Shaffer - Gender, Poverty and Deprivation Evidence From the Republic of Guinea

8/14/2019 Shaffer - Gender, Poverty and Deprivation Evidence From the Republic of Guinea

1/17

Pergamon WorldDevelopn?ent Vol. 26, No. 12, pp. 211Y-2135, 19980 19% Elsevicr Science LtdAll rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain

0305750X/98/$ - see front matterPII: s0305-750x(98)00114-4

Gender, Poverty and Deprivation: Evidence from theRepublic of GuineaPAUL SHAFFER*

Institu te of Developm ent S tudies, Brighton, U .K.Summary. - The article examines the relationship between gender and consumption povertyand between gender and deprivation in the Republic of Guinea. National household survey datareveal that women are not more likely than men to he consumption poor or to suffer greaterconsumption poverty. Participatory Poverty Assessment data from the village of Kamatiguiareveal that women are worse off than men when deprivation includes. infer alirr, excessive workload and reduced decision-making authority. When consumption poverty poorly correlates withother dimensions of deprivation. it should not be the sole guide tor equity-based policyintervention. 0 199X Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights rcscrvcd.Key ~i0rd.s - Guinea, Sub-Saharan Africa, gender, poverty, participation, welfare measures

1. INTRODUCTIONThere is an ongoing debate about the relation-

ship between gender and deprivation in thedeveloping world. Much of the debate hasfocused on the relationship between gender andincome or consumption poverty with a view todetermine, inter alia, if women are more likelythan men to be poor or to suffer greater poverty.Results have been mixed and sensitive to anumber of factors including the metric (incomeor consumption expenditure), the deflator (percapita or per adult equivalent) and the povertymeasure used (Haddad et al., 1995). A secondarystrand has examined other dimensions of depri-vation with a view to determine, inter ah, ifwomen are more likely to suffer from differentdeprivations and/or greater deprivation than men(Kabeer, 1994, Chapter 6). One problem withthis latter exercise is that there is no obvious wayto value and aggregate different dimensions ofdeprivation.

The present article contributes to this debatedrawing on new data from the Republic ofGuinea. It analyzes three aspects of the relation-ship between gender and consumption poverty:the poverty status of female-headed households,female representation in poor households andthe intrahousehold distribution of food andhealth care. Further, it examines other aspects ofdeprivation which may disproportionately affectwomen drawing on the results of a participatorypoverty assessment (PPA) in the village ofKamatiguia, Upper Guinea. In PPAs, the valua-

tion of different dimensions of deprivation isbased on the perceptions of villagers who rankhouseholds or individuals on the basis of allfactors which bear on their relative well-being ordeprivation.

The format is as follows: Section 2 presents apreliminary discussion of sources and reliabilityof data; Section 3 examines the relationshipbetween gender and consumption poverty in theRepublic of Guinea; Section 4 examines therelationship between gender and deprivation inthe village of Kamatiguia; Section 5 concludes.

2. DATA ISSUESThe source of the data presented in Sections

3(b)-(d) is a nationally representative WorldSupport for this research project from the CanadianInternational Development Agency and the SocialSciences and Humanities Research Council of Canadais gratefully acknowledged. The research project inGuinea would not have been possible without theexpert assistance of Youssouf DiouhatC and SonahMady Camera. Comments on an earlier version by BobBaulch, Sarah Cook, Anne-Marie Goetz. ReginaldGreen. Michael Lipton, an anonymous referee andseminar participants at the IDS are greatly appreciatedas is support from Albert Berry, Sue Horton andSandra Gardner at the University of Toronto, EssemiMenyi at the World Bank, Washington DC andnumerous persons at development organisations andgovernmental agencies in the Republic of Guinea.Errors of analysis and interpretation are my own. Finalrevision accepted: May 11, 1998.

211)


2/17

2120 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

Bank/Government of Guinea Social Dimensionsof Adjustment (SDA) Integrated-type surveyhousehold survey conducted over the periodJanuary 1994-February 1995. The samplecontained 4,416 households with approximately29,000 individuals. Stratified random samplingwas used in order to ensure sufficient representa-tion of IO socioeconomic groups.

Many of the problems attributable to faultyquestionnaire design in developing areas havebeen addressed in a more satisfactory way in theSDA Integrated-type surveys. The household wasdefined as those who usually live together, eattogether and accept the authority of the house-hold head. The consumption module coveredfood and non-food purchases as well as homeconsumption. Questions related to foodpurchases and home consumption wereaddressed to the persons responsible for mealpreparation while questions of non-foodpurchases were addressed to all those respon-sible. The recall period for food purchases andhome consumption was 48 hours in rural areasand 72 hours in urban areas. Rural householdswere visited seven times over a l4-day period,urban households 10 times over a 30-day period,for the collection of consumption data. Issues ofseasonal variation in consumption expenditurewere addressed by ensuring that the seasonaldistribution of visits across regions was identicaland the survey conducted during all seasons.

Both the collection and treatment of dataappear to have been of high quality. A majorfactor which improved the data collectionprocess was the use of laptop computers in thefield. Data were entered immediately by super-visors and computer tests for internal coherenceperformed before surveyors had left the arca.Interviews with both supervisors and surveyorssuggested that this made a big difference becauseit reduced the scope for honest anddishonest errors. With respect to data treat-ment, values were imputed for home consump-tion, the depreciation of assets, andowner-occupied housing in urban areas.Regional cost-of-living indices were computedand spatial and temporal price differencesadjusted.

Two caveats should be kept in mind, however,when reviewing these data. First, the aforemen-tioned concept of the household as a unit ofanalysis is problematic in situations such as WestAfrica where the there is only limited overlapbetween residential, consumption, and produc-tion units (Guyer and Peters, 1987, p. 205). It isunclear, however, how or if the resulting biaswould differentially affect consumption levels in

female-headed households (FHHs) and male-headed households (MHHs). Second, sclf-declared headship may systematicallyunderrepresent FHHs given the frequent identi-tication of the eldest male as household headirrespective of economic contribution or effectivecontrol of household budgetary decisions(Rosenhouse, 1989, p. 5). The ensuing welfarebias, however, is ambiguous (see Handa, 1994. p.1537).

The data presented in Section 4 are from aPPA conducted in the village of Kamatiguia. inthe region of Upper Guinea, by the author andtwo Guinean associates, all male. The durationof the Kamatiguia PPA was approximately oneweek, though five weeks were spent in the villageconducting a household survey, interviewing. etc.The PPA exercise was conducted in French andMalinke. Translation was provided by a teammember with an advanced degree in sociologyand an intimate knowledge of local culture.history and language.

