to boys, schooling outcoms of girls ar found to b mor rsponsiv to local school availability (Aldrman t al, 1996; Sathar and Lloyd, 1994; Lloyd t al. 2002), 4

5 rduction in distanc to school (Duraisamy (1992), provision of a mid-day mal in school (Drz and Kingdon, 2001), th prsnc of a bus stop in th villag (Bhat, 2002), school having lctricity (Arnds-Kunning and Ahmd, 2004b), th availability of NGO-run schools in villags (Sukontamarn, 2005) and provision of additional (fmal) tachrs (Banrj t al., 2000). Thrfor, gndr parity in th program ara is likly to b drivn by supply-sid rforms as wll. Nonthlss, vn whn supply-sid changs ar ntirly spcific to girl studnts, significant positiv supply-sid xtrnalitis may aris for boys. For instanc, in ordr to nsur th physical safty of thir daughtrs whil thy attnd schools, parnts may snd daughtrs to schools only whn thy ar accompanid by sons. In this cas, gndr gap will narrow if boy-spcific xtrnalitis ar non-xistnt or wak vii. Summing up, distortion of sx-spcific school pric in th FSS ara is likly to induc changs in intra-houshold allocations. Whilst this unambiguously raiss fmal schooling, for a numbr of rasons xact impact of this on gndr-quality within houshold rmains ambiguous. Factors such as sx-prfrnc in frtility, boy-spcific xtrnalitis and rlativ lasticity of fmal schooling with rspct to supply-sid changs intract in a complx way and oftn hav offstting ffcts. Which of ths ffcts dominat in th dciding th gndr gap rmains a mattr for mpirical invstigation. 3. Data and Mthodology W us data from th Houshold Incom and Survy (HIES) 2000 survy conductd by th Bangladsh Burau of Statistics. Th survy is dsignd aftr th World Bank s Living Standard Masurmnt Survys. Sampling is basd on a two-stagd mthodology whr in th first stag, primary sampling units (PSU) ar slctd from all divisions. Housholds wr randomly slctd from ach PSU in th scond stag. Th HIES 2000 sampld 7,440 housholds. Our working sampl compriss of 3088 urban and 6959 rural childrn all of whom ar childrn of houshold-hads. W primarily focus on th urban sampl to valuat th impact of th FSS program by gndr. Schools in mtropolitan part of th urban ara hav rmaind unxposd to th FSS program so that it is possibl to gt som crud masur of th program impact by looking across outcoms in th non-mtro and mtropolitan ara. Housholds locatd in th mtro aras constitut our control (non-program) group whilst thos in non-mtro ara constitut tratmnt (program) group viii. Simpl rducd form rgrssions ar stimatd for a sampl of childrn agd 6-17 yars using four diffrnt dpndnt variabls--grad, currnt nrolmnt in school, participation in child labor and houshold xpnditur on individual childrn. Th rational for using svral modls is to documnt gndr disparity in trms of outcoms as wll as intra-houshold allocation procss. Amongst outcoms, focusing on school participation and attainmnt is not sufficint. Housholds may rspond to incntiv schms simply by rducing childrn s lisur tim; school nrolmnt can incras without larg-scal rduction in child labor (Ravallion and Wodon, 1999). If so, sons may 5

