children's education in the phillipines

7/28/2019 Children's Education in the Phillipines

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/childrens-education-in-the-phillipines 1/30



PopulationResearch nd PolicyReview15: 219-247 (June 1996)© 1996KluwerAcademicPublishers. rinted n theNetherlands.

Children's ducation n thePhillipines:Does highfertility atter?

DEBORAH S. DeGRAFF1,RICHARD E. BILSBORROW2 &ALEJANDRON. HERRIN31Department f Economics,Bowdoin College,Brunswick,Maine, USA; 2CarolinaPopulationCenter and Department f BiostatisticsUniversity f North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NorthCarolina,USA;

3Schoolof

Economics,UniversityfthePhilippines, uezon

City,he

PhilippinesAbstract.hispaperexamines he effectsf familyize and sibling ositionn children'scurrentchool nrollmenttatusnthePhilippines.hetheoreticalrameworkocuses n thedeterminantsf children'sarticipationn alternativectivities,pecificallychooling, arketwork,ndhome roduction.his pproachllows or greaternderstandingf hemechanismsthroughhich ertility,s reflectedynumber fsiblingsndsiblingomposition,nfluenceschildren'sducationhanwould xamininghedeterminantsfschoolinglone.The model sestimatedsing he1983waveof the BicolMultipurposeurvey. he resultsndicate heexistencefnegativeffectsffertilityn school nrollment,hich,npart, perate hroughwork tatus.naddition,hese ffectsifferccordingo the iblingositionf the hild.

Keywords: ducation,ertility,hilippines,ime llocation

Introduction

Thestudyfthedeterminantsffertilityndevelopingountriesas beenan mportantopic f ocial cience esearchince he arly 970s.However,there ontinuesobe considerableebateabouttheconsequencesfhighfertility.he assessmentf the stateof our knowledge as been based

primarilyn therelationshipsetween opulation rowthnd economic

developmentt themacroevel.Onlyrecentlyasattentionegun ofocuson themicro evel onsequencesfhigh ertilityithin ouseholdsn de-velopingountriese.g.,Bauer& Racelis 991;Cochrane tal. 1989;Herma-linet al. 1982;Herrin 992;King1987;Knodel& Wongsith991;Knodeletal. 1989).Thispaper xamineshe ffectsfhigh ertilityn childwelfarein thePhilippines,ooking pecificallyt the llocationf children'sime san indicatorfwelfare. he objectives to analyze hetrade-offsetween

competingses ofchildren'sime, ndhow thesepatternsf timeuse areinfluencedyfamilyizeandcomposition,ncludinghe ibling ositionf

childrenn thehousehold.One ofthemost mportantomponentsf children'simeuse is schoolattendance.he extentowhich hildrenndevelopingountriesrebeingeducatedmay aveprofoundmplicationsor he ong-runelfaref hildrenand their amilies,s wellas foreconomic evelopmenthroughumancapital ormation. e assume hat, t least nthe ong-run,hildren'sdu-



220

cation s welfarenhancingor hechild, hefamily,nd the nation. hequestion fhow children'sime s allocated, etween choolingnd otheractivities,s thereforefgreat olicy elevance. lthoughherelated ssueofthetime llocation f women as receivedome attentionn thePhilip-pines nd elsewheree.g., Fabella et al. 1984;Ho 1979;King& Evenson1983;Quizon1978),analyses f the determinantsf children's imeuseacrossmultiplectivities emainimited,wing t least npart o lack ofadequate ata.1Moreover,most tudiesn the onsequencesfhigh ertilityfor hildren avefocused n health ndnutritionalspects nd noton otherimportantomponentsf childwell-beinguchas timeuse (e.g., Horton

1986;King1987;Popkin 983;Leslie & Paolisso1989).The

presenttudyof thedeterminantsf children'sime se should dd to ourunderstandingofthe onsequencesfhigh ertility.

The trade-offsetween hildren'school nrollmentnd theneedtocapi-talize n the hort-runncomearning otentialfchildrenndotherontri-butions ofamily aintenancere nfluencedy abormarketndschoolingopportunitiesvailable or hildrennthe ommunity,s well sbyhouseholdcharacteristics.ven when chool nrollments the ssueofprimaryolicyconcern,t can befullynderstoodnlywithinframeworkhichxaminesnot ustschool nrollment,ut also thealternativeses of children'sime.

Thusthis esearchxpands ponpreviousiteraturen thedeterminantsfchildren'sducationydeveloping conceptual odel fthese nterrelation-shipsand howthey re affectedypolicyfactorsChernichovsky985;DeGraff Bilsborrow993;King& Lillard 983;Paqueo 1985).

Background

The effectsfhigh ertilityn children'simeuse is a topic f substantialrelevancen thePhilippines.he population rowthatecontinues o be

relativelyigh approximately.3% per annum), nd has declined nlymoderatelyverthepasttwodecades, ncontrasto most ther ountriesin SoutheastAsia. The totalfertilityateremains bout4.1 childrenerwoman,ndover 0percentfthepopulations under ge16 World ank1994).Thusfamiliesre arge ndcontain everalmembershat recurrentlyorsoon tobe intheprime choolingndchild-bearingges.Forexample,70 percentfthehouseholdsncludednthedata set used here ontaintleast nechild fprimaryrsecondarychool ge,and the verage umberofschool-agehildrennthesehouseholdss2.8.

During heearly1970sthegovernmentf thePhilippinesdvocatednational olicy oreduce ertilityypromotingncreasedontraceptivese.While omeprogress asmade,duringhe1980s his olicyweakened ndthemodest ertilityecline alted. ublic ebate ontinuesbout heuse ofcontraceptionnd tspromotiony hegovernmentHerrin 989).Currently,contraceptiverevalence,lthough airly igh 45% nation-wide),s com-



221

prised argely f traditional,ess effectivemethods uch as withdrawal nd

rhythm.hissuggests hat urrent onditions re notconducive o a resump-tionofsignificantertilityecline n the short-run.

These demographicndpolicy rendshave been accompaniedbya periodof imited rnegative conomicgrowthince themid-1970s,rising rom hecombinedeffects f global recession,mismanagement f the Philippineseconomy, nd political nstability. eal per capita income has deteriorated

substantially, iththe incidenceof povertyncreasing rom 9.3% in 1971to 59.3% in1985 Herrin1989).Thusmany ilipinofamilies reexperiencingincreasing conomichardship, longwith ontinuing ighfertility.

Somewhat urprisingly,ducational

gainsin the

Philippiness measured

by enrollmentnd completion ateshave continued hroughouthisperiodin spiteof the unfavorable onditions. n 1960,50 percentofyoungadults

aged 20 to 24 had completed n elementaryducationwhile17 percenthadfinished ighschool. These statisticswere both alreadyquite highamongdeveloping ountries. y 1975thecorrespondingigures ere 73 percent nd34 percent King & Lillard 1983). In 1984, the current nrollment atereachednearly100 percentforprimary chool age childrenwhile that of

secondary choolage youthwas 68 percentUnitedNationsChildren's und

1989). However,thesefiguresmaska high ncidence fgraderepetitionnd

non-completionnd are both inflatedby enrollment f childrenwho areolderthanthe usual age ofcompletion.Recentestimates sing ohort urvi-val methods ndicate that the completionrate for elementary chool in

1990/91fthosewhowereeverenrolledwas approximately0 percent.The

corresponding igurefor secondaryschool, of those ever enrolled in se-

condary chool,was about76 percent.Furthermore,hequality fschoolingin thePhilippines as probablydeclinedduring hisperiod Government f

the Philippines1992). Nonetheless,therehave clearlybeen increasesin

schoolenrollmentnd educationalattainmentn recentdecades, facilitated

bygovernmentromotionfuniversal lementaryducation hroughompul-

soryminimumducation egislation nd a schoolbuilding rogram.These governmentctionshave createdgreaterncentivesnd opportuni-

tiesfor hildren ocontinue heir ducation, t leastthrough rimarychool.

However,the impactof thesemeasureson theeducationof anyparticularchilddependson the educational nd otheropportunitiesor hildrenn the

specific rea ofresidence, nd theability f the child'sfamily o avail itself

of such opportunities, speciallygiven the recenteconomic decline. The

relevant onstraintsnd optionsforeach childare thus ikely o be shapednotonlybytheavailabilityndquality f schoolsandlabormarket pportuni-ties in thecommunity,ut also by thenumber nd ages of childrenn the

household a reflectionfpastfertilitynd timing fbirths), ibling osition,characteristicsfthemother nd herenvironment hich nfluence erown

productivityn marketemployment ersusotheractivities, nd household

resources.Giventhis ontext, hearea ofthePhilippines nder tudyhere,theBicol



222

region, s particularlynteresting. he Bicol region s one of the poorestregionsof thecountry,withrelativelyow levels of per capita income andinfrastructureevelopmentHorton 1986). Since theearly1970s substantial

fundinghas been allocated to the region through he Bicol River Basin

DevelopmentProgramnorder o ncrease he evel of nfrastructure,rovidesocial services includingeducation), and promoteagricultural nd non-

agricultural evelopment.Although heprogramhas resulted n significantimprovements,he economicdevelopment f the Bicol regionas a wholecontinues o agbehindmuch f thecountry,nd there s substantial ariationwithin heregion s well. The Bicol region s also characterizedythehighest

fertilityates in the

Philippines Palmoreet al.

1991)and lower school

enrollment nd completion ates than the nationalaverage Government fthe Philippines1992). Under such circumstancest is likelythat decisions

concerninghildren's ime allocation are moreheavily nfluenced yshort-runeconomic considerations.

Earlier studies on women's time allocation in the Philippinesprovideevidence thatolder children's ime s often substitute ormother's ime nhomeproduction nd child care. Quizon (1978) foundthat thepresenceofchildren ged seven or older nthe homeincreases hemother's eisuretimebut does not affect er marketwork time.This suggests hatmother's ime

in home production s reduced. Similarly, abella et al. (1984) concludedthat the number of children ged 14 to 24 decreases the mother'shome

production imealthough t has no effect n hermarketwork time.Ho'sresults 1979) also support hesefindings.

Other tudiesnthePhilippinesndicate hat amilyize andsibling ositioninfluence he amount of time children llocate to economic activities ndeducation.Navera (1978) examined home production nd marketwork ofchildren ged fouryearsand older. He found hat otalfamilyize increasesthe amount of time allocated by childrento these activities, articularlymarketwork.Fabella et al. (1978) found hat henumber fsiblingsncreases

the timeallocated to marketworkbymale children ged 10 to 24, buthastheoppositeeffect n that f females nthe sameage group,while ncreasingtheir ime nhomeproductionctivities. egarding heschooling fchildren,Paqueo (1985) models thedeterminantsf educational ttainmentf children

aged 7 to 13 (primary chool), and finds negativeeffect f numberofsiblings.Herrin's 1992) results lso suggest negative ffect f number fsiblingson secondary chool enrollment.Bauer & Racelis (1991) reach asimilar onclusionfor econdary choolenrollment,lthough he number folder siblings aged 17 to 24) has a positiveeffect n the probability fenrollment. inally,King& Lillard 1983) conclude that ibling osition, n

addition o number fsiblings,nfluences hildren's ducational ttainment.Each of these studies has implications ormodelling he determinantsf

children's imeallocationand, therefore,welfare. n general,they uggestthatnotonly s family ize an important eterminant f children's imeuse,thesiblingpositionofchildrenwithin hefamily ccording o age and sex is



223

also important.owever,most f these tudies o notaddress he argerissueexamined ereofthe allocation f children'sime mong ompetinguses, ncludingchooling,ndhow his llocations related ofertility.

Theoretical ramework

Thetheoreticalrameworkor his nalysis iews ecisionsbout hildren'stime llocationsbeingmadeointly ith ecisionsoncerninghe llocationofother ouseholdmembers'ime nd non-laboresourcesomaximizehe

utilityf thefamilys a whole Birdsall& Cochrane 982;Levison1991,1995).Throughouthe hild's rimechoolingears, arentsreassumedoconsiderhe rade-offsetweenhe ong-runenefitsf ncreasinghe hild'shuman apital ndowmenthroughn additional ear feducation,n theonehand, ndtheforegonearningsnd other roductiveontributionsfchildren,s wellas direct osts fschooling,n theother. amilyifetime

utilitys assumed o be a functionftheconsumptionfgoodsandchild

well-beingrchild ervices. hefamily akes hoices bout heallocationoftime feachindividualn thehouseholdo alternativectivitiesn theshort-run,ndaboutthepurchase fgoods.Thesechoices re limited y

time onstraintsor achhouseholdmemberndbya budget onstraint.Children'simenmarket ork elaxes hebudget onstraintn theshort-run,while hildren'sducationalttainmentas thepotentialfrelaxingthebudget onstraintn the ong-run.hildren'simen homeproductioncontributesoconsumptionoods.Wealsoassume hat hildren'schoolingand eisureontributeirectlyofamilytilityy ncreasinghildwell-being.

The mplicationfthis rameworks that or achchildn a family,hort-run ecisionsremadeduringhe chool-ageears oncerninghe llocationof ime etweenompetingctivities,asedon currentnd nticipatedondi-tionswhichnfluencehe hort-nd ong-runosts ndbenefitsf lternative

timeallocation trategies.hus, n contrasto thestaticmodelsof thequantity/qualityiterature,hich ocus ncompletedducationalttainmentof childrenBecker& Lewis1973;Rosenzweig Evenson1977;Willis

1973),we propose hathousehold ecisions egardinghildren'schoolingaremade ndadapted equentially,nthe ontextfa complete ouseholdtime llocationmodel.Animportantmplicationfthe equentialmodellingapproachs thatpastfertilityehavior,ndthereforeibling umbernd

composition,anbe treateds exogenous.Anothermportantmplicationf this heoreticalrameworks that ime

allocationecisionsf llhouseholdmembersre nterrelatedndthusmust

be viewed s endogenous. hiscreates onsiderableomplicationsor heestimationfthefullmodel. n the nterestsftractability,heapplicationof theproposed rameworkerefocuses nlyon thetime llocation fchildrenfschool ge. Theresulting odel,while xplicitn its treatmentof he nterrelatednessfchildren'sime se,onlymplicitlyncorporateshe



224

time use of otherhousehold members.However,while all householdmem-

bers' time use decisions are consideredendogenous,we assume thatothermembers' resence n thehousehold, .e., household omposition,s exogen-ous at the timeof observationConnellyet al. 1995). We also assumethereis no jointproduction, hat s, children re not engagedin more than one

activity imultaneously.The time allocation of childrencomprisesfourmutually xclusiveand

exhaustive ategories: chool attendance, ncomegenerating r market ri-entedwork,homeproductione.g., housecleaning,gatheringuelorwater,caringforsiblings, tc.), and leisure. It is importanto note herethat thedistinction etween marketworkand home

productions not

alwaysclear

cut, theoreticallyr empirically. he conceptualdistinctionmployedhereis that market work involves work forremunerationn cash or kind or

production foutput or ale,whereashomeproductionnvolves heproduc-tion ofoutputforfamily onsumption. his is similar o thedichotomy sed

byAlderman & Chisti 1991). According o the theoretical ramework e

expectthe demands on each child'stime to be affected ythenumber nd

ages of other children n the family, nd by the individual hild's sex and

siblingposition. n particular, hildren romhighfertilityamilies re likelyto have greaterdemandsplaced on their ime nmarket nd homeproduc-

tion,otherthings qual. This is especially ikely o be the case forchildrenwithmanyyounger iblings, s olderchildren re generallymoreproductivethan youngerchildren,particularlyn market work. Sex of the child is

hypothesizedo be importantecause ofpotential ifferencesnproductivityat alternativeasks,butalso because of social norms boutappropriate olesforboysand girls.

We also expect the relative mportance f short-run nd long-run ostsand benefits f children's time use to differ ccordingto overall familyresources.For example,families loser to the subsistence evelare likely o

place greaterdemands upon childrento contribute o currenthousehold

income ndproduction. hus household ncomepotentialsexpected o havea negativeeffect n children'smarketworkand home production, nd apositive ffect n children's chooling.Parental ducation s hypothesizedohave similar ffects, othbecause itreflects igher conomic tatus nd alsoperhapsa greater mportance ttachedto children's ducation n theutilityfunction. urthermore,hemother's ducationreflects heopportunityostsof her time and will therefore ffect he relativeproductivityf mothersversuschildrennmarketwork and homeproduction.

The constraintsnd optionsfacing hildren re also shapedbyconditionsin the community.We hypothesize hatthe availability f schools in the

communitywill have a positiveeffect n children's chool attendancebyloweringboth the directand the opportunityosts of school attendance.3Economicandsocialfactorswhichncrease hedemandfor hild aborand/orthe remunerationf childlabor in the communityre expectedto have apositiveeffect n children's abor market ctivities.Communityonditions



225

which educe he need forhomeproductionr whichnfluencehildren'sproductivityn homeproductionillhave a direct ffectn time llocationtohomeproductionctivities.

