Those results tie into changes observed in India by two other studies of the same program<sup>1</sup> studied by Aggarwal (2018). Shamdasani (2016) finds an increase in the number of households that sell their crop output and an increase in the cultivation of non-cereal crops, and interprets these as a sign of a transition from subsistence to commercial farming. Asher & Novosad (2017) find an increase in off-farm employment outside the village, suggesting that the same program also improved access to labor markets. Indeed, this effect on labor markets is consistent with evidence from a road rehabilitation program in Nicaragua studied by Garz and Perova (2014).

Notably, Garz and Perova also find signs of improved health outcomes and access to health facilities, in addition to an increase in enrollment at the primary school level. The finding that roads improve enrollment in educational institutions is consistent with some studies (Khandker, Bhakt, and Koolwal, 2009; Khandker and Koolwal, 2011; and Mu and Van de Walle, 2012) as well as two other studies from India (Mukherjee, 2012; Adukia et al., 2019).

Finally, there are indications in this literature that the impact of roads may vary by gender though this is less well established. For instance, Garz and Perova (2014) and Khandker and Koolwal (2011) find that enrollment impacts are stronger on girls in primary education, while Adukia et al. (2019) and Mukherjee (2012) detect no significant differences between the genders. Similarly, in the case of employment, Garz and Perova (2014) detect stronger impacts on likelihood of employment for men, while Asher and Novosad (2016) find no significant differences between the genders.

There is some ambiguity ex ante about which gender is likely to benefit more. Women’s access to markets, services, and information tends to be weaker than men’s (World Bank, 2012). Consequently, men may benefit more since roads address only one of the several overlapping constraints that women face (we will refer to this scenario as a complementary constraints hypothesis). On the other hand, because women face a greater time constraint in accessing economic opportunities,<sup>2</sup> the marginal value of their time may be higher and they could benefit more than men for an equivalent decrease in travel times (we will refer to this scenario as a tightness of constraint hypothesis).

If the tightness of constraint hypothesis is correct, road improvements may constitute an effective policy tool in achieving the EAP WDR 2012 recommendations of “increasing women’s access to markets, factor inputs, locally available economic opportunities and services such as electricity, schools, hospitals and postal services.” Conversely, if the complementary constraints hypothesis is true, improving road connectivity alone may not be sufficient to achieve these development outcomes and other interventions may be needed to ensure that the benefits of infrastructure improvements flow to both genders equally.

Knowing which of these hypotheses is true has the potential to inform policy and development programming at a large scale. Estimates of global investment in transport, which are not easy to compile,

> 1 The Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana or PMGSY.

> 2 This is because women are typically responsible for a greater share of the household and child care burden than men. See World Development Report 2012 for a discussion of this literature.

4