|
k~AJJ~A
fL 0 lw f-^mwJ / V r/LA /6/n-5 1
P/9
DRAFT
F ILE
F\\l. 0-0
primos
INCORPORATING THE INTRAHOUSEHOLD
DIMENSION INTO DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS:
A GUIDE FOR PLANNERS
Beatrice Lorge Rogers
Tufts University School of Nutrition
Medford, Massachusetts
October 15, 1985
This paper has been prepared under contract with
USAID/PPC Human Resources Division
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword
Summary
1. Introduction 1
2. Procedures to Follow in Incorporating Intrahousehold Dynamics
Project Planning 2
2.1 Spell out the expected linkages between project
.inputs and expected outputs. 5
2.2 Before leaving the U.S., review the literature
on the country and area where the project is
to take place. 8
2.3 Identify social scientists from the country of
the proposed project who have worked on household
and iptrahousehold-level issues. 10
2.4 Travel to the area in which the project is to
take place. 12
2.5 Some on-the-ground data collection is essential. 13
2.5.1 Informal observation 15
2.5.2 Focus groups and open-ended interviews 15
2.5.3 Small-scale surveys 18
2.5.4 Timing 21
2.6 Build in a project monitoring capability which will address
intrahousehold issues. 22
3 Information Needs 24
3.1 Questions to answer 25
3.2 Data to collect 27
3.2.1 Household structure and composition 29
3.2.1.1 Importance of the concept 29
3.2.1.2 Data requirements 31
3.2.1.1 Uses of the data 32
(1) Degree of intersection among units 32
(2) Basis for inclusion in the household
group 33
(3) Household size and structure 34
3.2.1.4 Obtaining the data
3.2.2 Individual access to income and productive resources 38
3.2.2.1 Importance of the concept 38
3.2.2.2 Data requirements 41
3.2.2.3 Uses of the data 44
3.2.2.4 Obtaining the data 45
3.2.3 Time use and task allocation 46
3.2.3.1 Importance of the concepts 46
3.2.3.2 Data requirements 48
(1) Time use 48
(2) Task allocation 49
3.2.3.3 Uses of the data 51
(1) Time use 51
(2) Task allocation 53
3.2.3.4 Obtaining the data 54
3.2.4 Allocation of consumption goods among members 56
3.2.4.1 Importance of the concept 56
3.2.4.2 Data requirements 59
3.2.4.3 Use of the data 60
3.2.4.4 Obtaining the data 61
3.2.5 Sources of material support in emergency or crisis 62
3.3 Conclusion 64
FOREWORD
This guideline was developed as a result of a project funded
by the Policy and Program Coordination Office of USAID. The
project involved an extensive literature review on intrahousehold
resource allocation and its determinants in less-developed
countries (Rogers, 1985), and a four-day workshop at which
professionals from the U.S. and several developing countries
discussed why intrahousehold processes matter to economic
development projects, and ways in which concern for these
processes can reasonably be incorporated into project planning.
This guideline owes much to the papers prepared for that
workshop, and to the discussions which took place there.
I have tried to prepare this guideline in such a way that it
may be useful in the design of all kinds of development projects,
from direct provision of welfare-related goods and services, to
technical assistance, to programs intended to foster
institutional development and policy change at the national
level. However, the original impetus for the project was a
concern for the success of nutrition and health projects,
specifically those having infants and children as the main target
group. This orientation is evident in the examples chosen and in
some of the specific issues addressed in this paper.
I would like to thank my project officer, Dr. Judy McGuire
for her continuous assistance, including substantial intellectual
A list of workshop participants appears at the end of this
guideline. The workshop papers are being edited for publication.
interchange and valuable editorial comments on this and other
papers prepared under the project. I would also like to thank
Lisa Miller for editorial comments on this guideline, and Lisa
Miller, Jane Yudelman, Barbara Kaim, Lori Chobanian and Paula
McCree for their help in finding and abstracting the literature
on which this work is based. I would like to express my great
appreciation also for the contributions of all the workshop
participants, whose lively discussion and thoughtful preparation
was of inestimable value to my own thinking on the subject. Of
course, any errors of fact or judgment are my own.
Summary
Development projects have as their ultimate objective the
improvement of human welfare. Therefore, project analysis must
be concerned with whether target individuals are likely to
benefit from the resources and activities generated by projects.
Such analysis must be based on an understanding of individual
behavior and individual sources of income and material support.
The most important argument in this paper is that one cannot make
assumptions about sharing of resources within households. While
the groups to which a person belongs (family and household) can
be important sources of support, it is the individual who must be
the focus of analysis. To ensure that intrahousehold issues are
taken into account, the following steps in project planning are
recommended.
(1) Spell out the expected linkages between
project inputs and expected outputs.
Identify the specific household processes
by which these linkages will occur.
Identify the individuals involved.
(2) Before leaving the U.S., review the
literature on the country and area
where the project is to take place.
(3) Identify social scientists from the
country of the proposed project who
have worked on household and intra-
household level issues. Contact them
for assistance once in-country.
(4) Travel to the area in which the project
is to take place. If there are several
culturally distinct areas affected by the
project, all should be visited, at least
briefly, if at all possible.
(5) Some on-the-ground data collection is
essential. This may vary from relatively
unstructrued observation to a small-scale
survey.
(6) Especially with larger, long-term projects,
plan to start on a small scale, and in all
projects, build in a project monitoring
capability which will explicitly address
the major intrahousehold issues.
Analysis of intrahousehold issues should be organized around
answers to the following six questions.
1. Who will participate in the project?
2. Will the project require or cause a
fundamental change in household structure
or function?
3. Will the project change any person's access
to productive resources, or any person's
control over what is produced (including
income from his/her labor)?
4. Will participation in the project require
changes in the uses of any person's time?
5. Will it change any person's access to
consumption goods which affect individual
welfare (including food, health care,
education)?
6. Will it change any person's access to
material support during emergency or
crisis situations?
To obtain answers, data collection needs to address the
following major areas of inquiry:
o household structure and composition
o individual income and access to
productive resources
o time use of members, and task allocation
among them
o allocation of consumption goods among members
o sources of material support for households
and individuals in emergency or crisis
situations.
Specific items of data needed for the major areas of inquiry
identified are as follows:
(1) Household Structure and Composition
What groups can be treated as household
units
o Those who live in a single house or
compound
o Those who eat from a common food supply
o Those who contribute a significant portion
of the real income in order to provide for
each other's consumption
o Those who provide labor on each other's
behalf, or who can command labor from each
other.
For each group, the following information, is
needed:
o To what degree does this group intersect
with the other groups?
o On what basis are individuals included in
the group?
o What is the group size and structure?
o number of members
o number of children under three
o number of members working
at household production
agriculture production
and cash employment;
o number of members in each age/sex category
o kinship structure, specifically
extended (many parent-child units or
presence of three or more generations)
versus nuclear
presence of one or both parents for each
nuclear unit
presence of unrelated individuals
o migration status of members (i.e., individuals
reported as members of the unit but absent a
significant amount of time at work or school)
how frequently and for how long they return.
(2) Individual Access to Income and Productive
Resources
o Characteristics of the individual
age, sex, and position in the household
o Income producing activities
full or part time
seasonal or year round
performed in or outside the home
monetized or not
o income received
cash or kind
frequency (e.g., day, week, season)
reliability (windfall or regular income)
amount, relative to other income sources
o uses of income
are particular sources of income linked
to particular uses
are particular categories of consumption
expenditure considered the responsibility
of particular individuals
o access to income-producing resources
what is the nature of the important resources
(e.g., land, agricultural animals or equipment,
skills and education, etc.)
how is ownership obtained (e.g., through
spouse, natal family, allocation by a village
administrator, purchase)
what is the relationship between ownership
and use rights
how are use rights obtained
what is the distribution of resource
ownership, by sex, age, and position in the
household
o access to employment
how do individuals obtain jobs (e.g., through
traditional rights and obligations, by formal
application)
are jobs scarce, or is labor scarce;
Does this vary by season
how is employment distributed between the
formal and informal sectors
is access to employment determined by age,
sex, marital status, caste or class.
