WPS7843 Policy Research Working Paper 7843 Intergenerational Education Mobility in Africa Has Progress Been Inclusive? Théophile T. Azomahou Eleni A. Yitbarek Development Research Group Agriculture and Rural Development Team September 2016 Policy Research Working Paper 7843 Abstract This paper employs nationally representative household Nevertheless, the education of parents’ remains a strong survey data on parents of adult individuals to analyze the determinant of educational outcomes among the children intergenerational transmission of education in nine Sub- in all the countries. Ghana, Guinea, Nigeria, and Uganda Saharan African countries. The paper provides the levels, experienced the highest intergenerational mobility, and the trends, and patterns of intergenerational persistence of Comoros and Madagascar the lowest. In all the sample educational attainment over 50 years, with a special focus countries, more mobility is observed in the lower tail of on gender differences. The study finds a declining cohort the distribution of education. Intergenerational educational trend in the intergenerational educational persistence in persistence is strong from mothers to children, and the all the countries, particularly after the 1960s. The increase effect is more pronounced among daughters than sons. The in educational mobility coincides with drastic changes results highlight the need for targeted redistributive poli- in educational systems and a huge investment in human cies that improve intergenerational mobility in the region. capital accumulation in the region following independence. This paper is a product of the Agriculture and Rural Development Team, Development Research Group. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://econ.worldbank.org. The authors may be contacted at e.yitbarek@maastrichtuniversity.nl. The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. Produced by the Research Support Team Intergenerational Education Mobility in Africa: Has Progress Been Inclusive?* eophile T. Azomahou(a,b) and Eleni A. Yitbarek(a) „ Th´ (a) Maastricht University and UNU-MERIT Boschstraat 24, 6211 AX Maastricht, the Netherlands (b) University of Auvergne and CERDI 65 Boulevard F. Mitterrand, F-63009 Clermont-Ferrand, France Key words: Intergenerational persistence, education, Africa, gender gap JEL Classification: I24, I28, J24 * Acknowledgments: This study is done as background research for the World Bank flagship report “Poverty in a Rising Africa” led by the World Bank’s Africa Chief Economist Office. We are deeply indebted to Kathleen Beegle and Isis Gaddis to their constructive discussions and helpful comments throughout the study. We thank Dede Raissa for translating the French survey questionnaires. Fruitful discussions with participants of UNU-WIDER, Development Conference–Human capital and growth, 6-7 June 2016, Helsinki, are also gratefully acknowledged. „ Corresponding Author: E.A. Yitbarek, e-mail: e.yitbarek@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 1 Introduction Since the mid-1990s, the resurgence of growth has been remarkable in Sub-Sharan Africa. For instance, between 2000 and 2012, the region experienced a 3 percent per capita annual growth rate in Gross Domestic Product (Thorbecke, 2013). Recent evidence indicates that, while the observed growth has led to considerable poverty reduction, it has been accompanied by a rise in inequality in a number of countries, including Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia (Fosu, 2015). Accordingly, there is growing concern that the benefits of economic growth are not shared broadly. For policy making, it is important to understand whether the increase in inequality is an outcome of an economic structure that rewards hard work and risk taking, or whether it is a reflection of the existence of inequality of opportunity within society. The rise in inequality becomes a policy concern if it is an outcome of inequality of opportunity among individuals with different initial circumstances; for example children from poor families with ability and talent are unable to move beyond the position of their parents on the economic ladder through their own effort and choices (Rawls, 1971). Intergenerational persistence in socioeconomic status is the main mechanism through which inequality of opportunity persist in a society. For example, social mobility may differ based on gender, race, ethnicity, or region, suggesting differential access to opportunity across groups within a society. Equality of opportunity has come to be a key condition if a society is to achieve an acceptable level of equity: in its strongest form, equality of opportunity is a more relevant aspect of policy in a society than of inequalities of outcomes (Kanbur and Wagstaff, 2015; Rama et al., 2015). Greater inequality of opportunity may result in greater inequality in a society and affect public attitudes toward other social objectives such as growth and poverty reduction (Atkinson, 1980; Piketty, 1995; Corak, 2013). Because of this, the extent to which socioeconomic outcomes are transmitted from one generation to the next has long been of interest among development economists and policy makers. Although understanding intergenerational mobility is important for policy, economic analysis of in- tergenerational mobility in developing countries is only in its infancy because of lack of appropriate data. In particular, intergenerational mobility studies on Sub-Saharan Africa are scarce.1 The current study aims to fill this gap by taking advantage of recent nationally representative data that provide informa- tion on the social origin of adult individuals in nine Sub-Saharan Africa countries. We use education as an indicator of economic status. Using education as an indicator of economic status has four main advantages. First, the literature in both developed and developing countries identifies education as an important driver of labor market participation and, hence, income, more years of schooling is usually as- sociated with higher income (see Chevalier et al., 2003; Blanden et al., 2005; Black and Devereux, 2011). Understanding the trends, levels and patterns of the persistence of the education attainment across gen- erations therefore sheds light on overall mobility in economic status in a society. Second, schooling is an outcome on which it seems reasonable to assume respondents can reliably report on their parents. Third, data restrictions, especially in developing countries, are much less stringent; retrospective information on parents’ education has been more widely available recently than information on parental incomes or occupations. Finally, using income to proxy socioeconomic outcomes in developing countries is found to be problematic. There is a serious concern about persistence of measurement errors in consumption and income data from developing countries (see Deaton, 1997; Glewwe, 2005; Lee, 2009 for detailed discus- sion). Education is also considered a vital policy instrument in the creation of equal access to economic opportunity, leading to higher social mobility and economic progress (Bowles, 1972; Becker and Tomes, 1979; Piketty, 1995; Hertz et al., 2007; Corak, 2013; Reeves, 2014). Furthermore, the region serves as an excellent case study for intergenerational education mobility. It endorsed the United Nations goal of Ed- ucation for All agreed in Dakar in 2000, a commitment to provide quality basic education for all children and adults by 2015. Accordingly, many countries in the region undertook major reforms in education systems, including the abolition of school fees (Thakur, 1991; Tomasevski, 2006). Thus, gauging how such policy changes induce intergenerational mobility has important policy implications. Drawing on nationally representative survey data, the study analyzes the trends, levels, and patterns of intergenerational im(mobility) in educational attainment in the Comoros, Ghana, Guinea, Madagas- car, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda over 50 years, with a special focus on gender differences. The paper contributes to the existing literature in several ways. First, the study extends the existing evidence by creating comparable recent estimates for nine Sub-Saharan African countries so that we may begin to draw conclusions about the inclusiveness of the recent investment in education in the sampled countries. Using two widely applied measures of intergenerational persistence, we provide persistence estimates for 10 successive five-year birth cohorts at the aggregate and gender levels in each 1 SouthAfrica is the exceptional country in the region where there exists a reasonable literature on intergenerational transmission of economic status. 2 country. Second, by closely following the methodology of the two closest antecedent studies in developing countries (Hertz et al., 2007; Azam and Bhatt, 2015), we are able to rank countries in terms of inter- generational educational mobility. To the best of our knowledge, there exist no comparable estimates on these countries.2 Third, unlike other studies in developing countries, the estimates presented in this study do not suffer from selection bias caused by imposing co-residence to construct parent and child pairs. Most of the studies on intergenerational mobility still rely on cohabitation to identify parent and child pairs. Using this method has two major consequences. First, using coresidents to identify parent and child pairs leads to a sample selection that biases the intergenerational elasticity downward. For instance, Francesconi and Nicoletti (2006) and Azam and Bhatt (2015) document a substantial bias in constructing father and son pairs in the United Kingdom and India, respectively. Second, coresidence over represents younger adults who are still living with parents, which restricts the analysis to an unrepresentative young population (Jalan and Murgai, 2007; Hnatkovska et al., 2013). The current study addresses this issue by using nationally representative data on educational attainment among adult individuals and their parents regardless of whether parents are alive or, if alive, reside in the same household.3 Fourth, the existing evidence on the link between child and parental education by gender is largely unexplored. A handful of studies examine the intergenerational persistence of economic status between parents and daughters (see Grusky and DiPrete, 1990; Chadwick and Solon, 2002). In this study, we attempt to fill this gap in the literature and provide gender estimates (daughters-mothers, sons-mothers, daughters-fathers, and sons-fathers) of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohorts in each country. The study uses two measures of intergenerational educational mobility: intergenerational elasticity and the partial correlation coefficient. The analysis shows the trends in intergenerational educational mobility across five-year birth cohorts for each sex in each country. There are several findings. Comparing the highest educational attainment, both measures accord in pointing out the importance of parental education in determining the educational attainment of children in all the countries. We find a declining cohort trend in the estimated intergenerational elasticity in all the countries, particularly after the 1960s. This implies greater educational mobility among more recent birth cohorts in all the countries. The declining trend after the 1960s coincides with the drastic changes in educational systems and the huge investment in human capital accumulation in the region since independence. We note a country difference: Nigeria, Guinea, Ghana, and Uganda experienced the highest intergenerational mobility, and the Comoros and Madagascar the lowest. The decline in intergenerational education persistence is strongest in the lower tail of the education distribution, and, daughters’ educational attainment is more correlated with parental education. The greater intergenerational persistence among women compared with men is consistent with previous findings in other developing countries (Thomas, 1996; Branson et al., 2012; Ranasinghe, 2015; Emran and Shilpi, 2015). Furthermore, in all the countries except the Comoros, intergenerational persistence from mothers to children is stronger. This result contrasts with evidence from South Africa where the link between children and father’s education is stronger than or the same as that of mothers (Lam, 1999; Girdwood and Leibbrandt, 2009). In line with the findings of Hertz et al. (2007) for 42 countries and Azam and Bhatt (2015) for India, we also show that the correlation coefficient between parents and child’s schooling has been increasing or remaining constant across cohorts, mainly driven by educational inequality in the parents’ generation. This result is not surprising in our context given that the correlation coefficient provides an absolute measure of intergenerational persistence after account is taken of a possible improvement in the distribution of education attainment because of education system reforms, such as the abolition of school fees, which increase average schooling and reduce variation in schooling. The education systems of all the countries in our sample have changed drastically since the 1960s. From a policy perspective, our result highlights the demand for targeted redistributive policies that can improve intergenerational mobility in the region. Moreover, putting in place a favorable environment for women who are less well off in terms of education might play a decisive role in promoting social mobility not only in the short run, but also in the next generation. The rest of the paper proceeds as follows. Section 2 reviews the literature and places the study in the context of existing literature. Section 3 presents the analytical framework. Section 4 describes the data. Section 5 presents the results. Section 6 offers concluding remarks and describes potential policy implications. 2 The data used in this study are comparable with the data set used by Hertz et al. (2007) for 42 countries and Azam and Bhatt (2015) for India. Moreover, the sample of Hertz et al. (2007) uses an old survey of Ghana. 3 See section 4 on the construction of matched data on parents’ and children’s educational educational attainment. 3 2 Related literature Intergenerational social mobility refers to the ability of children to climb higher than their parents on the socio economic status ladder when they become adults. Although the literature has widely focused on income, several social outcomes such as education, social class, health, or occupation can be used to study intergenerational mobility in a society (Bhalotra and Rawlings, 2011; Causa and Johansson, 2011; Ferreira et al., 2012; Bauer and Riphahn, 2007). Indeed, education is viewed as the main shaper of all other adulthood opportunities (Stiglitz, 2012). The literature on intergenerational mobility in ed- ucation, occupation, and income is broad and extensive in developed countries. Black and Devereux (2011) update the previous works of Solon (1992, 1999) and present a survey of the literature, along with the methodological challenges of the existing evidence in developed economies. Recent contributions on education mobility in developed countries include Ranasinghe (2015), Johnston et al. (2014), Checchi et al. (2013), and Cobb-Clark and Nguyen (2010). Hertz et al. (2007) extend the analysis of intergener- ational educational mobility to 42 countries, including 19 developing countries, among which three are Sub-Saharan African countries (Ethiopia, Ghana, and South Africa), and present trends over 50 years. They find that the intergenerational regression coefficient has fallen over time, implying a high degree of intergenerational education mobility, but the correlation in educational attainment between children and their parents’ remained unchanged over the period. They also document considerable regional differences, with Nordic and Latin American countries displaying the highest and the lowest intergenerational edu- cation mobility, respectively. Daude and Robano (2015) study education mobility in 18 Latin American countries and confirm the finding of Hertz et al. (2007). Hnatkovska et al. (2013) study education and occupation mobility in India by caste. They conclude that structural changes in India have coincided with a breaking down of caste-based barriers to socioeconomic mobility. Azam and Bhatt (2015) examine the intergenerational transmission of education in India and report a decline in educational persistence between fathers and sons over the last 45 years. In contrast, Emran and Shilpi (2015) find that India shows greater intergenerational education persistence than Latin America and that educational mobility remained unchanged between 1991 and 2006. With the exception of South Africa, studies on the intergenerational transmission of education in Africa are almost nonexistent.4 Some important early contributions on South Africa include Thomas (1996), Lam (1999), Case and Deaton (1999), Nimubona and Vencatachellum (2007), and Girdwood and Leibbrandt (2009). Overall, the studies find that parental education determines education outcomes among children and that there is substantial education persistence in the country, especially among black South Africans. Recent studies (Branson et al., 2012; Kwenda et al., 2015) document a decrease in intergenerational transmission of education over the last five decades in the country. To the best of our knowledge, the only cross-country study on intergenerational education mobility that includes other African countries is Hertz et al. (2007). Using data from Ethiopia, Ghana, and South Africa, the authors present evidence of lower educational persistence in African countries compared with Latin American countries. However, the smaller educational persistence rate in educational attainments between children and parents in these countries is not necessarily indicative of greater mobility. Rather, parental education dispersion was limited because of the low educational level in the population during their study period. The evidence on education mobility across generations by sex is mixed. Lam (1999) finds that the effect of a mother’s education on a child’s education is no different relative to that of a father in South Africa. In contrast, Kwenda et al. (2015), Thomas (1996), and Branson et al. (2012) on South Africa, Ranasinghe (2015) and Crook (1995) on Australia, and Bj¨ orklund et al. (2006) on Sweden present empirical evidence that the schooling of mothers has a bigger effect on children’s educational attainment than that of fathers, while Girdwood and Leibbrandt (2009), Plug (2004), and Behrman and Rosenzweig (2005) find the paternal effect to be strong in the United States. The current study aims to extend the evidence for on nine Sub-Saharan African countries with recent data and provide an in-depth analysis of intergenerational education mobility over the long term. The study therefore complements the growing literature on international comparisons of intergenerational education mobility and fills the hitherto overlooked aspect of intergenerational mobility in developing countries particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. 