Arrow Table de matières
2873153

BIBLIOGRAPHIE, ANNEXE

  1. ARTICLES
  1. Agarwal (1997), "Bargaining and gender Relations: Within and Beyond the Household" feminist Economist, Vol. 3, N07, pp. 1-51.
  2. Alexander G. et Korenbrot C. (1995), "The role of prenatal care in preventing low birth weight", The future of Children, Vol.5, N01, pp. 103-120.
  3. Banque Mondiale (1993), " World Development Report 1993: Investing in Health" Oxford University Press: New York 1993.
  4. Banque Mondiale (2011), " World Development Report 2012: Gender Equality and Development" The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development: Washington, D.C., 2011.
  5. Bicego G. et Boerma J. (1993), "Maternal education child survival: a comparative study of survey data from 17counrties", Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 36, N09, pp.1207-1227.
  6. Blum (1974), "Discussion paper: A Geometry for Biology", Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol.231, pp. 19-30.
  7. Caldwell C. et Caldwell P. (1991), "What have we learnt about the cultural, social and behavioural determinants of health? From selected readings to the first health transition workshop", Health Transition Review: The Cultural, Social and Behavioral Determinants Of Health, vol.1, n01, pp. 3-19.
  8. Caldwell C. et McDonald P. (1982), "Influence of maternal education on infant and child mortality: levels and causes", Health Policy and Education, vol.2, n03-4, pp.251-267.
  9. Caldwell C., (1979), "Education as a factor in mortality decline. An examination of Nigerian data", Population Studies, Vol. 33, N03, pp. 395-413.
  10. Cleland G. and Van Ginneken K. (1 988), "Maternal education and child survival in developing countries: The search for pathways of influence", Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 27, N012, pp. 1357-1368.
  11. Currie J. and Hyson R (1999) "Is the Impact of Health Shocks Cushioned by Socioeconomic Status? The Case of Low Birth Weight", American Economic Review, Vol. 89, N02, pp. 245-250.
  12. Currie J. et Moretti E. (2003), "Mother’s education and the intergenerational transmission of human capital: Evidence from college opening" Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 118, N04, pp. 1495-1532.
  13. Duflo E. (2012) "Women empowerment and economic development", Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 50, N04, pp. 1051-1059.
  14. El-Halawany H. (2009), "Higher education and some upper Egyptian women’s negotiation of self-autonomy at work and home", Research in Comparative and International Education, Vol.4, N04, pp.423-436.
  15. Fafchamps M., Kebede B. et Quisumbing A. (2009), "Intrahousehold welfare in rural Ethiopia", Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 71, N04, pp. 567-599.
  16. Gokhale M., Kanade A., Rao S., Kelkar R., Joshi S., et Girigosavi S. (2004), "Female literacy: the multifactorial influence on child health in India", Ecology of Food and Nutrition, Vol.43, N04, pp. 257-278.
  17. Handa S. (1994), "Gender headship and intrahousehold resource allocation", World Development, Vol 22, N010, pp. 1537-1547.
  18. Hobcraft J. (1993),"Women’s education, child welfare and child survival: a review of evidence", Health Transition Review, Vol.3, N02, pp.159-175.
  19. Jyotsana S. (2011),"Social determinants of urban Indian women’s health status", UTSC Printing Publisher, University of Toronto Scarborough, India, Vol. 10, N01, pp. 87-110.
  20. Kamala K. et Kalemasi M. (2013), "Santé des enfants et offre de travail des femmes en RD Congo"
  21. Kennedy E., Haddad L. (1994), "Are pre-scholars from female headed households less malnourished? A comparative analysis of results from Ghana and Kenya", The journal of development studies, Vol. 30, N03, pp. 680-695.
  22. Kennedy E.et Peters P. (1992), "Household food security and child nutrition: The interaction of income and gender of household head", World Development, Vol. 20, N08, pp.1077-1085.
  23. Kiviet J. et Pleusy (2014): "The performance of tests on endogeneity of subsets of explanatory variables scanned by simulation" Amsterdam School of Economics, Department of Economics & Econometrics, JEI-Code, C12, C15, C30.
  24. Kramer S. (1987), "Determinants of low birth weight: methodological assessment and meta-analysis", Bull World Health Organ, Vol. 65, N05, pp. 663-737.
  25. Mahmud S., Shahs. et S Becker (2012), "Measuring women’s empowerment in rural Bangladesh", World Development, Vol. 40, N03, pp.610-619.
  1. Musonera A. et Heshmati A. (2016), "Measuring women’s empowerment in Rwanda", Discussion Paper n° 10131.
  2. Muswamba M. (2005),"L’accession des femmes congolaises au savoir dans une perspective historique", Mémoire de maitrise en histoire, Québec, Université Laval, p.41.
  3. Mwabu G. (2001), "Health status in Africa: a regional profile", South African Journal of Economics, Vol. 69, N02, pp. 319-335.
  4. Nakamura A. et Nakamura M. (1996), "Model specification and endogeneity Elsevier" journal of Econometrics, Vol.83, N0.1-2, pp.213-237.
  1. OMS (2001), "  Mental Health: New understanding, New Hope", The World Health Report 2001
  2. Onyango A., Tucker K., Eisemon T. (1994), "Household headship and child nutrition: a case study in western Kenya", Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 39, N012, pp. 1633-1639.
  3. Parlow A (2011), "Simultaneous Equations Models", Lab Session Economics 710, UWM Economics Department.
  4. Schmidt E. (2012), "The effect of Women’s Intrahousehold Bargaining Power on Child Health Outcomes in Bangladesh" Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 9, N01, pp. 4.
  5. Smith L., Ramakrishnan U., Ndiaye A., Haddad L., Martorell R. (2003), "The importance of women’s status for child nutrition in developing countries", Food and Nutrition Bulletin, Vol. 24, N03, pp. 2.
  6. Stefan L. (2001), "Endogénéité d’une variable explicative dichotomique dans le cadre d’un modèle probit bivarié une application au lien entre fécondité et activité féminine" Annales d’Economie et de Statistique, N062, pp. 251-269.
  1. OUVRAGES
  1. Bourbonnais (1998), Econométrie : Manuel et exercices corrigés, 2è Ed. Dunod
  2. Bourdieu P. (1986), The form of capital, in Richardson, Handbook of Theory and Research for Sociology of Education, Greenwood Press, New York, p.241.
  3. Gibson J. (2000), How can women’s education aid economic development? The effect on child stunting in Papua new Guinea, University of Waikato, New Zealand,
  4. Hoddinott J. et Haddad L. (1991), Household Expenditures, Child Anthropometric Status and the Intrahousehold Division of Income: Evidence from Cote d’Ivoire: Research Program in Development Studies, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University.
  5. Kishor S. (2000), "Empowerment of women in Egypt and links to the survival and health of their infants" in H.a.S. Presser, G. (ed),women’s Empowerment and Demographic Processes: Moving Beyond Cairo, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  6. Kishor S. et Subaiya L. (2008), Understanding women’s empowerment: A comparative analysis of Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data, USAID.
  7. Smith L. et Haddad L. (2000), Explaining child malnutrition in developing countries: a cross-country analysis, Research Report, Ed. IFPRI, p.126.
  8. Strauss J. and Thomas D. (1995), Human resources: empirical modeling of household and family decisions, in Handbook of Development Economics, Vol. 3, Part 1, pp. 1883-2023, ed. By J. Behrman, Elsevier science.
  9. Thomas D. (1997), Incomes, Expenditures and Health Outcomes: Evidence on Intrahousehold Resource Allocation, in L. Haddad, J. Hoddinott & H. Alderman (eds), Intrahousehold resource allocation in developing countries: models, methods and policy, Baltimore and London: john Hopkins University Press for the international food policy research institute.
  10. UNICEF (2007), La situation des enfants dans le monde 2007, femmes et enfants: double dividende de l’égalité de sexe, UNICEF, New York.

ANNEXES

Annexe 1: Etapes du test d’endogénéité de Nakamura Nakamura

 Le test d’endogénéité entre l’état de santé de l’enfant et pouvoir de négociation de la mère s’est fait de la manière suivante :

  • Estimation des résidus de la variable dépendante (état de santé de l’enfant) avec la commande stata : predict résidu’.
  • Régression de la variable pouvoir de négociation de la mère sur les résidus ainsi obtenus : ‘regpvrdenégrésidus’.
  • Si les résidus sont significativement expliqués par le pouvoir de négociation de la mère, on conclura donc à la présence de l’endogénéité et si non à son absence.
  • En cas d’endogénéité, la lever avec l’estimation 3-SLS ou 2-SLS avec la commande : ‘reg3 (y1 x1 xi) (x1y2 xi), 3sls’.

Annexe 2 : Résultats du test d’endogénéité 2007       

  1. Régression entre les résidus du Zscore taille et le pouvoir de négociation

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        residu |  Coef.                Std. Err.             tP>|t|     [95% Conf. Interval]

-------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      pvrnég |   .0013108   .0001411     9.29     0.000     .0010343    .0015873

       _cons |   .9615072   .0001051  9151.01   0.000     .9613012    .9617131

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

  1. Régression entre les résidus du Zscore poids et le pouvoir de négociation

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     residu2 |      Coef.            Std. Err.             t P>|t|     [95% Conf. Interval]

-------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      pvrnég |   .0030982   .0001223  25.33      0.000     .0028585    .0033379

       _cons |   .9590675   .0000911  1.1e+04   0.000     .9588889    .9592461

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Annexe 3 : Résultats du test d’endogénéité 2013

  1. Régression entre les résidus de la natalité et le pouvoir de négociation

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        residu |       Coef.               Std. Err.         tP>|t|         [95% Conf. Interval]

-------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zscoretaille |   .0012558   .0002632     4.77    0.000       .00074    .0017717

         _cons |    .971213   .0002595  3742.00   0.000     .9707043    .9717217

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  1. Régression entre les résidus de la mortalité et le pouvoir de négociation

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     residu2 |      Coef.           Std. Err.              tP>|t|   [95% Conf. Interval]

-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------

pvrdenég |   .0087883   .0000914    96.17      0.000     .0086092    .0089674

       _cons |   .9253356   .0000673  1.4e+04   0.000     .9252037    .9254674

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Partager ce travail sur :