The theoreticalrameworkields systemf four quations eflectingchildren'sime llocationcross hefour lternativectivities. e limit hemodel to three f these activities schooling,marketwork, nd homeproductionthefourthctivityleisure ime) s notexplicitlyncorporatedsincehours f eisuressimplyresidual. he structuralorm fthe heoreti-calmodel an be summarizeds follows:

Hs= ft+ 0mHm /3pHp/3;XS j3;Zs+es, (1)

Hm ao+ asHs+ apHp+ <*;Xm a'zZm em, (2)

Hp= y0 %HS+ ymHmy^Xp yiZp+ €p, (3)

where he ubscriptsres = school ime,m= market ork, ndp = home

production,ndtheHirepresentours llocated o eachof the hree ctivi-tiesbyeachchild.Theexplanatoryariablesdiscussedn detailn thenext

section)nclude heendogenous umberf hours llocated o eachoftheotherwo ime secategories,xogenousharacteristicsf the hild ndhisorherhouseholdX), andexogenousharacteristicsfthe ommunityZ),

whichrehypothesizedo affectime llocationneachof he hreectivities.The endogenousimeuse variables re included mong heexplanatoryvariableso enableus to distinguishirect ffectsromndirectffectsfother xplanatoryariables nd to explicitlyxaminewhetherhere retrade-offsetweenlternativesesofchildren'sime.

Estimation

Theestimationfthemodelusesdichotomous0, 1) measuresfthe hreedependentariablesatherhan he ctualnumberfhoursn eachactivity.Thereasons or his retwo-fold.irst,nformationnhours ctuallypentin school n thereference eek s notavailable;only urrentnrollmentstatuss ncludedn thedata.4 econd, lthoughourspentn home roduc-tion nd nmarket orkreavailable,heres substantiallusteringor heseactivitiestzerohours42.7% and68.9% of the ample eporterohoursinthese ctivities,espectively).hissuggestshat heyes/noichotomys

meaningful.hustheestimationf themodelfocuses n thedistinctionbetween

articipationndnon-participationn eachofthese ctivities.5

The estimationses two-stagerocedure.nthefirsttage, educed ormequations oreach of thethreedependent ariables re estimatedsingprobitmaximumikelihoodechniques. he explanatoryariables or ach

equationnclude ll oftheexogenous ariablesXi andZ4for = s, m,or

p) of thefull ystem. ased on theresults f thefirsttage,predicted



226

probabilitiesf participatingn each of the three ctivitiesre derived.

Theseestimatedalues erve s the ndogenousxplanatoryariablesntheestimationf the tructural odel nthe econd tage,which lsoemploysprobit pecificationsor all three quations.This two-stage roceduresnecessaryo ensure onsistentarameterstimatesiven he imultaneousstructuref themodel.6

Additionalstimationssuesnot addressedn thispaperarisefrom heincorporationfexplanatoryariables t the ommunityevel ndthepossi-ble inclusion f morethanone childperfamilyn thesample.The logicconfrontinghese wo ssues s similar. heremay xist nobservedactorsat the

communityevel or at the householdevel that esultncorrelated

behavior crosshouseholdswithin ommunitiesr across hildren ithinhouseholds,espectively,hat re not ccountedor n themodel.Anexam-ple mighte differencesmonghildrenna householdn nitial ndowmentsof intelligencehat ead to negativeorrelationscross ctivities. o theextentuch ntra-communityr intra-householdorrelationxists,twouldresultn downwardlyiased estimatesf the standard rrorsf the coef-ficients,lthoughhe oefficientshemselves ould till e consistentGuil-key1992;Guilkey Murphy989;Solonetal. 1987).

Data and variables

The dataused ntheanalysisre derived romhe1983wave of theBicolMultipurposeurveyBMS83) of the Bicolregion f thePhilippines.heBMS83contains othhousehold-ndcommunitybarangay)-levelata, ndis one ofthefew uchdetailed ata ets ndevelopingountries.he house-hold-levelata are based on a stratifiedandomample f 1901householdsfrom 00barangays.hese households ontain pproximately2,000 hil-dren, fwhich ,036 re ntheprime chooling earsages7 to17)andare

children fthe household ead and/orpouse.8The subsamples furtherrefinedo ncludenly hose hildren hohavenever eenmarriedndwhostillive t home.9 heserefinementseduce he ample o3,736 hildren.

Finally, ecausethedataconcerning arket ork nd homeproductionare basedon a referenceeriod fone weekprior o the urvey,he amplemustbe furtherestrictedo exclude hildren rom ouseholds hatwereintervieweduring periodwhenschool was not in sessionduringhepreviousweek.If schoolwas not n session, hehypothesisf trade-offsbetweenchooling, arket ork,ndhome roductions not smeaningful.Thuschildrenrom ouseholds hatwere ntervieweduringhe summer

vacationreexcluded,esultingna sample f2,679 hildren.The community-levelata are derived rom dministrativeecords nd

interviewsith eynformantsneachofthe100barangays.hecommunitysample onsists f15 urban arangaysrom he hree itiesntheregion, 4semi-urbanarangayspoblaciones)which retownsnrural reas, nd 71



227

Table 1. Summary f children's imeuse by age

Age 7-12 Age 13-17 Age 7-17

(n = 1541) (n = 1138) (n = 2679)

% enrolled 81.0 72.3 77.3% marketwork 21.9 43.6 31.1% homeproduction 49.2 68.4 57.3

Averagehoursmarketwork ifhours 0) 6.3 16.0 12.1

(8.5)a (17.5) (15.3)(3.0)b (8.0) (6.0)

Averagehourshome

productionifhours 0) 8.6 10.8 9.7

(9.3) (11.4) (10.5)

(^0) (^0) (^0)a Standarddeviation.bMedian.

ruralbarangays.None of thebarangay nformations based on aggregateddata from he household ample,as the number f householdsperbarangay

(19 on average) is too smallto providereliableestimates f such contextualmeasures.Individualchildren ged 7 to 17 serveas the unitsof observation n the

empiricalnalysis. choolingn thePhilippines onsists f sixyears fprimaryschool,which n averagebegins t age 7, andfouryearsofsecondary chool,which n averagebeginsat age 13, although here s substantial ariationn

ages ofentry,ontinuationates, ndcompletion ates King& Lillard1983;Herrin1990). The dependentvariables re (1) whether he child s currentlyenrolled nschool, 2) whether he childengaged n marketworkduring he

pastweek,and (3) whether he childcontributedo homeproduction uring

thepast week. Marketwork ncludesworkforwages or payment n kind,plus unpaidwork n a family arm r business.Home productionncludesworkactivities hatdo not result n paymentor in produce intendedforsale.10'11

Table 1 providesdescriptive tatistics orthe threedependentvariables.School enrollment ates n theBicol regionare relatively ighcomparedto

manydeveloping ountries; owever, heseratesare lowerthanthenational

averages.12We also see thatschool enrollment ecreaseswithage, while

participationn home production nd marketwork ncreasewithage. Themean numberof hours spent in home production nd marketwork also

increasewith ge, but,evenforyounger hildren, he amountof time pentin theseactivitiess nottrivial.Although heanalysisherefocuses n partici-pation, t s also interestingo note the argedispersion nd skewness n thedistributionsfhoursofmarketworkand homeproductionmongchildrenwhoengage n these ctivities.n eachcase, a highpercentage f observations



228

Table 2. Summary f children's nrollmenttatusbywork tatus nd age

% enrolled Age 7-12 Age 13-17 Age 7-17

(n = 1541) (n = 1138) (n = 2679)

Total 81.0 72.3 77.3No marketworkor homeproduction 70.5 77.3 72.2Market workonly 89.6 63.3 74.0Home production nly 88.9 72.1 80.4Both marketwork and homeproduction 91.2 63.5 74.2

are clusteredbelow themean,

with a muchsmallerpercentage llocatingrelativelyargenumbers f hours to marketwork and homeproduction.

Table 2 summarizes hildren's nrollmenttatus ccording o their artici-pation nmarketwork nd homeproduction. or older children articipationin eithermarketworkor homeproductions associatedwith owerrates ofschool enrollment. hisrelationship ppearsto be stronger ormarketworkthanforhomeproduction. he picture s notas clear for hildren fprimaryschoolage. The lower enrollment or hosenotworkings largely n artifactof owparticipationnanyof the three ctivities or heyoungest hildren.13

The exogenous explanatory ariablesof themodel are definednTable 3,

withdescriptivetatistics iven nTable 4. The variablescan mosteasilybedescribed ngroupswhich argely orrespond o theconcepts nthetheoreti-cal framework. irst are characteristicsf thechild,whichreflect otentialdifferencesn productivitynd in social norms.These includeage and sexof child n all three quations.The school enrollmentquationalso includes

age-squaredbecause the variation nage ofentrynd the ncreasing robabil-ityofdiscontinuationmongolder children re likely o result n nonlineareffects.

Because the mother'swork activitys endogenousbut is not explicitlymodelledhere,we includemother's ge and education n all equationsto

implicitlyapturethe effects f herproductivityn alternative ctivities.Asdiscussed bove, educationmayalso capture ncome effects nd differencesinpreferencesoncerninghildren's ctivities.Householdeconomic tatus salso directlyepresented ythevalue of andholdings ndquality fhousingmaterial.