6 simultanously work and attnd school in th stipnd ara to compnsat for th fact that daughtrs ar nrolld in scondary school. In this stting, on may obsrv a widning (and rvrsal) of gndr gap in child work as wll as school participation. Lastly, masurs such as grad and nrolmnt status may not adquatly captur disparitis in intra-houshold allocation of rsourcs for ducation. Sons may continu to attnd bttr quality schools than daughtrs and rciv a highr shar of th houshold budgt. W us rgrssion modls to xplicat variation in ach of th dpndnt variabls in trms FSS program xposur and gndr of th child, additionally accounting for diffrncs in family backgrounds (parntal ducation and ag; sx of th houshold had; houshold s pr capita xpnditur and landholding), sibling profil (numbr of brothrs and numbr of sistrs) and individual charactristics (rligion; birth ordr; ag and ag-squard) of th child. To tst th program ffct, w includ a dummy for non-mtropolitan ara (tratmnt indicator) as a RHS variabl in th rgrssion modl. To tst whthr th program ffct diffrs by gndr, w intract th tratmnt dummy with th child s sx. Givn th xistnc of girl-spcific incntivs in th tratmnt (i.. non-mtropolitan) ara, sistrs of scondary ag ar mor likly to b in school compard to thir prs in control (mtropolitan) ara. To indirctly tst for any spill-ovr ffcts arising from sistrs ducation, w intract th tratmnt dummy with numbr of sistrs in th houshold. To tst th hypothsis that girls schooling rsponds mor to supply-sid changs, w additionally control for school availability and quality using th rural sampl for which w complt information on school facilitis and quality in th villag. Lastly, w rport all rgrssions splitting th sampl by ag. This xrcis allows us to study th ffct of th program sparatly on primary and scondary schooling outcoms. Th approach takn in this papr is purly dscriptiv. Th rgrssions do not guarant causal stimats for a numbr of wll-known rasons rlatd to issus of sampl slction and cnsoring of th dpndant variabl. Furthrmor, as cautiond in Murdoch (2000), stablishing th dirction of causality rgarding th sibling variabls is not straightforward. Thr is vidnc of sx-bias in mortality and frtility of childrn in th South Asian contxt so that th assumption of xognity of houshold composition is unlikly to hold. Whilst w do not hav data to addrss ths issus, w provid siblingsfixd ffcts stimats of gndr gap for various sub-sampls that ar not subjct to problms of slction and ndognity bias. This approach, w argu, yilds by far th bst account of gndr gap in schooling outcoms and how thy diffr across tratmnt and control ara in Bangladsh. [Tabl 1 about hr] [Tabl 2 about hr] 6

7 Dscriptiv stats ar rportd in Tabls 1 and 2. Gndr gaps in grad, currnt nrolmnt status, incidnc of child labor ar vidnt. In all cass, boys ar th disadvantagd sx in trms of ducational outcoms. At th sam tim, numbr of boys is highr in th sampl highlighting th fact that girls ar disadvantagd in trms of mortality rat. Th nxt thr sctions invstigat how th vidnc of rvrs gndr gap in ducational outcoms and inputs vary onc w account for gndr-diffrncs in houshold conditions and school supplis. 4. Rsults This sction prsnts rsults from schooling and child labor rgrssions (sctions ). Child labor rgrssions ar spcifid similar to schooling rgrssions ix. Th dpndnt variabl quals 1 if th child was rportdly (i) in mploymnt, (ii) was looking for work and (iii) was availabl for work in th past 7 days. W also rport rgrssions on th dtrminants of total houshold ducational xpnditur on ach sampl child. All rgrssions of schooling outcoms and inputs control for larg numbr of covariats such as child s rligion, ag, parntal ducation and ag, sx of th houshold had, houshold xpnditur and landlssnss. Whilst discussing th rsults, w abstract away from ths covariats for th sak of brvity. Rathr w limit our discussion to variabls rlatd to sibling background, child s gndr and child s xposur to stipnd program and its intraction ffcts. For rasons rlatd to sampl slction and ndognity of sibling variabls, on may qustion th OLS/probit stimats of gndr gaps in ducational outcoms and xpnditur. If tru, this undrmins our analysis from a policy point of viw. Thrfor, in sction 4.1 w first porsnt sibling fixd-ffcts of gndr gaps in ducational outcoms and inputs. Although this framwork dos not yild stimats of corrlats spcific to common houshold and villag attributs, it yilds prcis stimats of gndr gap in inputs and outputs that ar robust to th omission of common obsrvd and unobsrvd factors. Sctions 4.2 and 4.3 thn prsnt dtaild rgrssion analysis fully controlling for various corrlats of schooling outcoms and houshold allocations. 4.1 Sibling fixd-ffcts stimats of gndr gaps Tabls 3-5 prsnt cofficints on mal dummy with and without control for child s ag. Th cofficint stimats ar obtaind by rstricting data to housholds that hav at last on brothr and sistr of rlvant ag. In addition to full sampl (childrn agd 6-17 yars old), rsults ar rportd sparatly for th primary and scondary school ag groups. For poold sampl (Tabl 3), sibling fixd-ffcts stimats yild no vidnc of gndr gap in houshold xpnditur on childrn s ducation in th rural. For th urban sampl, cofficint on mal dummy is significant and ngativ. Howvr, this bcoms insignificant onc w control for th child s ag. This is also tru for th program (urban) ara. Ths rsults hold for th primary as wll as scondary school ag childrn (Tabls 4 and 5 rspctivly). Th finding of no gndr bias in houshold xpnditur is 7