The choice of region and village was based onthe following considerations: Upper Guinea isthe poorest region in Guinea in terms ofincidence, intensity and severity of consumptionpoverty (RG, 1996b, p. 10); the chosen subpre-fecture, Siguiri, is the home area of the researchassociates which was important for logisticalreasons and which facilitated interpretation andunderstanding of local perceptions. The chosenvillage, Kamatiguia, satisfied two additionalcriteria: (a) it has a minimal number of house-holds, required for statistical purposes, and notso many as to make the PPA intractable; (b) itsoccupants remain resident during the goldmining season.

At least two caveats should bc kept in mindwith respect to the PPA data. First. the fact thatall researchers were male may have precludeddiscussion of certain issues (e.g., excision, sexualpractices), but in general women were quitecandid about many aspects of their lives (e.g.,violence), as were men. Second, the families ofthe rcscarch associates were known to thevillagers and held in esteem, a fact which theresearchers felt enhanced local confidence andtrust in the exercise. It is unclear, however, whateffect this fact may have had on research results.

3. GENDER AND CONSUMPTIONPOVERTYWhat is the relationship between gender andconsumption poverty in the Republic of Guinea?There are at least three facets to this question:


3/17

GENDER. POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION 2121

Is the incidence, intensity or severity ofconsumption poverty greater in female-headedhouseholds (FHHs)?Are women or girls overrepresented in poorhouseholds?Is the intrahousehold distribution of food orhealth care skewed to the disadvantage ofwomen and girls?The first question is addressed in Sections 3(b)and (c). The second question is addressed inSection 3(d). The final question is addressed inSections 3(e) and (f). The empirical results areprefaced by a brief discussion of measurementissues in Section 3(a).

(a) Measurement issuesThroughout Sections 3(b)-(d) the welfare

metric used is consumption expenditure. It iswidely held to be preferable to income for tworeasons: first, it is easier to measure and may besubject to less respondent error; second, it is abetter indicator of current and long-term welfareif consumption smoothing is practiced (Raval-lion, 1994).

Consumption expenditure levels are adjustedper adult equivalent. Equivalence scales adjustfor the fact that the commodity requirements ofa given utility level differ along age lines and/orif household economies of scale obtain. Thepresent analysis uses adult equivalence weightsestimated in Indonesia and Sri Lanka (Deatonand Muellbauer, 1986) and recently applied tothe Cote dIvoire (Glewwe, 1988). The weightsare as follows: 18-, 1 O. Sensitivity analysis presented inAppendix B shows that research results are notsensitive to use of different adult equivalencescales but are sensitive to use of different param-eter values which adjust for economies of scale.While the importance of scale economies ofconsumption in poor households in thedeveloping world is far from certain, this findingurges caution, nevertheless, when interpretingresearch results (see Appendix B).

In addition, two types of poverty lines arepresented, the normal poverty line and theultrapoverty line. These lines were derived onthe basis of the food-share method. The food-share method estimates the cost of a food bundlewhich satisfies dietary energy needs and multi-plies this by the inverse of the food share in totalexpenditure (Engel cocfhcient) of a populationsubgroup deemed poor. In Guinea, the referencepopulation subgroup consisted of the bottom twodeciles of the consumption distribution. The

normal poverty line at 463,056 francs guintens(FG) corresponds to the food and non-foodexpenditure level at which basic dietary energyneeds are satisfied. The ultrapoverty line at271615 FG corresponds simply to the foodexpenditure level at which basic dietary energyneeds are satisfied.

Section 3(b) presents measures of povertyincidence, intensity and severity drawing on ageneral class of poverty proposed by Foster,Greer and Thorbecke (FGT) (Foster et al., 1984)(see Appendix .4). Poverty incidence, repre-sented as P,,, is the proportion of poorindividuals in the total population or the headcount ratio. Poverty intensity, represented as P,,measures the poverty gap, or average shortfallfrom the poverty line. Poverty severity, repre-sented as P1, is a distributionally sensitivemcasurc of the poverty gap so that greaterweight is attached to larger poverty gaps. Twosample t tests for statistical significance ofdifferent t, values for population subgroups arecalculated on the basis of the derivation byKakwani (1993) of the standard error for P,.

(b) hciderzce, intensit)iand severity of overtyIs the incidence, intensity or severity of

consumption deprivation greater in female-headed households (FHHs)? Tables 1 and 2present data on these three poverty indicatorsfor consumption expenditure per adult equiva-lent in FHHs and male-headed households(MHHs) at the poverty line and ultrapovertyline. All P, values at both poverty lines arehigher for MHHs than FHHs. All P, differencesat the poverty line are statistically significant atthe 1% level, whereas P,, differences at the ultra-poverty line are statistically significant at the 5%Icvel. With respect to national poverty shares,between 93% and 96% of poor individuals live inMHHs depending on the poverty index andpoverty line used. These data suggest thatMHHs face greater consumption poverty thanFHHs in the Republic of Guinea.

The conclusion that poverty incidence is loweramong FHHs than MHHs parallels findings oftwo other recent household surveys conducted inthe capital city, Conakry by CornelliUSAID andthe International Institute of Social Studies (de1Ninno, 1993. p. 25: Dioubate, 1992, p. 66).3There are two explanations which have beenoffered for this finding. First, it is only relativelywealthy women who do not remarry, if divorcedor widowed, or who are not incorporated withinother households if unmarried (de1 Ninno, 1993,p. 6). In Guinea, a traditional practice, the


4/17


Table 1. Incidence, inter&y and .werit)? of povert_~ ;r FHHs and MHHJ expendtturc per adult equir&nt at povert)line (475157 FG)PC, National I, National t? National I (FHHs vs. MHHs)Poverty Poverty Poverty

Share (9;) Share (4) Share (9;) p,i 11 PIFHHs 0.252 6.8 0.06s 5.6 0.025 5.0 -4.1fl*= -j.lI*-^ -4.71*--MHHs 0.397 93.2 0. I27 94.4 0.054 95.0All 0.382 100.0 0.121 100.0 0.05 1 100.0*Signkant at 1% level.Source: Calculated from RG (IY9ha)

lhirat, persists, whereby the widow of adeceased male will remarry the latters eldestsurviving brother (RG, 1995b, p. 18). Second, ahigh proportion of FHHs benefit from significantremittance income (RG, 19Y6b. p. 18).

(c) Stochstic dominance testsDoes the finding that MHHs suffer greater

consumption deprivation than FHHs hold whendifferent poverty lines or different povertyindices are used? It is possible to assess thisthrough the use of stochastic dominance tests.The procedure is to compare the cumulativedistribution function (C@I of expenditure for allsubgroups in question. If the cclf of one subgrouplies nowhere below, and at some point above. thecdfof a second subgroup at all points up to apoverty maximum, poverty is unambiguouslygreater in the first group for the entire class of P,measures. This is known as the First OrderDominance (FOD) Condition. If the FOD Testis inconclusive, i.e. the CL@ intersect at somepoint, it is possible to apply a Second OrderDominance (SOD) Test to those povertymeasures sensitive to the depth of poverty, P,and P2. SOD obtains if the Poverty Deficit Curve(PDC), i.e. the area under the cdfi. of onesubgroup lies nowhere below and at some pointabove the PDC of another.

