Recent studies provide evidence that a significant portion of the cross-country variation in female labor force participation and fertility can be explained by cultural norms. 1 In a recent paper, we examine the historical origins of these cultural differences (see Alesina, Giuliano, and Nunn 2010) . We test the long-standing hypothesis, first developed by Ester Boserup (1970) , that different attitudes about gender roles evolved because of differences in the form of agriculture traditionally

more »

... acticed. In societies with shifting cultivation, agriculture is labor intensive, cultivation uses a hoe or a digging stick, and women actively participate. In contrast, with intensive cultivation, which uses the plough, agricultural work requires significant strength. In these societies men tend to specialize in agriculture and women tend to specialize in home production and other work within the domestic sphere. Boserup argues that the differences in the two types of agriculture resulted in different norms about the natural role of women in society. In societies featuring plough agriculture, gender attitudes typically exhibit less equality regarding the role of men and women in society, and the view that the appropriate role for women is in the domestic sphere is much more common. In Alesina, Giuliano, and Nunn (2010) , we test Boserup's hypothesis by constructing a measure of historic plough use among the ancestors 1 See for example Raquel Fernandez and Alessandra Fogli (2006 Fogli ( , 2009 , who examine second generation US immigrants and show that women's fertility and labor market participation are strongly correlated with the past fertility rates in the immigrants' home countries. See also Nicole Fortin (2005) and Fernandez (2007). ). We are grateful to the discussant Edward Miguel, as well as Raquel Fernandez, Oded Galor, and Judith Hellerstein for valuable comments. We also thank Eva Ng for research assistance. of populations today. We show that a history of plough agriculture, today, is associated with attitudes of gender inequality, and with less female participation in the labor force, entrepreneurial activities, and politics. 2 In the present paper, we continue this line of enquiry by analyzing the effect of historic plough use on beliefs about fertility. At first, one may expect that societies with historic plough use-and unequal gender roles-will have higher levels of fertility. If women are less likely to participate in market activities outside of the home, this lowers the cost of having children and increases fertility. The current study tests this hypothesis, and finds a surprising result: societies that historically engaged in plough agriculture today have lower fertility, not higher fertility. We show that this relationship is robust and is not caused by statistical outliers or omitted variables bias. We argue, and provide ethnographic evidence, that the finding is explained by the fact that with plough agriculture, children, like women, are relatively less useful in the field. The plough requires strength and eliminates the need for weeding, a task particularly suitable for women and children. This in turn generates a preference for fewer children, lowering fertility. I. Data and Estimation Results Our empirical analysis begins by examining the cross-country relationship between traditional plough use and fertility today. The measure of historic plough use, which we take from Alesina, Giuliano, and Nunn (2010) , is constructed using information, from the Ethnographic Atlas, on the traditional use of the plough among 1,267 ethnic groups worldwide 2 The analysis examines variation across countries, districts within countries, and ethnic groups. We show that the results are robust to various estimation strategies and to a large set of historic and contemporary covariates. See Alesina, Giuliano, and Nunn (2010) for full details.