A set of householdcharacteristicss includedto captureshort-run ostsand benefits f alternative ctivitiesof children. Costs of schoolingaremeasuredby traveltime from hehouse to the nearesthighschool, and isincluded nly ntheenrollmentquation.14 he existence fa family usinessis included nthemarketwork quationtoindicate amily emandformarket

labor.Important orthispaper are variablesmeasuring ouseholdcomposition,

which re included nall three quations.These variables apture he effectsof past fertilitynd, in particular, f the siblingpositionof the child of



229

Table 3. Definitions fexogenousexplanatory ariables

Variable Definition

CharacteristicsfchildMale child Sex ofchild,1 = male

Age Age of child n completedyears

CharacteristicsfhouseholdMother'seducation Mother'scompletedyearsof schoolMother's ge Age of mother n completedyearsLand holdings Value of landowned, n thousands fpesosSiblings ged 0-6 Numberofsiblings ged 0 to 6

Younger,female 7-17) Numberofyounger emale iblings fschoolage (age 7-17)

Younger,male (7-17) Numberofyoungermale siblings fschoolage (age 7-17)Older,female 7-17) Numberof olderfemale iblings f schoolage (age 7-17)Older,male (7-17) Numberof older male siblings f school age (age 7-17)Number f male adults Numberof malesaged 18 or olderNumber f femaleadults Numberof females ged 18 or olderTravel time Reportedtravel imefromhouse to nearesthigh choolin

minutes

Familybusiness Familyderives ome income from amily usiness,1 = yesHousingmaterial Qualityofmaterialhouse constructedf, 1 = lowestquality,

3 = highest uality

Characteristicsfcommunity

Urban Familyresidesn urban

barangay,1 =

yesSemi-urban Familyresides n semi-urban arangay,1 = yesLn childwage Natural ogarithmfaveragecommunitygriculturend

servicewage for hildren

Communitylectricity Electricitynbarangay,1 = yesDay care center Day care center nbarangay,1 = yes

observation, s well as thepresenceofhouseholdmembers hatmaysubsti-

tuteforchildren n varioustasks.Five siblingvariablesare included.Onemeasuresthe presenceof siblingswho are younger han school age, whiletheothersmeasure henumber fschool-aged iblings ategorized yrelative

age and bysex.

Finally,a set of community-levelariableswhichmeasurelabor marketconditions or hildren nd the need forhomeproduction re included.The

averagechildwage rate n thecommunityaptures heearnings otential f

children,whilethepresenceof electricityn the communitymayinfluence

production rocesses n a waythat ffectshemarket emandfor hild abor.The presenceof a daycarecenter n the communityeduces the need for

home-produced hildcare. We also controlforwhether he communitysurbanor semi-urban,with ruralcommunities s the omittedcategory, o

capture dditional ffectsf rural esidence hat re notadequatelymeasured

bythespecific ommunityharacteristicsvailable.15



230

Table 4. Descriptive statisticsfor exogenous explanatoryvariables, childrenaged 7-17

(n = 2,679)Variable Mean Standarddeviation

CharacteristicsfchildMale child 0.539 0.499

Age 11.799 3.061

CharacteristicsfhouseholdMother's education 5.827 2.756Mother'sage 41.814 7.730Land holdings 5.079 22.797

Siblings ged 0-6 1.291 1.227

Younger,female 7-17) 0.606 0.830Younger,male (7-17) 0.649 0.858Older, female 7-17) 0.813 0.995Older,male (7-17) 1.071 1.126Male adults 1.602 1.010Female adults 1.573 0.934Travel time 30.040 42.267

Familybusiness 0.467 0.499

Housingmaterial 1.313 0.588

Characteristicsf communityUrban 0.186 0.389Semi-urban 0.091 0.288Ln childwage 1.727 0.886

Community lectricity 0.807 0.395

Day care center 0.511 0.500

Results

Theempiricalesultsor he tructuralodel representedn Table 5. Theresults or he educed ormf he hreequations, hich ield he stimated

valuesused as explanatoryariablesnthe tructuralodel, re ncludedntheAppendix.ninterpretingheresultst s mportantokeep nmind hatthe tructuralquation or ach ofthe hree ctivitiesontrols or articipa-tionneachofthe therwo ctivities.hus he oefficientsf he xogenousexplanatoryariables epresentirect ffectshat re net oftheir ndirectinfluencesperatinghroughheother wo timeuse categories. he fulleffects,irect nd indirect,f any exogenous ariable re givenbythereducedform esults. he structuralorm, owever, rovidesmportantadditionalnsightsbouttheunderlyingrocessesffectinghildren'simeallocation.

Children'school nrollment

Focusing irstn theeffectsfparticipationnother ctivities,heresultslargelyupporthehypothesishat ompetingemands n children'sime



232

control, nd/orbecause ofgreaterdemandsforhoursof worktime marketor home) that s not fully eflectedn the dichotomousmeasures of workused here.

The results oncerninghecomposition f adult householdmembers ndi-cate thatonlythe number f adult women has an effect n children's choolenrollment. hismayreflect ubstitutbility etweenwomenand childrenn

productive ctivitieswhich s notfully apturedwithout onsidering umberofhours allocated to homeproduction nd marketwork.

The mother's education has a positiveeffect n school enrollment, s

expected.This mayreflect n income effect n children's chooling f mo-ther's

arnings,which s

likelyo be

positivelyorrelatedwithhereducation

level,and/or greater alueplacedon the educationofchildren yeducated

parents. Similarly, hildren romhouseholds of higher conomicstatus, smeasuredby housingconditions, xperiencea higherprobability f beingenrolled n school.

The effects f costs ofschooling re also consistentwith heoreticalxpec-tations.The greater hetravel imeto school,the ess likely t s that childis currentlynrolled. This finding as policy mplications ot onlyfor theconstructionnd locationofschools,but also for ystems ftransporto andfrom chools bothroad infrastructurend public transport).

Finally,the results ndicatethatgirls re morelikely o be enrolledthanboys.This is consistentwithpastresearch n thePhilippines, nd is thoughtto arise not onlybecause boys are more likelyto engage in marketwork

(whichwe have controlled or ndwilldiscussbelow), but also because boyswhowork allocatemore hours to marketwork thangirlswhowork,whichwe have notcontrolled or.Additionally,t is possiblethatparentsperceivegreaterfuturebenefits romeducating girlsthan boys, either because of

higherexpectedreturns o femaleschoolingor greaterexpectedfinancial

supportfrom aughters han from ons (Andersonet al. 1993). The formeris unlikelynthecontext f thePhilippines, ut evidence ofgreater inancial

supportfrommigrant aughters hanfrommigrantons has been found nseveral Asian countries, ncluding he Philippines Anderson et al. 1993;Findley& Williams1991;Huang 1984; Phongpaichat 993;Traeger1984).

Children'smarketwork

Looking at Table 5 we also see that school enrollment as no effect nchildren's articipationnmarketwork,whilehomeproductionncreases helikelihoodofmarketwork. This findings contraryo expectations ndmayresult rom omeunobserved haracteristicf the child forexample,abilityto handle multiple asks) or the familyforexample, poverty tatus)thatleads to more workof bothtypes, nd hence a positive ssociationbetweenthetwo.

The householdcompositionvariablessuggestthatthepresenceof oldermale siblingsdecreases the likelihood of marketworkby the child. This



233

suggests hatolder brothers re likely o earn more frommarketwork and

therefore ubstitute oryounger hildren.The absence of an effect f thenumber fyounger iblings n marketwork s consistent ith his nterpreta-tion.This s not ustan effect fage alone, as age of child howstheexpectedpositive ffect n theprobabilityf marketwork. This findinguggests hatthenegative ffects fhighfertilityor hildwelfare in the form f ncreasedmarketworkparticipation) re more likelyto be experiencedby childrenborn earlyin the reproductive istory f a family.This is an interestingfindings it runs ounter o thehypothesishat arlierborn hildren relikelyto be better ff ecause at eastpartof their hildhood ackscompetitionrom

many siblings.Salaaf s (1981) findingsor

Hong Kongare consistentwith

ourresults.The negativeeffect f mother's choolingon children'smarketworkis

consistentwithpreferencesmongeducatedparentsplacinga highervalueon child eisure. n addition, hegreater alue ofan educatedwoman'stimein themarket educesthesubstitutabilityf children ormothersnmarketwork.The resultsforfamily usinessare also consistentwiththeory.The

greater emandforfamilyaborunder uchcircumstanceseads to a greaterlikelihood hat hildren articipaten marketwork.

Characteristicsfthecommunityhat ffect he abormarket orchildren

also have an effect n children'smarketwork.Electricityn thecommunitymayresult n theuse ofmoreadvancedproduction echnologies hatdo notutilizechildlabor as inputs,resultingn a negativeeffect f electricitynmarketwork.These results re consistentwith hoseofprevious esearch n

thePhilippines n the effects f electrificationHerrin1979; Herrin& Te

1985).Contraryoexpectations,hemeasureofchildwages n thecommunityhas no effect n children'smarketwork.This mayreflect roblems n its

measurement,nd/or ossibly high ncidence funpaidfamilywork mongchildrenwho are engaged in marketwork. On the otherhand, children

residingn urbanand semi-urban ommunitiesre less likely o be engaged

in marketwork,whichprobablyreflects oth differencesn labor marketconditionsnd in attitudes owards hildren'sworkbetweenurbanand rural

areas.

Lastly, ooking t thesexofthechild,we find hatmale children remore

likely oparticipatenmarketworkthanare female hildren.As mentioned

previously,his s likely obe attributableothto differencesnproductivityin marketworkand differencesn social normsregardingppropriate oles

formale and femalechildren.

Children's omeproduction

The effect fschoolenrollmentn homeproductions positive,whilethere

is no significantffect fmarketworkon participationn homeproductionactivities. he positiveeffect f enrollmentmayreflect igherproductivityin home productionderivingfromschooling,or may be the resultof a



234

negativeeffect f hours ofmarketworkthrough chooling hat s not ade-

quatelycontrolled orusingthe dichotomousmeasure of marketwork.The number fpre-school ged siblingsncreasestheprobabilityhatthe

childofobservation ontributeso homeproduction. his is consistentwiththehypothesishatyounger hildren ncrease the demandson oldersiblingsforcustodialcare and other household chores.On the otherhand,there sno effect fsiblings f school age on homeproduction, uggestinghat heydo not substitute or children n householdwork nor creategreaterhome

production emands foreach other. These findingsre independent f theeffect f age of child, which, s expected, ndicates hat older children remore

ikelyoengage

inhomeproduction.The allocation of children's time to home production ctivities s not

influencedby land holdingsor by the age or education of the mother.However,the variablemeasuring ousing onditions as theexpectednega-tive ffect. avinga homeconstructedf a sturdymaterialwhich s indicativeof higher conomic status reduces the demands for homeproduction ime

bychildren.Thepresence fa daycare enter n thecommunityecreasesthe ikelihood

that choolage children ngage nhomeproduction. his reflects he effectsof theavailability f alternative ources of child care thatcan substitute or

siblingcare of youngchildren. Children n urban communities re morelikelyto contribute o home production han are children n ruralareas,whilechildren n semi-urban reas are less likelyto do so. In urban areasthismay arise because marketwork activities f parents, speciallyof themother, re more ikely o take them wayfrom he home forthemajorityof thedayand involve essflexibilityver work ime.Childrenmaythereforebe relieduponmore tomanagethehousehold.

Finally, he resultsndicate hatfemale hildren re more ikely operformhouseholdwork thanare male children.This is consistentwiththe overallpattern fdifferentiationfroles based on sex thathasemergedntheresults

formarketwork and school enrollment. he greaterpropensity orgirls oengage nhomeproduction eflectsocietalexpectationsoncerning ivisionsof labor in the domesticrealm.

Differencesysex ofchild

The resultspresented bove suggest hatthereare significantifferencesnthe time use of male and female children.Given this, the model is re-estimated orboysand girls eparately o ascertainwhether here re differ-ences in thesignificancer themagnitude f thecoefficients. he results f

thisexerciseare largely onsistentwith hose forthecombined ample,andthereforewillnotbe discussed n detail. However,a few nterestingiffer-encesemerge.Table 6 presents esults or hefemale ubsample,whileTable7 presentsresultsforthe male subsample. The reduced formresults reprovided n theAppendix.For thosecoefficientshat are significantnd of



236

Table 7. Resultsof structural odel for choolenrollment,marketwork, nd homeproduction:

male children ged 7-17

Explanatory ariable School Market Homeenrollment work production

Endogenousvariables predicted)Enrolled NA -0.169 1.055***Marketwork -2.773*** NA -0.281Home production -0.314 2.092*** NA

Characteristicsfchild

Age 1.968*** 0.038 0.123***

Age-squared -0.076***

CharacteristicsfhouseholdMother's education 0.043* -0.056*** -0.020Mother'sage -0.014 0.003 0.012Land holdings 0.001 0.000 -0.001

Siloings0-6 -0.823* -0.006 0.017Numberofsiblings

Younger,female 7-17) -0.073 0.029 0.017

Younger,male (7-17) -0.195*** -0.075 0.094*

Older, female 7-17) -0.147*** 0.012 -0.043Older,male (7-17) -0.120** -0.127*** -0.029

Male adults -0.022 0.025 -0.130***Female adults 0.166*** -0.011 -0.017Travel time -0.001

Familybusiness - 0.232***

Housingmaterial 0.043 0.054 -0.144**

Characteristicsf communityUrban -0.234* -0.371*** 0.204*Semi-urban -0.217 -0.032 -0.409***Ln childwage - 0.119**

Communitylectricity - -0.198*

Day care center - - -0.259***Constant -9.211*** -1.705*** -1.825***

Chi-squared 279.28*** 223.76*** 168.69***n 1298 1411 1414

Significanceevels: * = 10%; ** = 5%; ***= 1%.

effects romyounger isters fschoolage. Thus itappearsthat he educationofmale children fhighbirth rder s generallymorelikely o be compro-mised than s theeducationof femalechildren fhighbirth rder. Further-more,adultwomen nthehouseholdonly ncreasetheprobabilityfschoolenrollment ormale children.Finally,thenegativeeffect f traveltime to

school s only xperienced orfemale hildren. hismaybe a result f normsabout appropriate onduct of female children forexample,how far fromhome theyshould be allowed to travel)rather han an effect f resourcecosts ofeducationper se.

Looking at the resultsof the marketworkequationby sex of child,we



237

Table 8. Simulation esults predicted nrollment ates under alternativessumptions

Simulation Predicted nrollment ate %)a

Full sample Males Females

Baseline 77.31 73.98 82.01

Siblings ged 0-6 = 0 80.01/79.62 75.89/76.13 84.91/84.91

Younger,male and/or emale= 0b 80.97/80.87 76.38/76.92 84.17/84.15

Older,male and/or emale= 0b 79.42/81.31 73.34/76.36 83.14/83.16Mother's ducation= 10 84.04/81.87 82.66/78.39 85.51/85.32

aThe first umber or each entrys the totaleffect f the simulated hangefrom he reducedformmodel, and the second number s the direct effect f the simulatedchange fromthestructuralmodel.bBothare set to zero forthe full ample. Only the same sex is set to zero forthe sex-basedsubsample.

find hatthepositive ffect fhomeproduction oldsonlyformales,whilea positive ffect fschoolenrollmentn marketworkemergesforfemales.This maybe indicative f positivereturns o schoolingforgirlsat a fairly

young ge. Furthermore, hilethepresenceof oldersiblings fthe same sexreduces he ikelihood fmarketworkforboys,marketworkparticipationf

girlss not influenced y anyof the siblingvariables.Thus older brothers

substitute oryoungerbrothers n marketwork,but older sistersdo notsubstitute oryounger isters.Also, the community-level age rate is a

positive eterminantfyoungmale aborforce articipationutnotofyoungfemale aborforceparticipation. hismaybe attributableo greater emale

thanmale participationn unpaidfamilyabor,or maybe an artifactf the

constructionfthecommunity age forchildrenwhich mphasizesagricul-turalwagesthat re morerelevant orboys.

The results orthehomeproduction quation indicatethatthenumbers

of pre-school ged siblings nd younger isters ncrease the likelihoodof

homeproduction orgirlsutnotfor

boys.Similarly,henumber f

youngerboys of school age has a positiveeffect n boys' participationn home

production. hissuggests gender-based ifferentiationn homeproductiontasks at a fairly arly age. Finally, a negativeeffect f male adults on

children's omeproductionmergesformale children,while a similar ffect

obtainsforfemaleadultson girls'homeproduction.This indicatesgender-based substitutionetweenadultsand teenagers n homeproduction.

Simulation esults

Because ofthenon-linearitiesfthemodel tis difficulto assess themagni-tude of effects rom he coefficients.n Table 8 we presentthe resultsof

simulationswhichestimate heeffects f alternative ssumptions bout the

values of key explanatoryvariables. We focus on the resultsfor school

enrollments this s the primarynterest f thepaper. Each simulations



238

conductedn thefollowingay.First, he simulatedredictedrobabilityfor ach child s determinedsing he estimatedmodel oefficientsor llvariables,nd the actualdata for ll variables xcept he simulatedari-able^), to which imulatedalues reassigned.he resultsrethenveragedacross hildren o determinehe simulatedchool nrollmentatefor hesample. he simulatednrollmentate an then ecomparedo thebaselineenrollmentate which s derived sing he actual data forall variables.Results re presentedor the full ampleand for the male and femalesubsamples.wo simulatedchool nrollmentates regiven or ach imul-ation.The firstepresentshetotal ffect f the simulatedhange erivedfrom hereduced ormmodel

e.g., 80.01for hefirstimulation

singhe

full ample).The second epresentshedirect ffect hich s derived singthe oefficientsfthe tructuralodel, oldinghe ndogenousxplanatorytime sevariables onstante.g.,79.62for hefirstimulationsing hefullsample).

Three imulationsre conductedo estimatehe ffectsf iblingize andposition,nda fourthimulationstimateshe ffectsfmother'sducation.Reducinghe numberfyoungeriblingso zero,either f school ge oryounger,ncreases chool nrollmentates f either oys rgirls ytwo othree ercentageointsordecreases on-enrollmenty7.3% for oys nd

16.1% forgirls).The effectsre not arge,but are nonethelessmportantgiven he lready elativelyigh nrollmentates. n contrast,educinghenumberfolder iblingsf chool geto zero ncreaseshe chool nrollmentrateforgirls yslightly ore han ne percentage oint, utslightlye-creasestheschool enrollmentate forboys.The direct ffect orboys,however,s to increase choolenrollmentymorethan wopoints.Thedifferenceetween he two arisesbecauseof thenegativeffectsf olderbrothersn work ime.

The final imulations intended o highlightheimportancef longertermffectsffertilityeduction.fall mothersf the ample hildrenad

completedminimumf tenyears fschooling,he urrentnrollmentatewouldncreaseybetween hree ndnine ercentageointsnon-enrollmentwoulddecreaseby19.5and33.4%, respectively).hus currentffortsodecrease ertilityrenotonly ikely o increase he chool nrollmentateamong hecurrenteneration,utalso, by allowing hildren o achievehigherevels feducation,o ncrease he chool nrollmentate fthenextgenerationo anevengreaterxtent.

Discussion

The twoprimaryssues f nterestfthis aper rethe ffectsfhigh ertilityonchildren'sime se particularlychooling),ndthe ffectsfalternativechild abordemandsbothmarket nd home)on children'sducationalattainment.egardinghe atter,he esultsndicate hat ngagingnmarket



239

workeopardizesthe education f male children nly.The schoolenrollment

of femalechildren s not negativelynfluenced y current articipationnmarketwork,per se, although he ssue of whether here re differencesyhoursof workhas not been addressedhere.Nor does participationnhome

production educetheenrollmentrobabilityor hildren f either ex whenthe modelsare estimated eparately,however negative ffect s foundforthecombined ample.Froma policyperspective, hesefindingsuggest hateffortso furthermprove he educational ttainment f male childrenmustfocuson conditionsn the labor market paid or unpaid) foryoungmales.Lowerdemandforthe abor of male childrenwouldlead to higherevels of

schoolenrollment. or

females,while clear effects f child abor demands

do not emerge,the strongnegativeeffect f traveltime on their schoolenrollmentndicates he mportance fhaving choolscloser to dwellings.

The effects fhighfertilityn children'swelfare, s represented erebytimeuse, depend both on the sex and siblingpositionof the child. Theeducationofmale childrens negativelyffected yhighfertilityegardlessofthesibling osition fthe child.Highfertilityas a negative ffect n theschool enrollment f femalechildren nly if the child is an older sibling.Thusthe education fmale childrens generallymore ikely o be negativelyinfluencedy highfertilitynthePhilippines.

The resultsforchildren'sparticipationn marketwork do not providestrong upport ortheargumenthatchildren romhighfertilityouseholdsare more likelyto participate n income-generatingctivities.Rather,thenumber fyounger iblingshas no effect n marketworkstatus,whilethenumber folderbrothers as a negative ffect n theprobabilityfmarketworkofboys.Thushighfertilityeads to a situationnwhich here re goodsubstitutesvailableforyoungmale children'smarketwork,without avinga significantffect n theneed for hildren ohelpsupportyounger iblings.

Finally,the results ndicatethathighfertilityas the effect f placinggreater emandson children o contributeo homeproduction ctivities.n

general,thenumberof younger iblings ncreasesthe likelihoodthatbothboysand girls ontributeo householdwork,and theseeffects iffer ythe

genderofthesibling.One important olicy mplication f thisresearchrelatesto the ongoing

debatein thePhilippines egardinghevalue offertilityeclineand theroleofthegovernmentn theprovision ffamily lanning.The negative ffectsofhighfertilityn children's ducation, lthoughnot arge,contributeo the

argumentsn support fthebenefits ffamily lanning.Takinga long-termperspective, he positiveeffect f mother's ducationon children's chool

enrollment,nd its negativeeffect n children's abor forceparticipation,shouldbe emphasized.These results uggest hat mallgains n educationalattainmentmongtoday'schildrenmaytranslatento argergains n human

capitalaccumulationn thefuture.While thebenefits f reducedfertilityoreducationalattainmentand consequently oreconomicdevelopment)maybe minimaln theshort-run,reatermpacts re likely o emergeovertime.



240

Also, nother evelopingountries hereevels f ducationremuch owerthan nthePhilippines,nemightxpect reaterhort-runffectsfreducedfertilityn school nrollment.

In sum, ocomplementhewell-documentedenefitsf reduced ertilityon children's elfarerisingrom ealth nd nutritionffects, e find vi-denceof positive ffectsf reducedfertilityn child welfare peratingthroughhildren'sime se nthePhilippines. hen he dditionalotentialnegative ffects f rapidly rowing chool-age ohorts n thequality feducations considered,n issuewhich s not addressedn this aper, hetotal ffectsfhigh ertilitynhumanapital evelopment aybe greater.

Given hesebenefitsfreduced ertility,e argueforgreater rovisionfopportunitiesor ouples oeffectivelylanthe imingnd numberf theirchildrenhroughetter nformationnd the widest ossible hoiceswithrespectofamilylanning ethods.

Finally, verall he results re supportivef using structural odelwhichakes nto ccount heoint eterminationf hildren'sarticipationnalternativectivities.Whether ne's objectives to better nderstandhedeterminantsf children'school nrollmentr theeffectsfhigh ertilityon children,heresultsre more nformativef the model addresseshelargerssue ftime llocation atherhan implyocusingn onecomponent

of timeuse. Even in examininghesimpleparticipationichotomy,hisapproach ields sefulnsightshatmighte obscuredfusing more imitedframework.urthernalysisf hours fwork, ather hanparticipation,slikelyoproducedditionalnterestingnsightsbout he ointdeterminantsofeducationalttainmentndwork ehavior fchildrenndevelopingoun-tries.

Acknowledgments

Thisresearchwas supported yNational nstitutesf HealthgrantNo.2-T32-HD07237-06orpostdoctoralork fD.S. DeGraff t the CarolinaPopulation enter ndbyRockefelleroundationrant o. RF-90086-274.We aregratefulo theSocialScienceResearch enter f AtenaodeNagaUniversity,heUnited tatesAgency or nternationalevelopment,heCarolina opulationenter,ndBarry opkin or ccess o thedata.Excel-lentdatamanagementndcomputerrogrammingorkwasprovided yPhilBardsleyndJohn romartie.elpfulommentsnearlier ersions fthis aperwere eceived rom ohn auer, usanCochrane, avidGuilkey,David Lam, Cynthia loyd,Eva Mueller,Emmanuel koufias, ebecaWong, ndseminararticipantst theHumphreynstitutefPublicAffairs,thePopulation ouncil, ndtheUniversityf thePhilippines.



241

AppendixTableAl. Results of reducedformmodel for chool enrollment,marketwork,and

homeproduction: hildren ged 7-17


CharacteristicsfchildMale child -0.295*** 0.357*** -0.243***

Age 1.502*** 0.489*** 0.696***

Age-squared -0.062*** -0.016*** -0.024***

CharacteristicsfhouseholdMother'seducation 0.068*** -0.053*** 0.006Mother'sage -0.013** -0.001 0.002

Land holdings 0.001 -0.001 -0.000Siblings -6 -0.084*** -0.023 0.046*Numberofsiblings

Younger,female 7-17) -0.110** 0.010 0.013

Younger,male (7-17) -0.144*** -0.011 0.005

Older, female 7-17) -0.082** -0.034 -0.028

Older,male (7-17) -0.013 -0.123*** -0.046Male adults 0.029 -0.053 -0.043Female adults 0.117*** 0.011 -0.019

Travel time -0.002** 0.001 -0.001

Familybusiness -0.030 0.234*** -0.086

Housingmaterial 0.197*** -0.027 -0.119**

CharacteristicsfcommunityUrban -0.085 -0.212*** 0.194**

Semi-urban 0.128 -0.254** -0.157

Ln childwage -0.033 0.022 -0.022

Communitylectricity 0.181** -0.263*** -0.137*

Day care center 0.222*** 0.011 -0.148***

Constant -7.616*** -3.491*** -3.922***

Chi-squared 471.17*** 402.56*** 323.31***

n 2417 2622 2622




242

AppendixTable A2. Results of reducedformmodelfor chool enrollment,marketwork, nd

homeproduction: emalechildren ged 7-17

Explanatoryvariable School Market Homeenrollment work production


Age 1.504*** 0.534*** 0.835***

Age-squared -0.063*** -0.018*** -0.030***

CharacteristicsfhouseholdMother's education 0.036 -0.058*** 0.002Mother'sage -0.002 -0.011 -0.001Land holdings 0.010 -0.001 -0.001

Siblings0-6 -0.097* -0.032 0.107***NumberofsiblingsYounger,female 7-17) -0.187*** 0.005 0.076

Younger,male (7-17) -0.087 0.007 -0.047

Older, female 7-17) -0.070 -0.029 -0.032

Older, male (7-17) -0.044 -0.077 -0.016Male adults 0.008 -0.059 0.018Female adults 0.066 0.017 -0.072Travel time -0.003** 0.007 -0.003**

Familybusiness -0.033 0.334*** -0.120

Housingmaterial 0.424*** 0.027 -0.120

Characteristicsf communityUrban -0.152 -0.250** 0.160

Semi-urban 0.140 -0.190 0.005Ln childwage -0.046 0.023 0.101**

Community lectricity 0.024 -0.209* -0.143

Day care center 0.302*** 0.169* -0.105Constant -8.117*** -3.744*** -4.882***

Chi-squared 198.09*** 141.73*** 171.42***n 1117 1208 1208




243

AppendixTable A3. Results of reduced formmodel for choolenrollment,marketwork,and

homeproduction:male children ged 7-17



Age 1.542*** 0.484*** 0.640***

Age-squared -0.064*** -0.015*** -0.022***

CharacteristicsfhouseholdMother'seducation -0.089*** -0.051*** 0.012Mother'sage -0.121*** 0.007 0.004Land holdings 0.000 -0.000 -0.001

Siblings -6 -0.071* -0.007 -0.006NumberofsiblingsYounger,female 7-17) -0.071 -0.004 -0.038

Younger,male (7-17) -0.176*** -0.035 0.041

Older, female 7-17) -0.117** -0.030 -0.060

Older,male (7-17) -0.001 -0.147*** -0.024Male adults 0.058 -0.056 -0.104**Female adults 0.157*** 0.002 0.024Travel time -0.001 0.000 -0.000

Familybusiness -0.026 0.177** -0.075

Housingmaterial 0.073 -0.057 -0.142**

CharacteristicsfcommunityUrban -0.066 -0.199* 0.251**

Semi-urban 0.130 -0.302** -0.377***Ln childwage -0.038 0.025 -0.129***

Communitylectricity 0.295*** -0.292*** -0.115

Day care center 0.193** -0.107 0.188**

Constant -7.754*** -3.238*** -3.447***

Chi-squared 278.35*** 224.02*** 186.73***

n 1298 1411 1414

Significanceevels: * = 10%; ** = 5%; *** = 1%.

Notes

1. Amongthefewexceptions, ee Herrin 1992) fora modelof children'smarketworkand

educational ttainmentn thePhilippines, evison (1991, 1995) fora recent tudy f chil-

dren'stimeallocation n urbanBrazil, Rosenzweig& Evenson (1977) fora model of the

determinantsf fertility,hildren's ducationand children's abor forceparticipationn

India, and Skoufias 1994) foran analysisof children's chooling, eisureand domestic

activitiesn agricultural ouseholds n India.2. Whilewe have no data on schoolquality o incorporaten the formal nalysis,discussions

with everalgovernmentfficialsnd schoolteachers n the Bicol region uggest hat here

aregrowing roblemsn thesupply f education nterms fnumber ndquality fteachers,amountof classroom pace, availabilityf learningmaterials, tc.

3. Obviously, hequality fschooling rovided s also an importanteterminantfthereturns

to education.Unfortunately,s mentioned reviously,he data do not includeanyinfor-

mation n thesupply feducation,otherthan ocationof schools.4. Informationn hours pent n leisure ctivitiess also notavailable in the data and cannot



244

be derived s a residualbecause of the ack of nformationn hours fschooling.However,

giventhe current ocus on participation,he estimation f an equationfor eisure time sunnecessarys all children ngage n some leisure ctivity.

5. In the futurewe plan to model actualhours n homeproductionnd marketwork,takingintoaccount thecensoring t zero hours.

6. Note thatthevalidity f this pproachrestson theassumption hatthereexistexogenousvariables thatcan identifyach equationfrom he other two. For example,the structuralform ftheschooling quationmust ncludeat least one variablewhich s hypothesizedohave a direct ffect n schooling, ut to only nfluencemarketwork and homeproductionthroughtseffect n schooling. fthe data do not allow such dentification,hen nyeffectof the endogenoustime use variables on one anotherare likelyto reflect nobserved

heterogeneity hich nfluences ime allocation moregenerally, nd mayresult n biasedestimates f the effectsf other xogenousvariables.While ntheory his s always n issue

ofconcern,we do not see a problemhere because the results or theexogenousvariablesare largely onsistent cross the reduced form nd structuralmodels.

7. Althoughwe have not correctedfor eitherpotential ource of bias, we have conducted

sensitivitynalysis o assesswhether ibling orrelations a problem.Greaterthan90% ofthe sample childrenhave at least one siblingof school age. The model was re-estimated

repeatedly xcluding 0% of the children rommultiple hildrenhouseholdson a randombasis. This reduces the incidenceof multiple iblings nd therefore f sibling orrelation.The model results re highly obustto these sample exclusions, uggestinghatanybias

resultingrom ibling orrelation s negligible.8. Childrenwho are not children f the household head and/or pouse are excluded because

it is notpossibleto determine heirparentswith ertainty.9.

Manyof the children n the lattertwo

categoriesre

missingnformationn enrollment

status nd/or ime use. Nonetheless, s a partial heckofsensitivityo their xclusion hemodel was reestimatedncludinghose cases forwhichdata is available. The results re not

significantlyffected ythis hange n sampledefinition.10. Home production ctivities nclude shoppingfor or preparingfood, generalhousehold

chores,care of children, atheringwater or firewood, home repairs nd improvements,and home gardening.Data on timespent n each of these activities or the pastweek is

aggregated o derive totaltime pent nhomeproduction. he variableused here s simplya dichotomousmeasurereflectingours nhomeproduction reater han ero.

11. As previously iscussed,there are certainly rayareas as to whatshould be consideredhomeproductionnd what houldbe consideredmarketwork.However,thedetailednatureofthe timeuse data allow for moreaccuratecategorizationhan s typically ossible.

12. The enrollmentates nTable 1 are notstrictlyomparableto publishednational tatisticsbecause theformermeasure thepercentage f each age groupthat s currentlynrolled nschool,regardless fgrade,whilethe attermeasurethe ratioofchildren ttending rimaryschool (or secondary chool), regardless f age, to thepopulation ged 7 to 12 (or 13 to17). Nonetheless, ee Government f the Philippines 1992) for evidenceof lower thanaverageschoolparticipationates n the Bicol region.

13. Note thatonly42% ofsevenyearolds are enrolled n school. This is largely ecause theyhave notyet tarted chool rather hanbecause theyhavealreadydroppedout orwillneverbegin.The exclusionof this ge grouphas little ffect n the multivariateesults.

14. Other costs of education,such as tuition nd supplies,do not varyappreciably crosschildrennpublic chools.The costsofa private ducation re substantially igher, ut thisis clearly ndogenous nd therefore houldnot be included s an explanatory ariable.The

extentof private chooling n the Bicol region s small,especiallyat the primarychoollevel (5.5% forprimarychooland 27% for econdary choolamongthesample children).

15. Each equation also includescontrolvariables forprovinceof residence, nd the marketworkequationincludesmonthdummies o controlfor easonality f labordemand. Thesevariablesare omitted rom ll tables forbrevity; heresults re available from he authorsupon request.



245

References

Alderman,H. & Chishti,S. (1991). Simultaneousdetermination f householdand market-oriented ctivities f women n ruralPakistan,pp. 245-265, in: T.P. Schultz ed.), Researchin PopulationEconomics,Vol. 7. Greenwich,CT: JAI Press.

Anderson,K., King,E. & Wang,Y. (1993). Feedback effects f the abor market n schoolingchoice nMalaysia.Paperpresented t the 1993 annualmeeting f thePopulationAssociationofAmerica,Cincinnati,USA.

Bauer, J. & Racelis, R. (1991). Household characteristics,arnings, nd the activitytatusof

Filipinoyouth.Paper presented t the 1991 annualmeeting f thePopulationAssociationofAmerica,Washington, C, USA.

Becker,G.S. & Lewis,H.G. (1974). Interaction etweenquantitynd quality fchildren, p.

81-90, in: T.W. Schultz (ed.), Economics of thefamily.Chicago: National Bureau ofEconomicResearch,UniversityfChicagoPress.

Bilsborrow,R.E. & Guilkey,D.K. (1987). Communitynd institutionalnfluence n fertility:Analytical ssues. Geneva: International abour Office.Populationand Labour Policies

ProgrammeWorking aper, No. 157.