The intuitive reason is that the cdf containstwo pieces of information which figure in theFGT poverty indices. The y axis. cumulativepopulation 551. epresents the proportion of poorindividuals, P,,. The horizontal distance along theY axis between the cdf curve and the poverty linerepresents the poverty gap, P,. If the cdf of onesubgroup lies nowhere below, and at some pointabove, the cdf of a second subgroup at all pointsup to a poverty maximum, then all values of PO,P,, and by implication PL, will be greater.

Figure 1 presents the results of stochasticdominance tests for poverty orderings of MHHSand FHHs when using per adult equivalenthousehold expenditure. Although it appears thatthe cdfof MHHs lies everywhere above that ofFHHs, the latter is actually above the former forthe first few data points. As a consequence strictFirst Order Dominance does not obtain. Never-theless, the calf of MHHs lies above that ofFHHs over virtually the entire expenditurerange. Figure 1 shows the dominance of MHHsover FHHs within a range of &10% of thepoverty and ultrapoverty lines (z). In addition,the poverty deficit curves for MHHs and FHHs(not shown here) exhibit a similar dominance ofMHHs over FHHs for virtually the entire expen-diture range. These data suggest then, thatconsumption poverty is greater in MHHs thanFHHs in the Republic of Guinea for all P,measures and for any reasonable poverty line.

Table 2. lncidcnce, itztemit)? artd severity oj puverg ,for FHHs and A4HH.y expenditure per adult equivalent at ultra-

P,l National PI National PZ National t (FHHs vs. MHHs)Poverty Poverty PovertyShare (5%) Share (95) Share (7,) pr, I, P?

FHHs 0.04) 4.3 0.009 3.9 0.003 3.9 -2.09 ~ 1.93 -1.33MHHs 0.126 95.7 0.027 96.1 0.008 96.1All 0.118 100.0 0.025 IOU.0 0.008 IOO.0Signficant at 5% level.Source: Calculated from RG (1996a).


5/17

767066

s 605 66g 60346b0ns! 36.= 30$ 26E 200 16

1 060

GENDER, POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION 2123

Figure 1. Stochast ic domi nance test s, expendit ure per adult equivalent male-headed households (MHHs) and female-headed households (FHHs).

(d) Female representat ion in poor householdsAre women or girls overrepresented in poor

households? Table 3 presents data on the repre-sentation of women and all females in differenthousehold expenditure categories. The agecut-off for women is 18. Table 3 shows thatwomen and all females are underrepresented inboth ultrapoor and poor households. Further, forwomen, the relationship between consumptionexpenditure and female representation isincreasing throughout the expenditure range sothat women are most underrepresented in ultra-poor households.

(e) Intrahousehold dist ribution of foodThe ideal way to assess intrahousehold food

distribution is to collect data on individual foodconsumption within the household. In Guinea,no such data exist. Consequently evidence ongender differences in intrahousehold allocation

must be inferred from data on nutritionaloutcomes.Available gender-disaggregated anthropo-metric data for children include measures ofstunting, or height-for-age, and wasting, orweight for height. Stunting is a widely usedmeasure of chronic malnutrition while wasting isa widely used measure of acute malnutrition.Both occur when Z scores are two or morestandard deviations from the median score of areference population. Norms for the referencepopulation come from the US National Centerfor Health Studies (NCHS) which are similar tothe Harvard and Denver norms. For adults, thebody mass index (BMI), or weight over heightsquared, is used. Women and men areconsidered at health risk if their BMI totals areless than 17.5 and 18.4 respectively. In Guinea,the only BMI data which permit a gendercomparison are for the capital city Conakry.

As Table 4 reveals, the incidence of bothstunting and wasting is higher in boys than girlswhile a higher percentage of men than women

Table 3. Female and w omens representat ion (76) in household expendit ure categories expenditure per adult equival entFemalesUltra Poor Poor NonPoor All Ultra Poor

Women ( > 17)Poor NonPoor All

47.9 46.8 54.4 51.5 21.7 24.0 28.4 26.7Source: Calculated from RG (1996a).


6/17


Stunting Wasting BMI (Conakry)hHealth risk Undenvcight

Boys (3-59 months) 33. I 12.0 Men 11.1 17.3Girls (3-59 months) 30.0 11.0 Women 4.0 4.8Sources: RG (IYYI), pp. 145-148: hdel Ninno and Sahn (1992). p. 4.

are underweight and at a health risk in Conakry.These data do not reveal a bias against girls orwomen.

(f) lntruhousehold distribution of health careIs the intrahousehold distribution of health

care skewed to the disadvantage of girls andwomen? The question can be addressed byexamining gender-disaggregated data on healthoutcomes, infant and child mortality rates andthe aggregate Female-Male Ratio (FMR). TheEnquZte DCmographique et de SantL (EDS), ahousehold survey undertaken in 1992, providesdata on mortality. while the I983 populationcensus and three nationally representative house-hold surveys provide data on the FMR.Table 5 presents data on infant (< I) and child(l-5) mortality and on Excess Female Mortality(EFM) in Guinea. Determining ~xxcess mortalityis important because evidence shows thatnatural infant and child mortality rates tend tobe higher for males. Following Klasen (1996) (p.919) EFM may be expressed as:EFM= [AFMRIAMMR]l[SFMRlSMMRlwhere AFMR is the Actual Female MortalityRate; AMMR is the Actual Male Mortality Rate;SFMR is the Standard (Expected) FemaleMortality Rate and SMMR is the Standard(Expected) Male Mortality Rate. EFM exceedsone in situations of excess female mortality. EFMis less than one where there is excess malemortality. Four benchmarks of excess female

mortality are used. One, following Svedberg(1990) (p. 475), is based on the extrapolation ofabsolute differences in male and female mortalityrates from Sweden (SWEDABS). A second,following Klasen (1996) (p. 920). is based on theextrapolation of relutive (percentage) differencesin male and female mortality rates from Sweden(SWEDREL). The third and fourth are based onmodel life tables for Northern Europe (NORTH)and Europe, Asia, Australasia and South Africa(WEST).The important finding is that while childmortality is not sensitive to choice of referencenorms. infant tnortality is. All three relativenorms show excess female infant mortality ofapproximately 3%. It should be treated withcaution, however, given ongoing debates aboutthe appropriate benchmark to use, andbecause it is the only finding on health or nutri-tional outcomes in Guinea which suggests femaledisadvantage.

A final indicator of intrahousehold discrimina-tion in health or nutrition is the aggregatefemale-male ratio (FMR). As with mortalitydata, the key issue is the determination of thenatural ratio of females to males. Sub-SaharanAfrica has often been favorably contrasted toother regions of the world because of its higherFMR at 102.2 (Sen, 1092, pp. 587-588). Klasen(1994) (p. 1062) has recently argued that thisfavorable FMR reflects, in part. biologicallydetermined lower malcifemalc ratios at birthamong African populations. Adjusting for thisfact, and using model life tables, Klasen hascalculated the expected FMR in sub-SaharanAfrica to be 1.045. Table 6 presents data on the

Boys Girls EFMSWEDABS SWEDREL WEST NORTH

Infant mortality 162.8 142.7 0.89 I lJ3 I 03 1.03Child mortality 122.2 Ill.5 0.02 0.96 0.02 0.96Sources: RG (lYYSa), p. 146. Table 8.3; Calculated from RG (19Y5a) and Klasen (lY96), p. 920


7/17

Klasen

GENDER, POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION

Table 6. The aggregate emale-male ratio (FMR)Census ESIP

2125

EDSd EIFMR 1xl45 I.053 1.043 1.062 1.063Sources: Klasen (1906), p. 026; RCr (1989~1). p. 17, Table 1.9; RG (1991) Annexes Statistiques: 2. Table 1A;RG (19YSa). p. 12, Table 2. I; Calculated from RG (1996~1).

FMR in Guinea based on the 1983 populationcensus and three nationally representative house-hold surveys: the 1991 EnquCte sur les Informa-tions Prioritaires (ESIP); the 1992 EnquCteDemographique et de Sante (EDS) and the 1994EnquCte IntCgrale (El).

Table 6 reveals that three of the four FMRsexceed Klasens norm while one is virtuallyidentical. These data do not support the view ofintrahousehold discrimination against females inhealth care access.

4. GENDER AND DEPRIVATION (iii)What is the relationship between gender and

deprivation in the Republic of Guinea? Thequestion is addressed, drawing primarily onmicro-level data from a participatory povertyassessment (PPA) undertaken in the village ofKamatiguia, Upper Guinea. Section 4(a)provides an overview of the techniques used inthe Kamatiguia PPA. Section 4(b) discussesissues related to the concepts of well-being anddeprivation used in the Kamatiguia PPA. Section4(c) presents results of participatory groupdiscussions. Section 4(d) presents results of thewell-being ranking exercises. Section 4(e)addresses issues of generalizing the Kamatiguiaresults.

(a) The Kamatiguia PP!The Kamatiguia PPA, which spanned approxi- (iv)mately one week, comprised four stages:

(i) Social mupping. A map of the importantsites in the village including all householdswas prepared by a group of young men inthe village cafe, and later finalized by oneindividual. The households and householdmembers identified on the social map servedas the basis for the subsequent wealthranking exercises, though certain amend-ments were made to the household list aftercrosschecking with other sources.(ii) Participatoy group discussion. Two generalassemblies were held with a view to elicit

mens and womens views on conceptions ofdeprivation and well-being. The underlyingaim was to provide a forum to air divergentviews on deprivation and well-being usingparticipatory techniques designed to stimu-late a wide-ranging debate and to challengeaccepted positions. The first generalassembly was comprised of 12-15 mainlyelderly male heads of clans in the village,while the second general assembly wascomprised of approximately 200 men andwomen mostly between the ages of 15 and50.Well-being ranking. Two small groups of fourmen and four women were requested torank, according to their criteria of depriva-tion and well-being, all the households inthe village and subsequently the men andwomen in the village. The selection of parti-cipants was determined by village authori-ties and sought to reflect the diversity ofmen and women with respect to age, socialstructure and economic class. In thepresent case it was absolutely essential toproceed via the intermediary of villageauthorities because of the extremely sensi-tive nature of a public wealth-rankingexercise in Malinke culture. Threecategories were predetermined, worse off,intermediate and best off but the optionleft to participants to modify thiscategorization.Follow-~tp purticipatory discussion. In thedays following the ranking exercises, the twogroups were reconvened to explain infurther detail the ranking of particularhouseholds and to elaborate further on thecomparative ranking of men and women.The particular households chosen werethose which were ranked in oppositeextreme categories by the men and womenin addition to a number of households werethe ranking appeared at odds with thegroups own criteria, given our (limited)knowledge of village householdcharacteristics.


8/17


(b) Well-being and deprivation in the KamatiguiaPPA

PPAs strive to base the determination andassessment of well-being and deprivation onlocal conceptions of these terms. There are twomajor difficulties which immediately arise withthis type of exercise.

First, there are difficulties associated withunderstanding and interpreting local meanings(Giddens, 1976). These problems may beconceptualized in terms of the so-called herme-neutic circle: the fact that there is no meta-standard, outside of a specificlinguistic/conceptual scheme, with which togauge the validity of interpretation (Taylor,1985). While there is no practical way to breakout of the circle, the conceptual categories usedby PPA facilitator when participating in, andinterpreting results of, PPAs should be madeexplicit.

The conception of well-being which informsthe present study is based on the idea of aprudentially valuable life. By prudential value ismeant that which is in a persons interests orequivalently, that which is good for a person(Griffin, 1986, p. 37). Deprivation is simply theabsence of key prudentially valuable items.Considerable time was spent prior to the PPAexercise choosing the appropriate words inMalinkC to convey this sense of the terms well-being and deprivation. In the end, it was decidedto use the term daha (easy life), to convey thesense of the term well-being and bolokolonia(empty hands) to convey the sense of depriva-tion. Because bolokolonia could be construedsimply as lack of material possession, thefollowing terms were used in conjunction withbolokolonia to convey the wider notion ofprudential deprivation: nyagba (suffering), s&2(exhaustion). The term best off was conveyedas those with the most daha, and worse off asthose with the most holokolonia, nyagba and [email protected] of particular items of prudentialvalue was left to PPA participants. Nevertheless,this conceptual scheme puts structure of theunderlying conception of well-being/deprivationin two ways. First, it distinguishes between moraland prudential value. Moral value differs fromprudential value in that it is concerned with thedemands of right, justice, fairness, etc., whichmay, though need not, conflict with that which isin the interests of, or good for, a person(see Section 4~). Second, it requires that well-being/deprivation constituents be value-based.The effect is to restrict well-being/deprivationcomparisons to those based on factors which

contribute to a persons interest or good andrule out comparisons based, say, on frivolous orwhimsical considerations (see Section 4d).

