|
.7at. the Utniversi yorf adaJ -
Conference on
GENDER ISSUES IN FARMING SYSTEMS
RESEARCH AND EXTENSION
WOMEN'S WORK IN RURAL BANGLADESH1
Ben J. Wallace
Southern Methodist University
Rosie M. Ahsan
Dhaka University
Shahnaz H. Hussain
Dhaka University
From the time of my childhood, I can
remember performing efficiently all household
duties. As my husband is unable to take proper
care of the family, the responsibilities of
working hard have fallen on my shoulders. I am
growing potatoes and seasonal vegetables and I
grow seasonal fruits in the yard. Some of the
family expenses are met out of the sale of the
fruits. I also earn money by repairing people's
torn clothes, by making hand fans and brooms,
and by helping people with handicrafts. I also
have some ducks, cows, and goats.
Hamela Begum
May, 1985
These words by a village woman are reflective of the views
and activities of the women living and working in rural Bangladesh. In
this predominantly rural Islamic nation, eighty-seven percent of the
people live in the countryside. Women constitute approximately
forty-eight percent of the total population, ninety-two percent of whom
live in country villages. Our primary aim here is to demonstrate that
these rural women, married and divorced, old and young, rich and poor,
are just as much an integral part of the rural economy as are men. Rural
Bangladeshi women are not just housewives who look after a few cows, tend
to the goats, feed the chickens, and organize many of the post harvest
activities --they are major contributors to the economy of the
countryside. Regrettably, however, Bangladeshi women share with women in
many other countries the trait of economic invisibility (cf.
Safilios-Rothchild 1985, Rosaldo and Lamphere 1974, Islam 1985).
In Bangladesh, as in other markedly gender stratified societies, the
economic activities of women are hidden, go unnoticed, are disregarded,
or are invisible primarily because the society perceives of their
economic activities as wifely duty rather than as work. Consider, for
example, the threshing of rice, an activity which is primarily the
responsibility of women (Harder 1975). This is a time consuming
activity, whether by bullock, barrel, or feet, and although a part of a
woman's household responsibility, it is also economic behavior.
Bangladeshi women have developed considerable expertise in all phases of
post harvest rice processing. Women assume primary responsibility for
parboiling paddy, know the proper way to dry the grain, and can husk for
maximum recovery of the grain. When a man plows a field, it is a part of
his household activity, but it is also economic behavior. If a woman
devotes some of her time to feeding chickens and her husband later takes
a chicken to the market and sells it, they have cooperated to create a
economically productive situation. The chicken feeder and the chicken
seller are equally important in preparing the animal to be sold. Both
men and women in rural Bangladesh work in a farming economy, and farming
is a cooperative economic activity, usually between a man and wife (see
Ahmed 1981, Alamgir 1977, Cain et al. 1979, Harder 1978, S. Islam 1977, M
Islam 1975, Lindenbaum 1981, Sobhan 1978, and Westergaarde 1983 on status
and role and Abdullah 1980, Begum 1978, Chen 1983, Chowdhury and Afroz
1977, Germain 1977, Halim and Hossain 1981, M. Islam 1975, R. Islam 1981,
Khan 1977, Papanek 1973 and Laumark 1982 on economic behavior).
In this paper, we examine the time rural women in the Bangladeshi
villages of Choto Kalampur and Jalsha Borohissa spend working2. we
describe these women's work relative to their interaction with the other
constituents in the farming system (TAC 1978, IADS 1980, Norman, Gilbert
and Winch 1979, DeWalt 1985, Jones and Wallace 1986). Our perspective is
one that holds that despite the sophistication and impact of farming
systems research, as a model, it is significantly weakened because of its
male orientation. The whole-farm is not "his farm" and a farming system
is not "his system". The whole-farm is composed of a natural and
cultural environment, the latter expressed daily in the behavior of both
men and women.
THE JOBS THAT WOMEN DO
Rural Bangladeshi women (and men) work long hours. Often, this work
is physically demanding, e.g., carrying loads, getting water from the
nearby well, harrowing the fields, and husking paddy. Some of women's
work is what Farouk and Ali (1977) call monotonous (e.g., taking care of
children), mentally troublesome (e.g., searching for firewood or other
forms of fuel during the rainy season), and dirty (e.g., cleaning the cow
shed). These activities,however, are only an indication of the scope and
types of work women actually perform.