8 consistnt with arlir attmpts to invstigat gndr bias in intra-houshold allocations in Bangladsh (.g. Ahmad and Morduch, 2002) x. What is puzzling howvr is th robust vidnc of sx bias in favour of girls in ducational outcoms and child labour participation probability. In th sampl comprising childrn of ags 6-17 yars, boys complt significantly fwr grads, hav a lowr nrolmnt rat and ar mor likly to ngag in child labour (Tabl 3). Sparating primary and scondary school agd kids rvals that ths gaps aris purly in cas of scondary school agd kids. For primary agd kids, cofficints on mal dummy ar rarly significant (Tabl 4). Howvr, for th scondary sampl, boys ar systmatically wors-off in th rural ara. In th urban sampl, boys lag bhind girls in th program ara only (Tabl 5). Ths rsults hold tru vn aftr controlling for ag and ag-squard of th child. [Tabls 3-5 about hr] Summing up, our analysis clarly documnts a rvrs gndr gap in schooling and child labor outcoms in Bangladsh amonst scondary school ag kids. Th only xcption is th mtropolitan ara which has not bn xposd to th FSS intrvntion. This suggsts that th introduction of sx-spcific scondary school incntivs hav playd a significant rol in rvrsing th gndr gap in favour of girls in Bangladsh. Disaggrgat analysis rvals that rvrs gndr gap is xclusiv to scondary school agd childrn (11-17 yar olds). W thrfor striv to undrstand th sourcs of ths gaps at th scondary lvl in th rmaining part of th papr. Two potntial hypothss ar considrd nxt. W tst whthr girls ducational gains ovr boys is drivn by gratr lasticity of fmal ducation to supply-sid changs (.g. incrasd supply of local schools). Scond, w xamin whthr boys ar disadvantagd bcaus thy suffr mor from sibling rivalry within housholds compard to girls. 4.2 Dtrminants of school participation, attainmnt, child labour and intrahoushold allocations in urban ara Tabl 6 rports rgrssions for scondary school agd (11-17 yars) childrn in th urban ara. Poold rgrssion rsults show that boys ar clarly disadvantagd in trms of ducational outcoms and allocation of inputs. Ths diffrncs ar always significant at th convntional lvl. Poold spcification masks important diffrncs along th gndr lin, howvr. Gndr-spcific rgrssions rval that among boys, no significant diffrnc xists on grad bcaus of xposur to th FSS program. Boys in th tratmnt ara hav a marginally significant and highr probability of nrolmnt in school. On th contrary, among girls, thos in tratmnt ara hav significantly gratr probability of nrolmnt and grad than thir prs in th program ara. This finding is rassuring and bars tstimony to th ffct of th stipnd schm, givn th fact that intrvntion ara constituts th conomically lss dvlopd part of urban Bangladsh. 8

9 [Tabl 6 about hr] Turning to sibling-spcific ffcts, no diffrncs in schooling outcoms xist du to corsidnc with brothrs (Tabl 6; poold sampl). This is tru for both sxs. Whilst incras in th numbr of siblings significantly lowrs ducational xpnss for all kids, th ffcts of numbr of brothrs and sistrs do not diffr. This finding is puzzling givn th commonly hld viw that parnts in dvloping countris and South Asia in particular hav pro-son biass and/or childrn with mor brothrs ar wors-off compard to mor sistrs. If anything, split sampl stimats show that numbr of sistrs xrts a positiv significant ffct whn th child rsids in th tratmnt ara (Tabl 6; poold sampl). Howvr, this is only tru for mal sampl. Boys with mor sistrs and living in tratmnt ara complt mor grads and ar lss likly to b obsrvd in work. Similar rsults ar obtaind for child labour rgrssions. Th program has an insignificant (albit ngativ) ffct on child labor. Splitting sampl by gndr yilds a positiv impact for boys, howvr xi. It is difficult to infr whthr this finding is du to FSS program or whthr it simply capturs th fact that boys in th intrvntion ara blong to poorr housholds and hnc mor likly to work. Turning to sibling-spcific ffcts, no diffrncs in child labor outcoms xist du to co-rsidnc with brothrs. This is tru for both sxs. Sibling variabls numbr of brothr and sistrs do not mattr significantly for boys as wll as girls. Th only xcption is boys rsiding in th tratmnt ara for whom having mor sistrs significantly rducs th probability of child labor. In sum, th absnc of sibling ffcts for fmals in th tratmnt ara suggsts that impact of th stipnd dos not diffr for girls who hav mor siblings xii. Similarly, littl vidnc is found in support of th hypothsis that boys co-rsiding with sistrs ar wors-off. 4.3 Dtrminants of school participation, attainmnt, child labour and intrahoushold allocations in rural ara As pointd out arlir in sction 2, a potntial xplanation for th gndr diffrntiatd impact of th FSS program rlats to supply-sid fatur of th intrvntion. In th absnc of community lvl information on school availabl and quality, w could not tst this for th urban sampl. Howvr, such information is availabl for th rural sampl. Hnc, dspit th fact that this sampl prcluds non-program housholds, analysis of dtrminants of ducational outcoms in th rural ara can inform us about a ky sourc of gndr gap in th FSS program ara, namly diffrntial rspons of mal and fmal schooling to ducational supplis. [Tabl 7 about hr] Tabl 7 rports rgrssions for scondary school agd (11-17 yars) childrn in th rural ara. Rgrssion stimats basd on spcification 1 (without control for villag charactristics) show that th cofficint on th mal dummy is a larg and ngativ in currnt nrolmnt and grad rgrssion. It is also positivly signd in child 9