The second set of difficulties with group deter-mination/assessment of well-being/deprivation isoften referred to as the sour grapes (Elster,1987) or happy slave problem (Elster andRoemer, 1991). Determination and assessmentof well-being/deprivation is a social process,influenced by social expectations and conditionedby life experience. One might assume thatworse off groups will have less ambitiouswell-being/deprivation expectations (sourgrapes), and will base assessments of well-being/deprivation on lower well-being/deprivationreferents (happy slave). The main implication isthat results of self/group assessments and deter-mination of well-being/deprivation must be criti-cally reviewed both by a PPA facilitator andpolicy-maker before serving as a basis for policy(see Section 4~).

(c) Participatogj group discussion resultsThe participatory group discussions comprisedthree stages: first, a general discussion of major

problems facing the village; second, a discussionof constituents of well-being/deprivation andcharacteristics of households deemed worse offand best off; third, a discussion of the compara-tive position of men and women. The presentaccount will be restricted to issues raised in thesecond and third discussions.

One preliminary point is relevant. There was amarked reluctance of women to speak publicly inthe general assembly even though questions wereposed specifically to them. Follow-up discus-sions with individual women identified threefactors which lead to this reticence: fear ofspeaking in large assemblies, reluctance to speakbefore the village notables out of respect, andfear of speaking openly before men about issuesrelated to gender. This contributed to thedecision to stratify the well-being ranking groupsby gender.The lead discussion for the general discussionof well-being/deprivation constituents was thefollowing: When you hear the terms well-beingand deprivation what do you think of? Of themany things which no doubt come to mind,which are the most important and why? Thequestion elicited a wide range of responses.Many responses dealt with processes of impover-ishment and escape from poverty (i.e. the needfor: agricultural inputs; modern mining equip-ment; arms to fend off predatory animals;population pressure on the land, etc.). Most of


9/17


the responses dealing with well-being/deprivationconstituents fell under two broad categories:material needs (se) and social respect(bonnya).

Fulfillment (non-fulfillment) of materialneeds was the first, and most frequentlymentioned, aspect of well-being (deprivation).The two most important material needs inquestion related to food and health. It should benoted that Kamatiguia does not have a healthcenter and hunger is prevalent in the periodleading up to the harvest. Following food andhealth, other material needs mentioned includedshelter (having a straw hut or a house with tinroof) and clothing (quality and quantity).

Social respect was afforded great importance.Three sources of respect seemed particularlyimportant: individual behavior: wealth/income;and social status. Behavioral patterns whichmerited social respect included consideration forothers. honesty, and being serious in lifepursuits. Wealth and income commanded socialrespect in generul, because it conferred prestigeand power on the beholders. Finally, fourdifferent categories of social status wereimportant, but not determinant, sources of socialrespect: age, gender, caste, religious hierarchy.Ceteris pa rubis, respect increased with age, washigher for males, ascended along caste lines,was afforded to the village Imam and Marabout,and to those who had made the religiouspilgrimage to Mecca.

An attempt was made to assess the relativeimportance of respect and material need fulfill-ment. The group of men in the first generalassembly and the group of women in the well-being ranking were asked to choose between thefollowing two social states: materially poor,including inadequate food, but respected byfamily and community; wealthy, but notrespected by family and community. In bothinstances, an absolute consensus was immedia-tely and forcefully reached in favor of the firstsituation. It should be emphasized. however,that there need not be any tradeoff between thewealth/income and social respect as the former isusually a source of the latter, excepting caseswhere wealth/income is conjoined with objection-able behavior.

The lead question for the third discussion wasthe following: We have read in documents thatwomen are the worse off social group in Guinea.Do you agree with this conclusion or not andwhy or why not? The question generated livelydebate in both General Assemblies. Somewhatsurprisingly, a large majority of both women andmen agreed with the proposition. Two main

elements were invoked in support of thisposition:

(i) Work load: It was universally agreed that the

(ii)

work time of women far exceeded that ofmen when domestic duties were combinedwith economic work. Both men andwomen made note of the constant physicalfatigue of women due to their heavy workburden. As elsewhere, the main differencein work-time between men and womenstemmed from time allotted to domesticwork. Time-use data, culled from interviewswith individual women, identified majordomestic duties of women as: meal prepara-tion, drawing/heating water, child care (inthe evening) and household cleaning.

Decision-making authority: The lack ofeffective decision-making authority bywomen was acknowledged by all. Thegeneral sense conveyed was that men were incharge and women at their behest. This wasphrased in different ways including: lafemme est subordonnce a son mari; toutefemme reste derriere leur mari; lhommedecide, la femme obeisse, etc. The discus-sion did not specify particular decision-typesas it did convey the general sentiment ofwide gender disparities in social control.Reduced decision-making authority, andwide gender disparities in social control, arereflective, more generally, of the subordinateposition of women vis ti vi s men inKamatiguia.

Three factors were invoked by those who didnot accept, or who sought to nuance, the afore-mentioned position:(0

(ii)

Work in tensity: It was agreed that the physic-ally more onerous tasks belong to mtn.With respect to gold mining, a majoreconomic activity in the region, the pains-taking task of digging the mine shaft andexcavating the soil falls primarily upon men,while women are responsible for the lessphysically exacting tasks of drawing waterand washing the soil containing gold. Withrespect to agriculture, men are primarilyresponsible for the preparation of soils aswell as the harvesting and transportation ofproduce while women are primarily respon-sible for sowing, for the upkeep of cropsand le conditionnement des productions(RG, 1988, p. 67).S ecuriry of w~enu e: It was held that menface heightened revenue insecurity due totheir higher participation rates inagriculture which is subject to greater


10/17

2128 WORLD DEVELOPMEN?

(iii)

production variability than gold mining, theprincipal economic activity of women. Infact, the broader issue of economic vulncra-bility was never posed as a particularproblem facing women.Responsibility ,fol- household pm~isior~irg:There was wide recognition of the psycho-logical and physical burden placed on themale household head for the satisfaction ofthe familys food needs. In Kamatiguia, thehousehold .head is responsible for providing(not preparing) the staple foodstuffs for themain communal meal. It is important tonote, however, that with the increasingimportance of gold-mining among women,many provisioning responsibilities previouslyconferred on male household heads nowbelong to women including: purchase ofcondiments for meal preparation, purchaseof ingredients for the preparation of thenon-communal childrens meals; purchase ofchildrens clothing and payment of child-rens medical expenses (excepting majoremergencies).