(3) Time Use and Task Allocation
Time Use
o Characteristics of the individual
age
sex
membership in various household groupings
characteristics of the household groups
to which he/she belongs
o Inventory of tasks performed
o Nature of tasks
amount of time required
performed only at specific times of day?
performed only on certain days, or certain
times of month or year?
requiring minimum consecutive input of time?
compatible with other tasks?
which ones?
o Variability
variation in time input to a task, within the
week, and by season
variation in the amount of time spent, by task.
o Time burden
average and range of hours per day spent by
individuals in work outside the home,
work inside the home, leisure and
personal care, and rest and sleep
Task Allocation
o Inventory of tasks performed
o Nature of the time demand of each task (defined
in the previous paragraph
o Frequency with which important tasks are
performed by persons of each age grouping,
sex, and other relevant groupings
Age: suitable grouping might be:
(1) young children (3-6)
(2) older children (6-12)
(3) young adults (12-18, or to the age at
which people typically marry or leave
home)
(4) adults (18-55 or older, depending
on cultural perception of when old
age starts)
(5) elderly (55 and older)
Studies from a variety of cultures indicate
children begin to make work contribution to
the household at about three years of age.
Sex: it may be meaningful to divide females
into married and unmarried, and even to
distinguish widows separately, since task
allocation rules based on sex frequently
vary on this basis.
Position in the household: important
categories may include: relative/non-
relative; relative by blood/marriage
Other groupings: these may include, in
various settings, class, caste, special
special skill, religion, ethnicity.
(4) Allocation of Consumption Goods
Differential employment opportunities or
differential access to training and education
have implications for investment in
individuals within a household unit. Cultural
patterns, such as early marriage of daughters
who then leave the household or the payment of
dowry or bride price, which affect the potential
value of an individual to his or her natal
household will indicate whether or not a
systematic bias in the distribution of consumption,
human investment goods is likely to exist.
Data on individual consumption levels is quite
difficult to obtain. Shortcut methods for
assessing individual food consumption, for example,
have not proved reliable (Pinstrup-Andersen and
Garcia, 1984). Indirect indicators of allocation
patterns may be more feasible to obtain, and still
useful for project planning purposes, since the
outcomes of allocation processes are much easier
to measure directly. Growth statistics by age
and sex, and patterns of morbidity and mortality
will provide powerful information on whether
discrimination based on age or sex adversely
affects some groups. Education levels, information
on school attendance by girls and boys of different
ages, and on use of clinics and health care
services, indicate how such resources are
distributed among individuals. It may be more
difficult by such indirect means to identify
characteristics other than age and sex (e.g., birth
order, position in the household) which determine
access to consumption goods.
(5) Sources of Material Support during Emergency
or Crisis
What type of support networks exist for
recourse in cases of emergency. To whom
do people turn in cases of extreme need?
Do they look to their natal families; kin in
in the same village;.neighbors? Will the
project change the nature of these systems
of emergency support by relocating people
far from their natal homes, for example, or
by substituting the concept of wage labor
for the idea of labor based on mutual
obligation?
The collection of data and the analysis of intrahousehold
processes should be feasible in the context of existing USAID
project planning processes. Depending on the size and scope of
the project, one to six months should permit a reasonable
approach to the issue.
Understanding the reasoning behind the analysis should
contribute to improved project design even i- the entire process
suggested in this guideline cannot be undertaken.
Pages
12-64
Missing
From
Original
|
RSS
HIDE