For purposes here, the activities of women are divided into five
major categories: 1) Domestic/Personal Work, 2) Household Work, 3
Agricultural Work, 4) Non-Agricultural Work, and 5) Socio-Cultural/
Personal Work. Within each of these categories, women make either
"Direct Economic" or "Indirect Economic" contributions, measured in time,
to the household. A Direct Economic contribution is made when a woman
actually brings to the household either money or goods which she has
received for services performed or goods produced and sold. An Indirect
Economic contribution is made when she performs a work activity that she
or her husband theoretically would have to pay (in cash or kind) another
person to complete,i.e. time working at home is an indirect economic
activity because it is a saved expenditure. Women, of course, also
perform many activities that are "Non-Economic," e.g., they do not
receive either direct or indirect compensation in cash or kind for
bathing, visiting a friend, etc.
Domestic/Personal Activity
The Domestic/Personal Activities of women, generally quasi-economic
or non-economic, are: making the cooking fire; lighting the room:
carrying tobacco to husband in the field; bringing betel leaf to husband;
carrying things into the house; carrying goods for husband when they go
to market; serving rice to field laborers; preparing betel nut for
drying; painting containers; killing ants round the house; folding
clothes; maintaining lantern; drying mosquito nets; making beds; feeding
her family; killing bedbugs; making bread and cutting fish, meat and
vegetables; cooking; washing pots and pans and dishes; washing clothes;
and guarding the house.
Some of the personal (e.g., things she does for herself) and
non-economic activities of women are: making her own bed; eating;
chewing betel leaf; preparing food for herself; washing face and hands;
bathing; oiling face and hands; resting; dressing hair; visiting friends;
picking lice from hair; visiting friends and neighbors; and going to the
doctor.
Household Activity
Women contribute to the direct economy of the household by: working
in other households for cash or goods; bringing work into their own home
where they are compensated for their labor in cash or kind; caring for
other people's livestock; or working in other people's kitchen gardens.
Women contribute to the indirect economy of the household by: digging
soil for the house; maintaining dry firewood; cleaning ashes from the
oven; gathering firewood; leveling earth around the house; drying cow
dung; picking up cow dung; getting cow dung from the fields; house
maintenance (e.g., making jute door); digging out old mud floors; making
rope; carrying bricks from the road to the house; setting up paddy
thresher; repairing household fences; planting grass around the house;
laying bricks around courtyard; sweeping and cleaning house and
courtyard; helping husband construct house or shed; preparing wheat grass
roof; closing rat holes around the house; carrying grass from the fields;
and cutting banana plant to construct raft.
Some of the indirect economic activities of women in the arena of
livestock are: cleaning the cow shed; taking the cow out of the shed;
keeping straw around for the cows; fetching water for the cows; cutting
grass in the fields for the animals; caring for and feeding the goats;
taking the animals to the fields for grazing; fencing the cow shed;
-6-
milking goats and cows; preparing chicken and duck food; feeding the
chicken and ducks; washing the cows; taking ducks to the pond; making
chicken house; collecting snails for the ducks; and making rope to tie
goats and cows.
Women make indirect economic contributions to the household in their
kitchen gardens by: fencing the garden with cut bamboo; hoeing the
garden; planting the garden; putting stakes in the garden for climbing
plants; weeding; cultivating; watering the plants; and harvesting the
edible cultigens.
Agricultural Activity
In Agricultural Activity women make a direct contribution to the
economy of the household when they work for another household performing
such field activities as harrowing or planting. For this work, they are
paid in cash or in goods. This type of direct economic contribution is
made by women during the pre-harvest, harvest and post-harvest periods.
Pre-harvest indirect economic contributions made by women are: sowing
seed; spreading cow dung; weeding; harrowing the field; picking seedlings
from seed beds; preparing seed beds; furrowing rows in the field;
carrying seeds to the fields; and irrigating the field with a bucket and
pond water.
Women make indirect economic contributions to the household during
harvest by helping in the harvesting of the crops and helping to carry
the harvest to the house.
