Husband, sons and the fertility gap: evidence from India


A fertility gap—the difference between a woman’s ideal number of children and her actual number of children—is prevalent in both directions. We investigate the distribution of the fertility gap in India and factors that lead to women exceeding or underachieving their ideal number of children. We find that preference for males has a significant effect, contributing to a negative as well as a positive fertility gap. The probability that a woman exceeds her ideal number of children reduces by 7 percent in 2005–06 and 10 percent in 2015–16 if her first child is male. Further, we find that a husband’s preferences significantly shape the fertility gap. A woman is likely to exceed her ideal number of children by 3–4 percent if her husband prefers a higher number of sons than daughters. A husband’s ideal family size has an effect of similar magnitude as his son preference. Our results point to the important role of gender norms and household perspective in fertility analysis and policy settings and the challenges during fertility transitions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3


  1. 1.

    The 17 major states included in our analysis account for roughly 90 percent of India’s population and make up around 87 percent of India’s GDP. The remaining 11 states, not included in the analysis, were small with missing or unreliable data points. The states not included are Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Uttrakhand Goa, Mizoram, Sikkim, Arunanchal Pradesh, Meghalaya Jammu, Kashmir and Nagaland.

  2. 2.

    Respondents who gave a numerical response to the question on the ideal number of children were also asked how many of these children they would like to be boys, how many they would like to be girls, and for how many the sex would not matter. The employed variable, son preference, a binary variable is derived from responses to these questions. We define woman (or husband) as expressing son preference when their ideal number of boys exceeds their ideal number of girls.

  3. 3.

    Only 3 percent of women express a preference for daughters, that is, they respond that they would like more daughters than sons in their ideal family.

  4. 4.

    The pattern is similar for NFHS 4; hence, not shown here. Figures for NFHS 4 are available from the authors.

  5. 5.

    The terms “positive” or “negative” are used in a mathematical sense and only to refer to the sign (+ or −) of the calculated fertility gap.

  6. 6.

    In the full sample, this variable is available for 36 percent of women in NFHS 3 and 32 percent of women in NFHS 4.


  1. Adsera, A. (2006). An economic analysis of the gap between desired and actual fertility: The case of Spain. Review of Economics of the Household, 4(1), 75–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Adsera, A. (2011). The interplay of employment uncertainty and education in explaining second births in Europe. Demographic Research, 25(16), 513–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Anukriti, S., Bhalotra, S. R., & Tam, H. F., (2016). On the quantity and quality of girls: New evidence on abortion, fertility, and parental investments. IZA Discussion Paper No. 10271.

  4. Arnold, F., Choe, M. K., & Roy, T. K. (1998). Son preference, the family-building process and child mortality in India. Population Studies, 52(3), 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Arnold, F., Kishor, S., & Roy, T. K. (2002). Sex-selective abortions in India. Population and Development Review, 28(4), 759–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Aurino, E. (2017). Do boys eat better than girls in India? Longitudinal evidence on dietary diversity and food consumption disparities among children and adolescents. Economics and Human Biology, 25, 99–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Basu, D., & De Jong, R. (2010). Son targeting fertility behavior: Some consequences and determinants. Demography, 47(2), 521–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bhat, P. M., & Zavier, A. F. (2003). Fertility decline and gender bias in Northern India. Demography, 40(4), 637–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bongaarts, J., & Casterline, J. (2013). Fertility transition: Is sub-Saharan Africa different? Population and Development Review, 38, 153–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Casterline, J. B., & Agyei-Mensah, S. (2017). Fertility desires and the course of fertility decline in sub-Saharan Africa. Population and Development Review, 43, 84–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chaudhuri, S. (2012). The desire for sons and excess fertility: A household-level analysis of parity progression in India. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 38(4), 178–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chung, W., & Das Gupta, M. (2007). Why is son preference declining in South Korea? The role of development and public policy, and the implications for China and India (Vol. 4373). Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Clark, S. (2000). Son preference and sex composition of children: Evidence from India. Demography, 37(1), 95–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dommaraju, P., & Agadjanian, V. (2009). India’s North-South divide and theories of fertility change. Journal of Population Research, 26(3), 249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Forrest, W., Arunachalam, D., & Navaneetham, K. (2018). Intimate partner violence and contraceptive use in India: The moderating influence of conflicting fertility preferences and contraceptive intentions. Journal of Biosocial Science, 50(2), 212–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Harknett, K., & Hartnett, C. S. (2014). The gap between births intended and births achieved in 22 European countries, 2004–07. Population Studies, 68(3), 265–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ibisomi, L., & Odimegwu, C. (2011). Understanding resolution of differential fertility preferences among couples in Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(4), 98–105.

    Google Scholar 

  18. International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) & Macro International. (2007). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3), 2005–06: India: (Vol. I). Mumbai: IIPS.

    Google Scholar 

  19. International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) & ICF. (2017). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4), 2015–16: India. Mumbai: IIPS.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jayachandran, S. (2017). Fertility decline and missing women. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 9(1), 118–139.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jayachandran, S., & Pande, R. (2017). Why are Indian children so short? The role of birth order and son preference. American Economic Review, 107(9), 2600–2629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Milazzo, A. (2018). Why are adult women missing? Son preference and maternal survival in India. Journal of Development Economics, 134, 467–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Morgan, S. P., & Rackin, H. (2010). The correspondence between fertility intentions and behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, 36(1), 91–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pande, R., & Astone, N. (2007). Explaining son preference in rural India: The independent role of structural versus individual factors. Population Research and Policy Review, 26(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rasul, I. (2008). Household bargaining over fertility: Theory and evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Development Economics, 86(2), 215–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosenblum, D. (2013). The effect of fertility decisions on excess female mortality in India. Journal of Population Economics, 26(1), 147–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Testa, M. R., Cavalli, L., & Rosina, A. (2014). The effect of couple disagreement about child-timing intentions: A parity-specific approach. Population and Development Review, 40(1), 31–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Weitzman, A. (2014). Women’s and men’s relative status and intimate partner violence in India. Population and Development Review, 40(1), 55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaai Parasnis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.



See Fig. 4

Fig. 4

The fertility gap and socio−economic variables (NFHS 3). The fertility gap is defined as the difference between the ideal and actual number of children. Using NFHS 3 and NFHS 4 data. Sample restricted to women aged 40 and above

See Tables 6, 7, 8 , 9 and 10.

Table 6 Definition of Variables employed in analysis
Table 7 Full results for the fertility gap: average marginal effects from multinominal estimations
Table 8 Full results for the fertility gap: OLS estimations
Table 9 Full results for the fertility gap: average marginal effects from multinominal estimations. Pooled NFHS 3 and NFHS 4 sample
Table 10 Fertility and son preference by state

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mishra, A., Parasnis, J. Husband, sons and the fertility gap: evidence from India. J Pop Research 38, 71–102 (2021).

Download citation


  • Fertility
  • India
  • Fertility gap
  • Son preference
  • Household bargaining

JEL Classification

  • D10
  • J13
  • J16