Cited by 236Demographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics

Son Preference in Rural China: Patrilineal Families and Socioeconomic Change

Murphy, Rachel, Tao, Ran, Lu, Xi·2011·Population and Development Review

Abstract

This article draws on a survey conducted in six provinces in summer 2008 to investigate the determinants of son preference in rural china. The analysis confirms the conventional wisdom that son preference is embedded within patrilineal family structures and practices. We extend our analysis by exploring specific aspects of variation within patrilineal family culture. We find that the patrilineal group (clan) composition of villages and family participation in practices such as building ancestral halls and updating genealogies significantly influence son preference. Yet even though son preference is embedded within patrilineal family culture, our analysis suggests that over time the attenuation of son preference is likely. This is because determinants associated with socioeconomic change—for instance, higher levels of education, direct exposure to official policy education materials, higher income (a proxy for rural industrialization), and agricultural mechanization—all attenuate son preference. Being younger and female are also associated with weaker son preference, and both characteristics are likely to interact with education and industrialization to further dilute son preference in the longer term. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that concerted efforts are needed to ameliorate institutional discrimination against rural people in welfare provisioning and in labor markets, and to promote multiple dimensions of gender equality, including in land rights, wage rates, and education.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00452.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • With only one child available, many parents began to appreciate the value of their children, especially the care provided by daughters.

    “With only one child available, many parents began to appreciate the value of their children as well, especially the care provided by daughters (Zhang 2009, Murphy et al. 2011).”

    From The Social and Sociological Consequences of China's One-Child Policy (2021) · cites this paper as Murphy et al. 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Murphy, R., Tao, R., & Lu, X.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Renmin University of China (CN)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
Population and Development Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-12
Volume
37
Issue
4
Pages
665-690
ISSN
  • 0098-7921 (ISSN-L)
  • 1728-4457
OpenAlex
W2150427162
Cited by
236
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7
FWCI
10.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Population and Development Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/D005000/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Keywords
son preference, rural China, socio-economic change, gender discrimination, rural industrialization, agricultural mechanization, ancestral halls, genealogy, gender equality, land rights, labor market
MeSH terms
China, Cultural Characteristics, Education, Family, Family Characteristics, Gender Identity, Income, Nuclear Family, Ownership, Rural Health, Rural Population, Socioeconomic Factors, History, 21st Century

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review