PROPERTY STATUS AND INTER SPOUSAL DYNAMICS IN DECISION-MAKING IN KARNATAKA

Hema Swaminathan, Suchitra J. Y., Rahul LahotiCentre for Public Policy

Indian Institute of Management BangaloreASSA meetings, Chicago, IL

January 6-8, 2012

URPE/IAFFE Panel on Asset Ownership, the Intra-Household Distribution of Wealth and Household Decision-Making in Ecuador, Ghana and India

Why assets?

AssetsAssets

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Gender and assets• Unitary model does not fully capture intra-household

resource allocations

• Inequalities are masked, especially those across gender

• Most databases world over collect asset information using ‘household’ as unit– NSSO All India Debt and Investment Survey collects asset

data at the household level

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Research questions• Exploring spousal (dis) agreement in household

decision-making

• Understanding the role of property ownership on women’s say in the household and on decision-making processes

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Individuals not households

Individuals not households

Move away from headship

concept

Move away from headship

conceptPrimaryPrimary

Two interviews within a

household

Two interviews within a

household

Primary and secondary

Primary and secondary

KHAS: A different approach

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Assets• Principal residence• Agricultural land• Other real estate• Livestock• Agricultural tools and equipment• Non-farm businesses• Consumer durables• Financial assets

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Study districts

QualitativeQuantitativeQualitative & Quantitative

Sample description

• Households with principal couple respondents

• 2,511 households – 71% rural, 29% urban

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Modes of acquisition Modes of Acquisition Dwelling Agricultural Land

Husband Wife Husband Wife

Natal Inheritance 56 4 84 13

Marital Inheritance 2 36 1 48

Purchased/Loan 31 37 8 24

Government Program 8 18 3 5

Other 3 5 4 10

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Decision-making

• Two decisions of both spouses:– Employment– Use of earnings

• Four responses possible for each decision:– Alone– In consultation– With permission– Cannot decide

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Decision-making (contd.)• Four outcome variables defined:

– Autonomous: wife decides alone about her employment and earnings

– Agreement in consulting (wife): both spouses agree that wife’s employment and earnings decisions are made consultatively with each other

– Agreement in consulting (husband): both spouses agree that husband’s employment and earnings decisions are made consultatively with each other

– Egalitarian: both spouses agree that their decisions are made consultatively with each other

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Property status variable

• Property defined as – Principal residence– Agricultural land

• Variable– Only wife owns– Only husband owns– Both own– Neither owns

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Empirical model

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

RESULTS

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Incidence of ownership (%)

Property status Rural UrbanWife Husband Wife Husband

Residence owner 9 81 7 49

Agricultural land owner 5 63 1 16

Own either residence and agricultural land

11 86 8 55

Total number of respondents

1,778 733

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Property status & autonomy (%)

Decision-making process

Employment decision Earnings decision

Wife owns house or land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Wife owns house or land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Autonomous 23 14 23 12Consultative, with permission or not involved

77 86 77 88

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Property status & agreement in consultation (wife), %

Decision-making processEmployment decision Earnings decision

Wife owns house or land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Wife owns house or land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Agreement on consultative process

56 65 53 71

Agreement that spouse not involved in decision

4 2 8 3

Other agreement 8 5 4 6Overall agreement 68 72 65 80Overall disagreement 32 28 35 20

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Property status & agreement in consultation (husband), %

Decision-making processEmployment decision Earnings decision

Wife owns house or

land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Wife owns house or

land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Agreement on consultative process

29 32 39 45

Agreement that spouse not involved in decision

11 14 6 8

Other agreement 0 0 5 2Overall agreement 40 46 50 55Overall disagreement 60 54 60 45

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Property status & egalitarianism (%)

Decision-making processEmployment decision Earnings decision

Wife owns house or

land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Wife owns house or

land

Wife owns neither

house nor land

Egalitarian 22 29 30 46Husband dominates 4 5 2 2Wife dominates 0 0 1 1Other agreement 4 3 5 4Overall agreement 31 36 39 52Overall disagreement 69 64 61 48

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Property status & decision-making, odds ratios (employment)

Employment

Wife decides independently

about her decision

Wife's decision: Couple agree

decision is consultative

Husband's decision: Couple agree decision is

consultative

Egalitarian decision making

Couple Property Ownership Status (base: Only husband owns)Only Wife owns 1.412 0.891 1.063 0.983 (0.407) (0.239) (0.308) (0.309)Both Own 1.394* 0.973 1.287 1.014 (0.275) (0.169) (0.227) (0.193)Neither Own 1.093 1.14 1.079 0.976 (0.207) (0.170) (0.175) (0.167)

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Property status & decision-making, odds ratios (earnings)

Earnings

Wife decides independently

about her decision

Wife's decision: Couple agree

decision is consultative

Husband's decision: Couple agree decision is

consultative

Egalitarian decision making

Couple Property Ownership Status (base: Only husband owns)Only Wife owns 3.232*** 0.332*** 1.454 0.798 (1.351) (0.125) (0.411) (0.310)Both Own 0.819 0.838 0.979 0.705 (0.287) (0.223) (0.174) (0.188)Neither Own 1.501 0.91 1.054 0.849

(0.441) (0.229) (0.160) (0.211)

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

• Egalitarian outcome is ‘ideal’ and restrictive

• For property status to impact egalitarianism, it would have to – Impact her own involvement in decisions – Her spouse’s perception of her involvement

• May not be the case as women rarely acquire property independently (natal inheritance, purchase); mostly co-owners on husband’s property

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Other determinants• Women’s education

- No effect on employment decisionsIf more educated than husband, more likely to be

engaged in his employment decision

- Use of her earningsIncreased her ability to decide independently Decreased odds of agreeing it was consultative

• Broadly, any form of paid employment is better for her ‘voice’ than unpaid work

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Other determinants (contd.)• Increase in number of adult women negatively impacts

egalitarian process (employment)• Household wealth does not show a systematic effect• Rural couples

- More likely to be egalitarian - Women less likely to be autonomous

• Women in DK (matrilineal district) more likely to make decisions alone, less likely to be consultative and egalitarian

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Concluding thoughts• Women’s property status does matter

– Renders them more autonomous in making key economic decisions concerning themselves

• Agreement on consultation in both spouses’ decisions not systematically impacted – Asset acquisition of women largely mediated

through husbands

• Property ownership by itself may not be sufficient; how it is acquired also important

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA

Thank You!

Indian Institute of Management BangaloreBannerghatta Road, Bangalore – 560 076, INDIA

www.iimb.ernet.in

Swaminathan et al 2012, ASSA