Following the discussion of the dimensions offemale disadvantage and given that a smallminority did not accept the proposition of thatwomen were worse off than men, the followingquestion was posed: Taking into account all ofthe above factors which bear on the living condi-tions of men and women, what would you preferto be in a second life, male or female? Everytime this question was posed, an overwhelmingmajority of participants opted for the former, i.e.to be male.This finding is significant because it is a type ofrole play, based presumably on the simultaneousconsideration of all factors bearing on livingconditions of men and women. It is not suffi-cient, however, to affirm the thesis of greaterfemale deprivation vi.s ic vis men for two reasons:0)

(ii)

There is a problem of aggregation bias orusing aggregate .sociul categories which maskindividunl variation within these categories.The choice is between men as a group andwomen as a group and not between indivi-dual men and women.There is a related problem of category-selec-tivity bias in that gender is only one of manypotentially relevant analytical categories fordistinguishing social aggregates. The choiceis between men and women as a group andnot, say, between poor men and rich womenor low caste men and upper caste women.

A further point should be emphasized whichbears on the earlier distinction between pruden-

tial and moral value (Section 41~). Even if theranking does indicate that women as a groupoccupy a lower well-being rank than men. thereis no implication that this social arrangement isconsidered lrr!jzrsf. In fact. both men and somewomen were at pains to justify this arrangementin terms of religious. biological/cognitive,economic or historical/traditional considerations.The religious justification was based on the viewthat God created woman in the image. and forthe benefit, of man. The biological/cognitivejustification was premised on the idea thatwomen were less intelligent, less rational andincapable of longer-term reasoning. Theeconomic justification relates to securing areturn on the investment one makes in a bridein the form of bride wealth. The historicalitradi-tional justification was based on the persistenceof the arrangement over generations and theexpress wishes of ones parents to perpetuate it.

This affirmation of womens greater depriva-tion as just raises two additional issues. First, itis somewhat surprising that a common evaluativestandard was applied to men and women in thespace of prudential value (wetl-beingidepriva-tion) but not moral value (justice). That is, parti-cipants had no trouble finding women worse offthan men when both were compared in terms ofwork time, decision-making authority, etc., yetthis social outcome was not considered unjustbecause different standards of justice wereapplied to men and women. Second, it isimportant to recall the happy slave/sour grapescaveat (Section 4b). Results from group asscss-ments of well-being/deprivation are not beyondreproach and should not should not be accepteduncritically by policy-makers.One final interpretative difficulty should hementioned. There is an apparent contradiction inthat the .su~~ze behavioral patterns appear tofigure both positively and negatively as well-being constituents. Specifically. submissivefemale behavior figures negatively in the contextof decision-making authority but positively in thecontext of behavioral sources of respect. That is.the more submissive. the less decision-makingauthority and the worst-off. At the same time.however, the more submissive and respectful oftraditional social arrangements concerninggender roles, the greater social respect and thebetter off. One explanation for this apparentcontradiction is that while womens well-beingrange is severely limited, within this restrictedrange submissive women may be consideredbetter off. In short, the same submissivebehavioral patterns would have a differentialeffect on intergroup rankings (negative between


11/17

GENDE R, POVERTY AND DEP RIVATION 2129

women and men with respect to decision-makingauthority) and intragroup rankings (positiveamong women with respect to social respect).

(d) Well-being ranking resultsThe Well-being Ranking exercise had two

primary objectives: first, to rank the villagehouseholds according to the well-being criteria ofvillagers; second, to rank the men and women ofthe village in terms of the well-being criteria ofvillagers. The present discussion will focus on thesecond objective but mention the criteria used bymen and women for ranking the villagehouseholds.

The ranking criteria of households was broadlysimilar for men and women. Both attributedtwo characteristics to best-off households: theyfulfill material needs and other satisfii otherhousehold wants; and the household head isrespected in the community. The men added athird characteristic, that the household head islistened to, and obeyed by, his wives andchildren. Both men and women characterized theworse-off households as those unable to fulfillmaterial needs. The men also characterized theworse-off as lacking respect, though not thewomen. The intermediate category was able tosatisfy material needs, but unable to satisfy otherwants and enjoyed a moderate degree of socialrespect.

Following the ranking of houschnl& into thecategories worse off, intermediate and best off,the groups were asked to imagine that the house-hold ranking actually represented the ranking of1zousekoM heads who were all malt. It wasdecided that the ranking of household headswould fairly closely approximate the ranking ofhouseholds because household ranks were basedlargely, though not entirely. on household headcharacteristics. Participants were then asked torank the wives of the household heads withrespect to the male household heads. There wereapproximately twice as many women as men torank given the average of two wives per housc-hold head. The selection of wives of householdheads was based on the assumption that theywould serve as an adequate proxy for villagewomen in general. Practical imperativesprecluded a complete ranking of village womengiven that the total number of village womenexceeded two hundred. The categories for thesecond ranking were the same as the firstexcepting the addition of three categories to theleft of the initial ranking, labeled - 1, -2 and-3, representing progressively greaterdeprivation.

The ranking of village men and women by thegroup of men and the group of women wasidentical. Both groups ranked all married villagewomen as worse off than all male householdheads with the exception of two women. Allwomen, excepting two, were placed in thecategory - 1. Of the two exceptions, one woman,placed in the best-off category, enjoyedconsiderable wealth, had very successful childrenand had completed the pilgrimage to Mecca. Theother woman, placed in the intermediatecategory, was extremely intelligent, and knownfor her humanism. She served as intermediarybetween men and women in the village and washeld in great esteem.

When asked how it was possible for all women(excepting two) to be ranked below all men, thegroup of men explained primarily in terms ofdecision-making authority: cest lhomme quid&cide: toutes les femmes devraient Ctre mises ggauche (i.e. in category -1). The womenresponded by using the MalinkC phrase mvso yedyijtl 126di, which characterizes married womenas slaves. They proceeded to expound uponthe heavy work burden and attendant sufferingof women.

This finding is significant because it addressesthe problem of aggregation bias when inter-preting results from the participatory groupdiscussions (see Section 4~). The finding thatwomen are worse off than men now findsconfirmation at the level of individual well-beingranking. It is surprising, however, that the(materially) poorest man in the village would bedeemed better-off than the richest womangiven the importance placed on material needfulfillment as a well-being/deprivation con-stituent. When this issue was broached in thefollow-up discussion, it was explained thatwomen constituted a very homogenous group,which differed starkly from all men, in terms ofthe key criteria in the ranking, i.e. work time,dcciaion-making authority. This would appear toimply, further. that a much higher (negative)weight is placed on those elements of deprivationwhich disproportionately affect women (excessivework time, restricted decision-making authority)than those affecting households in general(non-fulfillment of material needs, lack of socialrespect).

There are a number of reasons, however, totreat this finding with caution. First, there arequestions about the adequacy of male householdheads and their wives as proxies for men andwomen in general. Excluded are the followingclasses of persons: married men who are nothousehold heads, unmarried men, unmarried


12/17

21.30 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

young women, migrant labor (approximately 30young men from neighboring villages). It isunclear how, or if, their inclusion would affectthe comparative ranking of men and women.

