 So, Raquel made my presentation much easier this morning because most of the motivation was there, and mainly is that recently we had a lot of economic research showing the importance of culture and family traditions on a lot of economic outcomes, in particular how traditional family structures have persistent decisions, persistent effects on household decisions, particularly on women's outcomes. Especially this cultural traits like patrilineality or patrilocality, bright prize and worry. Also recently we also have a lot of information and a lot of evidence on inter-household distribution of resources and how inequality within the household can shape different individual poverty and how this individual household poverty mismatches tend to decrease the resource shares that women acquire within the household in comparison with men. This can, what we're trying to show and we're trying to explore is whether this cultural variations between households can explain these differences in inter-household distribution of resources. So this paper, the paper that I'm going to present, first has this first objective of quantifying individual poverty in several countries and then to assess how these cultural traits could affect this distribution of resources. I'm going to focus today because of time on the second part of this paper. So what we use is we use this recent implementations of collective models that allow us to identify the resource shares within the households and by this I mean how the pie is distributed within the household between men, women and children. And then we will focus on patrilocality and matrilocality. Here Raquel also helped me a lot in explaining what this is and this is where this new husband and wife go to live after they get married in patrilocality. They go to the household or to the town whether the groom lives whether in matrilocality they go to the bride's parents. We have also, and it will be more important in the case of Latin America, we have also neo-local or ambilocal traditions of residency after marriage where the new couple can either decide whether to go in ambilocal or neo-local whether the new couple builds a new household. And we are going to focus in this case isn't the ancestral rather in the actual practice of patrilocality or matrilocality. This is first because actual arrangements we are focused on bargaining power or bargaining decisions within the household. And this current practice can be affected by other decisions, other decisions that can, other factors that can also affect bargaining power within the couple. But if we go to ancestral practices, the practices that the ethnic group had before industrialization, this will not affect current practice of patrilocality and bargaining processes. Also because as Raquel also explained very well today local policies and local practices can affect cultural practice in particular patrilocality and matrilocality. And last because what we are interested in particularly is on how the cultural trade portrays current norms. So how this transfers what happened a lot a long time ago can transfer to current practices nowadays. So the mechanisms and practices of how patrilocality and matrilocality can affect current results have been explained a lot today. So I am able to jump this part but the effects even of the current practice and the ancestral practices on mainly gender, female outcomes has been proven by a lot of previous work. Our empirical strategy resides mainly on Dunbar-Lewa-Lampendeker extension of collective models that allows us to estimate, to infer the sharing process within the household based on the existence of assignable woods. What we are going to try to identify is this ETA that is the resource share that goes to each of the household individuals, men, women and children, that we are going to say that it depends on demographic factors as the number of people within the household, the age of women, men and children and the urban category of the household. And also for and interestingly that our contribution resides here and that identifies whether the household belongs to an ethnic group that used to practice patrilocality before industrialization. Or what we do is to focus on private assignable woods that are only consumed by one type of individual within the household. In this case and as in most literature we focus on clothing, male, female and children clothing that are only consumed by male, female or children within the household. By doing this the observed household budget of this type of good will depend on how much the type of individual receives this ETA, the share of the individual of the total consumption times their angle curve for the consumption that will depend on their taste, the beta and on the total expenditure they obtain. This derivative is observable in expenditure service and by this and adding some additional restrictions on preferences on this beta we can perfectly identify the shares of consumption of each type of member within the household. Just a clarification, we just have the total expenditure that goes to all the children in the household, all the women in the household and all the men. We're not able to identify specifics within women, men or children. So the main application on the paper that I'm presenting now is based on Ghana and Malawi that are very interesting countries in these terms because they have both country and matrilocality norms in the same country and they don't have any other, they don't have ambi or neo-local traditional norms. This allows us to study the differences within country, they have internal originality but also we have the possibility to compare two different contexts in terms of getting some external identity and these two contexts that are very different because in the case of Ghana we have mainly a matrilocal context and in the case of Malawi we have mainly a matrilocal context. Also I'm going to present very preliminary results from Latin America. For three Latin American countries, Bolivia, Brazil and Mexico that we are working on in terms of getting a follow-up paper of the first. So for getting these ancestral norms what we have to do is some data work in order to match the expenditure service on which we work with the ancestral norms of matrilocality and neo-locality for each household. The first strategy we use is the very traditional one, the most traditional one in the literature that's individually matching each of the ethnic groups that the household declares to the ancestral, the more demographic atlas that recovers the practice of over 1,000 ethnic groups around the world before they had contact with Europeans. Well at the moment they had the contact with Europeans. So in this case we have information that goes beyond like 500 from 500 to 500 years before nowadays. Then what we also do for sensitivity analysis in the case of Malawi and Ghana but that's the only case that we can do for Latin American countries is to a geographical matching based on the place where the household resides and the traditional norm that was prevalent on that area before industrialization. So this is the matrilocal distribution for households in Ghana Malawi in these two strategies there you see that they are very similar. So turning to results, first this are the average resource shares for men, children and women for Ghana and Malawi for two types of households. The first one for columns one and three are households with men, women and children and the other are households with men and women and what we see is that the resource shares going to each men, women and children follow the previous results that we had for this region and for this countries and the pattern of gender inequality prevails as the resource shares going to women are lower than the ones going to men in both cases and in both types of households. But this, these are the most interesting results now we see that in both types of households and in both countries the effect of patrilocality is negative on resource shares for women. So households from patrilocal ancestral culture allocate to women less resource shares than matrilocal households. And this if we compare to the average resource shares of women in this countries and this households it represents about 10% less resource shares for women in patrilocal contexts. Turning now to our very, very preliminary results from Latin America, I can't stress that more. We find that we still have negative effects for patrilocality in the three countries in both types of households. The point estimates are negative in all cases, however they are only, they are only significant in the case of Brazil. And what we have is three possible hypotheses for now of what could be happening in this cases. First is that we can only use geographical matching instead of individual matching. So what we are seeing there is the effect of the household residing in an area that was mainly patrilocal instead of mainly, and this is our other hypothesis, mainly neolocal. Because in Latin American contexts, matrilocality is very less, it's almost nonprevalent as you can see here in this graph. So the distribution of, and this is our second hypothesis, is that the distribution of locality traits in the population is very different from what we had seen in the African context. So this households, this countries, what we are comparing in Latin America, Bolivia, Brazil, and Mexico is patrilocality against neolocality. And in this case, the effect is expected to be less strong. And last, and this is where we are farther from our area of expertise, is that the colonization process of both regions was very different, especially in terms of the amount of population from European countries that went to the colonized regions. So the mixture of population and mixed ethnics was much higher in Latin America than what happened in Africa. So this transmission of cultural ancestry can be less pronounced than what we are seeing generally in Africa. So this is just the main take of the paper, maybe it's that the persistence effect of this ancestral cultural patterns is clear, especially in the case of Africa. We have some trace of effects in the case of Latin America that we should exploit a little bit more to understand the differences within, between regions. And thank you very much.