10 labour rgrssion indicating that boys ar not only lss likly to b in school, thy ar also mor likly to b at work. Spcification 2 introducs dtaild control for villag infrastructur, school availability and quality. Howvr, th cofficint on mal dummy dos not fall whn w xtnsivly control for villag-lvl covariats suggsting that schooling outcoms do not diffr significantly by gndr with rspct to changs in supply sid conditions. W furthr stimatd rgrssions splitting th sampl obsrvations by gndr (rsults supprssd). It was found that boys and girls schooling did not systmatically rspond to villag infrastructur (.g. school quality, availability tc). Variabls such as prsnc of a scondary school, madrasa and fraction of fmal tachrs in primary school did not hav significant influnc on ithr boys or girls. Th only thr variabls that xrtd significant ffct on grad wr availability of FFE schm in th villag, distanc to bus station and STR in primary school. FFE program had a positiv ffct on boys but no impact on fmals. On th othr hand, primary school STR had a significantly ngativ ffct on grad of both sxs but th ffct was strongr for girls. Distanc to narst bus station from th villag cntr ngativly impactd both boys and girls. Among othr notabl gndr-diffrntiatd ffcts, w find vidnc that th incidnc of child labour varis by sibling backgrounds. Gratr numbr of brothrs and sistrs incras th probability of child labour. Gratr numbr of brothrs ngativly affcts boys but has no ffct on girls. On th othr hand, incras in th numbr of sistrs incrass th probability of work but only among girls. On th balanc, ths rsults suggst that vidnc of a rvrs gndr gap rportd is unlikly to b drivn by th fact that fmal studnts hav bnfitd disproportionatly from supply-sid rforms in th FSS ara. 5. Summary and policy implications This papr has providd a first-hand account of th impact of a fmal stipnd program on schooling outcoms, child labour and intra-houshold allocations by gndr in Bangladsh. This intrvntion, now in its tnth yar of opration, has bn th cornrston for achiving gndr-parity in scondary school participation and. Our analysis of houshold data suggsts that mor than closing th gndr gap, th schm has ld to a rvrsal of th gap. A systmatic ducational gndr imbalanc prvails in favour girls in rural as wll as urban aras. Within urban ara, boys ar mostly disadvantagd in th stipnd ara suggsting that th program has ngativly affctd boys schooling vis-à-vis girls. Nonthlss, no vidnc of gndr gap is found for primary school kids. At th primary lvl, outcoms (school attndanc, and participation in child labor) ar not snsitiv to th FSS program xposur within urban aras. This is consistnt with th fact that primary ducation in Bangladsh is fr for all childrn and th FSS schm had no spill-ovr ffcts on primary ducation in th intrvntion ara. 10