Birdsall,N. & Cochrane,S.H. (1982). Education and parentaldecisionmaking:A two-gen-eration pproach,pp. 175-210, in: L. Anderson& D.M. Windham eds.), Education and

development. exington,MA: LexingtonBooks, D.C. Heath and Company.Chernichovsky,. (1985). Socioeconomicand demographic spectsof school enrollmentnd

attendancen ruralBotswana,EconomicDevelopmentnd CulturalChange33: 319-332.

Cochrane,S.H., Kozel, V. & Alderman,H. (1989). Householdconsequencesofhighfertility:The case ofPakistan.Paper presented t the 1989annualmeeting f thePopulationAssocia-

tionofAmerica,Baltimore,USA.Connelly,R., DeGraff,D.S. & Levison,D. (1995). Women's employmentnd childcare in

Brazil,EconomicDevelopmentnd CulturalChange,forthcoming.DeGraff,D.S. & Bilsborrow,R.E. (1993). Female-headedhouseholdsand familywelfare n

ruralEcuador,Journal fPopulationEconomics6: 317-336.

DeGraff,D.S., Bilsborrow,R.E. & Guilkey,D.K. (1993). Communityevel determinantsf

fertilityn thePhilippines:A structuralnalysis.Unpublishedmanuscript,owdoinCollege.

Findley, . & Williams, . (1991). Womenwhogo and womenwhostay:Reflectionsffamily

migration rocesses n a changingworld.Geneva: International abour Office.Populationand Labour PoliciesProgrammeWorking aper,No. 176.

Fabella, R.V., Paqueo, V.B. & Paderanga, C.W. (1984). Wages, employment nd time

allocation:BMS,

1978.CouncilforAsianManpower

StudiesDiscussionPaper,No. 84-12.

Government f the Philippines 1992). Reporton thesituation f children nd women n the

Philippines, 992.Manila: UnitedNationsChildren'sFund.

Guilkey,D.K. (1992). Correctingorcommunityffectsndemographicnd health urvey ata.

Columbia,MD: IRD Macro.

Guilkey,D.K., Rindfuss,R.R., Popkin,B.M., Akin,J.S. & Paqueo, V. (1988). Childspacingin thePhilippines:The effect f current haracteristicsnd ruraldevelopment, opulationStudies 2: 259-273.

Guilkey,D.K. & Murphy,J.L. (1993). Estimation nd testingn the randomeffects robitmodel,Journal f Econometrics9: 301-317.

Hermalin,A.I., Seltzer,J.A. & Lin,C. (1982). Transitionsntheeffect ffamilyizeon female

educational ttainment: he case ofTaiwan, Comparative ducationReview26: 254-270.

Herrin,A.N. (1979). Fertilitynd ruralelectrificationn theSouthernPhilippines, opulationand DevelopmentReview5: 61-86.

Herrin,A.N. (1989). Population,povertynd publicpolicy n thePhilippines, p. 245-290, in:

Frameworksorpopulation nd developmentntegration,ol. II. Bangkok:Economicand

Social Commission orAsia and thePacific.

Herrin,A.N. (1992). Consequencesof population hangein thePhilippines.Paper presented



246

at the Economic and Social Commissionfor Asia and the PacificMeetingon the Conse-

quencesofPopulationChange inAsia, Bangkok.Herrin,A.N. & Te, A. (1985). Rural electrification,ertilityhange, and familyplanning

practice n the SouthernPhilippines, p. 7-46, in: R. Bilsborrow& P. Delargy eds.), The

impact fruraldevelopmentrojects n demographic ehavior.New York: UnitedNationsFund forPopulationActivity.

Ho, T.J. 1979). Time costsof childrearingnthe rural hilippines, opulation ndDevelopmentReview5: 643-662.

Horton,S. (1986). Childnutrition nd family ize in thePhilippines, ournal f DevelopmentEconomics 23: 161-176.

Huang, N.C. (1984). The migration f rural women to Taipei, in: J.T. Fawcett,S. Khoo &P.C. Smith eds.), Women n the cities fAsia: Migration nd urbanadaptation.Boulder,CO: WestviewPress.

King,E.M. (1987). The effect f family ize on familywelfare:What do we know?,pp. 373-411, in: D.G. Johnson& R.D. Lee (eds.), Populationgrowthnd economicdevelopment:issues and evidence.Madison,WI: Universityf Wisconsin ress.

King,E. & Evenson, R.E. (1983). Time allocation and home productionn Philippine uralhouseholds,pp. 35-61, in: M. Buvinic,M.A. Lycette& W.P. McGreevey eds.), Womenandpovertyn thethirdworld. Baltimore:The JohnsHopkinsUniversityress.

King,E.M. & Lillard,L.A. (1983). Determinants fschooling ttainment nd enrollmentatesin thePhilippines.Rand Note N-1962- ID. Santa Monica: The Rand Corporation.

Knodel, J., Havanon, N. & Sittitrai,W. (1989). Family ize and the education of childrennthe contextof rapid fertilityecline. PopulationStudiesCenter,Universityf Michigan,ResearchReport,No. 89-155.

Knodel,J. &

Wongsith,M.

(1991). Familyize and children's ducation n Thailand: Evidence

from national ample,Demography 8: 119-132.Leslie, J. & Paolisso, M. (1989). Women,work nd childwelfaren the thirdworld. Boulder

CO: WestviewPress.Levison,D. (1991). Children's abor forceactivitynd schooling n Brazil. UnpublishedPhD

dissertation, niversityfMichigan.Levison,D. (1995). Household composition nd early age humancapitalformation: vidence

from Brazil on children's labor force work and schooling. Unpublishedmanuscript,UniversityfMinnesota.

Navera, E.R. (1978). The allocation of household time associated withchildren n ruralhouseholds n Laguna, Philippines, hilippine conomic Journal 7: 203-223.

Palmore,J.A., Sarmiento, .M. & Guitiano,S.A. (1991). Fertilitystimates or hePhilippines,

1970 and 1980, by provinceand urban-rural esidence. East-West Population Institute,Working aper,No. 62.

Paqueo, V.B. (1985). An econometric nalysisof educationalattainmentmong elementaryschool age children:Preliminaryesults,Transactionsf the NationalAcademyofSciencesand Technology Philippines)1: 359-380.

Phongpaichit, . (1993). The labour market spectsof femalemigrationo Bangkok,pp. 178-191, in: R.E. Bilsborrowed.), Internationalmigrationf women n developing ountries.New York: United Nations.

Popkin,B.M. (1983). Ruralwomen,work,and child welfare n thePhilippines, p. 157-176,in: M. Buvinic,M.A. Lycette& W.P. McGreevey eds.), Women nd povertyn the thirdworld.Baltimore:The JohnsHopkins Universityress.

Quizon, E.K. (1978). Time allocation and home production n ruralPhilippinehouseholds,

Philippine conomicJournal 7: 185-202.Rosenzweig,M.R. (1978). The value of children's ime,family ize and non-household hild

activities n a developing ountry: vidence from ouseholddata, pp. 331-347, in: J. Simon(ed.), Research npopulation conomics,Vol. 1. Greenwich,CT: JAI Press.

Rosenzweig,M.R. & Evenson, R. (1977). Fertility,chooling nd the economiccontributionofchildren n rural ndia: An econometricnalysis,Econometrica 5: 1065-1079.



247

Salaff,J. (1981). Workingdaughters f Hong Kong: Filial pietyor power in thefamily?

Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityress.Schultz,T.P. (1987). School expendituresnd enrollments,960-1980: The effects f income,

prices, ndpopulation rowth, p. 413-476, n:D.G. Johnson R.D. Lee (eds.), Populationgrowthnd economicdevelopment:ssues and evidence.Madison: Universityf WisconsinPress.

Skoufias,E. (1994). Marketwages, family omposition nd the timeallocation of childrenn

agriculturalouseholds,Journal fDevelopment tudies30: 335-360.

Solon, G., Corcoran,M., Gordon,R. & Laren,D. (1987). The effect ffamily ackground neconomic tatus:A longitudinalnalysis fsibling orrelations.NBER Working aper,No.2282.

Trager,L. (1984). Family trategies nd themigrationf women:Migrants o Dagupan City,Philippines,nternational igration eview 18: 1264-1278.

UnitedNations Children'sFund (1989). The stateof theworld's children.New York: UnitedNationsChildren'sFund.

Willis,R. (1973). A new approachto the economic theory f fertilityehavior,JournalofPoliticalEconomy81: S14-S69.

WorldBank. (1991). Worlddevelopmenteport.New York: OxfordUniversityress.

Address orcorrespondence:eborah S. DeGraff,Department fEconomics,BowdoinCollege,Brunswick,ME 04011,USAPhone: (207) 725 3591; Fax: (207) 725 3691

children's education in the phillipines

Documents