3 Analytical framework There are several theoretical arguments on how parental educational background affects children’s edu- cation. Educational decisions on children are determined by parental preference and credit constraints 4 Tothe best of our knowledge, Hertz et al. (2007) are the only exception, their sample includes three Sub-Saharan African countries. This study also updates the data on Ghana using recent survey data. 4 (Becker and Tomes, 1979, 1986; Solon, 1992, 1999). These theoretical arguments identify many possible channels through which parental education affects children’s education. For instance, parents affect their children through innate ability, which has an impact on educational attainment, an aspect first formalized by the seminal work of Becker and Tomes (1979). The nutrition and health status of a mother during pregnancy have a huge impact on a child’s initial health endowments and, hence, outcomes in adulthood, including education (Currie, 2009, 2011; Hackman et al., 1983). For instance, a positive relationship between a mother’s education and a child’s birthweight, which is a strong predictor of health outcomes in adulthood, is found throughout the world (Currie and Moretti, 2003). The abilities of parents affect their own income and education outcomes, which determine the quality and quantity of investment in children, thereby affecting the educational attainment of the children (Becker and Tomes, 1979, 1986). First, well- educated parents generally earn higher incomes, which may increase the investment in a child’s education by relaxing resource constraints. Second, higher educational attainment may improve the productivity of parents in child development, thus enhancing activities that may positively affect the educational at- tainment of children. Finally, parental education directly influences the schooling of children through the choice of school, with an expectation that more able families send their children to more well-endowed schools. In this study, we are not trying to investigate the channels through which intergenerational educational correlations emerge. Our objective is to correlate the educational attainment of parents and children and to present comparisons of trends in intergenerational educational im(mobility) over time. 3.1 Identification issues Intergenerational mobility studies have been fraught with econometric challenges that have arisen be- cause of unobservable heterogeneity, including the inheritance of genetic endowments such as ability and preference across generations. The partial correlation observed in the data might be mainly driven by the transmission of preference and ability between parents and children. Previous studies attribute the par- tial, but high correlations between parents’ and children’s educational outcomes to nature and nurture, among other factors (Becker and Tomes, 1986; Haveman and Wolfe, 1995; Black and Devereux, 2011; Checchi et al., 2013). Nature refers to a genetic transmission of the ability of a parent to a child. Able parents have a higher chance of producing to have more able children who can attain higher levels of education without special parental investment. For instance, a child might learn skills through observa- tion without any additional effort from parents (Haveman and Wolfe, 1995; Basu and Getachew, 2015). Nurture pertains to the amount of time and economic investments of parents on a child’s human capital accumulation. The standard approach in tackling unobserved heterogeneity is to use instrumental variables. The challenge is to identify exogenous variables that affect parental educational attainment, but do not have any effect on children’s educational attainment. However, the instrumental variables used widely in the literature such as family background variables tend to affect children’s outcomes, including our main interest here, education. Some studies use data on adoption (Plug, 2004; Plug and Vijverberg, 2003) and twins (Behrman and Rosenzweig, 2005) to isolate the effect of nature from the effect of nurture. However, these studies are limited to developed countries, where reliable data are available. Other studies compare the effect of nature and nurture on social mobility and find that nurture is relatively more important in explaining parent-child education transmission (Checchi et al., 2013; Haveman and Wolfe, 1995). In the absence of quasi-experimental data and credible instruments, we limit our analysis to the correlation between the educational attainment of parents and children. If factors of nature are time invariant, analyzing changes in intergenerational educational mobility over time is policy relevant without differentiating the effect of nature and nature (Heineck and Riphahn, 2009). Moreover, we are not aware of any analysis of intergenerational educational mobility in our sample countries. Thus, the pattern of partial correlation over time may be of independent interest. 3.2 Estimation strategies In the literature, the measurement of the degree to which family educational background affects the edu- cational attainment of children has been accomplished in different ways (see Fields and Ok, 2000; Ferreira et al., 2012). Perhaps the most basic measures are intergenerational correlation and intergenerational elasticity. The standard OLS regression model that relates educational attainment transmission from parents to children allows an estimation of these measures: Eij = α + βEPi + εij , (1) 5 where i = 1, · · · , I indexes families and j = 1, · · · , J children; Eij denotes years of schooling of a child j in a family i; EPi is the parental years of schooling in a family i; and β is the intergenerational regression coefficient, which is the parameter of interest; ε is a mean zero error term that is independently and identically distributed across generations and individuals. Equation 1 allows the quantification of the importance of parental educational attainment on children’s years of schooling using two measures. The first measure is intergenerational elasticity (β ˆ). Intergenerational elasticity (IGE) shows the relationship between each additional year of schooling of the parents and their children. β ˆ measures intergenerational ˆ persistence, and 1 − β is a measure of intergenerational mobility. Higher-value intergenerational elasticity indicates higher intergenerational persistence and, hence, lower mobility. In this study, the estimations are carried out on five-year birth cohorts by sex in each country. Thus, β ˆ is the estimated intergenerational elasticity of each of five-year birth cohort among sons and daughters. Comparing β ˆ across birth cohorts in each country measures how intergenerational education persistence has evolved in both sexes over time. The intergenerational education correlation between Eij and EPi is an alternative measure of inter- generational elasticity that has also been widely used in the literature. The correlation coefficient (ˆ ρ) quantifies how much of the observed dispersion in children’s education is explained by parental educa- tion. A higher value in the correlation coefficient also implies lower intergenerational mobility and higher intergenerational education persistence. Intergenerational elasticity equals the correlation coefficient be- tween parent and child education weighted by the ratio of the standard deviations of education across generations. Thus the two measures, the correlation and the elasticity, will be equal provided that the standard deviation of years of schooling is the same across generations. The relationship between the two measures is as follows: ˆ = σpc = ρpc σc β (2) 2 σp σp σp ρpc = β c σ where σ p and σ c are the standard deviations of years of schooling of parents and children in each five-year birth cohort; σpc is the covariance between the years of schooling of parents and children; and ρpc is the correlation between the schooling of parents and children. An estimate of ρ that equals to 1 implies perfect intergenerational immobility, that is, child educational attainment is entirely influenced by the educational background of parents, while a ρ close to zero indicates a perfectly mobile society in which parental education has only limited or no effect on children’s educational attainment. A decrease (increase) in intergenerational elasticity (β ˆ) may arise because of either a decrease (in- crease) in intergenerational correlation (ˆρ) or a decrease (increase) in the inequality of education across σc generations ( σ ). Thus, the main difference between IGE (β ˆ) and the correlation coefficient (ˆρ) is that p the former factors out the cross-sectional inequality of education across generations and, hence, provides a relative measure of intergenerational mobility. In contrast, the estimated elasticity (β ˆ) provides an absolute measure of intergenerational persistence that is not affected by education policy changes in a country, for instance, the expansion of compulsory free primary education, and this reduces the possible variation in the measure. Hence, a change in the inequality of education across the generation of the parents and children will cause the two measures to evolve differently over time. Checchi et al. (2013) argue that a change in ρ ˆ captures not only a change in the parent–child education correlation, but also other events in the education system, such as the expansion of compulsory primary education. To dis- entangle the effects of these events from the educational correlation between parents and children, they propose decomposing ρ ˆ into three components: changes in the dispersion of the educational attainment of parents and children around the respective means, changes in children’s educational attainment con- ditional on the educational attainment of the parents, and changes in the unconditional distribution of parental educational attainment. They argue that changes in children’s schooling conditional on parent’s education is the most relevant for policy. In the same vein, we model the effect of the highest levels of education of parents on the highest level of schooling of the children, across the five- year birth cohorts using an ordered probit model. Let’s define the educational attainment of children in a household as follows: Eij = µ + ai + bij , (3) where i = 1, · · · , I indexes families and j = 1, · · · , J children; Eij is the years of schooling of a child j in a family i; µ is the population mean; ai is a family component common to all children in a household i; and bij is the individual specific component for a child that captures i s deviation from the family 6 component. Because the individual component (bij ) is orthogonal to the family component (ai ), one can express the family component as follows: ai = βEPi + zi , (4) where zi denotes family factors that are orthogonal to parental schooling. From equation 4, it follows that 2 2 σp σpc σ2 ρc = 2 = β2 2 + z 2 σpc σc σc (5) 2 = ρ + family factors orthogonal to parental schooling Equation (5) is widely known in the literature; it shows that the square of intergenerational correlation provides an estimate of the share of total variance in the educational attainment of children that can be explained by parental educational attainment only (Solon, 1999). As discussed above, β ˆ is affected by the relative variance of education in the two generations. Therefore, any change in the relative variance may lead to different ρ and β trend in a same society. For instance, Hertz et al. (2007) document that β fell over time (implying more mobility); yet, the correlation between children’s and parents’ educational attainment remained constant for half a century (implying no change in mobility). For this reason, it is a common practice to report both measures of educational persistence (see, for example, Ranasinghe, 2015; Checchi et al., 2013; Azam and Bhatt, 2015; Hertz et al., 2007). In this study, we follow the same tradition and report both measures, intergenerational elasticity (β ˆ) and the correlation coefficient (ˆ ρ), across five-year birth cohorts in all the countries. Both measures can be easily extended to analyze different aspects of intergenerational mobility, such as mobility by geography or difference in sex, caste, and other aspects socioeconomic status (Ranasinghe, 2015; Hnatkovska et al., 2013; Azam and Bhatt, 2015; Bourguignon et al., 2007; Binder and Woodruff, 2002). With the objec- tive of assessing a sex difference in intergenerational education persistence, we estimate the parameters in equations (1) and (2) for daughters and sons separately. To strengthen our analysis by looking at changes in children’s educational attainment conditional on parental educational attainment and shedding light on the role of maternal and paternal education on children’s human capital accumulation, we study the intergenerational transmission of children’s highest level of educational attainment across cohorts. We define three categories of education for both the generation of the children and the generation of the par- ents: no schooling, primary, and secondary schooling and above.5 Analyzing transitions in educational level between the two generations serves the same propose as the decomposition of Checchi et al. (2013). Theories on education inequality also support this approach by highlighting the importance of socioeco- nomic background in educational level transitions (Mare, 1980; Raftery and Hout, 1993). According to these theories, it is important to identify levels of education among children that are highly influenced by paternal or maternal education. Studying educational levels that are highly influenced by parental educational attainment is also important for policy within Sub-Saharan Africa. Following a series of education system reforms in many counties in the region, there has been a significant increase in primary education, but enrollment in higher education (secondary education and above) has remained low (Toma- sevski, 2006). Hence, this analysis will give an indication where policy should focus to promote equity in the long run. Accordingly, we model the effect of the highest levels of educational attainment among parents on children’s highest level of schooling across five-year birth cohorts. This entails estimating an ordered probit model. Let s∗ be an ordered response that takes on values of 0, 1, 2 denoting children’s highest level of education (0 = no schooling, 1 = primary, 2 = secondary and above). The latent model underlying the ordered probit model for s∗ is as follows: s∗ = spβ + , (6) ∗ where s is unobservable; sp is the control for the highest level of education of parents; β is the corre- sponding unknown coefficient; and ε is the error term, which is assumed to be normally distributed across observations with mean and variance normalized at 0 and 1. Although s∗ is unobservable, we observe the highest level of children’s educational attainment which is the category of the response, that is, as follows: 5 Because of a lower level of schooling among older parents, we could not define more education categories. 7 if s∗ ≤ α1   0 s= 1 if α1 < s∗ ≤ α2 (7) 2 if s∗ > α2  where α1 < α2 are the unknown cutoff points. The estimation of the parameters α and β is performed using maximum likelihood (Wooldridge, 2010). 4 Data We use data from Comoros - Enquˆ egrale aupr` ete int´ es des m´enages (EIM 2004), Ghana - Ghana Living Standards Survey (GLSS 2012/13), Guinea - Enquˆ egr´ ete Int´ ee de Base pour l’Evaluation de la Pau- vret´e (EIBEP 2002/03), Madagascar - Enquˆ ete permanente aupr` es des m´enages (EPM-2005), Malawi - Malawi Integrated Household Survey (IHS3 2010/11), Nigeria - Nigeria General Household Survey (GHS 2010/2011), Rwanda - Integrated Household Living Conditions Survey (EICV 1999/2000), Tanzania - Tanzania National Panel Survey (NPS 2009/2010), and Uganda - Uganda National Household Survey (UNHS 2005/06). The description of the sample composition in each country is presented in table 1. All the surveys are the latest representative datasets available that collect information on both children and their parent’s education regardless of whether parents are alive or, if alive, live in the same household. All the surveys have been conducted from 2000 onwards, and most have been conducted after 2005. The analysis is restricted to those individuals ages between 20 and 69, which corresponds to the year of birth going back as far as 1935 for Comoros, 1944 for Ghana, 1933 for Guinea, 1936 for Madagascar, 1942 for Malawi and Nigeria, 1931 for Rwanda, 1941 for Tanzania, and 1937 for Uganda.6 After data cleaning, the total sample size ranges from 32,730 in Ghana to 6,778 in Tanzania; a total of more than 145,000 adult children (ages between 20-69) are represented in the study. The data in all the countries are organized into five-year birth cohorts based on the children’s years of birth. In table 1, we also present the minimum sample size in each country, which corresponds to the smallest sample size of five-year birth cohort in each country. In all the countries, years of schooling is coded as the number of years associated with the highest grade completed, and repeated grades are not counted. Parental educational attainment is the average of the years of schooling of the mothers and fathers. All the surveys contain information on the educational attainment of parents in two separate variables that differentiate the education of parents who are co- residing or not residing in the household. We used the personal identification numbers of fathers and mothers to create a pair of parents and children if the parents and children are still living together in a household. Using this information to create pairs of parents and children imposes a co-residence condition that reduces the sample size significantly. In addition to this information, all the surveys have another question that collects information on retrospective parental educational attainment among household members who are not co-residing in the household regardless of whether the parent is alive. Combining these two variables, we have been able to identify parental schooling for more than 95 percent of adult respondents in each country. Because of the lack of long panel or administrative data, most studies in the literature have used cross-sectional data and co-residence to identify child-parent pairs, mostly father-son pairs (see, for example, Emran and Shilpi, 2015; Hnatkovska et al., 2013; Jalan and Murgai, 2007). Using co-residence identification has three important implications for the analysis. First, because the distribution of education across both generations is different in the subsample of adults who live together with their parents and versus the total population, sample selection problems arise that bias the intergenerational elasticity downward. For instance, Francesconi and Nicoletti (2006) and Azam and Bhatt (2015) document a bias because of the co-residence condition that ranges from 12% to 39% and 17% in constructing father-son pairs in the United Kingdom and India, respectively. Second, the co-residency criteria over identify younger adult children who are still living with their parents; this might not lead to a representative adult population sample (Jalan and Murgai, 2007; Hnatkovska et al., 2013). Third, children-parent pairs that are constructed using co-residence identification does not allow cohort-wise long-term trend analysis of intergenerational persistence. 6 The age range is consistent with Hertz et al. (2007), which makes our estimates directly comparable with their estimates of 41 countries. As a result, we are able to rank the countries in our sample against their estimates. 