Indirect post-harvest field activities are actually done by women
around the house. Some of these activities are: drying, stirring,
cleaning, threshing, parboiling, winnowing, and storing paddy; cleaning
and preparing wheat, mustard, and pulses for storing; cleaning and
storing potatoes; preparing spices for storage; and drying and extracting
fiber and seeds from jute.
Non-Agricultural Activity
In Non-Agricultural Activities, women make a direct economic
contribution to their families by: sewing cloth, quilts, etc. for other
people; making and selling toys; embroidering quilts for other
households; and making and selling straw mats and fans.
Women's indirect economic activities derived from cottage industry
but for use in the home are: making mats, fans, toys, and baskets; sewing
cloths and quilting; mending fishnets; and making brooms and other
household implements.
In the business and service arena, women make direct economic
contributions to their family when they work as servants in other
households or work as day laborers breaking bricks and digging and moving
dirt along the roads and highways.
Women's indirect economic activities in business and service
primarily involved preparing foodstuffs which are sold in the bazar e.g.,
vegetables, fruits, and milk.
Socio-Cultural/Personal Activity
The number of direct and indirect economic contributions that a woman
can make to the household in the area of social organization and cultural
beliefs is limited to her specialized skills. The specialized skills of
a few of the women in this study are: midwifery; practicing of folk
medicine; practicing folk veterinary medicine; and the bathing of the
dead. In most cases, women with these skills perform their complex and
varied activities for pay, and their economic contribution is direct. In
cases where they perform their skills on members of their own household
without compensation, their economic contributions are indirect.
Women, of course, do not work every minute of the day and often find
which are basically non-economic in nature. Some of the personal
activities which are reflective of their cultural beliefs are: praying;
reading the Holy Quran: listening to songs; enjoying and caring for a
grandchild; caring for children and husband when they are ill by pouring
water over them; gossiping with neighbors; giving food to the poor during
certain times of the year; bathing their mothers-in-law; helping friends
prepare for a wedding; and preparing food for the participation of the
family in religious events.
HOW MANY HOURS DOES A WOMAN WORK?
In the village of Choto Kalampur men work approximately 3487 hours a
year (Wallace 1984). In a study on work hours in six Bangladesh
communities, Farouk and Ali (1977) estimate that men work between 3138
and 3700 hours a year. In a community near Chittagong, Tahera (1978)
estimate that women devote 2048 hours a year to paddy work, livestock,
and kitchen gardening. Barkat-E-Khuda demonstrates that females work
fifty-two to sixty hours a week and men work thirty-seven to forty-six
hours a week (1980). Data from Kalampur and Jalsha suggest considerable
variability in the productive time of women. The key variables are
season of the year, size of the farm, and type of work. The average
amount of time devoted by women in Jalsha and Kalampur to
Domestic/Personal, Household, Socio-Cultural/ Personal, Agricultural, and
Non-Agricultural Activities, by farm size and season of the year, is
presented in Tables 1 and 2.
The most important classes of economic activity performed by women in
Kalampur and Jalsha are Household Work, Agricultural Work, and
Non-Agricultural Work. The category of Household Activity includes the
all important time demanding work associated with caring for livestock
all important time demanding work associated with caring for livestock
and poultry, working in the kitchen garden, and gathering and preparing
cooking fuel. This category also includes most of the chores necessary to
maintain the household. The category of Agricultural Activity includes
the work carried out by women during pre-harvest, harvest and
post-harvest periods. Finally, Non-Agricultural Activity includes all
the business, service, and craft work performed by women. The categories
of Domestic/Personal Work and Socio-Cultural/Personal Work are not
economically significant but they nonetheless consume a considerable
amount of a woman's time. This is especially the case with
Domestic/Personal Work because it includes the time women spend cooking
and generally caring for their families.
The number of hours a woman spends in direct economic activity is
affected by farm size class, the season of the year, and to a lesser
extent by village. In Jalsha Borohissa, for example, only women from
Landless Households spend much time in direct economic activity. Almost
all of this time is spent working for other people in pre-harvest,
harvest and post-harvest activity or performing various household chores
for other people. These women work in direct economic activity 96 hours
during the Jan-Apr season, 116 hours during the May-Aug season, and 248
hours during the Sept-Dec season. In total, Landless Household women in
Jalsha work approximately 461 hours a year or one hour and thirty minutes
a day in direct economic activity.
