Skip to Main Content

Next, panel A of Table 4 presents conditional transition probabilities across subgroups. I focus on the transition from below primary to junior secondary schooling and above. The brackets present 95% confidence intervals from bootstrapping. Column 1 shows that for parents who have not completed primary education, 42% of their children completed at least junior secondary school (this corresponds to the last three rows in column 1 in Table 3). Notably, this transition probability is higher (78%) if we condition on cohort pairs that coreside in slums. The coresiding sample excludes working children, who have their own households and tend to exhibit lower mobility, as well as grandparents, who also tend to be associated with lower mobility. Indeed, columns 2 and 3 show strong improvements in upward mobility from the earlier cohorts (grandparents–parents) to the later cohorts (parents–children). If the grandparents have less than primary education, then only 24% of the parents have junior secondary education and beyond. However, if the parents have below primary schooling, then 69% of their children have junior secondary schooling.

Table 4. 
Intergenerational Educational Mobility in Slums
Dependent Variable Sample: Ln(child's education) 
 All (1) Grandparents (2) Parents (3) Migrants (4) Jakarta Natives (5) Male (6) Female (7) 
Panel A: Conditional Transition Probability 
Ln(parent's education) 0.42 0.24 0.69 0.38 0.47 0.31 0.54 
 [0.28,0.56] [0.08,0.40] [0.46,0.93] [0.18,0.58] [0.26,0.68] [0.13,0.49] [0.22,0.85] 
Panel B: Intergenerational Elasticity 
Ln(parent's education) 0.27*** 0.40*** 0.17** 0.37*** 0.15 0.37*** 0.08 
 (0.06) (0.10) (0.06) (0.08) (0.09) (0.08) (0.09) 
No. of observations 333 170 163 175 158 229 104 
R-squared 0.08 0.13 0.06 0.13 0.03 0.14 0.01 
Mean 9.6 8.3 10.8 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.6 
Panel C: Intergenerational Correlation 
Ln(parent's education) 0.28 0.36 0.24 0.36 0.16 0.41  
 [0.00] [0.00] [0.002] [0.00] [0.04] [0.00] 
Dependent Variable Sample: Ln(child's education) 
 All (1) Grandparents (2) Parents (3) Migrants (4) Jakarta Natives (5) Male (6) Female (7) 
Panel A: Conditional Transition Probability 
Ln(parent's education) 0.42 0.24 0.69 0.38 0.47 0.31 0.54 
 [0.28,0.56] [0.08,0.40] [0.46,0.93] [0.18,0.58] [0.26,0.68] [0.13,0.49] [0.22,0.85] 
Panel B: Intergenerational Elasticity 
Ln(parent's education) 0.27*** 0.40*** 0.17** 0.37*** 0.15 0.37*** 0.08 
 (0.06) (0.10) (0.06) (0.08) (0.09) (0.08) (0.09) 
No. of observations 333 170 163 175 158 229 104 
R-squared 0.08 0.13 0.06 0.13 0.03 0.14 0.01 
Mean 9.6 8.3 10.8 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.6 
Panel C: Intergenerational Correlation 
Ln(parent's education) 0.28 0.36 0.24 0.36 0.16 0.41  
 [0.00] [0.00] [0.002] [0.00] [0.04] [0.00] 

Notes: The unit of analysis is a pair of generations (grandparents–parents and parents–children). The dependent variable is the logarithm of years of schooling for children and the regressor is the logarithm of years of schooling for parents. Column 1 includes 333 pairs with nonmissing information on educational attainment. Column 2 includes grandparents–parents pairs only and column 3 includes parents–children pairs only. Column 4 includes migrants and column 5 includes Jakarta natives. Columns 6 and 7 split the sample by gender. Panel A reports conditional transition probabilities (less than primary to junior secondary education and beyond), with 95% confidence intervals in brackets, obtained from bootstrapping. Panel B reports intergenerational elasticities with standard errors clustered by household. Panel C reports intergenerational correlations with p-values in brackets. *p < 0.1, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

Source: Author's calculations.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal