tion.<sup>62</sup> Both the RDD and the matching approach confirm the effects on expenditures on women’s assignable goods and remittances, despite the low statistical power of the RDD approach.<sup>63</sup> The matching procedure also confirms the effects on the decision-making index in wave 1 and girls’ expenditures, though the RDD coefficients are small and insignificant for these two variables.

I further implement a placebo test by comparing outcomes of the women in the top half of the selected group (who I define to receive the _placebo_ treatment) to outcomes of women in the bottom half of the selected group.<sup>64</sup> This means that I am now only comparing women who were participants of the promotion program. The placebo coefficients are all small and insignificant. These null results support the claims of the empirical strategy that (1) the ranking of eligible women in the shortlist is orthogonal to the outcomes of interest, and that (2) the cutoff which separates the selected from the non-selected is the relevant margin of interest.

As explained in Section 3.2, there was some differential attrition between the selected and the nominated group in the second wave of the household survey, for which I present two checks. The balance checks in Table 1 presented earlier only include the respondents whose responses are included in the analysis, and therefore show that the selected and the nominated group remain comparable even after taking attrition into account. Furthermore, bounds following Lee (2009) in Table C.21 confirm the main effects.<sup>65</sup> For the pooled estimates and the estimates only using data from wave 1, the bounds do not include zero for the outcomes I investigate. Also in wave 2, the bounds confirm positive effects on being a supervisor, female expenditures and remittances, though the higher attrition means that the bounds for the decision-making index include zero.

The Online Appendix shows several additional robustness checks.<sup>66</sup> Different data sources confirm the main results. Husbands of selected women also report higher promotions for their wives and higher expenditures on women’s expenditures and remittances (though no impacts on the women’s decision-making and girls’ expenditures).<sup>67</sup> Furthermore, the high-frequency phone 62Tables C.18 and C.19 in the Online Appendix present the estimates for all main outcomes for both approaches. 63See, for example, Deke and Dragoset (2012) and Schochet (2008) for a discussion of the lower power of regression discontinuity designs.

> 64I create the placebo treatment as follows. I only keep the women who were selected for the promotion program. For each factory ranking, I then assign the selected women who are in the top half of the ranking to the placebo treatment, and the bottom half of the selected women to the placebo control. For example, imagine a factory had 15 women in the shortlist after excluding ineligible women, and ten of these women were selected for the promotion training, while the other five are the non-selected nominees. I drop the non-selected nominees for this placebo test and assign the five selected women with the top rank in the shortlist to the placebo treatment and the remaining five selected women in the shortlist to the placebo control. See Table C.20 in the Appendix for results.

65The OLS estimates in Table C.21 in the Online Appendix are from an OLS regression with no controls where the sample is restricted to respondents who are married at baseline and do not live alone, except for the outcome capturing expenditures on girls for which the sample in addition only includes those who have had children at baseline. The bounds are calculated for these OLS estimates and tightened based on whether respondents were married at baseline.

66See Tables C.22 to C.26 in the Online Appendix.

> 67Note that I estimate Equation 1 with the husbands’ data but use the wives’ set of potential control variables for the PDS Lasso algorithm as in Section 4. Also note that some husbands were unexpectedly unavailable at the time of

24