All women in Choto Kalampur, regardless of farm size class, work in
direct economic activity. Landless Household and Small Farm Household
women make economic contributions to their families by doing agricultural
work during the pre-harvest, harvest and post harvest seasons. Women
from Medium and Large Farm Households do not do agricultural work for
-10-
other people. Their agricultural work is done within the family farm and
is an indirect economic contribution. Their direct economic
contributions to the households come from work in non- agricultural
activities. Landless Household women work about 532 hours a year or one
hour and forty-five minutes a day in direct economic activity. Small
Farm Household women devote 250 hours a year or a little less than an
hour a day to direct economic work. Women from Medium Farm Households
work only 142 hours a year or less than thirty minutes a day in direct
economic activity. Finally, women from Large Farm Households work 304
hours a year or around three quarters of an hour a day in direct economic
activity.
The differences between Kalampur and Jalsha in the amount of time
spent by farm size class in direct economic activity can be attributed to
the availability of work opportunities in Kalampur. Temporary jobs in
agricultural work are readily available in both villages. The higher
status non-agricultural jobs and the opportunity to sell craft products
are more readily available in the market center of Kalampur. Women
simply have more opportunity to participate in direct economic activity
in Kalampur than they do in Jalsha.
When the amount of time women spend taking care of their personal
activities is subtracted from total indirect economic time, there is not
a great deal of variation in the amount of time spent by the various farm
size classes in indirect economic activity. Landless Household women in
Kalampur work 3743 hours a year or around ten and one-half hours a day
making indirect economic contributions to the family. Landless Household
women in Jalsha devote 3677 hours a year or ten hours a days to indirect
economic activity. Small Farm Household women in Kalampur devote 3662
hours a year and Small Farm Household women in Jalsha devote 3797 hours a
-11-
year to indirect economic work. Medium Farm Households in Kalampur and
Jalsha work 3630 hours a year and 3784 hours a year respectively in
indirect economic activity. The women from Large Farm Households in
Kalampur spend 3576 hours a year in indirect economic pursuits while the
Large Farm Household women in Jalsha work 3844 hours a year in indirect
economic activity.
If the direct and indirect economic time is added together and the
time devoted to personal activity is deleted from the total, then women
from Landless Households work more hours each year than any other farm
size class of women. In Kalampur these women work 4275 hours a year and
in Jalsha, the women work 4138 hours a year. This is not surprising
because the poorest of the rural women are married to the poorest of the
rural men and it takes both of them to earn even a subsistence living.
The women who devote the second highest number of hours to economic
activity are from Large Farm Households. In Kalampur these women work
3880 hours a year, and in Jalsha they work 3844 hours a year. The
assumption that the wives of large land owners do much less work than the
women from the smaller farms is not supported by the data in this study.
That women from Large Farm Households are able to hire servants and
helpers is true, but this does not imply that they do little work
themselves. These women may have the same type of responsibilities as
women from other types of household but they have much greater resources
to manage. They generally have more domestic animals and because the
household farms a larger amount of land, there is a greater amount of
agricultural work to be completed. Women from Medium Farm Households in
both Kalampur and Jalsha work almost as many hours a year as the women
from the large farms. In Kalampur they work 3772 hours a year and in
Jalsha they work 3784 hours a year. The data are inconsistent with
-12-
regard to the number of hours women from Small Farm Households devote to
economic pursuits. The Small Farm Household women in Kalampur work
almost as many hours each year as the Landless Household women, 3912
hours. They, like the women from the Landless Households, are very poor
and have to make a major economic contribution to the household. The
women from the Small Farm Households in Jalsha, however, work 3797 hours
a year, 115 hours less than their Small Farm counterparts in Kalampur.
The answer to this inconsistency must await further analysis of the data.
CONCLUSIONS
Farming Systems Research is rapidly becoming the foundation on which
agricultural development policy is based in Bangladesh and many other
developing nations. It is imperative that when studying the "whole
farm", the work of women be given equal consideration to the work of men.