8 Table 1: List of Countries, Dates, Sample Size, and Average Years of Schooling Dates Sample size Average years of schooling Parents Children Country Survey Year Birth Years Total Minimum Cohort 1 Cohort 10 Cohort 1 Cohort 10 Comoros 2004 1935-1984 5,835 218 0.25 1.09 1.17 4.19 Ghana 2012/13 1944-1993 31,822 1,046 1.02 5.4 4.36 8.28 Guinea 2002/03 1933-1982 22,052 724 0.12 2.44 0.57 4.26 Madagascar 2005 1936-1985 20,736 508 1.21 2.47 1.05 2.44 Malawi 2010/11 1942-1991 22,427 615 0.35 2.47 2.68 6.19 Nigeria 2010/11 1942-1991 11,643 409 0.28 4.29 3.05 8.63 Rwanda 1999/00 1931-1980 10,653 310 0.16 2.5 1.36 5.2 Tanzania 2009/10 1941-1990 6,527 218 0.55 5.13 2.29 6.75 9 Uganda 2005/06 1937-1986 13,561 393 0.65 4.63 2.81 7.12 i) Total refers to the total sample size of adult children aged between 20-69 in survey years in each country ii) Minimum refers to the sample size of the smallest five-years birth cohort for each county iii) Parents’ year of education refers to the average year of schooling of mothers and fathers The last two columns of table 1 report the average years of schooling of parents and children in the first and last five-year birth cohorts. In all countries except Madagascar, the average years of schooling have increased rapidly over the past 50 years among both children and parents. Excluding Madagascar, we document four to six and two to five years of schooling gain between the first and the last five-year birth cohorts of children and parents, respectively. We observe the least year of schooling gain, about one year, among both children and parents in Madagascar. Figure 1 provides a visual illustration of the educational attainment of children (daughters and sons) and their parents across five-year birth cohorts. In all the countries, children, on average, have higher educational attainment than their parents. With the exception of the youngest cohorts, there has been an upward trend in the average years of schooling among both sons and daughters across cohorts. In general, average years of schooling is higher among sons than daughters, and the gender difference is significant. The gender difference remains similar across the two generations, women (mothers and daughters) show significantly fewer years of schooling than their men counterparts (fathers and sons). Figure 1: Educational attainment of children and parents by year of birth a. Comoros b. Ghana c. Guinea 2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10 Years of schooling Years of schooling Years of schooling 0 0 0 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1944 1954 1964 1974 1984 1994 1933 1943 1953 1963 1973 1983 Year of birth Year of birth Year of birth d. Madagascar e. Malawi f. Nigeria 2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10 Years of schooling Years of schooling Years of schooling 0 0 0 1936 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 1942 1952 1962 1972 1982 1992 1942 1952 1962 1972 1982 1992 Year of birth Year of birth Year of birth g. Rwanda h. Tanzania i. Uganda 2 4 6 8 10 10 2 4 6 8 10 Years of schooling Years of schooling Years of schooling 8 6 4 2 0 0 0 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 1937 1947 1957 1967 1977 1987 Year of birth Year of birth Year of birth Daughter Sons Father Mother Figure 2 presents children’s highest level of education across five-year birth cohorts. Overall, the proportion of children with no schooling has declined over the 50 years. We note a boom in primary education in all the countries, particularly among children born after the 1960s. This coincides with the policy changes in educational systems and a huge investment in human capital accumulation in the region after independence (Thakur, 1991). In all our sample countries, the proportion of children who completed tertiary education was small. The proportion of daughters who complete tertiary education is less than 10% among all cohorts and countries. We note the same trend among sons except in Ghana and Guinea, where we observe a slight improvement in the two youngest cohorts. Similarly, a large proportion of parents show a lower level of education, no education, and primary education in all the countries across cohorts (see table A1-A9 in Appendix A). Parent-child differentials in the distribution of the highest educational attainment suggest improvement in education mobility or a weak link between the educational persistence of parents and children over time, particularly among the youngest birth cohorts. 10 Figure 2: Children’s highest grade completed, by five-year birth cohort 25 50 75 100 a.Comoros b.Ghana c.Guinea 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 Proportion Proportion Proportion 0 0 0 1939 1949 1959 1969 1979 1948 1958 1968 1978 1988 1937 1947 1957 1967 1977 5−years birth cohorts 5−years birth cohorts 5−years birth cohorts d.Madagascar e.Malawi f.Nigeria 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 Proportion Proportion Proportion 0 0 0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 5−years birth cohorts 5−years birth cohorts 5−years birth cohorts g.Rwanda h.Tanzania i.Uganda 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 Proportion Proportion Proportion 0 0 0 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 5−years birth cohorts 5−years birth cohorts 5−years birth cohorts No education (Son) Primary (Son) Secondary (Son) Tertiary (Son) No education (Daughter) Primary (Daughter) Secondary (Daughter) Tertiary (Daughter) 5 Results We present the estimates of the two intergenerational educational persistence measures, intergenerational ˆ) and the correlation coefficient (ˆ elasticity (β ρ), in six stages. First, we present our baseline estimates at the country level using a pooled sample of all children in each country. Second, because our sample is comparable with the datasets used by Hertz et al. (2007) to rank 42 countries in five regions, we pool our data at the regional level and rank Sub-Saharan Africa in terms of intergenerational educational per- sistence among other regions. Third, we discuss the trend in intergenerational education mobility across five-year birth cohorts using both measures. Ranking each country among other nations on which com- parable estimates are available follows. Fourth, we explore the potential differences in intergenerational education mobility across gender. Fifth, we explore the potential difference of paternal and maternal ed- ucational attainment in influencing child’s educational attainment across five-year birth cohorts in each country. The final section presents the estimates of the order probit model of children’s highest level of education. 5.1 Intergenerational education mobility at the country level Table 2 presents the estimates of the intergenerational elasticity and correlation coefficients for the pooled sample in each country. The results reveal two main findings of interest. First, for all specifications considered, parental education has a statistically significant effect on children’s educational attainment in all the countries. The estimates imply that, despite the increase in years of schooling in almost all the countries over the last 50 years, parental education plays a crucial role in children’s education attainment. There exists an intergenerational link in educational outcomes: for instance, a one year difference in parental schooling is associated with a 0.74-year difference in children’s education in Madagascar. In terms of the estimated intergenerational elasticity, Tanzania and the Comoros show the highest and the lowest intergenerational education mobility, respectively. On average, an additional year of parental schooling is associated with a 0.47 and a 0.91-year difference in children’s years of schooling in Tanzania and the Comoros, respectively. Second, as discussed above, gender is an important determinant of educational attainment in many developing and developed countries. 11 In low-income countries, girls tend to receive less education than boys (Behrman and Knowles, 1999; Alderman, Harold and King, Elizabeth M, 1998). In Sub-Saharan Africa, boys are still 1.6 times more likely to complete secondary education than their girl counterparts (Klugman et al., 2014). This is also in line with our observation in the sample countries in figures 1 and 2, women (mothers and daughters) show significantly fewer years of schooling than their men counterparts (fathers and sons) in all the countries. Accordingly, in column (2), we control for gender. We find that estimated intergenerational elasticity declined slightly in Ghana, Guinea, Madagascar, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, and Uganda, while it increased slightly in the Comoros and Tanzania, suggesting lower educational mobility or higher ed- ucational persistence among daughters than sons in most countries. The next set of results in column 3, table 2 includes other control variables that are used in the literature: age and number of children in a household. Moreover, with the objective of capturing the cohort effect, we also include the square of age. The results in column 3, table 2 show that the addition of the controls does not affect the estimated intergenerational elasticity in any significant way in the countries, though it leads to slight increase in the explanatory power of the regression. Despite the inclusion of such powerful controls, the qualitative results remain unchanged; parental education plays a vital role in children’s educational attainment in all the countries. Table 2: Intergenerational education elasticity and correlation at the country level Dependent variable: Children Years of Schooling [1] [2]† [3]‡ Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Comoros ˆ) 0.906∗∗∗ 0.055 Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.909∗∗∗ 0.053 0.833∗∗∗ 0.049 2 R 0.105 0.136 0.192 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.324∗∗∗ # Observations 5,835 5,835 5,835 Ghana ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.489∗∗∗ 0.007 0.484∗∗∗ 0.006 0.490∗∗∗ 0.007 R2 0.214 0.262 0.263 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.463∗∗∗ # Observations 31,822 31,822 31,822 Guinea ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.528∗∗∗ 0.015 0.506∗∗∗ 0.015 0.465∗∗∗ 0.016 R2 0.139 0.200 0.221 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.372∗∗∗ # Observations 22,052 22,052 22,052 Madagascar ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.739∗∗∗ 0.017 0.738∗∗∗ 0.017 0.736∗∗∗ 0.017 R2 0.258 0.262 0.263 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.508∗∗∗ # Observations 20,736 20,736 20,736 Malawi ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.637∗∗∗ 0.009 0.630∗∗∗ 0.009 0.567∗∗∗ 0.010 2 R 0.214 0.258 0.288 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.463∗∗∗ # Observations 22,427 22,427 22,427 Nigeria ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.768∗∗∗ 0.012 0.758∗∗∗ 0.012 0.703∗∗∗ 0.123 2 R 0.288 0.317 0.335 Correlation(ˆ ρ) 0.537∗∗∗ # Observations 11,643 11,643 11,643 Rwanda Continued on next page. . . 12 Table 2 – continued [1] [2]† [3]‡ Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.748∗∗∗ 0.020 0.745∗∗∗ 0.020 0.554∗∗∗ 0.021 R2 0.188 0.202 0.267 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.434∗∗∗ # Observations 10,653 10,653 10,635 Tanzania ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.467∗∗∗ 0.012 0.469∗∗∗ 0.012 0.426∗∗∗ 0.014 2 R 0.201 0.225 0.267 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.448∗∗∗ # Observations 6,527 6,527 6,527 Uganda ˆ) Parents Years of Schooling (β 0.616∗∗∗ 0.011 0.613∗∗∗ 0.011 0.543∗∗∗ 0.011 R2 0.249 0.319 0.388 Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.499∗∗∗ # Observations 13,561 13,561 13,561 Parents education is average of mother’s and father’s years of schooling. † Regression include gender of children. ‡ In addition to gender this regression includes age, age square and the number of children in a family. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 5.2 Intergenerational education mobility at the regional level To rank Sub-Saharan Africa among world regions, we have pooled the sample at the regional level. We find a regional correlation coefficient of 0.51, indicating that parental years of schooling account for about 51% of the inequality in children’s years of schooling. Our estimate is above the global average of 0.42 (for 42 countries) documented by Hertz et al. (2007), and is comparable with their estimates of 0.39, 0.44, 0.46 in Asia, Western Europe and the United States, and Eastern Europe, respectively. Sub- Saharan Africa has lower estimated intergenerational educational persistence (ˆ ρ) than Latin America. Overall, mobility in Sub-Saharan Africa is lower than Europe and the United States and Eastern Europe and higher than Latin America. Our estimate of intergenerational correlation (ˆ ρ) is also higher than the African average of 0.36 estimated by Hertz et al. (2007). Therefore, using correlation coefficient of parental background explains a significantly higher share of the variation in the educational attainment of children in Sub-Saharan Africa than before.7 Similarly, we estimate an intergenerational elasticity of 0.66 for Sub-Saharan Africa, indicating that additional years of parental schooling, on average, increases children’s years schooling by 0.66. This estimate is higher than the estimates of Hertz et al. (2007) 0.52 in Western Europe and United States and 0.38 in Eastern bloc Europe, and is lower than the intergenerational elasticity of 0.83 in Latin America and 0.69 in Asia (see table 3). The intergenerational elasticity estimate of the current study is lower than the estimates of Hertz et al. (2007) (0.8) for four African countries (Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, and South Africa). Our estimates of the two measures paint a picture that is consistent with previous estimates on developing countries. While intergenerational elasticity demonstrates that an extra year of parental schooling adds fewer years of schooling to children’s education now than before, the regional correlation coefficient estimate is higher than previous estimates of Hertz et al. (2007), thereby, telling a bleaker story of mobility in the region. This apparent contradiction can be explained based on Eq.2: two countries can have the same intergenerational elasticity estimates, but the correlation coefficient can be different if the educational inequality in the generation of the parents and children varies over time, for instance because of, education policy changes affecting children’s generation (see section 5.3). As discussed in section 3, Eq.5, the square of intergenerational correlation provides an estimate of the share of the total variance in schooling that can be explained by parental years of schooling alone. We estimate that parents education alone can explain 31% of variations in the years of schooling of daughters and 21% of sons in the region. This estimate is higher than the available estimates for developed countries 7 Hertz et al. (2007) used older surveys from the Arab Republic of Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, and South Africa and study intergenerational mobility between 1925 and 1978. 13 that indicate that parental education explains only 9%-21% of the total variation in children’s years of schooling and lower than the estimates for India, where parental education explains 27%-29% and 31%- 39% of total the variations in the year of schooling of sons and daughters, respectively (Bjorklund and Salvanes, 2010; Emran and Shilpi, 2011). Table 3: Intergenerational education elasticity and correlation at regional level Region No of countries # Observations β ˆ ρˆ Rank Asia 9 96,455 0.69 0.39 5 Sub-Saharan Africa 9 145,256 0.66 0.51 2 Latin America 7 213,768 0.83 0.60 1 Eastern bloc 8 21,809 0.38 0.46 3 Western Europe and USA 13 34,940 0.52 0.44 4 Note: Estimates for Sub-Saharan African countries are World Bank calculations. Estimates for other regions are based on pooled data from Hertz et al. (2007). Number of countries refers to the sample counties in each region. 5.3 Cohort analysis In this section, we investigate the trends in intergenerational mobility in educational attainment of each of the five-year birth cohorts based on the number of years of schooling for both generations. Table 4 reports the results. In line with our previous observations in table 2, parental education has a statistically signif- icant effect on the child’s education across most birth cohorts in all the countries. The intergenerational persistence of education has generally decreased over the last five decades in all the countries, but the trend has not been consistent. In all the countries, there has been a significant improvement in education mobility from the 1960s onward. Nigeria, Guinea, Ghana and Uganda have recorded the highest gains in intergenerational mobility between those born from 1940s to the 1990s. The decline in the relationship between the education of parents and children is quite impressive in Nigeria, where the intergenerational elasticity between the youngest and the oldest cohort declined by 65% between 1942 and 1991 (table 4). For the Comoros, Guinea, and Rwanda, we document a small intergenerational educational persistence rate for the oldest cohorts. However, a lower persistence rate in educational attainment in these countries does not necessarily reflect high social mobility among older cohorts; rather parental education does not vary across households because of the low years of schooling, and parental education can only explain small proportion of the variation in child schooling. For example, children born between 1931 and 1935 in Rwanda have an average 1.4 years of schooling, while their parents have only 0.2 years of schooling. This is consistent with our observations that the explanatory power of the relationship between parental and children’s years of schooling has been limited among older cohorts and increased among the youngest cohorts in these countries (table 4, column 4). Our sample includes individuals who are continuing their education. This represents either delay in schooling or the pursuit to higher education. If it is caused by delayed completion among children in households with well-educated parents, the intergenerational elasticity will be biased downward. On the other hand, if children in household with less well educated parents are the ones taking more years to complete their education, the covariance between parental education and children’s education increases, and the intergenerational elasticity will be upwardly biased. In light of this, we repeat our analysis by excluding the youngest cohort that is made up of children ages between 20 and 24 from each country where the current enrollment is higher.8 Our results are relatively unaffected, and the bias is fairly small. In the youngest cohort, the true value of years of schooling is less than 1 year of schooling on average than what we observe in the youngest cohort if we use 20 years as the lower age cutoff.9 8 For the 25 to 29 age-group, the enrollment rate is always less than 7%. 9 Results are available upon request. 14 Table 4: Intergenerational education elasticity and correlations by cohort Birth cohorts ˆ) Coefficient (β Std.err R2 ρ) Correlation (ˆ # Observations Comoros 1934-1939 0.498 0.329 0.085 0.291 218 1940-1944 0.603∗ 0.249 0.038 0.195 393 1945-1949 0.039 0.116 0.000 0.016 337 1950-1954 0.632∗ 0.280 0.076 0.275∗∗ 558 1955-1959 0.936∗∗∗ 0.171 0.127 0.356∗∗∗ 509 1960-1964 1.153∗∗∗ 0.155 0.138 0.372∗∗∗ 675 1965-1969 0.940∗∗∗ 0.121 0.083 0.288∗∗∗ 839 1970-1974 0.887∗∗∗ 0.090 0.134 0.366∗∗∗ 894 1975-1979 0.917∗∗∗ 0.136 0.087 0.294∗∗∗ 680 1980-1984 0.682∗∗∗ 0.079 0.078 0.279∗∗∗ 732 Ghana 1944-1948 0.773∗∗∗ 0.050 0.157 0.396∗∗∗ 1,046 1949-1953 0.720∗∗∗ 0.048 0.146 0.382∗∗∗ 1,499 1954-1958 0.557∗∗∗ 0.049 0.103 0.321∗∗∗ 1,774 1959-1963 0.609∗∗∗ 0.031 0.153 0.392∗∗∗ 2,514 1964-1968 0.602∗∗∗ 0.028 0.208 0.456∗∗∗ 2,770 1969-1973 0.601∗∗∗ 0.024 0.239 0.489∗∗∗ 3,452 1974-1978 0.500∗∗∗ 0.018 0.242 0.492∗∗∗ 3,928 1979-1983 0.464∗∗∗ 0.017 0.259 0.509∗∗∗ 4,272 1984-1988 0.466∗∗∗ 0.016 0.274 0.524∗∗∗ 4,842 1989-1993 0.385∗∗∗ 0.014 0.243 0.493∗∗∗ 5,725 Guinea 1933-1937 0.299 0.203 0.009 0.096 724 1938-1942 0.868∗∗∗ 0.263 0.134 0.366∗∗∗ 1,156 1943-1947 0.423 0.231 0.030 0.172∗ 1,125 1948-1952 1.007∗∗∗ 0.103 0.086 0.293∗∗∗ 1,652 1953-1957 0.733∗∗∗ 0.104 0.055 0.235∗∗∗ 1,883 1958-1962 0.695∗∗∗ 0.061 0.112 0.335∗∗∗ 2,218 1963-1967 0.552∗∗∗ 0.049 0.111 0.333∗∗∗ 2,695 1968-1972 0.538∗∗∗ 0.046 0.158 0.398∗∗∗ 3,013 1973-1977 0.486∗∗∗ 0.032 0.155 0.394∗∗∗ 3,498 1978-1982 0.429∗∗∗ 0.019 0.172 0.415∗∗∗ 4,088 Madagascar 1936-1940 0.633∗∗∗ 0.097 0.213 0.462∗∗∗ 508 1941-1945 0.698∗∗∗ 0.130 0.113 0.337∗∗∗ 652 1946-1950 0.621∗∗∗ 0.115 0.148 0.384∗∗∗ 905 1951-1955 0.731∗∗∗ 0.072 0.166 0.407∗∗∗ 1,604 1956-1960 0.876∗∗∗ 0.057 0.258 0.508∗∗∗ 1,853 1961-1965 0.808∗∗∗ 0.051 0.234 0.484∗∗∗ 2,225 1966-1970 0.652∗∗∗ 0.052 0.178 0.422∗∗∗ 2,576 1971-1975 0.732∗∗∗ 0.042 0.236 0.485∗∗∗ 2,961 1976-1980 0.738∗∗∗ 0.044 0.317 0.563∗∗∗ 3,499 1981-1985 0.732∗∗∗ 0.032 0.356 0.597∗∗∗ 3,953 Malawi 1942-1946 0.955∗∗∗ 0.156 0.125 0.354∗∗∗ 615 1947-1951 0.575∗∗∗ 0.125 0.049 0.221∗∗∗ 916 1952-1956 0.833∗∗∗ 0.125 0.102 0.320∗∗∗ 927 1957-1961 0.613∗∗∗ 0.088 0.081 0.285∗∗∗ 1,181 1962-1966 0.710∗∗∗ 0.050 0.160 0.399∗∗∗ 1,625 1967-1971 0.794∗∗∗ 0.045 0.189 0.435∗∗∗ 1,901 1972-1976 0.685∗∗∗ 0.032 0.199 0.446∗∗∗ 2,783 1977-1981 0.590∗∗∗ 0.026 0.212 0.460∗∗∗ 3,529 1982-1986 0.529∗∗∗ 0.019 0.199 0.447∗∗∗ 4,393 1987-1991 0.545∗∗∗ 0.015 0.246 0.496∗∗∗ 4,557 Nigeria 1942-1946 1.507∗∗∗ 0.177 0.181 0.425∗∗∗ 409 1947-1951 1.228∗∗∗ 0.103 0.230 0.480∗∗∗ 664 Continued on next page. . . 