11 Dspit th robust vidnc of gndr disparity favoring girls at th scondary lvl, what drivs ths inqualitis rmains a puzzl. Two hypothss wr considrd as xplanations for th rlativly xcssiv growth in fmal school participation and attainmnt. Analysis of houshold data yilds no vidnc to suggst that this is du to gratr rsponsivnss of fmal ducation to th xpansion of ducational facilitis in th stipnd ara. Nithr do w find vidnc of sx bias in intra-houshold allocation of ducational xpnditur. Similarly, vidnc suggsting ngativ ffct of sibship siz is wak. Houshold s rspons rgarding fmal ducation is wll-undrstood, howvr. Within th urban ara, girls nrolmnt rat and yars of ducation compltd ar systmatically highr in th tratmnt ara. Girls also hav a significantly smallr probability of child work suggsting that housholds hav rspondd to girl-spcific school incntiv programs not just by nrolling girls in school but also withdrawing thm from paid mploymnt. Th finding that Bangladsh has marginally mor girls than boys in scondary school implis that it has joind ranks with Latin Amrican countris. Th rsult is striking in th South Asian contxt whr houshold frtility choics dmonstrat a prfrnc for son, as vidncd from skwd sx ratio and missing womn in th population. But th sam finding also mans that Bangladsh is now on of th countris off track to mt th gndr disparity targt by 2015 (UNESCO, 2006). This rvrsal of th gndr gap dos not man that Bangladsh has succdd in rmoving fmal disadvantag in all sphrs of ducation. Womn s litracy still rmains xtrmly low whn compard to that of mn. Th continuing disadvantags facd by girls ar also rflctd in cognitiv outcoms and SSC xam rsults (Asadullah, 2005; Asadullah t al. 2006). Poor quality of girls ducation in th FSS ara undrmins on of th ky objctivs of th program, namly to conomically mpowr fmals via acquisition of markt skills. Th vidnc prsntd in this papr thrfor dos not ncssarily call for a rmoval of pro-fmal incntiv schms and rform initiativs. Bangladsh still has a long way to go to ovrcom th barrirs facing womn and girls in and byond school. At th sam tim, rsponss to fmal incntiv schms nds to b bttr undrstood from a houshold prspctiv. Policy priority should b to promot fmal ducation minimizing any prvrs ffct on boys within th houshold. Furthrmor, givn th achivmnt of parity in participation, th focus should shift to closing gndr gap in larning outcoms in school. Carful targting of childrn of both sxs in poorr housholds provids a way forward. Rfrnc Ahmd, A., and C. Dl Nino (2002) Th food for ducation program in Bangladsh: An valuation of its impact on ducational attainmnt and food scurity, FCND Discussion Papr No. 138, Intrnational Food Policy Rsarch Institut: Washington. 11

12 Aldrman, H., Jr Bhrman, David Ross, and Richard Sabot (1996) Dcomposing th gndr gap in cognitiv skills in a poor rural Economy, Journal of Human Rsourcs, 32(1), pp Aldrman, Harold, Joosop Kim and Ptr F. Orazm (2003) Dsign, valuation, and sustainability of privat schools for th poor: th Pakistan urban and rural fllowship school xprimnts, Economics of Education Rviw, 22, pp Ahmad, Asif and Morduch, Jonathan (2002) Idntifying sx bias in th allocation of houshold rsourcs: Evidnc from linkd houshold survys from Bangladsh, mimo. Asadullah, M Niaz (2005) Th Effct of Class Siz on Studnt Achivmnt: Evidnc from Bangladsh, Applid Economics Lttrs, Volum 12, Numbr 4, pp , March (2006a) Rturns to Education in Bangladsh, Education Economics (forthcoming). (2006b) Th ffctivnss of privat and public schools in Bangladsh and Pakistan, Univrsity of Oxford, mimo. and N. Chaudhury (2006) Do rligious schools rspond to financial incntivs? Evidnc from govrnmnt subsidy programs in Bangladsh, Univrsity of Oxford (mimo)., N. Chaudhury and A. Dar (2006) School Choic and Cognitiv Achivmnt in Rural Bangladsh, papr prsntd at th Intrnational confrnc on th conomics of ducation, Jun 20-23, 2006, IREDU, Dijon, Franc. Arnds-Kunning, M. and S. Amin (2004a) School Incntiv Programs and Childrn s Activitis: Th Cas of Bangladsh, Comparativ Education Rviw, Vol. 48(3). and Akhtr U. Ahmd (2004b) Dos th impact of th Food for Education Program in Bangladsh diffr by gndr? An analysis of childrn s acadmic achivmnt, ASSA-AEA, San Digo. and Sajda Amin (2000). Th ffcts of schooling incntiv programs on houshold rsourc allocation in Bangladsh, Policy Rsarch Division Working Papr no Nw York: Population Council. Banrj, Abhijit, Suraj Jacob, and Michal Krmr with Jnny Lanjouw and Ptr Lanjouw (2000) Promoting School Participation in Rural Rajasthan: Rsults from Som Prospctiv Trials, mimo, MIT. Bhat, P., N. Mari (2002) Rturning a Favour: Rciprocity Btwn Fmal Education and Frtility in India, World Dvlopmnt, 30 (10): Bhrman, Jr R., Jorg Gallardo-Garc ıa, Susan W. Parkr, Ptra E. Todd and Viviana V lz-grajals (2005) How Conditional Cash Transfrs Impact Schooling and Working Bhaviors of Childrn and Youth in Urban Mxico, Univrsity of Pnnsylvania, mimo. Chaudhury, Nazmul and Parajuli, Dilip (2006) Impact Evaluation of Girls Stipnd Program in Punjab Provinc of Pakistan, Th World Bank, mimo. Drèz, Jan and Kingdon, G. (2001) School Participation in Rural India, Rviw of Dvlopmnt Economics, 5 (1):

13 Garg, Ashish and Jonathan Murdoch (1998) Sibling Rivalry and th Gndr Gap: Evidnc from Child Halth Outcoms in Ghana, Journal of Population Economics 11 (4), Glw, Paul and Michal Krmr (2005) Schools, tachrs and ducational outcoms in dvloping countris, forthcoming in Handbook on th Economics of Education, Elsvir. Duraisamy, P. (1992) Gndr, intra-family allocation of rsourcs and child schooling in South India, Discussion Papr No. 667, Economic Growth Cntr, Yal Univrsity. Janvry, Alain d and Elisabth Sadoult (2004) Conditional Cash Transfr Programs: Ar Thy Rally Magic Bullts?, Univrsity of California at Brkly (mimo). Jnsn, Robrt (2002) Equal tratmnt, unqual outcoms, Harvard Univrsity (mimo). Khandkr, Shahidur and Mark M. Pitt (2003) Subsidy to Promot Girls Scondary Education: Th Fmal Stipnd Program in Bangladsh, Annual Mting of th Population Association of Amrica. Klasn, Stphan (2002) Low Schooling for Girls, slowr Growth for All?, World Bank Economic Rviw, Vol. 16, pp Knowls, S., P.K. Lorlly, and P.D. Own (2002) Ar Gndr Gaps a Brak on Economic Dvlopmnt? Som Cross-Country Empirical Evidnc, Oxford Economic Paprs, Vol. 54(1). Lloyd, Cynthia, B.; Mt, Cm; and Sathar, Zba, A., (2002) Th Effct of Gndr Diffrncs in Primary School Accss, Typ and Quality on th Dcision to Enrol in Rural Pakistan Policy Rsarch Division Working Papr 164. Population Council. Murdoch, Jonathan (2000) Sibling Rivalry in Africa, Amrican Economic Rviw (AEA, Paprs and Procdings), May Ravallion, Martin and Wodon, Quntin (1999) Dos Child Labour Displac Schooling? Evidnc on Bhavioural Rsponss to an Enrolmnt Subsidy Economic Journal. Rosnzwig, Mark R. and Schultz, T. Paul (1982) Markt Opportunitis, Gntic Endowmnts, and Intrafamily Rsourc Distribution: Child Survival in Rural India, Amrican Economic Rviw, 72 (4): Sathar, Zba A. and Lloyd, Cynthia B. (1994) Who Gts Primary Schooling in Pakistan: Inqualitis among and within Familis, Pakistan Dvlopmnt Rviw, 32 (2): Schultz, T. Paul (2002) Why Govrnmnts Should Invst Mor to Educat Girls, World Dvlopmnt. Sukontamarn, Pataporn (2005) Th Entry of NGO Schools and Girls Outcoms in Bangladsh, STICERD Discussion Papr, LSE. UNESO (2006) EFA Global Monitoring Rport - Litracy for Lif. 13

14 Tabl 1: Summary statistics, urban sampl Childrn agd 6-17 yars Childrn agd yars Poold Mal Fmal Poold Mal Fmal Variabl Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. compltd school Child in work Total ducational xpnditur Ag in yars Ag squard Mal Non-Muslim Birth ordr # of brothrs # of sistrs Had is fmal Fathr's ag Fathr's ag missing Mothr's ag Mothr's ag missing Fathr's ducation Fathr's ducation missing Mothr's ducation Mothr's ducation missing Landlss houshold Data on land is missing Tratmnt ara Tratmnt*(child is mal) Tratmnt*(# of sistrs) Log of pr capita xpnditur N Not: Data on ducational xpnditur is availabl only for childrn who attndd school th prvious yar (N=2166). 14

15 Tabl 2: Summary statistics, rural sampl Childrn agd 6-17 yars Childrn agd yars Poold Mal Fmal Poold Poold Variabl Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. Man Std. Dv. compltd school Child in work Total ducational xpnditur Ag in yars Ag squard Mal Non-Muslim Birth ordr # of brothrs # of sistrs Had is fmal Fathr's ag Fathr's ag missing Mothr's ag Mothr's ag missing Fathr's ducation Fathr's ducation missing Mothr's ducation Mothr's ducation missing Landlss houshold Land data missing Log of pr capita xpnditur FFE program in villag Data on FFE missing Villag distanc of bus station Data on bus station missing STR in villag primary school Data on STR missing % fmal tachrs in villag primary school Data on fmal tachrs missing

16 Villag has a scondary school Villag has a madrasa N Not: Data on ducational xpnditur is availabl only for childrn who attndd school th prvious yar (N=4585). 16

17 Tabl 3: Siblings fixd-ffcts stimats of gndr gap in school participation, attainmnt, child labour and ducational xpnditur (Childrn agd 6-17 yars) Rural sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy (3.65)** (6.20)** (14.37)** -1 (6.63)** (4.68)** (14.31)** N Urban (poold) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy (4.43)** (3.34)** (3.82)** (2.73)** (4.21)** (3.62)** (4.77)** N Tratmnt (urban) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy (3.14)** (4.30)** (5.58)** (2.25)* (3.88)** (3.89)** (5.86)** -0.1 N Control (urban) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy (3.20)** (1.97)* N Not: Robust t-stats ar rportd. + significant at 10%; * significant at 5%; ** significant at 1%. rgrssion and xpnditur rgrssions ar stimatd by OLS. Enrolmnt and child labour rgrssions ar stimatd by linar probability modls. All rgrssions control for siblings-fixd ffcts. 17

18 Tabl 4: Siblings fixd-ffcts stimats of gndr gap in school participation, attainmnt, child labour and ducational xpnditur (Childrn agd 6-10 yars) Rural sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy (1.80) N Urban (poold) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy N Tratmnt (urban) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy N Control (urban) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Mal dummy N Not: Robust t-stats ar rportd. + significant at 10%; * significant at 5%; ** significant at 1%. rgrssion and xpnditur rgrssions ar stimatd by OLS. Enrolmnt and child labour rgrssions ar stimatd by linar probability modls. All rgrssions control for siblings-fixd ffcts. 18

19 Tabl 5: Siblings fixd-ffcts stimats of gndr gap in school participation, attainmnt, child labour and ducational xpnditur (Childrn agd yars) Rural sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Currntly in Expnditur Currntly in Expnditur Mal dummy (2.27)* (5.81)** (12.38)** (4.55)** (4.43)** (11.62)** -0.1 N Urban (poold) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Currntly in Expnditur Currntly in Expnditur Mal dummy (3.05)** (2.95)** (3.44)** (1.84)+ (2.98)** (3.52)** (3.83)** -1.2 N Tratmnt (urban) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Currntly in Expnditur Currntly in Expnditur Mal dummy (2.34)* (3.58)** (4.17)** -0.4 (3.05)** (3.70)** (4.17)** N Control (urban) sampl No control for ag of th child Control for ag and ag-squard Currntly in Expnditur Currntly in Expnditur Mal dummy (1.97) (2.69)** (2.58)* N Not: Robust t-stats ar rportd. + significant at 10%; * significant at 5%; ** significant at 1%. rgrssion and xpnditur rgrssions ar stimatd by OLS. Enrolmnt and child labour rgrssions ar stimatd by linar probability modls. All rgrssions control for siblings-fixd ffcts. 19