A farming system is a complex and interwoven network which consists of
numerous interrelated natural and socio-cultural factors. It is not just
the work that men do in the fields. A farm is more than its immediately
visible parts and a farmer is more than a man. In Bangladesh, a farmer
is a man but a farmer is also a woman. In some cases, a farmer may be a
child. Men, women, and children are all constituents in the complex and
interrelated natural and social environment called the farming system. A
failure to understand the significance of gender in Farming System
Research is to fail the Bangladeshi farmer.
Bangladeshi farming men and women may be poor, but they are hard
working and have demonstrated an ability to rebound from both natural and
political catastrophes. But, the future of the country's farmers is only
as good as the actions of the people responsible for planning, directing
and implementing programs in directed social and economic change.
-13-
Changing a people's culture and economy, however, is fraught with
difficulties, and the consequences of a change in economy or society
cannot always be predicted. Success is usually dependent upon a well
reasoned and goal oriented national strategy. To plan a strategy of
rural economic development without acknowledging women as a highly
visible economic resource is to doom the plan to failure. The rural
women of Bangladesh are not invisible to those who choose to .pen their
eyes and see the future.
-14-
NOTES
1. The research on which this report is based is part of a long term
Farming Systems Research project being conducted in collaboration with
the office of the Agricultural Economics and Social Sciences program of
the Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council. For generously giving his
time as well as logistical and intellectual support, we want to express
our sincere appreciation to Ekramul Ahsan, Member-Director and
Acting Chairman, BARC.
The research was supported by the Bangladesh Agricultural Research
Council and Winrock International Institute for Agricultural Development
(formerly International Agricultural Development Service). We are
particularly grateful to the Winrock International staff in the U.S., the
BARC staff in Dhaka, and David Daugherty of Winrock International, Dhaka
and his staff, especially Brook Greene.
Many people have worked on this project and we owe a debt of
gratitude to each of them. M. Khalilur Rahman and Habibur Rahman served
as general field supervisors. A.T.M. Rezaul Ahsan, T.I.M. Tugril
Hossain, Sajadur Rahman, Monwar Hossain Akhand. Md. Abdus Salam, Momotaz
Begum, Nilufar Khan, Mahbuba Begum, Samsunnahar, Samsunnahar Begum,
Naznin Akhtar, Shahan Ara, and Bashirunnesa worked as field
investigators. Coding and tabulation was done by A.T.M. Rezaul Ahsan,
Shahida Shamim, Bilkis Akhtar, Malmuda Zohra, Razia Sultana, and Rokeya
Akhtar. The cartographic work was done by Khalilur Rahman and T.I.M.
Tugril Hossain. Robert V. Kemper served as consultant on data analysis,
Michael Harris served as consultant on statistics and Ann
Schuessler Wallace did most of the photographic work on the project.
Finally, our sincere appreciation goes to the women and men of Choto
Kalampur and Jalsha Borohissa for opening their homes to us, for without
-15-
their help and cooperation, this research could not have been completed.
2. In this study, thirty-four households were selected from each
village, representing a 10% sample for Choto Kalampur and a 16% sample
from Jalsha Borohissa. The households were selected on a random basis
from the farm class categories of Landless Households (owning no land but
farming on a sharecropping basis), Small Farm Households !owning and
farming between 0.01 and 2.49 acres of land), Medium Farm Households
(owning and farming 2.50 to 5.00 acres of land), and Large Farm
Households (owning and farming more than 5.00 acres of land). Kalampur
is a more urban oriented community than Jalsha.
-16-
REFERENCES CITED
Abdullah, T. A. and S. A. Zeiderstein
1982 Village Women of Bangladesh: Prospects for Change, New
York: Pergamon Press.
Abdullah, T.
1980 "Women's Participation in Rural Development: A Bangladesh
Pilot Project," in Women in Rural Development: Critical Issues, pp.
33-36. Geneva: International Labor Organization.
Alamgir, S.F.
1977 Profile of Bangladeshi Women. Dhaka: USAID Mission.
Barkat-E-Khuda
1980 Time Allocation Among People in Rural Bangladesh. Bergen:
DERAP Publications.
