Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania, 239 McNeil Building, 3718 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6297, USA.
Population Studies Center Research Associate, University of Pennsylvania, Economics, McNeil 160, 3718 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6297, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2017 Dec;194:76-86. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.09.051. Epub 2017 Oct 9.
Empirical evidence suggests that parental preferences may be important in determining investment allocations among their children. However, there is mixed or no evidence on a number of important related questions. Do parents invest more in better-endowed children, thus reinforcing differentials among their children? Or do they invest more in less-endowed children to compensate for their smaller endowments and reduce inequalities among their children? Does higher maternal education affect the preferences underlying parental decisions in investing among their children? What difference might such intrafamilial investments among children make? And what is the nature of these considerations in the very different context of developing countries? This paper gives new empirical evidence related to these questions. We examine how parental investments affecting child education and health respond to initial endowment differences between twins within families, as represented by birth weight differences, and how parental preference tradeoffs and therefore parental investment strategies vary between families with different maternal education. Using the separable earnings-transfers model (Behrman et al., 1982), we first illustrate that preference differences may make a considerable difference in the ratios of health and learning differentials between siblings - up to 30% in the simulations that we provide. Using a sample of 2000 twins, collected in the 2012 wave of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey for Chile, we find that preferences are not at the extreme of pure compensatory investments to offset endowment inequalities among siblings nor at the extreme of pure reinforcement to favor the better-endowed child with no concern about inequality. Instead, they are neutral, so that parental investments do not change the inequality among children due to endowment differentials. We also find that there are not significant preference differences between families with low- and high-educated mothers. Our estimates are consistent with previous empirical evidence that finds that parents do not invest differentially within twins.
实证证据表明,父母的偏好可能对他们子女之间的投资分配起着重要作用。然而,对于一些重要的相关问题,仍存在着相互矛盾或缺乏证据的情况。父母是否会更多地投资于天赋更高的孩子,从而强化他们子女之间的差异?或者,他们是否会更多地投资于天赋较低的孩子,以弥补他们的天赋不足,并减少他们子女之间的不平等?母亲的受教育程度较高是否会影响父母在子女投资决策中的偏好?这些家庭内部的投资会对孩子产生什么影响?在发展中国家这种截然不同的背景下,这些考虑因素的性质是什么?本文提供了与这些问题相关的新的实证证据。我们考察了父母对子女教育和健康的投资如何应对家庭内双胞胎之间的初始禀赋差异,这种差异表现为出生体重的差异,以及在具有不同母亲受教育程度的家庭中,父母的偏好权衡和投资策略如何变化。我们使用可分离的收益转移模型(Behrman 等人,1982 年),首先说明偏好差异可能会对兄弟姐妹之间的健康和学习差异比例产生相当大的影响——在我们提供的模拟中,差异比例高达 30%。我们使用智利幼儿纵向调查在 2012 年收集的 2000 对双胞胎样本进行分析,发现偏好既不是纯粹补偿投资以抵消兄弟姐妹之间的禀赋不平等的极端情况,也不是纯粹加强对天赋更高的孩子的投资而不关心不平等的极端情况,而是中性的,因此父母的投资不会因禀赋差异而改变孩子之间的不平等。我们还发现,高学历和低学历母亲的家庭之间没有显著的偏好差异。我们的估计与先前的实证证据一致,即父母不会在双胞胎内部进行有区别的投资。