Suchergebnisse

Despite strong recent economic growth, gender inequality remains a major concern for India. This dissertation examines the effectiveness of public policy in improving some important human development outcomes, with a focus on gender issues. The national Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostics Techniques (PNDT) Act of 1994, implemented in 1996, banned sex-selective abortions in the Indian states which hitherto had not legislated such a policy. Using village-level and town-level longitudinal data from the 1991 and 2001 censuses, along with household survey data from other sources, the first essay finds a significantly positive impact of the PNDT Act on the female-to-male juvenile sex ratio (number of females per 1000 males below the age of 6 years). Although researchers frequently mention the futility of the Act, this study is among the first to use a treatment-effect type analysis of the pre-ban and post-ban periods to show that the law hindered any further worsening of the gender imbalance in India. I find that in the possible absence of the PNDT Act, juvenile sex ratio would have declined by another 13-20 points on average. A second study evaluates the `unintended consequences' of the PNDT Act on child quality. Using household survey data from two time periods, and exploiting a natural experiment framework originating from the timing of the PNDT Act, I find a mixed impact of the law on gender-relative child quality outcomes. Since the PNDT Act partially improved the sex ratio but did not uniformly worsen the nutritional and immunization status of girls, it could be regarded as a truly welfare enhancing public policy. Finally, a third study examines the effectiveness of the Indian school feeding program in improving the nutritional and learning outcomes of children. Using a household fixed-effect and a propensity score matching framework, the outcomes of children receiving school meals are compared with that of similar children who are not covered under the program. The results show that the school meal program generally does not have any significant effect on the child nutrition nor learning outcomes, neither does it have any impact on the relative outcomes of the girl children.

In the early stages of a pandemic, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that encourage physical distancing and reduce contact can decrease and delay disease transmission. Although NPIs have been implemented globally during the COVID-19 pandemic, their intensity and timing have varied widely. This paper analyzed the country-level determinants and effects of NPIs during the early stages of the pandemic (January 1st to April 29th, 2020). We examined countries that had implemented NPIs within 30 or 45 days since first case detection, as well as countries in which 30 or 45 days had passed since first case detection. The health and socioeconomic factors associated with delay in implementation of three NPIs—national school closure, national lockdown, and global travel ban—were analyzed using fractional logit and probit models, and beta regression models. The probability of implementation of national school closure, national lockdown, and strict national lockdown by a country was analyzed using a probit model. The effects of these three interventions on mobility changes were analyzed with propensity score matching methods using Google's social mobility reports. Countries with larger populations and better health preparedness measures had greater delays in implementation. Countries with greater population density, higher income, more democratic political systems, and later arrival of first cases were more likely to implement NPIs within 30 or 45 days of first case detection. Implementation of lockdowns significantly reduced physical mobility. Mobility was further reduced when lockdowns were enforced with curfews or fines, or when they were more strictly defined. National school closures did not significantly change mobility. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10198-021-01355-4.

AbstractEach year, 295,000 women die during and just after pregnancy, and 2.4 million babies die in the first month of their lives. In 2019, 2,160,000 neonatal deaths and 275,000 maternal deaths occurred in low-income and lower-middle-income countries alone, translating to a welfare loss equivalent to $426 billion and $36 billion for neonatal and maternal deaths, respectively. The total loss was $462 billion or almost 6 % of these countries' combined GDP. In the sustainable development goals pledge, the world promised to reduce maternal deaths to 0.07 % and neonatal mortality to below 1.2 %, saving about 200,000 women and 1.2 million children from dying annually. However, on the current trajectory, maternal mortality is expected to decline to only 0.16 % and neonatal deaths to only 1.5 % by 2030. This article analyses the most cost-effective way to reduce maternal and neonatal deaths – Increase coverage of basic emergency obstetric and newborn care from 68 to 90 % combined with increased family planning services in 55 low-income and lower-middle-income countries which account for around 90 % of the burden of maternal and neonatal mortality globally. The proposed package will require $3.2 billion per year more investment and will deliver benefits worth $278 billion per year in avoided deaths and higher economic growth. It will also yield a demographic dividend benefit equivalent to $25 billion annually. For every $1 invested, the social and economic benefits are estimated to be $87. The benefit-cost ratio is 87.