Birth Order Impact on Public and Private School Enrolment Rates in Pakistan
Author(s)
Hasnain Javed , Saba Fazal Firdousi , Dragana Ostic ,
Download Full PDF Pages: 65-79 | Views: 1523 | Downloads: 355 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3484271
Abstract
Education is a basic human right of every individual it is a reflection of cultural identity and society at large. Education is one the most important factor that can make individually skilled, provide social justice, improve the standard of living or reduce inequalities which translate as leading factor to contribute towards sustainable growth. Therefore, education plays a key role in improving the social, political, cultural and economic conditions. Moreover, in today’s world education is divided between public and the private sector in both developed and developing countries. In a nutshell, the existing literature both theoretical and empirical provided significant evidence on the relationship between on average household size and educational attainments by using different methodologies and experiments in both the developed and developing world. This study will contribute in the existing literature by determining the impact of birth order on both public and private school enrolments at primary, secondary and high school level by using the most recent data set. As the existing literature on birth order in the context of Pakistan only provides evidence of primary school and secondary enrolments rates. Moreover, this study will not only focus on one province but provide evidence from all provinces. This paper conducts a household level analysis using PSLM (Pakistan Social Living standard Measurement) 2010-2011 data for observing the birth order impact on public and private school enrolments in rural and urban regions and four major provinces of Pakistan: Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK). Furthermore, Ordinary Least Square (OLS), probit model and logit model will be used in this paper for empirical estimations. The remaining paper is organized as follows. Section II discusses the data set and its summary statistics. Section III provides the theoretical framework for this study. Section IV will discuss the findings and implication. Lastly, Section V will conclude the study followed by limitations and policy recommendations
Keywords
Education, Public Schooling, Private Schooling, Birth Order and School Enrollment
References
i. Ahmed, H., Amjad, S., Habib, M., & Shah, S. A. (2013). Determinants of School Choice: Evidence from Rural Punjab, Pakistan (No. 1-2013). Centre for Research in Economics and Business, The Lahore School of Economics.
ii. Alderman, H., Behrman, J. R., Lavy, V., & Menon, R. (2001). Child health and school enrollment:A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Human Resources, 185-205.
iii. Alderman, H., Orazem, P. F., &Paterno, E. M. (2001). School quality, school cost, and the public/private school choices of low-income households in Pakistan. Journal of Human Resources, 304-326.
iv. Andrabi, T., Das, J., &Khwaja, A. I. (2002). The rise of private schooling in Pakistan: Catering to the urban elite or educating the rural poor? (Mimeo). Washington, DC: World Bank.
v. Andrabi, T., Das, J., Khwaja, A. I., Vishwanath, T., &Zajonc, T. (2007).Learning and education achievements in Punjab schools (LEAPS):Insights to inform the education policy debate. Washington, DC:World Bank.
vi. Annual Status of Education Report. (2010). Annual status of educationreport (rural): Pakistan (2010). Lahore, Pakistan: South Asian Forum for Education Development.
vii. Aslam, M. (2009). The relative effectiveness of government and private schools in Pakistan: are girlsworse off?. Education Economics, 17(3), 329-354.
viii. Azariadis, C. &Drazen, A. (1990).Threshold Externalities inEconomic Development. Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp. 501-526.
ix. Becker, G., & Tomes, N. (1976). Child endowments, and the quantity and quality of children.
x. Behrman, J. R., &Deolalikar, A. B. (1990). The intrahousehold demand for nutrients in rural south India: Individual estimates, fixed effects, and permanent income. Journal of human resources, 665-696.
xi. Behrman, Jere R., and Paul Taubman. 1986. “Birth Order, Schooling, and Earnings.” Journal
a. OfLabor Economics 4(3):S121–S45.
xii. Behrman, J. R., Pollak, R. A., &Taubman, P. (1982). Parental preferences and provision for progeny. The Journal of Political Economy, 52-73.
xiii. Birdsall, Nancy. 1979. “Siblings and Schooling in Urban Columbia.” Dissertation,YaleUniversity, Department of Economics.
xiv. Black, S. E., Devereux, P. J., &Salvanes, K. G. (2005). The more the merrier? The effect of family size and birth order on children's education. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 669-700.
xv. Booth, A. L., &Kee, H. J. (2009). Birth order matters: the effect of family size and birth order on educational attainment. Journal of Population Economics, 22(2), 367-397.
xvi. Checchi, D., &Jappelli, T. (2003).School choice and quality (No. 828).IZA Discussion paper series.
