close
Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019;15(3):319-336.
doi: 10.1080/17441730.2019.1671015. Epub 2019 Nov 14.

Is banning sex-selection the best approach for reducing prenatal discrimination?

Monica Das Gupta  1
Affiliations

Is banning sex-selection the best approach for reducing prenatal discrimination?

Monica Das Gupta. Asian Popul Stud. 2019.

Abstract

Pressure to ban prenatal sex-selection has grown with rising sex ratios at birth in some countries. Governments feel pressured to act, and bans seem an immediate step they can take. However, such bans have been in place for some time in South Korea, China, and India and the available evidence suggests they are difficult to implement and have limited impact. This is indicated most clearly in the Chinese census data, which throw light on the mixed effects of a very intensive effort to implement the ban. Studies show that bans on sex-selection have negative consequences for unwanted girls and their mothers. By contrast, studies show that other policies - including mass messaging and measures to increase gender equity - show fairly quick impact in reducing son preference and increasing parental investment in girls. Such policies can permanently lower son preference and sex-selection, while also improving girls' life-chances.

Keywords: East Asia; Sex-selection; South Asia; abortion; gender equity; son preference.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Sex ratios at birth, China and South Korea, 1980–2010
Sources: South Korea: Korean Statistical Information Service), Statistics Korea, http://kosis.kr China: 1980–2007 from Das Gupta, Chung and Li (2009: Figure1), 2008–09 from the National Bureau of Statistics of China (2009, 2010), and 2010 from the 2010 census (long form, as also for 2000 — see note for Figure 3 on the long and short forms).
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Sex Ratio at Birth and some gender-related policies, South Korea 1970–2010 Sources: Sex ratios at birth from Korean Statistical Information Service. Policies from Shin (2006, 2014), ILO (1989), Kim (2013), Kim (2004), Chun (2018), Chung and Das Gupta (2007), and Na and Kwon (2015). The horizontal line indicates an approximately “normal” sex ratio at birth of 106 boys per 100 girls. Note the peaks in the sex ratio at birth also in 1986 (Year of the Tiger) and 1988 (Year of the Dragon) which are also inauspicious years for girls to be born. As Lee and Paik (2006) show, some of the sharp rise in sex ratios at birth in these years is attributable to shifting the recording of births that take place close to the beginning or the end of inauspicious years, to the neighboring year.
Figure 3:
Figure 3:. Sex Ratio at Birth by birth order, China 1982–2010
Source: Guo, Das Gupta, and Li (2016), derived from the full censuses of China of 1982, 1990, 2000 and 2010. Note: The 2000 and 2010 censuses collected data in both a “short form” and a “long form”. The data from both these forms indicate that the overall sex ratio at birth remained essentially stable, rising minimally in both cases. The data here are from the “long form”, as data on sex ratios at birth by birth order were only available from these.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ahn HS, Seol HJ, Lim JE, Hong SH, Lee SY, Park MI, Kim SD, and Kim HJ. (2012). Estimates of induced abortion in South Korea: health facilities survey. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 38(1), 324–8. - PubMed
    1. Anukriti S 2015. Economic Incentives and The Fertility-Sex Ratio Trade-off. in Eggleston Karen (ed) Policy Challenges from Demographic Change in China and India, Brookings Institution Press.
    1. Anukriti S (2018). Financial Incentives and the Fertility-Sex Ratio Trade-Off. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 10 (2), 27–57.
    1. Anukriti S, Bhalotra Sonia, and Tam Hiu. (2018). On the Quantity and Quality of Girls: Fertility, Parental Investments, and Mortality. Boston: Boston College Working Papers in Economics; 950.
    1. Asfaw Abay, Lamanna Francesca, and Klasen Stephan. (2010). Gender gap in parents’ financing strategy for hospitalization of their children: evidence from India. Health Economics 19(3), 265–79. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources