In 2019, I published a study titled "Reexamining the Influence of Conditional Cash Transfers on Migration from a Gendered Lens," to which Oded Stark has since issued a formal comment. This response has been written to address the major themes of Stark's comment. While the first three sections focus on specific items related to framing, selection bias, and endogeneity, the fourth and final section tackles a more substantive theoretical debate between Stark and me over how to conceptualize the New Economics of Labor Migration framework in relation to gender. In my original paper, I argued that conditional cash transfers (CCTs) are gendered in their program conditions in ways that promote a normative gendered division of labor and that constrain beneficiary women from migrating. I note here that Stark's primary issue with this point appears to be his contention that CCTs are not necessarily gendered but rather that women have a comparative advantage in completing housework and care work. My response first compares Stark's argument to that made by Gary Becker in A Treatise on the Family and engages with the literature that has emerged to critique Becker's own arguments regarding gendered comparative advantage. I then conclude my final section by offering some suggestions that might open a common theoretical path forward-one that insists on grounding microeconomic analyses of family behavior on assumptions that take gender and other aspects of culture and institutions seriously and one that also moves toward a bargaining model of microeconomic behavior rather than one that assumes consensus among all relevant actors.
Keywords: Conditional cash transfers; Family; Gender; Migration; New Economics of Labor Migration.
Copyright © 2021 The Author.