Table 3:
Impact of CGP on women’s total fertility and related outcomes
| All Women |
Main respondents Only |
||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | ||
| Panel A: 24 months | |||||||||
| Total fertility |
Currently pregnant |
Ever been pregnant |
Ever had miscarriage stillbirth or abortion |
Total fertility |
Currently pregnant |
Ever been pregnant |
Ever had miscarriage stillbirth or abortion |
Modern contraceptive use |
|
| Treatment | −0.02 | 0.019 | −0.025 | −0.027 | 0.008 | 0.029 | −0.007 | −0.024 | - |
| (0.84) | (1.38) | (1.89)* | (1.82)* | (0.37) | (1.74)* | (0.97) | (1.31) | - | |
| R2 | - | 0.03 | 0.53 | 0.05 | - | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.03 | - |
| N | 2,675 | 2,670 | 2,675 | 2,668 | 2,107 | 2,102 | 2,107 | 2,100 | - |
| Panel B: 36 months | |||||||||
| Treatment | −0.013 | 0.004 | −0.016 | 0.007 | 0.012 | 0.008 | −0.001 | 0.011 | −0.027 |
| (0.60) | (0.37) | (1.23) | (0.59) | (0.66) | (0.59) | (0.21) | (0.71) | (0.76) | |
| R2 | - | 0.01 | 0.08 | 0.01 | - | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.04 |
| N | 2,994 | 2,997 | 3,020 | 3,016 | 2,221 | 2,202 | 2,221 | 2,218 | 2,190 |
| Panel C: 48 months | |||||||||
| Treatment | 0.005 | 0.001 | −0.002 | −0.021 | 0.011 | 0.004 | 0 | −0.028 | 0.014 |
| (0.28) | (0.09) | (0.16) | (2.54)** | (0.66) | (0.29) | (0.02) | (2.66)*** | (0.46) | |
| R2 | - | 0.01 | 0.08 | 0.01 | - | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| N | 2,986 | 3,025 | 3,030 | 3,028 | 2,206 | 2,205 | 2,206 | 2,205 | 2,173 |
Notes: Robust t-statistics in parentheses.
p<0.1
p<0.05
p<0.01.
Total fertility models run with Poisson models; all other outcomes use linear probability models.
All models control for baseline values of log (household size), log (distance to food market), highest grade attained, marital status, basket of prices, and current age.