20 Tabl 6: Dtrminants of school, currnt nrolmnt, child labor and ducational xpnditur in urban aras [Childrn agd yars] Poold Mal Fmal Expnditur Expnditur Ag Expnditur (4.64)** (2.22)* (3.01)** (1.76)+ (3.67)** Ag squard (3.36)** (2.11)* (2.76)** Mal (3.15)** (2.82)** (2.68)** (2.28)* (.) (.) (.) (.) Non-Muslim (1.92)+ (2.31)* (1.70) (2.06)* Birth ordr (2.29)* (2.56)* (2.71)** (2.00)* (2.00)* # of brothrs (4.58)** (3.57)** (2.65)** # of sistrs (2.19)* (3.93)** (2.43)* (1.96)+ (3.13)** Tratmnt ara (3.06)** (4.13)** (7.34)** (2.21)* (2.01)* (4.68)** (3.31)** (3.48)** (1.93)+ (6.52)** Tratmnt*Mal (1.94)+ (2.01)* (3.11)** (.) (.) (.) (.) Tratmnt*(# of Sistrs) (1.99)* (1.69)+ (2.27)* (2.76)** Had is fmal (2.71)** (3.86)** Fathr's ag (2.26)* (3.39)** (2.27)* (1.89) (3.45)** Mothr's ag

21 Poold Mal Fmal Expnditur Expnditur (1.73) (1.98)* -1.6 Expnditur Fathr's ducation (4.85)** (4.78)** (4.54)** (7.05)** (4.50)** (5.81)** (5.18)** (4.48)** (2.30)* (5.30)** Mothr's ducation (10.92)** (5.10)** (3.22)** (7.72)** (7.81)** (2.83)** (5.02)** (7.50)** (4.85)** (4.60)** (5.75)** Landlss houshold (4.27)** (2.84)** (5.37)** (3.32)** (2.87)** (3.94)** (2.93)** (3.60)** Log of pr capita xpnditur (7.17)** (7.85)** (1.96)* (4.26)** (6.75)** (4.00)** (6.09)** (4.58)** Constant (6.37)** (4.11)** (5.23)** N Adjustd R-squard/Psudo Not: Htroscdasticity robust t-stats ar rportd. + significant at 10%; * significant at 5%; ** significant at 1%. and xpnditur rgrssions ar stimatd using an OLS. Enrolmnt and child labour rgrssions ar stimatd using a probit modl. For probit stimats, only marginal ffcts (computd as mans of th variabls) ar prsntd. 21

22 Tabl 7: Dtrminants of school, currnt nrolmnt, child labor and ducational xpnditur in rural aras [Childrn agd yars] Spcification 1 (without control for villag infrastructur) Spcification 2 (with control for villag infrastructur) Ag (6.22)** (1.70) (3.17)** (6.15)** (1.93) (3.22)** Ag, squard (4.78)** (4.72)** (1.65)+ Child is mal (6.86)** (8.30)** (16.78)** -1.4 (6.81)** (8.24)** (17.19)** non Muslim (3.10)** (3.05)** Birth ordr (2.40)* (4.75)** (2.90)** (2.02)* (4.37)** (2.72)** # of brothrs (2.46)* (3.41)** (2.05)* # of sistrs (3.12)** (2.20)* (1.70)+ (2.31)* (1.95)+ HH had is fmal Fathr's ag (1.74) Mothr's ag (3.97)** (3.12)** (4.14)** (1.76)+ (3.17)** Fathr's ducation (9.96)** (6.43)** (2.38)* (9.93)** (9.55)** (6.03)** (2.34)* (9.70)** Mothr's ducation (10.87)** (8.18)** (5.36)** (5.46)** (10.76)** (7.97)** (5.27)** (5.65)** Landlss houshold (7.11)** (6.37)** (4.49)** (3.20)** (6.75)** (5.93)** (4.63)** (3.92)** 22

23 Spcification 1 (without control for villag infrastructur) Spcification 2 (with control for villag infrastructur) Log of pr capita xpnditur (9.23)** (7.39)** (9.78)** (7.86)** Villag has FFE schm (5.72)** Villag distanc to buss (5.09)** (4.54)** (1.75) STR in villag primary school (3.86)** (3.07)** (2.46)* (2.92)** Fmal tachrs in villag primary school Villag has scondary school (1.76)+ (2.08)* Villag has madrasa (3.00)** (1.96)+ Constant (8.24)** (8.33)** N Adjustd R-squard/Psudo Not: Htroscdasticity robust t-stats ar rportd. + significant at 10%; * significant at 5%; ** significant at 1%. and xpnditur rgrssions ar stimatd using an OLS. Enrolmnt and child labour rgrssions ar stimatd using a probit modl. For probit stimats, only marginal ffcts (computd as mans of th variabls) ar prsntd. 23