Transcript A Tale of Birth Sex Ratios in South Korea and

Patrilineality, Son Preference,
and State Policies in South Korea
Dr. Andrea den Boer
University of Kent
List of Countries with Abnormally High Juvenile Sex Ratios in 1995 and 2015
Country, 1995
0-4 Sex Ratio
Country, 2015
0-4 Sex Ratio
China
112.6
Albania
110.2
China, Hong Kong
108.8
Armenia
114.0
India
109.4
Azerbaijan
115.0
South Korea
113.4
China
119.1
Taiwan
109.0
China, Hong Kong
108.2
Vanuatu
107.7
Egypt
108.2
Fiji
107.4
Georgia
111.5
India
108.2
Kosovo
108.0
Kuwait
108.1
Lebanon
109.6
Montenegro
109.5
Philippines
107.1
Republic of South Sudan
112.2
Republic of Sudan
112.4
Taiwan
109.5
TFYR of Macedonia
108.1
Vanuatu
107.8
Vietnam
113.8
Drivers of offspring sex selection
Three conditions of emergence:
•
supply (sex selective technology)
•
demand (desire for sons in areas of strong son preference)
•
fertility (in areas of declining fertility)
Son preference—strongly affected by male control of resources and assets
•
Patrilocal marriage
•
Patrilinealilty
• Inequitable Family Law that Discriminates Against Females
• Women’s Property Rights in Practice
•
Development?
South Korea Family Planning 1970s-1980s
Birth Sex Ratio, South Korea, 1981-2014
118.00
116.00
Sex Ratio (birth) total
114.00
112.00
110.00
108.00
106.00
104.00
102.00
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Sex Ratios at Birth by Birth Order, South Korea, 1981-2014
240.00
220.00
200.00
Sex Ratio (birth) total
180.00
Sex Ratio First child
Sex Ratio Second child
Sex Ratio Third child
160.00
140.00
120.00
100.00
Sex Ratio Fourth child
Sex Ratio Age 0-4, South Korea, 1990
127
125.23
121.66
Sex Ratio Age 0-4
122
117
112
115.44
115.2
111.63
111.2
111.13
111
110.15
109.24
107.41
108.02
107.95
107.45
107.45
106.57
107
102
Region
118.0
2.800
South Korea Birth Sex Ratios and Fertility, 1981-2014
2.600
116.0
2.400
114.0
Fertility
112.0
2.200
2.000
1.800
110.0
1.600
108.0
1.400
106.0
1.200
104.0
1.000
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Fertility Rate
Birth Sex Ratio
Birth Sex Ratio
Sex Ratio at Birth and GDP, South Korea, 1981-2013
118.00
30000
116.00
25000
BIRTH SEX RATIO
20000
112.00
15000
110.00
10000
108.00
5000
106.00
104.00
0
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
YEAR
Sex Ratio
GDP
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
GDP (PER CAPITA) US$
114.00
Normalising the sex ratio
• Method: historical process tracing
• Examined changing gender relations over time, from laws (and enforcement) to
practices, state policies to family practices, patterns of behaviour, role of
women’s rights activists, changing attitudes as reflected in surveys (regarding
son preference, family roles and relationships)
• Key surveys: 1976-2013 National Fertility and Family Health and Welfare Surveys
(married men and women are asked questions about the necessity of sons); Social
Surveys; Statistics on the Aged
• Census data and population statistics, 1981-2014
Hoju: patrilineal system
• Korean politics have been established along patrilineal lines—agnatic lineal
descent groups are the basic element of society
• Daughters are subordinate to fathers, wives to husbands, widows to sons
• The hojuje system has protected male dominance through patrilocal marriage
practices, patrilineage in kinship and inheritance of property
• Women not considered full members with equal rights in birth clan, removed
from birth register upon marriage, yet not considered part of their husband’s clan
• Resources kept within male line (early changes in 1977 enabled daughters to
inherit 25% of male inheritance; assets, including custody, remained with males
in divorce)
“Son Necessity” in Korean Surveys
Extent
Definitely
necessary
1976
61.0%
1985
38.7%
1991
40.5%
1994
26.3%
2000
16.2%
2006
10.2%
2012
8.2%
Son preference did not differ according to female employment, nor by age, but did differ according to the level of
education of the mother (with highest son preference among those with less than high school level education)
Laws and state policies affecting patrilineal
practices and sex selection
• Legal approach to sex selection: enforcement of a ban on physician-provided prenatal sex
identification in 1987 (abortion illegal, but not enforced)
• Legal attack on patrilineality
• Role of women’s movement mid-1980s-2000s—CEDAW; family register and family law
• 1991 first revisions to family law (wife’s name to be entered on husband’s register; no automatic paternal
custody; equal daughter and son inheritance)
• 2003 female-headed households legal
• 2005 full revision to the hoju system
• Provision of some form of old-age insurance to the bulk of the population
• Changing attitudes regarding caring for elderly (from both the elderly and their children)
• Urbanization and the decline of rural land as inheritance
• Absence of fertility control policies, even though TFR dropped significantly during the same
time period
Drawing lessons from South Korea and
future research
• Importance of both women’s rights activists and government
in altering patrilineal laws and practices
• Difficult to know the relative importance of urbanisation,
laws, and changing attitudes towards elderly, and the role
played by legal bans on sex selection
• Surprised by normalisation of the sex ratio in southeast
• Relative value of sons and daughters: lowering the value of
sons or raising the value of daughters?