15 Table 4 – continued Birth cohorts ˆ) Coefficient (β Std.err R2 ρ) Correlation (ˆ # Observations ∗∗∗ 1952-1956 1.024 0.126 0.141 0.375∗∗∗ 626 1957-1961 0.962∗∗∗ 0.066 0.173 0.416∗∗∗ 963 1962-1966 0.851∗∗∗ 0.060 0.182 0.426∗∗∗ 1,028 1967-1971 0.980∗∗∗ 0.049 0.240 0.489∗∗∗ 1,264 1972-1976 0.790∗∗∗ 0.043 0.256 0.506∗∗∗ 1,400 1977-1981 0.752∗∗∗ 0.033 0.294 0.542∗∗∗ 1,444 1982-1986 0.710∗∗∗ 0.025 0.337 0.581∗∗∗ 1,852 1987-1991 0.526∗∗∗ 0.021 0.279 0.528∗∗∗ 1,993 Rwanda 1931-1935 0.178 0.443 0.001 0.027 310 1936-1940 0.577∗ 0.225 0.025 0.157∗ 421 1941-1945 0.630∗∗∗ 0.160 0.056 0.237∗∗∗ 507 1946-1950 0.782∗∗∗ 0.139 0.089 0.299∗∗∗ 746 1951-1955 0.478∗∗∗ 0.091 0.050 0.223∗∗∗ 941 1956-1960 0.617∗∗∗ 0.085 0.069 0.262∗∗∗ 1,243 1961-1965 0.651∗∗∗ 0.064 0.105 0.324∗∗∗ 1,247 1966-1970 0.698∗∗∗ 0.050 0.144 0.380∗∗∗ 1,303 1971-1975 0.628∗∗∗ 0.048 0.165 0.406∗∗∗ 1,557 1976-1980 0.529∗∗∗ 0.033 0.161 0.401∗∗∗ 2,378 Tanzania 1941-1945 0.416 0.125 0.060 0.245 218 1946-1950 0.705∗∗∗ 0.170 0.084 0.290∗ 255 1951-1955 0.758∗∗∗ 0.118 0.132 0.363∗∗∗ 356 1956-1960 0.687∗∗∗ 0.070 0.181 0.426∗∗∗ 408 1961-1965 0.555∗∗∗ 0.061 0.146 0.382∗∗∗ 572 1966-1970 0.350∗∗∗ 0.052 0.106 0.326∗∗∗ 645 1971-1975 0.329∗∗∗ 0.034 0.110 0.331∗∗∗ 833 1976-1980 0.395∗∗∗ 0.027 0.191 0.437∗∗∗ 943 1981-1985 0.385∗∗∗ 0.031 0.161 0.402∗∗∗ 1,057 1986-1990 0.463∗∗∗ 0.028 0.226 0.475∗∗∗ 1,240 Uganda 1937-1941 1.047∗∗∗ 0.191 0.167 0.409∗∗∗ 393 1942-1946 0.853∗∗∗ 0.123 0.129 0.359∗∗∗ 454 1947-1951 0.679∗∗∗ 0.081 0.106 0.326∗∗∗ 561 1952-1956 0.660∗∗∗ 0.080 0.124 0.352∗∗∗ 723 1957-1961 0.680∗∗∗ 0.054 0.171 0.414∗∗∗ 1,011 1962-1966 0.653∗∗∗ 0.047 0.189 0.435∗∗∗ 1,265 1967-1971 0.609∗∗∗ 0.033 0.187 0.433∗∗∗ 1,688 1972-1976 0.603∗∗∗ 0.029 0.255 0.505∗∗∗ 1,949 1977-1981 0.561∗∗∗ 0.025 0.226 0.475 ∗∗∗ 2,484 1982-1986 0.494∗∗∗ 0.020 0.237 0.487∗∗∗ 3,033 Parents education is average of mother’s and father’s years of schooling. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% For the standardized measure of intergenerational mobility, the correlation coefficient, a declining trend is not visible. This result is similar to the findings of previous studies in developing countries (see, for example, Hertz et al., 2007; Azam and Bhatt, 2015; Daude and Robano, 2015). A plausible explanation for the discrepancy between the two measures is a change in the dispersion of the years of schooling across the two generations (parents and their children). To examine this possibility, we present, in Figure 3, the trend in the standard deviations of years of schooling of both generations and the two measures of intergenerational educational persistence. The result clearly shows that, while the dispersion of education in the children’s generation has decreased from the 1960s onward, the inequality in parental education has increased. This finding is expected: if nearly all parents were initially uneducated and then a small proportion, especially young parents, gain access to education, the variance in years of schooling will increase. For all the countries but Tanzania and Ghana among recent cohorts, the variance in children’s years of schooling is always greater than that of the parents. This leads to a ratio of the standard deviation of parental schooling to that of their children of less than 1, because of which the correlation coefficient (ˆ ˆ) among almost all the cohorts ρ) is less than the intergenerational elasticity (β 16 in every country. The combined effects, that is, the lower intergenerational correlation and the rise in the dispersion of parental education, explain the slight increase in intergenerational correlation. These patterns are similar to those reported by Hertz et al. (2007) and Azam and Bhatt (2015). Figure 3: Evolution of intergenerational educational persistence and standard deviations education by 5 years birth cohorts a. Comoros-2004 c. Ghana-2013 d. Guinea-2003 8 8 8 6 6 6 4 4 4 2 2 2 0 0 0 1939 1949 1959 1969 1979 1948 1958 1968 1978 1988 1937 1947 1957 1967 1977 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts e. Madagascar-2005 f. Malawi-2010 g. Nigeria-2010 8 8 8 6 6 6 4 4 4 2 2 2 0 0 0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts h. Rwanda -2000 i. Tanzania-2009 j. Uganda-2005 8 8 8 6 6 6 4 4 4 2 2 2 0 0 0 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts Coefficient Correlation Parents SD-years of schooling Children SD-years of schooling The general declining trend of intergenerational elasticity (β ˆ) across cohorts partly reflects the im- provement in the education systems and policies in many countries in the region. The education systems in Sub-Saharan Africa expanded substantially after independence in the 1960s, which almost doubled primary-school enrollments in many of the countries (Thakur, 1991). The expansion of primary educa- tion was facilitated through the expansion of public education. Government expenditure on education grew substantially during the period (UNESCO, 1970). During the decade, we observe a decline in inter- generational educational persistence in almost all countries in our sample (see, for instance the Comoros, Ghana, Guinea, and Nigeria estimates in table 4). In the 1980s, the recurrent balance of payment fail- ures and economic regression limited the public expenditure on education. We observe a rebound in the intergenerational persistence rate in our sample countries. A revival of public education funding occurred again in the 1990s and the education systems in many countries in the region underwent dramatic policy changes. One of the most dramatic educational policy changes, for instance, was the abolition of primary school fees in Ghana, Malawi, and Uganda in the 1990s and in Benin, Burundi, Lesotho, Liberia, Mozam- bique, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and Zambia in the 2000s (UNESCO, 2011). In line with this, we observe a decline in intergenerational elasticity among the youngest cohorts in all countries except Malawi and Tanzania. The positive relationship between public education expenditure and individual educational attainment has been extensively documented in the literature on both developing and de- veloped countries (Black and Devereux, 2011). Hertz et al. (2007) also provides a survey of the existing literature that reports changes in education policy and intergenerational education mobility. There is also empirical evidence that higher public expenditure on primary education is boosting education mo- bility across generations in many countries. Thus, it is plausible to hypothesize that our result of rising educational mobility across cohorts using intergenerational education elasticity to some extent reflects the inclusiveness of the policy changes in the region to create equal educational opportunities for children from different parental education backgrounds over time. Economic theory suggests three possible drivers of intergenerational mobility across countries, namely, 17 income inequality, the returns to education and public education expenditure. Without inferring any causality, this section shows the correlation between the two measures of intergenerational mobility and the potential drivers in each country. Figure 4 suggests a positive correlation educational persistence and income inequality measured by the Gini coefficient. Countries that show lower educational mobility over the 50 years tend to experience a higher level of income inequality (figure 4). Contrary to the prediction of theory, we observe a negative correlation between returns to education and intergenerational educational persistence. In countries where we observe greater mobility, the returns to education tend to be smaller. One plausible explanation might be the credit constraints affecting poor households in a country where the returns to education are higher. Children with higher parental years of schooling probably have higher incomes and, will have the capacity to invest more on children’s education relative to poor households. The results also suggest a negative relationship between educational persistence and public expenditure on education as a share of total government expenditure, implying that progressive public investment on education helps to foster equal opportunity in education among all children, including children with different parental educational backgrounds (figure 4). Figure 4: Possible drivers of intergenerational education persistence across countries NGA NGA .9 .9 .9 .8 .8 .8 Coefficient (b) Coefficient (b) Coefficient (b) COM MWI COM MWI MWI COM .7 .7 .7 UGA MDG MDG UGA MDG UGA .6 .6 .6 GIN GIN GIN RWA RWA RWA GHA GHA GHA .5 .5 .5 TZA TZA TZA .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 5 10 15 20 .12 .14 .16 .18 .2 .22 Gini coefficient Return to education Public expenditure on education .5 .5 .5 NGA NGA MWI MWI MWI .45 .45 .45 GHA GHA GHA UGA UGA UGA Correlation (r) Correlation (r) Correlation (r) .4 .4 .4 MDG MDG MDG TZA TZA TZA .35 .35 .35 .3 .3 .3 GIN GIN GIN RWA COM COM RWA COM RWA .25 .25 .25 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 5 10 15 20 .12 .14 .16 .18 .2 .22 Gini coefficient Return to education Public expenditure on education To compare levels of intergenerational educational persistence and rank the countries in our sample in terms of im(mobility) in educational attainment, we follow the approach of Hertz et al. (2007) and derive ˆ and ρ the simple average of β ˆ across five-year birth cohorts in each country.10 Using the intergenerational ρ) our result shows that most of the countries, except Rwanda and the Comoros, show correlation (ˆ greater intergenerational educational mobility than Latin American countries, but lower mobility than Western Europe, the United States and Eastern European countries.11 The estimates for Rwanda and the Comoros show that these countries are more mobile than most developed countries. However, parents in both countries show fewer average years of schooling even among the youngest birth cohorts, and parental 10 One advantage of using the average of educational persistence measures across cohorts rather than running a single regression for all age-groups as we did in table 3 is that the former does not give more weight to larger cohorts (Hertz et al., 2007). 11 As discussed above in section 3, β ˆ measures interpersonal differences in education, whereas the correlation coefficient divides the education difference by the standard deviation of education for the respective generation. Therefore, the question of which measure is more appropriate involves self-judgment. Since we are comparing countries with different educational systems and educational distribution, we use ρ ˆ to rank the countries. 18 schooling can explain only a small proportion of the variation in children’s schooling (see figure 1, figure 2, and table 4). Table 5: Countries ranked by average parent-child education correlations Country ˆ) Coefficient (β Rank ρ) Correlation (ˆ Rank Peru 0.88 7 0.66 1 Ecuador 0.72 15 0.61 2 Panama 0.73 12 0.61 3 Chile 0.64 23 0.60 4 Brazil 0.95 4 0.59 5 Colombia 0.80 9 0.59 6 Nicaragua 0.82 8 0.55 7 Indonesia 0.78 10 0.55 8 Italy 0.67 21 0.54 9 Slovenia 0.54 35 0.52 11 Egypt, Arab Rep. 1.03 2 0.50 12 Hungary 0.61 25 0.49 13 Sri Lanka 0.61 24 0.48 14 Nigeria 0.93 6 0.48 15 Madagascar 0.72 14 0.46 16 Pakistan 1.00 3 0.46 17 United States 0.46 42 0.46 18 Switzerland 0.49 39 0.46 19 Ireland 0.70 17 0.46 20 Ghana 0.55 34 0.45 21 South Africa 0.69 18 0.44 22 Poland 0.48 40 0.43 23 Uganda 0.68 19 0.42 24 Philippines 0.41 45 0.41 25 Vietnam 0.58 29 0.40 26 Belgium 0.41 44 0.40 27 Estonia 0.54 36 0.40 28 Sweden 0.58 32 0.40 29 Malawi 0.68 20 0.39 30 Ukraine 0.37 49 0.39 31 East Timor 1.27 1 0.39 32 Bangladesh 0.58 31 0.38 33 Slovakia 0.61 26 0.37 34 Czech 0.44 43 0.37 35 Netherlands 0.58 30 0.36 36 Tanzania 0.50 37 0.36 37 Norway 0.40 47 0.35 38 Nepal 0.94 5 0.35 39 New Zealand 0.40 46 0.33 40 Finland 0.48 41 0.33 41 Northern Ireland 0.59 28 0.32 42 United Kingdom 0.71 16 0.31 43 Malaysia 0.38 48 0.31 45 Guinea 0.60 27 0.30 46 Denmark 0.49 38 0.30 47 Kyrgyzstan 0.20 52 0.28 48 Comoros 0.73 13 0.27 49 Rwanda 0.58 33 0.27 50 China 0.34 50 0.20 51 India 0.64 22 0.52 10 Australia 0.30 51 0.31 44 Ethiopia 0.75 11 0.10 52 India data from Azam and Bhatt (2015). Australia data from Ranasinghe (2015). Continued on next page. . . 19 Table 5 – continued country Coefficient Rank Correlation Rank Other countries data from Hertz et al. (2007). Estimates for Sub-Saharan African countries are World Bank calculations. 5.4 Cohort analysis by gender In this section, we analyze the trends in intergenerational educational persistence across five-year birth cohorts by gender.12 Table 6 reports estimates of intergenerational elasticity and the correlation coeffi- cient among daughters and sons separately in each country. As we observed above, there is an increase in intergenerational mobility across birth cohorts. Although the general trend in intergenerational mobility is similar across cohorts, the pace of change varies along gender. In all countries, the pattern of inter- generational educational mobility is different among sons and daughters in the same birth cohorts. Both measures of intergenerational persistence are higher among daughters than sons except in the Comoros and Madagascar. This is especially true among children born after the 1960s. The results suggest that daughters education is more dependent on parental education relative to sons. The higher intergenera- tional educational persistence among daughters compared with sons is consistent with previous findings in both developing and developed economies. For instance, Ranasinghe (2015) and Emran and Shilpi (2015) report higher educational persistence among women compared with men in Australia and India, respectively. Emran and Shilpi (2015) also document lower occupational mobility from agriculture to nonfarm activities among women in Vietnam and Nepal. 12 Our analysis across gender is based on intergenerational elasticity that is estimated separately AMONG daughter and son subsample, showing the cohort trend within each gender. 20 Table 6: Intergenerational educational attainment persistence by gender Dependent variable: Children Years of Schooling Children Birth Cohort A. Comoros 1934-1939 1940-1944 1945-1949 1950-1954 1955-1959 1960-1964 1965-1969 1970-1974 1975-1979 1980-1984 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 1.041∗∗∗ 0.0873 0.0268 0.0643 0.829∗∗∗ 1.077∗∗∗ 0.714∗∗∗ 0.962∗∗∗ 0.695∗∗∗ 0.664∗∗∗ (0.137) (0.100) (0.017) (0.081) (0.186) (0.254) (0.144) (0.118) (0.155) (0.092) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.822∗∗ 0.126 0.023 0.063 0.556∗∗∗ 0.413∗∗∗ 0.267∗∗ 0.435∗∗∗ 0.232∗ 0.277∗∗∗ # Observations 92 189 176 305 236 330 417 506 416 435 R2 0.676 0.016 0.001 0.004 0.309 0.170 0.071 0.190 0.054 0.076 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 0.008 0.969∗∗ 1.690∗∗∗ 1.306∗∗ 1.401∗∗∗ 1.193∗∗∗ 1.042∗∗∗ 0.790∗∗∗ 1.064∗∗∗ 0.688∗∗∗ (0.168) (0.313) (0.085) (0.411) (0.249) (0.157) (0.146) (0.134) (0.181) (0.133) ρ) Correlation (ˆ 0.004 0.249 0.186 0.426∗∗∗ 0.344∗∗∗ 0.353∗∗∗ 0.308∗∗∗ 0.291∗∗∗ 0.341∗∗∗ 0.279∗∗∗ # Observations 126 204 161 253 273 345 422 388 264 297 21 R2 0.000 0.062 0.034 0.181 0.118 0.125 0.095 0.085 0.117 0.078 B. Ghana 1944-1948 1949-1953 1954-1958 1959-1963 1964-1968 1969-1973 1974-1978 1979-1983 1984-1988 1989-1993 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 0.686∗∗∗ 0.801∗∗∗ 0.669∗∗∗ 0.685∗∗∗ 0.662∗∗∗ 0.668∗∗∗ 0.511∗∗∗ 0.468∗∗∗ 0.476∗∗∗ 0.434∗∗∗ (0.070) (0.065) (0.069) (0.045) (0.033) (0.032) (0.023) (0.021) (0.022) (0.019) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.408∗∗∗ 0.507∗∗∗ 0.422∗∗∗ 0.444∗∗∗ 0.511∗∗∗ 0.551∗∗∗ 0.524∗∗∗ 0.535∗∗∗ 0.523∗∗∗ 0.533∗∗∗ # Observations 559 797 933 1405 1495 1890 2158 2317 2675 2981 R2 0.167 0.257 0.178 0.197 0.261 0.303 0.274 0.286 0.273 0.284 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 0.819∗∗∗ 0.688∗∗∗ 0.553∗∗∗ 0.517∗∗∗ 0.526∗∗∗ 0.491∗∗∗ 0.465∗∗∗ 0.443∗∗∗ 0.428∗∗∗ 0.320∗∗∗ (0.063) (0.061) (0.059) (0.041) (0.045) (0.034) (0.025) (0.026) (0.022) (0.018) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.407∗∗∗ 0.333∗∗∗ 0.284∗∗∗ 0.352∗∗∗ 0.413∗∗∗ 0.430∗∗∗ 0.470∗∗∗ 0.484∗∗∗ 0.522∗∗∗ 0.441∗∗∗ # Observations 487 702 841 1109 1275 1562 1770 1955 2167 2744 R2 0.166 0.111 0.081 0.124 0.170 0.185 0.220 0.234 0.273 0.195 Continued on next page. . . Table 6 – continued Dependent variable: Children Years of Schooling Children Birth Cohort C. Guinea 1933-1937 1938-1942 1943-1947 1948-1952 1953-1957 1958-1962 1963-1967 1968-1972 1973-1977 1978-1982 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 0.017 0.477∗ 0.151 1.029∗∗∗ 0.647∗∗∗ 0.605∗∗∗ 0.571∗∗∗ 0.560∗∗∗ 0.522∗∗∗ 0.477∗∗∗ (0.031) (0.212) (0.137) (0.143) (0.159) (0.075) (0.061) (0.057) (0.038) (0.025) ρ) Correlation (ˆ 0.009 0.437∗ 0.139 0.434∗∗∗ 0.271∗∗∗ 0.382∗∗∗ 0.374∗∗∗ 0.499∗∗∗ 0.499∗∗∗ 0.500∗∗∗ # Observations 347 605 546 837 990 1272 1637 1776 2028 2114 R2 0.000 0.191 0.019 0.188 0.073 0.146 0.140 0.249 0.249 0.250 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 0.357 1.141∗∗ 0.834∗∗∗ 0.887∗∗∗ 0.778∗∗∗ 0.736∗∗∗ 0.496∗∗∗ 0.478∗∗∗ 0.404∗∗∗ 0.357∗∗∗ (0.280) (0.385) (0.201) (0.135) (0.133) (0.092) (0.076) (0.072) (0.050) (0.028) ρ) Correlation (ˆ 0.105 0.387∗ 0.236∗ 0.241∗∗∗ 0.225∗∗∗ 0.310∗∗∗ 0.293∗∗∗ 0.331∗∗∗ 0.313∗∗∗ 0.354∗∗∗ # Observations 377 551 579 815 893 946 1058 1237 1470 1974 R2 0.011 0.150 0.056 0.058 0.051 0.096 0.086 0.109 0.098 0.125 22 D. Madagascar 1936-1940 1941-1945 1946-1950 1951-1955 1956-1960 1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 0.490∗∗∗ 0.284∗ 0.624∗∗∗ 0.718∗∗∗ 0.797∗∗∗ 0.784∗∗∗ 0.621∗∗∗ 0.694∗∗∗ 0.729∗∗∗ 0.729∗∗∗ (0.121) (0.130) (0.176) (0.090) (0.085) (0.078) (0.054) (0.058) (0.075) (0.050) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.503∗ 0.196∗∗ 0.388∗∗∗ 0.432∗∗∗ 0.487∗∗∗ 0.484∗∗∗ 0.454∗∗∗ 0.467∗∗∗ 0.543∗∗∗ 0.576∗∗∗ # Observations 223 320 464 785 933 1103 1346 1577 1862 2077 R2 0.253 0.039 0.150 0.187 0.238 0.235 0.206 0.218 0.294 0.332 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 0.731∗∗∗ 0.944∗∗∗ 0.618∗∗∗ 0.731∗∗∗ 0.932∗∗∗ 0.810∗∗∗ 0.693∗∗∗ 0.771∗∗∗ 0.740∗∗∗ 0.735∗∗∗ (0.150) (0.181) (0.149) (0.103) (0.074) (0.064) (0.089) (0.057) (0.050) (0.039) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.464∗∗∗ 0.398∗∗∗ 0.381∗∗∗ 0.393∗∗∗ 0.523∗∗∗ 0.479∗∗∗ 0.398∗∗∗ 0.504∗∗∗ 0.579∗∗∗ 0.618∗∗∗ # Observations 285 332 441 819 920 1122 1230 1384 1637 1876 R2 0.215 0.158 0.145 0.155 0.273 0.230 0.158 0.254 0.336 0.382 Continued on next page. . . Table 6 – continued Dependent variable: Children Years of Schooling Children Birth Cohort E. Malawi 1942-1946 1947-1951 1952-1956 1957-1961 1962-1966 1967-1971 1972-1976 1977-1981 1982-1986 1987-1991 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 0.764∗∗ 0.630∗∗∗ 0.768∗∗∗ 0.509∗∗∗ 0.740∗∗∗ 0.744∗∗∗ 0.640∗∗∗ 0.616∗∗∗ 0.543∗∗∗ 0.545∗∗∗ (0.240) (0.164) (0.180) (0.127) (0.084) (0.063) (0.057) (0.043) (0.027) (0.021) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.353∗∗∗ 0.299∗∗∗ 0.324∗∗∗ 0.270∗∗∗ 0.464∗∗∗ 0.462∗∗∗ 0.420∗∗∗ 0.501∗∗∗ 0.482∗∗∗ 0.512∗∗∗ # Observations 317 503 492 588 793 924 1359 1767 2360 2523 R2 0.124 0.089 0.105 0.073 0.215 0.213 0.176 0.251 0.233 0.262 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 1.133∗∗∗ 0.487∗∗ 0.811∗∗∗ 0.685∗∗∗ 0.669∗∗∗ 0.824∗∗∗ 0.661∗∗∗ 0.550∗∗∗ 0.506∗∗∗ 0.531∗∗∗ (0.118) (0.184) (0.168) (0.112 ) (0.059) (0.059) (0.037) (0.029) (0.025) (0.020) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.395∗ 0.172∗ 0.320∗∗∗ 0.317∗∗∗ 0.371∗∗∗ 0.437∗∗∗ 0.455∗∗∗ 0.434∗∗∗ 0.422∗∗∗ 0.474∗∗∗ # Observations 298 413 435 593 832 977 1424 1762 2033 2034 R2 0.156 0.030 0.102 0.100 0.138 0.191 0.207 0.188 0.178 0.225 23 F. Nigeria 1942-1946 1947-1951 1952-1956 1957-1961 1962-1966 1967-1971 1972-1976 1977-1981 1982-1986 