xvii. Deolalikar, A. B. (1993). Gender differences in the returns to schooling and in school enrolment rates in Indonesia. Journal of Human Resources, 899-932.
xviii. Ejrnæs, M., & Pörtner, C. C. (2004). Birth order and the intrahousehold allocation of time and education. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(4), 1008-1019.
xix. Dreze, J., &Kingdon, G. G. (2001).School participation in rural India.Review of Development Economics, 5(1), 1–24.
xx. Galor.O&Zeira.J. (1993).Income Distribution and Macroeconomics. The Review of Economic Studies, Vol.60, No.1, pp. 35-52.
xxi. Greenhalgh, S. (1985). Sexual stratification: The other side of" growth with equity" in east Asia. Population and Development Review, 265-314.
xxii. Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality.Journal of political economy, 84-117.
xxiii. Horton, S. (1988). Birth order and child nutritional status: Evidence from the Philippines. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 341-354.
xxiv. Iram, N., Hussain, Z., Anwar, S., Hussain, I., &Akram, W. (2008).Determinants of child school choice in Punjab: Policy implications.European Journal of Scientific Research, 23(2), 285–293.
xxv. Jepsen, C., & Montgomery, M. (2009). Miles to go before I learn: The effect of travel distance on the mature person's choice of a community college. Journal of Urban Economics, 65(1), 64-73.
xxvi. Kornrich, S., & Furstenberg, F. (2013).Investing in Children: Changes in parental spending on children, 1972-2007. Demography, 50, 1-23.
xxvii.Langouet, G., & Léger, A. (2000). Public and private schooling in France: an investigation into family choice. Journal of Education Policy, 15(1), 41-49.
xxviii.Lloyd, C. B., Mete, C., &Sathar, Z. A. (2005).The effect of gender differences in primary school access, type, and quality on the decision to enroll in rural Pakistan. Economic Development andCultural Change, 53(3), 685–710.
xxix. Lopez-Turley, Ruth N. 2003. “Are Children of Young Mothers Disadvantaged Because of
a. Their Mother’s Age or Family Background?” Child Development 74(2):465–74.
xxx. Lucas, Robert E., Jr. (1988). On the Mechanics of Economic Development.Journal of Monetary Economics.22 pp.3-42.
xxxi.Muralidharan, K., & Kremer, M. (2006). Public and private schools in rural India.Harvard University, Department of Economics, Cambridge, MA.
xxxii.Parish, W. L., & Willis, R. J. (1993). Daughters, education, and family budgets Taiwan experiences. Journal of Human Resources, 863-898.
xxxiii.Pritchett, L., & Viarengo, M. (2008). The State, Socialization and Private Schooling: When Will Governments Support Alternative Producers?. Retrieved July, 7, 2011.
xxxiv. Rosenzweig, M. R., &Wolpin, K. I. (1980). Testing the quantity-quality fertility model: The use of twins as a natural experiment. Econometrica: journal of the EconometricSociety, 227- 240.
xxxv. Rosenzweig, M. R., & Zhang, J. (2009). Do population control policies induce more human capital investment? Twins, birth weight and China's “one-child” policy. The Review of Economic Studies, 76(3), 1149-1174.
xxxvi. Sathar, Z. A., & Lloyd, C. B. (1994). Who gets primary schooling in Pakistan: Inequalities among and within families. The Pakistan Development Review, 103-134.
xxxvii. Srivastava, P. (2007). Neither voice nor loyalty: School choice and the lowfeeprivate sector in India (Occasional Paper No. 134, Research Publications Series), New York, NY: National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education.
xxxviii. Strauss, J., Mwabu, G., &Beegle, K. (2000). Intrahousehold allocations: a review of theories and empirical evidence. Journal of African Economies,9(Supplement 1), 83-143.
xxxix. Sawada, Y., &Burki, A. A. (1997). Human Capital Investments in Pakistan: Implications of Micro Evidence from Rural Households [with Comments]. The Pakistan Development Review, 695-712.
xl. World Bank. (1996). Improving basic education in Pakistan (Report No.14960-PAK).Washington, DC: Author.
xli. Wrinkle, R. D., Stewart Jr, J., & Polinard, J. L. (1999). Public school quality, private schools, and race. American Journal of Political Science, 1248-1253.
xlii.Zajonc, R. B. (1976). Family configuration and intelligence: Variations in scholastic aptitude scores parallel trends in family size and the spacing of children. Science.
Cite this Article: