A Gendered Analysis ofLivelihoods Interventionswith the Extreme PoorMarie Sophie PetterssonGender Adviser and Programme Analyst

EEP/ShireeDecember 2014

Table of Contents Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................... 3

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................... 3

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 4

Overview of 16 Partner NGOs included in this study .......................................................................... 6

Who are the Female Beneficiaries? .......................................................................................................... 6

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 7

Part One: Gendered Analysis of EEP/Shiree Livelihoods Interventions .......................................... 9

Gender Analysis not included in Initial Programme Design .......................................................... 9

Change Monitoring System (CMS) Data on Gendered Differences in IGAs ............................... 10

Evidence of Female Headed Households Lower Graduation Performance ............................... 11

Findings on Gender Challenges to IGAs .......................................................................................... 12

Findings on Struggling Female Headed Households ..................................................................... 19

Beyond Women to Gender Relations ................................................................................................ 21

Reasoning for Focus on Empowering Women with IGAs ............................................................. 22

NGO responses to reasons for targeting women ............................................................................ 22

Part Two: Recommendation for Step-by-Step Strategy ...................................................................... 23

Step 1 – Context-specific IGA Analysis ............................................................................................. 25

Step 2 – Select Hardware..................................................................................................................... 33

Step 3 – Implement Women-focused Software Systems ................................................................ 37

Step 4 – Sustainability Strategies ....................................................................................................... 38

Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................. 39

Annex: Summary Table of NGO Survey on Female-Friendly IGAs ................................................. 41

2

Acronyms

BHH – Beneficiary Household

BCC – Behaviour Change Counselling

CBO – Community Based Organisations

CMS – Change Monitoring System

DfID –Department for International Development of the United Kingdom

EEP – Economic Empowerment of the Poorest

FGD – Focus Group Discussion

FHH – Female Headed Household

FMH – Female Managed Household

IGA – Income Generating Asset/Activity

MDG – Millennium Development Goals

MHH – Male Headed Household

NGO – Non-Governmental Organisation

SHIREE – Stimulating Household Improvements Resulting in Economic Empowerment

Acknowledgements

This study could not have been possible without the continual input from the support of the project teams of the 16 EEP/Shiree Partner NGOs who took part in this study and provided logistical support, guidance, feedback and general hospitality during fieldwork.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the external Peer Reviewers of the Guidance Note: Ms. Lucia Da Corta, Former Academic at Bath University, Ms. Ramona Radolfi, Gender Manager at Hellen Keller International, Mr. Owasim Akram, Gender-focused Research Officer at EEP/Shiree.

Within Shiree I would like to recognise the support of Ms. Sally Faulkner, who helped initiate the idea of this study. I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support of the EEP/Shiree Programme Managers and Research Officers for their support during the NGO field visits, helping me conduct the beneficiary Focus Group Discussions and facilitate the Project Staff interviews. Finally, I owe my genuine thanks to the EEP/Shiree CEO Eamoinn Taylor and the former CEO Colin Risner for their continued support and guidance.

3

Introduction The purpose of this paper is to inform and assist the next generation of livelihoods programmes working with the extreme poor in Bangladesh to fully take account of gender in the design and implementation phase. It may also be applicable to other country contexts. Background The paper draws on experience and lessons learned fromn the Government of Bangladesh's (GoB) Economic Empowerment of the Poorest Programme (EEP)/Shiree. It is a joint initiative between the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) and UKaid/the Department for International Development (DFID) and Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC). The programme also has the title “Shiree”, the Bangla word for “steps”, which sums up the basic purpose of the programme: to enable one million people - members of over 3000,000 households - to climb the ladder out of extreme poverty, sustainably. EEP/Shiree started in 2008, was originally due to end in December 2015, but was extended to march 2016. The original total programme value was £65,000,000 increasing to £71,457,760 at the end of 2012, over 99% of which is provided in the form of grant funding by DFID. Following a DFID Business Case extension, the programme now continues to March 2016. Additional funding of £4 million was granted SDC. The total programme value now stands at £83,500,000.

International and local NGOs were challenged to submit proposals for projects that adopt a variety of economic empowerment interventions with the common objective of achieving sustainable graduation from extreme poverty. The interventions were designed by the NGOs and not, as is common with other programmes, designed by the management agency and imposed in a top-down manner. The key characteristic of EEP/Shiree is the combination of diversity and scale.

EEP/Shiree is under the direction of a Management Agency (MA), a consortium of Ecorys UK (lead)1, PMTC-Bangladesh, the University of Bath - Centre for Development Studies, the British Council and Unnayan Shamannay, with support from the University of Cambridge. The MA administered the challenge funds, supported the bidding process (selection via an Independent Assessment Panel); contracted selected NGOs, managed the contract; and regularly reviews performance.

The programme can be described as a “Challenge Fund ++” – combining the core functions of financial management, fund disbursement and monitoring common to all challenge funds with a range of significant value added elements.

The MA provides operational support to projects, and conducts activities including supporting research into the dynamics of extreme poverty, facilitating learning amongst partner NGOs and with a wider audience, and planning and implementing advocacy campaigns at local and national levels. A nutrition support output commenced in 2012 and involves behavioural change counselling and provision of micro nutrients to all Scale Fund beneficiary households that include pregnant or lactating mothers, children under 2 years of age, and adolescent girls.

1 Harewelle International was the original contractor of the DFID project EEP. In 2012, Harewelle became part of the Ecorys group through acquisition by Ecorys UK. Henceforth, the lead consortium partner will be referred to as Ecorys UK.

4

Scope The paper presents a gender analysis of extreme poor livelihood interventions managed by the partner NGOS of EEP/Shiree. Part One provides an overview of various gendered aspects of the partner NGO projects’ interventions to create Income Generating Activities (IGA) for female beneficiaries by outlining key successes, constraints and misunderstandings. Part Two provides recommendations for a step-by-step, gender-sensitive guide for developing sustainable Income Generating Activities (IGA with female beneficiaries. It is not prescriptive instruction, rather guidance for use by livelihood projects at their own discretion to further adapt their interventions with female beneficiaries and introduce new activities where needed. Rationale EEP/Shiree’s goal is to help one million people lift themselves out of extreme poverty by 2015. To achieve this goal means economically empowering all family members of extreme poor beneficiary households – male and female. EEP/Shiree became concerned about the gender dimension of its work when it noted reports from some of its partner NGOs about the challenges of maintaining IGAs with women of extreme poor beneficiary households (BHHs), particularly when the household head is female. Not all female beneficiaries and female household heads require specialised interventions. Some are capable, experienced, motivated and have the support from kin to engage with the project in the same manner as male beneficiaries and household heads. However, EEP/Shiree's experience has , shown that many female beneficiaries and female household heads face additional challenges and constraints towards engaging with, and being empowered by IGAs provided by the NGOs' projects as initially designed, and thus alternative arrangements need to be developed. Methodology The paper is based on a feedback from 16 EEP/Shiree Partner NGOs working in all five regions of Bangladesh on both Innovation and Scale Fund projects. Evidence was collected through project staff interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs) with beneficiaries, follow-up workshops with EEP/Shiree and Partner NGO staff members, qualitative and quantitative data analysis from the EEP/Shiree Change Monitoring System (CMS) and overall research findings.

5

Overview of 16 Partner NGOs included in this study Region

NGO Scale or Innovation Fund Project

Southern Coastal Belt

Uttaran, Save the Children, Oxfam, Shushilan

Scale Fund

BOSS, Save the Children

Innovation Fund

Urban

DSK

Scale Fund

Priptrust

Innovation Fund

North West

Care, Practical Action Bangladesh, Netz

Scale Fund

North East Haor Region

Concern Worldwide

Scale Fund

Chittagong Hill Tracts

Caritas, Green Hill, Hellen Keller International

Scale Fund

Tarango

Innovation Fund

More information about each individual project and the difference between Scale and Innovation funds can be found on the EEP/Shiree website: www.shiree.org

Who are the Female Beneficiaries? The Target Group is Female Beneficiaries (adult women and adolescent girls) in:

• Female headed households • Male headed households • ‘Silently’ female headed households – where male adult is too old or sick to effectively earn an

income. The EEP/Shiree portfolio has a high representation of female beneficiaries - the first baseline report (2011) showed 53.47% of beneficiaries are female. If EEP partner NGOs only engaged men in income generation then less than half of the potential of the beneficiary household (BHH) would may be realised. While almost all EEP/Shiree BHHs contain female household members, NGOs struggle the most with IGA interventions where the head of household is female. The situation is more difficult if the head of household is also elderly and/or disabled2 , or if the female head is also caring for elderly or disabled household members or young children.

2 Please refer to Guidance Note on Disabled and Old Age-friendly IGAs for these cases.

6

At baseline approx 30%3 of our beneficiary households were female headed (notably with significant variations across Partner NGOs). The figure for female headed households has fallen to around 22% according to latest the CMS 2 data analysis from July 2014. One of the main causes behind this reduction in female headed households is an observed tendency for male heads to return to the households they had previously abandoned or migrated away from once the household moves out of extreme poverty. According to most recent baseline report (August 2014), over half (55%) of these female households heads were widowed, 17% separated, divorced or abandoned, while 27% were married but living alone without their husbands (usually due to his migration for work or him living with a second wife). In addition, , CMS 5 research (Shiree Q² Report October 2011) reveals that female headedness also happens ‘silently’ within marriage in households officially categorised as male headed. For instance, in order to avoid the costs of dowry, some extremely poor parents marry their daughters at an early age to men who have impaired physical or mental capacity, or are simply old. These men are effectively not performing the role of the family’s breadwinner and provider, but still remain the authority of the household. Importantly, these female household heads (or ‘silent’ female household heads) are often also sole breadwinners for their families and do not have an adult male breadwinner to rely on.

Executive Summary This paper presents a number of findings on challenges, misperceptions, opportunities, lessons and recommendations to empowering extreme poor women with income generating activities. The key points are summarised below.

Gendered Constraints in EEP/Shiree Interventions:

• Gendered analysis was not included in the initial EEP/Shiree programme design: this resulted in a policy gap in the official commitment to women’s empowerment and gender equality within EEP/Shiree overall from the onset.

• The majority of EEP/Shiree Partners did not have specific and comprehensive gender strategies in place for working with female beneficiaries (both in male and female headed households) at the start of their interventions.

• The vast majority of surveyed female beneficiaries were not engaged in IGAs (entrepreneurship

or employment); but contrarily the majority of them became unemployed housewives following the start of project interventions.

• According to socio-economic data analysis form March 2014 (CMS 3 2014), more than half (51.5%) of female household heads did not own or use productive assets, which suggest inadequate engagement of female households heads with IGAs

• Across survey rounds, for female household heads the main trend was to move away from working as domestic maids and begging to instead doing household work as housewives. There was only a small initial increase in women doing petty trade (an EEP/Shiree IGA), yet this increase was equal to the initial increase in women doing day labour (not an EEP/Shiree IGA) and both occupations dropped again after survey 4 leading to an increase in unemployment. Thus according to this data analysis, it appears that female heads of households did not benefit

3 31% according to the first baseline report “Characteristics of Shiree Beneficiary Households” (2011) and 28% according to the second baseline report “State of Extreme Poverty Baseline Report” (August 2014).

7

from income diversification from IGA interventions to the same extent that male heads of household did.

• CMS 3 quantitative data analysis of graduation from extreme poverty based on the EEP/Shiree Multidimensional Graduation Index (incl. food security, food diversity, asset base, savings, income, land access, water &sanitation, women’s empowerment, and children’s school enrolment) demonstrates that female headed households perform worse than male headed households overall (Mascie-Taylor, Goto, Pettersson April 2014).

• CMS 3 analysis showed that the failure to graduate was associated with sex of household head. Just over a quarter of female household heads (28.3%) failed to graduate compared with 14.2% of male headed households

• Female headed households made out the overall majority and the lowest percentile of households that were not graduated (Mascie-Taylor and Goto 2014)

• Between surveys 7 to 8 the gender gap in graduation started widening suggesting that female headed households’ graduation from extreme poverty is less likely to be sustainable and over time the gender gap in graduation tends to widen.

. Key lessons learned about gender in livelihoods programming

• Historically, EEP/Shiree Livelihoods interventions were designed to improve the overall household level of economic empowerment, preventing a focus on each individual household member and interventions focused more on women’s rights. Due to gender discrimination within households and unequal allocation of resources, control, power and benefits, this often meant women and girls were less likely to benefit from IGA interventions. Thus, gender inequality needs to be addressed within as well as beyond the boundaries of household units.

• Targeting women does not automatically ensure gender equality. A key programmatic challenge is assuming that transferring economic resources to women automatically translates into their empowerment. If women are not involved in IGA selection, or if they lack the skills and enabling environment to succeed (supportive household and community members, female-friendly market places etc), then the IGAs will not empower them.

• Programmes need to focus on improving the gender dynamics preventing women from being empowered by IGAs. This includes focusing on improving women’s control over IGAs rather than simply their access to them, by ensuring their equal role in financial decision making, ownership, management and operation of IGAs. Furthermore, ensuring equal allocation of IGA earnings to make sure equal intra-household benefits and equal division of household work to ensure women do not face a double burden by also engaging in productive work.

• We need to look beyond women to gender relations - the roles of men as well as women and how they interact. The move towards a gender-equal society requires men and boys to think and act in new ways, to reconsider traditional images of manhood, and to reshape their relationships with women and girls. Men and boys are most likely to support change towards gender equality when they can see positive benefits for themselves and the people in their lives.

8

Key recommendations on how to empower women with IGAs

• Always encourage women to take on main IGAs that are both profitable, sustainable and gender transformative (i.e. not only secondary traditional IGAs for women that do not serve as a main HH income source).

• IGAs for women should be tailored according to a comprehensive context analysis on type of household (MHH, FHH, FMH), Age, Region, Market Analysis, Local Gender Norms, Beneficiary Capacity and Preference, sustainability vs. Risk analysis

• Implement ‘Software’ mechanisms alongside ‘hardware’ IGA packages: - Training for female beneficiary on IGA/business management, productive profit

reinvestment, marketing, accounting, financial literacy, savings - Establish Women’s Support Groups including: group savings, IGA, group child care and

general support network, - Gender Awareness Sensitisation training with whole HH and whole community on socio-

economic benefit of women working, women’s rights, stopping gender discrimination and violence, sharing productive and reproductive work, etc.

- Men’s groups and Couple’s Therapy Groups on gender awareness raising, - Social Mobilisation with community leaders (religious leaders, village leaders, teachers, Local

government, UP Chairmen, etc.) on gender awareness and socio-economic benefit of women working

- Create female-friendly Market Places (or women’s corners at market-places) with female toilet facilities, Market linkages or Central Collective Marketing Centres for female beneficiaries

• Implement Sustainability Strategies:

- Lobbying Campaigns with Private Sector Employers/Landlords on equal wages and equal recruitment of women, equal khasland provision

- Enable women’s Labour Union linkages - Encourage women’s participation in local politics and decision-making at the community

level as female representatives in local governance structures and community meetings. - Lobby with local government for access to public services, social safety nets and legal

services - Gender awareness raising with marketing actors (vendors, male entrepreneurs, male

customers, etc) for female-friendly market places with equal prices, no harassment/violence and discrimination

Part One: Gendered Analysis of EEP/Shiree Livelihoods Interventions

Gender Analysis not included in Initial Programme Design

Despite the high representation of females and female headed households within the EEP/Shiree portfolio, living in highly gendered contexts both within their families and wider society, only 8 of the 16 partners consulted had specific and comprehensive strategies in place for working with female beneficiaries (both in male and female headed households) at the start of their interventions. Several reasons for this limitation were observed among Partner NGOs: 1) lack of understanding among NGO

9

project staff of how gender impacts livelihoods, 2) perceptions that gender issues are too culturally sensitive to address within standard livelihood interventions, 3) budgetary constraints and perceptions that it is more guaranteed value for money and less risky to focus on empowering male beneficiaries with IGAs, 4) time constraints for more comprehensive interventions needed to empower women with IGAs, and 5) Risk-adverse behaviour of NGO project staff – avoiding antagonising male household and community members. However, a more fundamental constraint was the lack of gendered analysis in the initial EEP/Shiree programme design. This resulted in a policy gap on women’s empowerment and gender equality from the onset. This was because of the focus on households rather than individuals in terms of ensuring and measuring graduation from extreme poverty. Thus, livelihoods interventions were generally only designed to improve the overall household level of economic empowerment. This prevented a focus both on individual household members and interventions focused on women’s and child rights. Due to unequal intra-household allocations of benefits, power and resources however, this inevitably leads to intra-household gender disparities in empowerment. During the course of implementation, evaluation of interventions and research has clearly demonstrated that female beneficiaries usually face gender-specific challenges to performing the same IGAs as male beneficiaries. They need more comprehensive interventions to be socially and economically empowered to the same extent as male beneficiaries. In 2013/2014 gender mainstreaming increased at pace within EEP/Shiree through the appointment of a Gender Focal-Point. This position involves leading the design, planning and implementation of the EEP/Shiree Gender Mainstreaming Strategy across the entire organization; within Partner NGO operations, the nutrition component, CMS, research and advocacy. This initiative both aims to increase the visibility of gendered aspects of extreme poverty and to ensure that these gendered issues are addressed effectively and timely. This is in line with EEP/Shiree and our donors’ commitment to achieving the MDG 3 on Promoting Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment as well as ensuring an enhanced gender focus in the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals.

Change Monitoring System (CMS) Data on Gendered Differences in IGAs

In the EEP/Shiree quantitative socio-economic and anthropometric panel survey (CMS 3) significant gendered differences were found in main occupation and ownership of productive assets between male and female households heads at the beginning of the project interventions and throughout (Mascie-Taylor and Goto 2013 and 2014). Main Occupation: At baseline (CMS 3 Survey Round 1) in March 2010 (i.e. before project intervention), nearly 5 times as many female household heads (14.2%) used begging as their main occupation compared to male household heads (3%). For male household heads, there was a general trend of men moving away from being day labourers or unemployed to instead doing business and service jobs, especially between survey 1 and 4 (i.e. right after project interventions). However, for female household heads the main trend was to move away from working as domestic maids and begging to instead doing household work as housewives. There was only a small initial increase in women doing petty trade (a Shiree IGA), yet this increase was equal to the initial increase in women doing day labour (not a Shiree IGA) and both occupations dropped again after survey 4 leading to an increase in unemployment. Thus according to this data analysis, it appears that female heads of households did not benefit from income diversification from IGA interventions to the same extent that male heads of household did. The vast majority of surveyed female beneficiaries were not engaged in IGAs (entrepreneurship or employment), but contrarily the majority of them became unemployed housewives following the start of project interventions.

Ownership and Use of Productive Assets: Questions on ownership and use of productive assets were introduced in CMS 3 survey 8 in March 2013. Female headed households were more likely to own cattle,

10

goats, poultry and a sewing machine, while male headed households were more likely to own a fishing net, rickshaw, boat, mobile phone and a bicycle. Female heads were more likely to look after animals and use a sewing machine, while male heads operated rickshaw, fishing net, boat and used mobile phone and bicycle. This demonstrates an overall mostly traditional gendered labour division within beneficiary households with women mostly being responsible for the more homestead-based and less physically demanding types of IGAs, while men were mostly responsible for IGAs that require high level of physical activity outside the homestead.

Overall, male ownership and use of productive assets was significantly higher than female. More than half (51.5%) of female household heads did not own or use any productive assets, which suggest inadequate engagement of female households heads with IGAs.

Evidence of Female Headed Households Lower Graduation Performance

CMS 3 quantitative data analysis of graduation from extreme poverty based on the EEP/Shiree Multidimensional Graduation Index (incl. food security, food diversity, asset base, savings, income, land access, water &sanitation, women’s empowerment, and children’s school enrolment) demonstrates that female headed households perform worse than male headed households overall (Mascie-Taylor, Goto, Pettersson April 2014). Further, female headed households made out the overall majority and the lowest percentile of households that were not graduated. In all Partner NGOs the proportion of female headed households graduating is lower than male headed households. The gender gap in graduation across survey rounds was similar for all NGOs, except Practical Action Bangladesh which had much lower graduation rates in female headed households in surveys 7 and 8. The mean graduation scores (range 0-13 in rural areas and 0-10 in urban areas) were computed for each survey by head of household. In rural areas (Figure 1, left side) although male households had slightly higher mean graduation scores than female headed households, there were no significant differences in mean graduation scores up until survey 7, however between survey 7 to 8 the gender gap started widening. In the urban areas graduation scores were very similar between male and female headed households in surveys 1 and 4, but in surveys 7 and 8 male headed households mean scores were significantly higher than female headed households (Figure 1 right side). Figure 3 Change in mean graduation scores by head of household over the four surveys in rural (left)and urban (right) households in cohort 1

11

Finally, CMS 3 analysis showed that the failure to graduate was associated with sex of household head. Just over a quarter of female household heads (28.3%) failed to graduate compared with 14.2% of male headed households. From this is could be derived that female headed households struggle more to lift themselves out of extreme poverty. Whilst initially after project interventions they might go on a similar upward trajectory as male headed households, their graduation from extreme poverty is less likely to be sustainable, and over time the gender gap in graduation tends widen. This further implies that female headed households, living without male guardian, generally have not benefitted from EEP/Shiree IGA interventions in the way they have been dispersed to the same extent that male headed households have. This then leads us to ask whether women are simply too difficult to engage and empower with IGAs? Or whether EEP/Shiree and Partner NGOs have been doing something wrong in our IGA interventions with female beneficiaries, especially female household heads? Have we not targeted women enough or have we perhaps targeted them the wrong way? Are our interventions sufficiently gender-sensitive?

Findings on Gender Challenges to IGAs

Despite there being obvious benefits to empowering women, the severe lack of gender equality in extreme poor families and communities in Bangladesh (in access and control over resources, decision-making power and basic human rights - from freedom from violence to the right to work) often mean that it is difficult for poverty reduction programmes to achieve their desired aims when working with females. In terms of income generation, extreme poor women are at a considerable disadvantage in relation to their male counterparts from the beginning and throughout EEP/Shiree interventions. EEP/Shiree Research findings have shown that various factors (listed below) as a result of gender dynamics both within households and wider communities have significant impacts on female beneficiaries’ ability to engage with, benefit from and be empowered by IGAs. These factors ensure that women are often excluded from activities with higher economic returns. If they have no able working male to support them, women are often confined to homestead-based, low-return IGAs, which at best enable them to temporarily meet some subsistence requirements. While EEP/Shiree mainly operates on a household basis with IGA interventions targeted at beneficiary households as a whole, this guidance note recognises feminist critiques of standard ‘household economics’ models that households are not ‘unitary entities operating on altruistic principles’ but often characterized by competing claims, rights, power, interests and resources (Chant 2003). Due to gender discrimination, this often means women and girls are less likely to benefit from IGA interventions. Based on EEP/Shiree quantitative and qualitative research findings, surveys conducted with NGO project staff and beneficiary focus group discussions of 16 Partner NGOs, the following key challenges were identified for women’s engagement with and empowerment from IGAs:

12

Identified Challenge Context Explanation

Women’s Lack of mobility beyond the homestead or village

At baseline (EEP/Shiree Baseline Report 2014), around two-thirds of all women said they did not feel confident moving outside their village or slum area alone (66%). This is both a result of restriction by the husband and in-laws to protect the ‘family honour’ and the social stigma given by community members who perceive that women’s place is in the home. In other cases it is also perceived as a way of protecting women from harassment and assault. Faulkner (2014) demonstrates that mobility is one the major factors that influence female Shiree/Oxfam beneficiaries’ decision in the asset selection process is mobility. In her research with beneficiaries, key concerns were raised about the “bad talking” that would occur if their wives went outside to work, especially by elderly community members, local elites and imans. The overriding concern amongst the men in the FGDs was losing their own dignity and being emasculated if their wife worked. This reflects the belief that often even extreme poor men do not like their wives or elder daughters to work outside the home because it reflects badly on them, whilst further undermining male breadwinner roles already diminished by underemployment and extreme poverty (Silberschmidt, 2001). There is also a fear that women’s mobility would bring a bad reputation to the household in general.

Women’s traditional role as mothers and caregivers, not breadwinners

This norm is often reinforced by husbands, in-laws and women themselves. Many husbands forbid their wives from working, especially outside the home, which leaves households reliant on a single wage with greater risks of remaining destitute. This was reported as less of a problem among indigenous tribal communities (both in the Chittagong Hill Tracts and in the North) where women and men are usually both income earners and joint heads of the family.

