WOMEN’S PROPERTY, MOBILITY AND DECISION-MAKING: EVIDENCE FROM RURAL KARNATAKA, INDIA Hema Swaminathan, Rahul Lahoti, Suchitra J. Y. Centre for Public Policy Indian Institute of Management Bangalore Annual Conference of the International Association for Feminist Economics Barcelona, June

Motivation Women’s asset ownership has several welfare outcomes – Greater control over income – Improvements in prenatal care, children’s schooling status, nutrition – Bargaining power – Reduced experience of violence

Property - Decision making - Welfare Women’s asset ownership + Bargaining power (participation in decision- making) + Schooling status + Nutrition - Violence

Literature Allendorf (2007): Nepal DHS – land ownership enhances decision-making power pertaining to own health, household purchases, family visits Garikipati (2009): South Indian state of Andhra Pradesh – land + other productive assets leads to greater autonomy in household decision-making and labour markets Datta (2006): North Indian city of Chandigarh – joint titling policy enhances participation in household decision-making

Research Question What is the impact of women’s property ownership on their mobility and decision- making status?

Data and Methods Data from the Gender Asset Gap Project ( ) – Karnataka Household Asset Survey (KHAS) – Rural area focus Asset ownership of individuals – Enables a true gendered analysis instead of having to rely on analysis based on sex of household head Valuation of assets

Asset Ownership Principal residence Agricultural land – Together account for 87% of gross physical worth in rural areas Two specifications: – Incidence of ownership – Share in household worth of these assets

Decision-making Whether to be employed (1=decide independently, 0 otherwise) Accessing health services (1=decide independently, 0 otherwise) Use of money (2=have money and decide independently, 1=have money and cannot decide independently, 0=no money)

Mobility – Market – Health facility – Outside the community Index combining the above – 1 if travel to all three alone, 0 otherwise

Empirical Specification

Endogeneity Concerns Instruments (?) Modes of asset acquisition – Use of assets acquired only exogenously by women: natal inheritance, inheritance upon death of spouse, government programmes, gifts – Assets acquired through modes that could be endogenous excluded: self-acquisition, natal inheritance of spouse

RESULTS

Incidence of Asset Ownership by Sex (%) Asset category All men All women Currently married women Currently single women Principal residence Agricultural land Total number of respondents2,2272,4501,994456

Asset Ownership and Mobility (%) Asset ownership Women allowed to travel alone to MarketHealth facility Other places outside community All three places Women in households that do not own land or residence Non-owning women in households that own land or residence Women owners of either land or residence All women Asset ownership Women allowed to travel alone to MarketHealth facility Other places outside community All three places Women in households that do not own land or residence Non-owning women in households that own land or residence Women owners of either land or residence Currently married women

Asset Ownership and Decision-making (%) All women Currently married women Asset ownership Women's ability to make decisions alone Whether to be employed Accessing health facility Spending money of their own Women in households that do not own land or residence Non-owning women in households that own land or residence Women owners of either land or residence Asset ownership Women's ability to make decisions alone Whether to be employed Accessing health facility Spending money of their own Women in households that do not own land or residence Non-owning women in households that own land or residence Women owners of either land or residence

Exogenously Acquired Assets All women Currently married women Owning either house or land 156 Mean share in gross worth of house and land 72 Summary Statistics

Property Ownership, Mobility, and Decision-making: Marginal Effects All womenOwner of land or house Share in worth of house and land Mobility 0.092***0.091* Employment 0.171***0.140*** Access to health service 0.083***0.033 Have money and can decide 0.100***0.098* Currently married womenOwner of land or house Share in worth of house and land Mobility 0.134***0.299*** Employment 0.074**0.077* Access to health service 0.081**0.142*** Have money and can decide

Predicted Probability for Wealth Shares, All Women

Predicted Probability for Wealth Shares, Currently Married Women

Other determinants – Incidence specification Variables All womenCurrently married women MobilityEmployment Health service Use of moneyMobilityEmployment Health service Use of money Occupation (base: homemaker) Wage employed(+) ***(+) **(+) *** (+) ** Self employed(+) ***(+) *(+) *** Casual worker(+) *** Contributing family worker(+) ***(+) **(+) ***(+) **(+) *(+) *** Education (base: illiterate) Secondary(+) * Higher secondary(+) * Diploma and above(+) ** (+) *** Age(+) *** (+) ** (+) *** (+) ** Number of observations2,4272,4252,4172,4221,9771,9761,9721,974

Other determinants – Incidence specification Variables All womenCurrently married women MobilityEmployment Health service Use of moneyMobilityEmployment Health service Use of money Currently married (base: currently single)(-) *** Spouse present(-) *(-)*** Islam (base: Hindu)(-) ***(-) **(-) *** Caste (base: Forward Caste and other) Backward and Other Backward Caste(-) **(-) * Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe(-) **(-) * No. adult men in hh(-) *** (-) * No. adult women in hh(-) ** Household wealth (base: bottom 20%) Middle 40%(-) ** (-) *** Top 40%(-) *** (-) *(-) *** (-) * Number of observations2,4272,4252,4172,4221,9771,9761,9721,974

Concluding thoughts Vast gender asset gap prevails in home and land ownership Women’s channels of asset acquisition overall are restricted Property ownership enhances their ability to travel alone and independently make decisions in areas important to their lives

Role of employment – any form of employment improves autonomy Education – not as strong an impact as expected Household economic status – negative impact

Thank You! For the country studies & comparative report see: Indian Institute of Management Bangalore Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore – , INDIA