1981 Socio-Economic Assessment of Improved Jute Production
Technologies and Identification of Constraints to their Adoption.
Bangladesh Jute Research Institute.
1982 Socio-Economic Assessment of Improved Jute Production
Technologies and Identification of Constraints to their Adoption.
Bangladesh Jute Research Institute.
1983 Socio-Economic Assessment of Improved Jute Production
Technologies and Identification of Constraints to their Adoption.
Bangladesh Jute Research Institute.
Begum, S.
1978 "Integration of Women in Development and the Choice of
Appropriate Technology," ADAB News 6:12-14.
Cain, M.T. et al.
1979 "Class, Patriarchy, and Women's Work in Bangladesh,"
Population and Development Review 5:405-438.
Chaudhury, R.H. and N.R. Ahmed
1980 Female Status in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Institute of
Development Studies. Dacca.
Chen, Marty Alter
1983 A Quiet Revolution: Women in Transition in Rural
Bangladesh. Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing Co.
Chowdhury, N. and G. Afroz
1977 "Role of Women in Production Activities in Bangladesh: A
Preliminary Analysis," in Role of Women in Socio-Economic Development in
Bangladesh pp. 32-45. Dhaka: Bangladesh Economic Association.
Germain, A.
1977 "Women's Roles in Agricultural and Rural Development,"
ADAB News 4:17.
-17-
Halim, A. and A. Hossain
1981 Women Time Allocation and Adoption of Family Planning
Practices in Farm Family. Mymensingh: Agricultural University Graduate
Training Institute Publication No. 23.
Halim, A.
1983
Analysis.
Institute
and F.E. McCarthy
Women Labourers in Rural Bangladesh: A Socio-Economic
Mymensingh: Agricultural University Graduate Training
Publication No. 35.
Harder, G.M. von
1978 "Women in Rural Bangladesh," Entwicklung und Laendlicher
Rauml2:7-9.
1981 Women in Rural Bangladesh. Fort Lauderdale:Verlag
Breitenbach Publishers.
I ADS
1980
Review Team.
Bangladesh Agricultural Research System. Report of the
Arlington: International Agricultural Development Service.
Islam, M.
1975 "Women at Work in Bangladesh," Women for Women 93-120.
Dhaka: University Press.
1979 "Social Norms and Institutions," The Situation of Women
in Bangladesh, 225-230. Dhaka: Women for Women Study Group.
Islam, R.
1981 "Women, Work and Wages in Rural Bangladesh,"
Social Studies 11:56-69.
Journal of
Islam, S.(ed.)
1977 Exploring the Other Half: Field Research With Rural Women
in Bangladesh. Dhaka: Women for Women Reserch and Study Group.
1985 Invisible Labour Force: Women in Poverty in Bangladesh.
Dhaka: BRAC Printers.
Khan, A.Z.M.0.
1977 "Women in Agricultural Development," ADAB News 4:15-27.
Laumark, S.
1982 "Women's Contribution to Intensive Household Production,"
ADAB News 9:34-41.
Lindenbaum, S.
1981 "Implications for Women of Changing Marriage Transactions
in Bangladesh," Studies in Family Planning 12:394-401.
McCarthy, Florence
1977 "Bengali Women as Mediators of Social Change," Human
Organization 36(4):363-370.
Norman, D., Gilbert, D.H. and F. Winch
1979 Farming Systems Research for Agricultural Development: A
-18-
Review of the Arts in Low Income Countries. Washington: USAID.
Papanek, H.
1973 "Men, Women and Work: Reflections on the Two Person
Career," American Journal of Sociology 78:852-872.
Rosaldo, M. and L. Lamphere
1972 Women, Culture, and Society. Stanford; Stanford University
Press.
Safilios-Rothchild, C.
1985 "The Persistence of Women's Invisibility in Agricuiture:
Theoretical and Policy Lessons from Lesotho and Sierra Leon," Economic
Development and Culture Change,299-317.
TAC
1978 Farming Systems Research Report, 1978. Technical Advisory
Committee of the Consultative Group for International Agricultural
Research.
Wallace, B.J.
1970 Hill and Valley Farmers. Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing
Co.
1984 Working The Land: A Case Study in Applied Anthropology
and Farming Systems Research in Bangladesh. Dhaka: Bailgladesh
Agricultural Research Council.
Westergaarde, K.
1983 Pauperization and Rural Women in Bangladesh: A Case
Study. Comilla: Bangladesh Academy for Rural Development.
JALSBA BOROHISSA
Class Season Domest Hhold Agri Non-Agri :Social Total
_Tm Tin Tm Tm Tm Tm
Landless Jan-Apr 0 30.49 1.10 16.83 0 48.42
May-Aug 0 53.10 0 5.84 0 58.94
Sep-Dec 0 57.85 35.37 30.00 0 123.22
Small Jan-Apr 0 0 2.70 14.54 .14 17.38
May-Aug 0 0 2.24 5.81 0 8.04
Sep-Dec 0 0 4.82 7.59 0 12.41
Medium Jan-Apr 0 0 0 0 0 0
May-Aug 0 0 0 4.03 0 4.03
Sep-Dec 0 0 0 0 0 0
Large Jan-Apr 0 0 0 0 0 0
May-Aug 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep-Dec 0 0 0 0 0 0
=I_
Landless Jan-Apr 90.61 361.44 120.93 8.48 94.24 657.7
May-Aug 112.39 370.12 99.25 9.96 73.10 664.81
Sep-Dec 142.94 262.59 88.08 14.68 92.29 600.58
Small Jan-Apr 77.70 351.40 192.60 5.36 91.21 718.27
May-Aug 56.16 435.22 151.93 8.74 60.12 712.17
Sep-Dec 150.12 297.25 145.85 28.88 87.68 709.78
Medium Jan-Apr 83.69 313.26 250.17 0 73.93 721.05
May-Aug 106.84 299.26 263.89 5.00 54.91 729.54
Sep-Dec 138.94 275.08 194.93 14.72 101.94 725.60
Large Jan-Apr 35.71 330.00 337.14 0 38.57 741.43
May-Aug 102.50 302.50 248.00 .0 85.50 738.50
Sep-Dec -119.06 246.88 203.75 65.63 96.25 731.56
Table 1
Female Activity: Minutes Spent Per Day
CHOTO KALAMPUR
Class Season Domest Hhold Agri Non-Agri :Social Total
Tm Tm Tm Tm Tm Tm
Landless Jan-Apr 0 53.72 8.26 28.72 0 90.70
May-Aug 0 49.86 12.89 5.70 0 68.45
Sep-Dec 0 9.29 42.48 48.36 4.62 104.74
Small Jan-Apr 0 36.35 2.88 10.72 0 49.95
May-Aug 0 16.35 5.08 18.70 0 40.12
Sep-Dec 0 2.52 13.84 18.56 0.03 34.95
Medium Jan-Apr 0 0 0.83 2.22 0 3.06
May-Aug 0 0 0 38.00 0 38.00
Sep-Dec 0 2.41 0.53 27.05 0 29.99
Large Jan-Apr 0 0 0 40.14 0 40.14
May-Aug 0 0 0 48.47 0 48.47
Sep-Dec 0 0 0 63.45 0 63.45
Landless Jan-Apr 115.47 325.60 80.49 6.98 101.23 629.77
May-Aug 68.01 400.54 87.24 15.99 80.27 652.04
Sep-Dec 121.90 291.02 109.20 13.46 82.39 617.97
Small Jan-Apr 115.37 287.66 129.75 9.71 127.71 670.20
May-Aug 76.77 312.91 141.76 15.26 133.52 680.21
Sep-Dec 110.39 289.83 160.52 27.66 96.83 685.22
Medium Jan-Apr 105.00 268.22 211.56 28.04 106.07 718.89
May-Aug .80.14 302.81 159.59 13.24 126.55 682.43
Sep-Dec 109.69 268.06 205.23 11.43 95.79 690.21
Large Jan-Apr 106.89 285.51 117.84 22.43 148.14 680.81
May-Aug 76.95 257.00 193.37 7.63 148.14 671.95
Sep-Dec 106.98 294.70 162.71 1.34 91.04 656.76
Table 2
Female Activity: Minutes Spent Per Day
|
RSS
HIDE