Women’s burden of sole responsibility for household and care work

Women’s choices are heavily influenced by time constraints and other commitments. If they have children to look after and chores to do within the home, it is difficult for them to run a business, especially one which requires them to spend a lot of time outside. They are mostly not excused from this domestic workload even if they have the potential to generate income for the family (Faulkner 2014. This burden is especially big if the family has young children or disabled/chronically ill household members. In most cases, husbands are unwilling to share this burden as they do not see it as their responsibility and alternative childcare facilities are generally not available. This was reported as less of a problem in the CHT where women and men usually both share the household and care work. Kabeer (2012) explains that women often suffer from “time poverty”. This is caused by the longer hours relative to men, women have to work each day because, even after taking up paid work, they remain responsible for a great deal of the unpaid domestic work that ensures the survival of the family. Due to

13

such time constraints, Banerjee and Duflo (2011) found that in some cases extreme poor women do not actually like being small scale entrepreneurs because it simply adds more work to their already overburdened schedule – something which goes unappreciated by their husbands or male relatives.

Low self-esteem, confidence and motivation

Women’s own belief that they are not capable to be breadwinner and their fear of disapproval by others if they do become breadwinners was reported by NGO staff as a major barrier. Over half of 36 women interviewed in FGDs and in-depth interviews mentioned issues related to their own confidence as the biggest influencing factor for not being involved in the management of a small business, with many simply not being aware of anything they were capable of doing (Faulkner 2014). These perceptions are likely to manifest themselves during asset selection and business plan development, and result in the selection of safe assets or assets which can be managed by male relatives. Despite owning an asset therefore, “women remain highly dependent on men to make a living” from that asset (Holmes et al, 2010, p.24), and often they tend to select assets that will be directly managed by their husband or adult son (Faulkner 2014).

Lack of literacy, numeracy, financial literacy as well as bargaining, accounting and business skills

Women’s lower level literacy, numeracy, financial literacy partly due to their lower levels of schooling is a major barrier to their involvement in more complex IGAs that involve marketing and running a business. Since they have traditionally been excluded from involvement in managing family businesses, including doing accounting, marketing and financial decision-making, they often lack these skills.

Lack of decision-making power in the household

Women’s lack of or low decision-making power within households was a key overarching factor reported by NGOs. At Baseline (Baseline Report 2014), there was clear evidence of male dominance in decision-making within beneficiary households. The majority of men and slightly under half of all women reported the husband as the sole decision makers on use of household earnings and whom to vote for , while around one-third of men and women said the same about use of cash savings, taking out a loan, children’s education and health care expenditure. Very few men and women reported the wife as sole decision makers in any area. Half of all women reported not feeling confident to take small financial decisions on their own. The exclusion of women from financial decision making is often exacerbated when women are not engaged in income earning. As noted by Swaminathan, Lahoti and Sichitra (2012), even in female headed, decisions are still often influenced by male relatives, in-laws or even adult male children.

Unequal distribution of resources and benefits

Male control over resources and benefits from IGAs was reported by the majority of Partner NGOs and BHHs. Ultimately men have a privileged bargaining power due to their role as main breadwinners and family heads, which enabled them to command a larger share of resources and decide about

14

the use of income earnings. Some NGOs and BHHs reported that this sometimes lead to cases of husbands spending the majority of the IGA earnings on alcohol consumption and gambling, rather than children’s education or health care and nutrition for all. At Baseline (March 2019), 34% of households reported giving more food to male earning household members, whereas in March 2014 only 8% of households reporting using this coping strategy.

Dominance and reluctance of husband/father/brother/son/in-laws

Some NGOs reported cases of male guardians restricting women and confining them to the homestead. Qualitative CMS 5 findings also reveal many cases of dominant and abusive husbands, and endorsing parents and in-laws. One example is Kamrunnahar, an Uttaran beneficiary, who is not allowed by her husband and in-laws to manage the productive assets she received from the project. Her mother in-law explained: “as she is a young girl we don’t let her to go outside alone and always send a chaperone with her when she goes outside”. Her mother used to be a victim of domestic violence and she still thinks that spending your husband’s money and going outside without notifying your husband first justifies domestic violence. Crucially, in order to enable husbands to see the full potential of their wives as economic contributors, it is necessary to actively bring men into women’s empowerment initiatives (Connell, 2003), e.g. through male focus groups on gender awareness.

Community stigma against women who work outside their home and go to market places

At Baseline (Baseline Report 2014), around two-thirds of all women surveyed said they did not feel confident moving outside their village or slum area alone (66%) and half of all women reported not feeling comfortable talking to men outside their family (47%). NGOs and BBHs reported that sometimes the stigma is bigger for women in male headed households as it is considered shameful for the husbands if their wives work and move around outside the home/village.

At baseline (Baseline Report 2014), more women in female headed households compared to women in male headed households answered that they were confident in talking to men who are not relatives and moving outside their village or slum area. Yet social stigma is also used against female household heads, as the community may consider it shameful if they were abandoned or divorced. Yet, widowed women and some abandoned women are also likely to receive sympathy from people in their community, who support them financially or accept their engagement with IGAs recognizing that they no longer have a man to rely on.

15

Discrimination against women in price negotiation

It was reported that when women sell items at market places they face discrimination and are unable to sell items at the same prices as men. However women who sell items by going door to door reported that they often get higher prices than men because they have better access to houses while men are not allowed inside. In the CHT it was reported that Adivasi women face an additional language barrier compared to Adivasi men when selling items at Bangladeshi market places as they often struggle more speaking Bengali.

Harassment and violence both at home and in the village

Women’s perceived and real lack of security was considered a key obstacle to engaging them in income generation, especially outside the home. Studies have shown that female breadwinners are more likely to be victims of domestic violence as they pose a potential threat to their husband’s authority. Furthermore, women who work outside the home and engage with male colleagues or male market actors have a higher risk of becoming victims of harassment or violence at the village level. Women’s interaction with or exposure to other men outside their homestead also sometimes reinforces their husbands’ jealousy and restrictions upon their wives’ mobility. In the CHT it was reported that Adivasi women face a particular high threat of violence and harassment when they walk to and from market places. EEP/Shiree CMS 5 qualitative findings reveal many cases of violence against female beneficiaries. One example is Laksmi, a Netz beneficiary: Laksmi’s husband forced her to conceive against her will, as he wanted a son, thus confining her to their home. Laksmi told us that she believes that her husband did not allow her to pursue labour work due to his belief that she might start adulterous relationships with new colleagues or other men if he allowed her to move outside. Laksmi said that one incident of violence occurred over her being late in preparing food. Another time she suffered a beating for not handing the mobile phone to him while she was talking with her elder brother living in Dhaka, as her husband thought she was talking to someone with whom she was having an adulterous relationship.

Physical Constraints

Some NGOs reported that women are often unable to do more profitable types of IGAs because they are not physically strong enough to transport items to further away market places, doing agricultural and aqua-cultural work or managing larger livestock. Thus they are perceived to be better suited for managing small scale IGAs that are homestead based and involve little physical activity.

Limited Access to Land

While land is essential for agricultural production and rural livelihoods, women are mostly denied land rights by land lords and local government. In FGDs and key informant interviews with female household heads, most of the respondents shared that they had been denied land ownership by their in-laws and relatives (Owasim 2014, p.15). Those few widows who live on the land of their husbands feel insecure as they know they could be evicted at any time. In many cases, once a woman is abandoned, divorced or widowed, the in-laws make her landless as women have no rights to inheritance.

16

EEP/Shiree qualitative CMS 5 findings reveal many case studies of gender discrimination in land access. One example is Dipali Baroi, a Netz beneficiary. According to Hindu inheritance law in practice in Bangladesh, neither Dipali nor her daughters will inherit the land on which her house is located. Only her sons will have legal entitlement to the land. During her husband’s illness, Dipali took 24,000 Taka from her younger son on the understanding that she would arrange the registration of the land in the younger son’s name. Since her husband died, the registration could not be done and her elder son instead decided to sell the land to a neighbour who was able to offer a higher price for the land. However, Dipali’s elder daughter, who was also living on the land, decided to purchase her elder brother’s share of the land to resist her and her mother’s potential eviction. She has so far paid her elder brother 18,000 Taka, but he is claiming 45,000 Taka. Dipali hopes that her daughter will be able to negotiate a lower price with him. Once her elder daughter has purchased the land, Dipali hopes that to be offered shelter in her daughter’s home.

Lack of control and ownership over IGAs

There are many cases of women being the official owner of an asset which is effectively managed by her husband or another adult male. Through Shiree CMS5 data we have found that in such cases overtime men slowly begin assuming control of the asset, until it is questionable who actually has ownership. This has important implications for a woman’s future security as it is difficult to know what would happen to the asset if the husband or son separated from the family. Although women are often targeted as the lead beneficiary in the household in the majority of Shiree’s projects, this does not necessarily mean that they will be transferred an asset which they will manage independently. Throughout the annual Shiree socio-economic and anthropometric panel survey, from baseline in 2009 to the latest 2014 survey, we have seen that women’s over ownership of productive assets (including livestock, rickshaw, boat, sewing machine, agricultural equipment, fishing net and other working equipment) remains around 20-30% lower than that of men’s (CMS 3 2014).

Women seen as risky IGA managers

One common characteristic of the extreme poor is that if people need food they will opt for “quick return” IGAs that yield immediate results rather than “slow return” IGAs that are perceived as risky. Targeting asset transfers to women over able-bodied men can be perceived as risky by a number of agents – the NGO fieldworker, the male household head, and even female spouses and mothers. Even in female headed households’ assets are often given to adult sons or other male relatives, despite the fact that many extreme poor men suffer from compromised physical or mental health, old age or some form of addiction. This results in the transferred asset not being as profitable as initially anticipated. EEP/Shiree CMS 5 research has seen this pattern of unsuitable asset selection occur across a number of beneficiaries in the first and second years of the project.

17

Gender discrimination by market actors (vendors, customers, wholesalers, market places), and employers

NGO staff reported that a key reason why women face barriers to engaging in entrepreneurship or employment is reluctant and discriminating attitudes towards women by market actors and employers. This includes reluctance to buy products from women or to employ women.

Unequal Wages and Discrimination in the Labour Market

Female beneficiaries reported experiencing discrimination in wage payments with no ability to seek redress (Owasim 2014). Employers tend to use this opportunity to exploit women, especially female household heads. Women in Bangladesh continue to be concentrated to a greater extent in occupations with lower pay, worse prospects for advancement and poorer working conditions (Kabeer, 2012, p.15). We see such discrepancies specifically in agricultural wages coming up repeatedly in EEP/Shiree research, but wage differentials also exist in other sectors, in particular the garments industry. Here, in an industry characterized by low wages, women make up around 85% of the workforce, with men performing the better paid jobs such as general managers, line managers and supervisors (War on Want, 2011).

NGO IGA interventions embedded in patriarchal system

Despite enhanced awareness about the importance of empowering women, the general practice of NGOs is still to transfer assets that can only be primarily operated by males within the household as this is likely to be more profitable and less risky. Extreme poor men with limited skills are still more likely to have more experience working outside than women, which means that they may be favoured by NGOs for investments in income generation within the household. Despite the fact that NGOs recognize women as being the “poorest of the poor”, in non-domestic livelihood work men are often preferred. Not only do men in Bangladesh have more experience with working outside the home, they also have better access to inputs (such as cow fodder or grocery stock) and markets, and do not face restrictions on their mobility nor the burden of household work. Transferring assets directly to women or giving them some training that will enable them to generate an income is a step towards making women financially autonomous; achieving full empowerment involves challenging the persistent patriarchy and working around the cultural and religious norms which currently prevent women from engaging in income generating activities.

18

Findings on Struggling Female Headed Households

Women in female-headed households are often categorised as particularly vulnerable and ‘the poorest of the poor’ constituting a disproportionate number of the extreme poor. There are numerous factors for why women already subject to gender discrimination become further disadvantaged when becoming the head of incomplete and under-resourced households. While women in all households face gender specific disadvantages– (lack of entitlements and capabilities, the unvalued double burden of reproductive work, wage discrimination, constraints on their mobility due to social norms and gendered labour market barriers) these disadvantages cause particular stresses when women are necessitated to be income earners because there is no male guardian to rely on Naila Kabeer (2003). In such cases the only two options become either to struggle to challenge gender barriers in order to earn a living as a female head, or to remain extreme poor. Akhter et al. (2007) found that in five of six Sub-Saharan African countries and in three Asian countries (Bangladesh, India and Vietnam), female headed households are more likely to be found living in ultra poverty than in moderate poverty. EEP/Shiree baseline data analysis (Baseline Report 2014) reveals clear differences between female and male headed households. Cash and in-kind income per household per month was almost twice as high in male headed households (2,386 taka) compared to female headed households (1,611 taka). A significantly higher percentage of children in male headed households were receiving cash for education compared to children in female headed households. Twice as high a proportion of female headed households were completely landless compared to male headed households. On average across regions, female headed households had around 50% lower values of productive assets than male headed households. Overall, female household heads are 10% more likely to be illiterate and have received no schooling than male household heads. At all levels of schooling, there is a higher percentage of male household heads compared to female heads. The percentage for use of child labour at baseline was twice as high among female headed households (14%) compared to male headed households (7%). Moreover, CMS 3 baseline data analysis (2012) showed that there were significant morbidity differences between male and female headed households; fever in the last 30 days was about 11% higher in female (50%) than male (39%) heads and anaemia was 23% higher in female (about 57%) than male headed households (34%).

Because women have throughout their lives been socialized into depending on male breadwinners, once they are forced into a situation of female headship they often lack the skills, knowledge, confidence and motivation to earn and income on their own. A connected element is the concept of an ‘intergenerational transmission of disadvantage;’ that the deprivation of female household heads is passed on to their children because female heads struggle to properly support their families (Chant 2003). A recent working paper by EEP/Shiree (Owasim 2014) revealed significant challenges to food insecurity and resilience among extreme poor female headed households in Coastal Bangladesh. The study found that high levels of food insecurity among FHHs lead to severe problems of so-called ‘food orphans’, i.e. infants and small children who are put into public or private orphanages or are sent to work as residential housemaids in richer families in exchange for food.

However, substantial research, both by EEP/Shiree in Bangladesh and beyond, has also demonstrated that ‘feminisation of household headship’ does not necessarily equal a worse fate for women and family breakdown. Notably, not all women become female heads because of abandonment by their husband: death, illness, and divorces initiated by women can also lead to women becoming heads of household. Furthermore, not all female headed households are living without an adult male but in some cases a male relative is available to provide her with support. Yet EEP/Shiree qualitative findings from CMS 5 do clearly demonstrate that when extreme poor households become female headed women’s access to men’s support for them and for their children (and other dependents) is severely eroded if not stopped

19

altogether. In the majority of causes this severely exacerbates their level of extreme poverty due to their inability to financially support their family on their own.

Following Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) conducted to investigate FHHs’ experience with IGA interventions of different Partner NGOs, a general trend observed was female households heads’ high level of resilience in coping for survival without a male guardian. In other words, when women become sole breadwinners in their households they are forced into a situation of economic activity that they were previously restricted from, always forced by society to depend on their husbands and fathers. Out of necessity for survival and to build a more sustainable future for their family, some female heads break societal gender barriers and take on more profitable market or land-based IGAs. In some cases challenging gender norms is less of a challenge for single women because they have no husband or male guardian restricting them and benefit from the sympathy of people in their community which make them more accepting of single women’s engagement in traditional male jobs.

Hence, we cannot assume that extremely poor households headed by females are 'too difficult to target'. Though they are vulnerable they can become self-sufficient. In some cases they even face fewer gendered barriers to engaging in IGAs, and fewer patriarchal risks overall keeping them in extreme poverty, compared to women in male headed households. The key point is that an appropriate intervention tailored to the circumstances of the individual, with sustainable IGAs, training and confidence building, creates the support network for the extreme poor female headed household where they were formerly excluded. The table below gives two examples of a successful and an unsuccessful intervention with a female headed household: Unsuccessful Intervention with Female Headed Household

Successful Intervention with Female Headed Household

Narmin, Uttaran – widow. Before: Husband died after they spent all their savings admitting him to hospital in Calcutta After: Household composition:

- Old age father suffers from chronic illness, older brother disabled

- Older mother and daughter Orjona are the only income earners

- Orjona’s 1 son (4 years old) IGAs given by project: livestock rearing, homestead gardening Narmin and her mother manage their land cultivation by seeking help from others – they cannot themselves work on the land because of social norms and burden of HH work and care for child, ill father and disabled brother

Rita, Save The Children – divorced. Before: Early marriage. Domestic Violence, husband’s alcohol addiction and gambling. Confined to household, not allowed to work or talk to neighbours. She asked a religious leader for help with getting a divorce. Ostracised by family, in-laws and village members and received no moral or financial support. UP Chairman got her the cleaning job at the hospital and donated rice to her from time to time and new clothes for Eid. After Household composition: Her and her adopted infant daughter IGA given by project: 9,000 taka invested in livestock (chicken, goats) and sari business.

20

They only have food security when they receive help for land cultivation The father and older brother are the main decision-makers and function as official household heads despite not being income earners Narmin and her mother cannot do any market selling on their own (and the ill father and disabled are unable to help them), so the IGAS they manage (livestock rearing and homestead gardening) is only for the family’s own consumption. During our visit she said: “Please give us more support, we are so poor and cannot support our family”

Today she has 5 different income sources which she herself diversified into:

- Sari business - Water distribution business - Domestic helper - Cleaner at hospital - Livestock rearing/selling

She feels no shame or problems travelling far distances on her own; “why would people talk bad about me, I haven’t done anything bad to them” She has cash savings + reinvested IGA earnings in a sanitary latrine, tube well, a nice big house, a bed, TV, kitchen ware, fan, CD player, mobile phone.

Beyond Women to Gender Relations

An overarching lesson learned from EEP/Shiree IGA interventions with extreme poor women, as well as gender reviews of social protection and livelihoods programme globally, is that “targeting women does not automatically ensure gender equality”(Holmes and Jones 2010). A key challenge faced by many programmes including EEP/Shiree is the assumption that the transfer of economic resources to women will automatically translate into their empowerment in the household and beyond. Notably, if IGAs given to women are not selected by women themselves, or if they lack the skills and enabling environment (supportive household and community members, female-friendly market places etc), then the IGAs will not empower them. Making women official owners of IGAs without empowering them to manage and operate them, merely sustains women in their existing situation and further victimises them as bearers of the risk and burden of assets without directly benefitting from them. In their design, few programmes are seen to have prioritised transforming intra-household gender relations. Yet these very issues must be addressed to ensure women’s empowerment in a sustainable and effective way. Thus, this guidance note aims to investigate how to go beyond simply targeting female beneficiaries with standard IGAs to instead empowering them with IGAs. This necessitates going beyond simply “adding women and stirring” to focusing on improving the gender dynamics preventing women from being empowered by IGAs. This includes focusing on improving women’s control over IGAs rather than simply their access to them, by ensuring their equal role in financial decision making, ownership, management and operation of IGAs. Furthermore, ensuring equal allocation of IGA earnings to make sure equal intra-household benefits and equal division of household work to ensure women do not face a double burden by also engaging in productive work. In relation to this, while it may seem more urgent and sometimes easier to target women in female headed households with IGAs as there are less intra-household gendered barriers going against them, we still need to focus on empowering the majority of women who live in male headed households (Chant 2003). Women in male headed households face serious patriarchal risks (including male dominance, domestic violence, restricted mobility, women’s sole responsibility of household work, women’s restriction from breadwinning) which female household heads may be exempt from On the other hand, men’s departure may well enhance the economic security and well-being of other household members,

21

and even if women may be poorer in income as heads of their households they may feel more socially empowered (higher control and access) and less vulnerable to violence and restriction (Chant 2003). Furthermore women in male headed households may one day become female heads themselves, whether from choice, abandonment or being widowed. Thus the need to become economically empowered and financially independent is just as important for women in male headed households as it is for female household heads. Gender inequality needs to be addressed within as well as beyond the boundaries of household units. Unless factors such as ‘secondary poverty’ within households are recognised then efforts to empower women through IGAs may well come to nothing. We need to look beyond women to gender relations - the roles of men as well as women and how they interact. It is not possible to move gender systems far towards equality without broad social consensus in favour of gender equality – and that consensus must include men and boys (Connell 2003). Research has repeatedly shown that patterns of gender inequality are interwoven with social definitions of masculinity and men's gender identities. To move towards a gender-equal society often requires men and boys to think and act in new ways, to reconsider traditional images of manhood, and to reshape their relationships with women and girls. Men and boys are most likely to support change towards gender equality when they can see positive benefits for themselves and the people in their lives.

Reasoning for Focus on Empowering Women with IGAs

Since evidence demonstrates men and women are not entering IGA interventions from the same starting point, to reach a point of gender equity, projects must necessarily treat women and men differently. Thus in order to allow IGA interventions to benefit and empower men and women equally, positive discrimination towards women must be applied. There are multiple benefits in improving the lives and living conditions of women. Not only does women’s empowerment bring immediate improvements for women themselves, it also results in benefits for other members of the household and the community. Economically empowering women not only reduces the likelihood of household poverty, but placing household resources in women’s hands generally leads to a range of positive outcomes for human capital and inter-generational capabilities (Kabeer, 2012). By targeting women within households with assets that they themselves can generate an income from, programmes can contribute to a sustainable transition from extreme poverty. Avoiding over-investment in males at the cost of females ensures that donor money is not wasted in the event of separation or death of husbands and adult sons (Faulkner 2014). Women can and want to work, all they need is an enabling environment. Without women as income earners we cannot eradicate extreme poverty.

NGO responses to reasons for targeting women Despite the identified gender gap in implementation of livelihoods interventions and a demonstrated lack of understanding of how to ensure interventions are gender-sensitive in practice, there appeared to be high level of awareness among NGO staff for why a focus on women’s empowerment is important: DSK: "If the IGA is given to the woman, then the whole family is more likely to benefit from IGA earnings leading to whole-family welfare and economic empowerment"

22

Hellen Keller International: "in CHT women control all aspects of work, both productive and reproductive - cooking, childcare and income generation. Thus if women are not given their right to manage and head the household they face problems. As women do everything they should be recognised and receive dignity. If women are more valued then the whole family can make better progress." Care: "Socio-economic empowerment of the whole household requires engaging both men and women with work. In order to enhance women's social status and empowerment in a more sustainable way there is a need for combined efforts to both increasing their economic empowerment and reversing social gender norms within households and communities" Practical Action Bangladesh: "Women usually invest more time in managing IGAs and will prioritise spending IGA earnings on children, nutrition and education. This is also important for the income diversification, better division of labour and graduation of the HH" Uttaran: "to empower women and reduce discrimination, targeting women is very important in project design. This is especially important because husbands commonly abandon their wives so women need financial independence and economic empowerment!" Save the Children: "If a woman makes profits from IGAs then the husband is more likely to not abandon the family, return to the family if he abandoned them already, and the wife is more able to manage the family alone without him. Women need real effective ownership of IGAs for financial independence!" Netz:”Transferring assets and its ownership to female household members is considered a vehicle to address gender equity, women’s empowerment and self help, which are all Netz’core values.”