1987-1991 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 1.745∗∗∗ 1.145∗∗∗ 1.165∗∗∗ 1.026∗∗∗ 0.935∗∗∗ 1.139∗∗∗ 0.829∗∗∗ 0.814∗∗∗ 0.814∗∗∗ 0.631∗∗∗ (0.374) (0.168) (0.255) (0.091) (0.089) (0.076) (0.060) (0.047) (0.032) (0.029) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.406∗∗ 0.516∗∗∗ 0.439∗∗∗ 0.503∗∗∗ 0.466∗∗∗ 0.583∗∗∗ 0.524∗∗∗ 0.561∗∗∗ 0.628∗∗∗ 0.596∗∗∗ # Observations 184 300 295 462 529 705 802 883 1137 1042 R2 0.165 0.266 0.193 0.253 0.217 0.339 0.274 0.314 0.395 0.355 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 1.289∗∗∗ 1.255∗∗∗ 0.942∗∗∗ 0.883∗∗∗ 0.750∗∗∗ 0.757∗∗∗ 0.713∗∗∗ 0.644∗∗∗ 0.523∗∗∗ 0.381∗∗∗ (0.172) (0.111) (0.122) (0.093) (0.081) (0.063) (0.058) (0.047) (0.037) (0.028) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.414∗∗ 0.477∗∗∗ 0.350∗∗∗ 0.361∗∗∗ 0.393∗∗∗ 0.401∗∗∗ 0.483∗∗∗ 0.520∗∗∗ 0.495∗∗∗ 0.428∗∗∗ # Observations 225 364 331 501 499 559 598 561 715 951 R2 0.171 0.228 0.123 0.131 0.154 0.161 0.233 0.271 0.245 0.183 Continued on next page. . . Table 6 – continued Dependent variable: Children Years of Schooling Children Birth Cohort G. Rwanda 1931-1935 1936-1940 1941-1945 1946-1950 1951-1955 1956-1960 1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 0.31 0.863∗∗∗ 0.754∗∗∗ 0.842∗∗∗ 0.544∗∗∗ 0.543∗∗∗ 0.670∗∗∗ 0.722∗∗∗ 0.637∗∗∗ 0.598∗∗∗ (0.414) (0.195) (0.199) (0.154) (0.113) (0.092) (0.078) (0.067) (0.060) (0.048) ρ) Correlation (ˆ 0.080 0.425∗ 0.372∗∗ 0.418∗∗∗ 0.290∗∗∗ 0.257∗∗∗ 0.344∗∗∗ 0.382∗∗∗ 0.442∗∗∗ 0.435∗∗∗ # Observations 177 244 291 433 497 736 704 737 903 1311 R2 0.006 0.180 0.139 0.175 0.084 0.066 0.118 0.146 0.196 0.189 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 1.409∗∗∗ 0.226 0.477 0.698∗∗ 0.418∗∗ 0.734∗∗∗ 0.624∗∗∗ 0.661∗∗∗ 0.616∗∗∗ 0.455∗∗∗ (0.161) (0.353) (0.272) (0.239) (0.149) (0.164) (0.108) (0.074) (0.080) (0.045) ρ) Correlation (ˆ 0.051 0.058 0.148 0.239∗∗ 0.180∗∗ 0.280∗∗∗ 0.303∗∗∗ 0.375∗∗∗ 0.361∗∗∗ 0.362∗∗∗ # Observations 133 177 216 313 444 507 543 566 654 1067 R2 0.003 0.003 0.022 0.057 0.032 0.079 0.092 0.141 0.131 0.131 24 H. Tanzania 1941-1945 1946-1950 1951-1955 1956-1960 1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 0.419∗∗∗ 0.529 0.745∗∗∗ 0.704∗∗∗ 0.668∗∗∗ 0.388∗∗∗ 0.409∗∗∗ 0.428∗∗∗ 0.355∗∗∗ 0.484∗∗∗ (0.099) (0.291) (0.132) (0.098) (0.085) (0.077) (0.045) (0.038) (0.040) (0.036) ρ) Correlation (ˆ 0.385∗∗ 0.235 0.410∗∗∗ 0.446∗∗∗ 0.447∗∗∗ 0.367∗∗∗ 0.390∗∗∗ 0.452∗∗∗ 0.383∗∗∗ 0.495∗∗∗ # Observations 118 127 183 209 278 344 453 504 603 675 R2 0.148 0.055 0.168 0.199 0.199 0.135 0.152 0.204 0.147 0.245 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 0.510∗ 0.762∗∗∗ 0.788∗∗∗ 0.638∗∗∗ 0.450∗∗∗ 0.317∗∗∗ 0.241∗∗∗ 0.359∗∗∗ 0.434∗∗∗ 0.438∗∗∗ (0.2230) (0.134) (0.198) (0.090) (0.083) (0.057) (0.051) (0.040) (0.045) (0.043) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.236∗ 0.332∗ 0.358∗∗∗ 0.434∗∗∗ 0.344∗∗∗ 0.296∗∗∗ 0.264∗∗∗ 0.422∗∗∗ 0.438∗∗∗ 0.456∗∗∗ # Observations 100 128 173 199 294 301 380 439 454 565 R2 0.056 0.110 0.128 0.188 0.118 0.088 0.070 0.178 0.192 0.208 Continued on next page. . . Table 6 – continued Dependent variable: Children Years of Schooling Children Birth Cohort I. Uganda 1937-1941 1942-1946 1947-1951 1952-1956 1957-1961 1962-1966 1967-1971 1972-1976 1977-1981 1982-1986 Daughters ˆ) IGE (β 0.967∗∗∗ 0.726∗∗∗ 0.822∗∗∗ 0.735∗∗∗ 0.764∗∗∗ 0.747∗∗∗ 0.656∗∗∗ 0.623∗∗∗ 0.623∗∗∗ 0.526∗∗∗ (0.204) (0.159) (0.096) (0.106) (0.069) (0.059) (0.042) (0.040) (0.032) (0.029) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.478∗∗∗ 0.363∗∗∗ 0.491∗∗∗ 0.470∗∗∗ 0.504∗∗∗ 0.525∗∗∗ 0.489∗∗∗ 0.530∗∗∗ 0.544∗∗∗ 0.492∗∗∗ # Observations 205 233 282 386 509 664 853 989 1350 1611 R2 0.228 0.131 0.242 0.220 0.254 0.276 0.240 0.281 0.296 0.242 Sons ˆ) IGE (β 0.862∗∗∗ 0.753∗∗∗ 0.576∗∗∗ 0.672∗∗∗ 0.609∗∗∗ 0.577∗∗∗ 0.526∗∗∗ 0.554∗∗∗ 0.453∗∗∗ 0.453∗∗∗ (0.255) (0.146) (0.125) (0.099) (0.072) (0.069) (0.046) (0.034) (0.037) (0.028) Correlation (ˆ ρ) 0.356∗∗ 0.355∗∗∗ 0.278∗∗∗ 0.319∗∗∗ 0.390∗∗∗ 0.397∗∗∗ 0.394∗∗∗ 0.503∗∗∗ 0.401∗∗∗ 0.485∗∗∗ # Observations 188 221 279 337 502 601 835 960 1134 1422 R2 0.127 0.126 0.077 0.102 0.152 0.157 0.155 0.253 0.161 0.236 25 Parents education is average of mother’s and father’s years of schooling. Robust standard errors are in parentheses. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 5.5 What is important, education among mothers or education among fa- thers? As discussed in section 2, much is still not known about the relative importance of the education of mothers and the education of fathers on children’s educational outcomes, but the existing evidence reveals some suggestive patterns. With the objective of looking at the differential effect of the education of mothers and the education of fathers on the intergenerational mobility of daughters and sons, we carry out the same analysis on each sample. Figure 5 and Appendix B present the results. There are two notable findings. First, in all countries except the Comoros, both measures coincide in pointing out the stronger effects of maternal years of schooling relative to paternal education. This finding echoes previous findings in other countries such as South Africa, Australia, and Sweden (Kwenda et al., 2015; Ranasinghe, 2015; Thomas, 1996; Branson et al., 2012). Figure 5 shows that, in all countries except Madagascar, maternal schooling has a stronger effect on daughters than on sons. The results suggest that extra maternal years of schooling have an important role in determining the educational outcomes among daughters than sons (see tables B10-B18 in Appendix B). This finding is similar to the findings of previous studies results in other parts of the world. Several studies in developed countries underlined that mothers education strongly affects the educational attainment of female children relative to male children (see, for example, Crook, 1995 on Australia; Bj¨ orklund et al., 2006 on Sweden). The differences in the effects of maternal and paternal years of schooling on children’s educational outcomes might emerge from the different roles played by mothers and fathers in family life, in the labor market, and role model effect in each country. It is likely that mothers become the natural role model for a daughter, and fathers for sons. Social norms regarding gender roles might also play a big role on who, sons or daughters, obtain more years of schooling. Second, in line with our other findings, we note a decline in father–child and mother–child ˆ) across birth cohorts after the 1960s. The mother–child intergenerational intergenerational elasticity (β elasticity declined more than father–child’s elasticity in Ghana, Guinea, Madagascar, Nigeria, Rwanda, and Uganda over the 50 years. In the Comoros, Malawi, and Tanzania, we document more gains in mobility from fathers to children. Figure 5: The education of mothers or fathers? a. Comoros-2004 b. Ghana-2013 c. Guinea-2003 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 .5 .5 .5 0 0 0 1939 1949 1959 1969 1979 1948 1958 1968 1978 1988 1937 1947 1957 1967 1977 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts d. Madagascar-2005 e. Malawi-2010 f. Nigeria-2010 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 .5 .5 .5 0 0 0 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts g. Rwanda -2000 h. Tanzania-2009 i. Uganda-2005 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 .5 .5 .5 0 0 0 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts 5-years birth cohorts bmother bfather rmother rfather 26 5.6 Intergenerational mobility in educational attainment As discussed in section 3, estimates of intergenerational elasticity and the correlation coefficient do not allow us to identify the level of children’s educational attainment that is more affected by parental education. To investigate this, we estimate an order probit model for children’s highest level of education in each country for each five-year birth cohort. The tables in Appendix C present the probability of a child achieving primary educational attainment or above, conditional on her mother or father’s education across each five-year birth cohort in each country. In all countries, the omitted category of mother’s and father’s education is parents with no schooling. Despite family background, we document a convergence toward zero in the probability of children attaining no education in all countries. The results show that downward mobility, that is, attaining no schooling if parents have at least primary education, is negative across cohorts, suggesting an upward mobility from no schooling to an upper level of educational attainment. Concerning primary education, we find a narrowing, but not closing gap in the probability of childrens attaining primary education across all family educational backgrounds. For instance, in the Comoros, the probability of attaining a primary education when a mother has primary education as well declines from 13 percent in the oldest cohort to 2.5 percent in the youngest cohort. We observe a similar trend in primary education in all the countries except Ghana, Nigeria, and Uganda. This result suggests a narrowing, but not closing gap in primary education across children with a different parental educational background. However, in Ghana, Nigeria, and Uganda, the children of parents who have primary education experienced upward mobility and had a greater chance of obtaining a secondary education or above. Furthermore, children in more well educated households (parents who have secondary education or above) have a greater chance of obtaining a higher education than the children of parents who have no education or who have completed only primary education. Thus, children with poor parental education still have a lower prospect of attaining higher education. The overall results suggest that all the counties experienced upward intergenerational educational mobility over the last 50 years. However, the observed mobility in almost all the countries is concentrated in the lower tail of the education distribution, primary education. It is plausible that this is the result of the expansion in primary education in the region after independence in the 1960s. In line with our results in previous sections, we document evidence that maternal education is more important in influencing children’s education relative to schooling of fathers in all the countries but the Comoros. 6 Conclusion Drawing on nationally representative survey data, we study the intergenerational im(mobility) of edu- cational attainment in the Comoros, Ghana, Guinea, Madagascar, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda over 50 years, with a particular focus on gender differences. The overall results indicate that there has been a significant improvement in intergenerational educational mobility during the last five decades, particularly after the 1960s. We document a country difference: Nigeria, Guinea, Ghana, and Uganda experienced the highest intergenerational mobility, and the Comoros and Madagascar the lowest. Nevertheless, the educational attainment of parents remains a strong determinant of children’s schooling outcomes. We also find considerable gender differences in the persistence of education across generations, which are masked in the country estimations; the educational attainment of daughters is more closely correlated with parental years of schooling relative to educational attainment of sons. On paternal or maternal effects, the education of mothers is significantly more important than the education of fathers in shaping the educational attainment of both daughters and sons, though the effect is much stronger among daughters. Furthermore, we document more mobility in the lower tail of education dis- tribution. In the countries, children from all family backgrounds exhibit a greater chance of attaining primary schooling, while children from more well educated family backgrounds have a greater chance of obtaining more schooling beyond primary education. From a policy perspective, our results suggest a need for targeted redistribution policies that improve intergenerational mobility in the region. Moreover, putting in place an inclusive environment for women (mothers) who are less well off in human capital accumulation might play a decisive role in promoting social mobility in the long run. While primary education enrollment in our sample has generally increased over the five decades, access to secondary schooling is far from universal. Putting in place policies that promote access to secondary education is therefore a priority among the educational systems in the countries under investigation. Evidence from developed countries suggests that making secondary education mandatory better promotes education outcomes among the next generation. However, the policies in each country should be context specific. 27 There are two caveats. Because it was difficult to find valid instrumental variables to address the genetic correlations (ability and preference) between parents and their offspring, the study does not distinguish the effects of nature and nurture. We limit our analysis to investigating the correlation between the educational attainment of parents and children without implying any causality. Second, for all countries in our sample, we rely on single cross-sectional surveys and study intergenerational mobility among five-year age cohorts. Hence, we cannot assess the extent of measurement error, if any, in the education variable of both parents and their children. Future research might therefore involve examining the importance of these elements to document the importance of the recent education policy changes in the region in promoting social mobility. 28 References Alderman, Harold and King, Elizabeth M (1998), ‘Gender differences in parental investment in education’, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 9(4), 453–468. Atkinson, A. B. (1980), ‘On intergenerational income mobility in Britain’, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 3(2), 194–218. Azam, M. and Bhatt, V. (2015), ‘Like Father, Like Son? Intergenerational Educational Mobility in India’, Demography 52(6), 1929–1959. Basu, P. and Getachew, Y. (2015), ‘An adjustment cost model of social mobility’, Journal of Macroeco- nomics 44, 177–190. Bauer, P. and Riphahn, R. T. (2007), ‘Heterogeneity in the intergenerational transmission of educa- tional attainment: evidence from Switzerland on natives and second-generation immigrants’, Journal of Population Economics 20(1), 121–148. Becker, G. S. and Tomes, N. (1979), ‘An equilibrium theory of the distribution of income and intergen- erational mobility’, Journal of Political Economy 87, 1153–1189. Becker, G. S. and Tomes, N. (1986), Human capital and the rise and fall of families, in ‘Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education (3rd Edition)’, The University of Chicago Press, pp. 257–298. Behrman, J. R. and Knowles, J. C. (1999), ‘Household income and child schooling in Vietnam’, The World Bank Economic Review 13(2), 211–256. Behrman, J. R. and Rosenzweig, M. R. (2005), ‘Does increasing women’s schooling raise the schooling of the next generation? Reply’, American Economic Review 95, 1745–1751. Bhalotra, S. and Rawlings, S. B. (2011), ‘Intergenerational persistence in health in developing countries: The penalty of gender inequality?’, Journal of Public Economics 95(3), 286–299. Binder, M. and Woodruff, C. (2002), ‘Inequality and Intergenerational Mobility in Schooling: The Case of Mexico’, Economic Development and Cultural Change 50(2), 249–267. orklund, A., Lindahl, M. and Plug, E. (2006), ‘The origins of intergenerational associations: Lessons Bj¨ from Swedish adoption data’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 121, 999–1028. Bjorklund, A. and Salvanes, K. G. (2010), ‘Education and family background: Mechanisms and policies’. Black, S. E. and Devereux, P. J. (2011), ‘Recent developments in intergenerational mobility’, Handbook of Labor Economics 4, 1487–1541. Blanden, J., Gregg, P. and Machin, S. (2005), ‘Intergenerational Mobility in Europe and North America’, London. London School of Economics. Centre for Economic Performance . Bourguignon, F., Ferreira, F. H. and Menendez, M. (2007), ‘Inequality of opportunity in Brazil’, Review of income and Wealth 53(4), 585–618. Bowles, S. (1972), ‘Schooling and inequality from generation to generation’, Journal of Political Economy 80, S219–S251. Branson, N., Garlick, J., Lam, D. and Leibbrandt, M. (2012), ‘Education and Inequality: The South African Case’, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit . Case, A. and Deaton, A. (1999), ‘School inputs and educational outcomes in South Africa’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 114, 1047–1084. Causa, O. and Johansson, ˚A. (2011), ‘Intergenerational social mobility in OECD countries’, OECD Journal: Economic Studies 2010(1), 1–44. Chadwick, L. and Solon, G. (2002), ‘Intergenerational income mobility among daughters’, American Economic Review 92(1), 335–344. 29 Checchi, D., Fiorio, C. V. and Leonardi, M. (2013), ‘Intergenerational persistence of educational attain- ment in Italy’, Economics Letters 118(1), 229–232. Chevalier, A., Denny, K. and McMahon, D. (2003), ‘A multi-country study of inter-generational educa- tional mobility’, University College Dublin. School of Economics . Cobb-Clark, D. A. and Nguyen, T.-H. (2010), ‘Immigration Background and the Intergenerational Cor- relation in Education’, SSRN Working Paper Series . Corak, M. (2013), ‘Income inequality, equality of opportunity, and intergenerational mobility’, The Jour- nal of Economic Perspectives 27, 79–102. Crook, C. J. (1995), ‘The role of mothers in the educational and status attainment of Australian men and women’, Journal of Sociology 31(2), 45–73. Currie, J. (2009), ‘Healthy, wealthy, and wise: Is there a causal relationship between child health and human capital development?’, Journal of Economic Literature 47(1), 87–122. Currie, J. (2011), Inequality at birth: some causes and consequences, Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research. Currie, J. and Moretti, E. (2003), ‘Mother’s education and the intergenerational transmission of human capital: Evidence from college openings’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, 1495–1532. Daude, C. and Robano, V. (2015), ‘On intergenerational (im) mobility in Latin America’, Latin American Economic Review 24(1), 1–29. Deaton, A. (1997), The analysis of household surveys: a microeconometric approach to development policy, World Bank Publications. Emran, M. S. and Shilpi, F. (2011), ‘Intergenerational Occupational Mobility in Rural Economy Evidence from Nepal and Vietnam’, Journal of Human Resources 46(2), 427–458. Emran, M. S. and Shilpi, F. (2015), ‘Gender, geography, and generations: Intergenerational educational mobility in post-reform India’, World Development 72, 362–380. opez-Calva, L.-F., Lugo, M. A., Vakis, R., L´ Ferreira, F. H., Messina, J., Rigolini, J., L´ o, L. F. et al. (2012), Economic mobility and the rise of the Latin American middle class, World Bank Publications. Fields, G. S. and Ok, E. A. (2000), Income Mobility: Concepts and Measures, in N. Birdsall and C. Gra- ham, eds, ‘New Markets, New Opportunities? Economic and Social Mobility in a Changing World’, Brookings Institution and Carnegie Endowment Press, Washington, DC. Fosu, A. K. (2015), ‘Growth, inequality and poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa: recent progress in a global context’, Oxford Development Studies 43(1), 44–59. Francesconi, M. and Nicoletti, C. (2006), ‘Intergenerational mobility and sample selection in short panels’, Journal of Applied Econometrics 21(8), 1265–1293. Girdwood, S. and Leibbrandt, M. (2009), ‘Intergenerational Mobility: Analysis of the NIDS Wave 1 Dataset’, National Income Dynamics Study Discussion Paper 15. Glewwe, P. (2005), ‘How Much of Observed Economic Mobility Is Measurement Error? A Method to Remove Measurement Error, with an Application to Vietnam’, Unpublished paper, World Bank, Washington, DC . Grusky, D. B. and DiPrete, T. A. (1990), ‘Recent trends in the process of stratification’, Demography 27(4), 617–637. Hackman, E., Emanuel, I., Van Belle, G. and Daling, J. (1983), ‘Maternal birth weight and subsequent pregnancy outcome’, Jama 250(15), 2016–2019. Haveman, R. and Wolfe, B. (1995), ‘The determinants of children’s attainments: A review of methods and findings’, Journal of Economic Literature 33, 1829–1878. 30 Heineck, G. and Riphahn, R. T. (2009), ‘Intergenerational transmission of educational attainment in ucher f¨ GermanyThe last five decades’, Jahrb¨ okonomie und Statistik 229, 36–60. ur National¨ Hertz, T., Jayasundera, T., Piraino, P., Selcuk, S., Smith, N. and Verashchagina, A. (2007), ‘The inher- itance of educational inequality: International comparisons and fifty-year trends’, The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy 7(2), 1–48. Hnatkovska, V., Lahiri, A. and Paul, S. B. (2013), ‘Breaking the caste barrier intergenerational mobility in india’, Journal of Human Resources 48(2), 435–473. Jalan, J. and Murgai, R. (2007), ‘Intergenerational mobility in education in India’, Processed. Delhi: the World Bank . Johnston, D. W., Lee, W.-S., Shah, C., Shields, M. A. and Spinks, J. (2014), Are neighbourhood char- acteristics important in predicting the post-school destinations of young Australians?, National Centre for Vocational Education Research Adelaide. Kanbur, R. and Wagstaff, A. (2015), ‘How useful is inequality of opportunity as a policy construct?’. Klugman, J., Hanmer, L., Twigg, S., Hasan, T., McCleary-Sills, J. and Santamaria, J. (2014), Voice and Agency: Empowering women and girls for shared prosperity, World Bank Publications. Kwenda, P., Ntuli, M. and Gwatidzo, T. (2015), ‘Temporal developments in intergenerational trans- mission of education: Case for black South Africans’, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 42, 96–113. Lam, D. (1999), ‘Generating Extreme Inequality: Schooling, Earnings, and Intergenerational Transmis- sion of Human Capital in South Africa and Brazil’, Research Report . Lee, N. (2009), ‘Measurement error and its impact on estimates of income and consumption dynamics’, Department of Economics, USC (2008, November) . Mare, R. D. (1980), ‘Social background and school continuation decisions’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 75(370), 295–305. Nimubona, A.-D. and Vencatachellum, D. (2007), ‘Intergenerational education mobility of black and white South Africans’, Journal of Population Economics 20(1), 149–182. Piketty, T. (1995), ‘Social mobility and redistributive politics’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 110, 551– 584. Plug, E. (2004), ‘Estimating the effect of mother’s schooling on children’s schooling using a sample of adoptees’, American Economic Review 94, 358–368. Plug, E. and Vijverberg, W. (2003), ‘Schooling, family background, and adoption: Is it nature or is it nurture?’, Journal of Political Economy 111(3), 611–641. Raftery, A. E. and Hout, M. (1993), ‘Maximally Maintained Inequality: Expansion, Reform, and Oppor- tunity in Irish Education, 1921-75’, Sociology of Education 66(1), 41–62. Rama, M., B´eteille, T., Newman, J. L. and Li, Y. (2015), Addressing Inequality in South Asia, World Bank Publications. Ranasinghe, R. (2015), ‘The transmission of education across generations: Evidence from Australia’, The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy 15, 1893–1917. Rawls, J. (1971), A theory of justice, Cambridge, Harvard University Press. Reeves, R. V. (2014), Saving Horatio Alger: Equality, Opportunity, and the American Dream, Brookings Institution Press. Solon, G. (1992), ‘Intergenerational income mobility in the United States’, American Economic Review 82, 393–408. Solon, G. (1999), ‘Intergenerational mobility in the labor market’, Handbook of Labor Economics 3, 1761– 1800. 31 Stiglitz, J. (2012), The price of inequality, Penguin UK. Thakur, D. S. (1991), ‘Implementing educational policies in Sub-Saharan Africareview essay’, Economics of Education Review 10(4), 385–390. Thomas, D. (1996), ‘Education across generations in South Africa’, American Economic Review 86, 330– 334. Thorbecke, E. (2013), ‘The interrelationship linking growth, inequality and poverty in sub-Saharan Africa’, Journal of African Economies 22(suppl 1), i15–i48. Tomasevski, K. (2006), ‘Free or fee: 2006 global report’, Copenhagen: Right to Education . UNESCO (1970), Educational planning: a world survey of problems and prospects. UNESCO (2011), ‘Financing Education in Sub-Saharan Africa: Meeting the challenges of expansion, equity and quality’. Wooldridge, J. M. (2010), Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data, MIT press. 32 Appendix A Educational attainment Table A1: The Comoros - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-year birth cohort Cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1934-1939 1.7 75.0 15.6 7.8 1.6 1940-1944 1.2 83.3 11.5 3.4 1.9 1945-1949 1.9 75.3 14.2 8.0 2.5 1950-1954 2.1 77.5 9.3 10.1 3.1 1955-1959 3.3 63.4 15.4 14.7 6.5 1960-1964 4.4 55.7 13.1 22.7 8.5 1965-1969 5.8 38.3 19.9 32.6 9.2 1970-1974 5.1 39.7 26.1 28.4 5.8 1975-1979 4.1 52.2 20.6 22.8 4.4 1980-1984 5.1 42.7 17.5 37.2 2.6 Daughter 1934-1939 0.4 95.7 0.0 4.3 0.0 1940-1944 0.1 97.4 2.1 0.5 0.0 1945-1949 0.2 97.2 1.1 1.1 0.6 1950-1954 0.3 94.8 3.9 1.3 0.0 1955-1959 1.2 83.2 9.7 6.3 0.8 1960-1964 2.3 74.4 10.4 11.0 4.2 1965-1969 2.5 70.4 12.0 15.1 2.6 1970-1974 3.7 54.4 20.3 22.0 3.3 1975-1979 2.6 67.8 13.9 16.7 1.7 1980-1984 3.6 57.4 14.5 26.3 1.8 Mother 1934-1939 0.1 98.5 0.5 1.0 0.0 1940-1944 0.1 98.9 0.8 0.3 0.0 1945-1949 0.0 99.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 1950-1954 0.2 97.5 1.9 0.6 0.0 1955-1959 0.2 96.7 2.3 1.0 0.0 1960-1964 0.2 96.8 2.0 0.8 0.5 1965-1969 0.2 96.6 2.4 0.9 0.1 1970-1974 0.3 95.9 2.8 1.1 0.3 1975-1979 0.3 94.5 4.0 1.2 0.4 1980-1984 0.7 90.4 6.5 3.2 0.0 Father 1934-1939 0.3 96.5 2.0 1.5 0.0 1940-1944 0.2 97.3 2.4 0.3 0.0 1945-1949 0.1 98.4 1.3 0.3 0.0 1950-1954 0.3 97.2 1.7 1.1 0.0 1955-1959 0.8 92.4 3.5 2.5 1.7 1960-1964 0.7 92.2 5.5 1.5 0.8 1965-1969 0.8 90.2 6.7 2.8 0.4 1970-1974 1.1 87.3 7.8 3.1 1.8 1975-1979 1.4 84.3 9.5 4.6 1.7 1980-1984 1.5 82.9 9.2 6.5 1.5 33 Table A2: Ghana - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-year birth cohort Cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1944-1948 6.4 46.1 12.0 28.0 13.9 1949-1953 7.9 34.7 11.9 37.8 15.6 1954-1958 8.5 28.9 13.2 43.2 14.7 1959-1963 8.1 31.5 13.6 40.5 14.5 1964-1968 8.3 28.4 13.6 46.2 11.9 1969-1973 8.1 27.4 13.8 48.3 10.6 1974-1978 7.6 25.2 14.2 48.8 11.8 1979-1983 7.7 21.8 14.1 52.8 11.4 1984-1988 8.5 16.0 14.7 56.0 13.2 1989-1993 8.9 8.8 14.1 72.3 4.8 Daughter 1944-1948 2.6 69.8 15.0 12.9 2.3 1949-1953 4.0 60.8 12.5 21.2 5.6 1954-1958 5.4 47.7 16.1 29.9 6.3 1959-1963 5.0 51.9 14.1 29.4 4.6 1964-1968 5.4 47.3 15.7 31.8 5.3 1969-1973 5.3 46.7 16.4 32.4 4.5 1974-1978 5.1 41.8 18.1 36.2 3.8 1979-1983 5.3 37.4 19.0 38.7 4.9 1984-1988 6.7 28.4 16.9 45.8 8.9 1989-1993 7.7 18.1 16.0 61.9 4.1 Mother 1944-1948 0.5 95.8 1.3 2.5 0.4 1949-1953 0.6 94.3 1.8 3.2 0.7 1954-1958 0.7 93.1 2.5 3.9 0.6 1959-1963 1.0 90.8 2.8 5.4 1.0 1964-1968 1.5 86.1 4.2 8.0 1.7 1969-1973 1.9 82.4 4.9 11.1 1.6 1974-1978 2.5 77.7 5.1 15.1 2.2 1979-1983 3.0 73.4 6.7 17.3 2.6 1984-1988 3.9 64.8 8.4 23.5 3.3 1989-1993 4.2 59.8 11.1 25.6 3.6 Father 1944-1948 1.6 87.8 1.1 8.8 2.3 1949-1953 1.7 86.3 2.0 9.5 2.2 1954-1958 2.3 81.9 3.0 11.7 3.5 1959-1963 2.7 79.0 2.5 14.2 4.3 1964-1968 3.6 72.1 3.1 19.6 5.2 1969-1973 4.1 69.5 2.5 20.5 7.5 1974-1978 4.6 65.3 2.9 23.9 7.9 1979-1983 5.2 60.5 4.0 26.4 9.1 1984-1988 6.3 51.6 4.9 32.4 11.1 1989-1993 6.6 46.1 7.9 35.3 10.7 34 Table A3: Guinea - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-year birth cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1933-1937 0.9 87.8 8.2 1.9 2.1 1938-1942 1.4 85.1 5.8 5.4 3.8 1943-1947 2.6 76.7 6.5 7.5 9.3 1948-1952 4.4 61.8 9.5 12.2 16.5 1953-1957 5.5 54.0 9.8 14.6 21.7 1958-1962 4.7 56.2 10.5 19.0 14.3 1963-1967 3.9 57.9 13.1 20.1 8.9 1968-1972 4.2 54.7 15.7 20.7 9.0 1973-1977 4.8 47.9 17.3 24.7 10.1 1978-1982 5.9 36.5 14.2 44.5 4.8 Daughter 1933-1937 0.2 97.2 1.4 1.1 0.3 1938-1942 0.2 96.9 1.8 1.1 0.2 1943-1947 0.4 94.9 2.7 1.6 0.7 1948-1952 1.0 90.2 2.8 4.6 2.4 1953-1957 1.6 83.9 4.6 6.3 5.1 1958-1962 1.4 84.1 4.7 8.9 2.3 1963-1967 1.6 81.7 6.4 9.6 2.4 1968-1972 1.6 80.0 9.3 8.3 2.3 1973-1977 1.6 78.7 9.3 10.1 1.9 1978-1982 2.7 67.0 11.2 20.0 1.9 Mother 1933-1937 0.0 99.4 0.4 0.1 0.0 1938-1942 0.0 99.5 0.2 0.4 0.0 1943-1947 0.1 98.7 0.9 0.5 0.0 1948-1952 0.1 98.8 0.5 0.5 0.2 1953-1957 0.2 98.2 0.9 0.8 0.2 1958-1962 0.3 96.9 1.5 1.0 0.6 1963-1967 0.4 96.0 1.5 1.8 0.7 1968-1972 0.7 92.1 3.4 3.1 1.4 1973-1977 1.0 89.7 3.5 3.9 2.8 1978-1982 1.9 82.1 5.1 7.2 5.6 Father 1933-1937 0.2 97.7 1.1 0.6 0.6 1938-1942 0.4 96.4 0.9 1.3 1.4 1943-1947 0.5 95.2 2.4 1.1 1.3 1948-1952 0.5 95.0 2.3 1.3 1.5 1953-1957 0.8 93.0 3.1 1.4 2.6 1958-1962 1.2 89.8 3.3 2.4 4.5 1963-1967 1.2 89.7 3.4 3.0 4.0 1968-1972 1.7 85.5 5.0 3.3 6.3 1973-1977 1.9 84.6 4.4 4.0 7.1 1978-1982 2.8 76.7 6.2 6.4 10.6 35 Table A4: Madagascar - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-years birth cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1936-1940 1.5 78.2 14.5 5.5 1.9 1941-1945 2.1 74.2 12.0 11.2 2.6 1946-1950 2.6 65.8 18.6 12.6 3.1 1951-1955 2.6 67.6 16.3 11.8 4.3 1956-1960 3.0 63.5 18.5 13.3 4.6 1961-1965 3.3 58.3 19.9 17.9 3.8 1966-1970 3.1 58.9 21.3 17.1 2.7 1971-1975 2.8 61.1 22.6 14.1 2.2 1976-1980 2.5 65.0 21.9 11.0 2.2 1981-1985 2.6 63.5 20.8 14.6 1.1 Daughter 1936-1940 0.5 91.9 5.9 1.5 0.7 1941-1945 0.8 88.5 7.5 3.8 0.3 1946-1950 1.4 80.1 13.3 5.5 1.1 1951-1955 1.6 78.2 13.1 7.5 1.2 1956-1960 2.1 72.7 14.1 10.7 2.5 1961-1965 2.3 68.3 17.2 12.8 1.6 1966-1970 2.6 61.8 24.1 12.7 1.4 1971-1975 2.2 67.0 22.2 9.6 1.2 1976-1980 2.1 68.9 20.5 8.9 1.7 1981-1985 2.3 66.8 20.2 11.9 1.1 Mother 1936-1940 0.9 70.8 27.6 1.2 0.4 1941-1945 0.9 70.3 28.4 1.1 0.2 1946-1950 1.3 61.5 35.3 2.9 0.2 1951-1955 1.3 60.3 37.1 2.4 0.3 1956-1960 1.6 56.5 39.3 3.8 0.4 1961-1965 1.7 53.8 41.4 4.5 0.3 1966-1970 1.9 49.5 44.6 5.4 0.5 1971-1975 1.9 51.1 42.4 6.3 0.2 1976-1980 2.0 52.3 40.6 6.3 0.7 1981-1985 2.1 57.9 33.0 8.5 0.6 Father 1936-1940 1.5 61.5 34.2 3.9 0.4 1941-1945 1.3 62.5 34.1 3.2 0.2 1946-1950 1.9 52.4 41.9 5.1 0.7 1951-1955 1.9 50.3 43.6 5.7 0.5 1956-1960 2.1 46.8 45.6 6.9 0.6 1961-1965 2.3 43.7 48.3 7.2 0.8 1966-1970 2.7 38.9 49.8 10.4 0.9 1971-1975 2.7 40.3 48.4 10.5 0.8 1976-1980 2.7 41.9 46.1 10.4 1.6 1981-1985 2.8 47.6 37.8 12.6 2.0 36 Table A5: Malawi - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-years birth cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1942-1946 3.7 33.2 51.7 13.1 2.0 1947-1951 4.5 22.5 54.2 21.1 2.2 1952-1956 4.8 22.8 50.6 24.1 2.5 1957-1961 5.0 19.1 54.1 23.3 3.5 1962-1966 5.3 19.4 49.2 27.6 3.9 1967-1971 5.6 15.8 50.7 28.5 5.1 1972-1976 6.0 14.1 48.6 33.2 4.1 1977-1981 6.6 10.3 45.1 40.9 3.7 1982-1986 7.0 7.8 44.0 44.4 3.8 1987-1991 6.8 6.9 45.1 46.5 1.5 Daughter 1942-1946 1.8 61.2 35.7 2.5 0.6 1947-1951 2.1 56.3 38.2 4.8 0.8 1952-1956 2.5 51.4 38.6 9.6 0.4 1957-1961 2.7 48.5 40.1 10.9 0.5 1962-1966 3.2 38.1 50.1 10.2 1.6 1967-1971 3.5 38.4 46.7 11.7 3.3 1972-1976 3.7 31.8 53.1 14.2 0.9 1977-1981 4.7 22.6 53.6 21.4 2.4 1982-1986 5.4 14.8 54.6 28.5 2.2 1987-1991 5.7 12.3 53.5 32.9 1.4 Mother 1942-1946 0.2 97.8 0.2 2.1 0.0 1947-1951 0.1 98.3 0.3 1.3 0.1 1952-1956 0.2 97.7 0.4 1.9 0.0 1957-1961 0.3 96.7 0.4 2.9 0.1 1962-1966 0.5 95.1 0.4 4.3 0.3 1967-1971 0.5 94.2 1.1 4.4 0.3 1972-1976 0.7 91.6 1.5 6.6 0.4 1977-1981 1.0 88.4 2.4 8.3 0.9 1982-1986 1.3 83.5 5.3 10.4 0.8 1987-1991 1.8 73.8 13.4 12.0 0.8 Father 1942-1946 0.5 94.4 0.2 5.3 0.2 1947-1951 0.5 94.1 0.0 5.8 0.1 1952-1956 0.9 90.0 0.0 10.0 0.1 1957-1961 0.9 90.3 0.0 9.3 0.4 1962-1966 1.2 88.0 0.1 10.9 1.0 1967-1971 1.3 86.7 0.3 12.4 0.7 1972-1976 1.6 83.0 0.5 15.2 1.3 1977-1981 2.2 78.1 1.4 18.3 2.3 1982-1986 2.7 72.1 3.6 21.8 2.6 1987-1991 3.1 63.7 10.2 23.4 2.8 37 Table A6: Nigeria-Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-year birth cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1942-1946 4.4 45.3 34.2 16.0 4.4 1947-1951 4.2 51.1 27.1 16.4 5.5 1952-1956 5.5 37.8 32.0 23.9 6.3 1957-1961 5.8 37.3 30.3 24.8 7.6 1962-1966 7.0 30.7 25.6 35.5 8.2 1967-1971 7.6 26.2 25.1 39.4 9.3 1972-1976 7.5 23.9 26.3 44.7 5.2 1977-1981 8.1 22.7 20.2 49.3 7.8 1982-1986 9.4 17.0 12.4 60.1 10.5 1987-1991 9.6 11.1 9.8 75.3 3.8 Daughter 1942-1946 1.5 77.8 15.7 6.5 0.0 1947-1951 2.1 69.6 21.1 7.6 1.7 1952-1956 2.8 59.5 29.7 8.1 2.7 1957-1961 3.2 61.6 22.2 13.4 2.8 1962-1966 4.5 49.9 24.4 21.7 4.0 1967-1971 4.2 51.1 24.7 22.0 2.1 1972-1976 5.1 42.0 27.8 27.0 3.2 1977-1981 5.6 41.0 22.5 33.1 3.4 1982-1986 6.4 37.4 17.1 41.7 3.8 1987-1991 7.8 26.8 11.4 58.6 3.2 Mother 1942-1946 0.1 98.3 1.7 0.0 0.0 1947-1951 0.3 94.8 4.7 0.5 0.0 1952-1956 0.4 93.7 5.6 0.6 0.0 1957-1961 0.5 92.5 5.5 1.7 0.3 1962-1966 0.8 88.2 9.2 2.3 0.3 1967-1971 0.9 86.2 10.9 2.8 0.2 1972-1976 1.3 81.4 14.2 4.1 0.4 1977-1981 1.7 76.9 16.4 5.9 0.7 1982-1986 2.6 66.8 19.9 11.6 1.7 1987-1991 3.7 55.9 23.8 18.6 1.6 Father 1942-1946 0.5 92.7 5.6 1.5 0.2 1947-1951 0.8 88.9 7.9 2.9 0.3 1952-1956 1.0 84.6 12.9 1.9 0.6 1957-1961 1.1 85.2 10.4 4.1 0.3 1962-1966 1.5 80.9 13.1 5.1 1.0 1967-1971 1.8 76.4 15.7 6.5 1.4 1972-1976 2.1 73.2 17.3 8.0 1.5 1977-1981 2.9 65.8 19.9 11.5 2.9 1982-1986 3.6 59.3 21.8 14.6 4.3 1987-1991 4.9 47.0 25.6 21.2 6.3 38 Table A7: Rwanda - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-year birth cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1931-1935 2.4 44.7 50.4 4.3 0.7 1936-1940 2.8 38.2 54.3 7.5 0.0 1941-1945 2.6 41.5 51.3 6.8 0.4 1946-1950 3.4 33.7 56.6 7.7 2.0 1951-1955 3.6 29.2 60.4 9.5 1.0 1956-1960 3.7 30.8 55.8 11.3 2.0 1961-1965 4.4 25.9 57.7 12.8 3.6 1966-1970 5.2 21.3 54.1 20.3 4.3 1971-1975 5.2 20.2 54.8 22.2 2.8 1976-1980 5.2 13.5 64.8 20.4 1.3 Daughter 1931-1935 0.6 82.8 16.2 1.0 0.0 1936-1940 0.6 81.4 17.5 0.7 0.4 1941-1945 1.1 71.4 25.7 2.9 0.0 1946-1950 1.4 66.8 28.9 3.8 0.4 1951-1955 1.9 54.7 39.8 5.3 0.2 1956-1960 2.4 48.4 44.5 6.7 0.5 1961-1965 3.3 43.2 43.4 12.4 1.0 1966-1970 4.3 29.7 51.1 18.2 1.0 1971-1975 4.8 20.4 60.9 17.0 1.6 1976-1980 5.2 15.8 63.1 19.8 1.3 Mother 1931-1935 0.0 99.4 0.6 0.0 0.0 1936-1940 0.1 98.6 1.4 0.0 0.0 1941-1945 0.1 97.3 2.7 0.0 0.0 1946-1950 0.2 96.6 3.3 0.1 0.0 1951-1955 0.3 94.0 5.9 0.1 0.0 1956-1960 0.3 93.8 5.8 0.4 0.0 1961-1965 0.5 87.6 11.8 0.6 0.0 1966-1970 0.9 81.2 17.1 1.5 0.2 1971-1975 1.3 73.4 22.9 3.5 0.3 1976-1980 1.9 60.1 35.2 4.4 0.2 Father 1931-1935 0.3 96.3 2.8 0.6 0.3 1936-1940 0.2 95.8 3.5 0.7 0.0 1941-1945 0.4 93.9 5.1 1.0 0.0 1946-1950 0.5 91.2 7.5 1.3 0.0 1951-1955 0.8 86.3 12.6 1.1 0.1 1956-1960 1.0 81.4 16.7 1.8 0.1 1961-1965 1.5 72.5 24.1 3.1 0.3 1966-1970 2.1 63.9 30.5 5.1 0.5 1971-1975 2.7 54.1 38.8 6.4 0.8 1976-1980 3.2 43.8 46.9 8.3 0.9 39 Table A8: Tanzania - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-year birth cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1941-1945 3.5 36.8 52.8 7.6 2.8 1946-1950 4.0 26.9 63.4 7.5 2.2 1951-1955 5.2 25.8 54.5 14.6 5.1 1956-1960 5.8 19.8 58.5 17.9 3.9 1961-1965 6.9 12.0 62.2 22.7 3.0 1966-1970 6.6 10.3 68.7 19.4 1.6 1971-1975 6.7 8.4 70.9 19.0 1.8 1976-1980 6.6 10.2 68.4 19.0 2.4 1981-1985 6.9 10.6 63.2 23.8 2.3 1986-1990 7.1 10.5 52.8 35.0 1.7 Daughter 1941-1945 1.2 71.4 26.9 1.7 0.0 1946-1950 1.5 69.5 29.0 0.0 1.5 1951-1955 2.8 53.1 38.1 7.7 1.0 1956-1960 3.4 46.3 45.4 7.4 0.9 1961-1965 4.8 31.4 55.4 12.5 0.7 1966-1970 5.3 23.4 63.8 12.5 0.3 1971-1975 5.7 19.7 65.4 15.0 0.0 1976-1980 6.1 17.8 64.4 16.1 1.7 1981-1985 6.2 17.0 61.5 20.4 1.1 1986-1990 6.5 14.3 56.9 28.4 0.4 Mother 1941-1945 0.2 96.2 3.8 0.0 0.0 1946-1950 0.2 95.9 4.1 0.0 0.0 1951-1955 0.6 88.9 10.6 0.3 0.3 1956-1960 0.8 84.9 13.5 1.6 0.0 1961-1965 1.1 80.2 19.5 0.4 0.0 1966-1970 1.6 73.1 24.4 1.8 0.7 1971-1975 2.1 66.6 30.3 2.5 0.5 1976-1980 3.2 51.5 43.3 4.2 1.1 1981-1985 4.0 42.5 48.0 8.3 1.2 1986-1990 4.5 37.2 51.1 10.6 1.1 Father 1941-1945 0.9 85.7 12.9 0.5 1.0 1946-1950 0.5 88.1 11.5 0.4 0.0 1951-1955 1.3 74.5 24.1 0.9 0.6 1956-1960 2.0 68.0 27.9 2.6 1.6 1961-1965 2.3 61.1 36.0 2.1 0.8 1966-1970 2.7 55.8 38.2 4.7 1.3 1971-1975 3.3 48.0 45.5 4.7 1.9 1976-1980 4.8 34.9 51.4 9.6 4.1 1981-1985 5.2 29.4 55.3 11.6 3.6 1986-1990 5.8 25.8 55.5 15.0 3.7 40 Table A9: Uganda - Educational attainment of children and their parents by five-year birth cohort Average years of schooling No schooling Primary Secondary Tertiary Son 1937-1941 4.4 26.0 55.0 18.0 1.0 1942-1946 5.8 18.1 46.6 33.6 1.7 1947-1951 6.4 10.4 55.2 31.9 2.4 1952-1956 5.9 16.0 51.5 31.4 1.1 1957-1961 6.5 11.8 57.7 28.5 2.1 1962-1966 6.1 11.1 62.7 24.0 2.2 1967-1971 6.7 7.2 58.6 32.4 1.8 1972-1976 7.0 5.9 59.5 32.0 2.6 1977-1981 7.1 4.9 57.2 35.9 1.9 1982-1986 7.7 4.1 49.2 46.1 0.6 Daughter 1937-1941 1.4 74.1 21.8 3.7 0.5 1942-1946 1.9 60.6 33.3 5.7 0.4 1947-1951 2.7 47.4 42.1 10.3 0.3 1952-1956 3.4 38.5 49.9 11.4 0.3 1957-1961 3.8 38.6 45.3 15.5 0.6 1962-1966 3.9 32.0 54.7 13.0 0.3 1967-1971 4.3 28.0 55.3 15.9 0.8 1972-1976 4.9 21.8 57.9 19.8 0.5 1977-1981 5.4 17.3 56.4 25.7 0.6 1982-1986 6.6 9.6 53.6 36.3 0.6 Mother 1937-1941 0.4 91.8 7.9 0.3 0.0 1942-1946 0.6 86.3 13.2 0.5 0.0 1947-1951 0.7 82.4 16.6 0.8 0.2 1952-1956 0.8 81.8 17.6 0.6 0.0 1957-1961 1.1 76.2 22.8 1.0 0.0 1962-1966 1.2 72.7 25.9 1.4 0.0 1967-1971 1.6 66.4 31.6 2.0 0.0 1972-1976 2.2 57.3 38.4 4.2 0.1 1977-1981 2.8 48.0 45.2 6.5 0.3 1982-1986 3.5 39.7 49.0 11.0 0.3 Father 1937-1941 0.9 79.3 19.8 0.9 0.0 1942-1946 1.4 69.8 29.3 0.7 0.2 1947-1951 1.9 60.7 36.2 2.8 0.4 1952-1956 2.0 59.0 38.1 2.6 0.3 1957-1961 2.5 53.1 42.8 3.6 0.4 1962-1966 2.8 47.9 47.0 4.6 0.5 1967-1971 3.5 38.9 53.2 7.1 0.8 1972-1976 4.1 34.3 53.2 11.0 1.5 1977-1981 4.9 26.4 55.5 16.0 2.1 1982-1986 5.8 19.5 54.2 24.1 2.1 41 Appendix B Estimates of intergenerational educational persis- tence Table B10: Comoros - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err β ˆf ather Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 0.308 0.311 0.347 0.293 0.182 0.218 1940-1944 0.070 0.037 0.518*** 0.143 0.027 0.266 1945-1949 0.126*** 0.028 0.106 0.157 0.000 0.050 1950-1954 0.246 0.157 0.625* 0.255 0.113 0.322* 1955-1959 0.666 0.348 0.546*** 0.087 0.159 0.367*** 1960-1964 0.778*** 0.138 0.792*** 0.087 0.244 0.365*** 1965-1969 0.482*** 0.112 0.530*** 0.088 0.127*** 0.268*** 1970-1974 0.397** 0.137 0.560*** 0.048 0.128*** 0.382*** 1975-1979 0.574*** 0.151 0.576*** 0.104 0.172*** 0.281*** 1980-1984 0.512*** 0.086 0.401*** 0.058 0.198*** 0.258*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.712** 0.255 1.095*** 0.013 0.596 0.802** 1940-1944 0.023 0.036 0.266 0.176 0.059 0.247 1945-1949 0.056 0.034 0.030 0.019 0.000 0.026 1950-1954 0.046 0.059 0.064 0.075 0.058 0.071 1955-1959 0.450 0.255 0.519*** 0.109 0.192 0.592*** 1960-1964 0.565** 0.181 0.853*** 0.134 0.224*** 0.454*** 1965-1969 0.632*** 0.113 0.357** 0.119 0.201* 0.209*** 1970-1974 0.423* 0.172 0.600*** 0.056 0.159*** 0.448*** 1975-1979 0.580** 0.224 0.423** 0.146 0.168** 0.198*** 1980-1984 0.511*** 0.100 0.404*** 0.091 0.209*** 0.246*** Sons 1934-1939 0.136 0.031 0.09 0.233 0.065 0.056 1940-1944 0.012 0.041 0.486** 0.157 0.247 0.250 1945-1949 0.044 0.034 0.853*** 0.041 0.026 0.196 1950-1954 0.627** 0.191 1.219*** 0.187 0.196 0.484* 1955-1959 1.44 0.773 0.687*** 0.125 0.215 0.315** 1960-1964 0.993*** 0.155 0.717*** 0.111 0.273** 0.313*** 1965-1969 0.31 0.171 0.603*** 0.094 0.079 0.305*** 1970-1974 0.406** 0.129 0.504*** 0.088 0.101* 0.307*** 1975-1979 0.547** 0.197 0.632*** 0.124 0.175 0.330** 1980-1984 0.500** 0.154 0.394*** 0.074 0.181*** 0.271*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 42 Table B11: Ghana - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 0.763*** 0.050 0.531*** 0.042 0.391*** 0.314*** 1940-1944 0.557*** 0.063 0.550*** 0.035 0.404*** 0.238*** 1945-1949 0.521*** 0.043 0.389*** 0.042 0.314*** 0.238*** 1950-1954 0.536*** 0.034 0.424*** 0.027 0.378*** 0.292*** 1955-1959 0.505*** 0.028 0.471*** 0.024 0.462*** 0.341*** 1960-1964 0.516*** 0.024 0.466*** 0.020 0.491*** 0.385*** 1965-1969 0.440*** 0.019 0.401*** 0.016 0.490*** 0.414*** 1970-1974 0.404*** 0.017 0.387*** 0.014 0.514*** 0.425*** 1975-1979 0.406*** 0.016 0.382*** 0.015 0.508*** 