Second, the problem of category-selectivitybias discussed in Section 4c remains. Inparticular, a bias may have been introduced byfailing to ask participants during the well-beingranking if the category of gender should besubdivided into other relevant categories such asage, caste, wealth, etc. While in principle anindividual wealth-ranking exercise should captureany well-being relevant differences betweenindividuals, in practice it may not. The problemis brought out most clearly in the ranking ofalmost all women into category - I. While thisranking no doubt reflects the high degree ofhomogeneity among village women in someaspects of well-being/deprivation (work time,decision-making authority), it is neverthelesssurprising given differences crrnong abdomen inother aspects of deprivation (material needfulfillment, social respect).

A final caveat relates to the problem ofconflating well-being ranking and hierarchy-mapping. It is conceivable that the comparativeranking of men and women by the group of menwas motivated by a desire to affirm their super-iority in a hierarchy and nothing more. In thiscase, the comparison would not be value-basedand thus not qualify as well-being or dcprivation-relevant (see Section 4b). There are two consid-erations, however, which militate against thisinterpretation. First, the reasons given for theranking of women by the group of men fallwithin the purview of what was considered to beprudentially valuable (primarily decision-makingauthority). Second, as discussed in Section 4c,social standing in a hierarchy, or social status,enters prudential value via the intermediary ofrespect. Gender is one factor which bears on theesteem or respect afforded individuals.

(e) Generalizing the PPA resultsCan the Kamatiguia results be generalized tothe national level in Guinea? Generalization

based on one case study requires a judgmentabout the typicality of the population charac-teristics in the populations in question(Hammersley, 19Y2, Chapter 5). In the presentcase, this entails an assessment of the typicalityof well-being/deprivation-relevant genderrelations in Kamatiguia and the typicality ofpopular perceptions of the relative well-being/deprivation status of men and women.

On the first issue. the one atypical aspect ofgender relations in Kamatiguia relates to thegreater wealth. economic security and autonomywhich women enjoy due to their activities in goldmining. As discussed above, gold mining is theprinciple economic activity conducted by women,which is apparently subject to less earningsvolatility than agriculture. Further. typicallywomen do not pass on their earnings from goldmining to the household head (though they doshoulder a greater share of household expendi-ture). If anything, womens participation in goldmining has strengthened their decision-makingauthority in economic matters as men cannotoblige their wives to work in their fields. It doesnot appear to have had a similar effect, however.on domestic matters.There is evidence to suggest that those aspectsof deprivation which disproportionately affectedwomen in Kamatiguia are typical at the nationallevel. National time-use data show significantgender gaps favoring males in all strata andregions for total work time, i.e. economic anddomestic work. (Shaffer, 1996, pp. 20-21).National data on gender disparities in decision-making authority provide support for theKamatiguia results as well although it should benoted that few micro studies have attempted tosystematically document these phenomena (RG,1995b, pp. 54-56).

With respect to popular perceptions of therelative well-being/deprivation status of men andwomen, limited information is provided bynational participatory poverty studies undertakenby UNDP in 1994. These studies affirmed thegeneral recognition of female hardshipthroughout Guinea and concluded forcefullythat women are the most disadvantaged socialgroup in Guinea (PNUD, 1995, pp. 38, Y2). Itshould be noted, however, that these studies didnot use the more formalized techniques of PPAsand their conclusion is based on group discus-sions results where participants were not directlyasked to rank men and women.One final caveat should be mentioned. Gencr-alizing community-specific assessments of well-being does not necessarily provide a basis formaking intercommunity comparisons. The reasonis that welfare comparisons conducted indifferent communities will always be based onlocally relevant welfare referents. Locallyrelevant welfare referents must be broadlysimilar to make intercommunity welfarecomparisons possible. Where locally relevantwelfare referents differ widely there is noimmediately obvious basis for intercommunitycomparisons. The main implication is that even if


13/17

GENDER. POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION 2131

the Kamatiguia results may be generalized to thenational level, they cannot serve as a basis formaking comparisons across very differentcommunities, and therefore should not serve asthe sole basis for national or regional policy.

5. CONCLUSIONIn the Republic of Guinea, household survey

data suggest that women are not more likelythan men to be consumption poor or to suffergreater consumption poverty. All P, povertyindices are higher in male-headed householdsthan female-headed households at the povertyand ultrapoverty lines. Stochastic dominancetests suggest that this result obtains over almostthe entire expenditure range for all povertymeasures used. In addition, both women and allfemales are underrepresented in poor and ultra-poor households. With respect to the intrahouse-hold distribution of food, data on nutritionaloutcomes suggest that girls fare better than boyswhile women in Conakry fare better than men.Data on the intrahousehold distribution ofhealth suggest that females fare better thanmales with the exception of infant mortality datawhen using relative-difference or model lifetable norms.

Data from the Kamatiguia PPA, however,suggest that consumption poverty misses criticalelements of womens deprivation. In groupdiscussions, two dimensions of deprivation weresingled out by men and women which dispropor-tionately affect women: excessive work load anddecision-making authority. In the well-beingranking exercises, groups of both men andwomen separately ranked all married villagewomen (excepting two) below all male householdheads in terms of their own criteria of well-beingand deprivation. The PPA evidence suggests thatin Kamatiguia, women are worse off than menwhen deprivation extends beyond consumptionpoverty.

In many circles, consumption poverty remainsthe measure of choice which guides equity-basedpolicy intervention. It addresses one dimensionof deprivation whose importance should not bebelittled. It misses other aspects of deprivation,however, which may be critically important.When consumption poverty correlates poorlywith these other dimensions of deprivation,different groups will be found consumptionpoor and worse off. In situations such asthese. the equity import of policy interventionsbased exclusively on consumption poverty islimited indeed.

NOTES

1. This result stems from the fact that MHHs arelarger than FHHs at 7 and 4.3 household membersrespectively.2. The poverty lines were derived by the Governmentof Guinea/World Bank statistical team in Guinea (RG,1996b, pp. 6-7) and have been scaled up to take intoaccount the use of adult equivalent weights.3. The percentage of individuals in MHHs and FHHsis 90% and 10% respectively, while the percentage ofMHHS and FHHs is 16% and 84% respectively.4. In sub-Saharan Africa the evidence on the relation-ship between poverty and female headship is mixedand sensitive to choice of welfare metric (income,consumption) welfare deflator (per capita, per adultequivalent) and poverty measure (P,, P,, P,). Withrespect to consumption expenditure per capita, theanalysis by Lachaud (1994) (p. 109) of urban house-hold survey data in West Africa and Madagascar foundhigher incidence of poverty in female headed house-holds (FHHs) in four of six cases and the analysis byHaddad et al. (1995) (pp. 57-59) of five African countydata sets found higher PU for (FHHs) in four of fivecases, higher P, in two of five cases and higher Pz in