Part Two: Recommendation for Step-by-Step Strategy IGA strategies for women should be integrated into programmes as early as possible. The support required will differ according to different contexts, but can be broadly divided into three categories: 1. Hardware. This is the core IGA and mechanism of IGA development. 2. Software. Hardware is nothing without software. 3. Sustainability Strategies. These will ensure women’s engagement with and empowerment from IGA will be sustained in the long run. This Step-by-step strategy not only presents some of the best options for Hardware, Software, and Sustainability Strategies, but outlines the process of integrating an effective IGA strategy into existing projects. Where possible, this strategy should be developed during project inception. Individual BHHs may require different degrees of support from each of these categories. The options are briefly summarised in Table 1:

23

Table 1: Summary Table of Step-by-Step Process to IGA Selection for Women

Step 1: Context Analysis

Step 2: Hardware Options Step 3: Software Options Step 4: Sustainability Strategies

Beneficiary is capable and confident manage their own non-traditional IGAs + and enabling environment is feasible

1.Gender Transformative IGA: Small-scale Market-based Entrepreneurship (grocery shop, beauty parlour, tea stall, tailoring shop, vegetable business, handicraft business) Land-based cultivation Aquaculture Private Sector/Factory Work

Training for female beneficiary on IGA/business management, productive profit reinvestment, marketing, accounting, financial literacy, savings Establish Women’s Support Groups including: group savings, IGA, group child care and general support network, Gender Awareness Sensitisation training with whole HH and whole community on socio-economic benefit of women working, women’s rights, stopping gender discrimination and violence, sharing productive and reproductive work, etc Men’s groups on gender awareness raising Couple’s Therapy Groups on gender awareness raising Social Mobilisation with community leaders (religious leaders, village leaders, teachers, Local government, UP Chairmen, etc) on gender awareness and socio-economic benefit of women working Create female-friendly Market Places (or women’s corners at market-places) with female toilet facilities, Market linkages or Central Collective Marketing Centres for female beneficiaries

Lobbying Campaigns with Private Sector Employers/Landlords on equal wages and equal recruitment of women, equal khasland provision Enable women’s Labour Union linkages Encourage women’s participation in local politics as female representatives in local governance structures and community meetings. Lobby with local government. Gender awareness raising with marketing actors (vendors, male entrepreneurs, male customers, etc) for female-friendly market places with equal prices, no harassment/violence and discrimination

Beneficiary is most suited for traditional IGA and/or with outsider support to manage IGA

2.Traditional IGA: Livestock Rearing Homestead Gardening Homestead Based Business/shop OR Any of the Gender Transformative IGAs jointly managed with husband, especially for marketing and hard physical labour

24

Table 2: Explanatory Overview of Two Types of IGAs for Women: Traditional IGAs

Gender Transformative IGAs

Homestead based

Market and Land based

Small Scale

Large Scale

Compatible with women maintaining their household responsibilities but not adequate as a main income source for the family

More profitable and sustainable as they involve marketing linkages outside the homestead or more large-scale land-based work; i.e. traditional male work.

Work within existing gender norms Challenge social norms about their movement within the wider community and society

Easier and low-risk for women to do Pose potential risks to household and community dynamics and require additional skill training for women on marketing, accounting etc.

Empower women practically to do a small extent without changing underlying systematic inequalities

Promote longer term societal change towards equality between men and women and empower them both economically and socially in a more sustainable way

Address Practical Gender Needs

Address Strategic Gender Needs

Step 1 – Context-specific IGA Analysis Prior to IGA selection for the female beneficiary, NGO field staff should facilitate in-depth context analysis in order to assess the market viability, regional context and beneficiary capacity given household composition, age, prevalence of restrictive gender norms, resilience and risk factors. This includes a participatory session with the beneficiary household. During this session it is important to ensure the participation of all household members and to give the female beneficiary priority in decision-making and sharing her opinion. Preferably a separate session should also be held with the female beneficiary alone to avoid dominance of other household members on her decision-making power. It is the responsibility of the NGO field staff to encourage the female beneficiary to select an IGA which she can manage herself or jointly with her husband/male guardian. Field staff should always encourage women to take on main IGAs that are both profitable, sustainable and gender transformative (i.e. not only secondary traditional IGAs for women that do not serve as a main HH income source). Thus, ensuring the female beneficiary is able to make an informed choice about which IGA she is capable and socially enabled to do is crucial. This necessitates comprehensive orientation on the socio-economic benefits of women engaging in more profitable, sustainable and gender transformative IGAs. Yet importantly, there is “no one magic bullet” to how to best empower women with IGAs. As women do not live in vacuum, it inevitably depends on the environment she is embedded in according to various context analysis indicators as presented in table 3.

25

Table 3: Context Analysis Overview Table of Categories

Context Analysis Category

Elements

Age of female beneficiary • Adolescent girl • Adult woman • Old age woman

Household Structure • Male Headed, Female Headed or Female

Managed (silently female headed). See table 10 for details.

• Number of dependents:young children, elderly, disabled

• Availability of other male guardians: adult son, father, brother, father in-law

Geographical location

• North: Especially affected by seasonal hunger “Monga”

• The “Haor” region: “Basin” shaped landscape, during rainy season the area is under water separating communities into islands

• South West Coastalbelt: Most vulnerable to severe climatic shocks including cyclones

• The Chittagong Hill Tracts: Indigenous ethnic minority communities mainly living off Jhum (slash and burn) cultivation and suffering from diminished access to land

• Urban: Street dwellers and slum dwellers of Dhaka’s three largest slums, high population density and lack of hygiene and safe water

Local Market Analysis

• Demand • Supply • Competition • Market Linkages: Market places, vendors,

collection centres, etc

Prevalence of Restrictive Local Gender Norms • Community level: conservative norms restricting women’s mobility and work, influence of religion and religious leaders

• Household level: restrictive husband, in-laws or other adult male members (adult son, brother)

26

Beneficiary Capacity and Preference

• Skills and experience • Training opportunities available • Informed Choice • Motivation

Sustainability vs. Risk Analysis

• Sustainability of Traditional IGAs: risk

avert +accommodating of traditional gender norms

• Sustainability of Gender Transformative IGAs: gender norm transformation + income diversification + higher HH economic resilience and empowerment

• Consider trade-off and avoid putting female beneficiary at any high risk of violence or harassment due to IGA selection.

Table 4: Overview of IGA Context Analysis According to Household Type based on study findings from NGO Project Staff survey and FDGs with beneficiaries

Women in Male Headed Households

Majority of Cases Exceptional Cases Depends on

Homestead Based Traditional IGAs Factors:

- traditional 'male breadwinner/female caretaker' model

- Husband restricting her mobility, work outside HH, financial decision making and engagement in marketing of IGAs,

- Threat of domestic violence from husband make wives fearful of taking on IGAs outside the homestead

- Husbands’ jealousy or fear for the “safety” of their wives make them reluctant to let their wives work outside the homestead where they are exposed to other men

Market-based and land-based non-traditional IGAs Factors:

- The more the HH is struggling the less restrictive the gender norms become and the more likely it is that the women will engage in doing IGAs outside the homestead

- Joint model is most common among these cases: husband and wife both share work doing market-based and land-based IGA, either share reproductive HH work (in the CHT) or double burden for women, joint financial decision making, this joint model makes women feel

Gender dynamics in male headed HHs tend to be reinforced as the HH gets richer, whereas the poor the HH is the less relevant the gender norms become out of necessity to survive Depends on restrictive/supportive attitudes of husband, adult son and in-laws Level of confidence Level of skills or the skill training she can receive The number of dependents she needs to take care of adding to the double burden of reproductive household work Her husband or other family

27

more secure - Dominance of husband in

control of IGA earning remains prevalent even if the wife is operating IGAs that are more profitable

- Most women doing these kinds of IGAs still need support from their husbands for financial decision making and market selling due to lack of financial literacy skills and gender discrimination at market places

members’ willingness to support her with the reproductive household work

- Shared model is more common in the CHT.

Female Households Heads

Majority of Cases Exceptional Cases Depends on Homestead Based Traditional IGAs Factors: - Single women are far more

likely to opt for traditional homestead based assets which are traditionally female and seen as “safe” even if they knew the expected pay off was lower

- No male guardian to support her with IGAs thus choose IGA she can manage alone

- Face challenges doing traditional male tasks: marketing/price negotiation, physically hard labour, travelling far distances for market selling and raw material collection, financial decision making and general IGA management.

- Double burden of reproductive household work make it difficult for single women to work

Market-based and land-based non-traditional IGAs Factors: - Mostly single women take on

these kinds of IGAs if they have male relatives to support them managing and operating it; especially collecting material form whole seller and selling produce at market places.

- Older single women are more likely to take on IGAs which require them to move around outside their homestead and village, surveyed BHHs reported this was because they were less at risk at sexual assault (Faulkner 2014, p. 14)

- Despite encouragements from field officers, single women are still very unlikely to select these types of IGAs as they considered more “risky” and single women cannot afford to lose their only income source if the IGA should fail (Faulkner 2014, p.16)

- No husband to restrict her: more freedom and mobility

Level of confidence - initially after

abandonment/divorce/loss confidence might be low

Level of skills or the skill training she can receive Community stigma vs. community sympathy: - Single women often face

harassment and stigma due to being without a husband

- But many also receive sympathy from the community, accepting her need to be a breadwinner and helping her with food donations and informal loans

Whether adult male son or guardian is available to support or restrict her - Often the adult son takes on the

role of the male heads in the husband’s absence

The number of dependents she needs to take care of adding to the double burden of reproductive household work - Many single women take their

28

outside the homestead, especially if they have many dependents.

- IGA selection is sometimes difficult as they often lack awareness of what IGAs will be more profitable and suitable for them

- Some single women reported being afraid of doing IGAs outside their homestead because this would involve interaction with other men and put them at risk of sexual assault (Owasim 2014, p.12)

- Single women with adolescent daughter reported not wanted to do IGAs outide their homestead because they worried this would risk deteriorating their daughters’ reputation making them less likely to get married off. Thus many single women with daughter only choose to do IGAs outside their homestead after their daughters have been married off. (Owasim 2014, p.12)

- Necessity to do more profitable IGA as the sole breadwinner makes single women more likely to become entrepreneurs and do IGAs outside their HH.

- Female heads take more challenges and risks out of necessity

- More dedicated and hardworking.

- "when women lose their husbands they are considered equal to men" (ref. Concern Worldwide project staff), i.e. women without husbands are usually socially accepted to do most of the IGAs their husbands did before.

children out of school to engage them in child labour or to help with the household work as early as possible

Women in Female Managed Households (Silently Female Headed)

Majority of Cases

Exceptional Cases

Depends on:

Homestead Based Traditional IGAs Factors - Double burden of

reproductive household work with higher burden of care of disabled/sick husband is a key factor making women unable to

Market-based and land-based non-traditional IGAs Factors - High medical treatment costs

for disabled/sick husband sometimes necessitate wife to work doing more profitable non-traditional IGAs or take

Husband’s level of disability/illness - If less severe: Joint non-traditional

IGA with support from husband for marketing, less demanding physical labour and financial decision-making.

- If severe: mostly homestead based traditional IGA, but also exceptionally non-traditional IGAs if husband allows it and if she has

29

do work outside the homestead

- Restrictive and dominant attitudes of the disabled/sick husband is a major factor preventing the wife from working outside the homestead

- Some cases were reporting of husbands choosing IGAs for themselves (e.g. rickshaw van) despite not being able to operate it, and no IGA for their wife (Faulkner 2014, p. 15).

loans - These IGAs are usually jointly

manages by both wife and sick/disabled husband, in cases where he is still able to work to a limited extent.

- These are usually cases where the husband is more supportive and less restrictive allowing the wife to work in garments factories or domestic service.

- In some very rare cases where the husband is not severely disabled/ill he allows his wife to migrate for work while he stays back to manage the household and children alone.