0.458*** 1980-1984 0.309*** 0.012 0.308*** 0.012 0.470*** 0.416*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.759*** 0.059 0.439*** 0.060 0.393** 0.360** 1940-1944 0.680*** 0.079 0.614*** 0.042 0.540*** 0.363*** 1945-1949 0.567*** 0.063 0.455*** 0.057 0.418*** 0.291*** 1950-1954 0.592*** 0.052 0.463*** 0.033 0.442*** 0.313*** 1955-1959 0.578*** 0.031 0.496*** 0.030 0.501*** 0.403*** 1960-1964 0.580*** 0.033 0.514*** 0.024 0.552*** 0.442*** 1965-1969 0.452*** 0.025 0.406*** 0.021 0.519*** 0.445*** 1970-1974 0.407*** 0.022 0.381*** 0.017 0.534*** 0.440*** 1975-1979 0.413*** 0.022 0.392*** 0.019 0.516*** 0.449*** 1980-1984 0.366*** 0.017 0.341*** 0.017 0.498*** 0.467*** Sons 1934-1939 0.741*** 0.065 0.604*** 0.045 0.417*** 0.294*** 1940-1944 0.450*** 0.099 0.528*** 0.048 0.354*** 0.159*** 1945-1949 0.516*** 0.045 0.369*** 0.055 0.273*** 0.222*** 1950-1954 0.452*** 0.044 0.382*** 0.042 0.337*** 0.267*** 1955-1959 0.416*** 0.047 0.436*** 0.037 0.435*** 0.287*** 1960-1964 0.415*** 0.030 0.386*** 0.029 0.433*** 0.331*** 1965-1969 0.408*** 0.027 0.375*** 0.022 0.468*** 0.392*** 1970-1974 0.377*** 0.024 0.383*** 0.024 0.496*** 0.404*** 1975-1979 0.371*** 0.020 0.350*** 0.021 0.497*** 0.464*** 1980-1984 0.241*** 0.017 0.265*** 0.015 0.436*** 0.354*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 43 Table B12: Guinea - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ 1934-1939 0.038 0.035 0.187 0.124 0.109 0.007 1940-1944 0.009 0.096 0.566*** 0.168 0.397*** 0.002 1945-1949 0.078 0.145 0.315* 0.142 0.193 0.021 1950-1954 0.538** 0.179 0.718*** 0.073 0.300*** 0.106 1955-1959 0.636*** 0.154 0.453*** 0.083 0.226*** 0.124*** 1960-1964 0.609*** 0.098 0.493*** 0.046 0.338*** 0.205*** 1965-1969 0.511*** 0.072 0.415*** 0.039 0.324*** 0.207*** 1970-1974 0.548*** 0.070 0.414*** 0.037 0.378*** 0.346*** 1975-1979 0.498*** 0.039 0.416*** 0.027 0.382*** 0.342*** 1980-1984 0.417*** 0.022 0.369*** 0.019 0.395*** 0.378*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.025 0.047 0.01 0.027 0.006 0.012 1940-1944 0.117 0.129 0.304* 0.137 0.472 0.081 1945-1949 0.129 0.188 0.12 0.092 0.158 0.078 1950-1954 0.537* 0.228 0.714*** 0.080 0.439** 0.181 1955-1959 0.513* 0.249 0.362*** 0.106 0.258*** 0.132 1960-1964 0.604*** 0.103 0.384*** 0.052 0.361*** 0.252** 1965-1969 0.495*** 0.093 0.386*** 0.050 0.352*** 0.237*** 1970-1974 0.563*** 0.092 0.388*** 0.048 0.460*** 0.409*** 1975-1979 0.502*** 0.054 0.416*** 0.034 0.474*** 0.421*** 1980-1984 0.464*** 0.029 0.386*** 0.025 0.460*** 0.467*** Sons 1934-1939 0.115*** 0.027 0.187 0.145 0.109 0.011 1940-1944 0.154*** 0.037 0.766** 0.240 0.425*** 0.023 1945-1949 0.012 0.213 0.553*** 0.123 0.251** 0.002 1950-1954 0.480 0.289 0.634*** 0.102 0.247*** 0.075 1955-1959 0.686*** 0.182 0.574*** 0.109 0.234*** 0.119* 1960-1964 0.518** 0.187 0.605*** 0.063 0.345*** 0.161** 1965-1969 0.482*** 0.112 0.426*** 0.058 0.301*** 0.170*** 1970-1974 0.465*** 0.106 0.420*** 0.059 0.330*** 0.286*** 1975-1979 0.414*** 0.059 0.378*** 0.044 0.317*** 0.270*** 1980-1984 0.335*** 0.032 0.326*** 0.027 0.350*** 0.311*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 44 Table B13: Madagascar - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 0.757*** 0.129 0.397*** 0.081 0.380*** 0.486*** 1940-1944 0.612*** 0.133 0.530*** 0.110 0.321*** 0.290*** 1945-1949 0.631*** 0.135 0.444*** 0.079 0.361*** 0.352*** 1950-1954 0.665*** 0.071 0.571*** 0.063 0.384*** 0.364*** 1955-1959 0.784*** 0.062 0.730*** 0.046 0.500*** 0.447*** 1960-1964 0.742*** 0.053 0.659*** 0.046 0.454*** 0.443*** 1965-1969 0.584*** 0.051 0.523*** 0.041 0.412*** 0.366*** 1970-1974 0.645*** 0.051 0.585*** 0.035 0.465*** 0.425*** 1975-1979 0.692*** 0.044 0.591*** 0.038 0.525*** 0.530*** 1980-1984 0.682*** 0.034 0.567*** 0.027 0.555*** 0.546*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.474** 0.179 0.365*** 0.083 0.498* 0.388* 1940-1944 0.137 0.120 0.250* 0.115 0.230* 0.089** 1945-1949 0.611** 0.197 0.421*** 0.112 0.339*** 0.370*** 1950-1954 0.613*** 0.105 0.638*** 0.079 0.436*** 0.381*** 1955-1959 0.739*** 0.094 0.640*** 0.067 0.458*** 0.455*** 1960-1964 0.729*** 0.085 0.597*** 0.063 0.421*** 0.458*** 1965-1969 0.552*** 0.052 0.487*** 0.040 0.429*** 0.403*** 1970-1974 0.606*** 0.073 0.553*** 0.041 0.441*** 0.411*** 1975-1979 0.679*** 0.075 0.584*** 0.064 0.498*** 0.516*** 1980-1984 0.667*** 0.049 0.567*** 0.044 0.520*** 0.540*** Sons 1934-1939 0.892*** 0.168 0.413** 0.136 0.339** 0.531*** 1940-1944 0.857*** 0.175 0.744*** 0.149 0.376*** 0.364*** 1945-1949 0.667*** 0.158 0.456*** 0.108 0.375*** 0.339*** 1950-1954 0.708*** 0.097 0.526*** 0.084 0.352*** 0.363*** 1955-1959 0.827*** 0.076 0.792*** 0.059 0.528*** 0.447*** 1960-1964 0.732*** 0.066 0.689*** 0.060 0.473*** 0.426*** 1965-1969 0.638*** 0.090 0.566*** 0.071 0.400*** 0.342*** 1970-1974 0.691*** 0.066 0.615*** 0.054 0.487*** 0.444*** 1975-1979 0.699*** 0.049 0.591*** 0.045 0.547*** 0.543*** 1980-1984 0.703*** 0.045 0.567*** 0.034 0.588*** 0.556*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 45 Table B14: Malawi - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 0.589** 0.221 0.579*** 0.113 0.340*** 0.193* 1940-1944 0.202 0.191 0.366*** 0.072 0.237*** 0.057*** 1945-1949 0.542** 0.172 0.440*** 0.073 0.297*** 0.156*** 1950-1954 0.436*** 0.127 0.393*** 0.061 0.273*** 0.182*** 1955-1959 0.563*** 0.070 0.510*** 0.040 0.390*** 0.293*** 1960-1964 0.623*** 0.066 0.544*** 0.033 0.433*** 0.282*** 1965-1969 0.613*** 0.039 0.458*** 0.026 0.416*** 0.353*** 1970-1974 0.535*** 0.032 0.421*** 0.021 0.435*** 0.378*** 1975-1979 0.511*** 0.022 0.362*** 0.016 0.405*** 0.387*** 1980-1984 0.512*** 0.018 0.373*** 0.013 0.442*** 0.439*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.219 0.113 0.502** 0.158 0.381*** 0.089 1940-1944 0.261 0.285 0.409*** 0.096 0.319*** 0.095 1945-1949 0.392*** 0.117 0.402*** 0.098 0.320*** 0.084* 1950-1954 0.451** 0.164 0.280** 0.085 0.226*** 0.218** 1955-1959 0.525*** 0.116 0.563*** 0.066 0.471*** 0.313*** 1960-1964 0.630*** 0.092 0.537*** 0.050 0.445*** 0.344*** 1965-1969 0.549*** 0.072 0.385*** 0.041 0.375*** 0.320*** 1970-1974 0.588*** 0.039 0.432*** 0.033 0.470*** 0.421*** 1975-1979 0.525*** 0.032 0.371*** 0.023 0.441*** 0.416*** 1980-1984 0.516*** 0.025 0.366*** 0.018 0.446*** 0.463*** Sons 1934-1939 0.910*** 0.183 0.664*** 0.134 0.353*** 0.282 1940-1944 0.137 0.170 0.299** 0.105 0.184** 0.033 1945-1949 0.476* 0.208 0.454*** 0.104 0.297*** 0.166** 1950-1954 0.421* 0.183 0.480*** 0.069 0.326*** 0.173** 1955-1959 0.595*** 0.080 0.453*** 0.050 0.345*** 0.298*** 1960-1964 0.661*** 0.081 0.522*** 0.041 0.430*** 0.270*** 1965-1969 0.603*** 0.044 0.468*** 0.032 0.434*** 0.368*** 1970-1974 0.469*** 0.049 0.402*** 0.025 0.417*** 0.344*** 1975-1979 0.486*** 0.027 0.346*** 0.021 0.382*** 0.366*** 1980-1984 0.491*** 0.023 0.370*** 0.018 0.434*** 0.409*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 46 Table B15: Nigeria - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 1.563*** 0.341 0.905*** 0.108 0.410*** 0.291** 1940-1944 1.326*** 0.210 0.735*** 0.073 0.443*** 0.379*** 1945-1949 0.898*** 0.110 0.671*** 0.104 0.364*** 0.263*** 1950-1954 0.670*** 0.063 0.749*** 0.057 0.424*** 0.283*** 1955-1959 0.700*** 0.053 0.688*** 0.042 0.436*** 0.327*** 1960-1964 0.755*** 0.053 0.706*** 0.036 0.478*** 0.354*** 1965-1969 0.760*** 0.054 0.609*** 0.032 0.483*** 0.449*** 1970-1974 0.695*** 0.038 0.546*** 0.029 0.505*** 0.468*** 1975-1979 0.644*** 0.026 0.582*** 0.022 0.561*** 0.515*** 1980-1984 0.461*** 0.020 0.432*** 0.018 0.504*** 0.468*** Daughters 1934-1939 1.730*** 0.053 0.967*** 0.272 0.389*** 0.238** 1940-1944 1.264*** 0.337 0.660*** 0.097 0.468*** 0.408*** 1945-1949 1.132*** 0.214 0.695*** 0.205 0.402*** 0.334*** 1950-1954 0.809*** 0.103 0.763*** 0.077 0.505*** 0.362*** 1955-1959 0.770*** 0.077 0.745*** 0.069 0.470*** 0.363*** 1960-1964 0.887*** 0.086 0.786*** 0.055 0.548*** 0.438*** 1965-1969 0.825*** 0.056 0.624*** 0.045 0.489*** 0.481*** 1970-1974 0.742*** 0.056 0.566*** 0.041 0.511*** 0.481*** 1975-1979 0.753*** 0.036 0.656*** 0.030 0.603*** 0.563*** 1980-1984 0.567*** 0.028 0.532*** 0.025 0.573*** 0.537*** Sons 1934-1939 1.310** 0.394 0.789*** 0.112 0.401*** 0.284** 1940-1944 1.297*** 0.240 0.778*** 0.090 0.451*** 0.365*** 1945-1949 0.736*** 0.108 0.669*** 0.094 0.360*** 0.222*** 1950-1954 0.533*** 0.082 0.736*** 0.076 0.384*** 0.225*** 1955-1959 0.616*** 0.073 0.615*** 0.052 0.407*** 0.298*** 1960-1964 0.569*** 0.058 0.572*** 0.048 0.408*** 0.277*** 1965-1969 0.655*** 0.091 0.566*** 0.041 0.475*** 0.410*** 1970-1974 0.597*** 0.049 0.496*** 0.038 0.502*** 0.447*** 1975-1979 0.470*** 0.036 0.432*** 0.033 0.473*** 0.445*** 1980-1984 0.323*** 0.029 0.303*** 0.023 0.404*** 0.372*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 47 Table B16: Rwanda - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 0.001 0.311 0.087 0.222 0.027 0.098 1940-1944 0.535 0.300 0.280 0.152 0.129* 0.098* 1945-1949 0.775*** 0.153 0.332** 0.110 0.215*** 0.190** 1950-1954 0.690*** 0.199 0.563*** 0.092 0.294*** 0.212*** 1955-1959 0.441*** 0.129 0.371*** 0.064 0.245*** 0.149*** 1960-1964 0.448*** 0.104 0.468*** 0.057 0.288*** 0.155*** 1965-1969 0.508*** 0.072 0.493*** 0.056 0.347*** 0.206*** 1970-1974 0.691*** 0.061 0.488*** 0.040 0.372*** 0.309*** 1975-1979 0.566*** 0.054 0.460*** 0.039 0.376*** 0.354*** 1980-1984 0.388*** 0.033 0.408*** 0.028 0.390*** 0.304*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.050 0.104 0.155 0.207 0.081 0.027 1940-1944 0.669 0.348 0.648*** 0.171 0.394** 0.324** 1945-1949 0.907*** 0.155 0.403* 0.166 0.335*** 0.352** 1950-1954 0.673** 0.222 0.578*** 0.104 0.413*** 0.274** 1955-1959 0.566** 0.172 0.402*** 0.089 0.305*** 0.222*** 1960-1964 0.563*** 0.118 0.383*** 0.062 0.255*** 0.187*** 1965-1969 0.601*** 0.096 0.487*** 0.065 0.357*** 0.251*** 1970-1974 0.658*** 0.081 0.487*** 0.055 0.367*** 0.299*** 1975-1979 0.551*** 0.071 0.469*** 0.047 0.415*** 0.373*** 1980-1984 0.416*** 0.047 0.484*** 0.041 0.438*** 0.315*** Sons 1934-1939 0.222 0.039 0.699*** 0.081 0.050 0.081 1940-1944 0.422*** 0.099 0.0778 0.188 0.039 0.041 1945-1949 0.838 0.715 0.252 0.148 0.147 0.083 1950-1954 0.687 0.352 0.541*** 0.147 0.244*** 0.185** 1955-1959 0.324 0.193 0.347*** 0.088 0.207*** 0.098* 1960-1964 0.298* 0.149 0.596*** 0.098 0.342*** 0.110** 1965-1969 0.346** 0.110 0.506*** 0.100 0.346*** 0.138*** 1970-1974 0.725*** 0.089 0.481*** 0.057 0.378*** 0.321*** 1975-1979 0.592*** 0.083 0.445*** 0.066 0.327*** 0.333*** 1980-1984 0.356*** 0.045 0.330*** 0.039 0.334*** 0.289*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 48 Table B17: Tanzania - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 0.396 0.281 0.213** 0.070 0.217*** 0.159 1940-1944 0.896*** 0.195 0.409** 0.155 0.235*** 0.309*** 1945-1949 0.622*** 0.131 0.509*** 0.093 0.340*** 0.272*** 1950-1954 0.621*** 0.074 0.469*** 0.061 0.401*** 0.338*** 1955-1959 0.457*** 0.067 0.434*** 0.051 0.372*** 0.307*** 1960-1964 0.344*** 0.045 0.237*** 0.050 0.272*** 0.312*** 1965-1969 0.244*** 0.035 0.258*** 0.031 0.318*** 0.254*** 1970-1974 0.353*** 0.029 0.297*** 0.025 0.396*** 0.387*** 1975-1979 0.317*** 0.029 0.290*** 0.030 0.364*** 0.344*** 1980-1984 0.394*** 0.028 0.361*** 0.025 0.433*** 0.427*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.049 0.137 0.212*** 0.049 0.372 0.023 1940-1944 0.750* 0.318 0.264 0.237 0.168 0.278 1945-1949 0.660*** 0.164 0.456*** 0.093 0.352*** 0.353*** 1950-1954 0.657*** 0.119 0.438*** 0.077 0.399*** 0.369*** 1955-1959 0.578*** 0.083 0.507*** 0.073 0.423*** 0.385*** 1960-1964 0.394*** 0.061 0.253** 0.078 0.289*** 0.372*** 1965-1969 0.278*** 0.049 0.335*** 0.037 0.381*** 0.286*** 1970-1974 0.385*** 0.039 0.320*** 0.036 0.408*** 0.410*** 1975-1979 0.266*** 0.038 0.295*** 0.040 0.388*** 0.295*** 1980-1984 0.424*** 0.039 0.358*** 0.032 0.442*** 0.444*** Sons 1934-1939 0.490 0.263 0.387* 0.162 0.237** 0.202 1940-1944 0.917*** 0.139 0.480*** 0.133 0.286*** 0.336** 1945-1949 0.625** 0.191 0.563*** 0.157 0.355*** 0.243*** 1950-1954 0.554*** 0.079 0.486*** 0.085 0.444*** 0.328*** 1955-1959 0.329*** 0.099 0.370*** 0.066 0.350*** 0.239*** 1960-1964 0.283*** 0.058 0.231*** 0.045 0.275*** 0.249*** 1965-1969 0.218*** 0.051 0.175*** 0.046 0.240*** 0.234*** 1970-1974 0.315*** 0.045 0.272*** 0.034 0.386*** 0.360*** 1975-1979 0.383*** 0.044 0.299*** 0.043 0.356*** 0.412*** 1980-1984 0.363*** 0.041 0.366*** 0.039 0.426*** 0.411*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 49 Table B18: Uganda - Estimates of intergenerational educational persistence by five-year birth cohort Cohort ˆmother β Std. Err ˆf ather β Std. Err ˆmother ρ ˆf ather ρ All children 1934-1939 0.991*** 0.233 0.656*** 0.142 0.387*** 0.332*** 1940-1944 0.717*** 0.150 0.608*** 0.109 0.347*** 0.278*** 1945-1949 0.447*** 0.113 0.423*** 0.061 0.301*** 0.204*** 1950-1954 0.558*** 0.101 0.519*** 0.058 0.380*** 0.247*** 1955-1959 0.626*** 0.063 0.530*** 0.043 0.414*** 0.324*** 1960-1964 0.609*** 0.057 0.518*** 0.039 0.433*** 0.363*** 1965-1969 0.562*** 0.040 0.435*** 0.028 0.399*** 0.367*** 1970-1974 0.566*** 0.032 0.454*** 0.024 0.463*** 0.447*** 1975-1979 0.492*** 0.027 0.427*** 0.023 0.438*** 0.412*** 1980-1984 0.422*** 0.020 0.391*** 0.019 0.457*** 0.425*** Daughters 1934-1939 0.833*** 0.219 0.664*** 0.145 0.471*** 0.323*** 1940-1944 0.722*** 0.188 0.477** 0.143 0.328*** 0.311*** 1945-1949 0.560** 0.173 0.448*** 0.067 0.420*** 0.336*** 1950-1954 0.699*** 0.132 0.525*** 0.072 0.462*** 0.368*** 1955-1959 0.781*** 0.090 0.542*** 0.054 0.473*** 0.434*** 1960-1964 0.734*** 0.075 0.551*** 0.049 0.486*** 0.468*** 1965-1969 0.636*** 0.051 0.472*** 0.037 0.450*** 0.429*** 1970-1974 0.599*** 0.043 0.459*** 0.032 0.475*** 0.490*** 1975-1979 0.575*** 0.032 0.471*** 0.029 0.505*** 0.486*** 1980-1984 0.458*** 0.030 0.395*** 0.026 0.444*** 0.435*** Sons 1934-1939 0.825** 0.293 0.523* 0.212 0.327*** 0.310*** 1940-1944 0.583*** 0.175 0.532*** 0.133 0.335*** 0.268*** 1945-1949 0.345** 0.118 0.428*** 0.096 0.291*** 0.148** 1950-1954 0.439** 0.151 0.591*** 0.072 0.385*** 0.177** 1955-1959 0.509*** 0.084 0.520*** 0.059 0.416*** 0.281*** 1960-1964 0.501*** 0.083 0.493*** 0.056 0.426*** 0.306*** 1965-1969 0.456*** 0.057 0.375*** 0.040 0.364*** 0.320*** 1970-1974 0.505*** 0.040 0.436*** 0.030 0.482*** 0.423*** 1975-1979 0.368*** 0.041 0.354*** 0.034 0.374*** 0.333*** 1980-1984 0.384*** 0.027 0.375*** 0.026 0.471*** 0.426*** Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 50 Appendix C Ordered probit estimates Table C19: Comoros – Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child: No schooling 1934-1939 1.114*** 0.192 0.201* 0.207 1940-1944 -0.028* 0.127 0.939*** 0.139 1945-1949 0.629*** 0.115 0.105** 0.042 1950-1954 -0.111* 0.080 -0.161* 0.113 1955-1959 -0.307** 0.161 -0.584** 0.290 1960-1964 -0.393** 0.171 -0.748*** 0.154 1965-1969 -0.306*** 0.089 -0.494** 0.235 1970-1974 -0.260*** 0.094 -0.222* 0.223 1975-1979 -0.334*** 0.114 -2.526*** 0.057 1980-1984 -0.410*** 0.089 -0.668*** 0.163 Child: Primary 1934-1939 -0.520*** 0.150 -0.094* 0.098 1940-1944 0.017* 0.079 -0.580*** 0.117 1945-1949 -0.303*** 0.079 -0.053** 0.030 1950-1954 0.040* 0.030 0.058* 0.042 1955-1959 0.094** 0.051 0.178** 0.093 1960-1964 0.076** 0.035 0.145*** 0.038 1965-1969 0.053*** 0.018 0.085** 0.043 1970-1974 0.040** 0.017 0.034* 0.035 1975-1979 0.071*** 0.027 0.536*** 0.086 1980-1984 0.027** 0.011 0.044** 0.019 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 -0.594*** 0.152 -0.107* 0.113 1940-1944 0.011* 0.049 -0.359*** 0.099 1945-1949 -0.326*** 0.090 -0.051*** 0.017 1950-1954 0.071* 0.052 0.103* 0.073 1955-1959 0.213** 0.113 0.406** 0.202 1960-1964 0.317** 0.138 0.603*** 0.125 1965-1969 0.253*** 0.074 0.408** 0.194 1970-1974 0.219*** 0.079 0.187* 0.189 1975-1979 0.263*** 0.091 1.990*** 0.090 1980-1984 0.383*** 0.084 0.624*** 0.152 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 51 Table C20: Comoros–Ordered probit: marginal effects for fathers’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.251* 0.162 -0.300* 0.222 1940-1944 -0.285*** 0.083 -0.306*** 0.024 1945-1949 -0.156* 0.101 -0.097* 0.155 1950-1954 -0.180** 0.079 -0.272** 0.111 1955-1959 -0.355*** 0.105 -0.645*** 0.086 1960-1964 -0.614*** 0.099 -0.599*** 0.115 1965-1969 -0.315*** 0.088 -0.460*** 0.102 1970-1974 -0.362*** 0.073 -0.712*** 0.108 1975-1979 -0.327*** 0.104 -0.712*** 0.135 1980-1984 -0.337*** 0.098 -0.492*** 0.100 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.130* 0.089 0.155* 0.121 1940-1944 0.182*** 0.064 0.195*** 0.041 1945-1949 0.077* 0.055 0.048* 0.078 1950-1954 0.065** 0.032 0.099** 0.045 1955-1959 0.135*** 0.045 0.244*** 0.047 1960-1964 0.132*** 0.028 0.129*** 0.031 1965-1969 0.056*** 0.018 0.082*** 0.022 1970-1974 0.064*** 0.018 0.125*** 0.029 1975-1979 0.072*** 0.026 0.156*** 0.039 1980-1984 0.025** 0.011 0.036*** 0.014 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.121* 0.082 0.144* 0.111 1940-1944 0.103*** 0.039 0.111*** 0.028 1945-1949 0.079* 0.050 0.049* 0.079 1950-1954 0.114** 0.051 0.173** 0.072 1955-1959 0.221*** 0.066 0.401*** 0.063 1960-1964 0.482*** 0.081 0.470*** 0.093 1965-1969 0.259*** 0.073 0.379*** 0.084 1970-1974 0.298*** 0.061 0.587*** 0.093 1975-1979 0.256*** 0.082 0.556*** 0.108 1980-1984 0.312*** 0.091 0.456*** 0.093 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 52 Table C21: Ghana–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child: No schooling 1934-1939 -0.649*** 0.145 -0.943*** 0.150 1940-1944 -0.404*** 0.100 -0.528*** 0.099 1945-1949 -0.382*** 0.080 -0.502*** 0.081 1950-1954 -0.332*** 0.073 -0.516*** 0.054 1955-1959 -0.267*** 0.055 -0.553*** 0.053 1960-1964 -0.438*** 0.049 -0.536*** 0.040 1965-1969 -0.267*** 0.055 -0.553*** 0.053 1970-1974 -0.438*** 0.049 -0.536*** 0.040 1975-1979 -0.291*** 0.034 -0.454*** 0.030 1980-1984 -0.110*** 0.013 -0.191*** 0.013 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.063*** 0.024 0.092*** 0.030 1940-1944 0.004* 0.006 0.006* 0.008 1945-1949 -0.036*** 0.010 -0.047*** 0.012 1950-1954 -0.019*** 0.006 -0.030*** 0.008 1955-1959 -0.031*** 0.007 -0.064*** 0.011 1960-1964 -0.048*** 0.008 -0.059*** 0.009 1965-1969 -0.031*** 0.007 -0.064*** 0.011 1970-1974 -0.048*** 0.008 -0.059*** 0.009 1975-1979 -0.050*** 0.007 -0.078*** 0.010 1980-1984 -0.098*** 0.011 -0.170*** 0.012 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.586*** 0.131 0.851*** 0.139 1940-1944 0.399*** 0.099 0.522*** 0.098 1945-1949 0.418*** 0.087 0.549*** 0.088 1950-1954 0.351*** 0.078 0.547*** 0.057 1955-1959 0.297*** 0.061 0.617*** 0.060 1960-1964 0.486*** 0.054 0.595*** 0.045 1965-1969 0.297*** 0.061 0.617*** 0.060 1970-1974 0.486*** 0.054 0.595*** 0.045 1975-1979 0.341*** 0.039 0.532*** 0.036 1980-1984 0.207*** 0.023 0.361*** 0.020 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 53 Table C22: Ghana–Ordered probit: marginal effects for father’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.021* 0.200 -0.588*** 0.060 1940-1944 -0.485*** 0.094 -0.588*** 0.057 1945-1949 -0.322*** 0.078 -0.393*** 0.060 1950-1954 -0.449*** 0.074 -0.446*** 0.035 1955-1959 -0.208*** 0.061 -0.474*** 0.029 1960-1964 -0.328*** 0.064 -0.536*** 0.027 1965-1969 -0.321*** 0.047 -0.453*** 0.023 1970-1974 -0.229*** 0.037 -0.431*** 0.020 1975-1979 -0.190*** 0.027 -0.343*** 0.018 1980-1984 -0.095*** 0.013 -0.195*** 0.012 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.002* 0.023 0.069*** 0.020 1940-1944 0.003* 0.008 0.004* 0.010 1945-1949 -0.029*** 0.010 -0.036*** 0.012 1950-1954 -0.030*** 0.008 -0.030*** 0.007 1955-1959 -0.026*** 0.008 -0.060*** 0.009 1960-1964 -0.042*** 0.009 -0.069*** 0.009 1965-1969 -0.055*** 0.009 -0.077*** 0.008 1970-1974 -0.059*** 0.010 -0.111*** 0.011 1975-1979 -0.086*** 0.013 -0.155*** 0.010 1980-1984 -0.093*** 0.012 -0.189*** 0.011 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.019* 0.177 0.519*** 0.053 1940-1944 0.482*** 0.093 0.585*** 0.057 1945-1949 0.351*** 0.084 0.428*** 0.069 1950-1954 0.478*** 0.079 0.476*** 0.038 1955-1959 0.234*** 0.069 0.534*** 0.032 1960-1964 0.370*** 0.071 0.605*** 0.030 1965-1969 0.376*** 0.054 0.530*** 0.025 1970-1974 0.288*** 0.046 0.541*** 0.024 1975-1979 0.275*** 0.039 0.498*** 0.023 1980-1984 0.188*** 0.024 0.384*** 0.017 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 54 Table C23: Guinea–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child: No schooling 1934-1939 0.016* 0.067 0.484*** 0.100 1940-1944 0.635*** 0.094 -0.066* 0.072 1945-1949 -0.177** 0.093 0.037* 0.097 1950-1954 0.014* 0.116 -0.267*** 0.101 1955-1959 -0.324*** 0.118 -0.265*** 0.085 1960-1964 -0.196** 0.095 -0.504*** 0.093 1965-1969 -0.446*** 0.076 -0.339*** 0.052 1970-1974 -0.335*** 0.059 -0.442*** 0.053 1975-1979 -0.267*** 0.057 -0.490*** 0.034 1980-1984 -0.425*** 0.041 -0.503*** 0.036 Child: Primary 1934-1939 -0.010* 0.044 -0.317*** 0.090 1940-1944 -0.233*** 0.054 0.024* 0.028 1945-1949 0.057** 0.032 -0.012* 0.031 1950-1954 -0.003* 0.025 0.058** 0.023 1955-1959 0.062** 0.024 0.051*** 0.018 1960-1964 0.046** 0.023 0.119*** 0.026 1965-1969 0.123*** 0.024 0.093*** 0.017 1970-1974 0.110*** 0.021 0.145*** 0.020 1975-1979 0.076*** 0.018 0.141*** 0.015 1980-1984 0.067*** 0.009 0.080*** 0.010 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 -0.005* 0.023 -0.167*** 0.044 1940-1944 -0.402*** 0.085 0.042* 0.045 1945-1949 0.121** 0.064 -0.025* 0.066 1950-1954 -0.011* 0.091 0.209*** 0.079 1955-1959 0.262* 0.096 0.215*** 0.069 1960-1964 0.150*** 0.073 0.386*** 0.072 1965-1969 0.323** 0.056 0.246*** 0.038 1970-1974 0.225*** 0.040 0.297*** 0.038 1975-1979 0.190*** 0.041 0.350*** 0.026 1980-1984 0.357*** 0.036 0.423*** 0.031 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 55 Table C24: Guinea–Ordered probit: marginal effects for father’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.030* 0.055 -0.126** 0.062 1940-1944 -0.157** 0.071 -0.235*** 0.048 1945-1949 -0.097** 0.058 -0.214*** 0.063 1950-1954 -0.295*** 0.050 -0.468*** 0.062 1955-1959 -0.256*** 0.045 -0.392*** 0.036 1960-1964 -0.301*** 0.043 -0.357*** 0.033 1965-1969 -0.303*** 0.043 -0.428*** 0.032 1970-1974 -0.303*** 0.043 -0.428*** 0.032 1975-1979 -0.251*** 0.044 -0.473*** 0.028 1980-1984 -0.373*** 0.035 -0.479*** 0.029 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.020* 0.036 0.083** 0.043 1940-1944 0.067** 0.033 0.101*** 0.027 1945-1949 0.032* 0.020 0.070*** 0.026 1950-1954 0.063*** 0.014 0.100*** 0.019 1955-1959 0.068*** 0.014 0.104*** 0.015 1960-1964 0.091*** 0.015 0.108*** 0.014 1965-1969 0.101*** 0.017 0.143*** 0.015 1970-1974 0.101*** 0.017 0.143*** 0.015 1975-1979 0.071*** 0.014 0.134*** 0.013 1980-1984 0.058*** 0.008 0.074*** 0.008 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.010* 0.019 0.043** 0.023 1940-1944 0.090** 0.042 0.134*** 0.033 1945-1949 0.065** 0.039 0.143*** 0.043 1950-1954 0.232*** 0.040 0.368*** 0.050 1955-1959 0.188*** 0.033 0.288*** 0.028 1960-1964 0.210*** 0.030 0.248*** 0.024 1965-1969 0.202*** 0.030 0.285*** 0.024 1970-1974 0.202*** 0.030 0.285*** 0.024 1975-1979 0.180*** 0.032 0.339*** 0.021 1980-1984 0.315*** 0.030 0.405*** 0.026 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 56 Table C25: Madagascar–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child: No schooling 1934-1939 -0.216*** 0.052 -0.395*** 0.118 1940-1944 -0.159*** 0.044 -0.652*** 0.107 1945-1949 -0.291*** 0.044 -0.433*** 0.117 1950-1954 -0.194*** 0.032 -0.620*** 0.074 1955-1959 -0.228*** 0.030 -0.643*** 0.071 1960-1964 -0.227*** 0.027 -0.692*** 0.070 1965-1969 -0.257*** 0.027 -0.615*** 0.055 1970-1974 -0.199*** 0.023 -0.684*** 0.048 1975-1979 -0.194*** 0.022 -0.666*** 0.044 1980-1984 -0.237*** 0.022 -0.690*** 0.037 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.144*** 0.035 0.264*** 0.091 1940-1944 0.067*** 0.020 0.274*** 0.066 1945-1949 0.162*** 0.028 0.241*** 0.071 1950-1954 0.102*** 0.019 0.325*** 0.047 1955-1959 0.099*** 0.016 0.279*** 0.037 1960-1964 0.095*** 0.013 0.289*** 0.033 1965-1969 0.128*** 0.015 0.307*** 0.032 1970-1974 0.115*** 0.015 0.395*** 0.034 1975-1979 0.112*** 0.014 0.386*** 0.031 1980-1984 0.119*** 0.013 0.346*** 0.027 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.072** 0.033 0.131** 0.056 1940-1944 0.092*** 0.029 0.378*** 0.073 1945-1949 0.130*** 0.026 0.193*** 0.055 1950-1954 0.092*** 0.017 0.295*** 0.042 1955-1959 0.129*** 0.018 0.364*** 0.047 1960-1964 0.132*** 0.016 0.403*** 0.046 1965-1969 0.129*** 0.015 0.309*** 0.032 1970-1974 0.084*** 0.011 0.289*** 0.025 1975-1979 0.081*** 0.010 0.279*** 0.024 1980-1984 0.118*** 0.012 0.344*** 0.023 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 57 Table C26: Madagascar–Ordered probit: marginal effects for fathers’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child: No schooling 1934-1939 -0.154*** 0.058 -0.313*** 0.067 1940-1944 -0.176*** 0.041 -0.398*** 0.116 1945-1949 -0.223*** 0.044 -0.503*** 0.090 1950-1954 -0.201*** 0.033 -0.526*** 0.064 1955-1959 -0.187*** 0.031 -0.648*** 0.067 1960-1964 -0.215*** 0.028 -0.631*** 0.055 1965-1969 -0.225*** 0.029 -0.576*** 0.042 1970-1974 -0.209*** 0.025 -0.668*** 0.038 1975-1979 -0.157*** 0.024 -0.628*** 0.039 1980-1984 -0.183*** 0.024 -0.621*** 0.034 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.094*** 0.030 0.191*** 0.058 1940-1944 0.078*** 0.023 0.175*** 0.062 1945-1949 0.132*** 0.028 0.299*** 0.062 1950-1954 0.106*** 0.020 0.279*** 0.043 1955-1959 0.081*** 0.015 0.281*** 0.037 1960-1964 0.093*** 0.014 0.274*** 0.030 1965-1969 0.113*** 0.016 0.288*** 0.027 1970-1974 0.125*** 0.016 0.401*** 0.030 1975-1979 0.095*** 0.015 0.380*** 0.030 1980-1984 0.093*** 0.013 0.317*** 0.024 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.060** 0.036 0.122*** 0.044 1940-1944 0.098*** 0.025 0.222*** 0.069 1945-1949 0.091*** 0.022 0.205*** 0.044 1950-1954 0.094*** 0.017 0.247*** 0.035 1955-1959 0.106*** 0.019 0.366*** 0.043 1960-1964 0.122*** 0.016 0.357*** 0.036 1965-1969 0.112*** 0.016 0.287*** 0.026 1970-1974 0.083*** 0.011 0.267*** 0.021 1975-1979 0.062*** 0.010 0.249*** 0.021 1980-1984 0.089*** 0.013 0.303*** 0.021 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 58 Table C27: Malawi–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -2.826*** 0.083 -0.452*** 0.167 1940-1944 -0.128* 0.080 -0.097* 0.151 1945-1949 -0.170*** 0.019 -0.521*** 0.128 1950-1954 -0.037* 0.098 -0.320*** 0.112 1955-1959 -0.014* 0.257 -0.400*** 0.068 1960-1964 -0.079* 0.074 -0.368*** 0.064 1965-1969 -0.135* 0.096 -0.466*** 0.039 1970-1974 -0.183*** 0.043 -0.313*** 0.038 1975-1979 -0.117*** 0.019 -0.264*** 0.019 1980-1984 -0.126*** 0.011 -0.246*** 0.015 Child: Primary 1934-1939 1.689*** 0.192 0.270** 0.106 1940-1944 0.064* 0.041 0.048* 0.076 1945-1949 0.071*** 0.014 0.217*** 0.059 1950-1954 0.014* 0.037 0.120*** 0.044 1955-1959 0.004* 0.065 0.101*** 0.023 1960-1964 0.010* 0.010 0.047*** 0.017 1965-1969 0.005* 0.006 0.017* 0.017 1970-1974 -0.068*** 0.018 -0.116*** 0.025 1975-1979 -0.105*** 0.017 -0.236*** 0.024 1980-1984 -0.177*** 0.016 -0.345*** 0.024 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 1.137*** 0.145 0.182*** 0.069 1940-1944 0.064* 0.040 0.049* 0.076 1945-1949 0.099*** 0.006 0.304*** 0.076 1950-1954 0.023* 0.061 0.200*** 0.071 1955-1959 0.011* 0.192 0.298*** 0.052 1960-1964 0.069* 0.064 0.321*** 0.057 1965-1969 0.130* 0.093 0.449*** 0.039 1970-1974 0.251*** 0.059 0.429*** 0.059 1975-1979 0.222*** 0.035 0.500*** 0.038 1980-1984 0.303*** 0.025 0.591*** 0.032 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 59 Table C28: Malawi–Ordered probit: marginal effects for fathers’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -2.746*** 0.088 -0.518*** 0.104 1940-1944 -0.145*** 0.017 0.361*** 0.061 1945-1949 -0.156*** 0.020 -0.381*** 0.067 1950-1954 -0.121*** 0.020 -0.332*** 0.064 1955-1959 -0.255** 0.120 -0.465*** 0.034 1960-1964 -0.005* 0.053 -0.360*** 0.026 1965-1969 -0.115** 0.049 -0.275*** 0.019 1970-1974 -0.115** 0.049 -0.275*** 0.019 1975-1979 -0.077*** 0.022 -0.192*** 0.012 1980-1984 -0.085*** 0.011 -0.180*** 0.010 Child: Primary 1934-1939 1.703*** 0.195 0.322*** 0.077 1940-1944 -0.198*** 0.028 -0.185*** 0.036 1945-1949 -0.142*** 0.022 0.163*** 0.034 1950-1954 -0.163*** 0.018 0.127*** 0.028 1955-1959 0.033** 0.019 0.059*** 0.020 1960-1964 0.000* 0.002 0.015* 0.014 1965-1969 -0.046** 0.020 -0.110*** 0.017 1970-1974 -0.046** 0.020 -0.110*** 0.017 1975-1979 -0.070*** 0.020 -0.174*** 0.015 1980-1984 -0.114*** 0.015 -0.242*** 0.017 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 1.043*** 0.144 0.197*** 0.044 1940-1944 0.343*** 0.036 -0.176*** 0.031 1945-1949 0.298*** 0.035 0.218*** 0.040 1950-1954 0.284*** 0.031 0.205*** 0.040 1955-1959 0.223** 0.104 0.406*** 0.030 1960-1964 0.005* 0.051 0.345*** 0.025 1965-1969 0.161** 0.068 0.384*** 0.029 1970-1974 0.161** 0.068 0.384*** 0.029 1975-1979 0.147*** 0.041 0.366*** 0.022 1980-1984 0.198*** 0.025 0.422*** 0.021 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 60 Table C29: Nigeria–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child: No schooling 1934-1939 -0.704*** 0.176 0.340*** 0.060 1940-1944 -0.528*** 0.095 -2.926*** 0.051 1945-1949 -0.430*** 0.069 -2.850*** 0.058 1950-1954 -0.380*** 0.059 -0.737*** 0.151 1955-1959 -0.363*** 0.050 -0.856*** 0.157 1960-1964 -0.473*** 0.046 -0.690*** 0.113 1965-1969 -0.444*** 0.036 -0.591*** 0.111 1970-1974 -0.370*** 0.033 -0.637*** 0.058 1975-1979 -0.373*** 0.028 -0.543*** 0.040 1980-1984 -0.230*** 0.021 -0.349*** 0.026 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.250*** 0.074 -0.139*** 0.036 1940-1944 0.165*** 0.039 0.914*** 0.135 1945-1949 0.101*** 0.027 0.670*** 0.133 1950-1954 0.061*** 0.017 0.118*** 0.033 1955-1959 -0.017* 0.011 -0.040* 0.029 1960-1964 -0.003* 0.013 -0.005* 0.019 1965-1969 -0.059*** 0.015 -0.078*** 0.028 1970-1974 -0.091*** 0.013 -0.157*** 0.025 1975-1979 -0.121*** 0.013 -0.176*** 0.021 1980-1984 -0.110*** 0.011 -0.166*** 0.017 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.454*** 0.120 -0.201*** 0.035 1940-1944 0.363*** 0.068 2.011*** 0.116 1945-1949 0.329*** 0.052 2.180*** 0.094 1950-1954 0.319*** 0.049 0.619*** 0.130 1955-1959 0.379*** 0.052 0.896*** 0.170 1960-1964 0.476*** 0.046 0.695*** 0.116 1965-1969 0.503*** 0.041 0.669*** 0.132 1970-1974 0.462*** 0.040 0.793*** 0.074 1975-1979 0.494*** 0.035 0.719*** 0.055 1980-1984 0.339*** 0.028 0.515*** 0.036 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 61 Table C30: Nigeria–Ordered probit: marginal effects for father’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child: No schooling 1934-1939 -0.546*** 0.095 -0.674*** 0.158 1940-1944 -0.365*** 0.063 -0.690*** 0.115 1945-1949 -0.500*** 0.059 -0.458** 0.184 1950-1954 -0.483*** 0.048 -0.664*** 0.092 1955-1959 -0.374*** 0.044 -0.773*** 0.082 1960-1964 -0.419*** 0.040 -0.703*** 0.063 1965-1969 -0.349*** 0.033 -0.605*** 0.051 1970-1974 -0.323*** 0.030 -0.542*** 0.039 1975-1979 -0.353*** 0.028 -0.549*** 0.032 1980-1984 -0.251*** 0.020 -0.334*** 0.022 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.209*** 0.051 0.258*** 0.074 1940-1944 0.128*** 0.030 0.242*** 0.052 1945-1949 0.141*** 0.029 0.129** 0.056 1950-1954 0.087*** 0.021 0.119*** 0.030 1955-1959 -0.021** 0.012 -0.042* 0.026 1960-1964 -0.005* 0.012 -0.009* 0.021 1965-1969 -0.049*** 0.012 -0.086*** 0.022 1970-1974 -0.081*** 0.011 -0.135*** 0.020 1975-1979 -0.130*** 0.014 -0.203*** 0.025 1980-1984 -0.127*** 0.014 -0.170*** 0.016 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.337*** 0.063 0.415*** 0.102 1940-1944 0.237*** 0.042 0.448*** 0.081 1945-1949 0.358*** 0.045 0.328** 0.134 1950-1954 0.397*** 0.041 0.545*** 0.078 1955-1959 0.394*** 0.046 0.816*** 0.091 1960-1964 0.425*** 0.042 0.711*** 0.067 1965-1969 0.399*** 0.037 0.691*** 0.061 1970-1974 0.404*** 0.035 0.677*** 0.050 1975-1979 0.484*** 0.035 0.752*** 0.048 1980-1984 0.379*** 0.029 0.504*** 0.029 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 62 Table C31: Rwanda–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.292*** 0.070 -0.025* 0.021 1940-1944 -0.486*** 0.097 -0.394*** 0.058 1945-1949 -0.505*** 0.087 -0.290*** 0.049 1950-1954 -0.402*** 0.100 -0.242*** 0.041 1955-1959 -0.254*** 0.070 -2.836*** 0.084 1960-1964 -0.286*** 0.060 -0.371*** 0.090 1965-1969 -0.327*** 0.044 -2.857*** 0.064 1970-1974 -0.290*** 0.035 -0.851*** 0.188 1975-1979 -0.174*** 0.026 -0.640*** 0.083 1980-1984 -0.093*** 0.013 -0.333*** 0.038 Child: Primary 1934-1939 -0.025** 0.015 -0.002* 0.002 1940-1944 0.383*** 0.091 0.450*** 0.060 1945-1949 0.432*** 0.083 -0.035*** 0.011 1950-1954 0.301*** 0.081 -0.063*** 0.014 1955-1959 0.186*** 0.054 2.082*** 0.143 1960-1964 0.194*** 0.043 0.252*** 0.064 1965-1969 0.187*** 0.030 1.639*** 0.132 1970-1974 0.105*** 0.019 0.308*** 0.080 1975-1979 0.020** 0.012 0.072** 0.042 1980-1984 -0.030*** 0.008 -0.109*** 0.027 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.317*** 0.071 0.027* 0.023 1940-1944 0.102*** 0.030 -0.055*** 0.020 1945-1949 0.074*** 0.021 0.325*** 0.052 1950-1954 0.101*** 0.028 0.304*** 0.045 1955-1959 0.068*** 0.019 0.754*** 0.096 1960-1964 0.092*** 0.020 0.119*** 0.030 1965-1969 0.139*** 0.020 1.219*** 0.093 1970-1974 0.185*** 0.023 0.543*** 0.122 1975-1979 0.155*** 0.023 0.569*** 0.076 1980-1984 0.123*** 0.017 0.442*** 0.049 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 63 Table C32: Rwanda–Ordered probit: marginal effects for father’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 0.316* 0.223 -2.844*** 0.139 1940-1944 -0.390*** 0.061 -0.285* 0.412 1945-1949 -0.449*** 0.116 -0.704*** 0.166 1950-1954 -0.378*** 0.064 -0.637*** 0.135 1955-1959 -0.268*** 0.049 -0.671*** 0.127 1960-1964 -0.269*** 0.040 -0.728*** 0.139 1965-1969 -0.320*** 0.037 -0.620*** 0.120 1970-1974 -0.275*** 0.028 -0.566*** 0.126 1975-1979 -0.166*** 0.023 -0.559*** 0.063 1980-1984 -0.104*** 0.012 -0.352*** 0.028 Child: Primary 1934-1939 -0.280* 0.199 2.523*** 0.262 1940-1944 0.319*** 0.067 0.233* 0.338 1945-1949 0.392*** 0.105 0.614*** 0.152 1950-1954 0.293*** 0.059 0.493*** 0.115 1955-1959 0.204*** 0.042 0.510*** 0.105 1960-1964 0.188*** 0.032 0.509*** 0.104 1965-1969 0.194*** 0.028 0.376*** 0.079 1970-1974 0.106*** 0.018 0.219*** 0.055 1975-1979 0.011* 0.012 0.037* 0.039 1980-1984 -0.041*** 0.009 -0.139*** 0.030 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 -0.036* 0.032 0.321** 0.162 1940-1944 0.071*** 0.020 0.052* 0.077 1945-1949 0.057*** 0.020 0.090*** 0.031 1950-1954 0.085*** 0.018 0.143*** 0.038 1955-1959 0.064*** 0.013 0.161*** 0.036 1960-1964 0.081*** 0.013 0.219*** 0.045 1965-1969 0.126*** 0.016 0.244*** 0.050 1970-1974 0.169*** 0.017 0.347*** 0.081 1975-1979 0.155*** 0.021 0.522*** 0.061 1980-1984 0.145*** 0.017 0.491*** 0.040 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 64 Table C33: Tanzania–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mother’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.429** 0.195 -0.356** 0.171 1940-1944 -0.475** 0.198 -0.476*** 0.183 1945-1949 -0.332*** 0.076 -0.741*** 0.269 1950-1954 -0.387*** 0.066 -0.803*** 0.245 1955-1959 -0.280*** 0.044 -0.345** 0.173 1960-1964 -0.143*** 0.032 -0.403*** 0.085 1965-1969 -0.141*** 0.025 -0.345*** 0.094 1970-1974 -0.147*** 0.023 -0.554*** 0.062 1975-1979 -0.141*** 0.022 -0.447*** 0.050 1980-1984 -0.157*** 0.019 -0.428*** 0.044 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.365** 0.171 0.320** 0.156 1940-1944 0.421** 0.182 0.444** 0.175 1945-1949 0.217*** 0.057 0.485*** 0.185 1950-1954 0.251*** 0.054 0.521*** 0.170 1955-1959 0.137*** 0.031 0.169** 0.090 1960-1964 0.056*** 0.020 0.158*** 0.055 1965-1969 0.051*** 0.016 0.126*** 0.047 1970-1974 0.031** 0.015 0.116** 0.054 1975-1979 0.015* 0.013 0.048* 0.039 1980-1984 -0.061*** 0.015 -0.168*** 0.042 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.064** 0.034 0.036** 0.022 1940-1944 0.054** 0.025 0.032** 0.016 1945-1949 0.115*** 0.028 0.256*** 0.097 1950-1954 0.136*** 0.027 0.282*** 0.094 1955-1959 0.143*** 0.026 0.176** 0.088 1960-1964 0.087*** 0.021 0.245*** 0.054 1965-1969 0.090*** 0.016 0.220*** 0.061 1970-1974 0.116*** 0.018 0.438*** 0.050 1975-1979 0.126*** 0.019 0.398*** 0.044 1980-1984 0.218*** 0.023 0.596*** 0.055 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 65 Table C34: Tanzania–Ordered probit: marginal effects for father’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.282*** 0.099 -0.502*** 0.062 1940-1944 -0.247** 0.113 -0.413*** 0.044 1945-1949 -0.328*** 0.065 -0.381*** 0.053 1950-1954 -0.289*** 0.054 -0.899*** 0.156 1955-1959 -0.239*** 0.036 -0.709*** 0.124 1960-1964 -0.130*** 0.027 -0.237*** 0.079 1965-1969 -0.128*** 0.022 -0.348*** 0.062 1970-1974 -0.134*** 0.023 -0.428*** 0.043 1975-1979 -0.147*** 0.024 -0.362*** 0.039 1980-1984 -0.161*** 0.021 -0.370*** 0.035 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.243*** 0.091 0.432*** 0.077 1940-1944 0.216** 0.101 0.361*** 0.054 1945-1949 0.225*** 0.050 0.262*** 0.050 1950-1954 0.192*** 0.041 0.597*** 0.125 1955-1959 0.117*** 0.027 0.347*** 0.087 1960-1964 0.052*** 0.015 0.095** 0.039 1965-1969 0.045*** 0.015 0.121*** 0.042 1970-1974 0.026** 0.014 0.083** 0.045 1975-1979 0.011* 0.015 0.027* 0.036 1980-1984 -0.069*** 0.018 -0.159*** 0.038 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.039** 0.018 0.070*** 0.023 1940-1944 0.031** 0.016 0.052*** 0.013 1945-1949 0.103*** 0.024 0.119*** 0.018 1950-1954 0.097*** 0.022 0.303*** 0.063 1955-1959 0.122*** 0.021 0.361*** 0.069 1960-1964 0.078*** 0.019 0.142*** 0.050 1965-1969 0.083*** 0.015 0.227*** 0.042 1970-1974 0.108*** 0.019 0.344*** 0.035 1975-1979 0.136*** 0.021 0.334*** 0.033 1980-1984 0.231*** 0.027 0.528*** 0.043 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 66 Table C35: Uganda–Ordered probit: marginal effects for mothers’s education Mother: Primary Mother: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.509*** 0.099 -2.768*** 0.088 1940-1944 -0.334*** 0.088 -0.418** 0.246 1945-1949 -0.197*** 0.047 -0.319** 0.189 1950-1954 -0.193*** 0.046 -0.546** 0.222 1955-1959 -0.252*** 0.032 -0.384*** 0.147 1960-1964 -0.187*** 0.026 -0.699*** 0.105 1965-1969 -0.190*** 0.019 -0.502*** 0.075 1970-1974 -0.166*** 0.016 -0.431*** 0.048 1975-1979 -0.124*** 0.013 -0.290*** 0.028 1980-1984 -0.054*** 0.007 -0.136*** 0.013 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.256*** 0.068 1.393*** 0.233 1940-1944 0.074** 0.030 0.093* 0.064 1945-1949 0.027* 0.018 0.043* 0.037 1950-1954 0.020* 0.015 0.058* 0.047 1955-1959 0.021* 0.016 0.032* 0.027 1960-1964 0.032** 0.013 0.118** 0.048 1965-1969 -0.027** 0.012 -0.071** 0.033 1970-1974 -0.062*** 0.012 -0.162*** 0.036 1975-1979 -0.111*** 0.014 -0.260*** 0.033 1980-1984 -0.179*** 0.018 -0.449*** 0.039 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.253*** 0.057 1.376*** 0.183 1940-1944 0.259*** 0.072 0.325** 0.191 1945-1949 0.170*** 0.037 0.276** 0.163 1950-1954 0.173*** 0.042 0.488** 0.199 1955-1959 0.231*** 0.028 0.352*** 0.135 1960-1964 0.155*** 0.022 0.581*** 0.091 1965-1969 0.217*** 0.022 0.573*** 0.085 1970-1974 0.228*** 0.019 0.593*** 0.066 1975-1979 0.235*** 0.022 0.550*** 0.052 1980-1984 0.233*** 0.023 0.585*** 0.046 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 67 Table C36: Uganda–Ordered probit: marginal effects for father’s education Father: Primary Father: Secondary and above Coef. Std. Err. Coef. Std. Err. Child : No schooling 1934-1939 -0.386*** 0.073 -0.796*** 0.288 1940-1944 -0.315*** 0.053 -0.323* 0.253 1945-1949 -0.216*** 0.044 -0.521*** 0.116 1950-1954 -0.229*** 0.037 -0.610*** 0.108 1955-1959 -0.229*** 0.029 -0.617*** 0.078 1960-1964 -0.179*** 0.023 -0.599*** 0.056 1965-1969 -0.157*** 0.018 -0.397*** 0.038 1970-1974 -0.120*** 0.015 -0.380*** 0.028 1975-1979 -0.096*** 0.014 -0.266*** 0.021 1980-1984 -0.038*** 0.007 -0.121*** 0.011 Child: Primary 1934-1939 0.232*** 0.057 0.479*** 0.185 1940-1944 0.098*** 0.031 0.101* 0.083 1945-1949 0.027* 0.020 0.065* 0.047 1950-1954 0.029* 0.020 0.077* 0.051 1955-1959 0.022* 0.016 0.058* 0.042 1960-1964 0.028** 0.013 0.094** 0.041 1965-1969 -0.022** 0.011 -0.056** 0.027 1970-1974 -0.054*** 0.011 -0.171*** 0.031 1975-1979 -0.089*** 0.014 -0.245*** 0.027 1980-1984 -0.147*** 0.025 -0.460*** 0.035 Child: Secondary and above 1934-1939 0.154*** 0.031 0.317*** 0.121 1940-1944 0.216*** 0.035 0.222* 0.174 1945-1949 0.190*** 0.036 0.456*** 0.101 1950-1954 0.200*** 0.031 0.533*** 0.096 1955-1959 0.208*** 0.023 0.559*** 0.074 1960-1964 0.151*** 0.019 0.504*** 0.050 1965-1969 0.180*** 0.020 0.453*** 0.044 1970-1974 0.173*** 0.021 0.552*** 0.038 1975-1979 0.185*** 0.026 0.511*** 0.036 1980-1984 0.185*** 0.031 0.581*** 0.039 The reference group is parents with is no education. Significance levels: ∗ : 10% ∗∗ : 5% ∗ ∗ ∗ : 1% 68