- A key negative trend is dominant restrictive husbands controlling the IGA earnings of their wife so that even if she does more profitable IGAs the economic benefits do not necessarily go to her and the children

support from others for care work Social restrictions imposed by disabled/sick husband Older male son to either support or restrict her Young children or other disabled/sick/elderly HH members to take care of Community stigma vs. community sympathy - Some women with disabled/sick

husbands receive sympathy from the community, accepting her need to be a breadwinner and helping her with food donations and informal loans

Level of confidence Level of skills, opportunities for training and IGA experience

Unmarried Adolescent Girls

Majority of Cases

Exceptional Cases

Depends on

Traditional homestead based IGAs + gets support for marketing from father/brother Factors: - Homestead based tailoring

is most common - Face more restrictions

from parents, grandparents, aunts/uncles and brothers

- More vulnerable to sexual harassment, violence, community stigma

- Fear of hampering the girl’s reputation making her unable to get married off

Garments work or Domestic Service Factors: - if the household is struggling a

lot - if the adult guardians have less

restrictive attitudes - More common in female

headed household where the adolescent daughter is sent to work out of necessity

Gender dynamics in male headed HHs tend to be reinforced as the HH gets richer, whereas the poor the HH is the less relevant the gender norms become out of necessity to survive Depends on restrictive/supportive attitudes of parents, grandparents brother, other relatives Level of confidence Level of skills or the skill training she can receive Prevalence of conservative gender norms in community Risk of trafficking of girls in the community

30

Table 5: IGA Option Overview Table based on Context Analysis Regions Gender Norms Market NGOs Traditional

IGAs Gender Transformative IGAs

Haor Very conservative and patriarchal (e.g. restricted mobility, women not accepted as breadwinners, child marriage, violence against women, women’s restricted decision-making)

Seasonal Concern Worldwide, Helvetas

Livestock, homestead gardening, homestead-based business/shop, food processing

Small market-based business (grocery shop, tea stall, cosmetic shop, tailoring shop), land cultivation + marketing of produce, Basket selling

Urban More liberal but still conservative (e.g. less restricted mobility, women more accepted as breadwinners, but high rates of violence and abandonment, women’s double burden as sole caretakers, women’s restricted decision-making)

Very large and diverse

DSK, Priptrust Homestead-based business/shop (tailoring, handicraft, beauty parlour)

Construction, Garments, domestic Service, Small market-based business (grocery shop, tea stall cosmetic shop, tailoring shop)

Chittagong Hill Tracts

Matriarchal and liberal (free mobility, female breadwinners, shared household work, equal decision-making) but ethnic-based gender

Remote, no linkages, ethnic discrimination

Tarango, Caritas, Eco Dev, Green Hill, HKI

Livestock, homestead gardening, homestead-based handicraft

Jhum Cultivation + Market selling of produce, Handicraft business,

31

discrimination by Bengalis (e.g. violence and harassment)

Southern Coastal Belt

Very conservative and patriarchal (e.g. restricted mobility, women not accepted as breadwinners, child marriage and violence against women, women’s double burden as sole caretakers, women’s restricted decision-making)

Connected to coast

Save the Children, Uttaran, Oxam, Shushilan, iDE

Livestock, homestead gardening, homestead-based business/shop (handicraft, tailoring, beauty parlour), food processing

Aquaculture, Small market-based business (grocery shop, tea stall, cosmetic shop, tailoring shop), vegetable cultivation + selling, agriculture + selling of produce, Basket selling

North Conservative and patriarchal (e.g. less restricted mobility, women more accepted as breadwinners, but high rates of child marriage and violence against women, women’s double burden as sole caretakers, women’s restricted decision-making)

Large and diverse

Care, PAB, Netz, Helvetas

Livestock, homestead gardening, homestead-based business/shop (handicraft, tailoring, beauty parlour), food processing

Rug factories, Indigo factories, Handicraft business, Sandbar cropping, vegetable cultivation + selling, agriculture + selling of produce, Small market-based business (grocery shop, tea stall, cosmetic shop, tailoring shop), Basket selling

32

Step 2 – Select Hardware Overall Recommendations to IGA Selection Process:

• Participatory approach engaging all household members in the IGA selection process • Give priority to women's preference and opinion • Make it "compulsory" for female beneficiary to select an IGA which she can herself manage and

operate unless she is physically incapable (in which case caretaker system may be a solution, see Guidance Note on IGAs for Disabled and Old Age People) or if engaging in an IGA poses high risk to her security

• Inform female beneficiary about skill training available for her to receive in order to encourage her to do IGAs she has no previous experience with or skills for

• Encourage women to do more profitable gender transformative market-based, land/water-based IGAs or jointly managed IGAs with husbands or other female beneficiaries where appropriate and there is no high risk to her security involved

• Provide awareness session around socio-economic benefits of women engaging with IGAs during IGA selection meeting with whole household

• If wife chooses non-traditional gender transformative IGA, discuss household strategy with all members for how to manage the sharing reproductive household work to avoid double burden on woman

• It is important to remember that the constraints and restrictions women face are very real, and women should not be forced into taking on assets that they are not comfortable with and who will put them at serious risk. However, by providing the necessary skills and training, along with asset transfer, it is more likely that women will develop the confidence to take on more “risky” assets.

Table 6: Overview of different IGA Types for women Type 1: Traditional homestead-based IGAs for Women

(e.g. livestock, homestead gardening, homestead aquaculture, homestead business/shop) Benefits Challenges - Accommodating of traditional gender norms of

women as homestead-based caretakers and housewives because IGAs are homestead based.

- Livestock can follow her around while she is doing her other household tasks.

- Women are habituated to and feel comfortable managing livestock rearing and would thus not require any further skill training or support from others.

- Increase women’s economic and social empowerment to a limited extent: e.g. give women recognition as income earners with increased voice, confidence and access to IGA earnings and/or food produce, but does not necessarily equate her control over the use of earnings and distribution of food and financial decision making

- Give women the opportunity to sell IGA produce from home

- Put women at less risk of domestic violence

- Not suitable as main source of income because it is not sufficiently profitable due to lack of marketing outside homestead (unless husband or male guardian supports wife with marketing of livestock and produce) and due to lack of sufficient land at homestead

- Not sufficient for women as main income source if they should become female headed

- Not sufficient for sustainable graduation out of extreme poverty

- Not sufficient for women’s long-term social and economic empowerment, as it does not transform gender norms or improve unequal intra-household gender relations

- High dependence on male guardian for marketing IGA produce at market places and buying raw material from whole seller as women lack marketing skills and social acceptance for mobility outside homestead

- High mortality rate of livestock - Lack broader market linkages

33

and condemnation by husband/in-laws and sexual assault, harassment and stigma by community members

- Livestock seen as providing households with a sense of social status and security serving as asset savings

- Some women state they prefer being housewives and not working or doing IGAs that they can manage from home. They will only not stay at home if they have no other option; e.g. if they have no husband or male guardian to support them, or if the family is struggling so they have to work. We have seen examples of female beneficiaries who would previously do day labour or domestic service work, but after the Shiree intervention they would select livestock as IGA so they can afford to stay at home.

Type 2: Gender Transformative IGAs –Market-Based Entrepreneurship IGAs (e.g. tailoring business, shop, tea stall, basket-selling)

Benefits Challenges - IGA more profitable and functions as a main

income source - IGA suitable for sustainable graduation from

extreme poverty - Enhances the household’s economic well-being

with two income earners - Allows beneficiary to keep savings to become

more resilient to shocks - Allows the beneficiary to reinvest in other

productive and non-productive assets - Enables women’s more sustainable social and

economic empowerment as it challenges traditional gender norms

- Enables women’s enhanced influence of household decision making and makes intra-household gender relations more equal

- Enhances women’s status in the community and household recognised as financially independent breadwinner and entrepreneur

- If husband were to fall ill, abandon the household or pass away, the woman would still be financially independent as a breadwinner

- Sets a good female role model for other women and girls in the community, including daughters of the female breadwinner, which may lead to broader and more sustainable gender transformation at the community level

-

- In most cases women lack previous experience with entrepreneurship, business and marketing

- Women often lack necessary skills for financial literacy, accounting and business management

- Market places are male dominated and not gender sensitive, e.g. lack female toilet facilities

- Community stigma and harassment against women who sell produce or run businesses at market places

- Stigma and restrictions from household and community members to let women move around outside their homestead and village

- Risk of harassment and assault by community members against women who move around alone outside their homestead and do traditional male work

- Women’s limited bargaining power and discrimination against female entrepreneurs in price negotiation with vendours and customers

- Women’s limited physical capacity to carry heavy produce to the market place

- Risk of domestic violence against women due to challenging traditional gender roles. Husband may perceive this as a threat to their masculinity and in-laws may perceive this as shameful for their son.

- Risk of community people talking bad about the women and hampering the family honour

- Women’s double burden of reproductive household work if they do not receive support from other household members

34

- Require more ‘software’ inputs by NGOs, e.g. social mobilization, awareness raising, training for women, etc.

- NGO staff reported:”this is not suitable for women in our Bengali culture”

Type 3: Gender Transformative IGAs – Private Sector Engagement & Land/Water-based IGAs (e.g. RMG, Rug factory, Construction, Domestic Service, Cleaner, Agriculture, Aquaculture)

Benefits Challenges - More profitable and functions as a main

income source - Suitable for sustainable graduation from

extreme poverty - Enhances the household’s economic well-being

with two income earners - Allows beneficiary to keep savings to become

more resilient to shocks - Allows the beneficiary to reinvest in other

productive and non-productive assets - Enables women’s more sustainable social and

economic empowerment as it challenges traditional gender norms

- Enables women’s enhanced influence of household decision making and makes intra-household gender relations more equal

- Enhances women’s status in the community and household recognised as financially independent breadwinner and entrepreneur

- If husband were to fall ill, abandon the household or pass away, the woman would still be financially independent as a breadwinner

- Sets a good female role model for other women and girls in the community, including daughters of the female breadwinner, which may lead to broader and more sustainable gender transformation in the community

- Introducing new innovative types of IGAs for female beneficiaries (e.g. rug factory, indigo dying) sometimes easier for social acceptance because these IGAs are not already embedded in traditional gender norms usually attached to standard types of IGAs.

- Permanence of private sector employment compared to entrepreneurship and other IGAs.

- For adolescent girls, engaging in private sector employment can be essential for delaying their marriage and pregnancy, avoiding child marriage and child pregnancy.

- Adivasi women have traditionally always been engaged in Jhum cultivation so for them this is a very suitable IGA.

- Historically Bengali women were also farmers,

- In most cases women lack previous experience and skills

- Work places are often male dominated and not gender sensitive, e.g. lack female toilet facilities and places for women to change and dispose of sanitary pads during menstruation

- Unequal wages, discrimination against female workers by up to 50%

- Women’s limited physical capacity to do land cultivation

- Community stigma and harassment against women who do work outside their homestead

- Stigma and restrictions from household and community members to let women move around outside their homestead and village

- Risk of harassment and assault by community members against women who move around alone outside their homestead and do traditional male work

- Risk of community people talking bad about the women and hampering the family honour

- Risk of domestic violence against women due to challenging traditional gender roles. Husband may perceive this as a threat to their masculinity and in-laws may perceive this as shameful for their son.

- Women’s double burden of reproductive household work if they do not receive support from other household members

- Private sector jobs often require women’s more long-term migration away from their family which is difficult for women given their traditional gender role as caretakers

- Beneficiaries’ fear to engage in factory work after the Rana Plaza collapse on 24 April 2013.

- Require more ‘software’ inputs by NGOs, e.g. social mobilization, awareness raising, training for women, etc.

- NGO staff reported:”this is not suitable for women in our Bengali culture”

- Extreme poor sometimes less willing to try new types of innovative and unfamiliar IGAs as they cannot afford taking risks

35

yet in the past decades this has become less socially acceptable in Bangladesh.

Type 4: Joint IGA management/operations (husband and wife or groups of women)

Benefits Challenges - Joint management between husband and wife

of traditional male IGA (e.g. market-based businesses) more socially accepted within communities and households

- Jointly managed IGAs between groups of women outside the homestead enhances their confidence, security from harassment/assault, their bargaining power and their physical capacity than if they were running the IGA alone

- Women’s group IGAs enable a support network of how best to manage and operate IGAs, which is especially useful for women without male guardians to support them

- More profitable and functions as a main income source

- Suitable for sustainable graduation from extreme poverty

- Enhances the household’s economic well-being with two income earners

- Allows the beneficiary to reinvest in other productive and non-productive assets

- Allows beneficiary to keep savings to become more resilient to shocks

- Enables women’s more sustainable social and economic empowerment as it challenges traditional gender norms

- Enables women’s enhanced influence of household decision making and makes intra-household gender relations more equal

- Enhances women’s status in the community and household recognised as financially independent breadwinner and entrepreneur

- If husband were to fall ill, abandon the household or pass away, the woman would still be financially independent as a breadwinner

- Sets a good female role model for other women and girls in the community, including daughters of the female breadwinner, which may lead to broader and more sustainable gender transformation in the community

- Women’s collective IGAs can fail due to negative group dynamics, tension and lack of trust

- In most cases women lack previous experience with entrepreneurship, business and marketing

- Women often lack necessary skills for financial literacy, accounting and business management

- Market places are often male dominated and not gender sensitive, e.g. lack female toilet facilities

- Community stigma and harassment against women who sell produce or run businesses at market places

- Stigma and restrictions from household and community members to let women move around outside their homestead and village

- Risk of harassment and assault by community members against women who move around outside their homestead and do traditional male work

- Risk of community people talking bad about the women and hampering the family honour

- Women’s limited bargaining power and discrimination against female entrepreneurs in price negotiation with vendours and customers

- Women’s limited physical capacity to carry heavy produce to the market place

- Risk of domestic violence against women due to challenging traditional gender roles. Husband may perceive this as a threat to their masculinity and in-laws may perceive this as shameful for their son.

- Women’s double burden of reproductive household work if they do not receive support from other household members

- Require more ‘software’ inputs by NGOs, e.g. social mobilization, awareness raising, training for women, etc.

- NGO staff reported:”this is not suitable for women in our Bengali culture”

- From FGDs with beneficiaries doing joint IGAs between husband and wife, the vast majority reported using a traditional division of labour where the wife does the homestead based tasks (food processing) and the husband would do the remaining tasks outside the household (land cultivation, raw material collection,

36

marketing, transportation etc). Almost all of the husbands surveyed said they didn’t think their wives would be able to continue the business in their absence (Faulkner 2014, p.16-17)

Step 3 – Implement Women-focused Software Systems A critical success factor to empowering women through IGAS is the extent of the socially transformative nature of the IGA on the female beneficiary and her environment: both economic and social dimensions of their disempowerment must be addressed and reversed. Overall Recommendations based on NGO Project Staff interviews and BHHs FGDs:

• Training must be provided to female beneficiary on: IGA and business management, productive reinvestment from profits, marketing, accounting, financial literacy, savings

• Establish Women’s Support Groups as a platform to advice each other (on IGA related issues, mental support for female household heads) and to enable collective childcare, group savings and collective marketing and management of IGAs

• Gender Awareness Behaviour Change Counseling with whole household and community members on women’s rights, mobility, stopping gender discrimination and violence, sharing productive and reproductive work, the socio-economic benefit of women working, family planning, child marriage, equal nutrition and health care, equal decision making etc, facilitated by trained field staff

• Establish Men’s groups to discuss the need for positive male role models for gender equality and stopping discrimination and violence, facilitated by trained male field staff

• Establish Couple’s Therapy Sessions on gender equality within households, facilitated by trained Field staff

• Conduct Street Theatre sessions at village level for awareness raising on gender issues, e.g. violence against women

• Social mobilization efforts with local community leaders (e.g. religious leaders, teachers, village leaders, elite, UP members) on gender awareness raising and the socio-economic benefit of women’s engagement in IGAs

• Establish female-friendly Market Linkages: Women's Market Places (or women’s corners at market-places) with female toilet facilities or Central Collective Marketing Centres for female beneficiaries

• Give women assurance that they will be trained adequately in the initial discussions as this might help reduce risk aversion.

• Provide the option of compensation packages if women opt for a business in which they will take the lead.

• Encourage women to form groups which enable them to visit the market together, and ensure they are properly trained in going to the market by female field officers.

• Provide examples of other extreme poor Bangladeshi women who are doing similar jobs with ease, e.g. successful female entrepreneurs – perhaps through videos or inviting other female

37

beneficiaries to come and share their positive experiences highlighting the reasons why it was easy for them, provide advice and serve as positive role models.

• Where women are not the main breadwinner, at least ensure they are engaged in some form of IGA so they are not fully dependent and can sustain themselves and the family if the husband should leave, become injured or die. For the same reason it is helpful that both women and men get training on any IGA that if transferred to a household – even if the IGA will mainly be operated by the husband.

• Encourage joint management, decision-making and operation of any IGA transferred to the household.

• Encourage women to do more gender transformative IGAs in all cases where she is physically capable and it does not put her security at any severe risk.

• Hire and train female field staff who can provide follow-up and motivational support to female beneficiaries engaged with IGA.

Step 4 – Sustainability Strategies Overall Recommendations based on NGO Project Staff interviews and BHHs FGDs:

• Lobbying Campaigns with Private Sector employers for equal wages and equal recruitment of female employees

• Gender awareness raising with local market actors (e.g. vendours and other male entrepreneurs) to enable female friendly market linkages and market places with gender equal price negotiation, no harassment and violence and female toilet and sanitation facilities

• Link with labour unions • Lobbying with landlords for equal khasland provision for women without male guardians • Enable Labour Union linkages for women • Encourage women’s participation in local politics as female representatives in local governance

structures and meetings. Lobbying campaign with local government. • Lobbying Campaigns with local government to promote women’s access to public services (e.g.

health care), social safety nets for women (e.g. widow allowance), and legal services (e.g. for cases of domestic violence)

• Promote the participation of women in local governance structures and community meetings to ensure effective programme implementation: eg. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) guidelines recommend that women are represented in the social audit forum (a grassroots monitoring mechanism), CFPR programme in Bangladesh encourages women to participate in the specially created Village Poverty Reduction Committees (comprised of local elites) which aims, in part, to increase women’s social capital.

38

Bibliography

Akhter U. Ahmed, Ruth Vargas Hill, Lisa C. Smith, Dor is M. Wiesmann, Tim Frankenberger (2007), The World’s Most Deprived: Characteristics and Causes of Extreme Poverty and Hunger, 2020 Discussion Paper 43, International Food Policy Research Institute, Available at - www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/vp43.pdf, Accessed 03 March 2014 Banerjee , A. and Duflo, E. (2011), Poor Economics (New York: Public Affairs)

BRIDGE (2001) Briefing Paper on the ‘Feminisation of Poverty’ (prepared for the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency). BRIDGE Report No. 59 (Sussex: Institute of Development Studies).

Chant, Silvia H. (2003). Female Household Headship and the feminization of poverty: facts, fictions and forward strategies. London: LSE.

Connell, R. W. (7 October 2003), “The role of men and boys in achieving gender equality”, United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW) in collaboration with International Labour Organization (ILO)Joint United Nations Programmes on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)Expert Group Meeting on“The role of men and boys in achieving gender equality” 21 to 24 October 2003Brasilia, Brazil

EEP/Shiree Baseline Report “Characteristics of Shiree Beneficiary Households” (2011)

EEP/Shiree CMS 3 Report (2012)“Similarities and differences in the socio-economic and nutritional status between male and female headed households”

EEP/Shiree Baseline Report 2014 - State of Extreme Poverty Report (August 2014)

Faulkner, Sally (2014), Assessing women’s choice in asset empowerment strategies in south west coastal region of Bangladesh. EEP/Shiree. Bangladesh

Holmes and Jones (2010) “Social Protection Programming – the Need for Gender Lens”. 1-4. Available at: http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/4944.pdf

Kabeer, Naila (2003), Gender Mainstreaming in Poverty Eradication and the Millenium Development Goals: A Handbook for Policy-Makers and Other Stakeholders (London: Commonwealth Secretariat).

Kabeer, Naila (2012), “Women’s economic empowerment and inclusive growth: labour markets and enterprise development”, [online] Available at: http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Documents/NK-WEE-Concept-Paper.pdf

Mascie-Taylor, Nick, Goto, Dr. Rie, and Pettersson, Marie Sophie (April 2014). A combined Quantitative and Qualitative examination of factors contributing to the graduation from extreme poverty of Bangladeshi households between March 2010 and March 2013. EEP/Shiree. Bangladesh

Mascie-Taylor, Nick and Goto, Dr Rie (August 2014) CMS 3: Monitoring the changes in Socio-Economic & Nutritional status of extreme poor households between March 2010 and March 2014; results from the nine panel surveys

39

Mascie-Taylor, Nick and Goto, Dr Rie (August 2013) CMS 3: Monitoring the changes in Socio-Economic & Nutritional status of extreme poor households between March 2010 and March 2013; results from the eight panel surveys. EEP/Shiree. Bangladesh

Owasim Akram (2014) “Coping Strategies and Challenges to Food Security of Female Headed Households in Coastal Areas”, EEP/Shiree, Oxfam, Bangladesh

Silberschmidt, M. (2001) “Disempowerment of Men in Rural and Urban East Africa: Implications for Male Identity and Sexual Behavior”, World Development 29(4): 657-671.

Swaminathan, H. Lahoti, R. and Suchitra, J.Y. (2012), “Women’s Property, Mobility, and Decision-making Evidence from Rural Karnataka, India” [online] Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01188.pdf

War on Want (2011), “Stitched up: Women workers in the Bangladeshi garment sector” [online] Available at: http://www.waronwant.org/attachments/Stitched%20Up.pdf

40

Annex: Summary Table of NGO Survey on Female-Friendly IGAs

NGO Region Traditional IGAs for Women

Non-traditional IGAs?

Key Obstacles for Women with IGAs

Community and Household Response

Additional NGO Gender Measures?

Improvements Needed?

Scale Fund Projects Uttaran Project Staff Review

South Coastal

Livestock Small Homestead-based Business Homestead Cultivation Homestead Shop

Fishing on boat Van Pulling (2 cases) Construction Work Agricultural Work Day Labour

Marketing Mobility Outside Homestead Double Burden of Reproductive Work Resistance from Husband and Community Waterbody lease is 98% male dominated

Negative community resistance and stigma against women who go to markets to sell produce. A few negative responses from husbands (10-15%), disallowing women from working, stealing IGA money and abandoning wife. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Mostly target women as lead beneficiaries (95%) Equal division of land lease to men and women. Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC. Women’s involvement in savings groups.

Confidence-building for women Encouraging women’s equal role in financial decision-making Awareness building for whole household and community Financial Literacy and Marketing skills training for women Special workshop for widows and abandoned women Separate women-only area in market place to make markets more female-friendly Better market linkages for women, e.g. local central market point. Need bigger IGA packages to have both main IGA and secondary IGA which can include less-profitable female-friendly IGA. Encourage more jointly managed IGAs between husband and wife.

41

Uttaran BHHs FGD

South Coastal

All: Livestock Rearing Homestead gardening. FMH and MHH: Homestead tailoring business.

FHH: Tailoring shop in village. MHH: Husband and wife jointly work on land and jointly go to market to sell produce. MHH and FHH: construction work MHH: Teastall managed by husband and wife jointly MHH: husband and wife jointly manage vegetable business. FHH: brick making.

FHH: Lack mobility to access Upazilla market so only sell locally. FMH: Seeks help from others to do land cultivation and market selling as wife is widowed and a full-time carer of children, mother, chronically ill father and disabled brother. Women also do not have access to go to market. FMH: Cannot go to market because full-time carer of disabled husband so vendours come to her house but give her bad prices. MHH: after son got older and they became more graduated her son is restricting her from working on the land and from taking part in

Need better market linkages. More IGA options for FHHs and FMHs, e.g. grocery shop.

42

marketing and financial decision-making

Save the Children Project Staff Review

South Food Processing Homestead based tailoring business Homestead gardening Homestead shop Livestock Rearing

Garments Worker Domestic Helper Jointly Run Grocery Shop Agriculture Fishing Market-based business Tea Stall Market-based Grocery Shop

Lack of Access to Market for selling and collection of raw materials. Lack of Price Negotiation Skills. Social Restrictions by Husband, Son and In-Laws: Mobility, Decision-Making, Work. More restrictions in Muslim communities. Threat of Violence Against Women.

Husband restrictive and controlling. Domestic Violence. Community Rumour Spreading and Social Stigma. Community disapproval of non-traditional IGA. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Joint IGA selection process Training for women on traditional IGAs Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC

Better Market Linkages Women’s Savings Groups Women’s Support Groups More IGA training for women, incl. on non-traditional IGA. Financial Literacy and Marketing skills training for women

Save the ChildrenBHH FDG

All: Livestock rearing MHH: Basket Weaving at Home MHH: Fishing net making at home FMH: Food processing at home

FHH: Basket Making Business, buys raw material from whole sale market and sells them herself in neighbouring villages FHH: Sari Business, Cleaner, Water Distribution

Lack of confidence as sole breadwinner Women in MHH not allowed mobility to do selling of baskets outside the house. Lack of Financial Decision-Making.

Community shows abandoned woman sympathy and accepts her managing the business on her own. They also give her food donations. Social Restrictions by Husband and In-Laws: Mobility, Decision

43

Business, Domestic Helper

Restricted from running Grocery Shop, so son transports disabled husband to shop at market place, and also collects raw material.

Making

DSK Project Staff Review

Urban Slums

Homestead based Tailoring/Handicraft Business Homestead based Grocery Shop

Tea stall Beauty Parlour Mat business

Women’s Lack of Literacy and Numeracy Lack of Financial Literacy Women’s lack of security at market place after dark Women lack price negotiating skills Social stigma against FHH Sexual Harassment Double burden of reproductive work Inability to work during pregnancy

Community skepticism that if women were engaged with NGO-provided IGA it would convert them to Christianity. Sexual Harassment. Social Stigma. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC BHH Gender Awareness training about violence, dowry, child marriage, family planning and women’s rights. Women’s involvement in Community Based Organisations and savings groups.

Financial Literacy and Marketing skills training for women Make Marketplaces more female-friendly

44

Oxfam Project Staff Review

South Coastal

Livestock Rearing Household Business: Tailoring, Rug Making, Handicrafts Homestead gardening

Market-based business: Beauty Parlour, Mobile Top-up Business, Cake Selling

Husband’s dominance during IGA selection Restricted Mobility due to social norms in community and as enforced by other HH members. Fear of disapproval by others. Lack of literacy and numeracy. Lack of Physical Strength Lack of Confidence Double burden of reproductive work Lack of Motivation Lack of Financial Literacy and Business Skills Women’s own preference to stay at home.

Husband’s disapproval of wife selecting IGA for herself rather than for himself. Women given more voice in HH on financial matters. Women given more decision-making power. Women given more freedom of mobility. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process Make it mandatory for women to select IGA for herself to manage. Provide IGA and Value-Chain training to women. Women’s involvement in Community Based Organisations and savings groups.

Need bigger IGA packages to have both main IGA and secondary IGA which can include less-profitable female-friendly IGA.

45

Care Project Staff Review

North West

Livestock rearing Household Business: handicraft, tailoring Homestead gardening

Agricultural day labour Construction Work Market-based business: beauty parlour, grocery shop Rural-based Rug Factory Garments Factory Work Indigo Dying

Restrictive social norms on women’s mobility Double burden of reproductive work Markets are not female-friendly, e.g. no female toilet facilities Women often rely on husband for help with marketing produce Women’s lack of motivation to do main IGA if have husband who’s already a breadwinner Women lack confidence Risk-avert attitude towards engaging in new kind of IGA Women lack access to HH decision-making Social Stigma against widowed and abandoned women

Husbands are mostly supportive of their wives’ working.

Have created female-friendly central market places with female toilet facilities, and women’s corners at normal market places Lobbying and campaigning for equal Labour wages Women’s EKATA support groups with training on rights, IGA, discrimination an overall gender issues. IGA and accounting training Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process Women’s Savings Groups

More awareness building about benefits of engaging women with non-traditional IGAs with whole family and community More IGA and marketing training for women Factories need daycare facilities

46

Care BHH Focus Group Discussion

North West

Livestock rearing

Market-based business: grocery shop, cosmetic shop, some do all marketing alone without help from husbands, others do it jointly with husbands and others go to markets in groups of women Rug Factory

Some women said they find it hard to be away from their children during the day. Double Burden of Reproductive work. Domestic Violence is still a problem. Some cases of husband taking the earnings and not including the wife in financial decisions. Spending earnings on dowry to marry off daughters.

The women said they get fair prices when selling at the market place Some husbands now help them with the household work Women said they now do joint financial decision making in the household Women said they feel more confident at home and in the village after receiving IGA skill training and own IGA to manage Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner. Domestic Violence is still a problem. Some cases of husband taking the earnings and not including the wife in financial decisions.

Factory needs daycare for non-school age children

47

Practical Action Bangladesh Project Staff Review

North West

90-95% do livestock rearing homestead based businesses: grocery shop, handicraft, tailoring Homestead-based and floating gardening Homestead-based Cage aquaculture

FHH: Pumpkin cultivation + marketing MHH: Pumpkin cultivation done jointly with husbands, marketing done by husbands

Restrictive social norms on women’s mobility Double burden of reproductive work Lack of Marketing Skills and female-friendly market places Inability to do physically hard labour

Lack of social acceptance of women working by communities. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Awareness training on women’s rights and gender issues Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process Women’s Savings Groups

Financial Literacy training for Women IGA and Marketing Training

Caritas Project Staff Review

Chittagong Hill Tracts

All women’s secondary IGAs: Livestock rearing Homestead business: tailoring, handicraft Homestead vegetable cultivation

All women’s main IGAs: Jhum cultivation Market-based business: selling produce

Female Adivasis have more barriers with language and price negotiation than men Women’s lower financial literacy. Women have less marketing skills. Domestic Violence Husband’s Alcohol Addiction

Women face no restrictions on their mobility and move around freely and work on the land and at market places. Some Adivasi women face harassment when they go to Bengali market places, e.g. in Bandarban, but they face no problems within Adivasi communities. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Awareness building about ethnic discrimination and Adivasi rights Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process

Need more Adivasi women friendly market places Financial Literacy training Gender awareness training for whole family and community

48

Concern Worldwide Project Staff review

Haor region

Livestock rearing Household Business: Grocery shop, Handicraft, Tailoring, Food Processing

Basket Selling Agricultural day labour Market-based tailoring shop

Social stigma against women who go to market Women’s restricted mobility form social norms Women cannot travel long hours to access market places Double Burden of Reproductive Work

Social stigma against women who go to market Social Stigma against widowed and abandoned women Community members provide childcare support to women if work outside household. Resistance from husband, prefer wife to stay at home. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process Women’s involvement in Savings Groups and Community-Based Organisations

Awareness-building of whole family and community about cost-benefit of women working and sharing household work Promoting non-traditional IGAs and market-based entrepreneurship for women Family planning awareness Motivation of women More support for widowed and abandoned women Women’s involvement in CBOs and self-help groups Encourage more female local government representatives

Netz

North West

Livestock rearing Homestead gardening

Joint IGAs with husband: Aquaculture Tea Stall and Restaurant Small Mobile Business

Male control over IGAs and IGA earnings Male dominance in household decision making Women’s restricted access to the market and public meetings Women’s restricted

Increased social acceptance and status of women within communities Women’s increased voice and decision making power at community level and household level. Cases of physical and mental abuse of women by their husband due to

Official ownership of IGA goes to woman. Orientation and participation of whole household during family micro plan establishment, with focus on how woman wants to achieve her dream.

49

mobility their interaction with other BHHs and community member e.g. to attend regular NGO meetings.

All female beneficiaries receive skill training and participate in buying their own IGAs. Gender awareness training with women, their husbands and the whole community, e.g. on women’s rights. Savings Groups with Women Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process Gender awareness raising and social mobilization with local village leaders and Union Parisha.

50

Green Hill

Chittagong Hill Tracts

Livestock rearing Homestead gardening Homestead Rice wine making

Market-based businesses: handicrafts, vegetable Jhum Cultivation

Female Adivasis have more barriers with language and price negotiation than men Some women lack motivation to do IGAs outside the homestead. Domestic Violence Husband’s Alcohol Addiction

Women face no social restrictions on their mobility and can move around freely. A very matriarchal society so women are socially accepted as breadwinners. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner.

Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process

Shushilan South Coastal

Livestock rearing Homestead gardening

None Restrictive social norms on women’s mobility Male dominance in household financial decision-making Women’s lack of social acceptance at market place Women’s traditional gender role as housewives High Prevalence of Child Marriage

Social stigma against women who work or go to market place Male dominant attitudes

Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC Joint IGA selection process

Women’s interest in doing joint IGA and joint marketing in groups of women together

51

Hellen Keller International Project Staff Review

Chittagong Hill Tracts

Livestock rearing Homestead gardening Selling produce to vendours from homestead

Land-based Vegetable cultivation Women in Marketing Committees and selling produce at market places

Husband and wife usually share the reproductive and productive work equally between them, so double burden not applicable. Double burden of reproductive work if no husband Women less able to work on distant land on her own if have no husband Sexual and verbal harassment, sexual violence, domestic violence

Generally community and HH members appreciate the work HKI does engaging women with IGAs Male dominant oppressive attitudes not accepted within adivasi communities, thus it is rare Once case of husbands objecting to their wives received group IGA because only one machine was provided to share between 3 paras , the husband wanted 1 machine per para and thus forced their wives to reject the IGA. Women’s dignity has increased both in community and hh level, earning more Women have evolved as leading Social engineers for the well being of their communities and families

Gender and Nutrition CPK BCC + social mobilization component and link with UNDP Health Clinic Joint IGA selection process Promoting IGAs that are mainly managed by women and suitable for women for their empowerment, e.g. small scale marketing, livestock and land cultivation Gender awareness orientation with BHHs (both husband and wife), incl. 24 hour analysis, time-use exercise

Component to address issues of sexual harassment, gender-based violence, verbal ethnic/gender harassment

52

Adivasi women face harassment, violence and rape from the military and general Bengali male population in CHT, generally regarded as secondary citizens and face human rights violations Sexual harassment and domestic violence also happening within adivasi communities

Hellen Keller International BHH FDGs

Chittagong Hill Tracts

All: Livestock rearing Vegetable cultivation on land near homestead FMH: Selling produce to vendours from homestead

All: Women in Marketing Committees and selling produce at market places

MHHs: Husband and wife both manage and operate IGAs together, but the more physically hard work on land e.g. ploughing done by husband MHH: Husband and wife take turns to go to the distant market places to sell produce, All: women can go alone

Husband and wife share the reproductive work, when wife works on land or goes to market place the husband takes care of the household work and the children, and vice versa. Husband and wife do all financial decision making jointly, but women sometimes decide more because they are the main managers of the

53

or in groups no problem FMH: manages all IGAs and marketing on her own with no problems

IGAs. Women as Marketing Committee members as leaders has enhanced their status and role in their families and communities

Innovation Fund Projects Tarango Project Staff Review

Chittagong Hill Tracts

Livestock rearing Homestead gardening Homestead based handicraft production

Vegetable Land cultivation + selling at market place Marketing handicraft business at local markets and at Bandarban based Crafts Emporium

Handloom more physically challenging to use, sometimes need support from husband Female Adivasis have more barriers with language and price negotiation than men Domestic Violence Husband’s Alcohol Addiction

Women face no social restrictions on their mobility and can move around freely and many any kind of IGA on her own. A very matriarchal society so women are socially accepted as breadwinners. Husband happy that wife is helping him as an income-earner. One case of a violent husband destroying wife’s handloom because it was too difficult for her to manage and he was not allowed a loan from the VSL group.

2-3 women’s gender awareness sessions per year on violence, rights, child marriage etc Buyer marketing linkage sessions for women’s handicraft marketing. Women engaged in VSL groups. Joint IGA selection process

54

Priptrust Project Staff Review

Urban Group-based Construction work

Construction work a very male-dominant field of work with only male labour leaders. Wage discrimination Employer reluctance to hire women even though received Priptrust skill training and equipment

Men are supportive of women working in construction as they also work in construction themselves. Abandoned and widowed women are feel insecure as single breadwinners. Childcare is a big obstacle, especially if children are young. Lack of female toilet facilities at construction sites. No sexual harassment or violence observed or reported at work places. Empowerment is reverse – some women would prefer doing homestead-based IGA.

Gender awareness training for women with some husbands present also. Construction Training and equipment, market linkages with employers and labour unions Group based employment and group support network

55

Priptrust BHH FDG

Urban Group 1: Brick Layering Group 2: Plastering

Hard physical labour a problem Low unequal wages for female construction workers Income not sufficient, e.g. cannot afford to send kids to school and 3 meals a day Double burden of reproductive work, gets help from relatives/neighbours Some said would prefer to stay at home with their children and not work

Husband supportive and encourages wife to earn money for the family too Some husbands still not supportive Labour unions have helped increase their collective voice Working with men no problem, male colleagues are supportive

Some said they would prefer also having an alternative IGA to manage from home during rainy season More efforts needed to make women and men equal at work places with equal salaries

SSS Project Staff Review + BHH FGD

North West

Livestock rearing Homestead gardening

Some women sell their produce at local market places

Restrictive gender norms on mobility Women’s lack of bargaining power and price negotiation skills Social stigma against women working and selling at market places Women reported

When women do go to the markets they face no problems from the community

Slightly Top-down IGA selection process Marketing Collection Centres set up but only functioning in one Upazila.

56

receiving lower prices for their produce

BOSS Project Staff Review and BHHs FDG

North West

Livestock rearing Homestead gardening

Hair dressing salon Land cultivation

Women do all the marketing though they do not feel comfortable going to the market place (high transportation cost and time consuming) so all selling is to buyers who come to their houses.

Husbands are now also helping in the house and working whereas before they would not do much due to their alcohol addiction Women feel more empowered, confident and socially recognised in their communities Restrictive gender norms have been reduced, e.g. child marriage Slightly Matriarchal Hindu communities where women are the main breadwinners

Women’s involvement in Savings Group

Need more marketing support

57

EEP/ShireeHouse 5, Road 10, BaridharaDhaka 1212, BangladeshTel: 9892425E-mail: info@shiree.org

www.shiree.org