three of five cases. With respect to consumption peradult equivalent, Haddad et ul. found higher P,, in fourof five cases and higher P, and PL in three of five casts.Hanmer et al. (1997) (p. 3.9) present data on therelative probabilities of being poor for FHHs andMHHs drawing on recent consumption expendituredata from World Bank Poverty Assessments insub-Saharan Africa. They found FHHs more likely tobe poor in one case, much more likely to be poor inone case, less likely to be poor in two cases and equallylikely in five cases. It is not clear if these latter datawere adjusted per capita or by adult equivalent.5. See Ravallion (1994) (pp. 66-72) on which thissection draws.6. The social structure in the region comprises fourgroups: (a) Descendants of Nobility (Entigui) whoselineage is traced to the founding families in the region;(b) Free Persons (H&&z) who settled in the area fromabroad; (c) People of Caste (Gnumakala) includingblacksmiths (Noumou) and griots (DjC&) and (d)Ex-Slaves @y&z) (RG, 1989b. pp. 96-97). The wealthranking exercise included members of the first threegroups excepting griots (there was only one griot


14/17


family in the village) and ex-slaves (to my knowledge,there were no ex-slaves in Kamatiguia).7. See IIED (1992) for an overview of relevant PPAtechniques.8. Other difficulties are discussed below.9. See Sen (1985) for discussion of potential conflictsbetween, inter dia. prudential and moral value.IO. For a general discussion of this issue and theproblems it poses for PRA techniques see Jackson(1996) (p. 500) and Mosse (1994) (pp. 51 l-516).11. See note 6.

16. This finding contrasts with Shah (IM) whosePPA in Ghana found systematic gender differcncc\ butis consistent with Scoones (1995) whose ucalth-rankingexercise in Southern Zimbabwe found broad gendersimilarities with respect to wealth indicators.

12. This result has been found elsewhere (Beck, 1994,pp. 181-183).

17. The women used the religious term believer.(limannyrr) to characterize the worst off. The under-lying idea was that the worse-off \toical!y and couragc-ously accepted their divinely dctermincd fate. andtherefore merited respect. This apparently contradictsearlier affirmations of the importance of respect as awell-being/deprivation constituent. One possibleexplanation is that the women were attempting todepict in a positive light those who they were publiclyranking as worse off in the village.

13. A third element, iw~$icil in much of the discus-sion, may he termed life chances. Soon after the age ofpuberty, the relatively care-free life of young girls endsfor a life of fatigue and conjugal servitude. Aspects ofreduced lift chances mentioned in later discussionsincluded early marriages and the child-bearing burdenof women.

1X. It should be noted, however, that the term slaveis meant to denote servitude and extreme inequality inpower but not relations of master/slave domination asin, say, North American slavcry.

14. During the day, child care is mainly provided byother children. Infants usually accompany theirmothers to work (strapped on their backs).

19. For empirical evidence on the relevance of thesecategories in participatory assessments see Welhournc(1991).20. This paragraph is hased on interviews with menand women in Kamatiguia.

15. The subordinate position of women is enforced bythreats, or episodes, of physical violence. In interviews,women complained that they received beatings fromtheir spouses and/or other male kin approximately twoor three times per month for perceived insubordina-tion. In Guinea, a traditional practice, the baston-nade, persists, whereby a husband and other kin maypublicly beat a spouse for perceived wrongdoing (RG,1995b, p. 18).

21. This point is based on interviews with threememhers of the Participatory Poverty Study teams.22. Conclusions about consumption poverty andgender in Kamatiguia are limited by the absence offemale-headed households and the ahaencc of anthro-pometric data. Data on intrahousehold distribution offinal consumption. based on questionnaire responses,found small gender differences (Shaffer: 1996).

REFERENCESBeck, T. (19Y4) The Experiezce offovert)~. Intermediate

Technology Publications, London.Deaton. A. and Muellbauer, J. (1986) On measuring

child costs: With applications to poor countries.journal of Political Economy 94(4), 720-744.

dcl Ninno, C. (1993) Welfare and poverty in Conakry:Assessments and determinants. ENCOMEC BulletinNo. I 1,Cornell Food and Nutrition Policy Program,Washington DC, January

del Ninno, C. and Sahn, D. (1992) Nutritional statusand morbidity in Conakry. ENCOMEC Bulletin No.7. Cornell Food and Nutrition Policy Program,Washington DC, May.

Dioubatb, Y. (1992) PauvretC et march6 du travail BConakry (Repuhlique de GuinCe). Discussion Paper,International Institute of Social Studies, ILO,Geneva.

D&e, J. and Srinivasan, P. V. (1997) Widowhood andpoverty in rural India: Some inferences from house-hold survey data. Journal ofDevelopment Economics54, 217-234.

Elster, J. (1987) Sour Grtrpcs. Sn&~s irj tllc .S&~c,rslo,rof Nationality. Camhridgc University Press,Cambridge.

Elstcr, J. and Roemer, J. (1991) Introduction. In Inrcr-personal Compurisoru vf Wd-Being. cd. J. Elster andJ. Roemer, pp. l-15. Cambridge University Press.Cambridge.

Foster, J., Grew, R. and Thorheckc, E. (lYX4) A classof decomposable poverty measures. Ewnomc~tricrr52(3), 761-766.

Giddens, A. (1976) New Rules of Sociologicd Mcii~od:A Positive Critique of /nrerpretative Sociologi~~.~.Hutchison & Co., London.

Glewwe, P. (1988) The distribution of welfarc in CetedIvoire in 1985. LSMS Working Paper No. 29, TheWorld Bank, Washington DC.

Griffin, J. (1986) l+&Beirzg. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Guyer, J. and Peters, P. (1987) Introduction toconceptualising the household: Issues of theory and

policy in Africa. Development und Charge 18(2).197-214. Special issue


15/17


Haddad, L. et al . (1995) Poverty and N utrition w ithinHouseholds: Revi ew and New Evidence. IFPRI-WHO Collaborative Work on IntrahouseholdResource Allocation FPRI, Washington DC,August.

Hammersley, M. (1992) Whats Wrong with Ethnog-raphy? Methodological Explorations. Routledge,London and New York.

Handa, S. (1994) Gender, headship and intrahouseholdresource allocation. W orld Developm ent 22( l(I),1535- 1547.

Hanmer, L. et al. (1997) Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa:W hat can w e Learn from the W orld Banks Pov ertyAssessments? Institute of Social Studies AdvisoryService, The Hague.

International Institute for Environment and Develop-ment (IIED) (1992) Special Issue on Applications ofWealth Ranking. RRA Notes No. 15.

Jackson, C. (1996) Rescuing gender from the povertytrap. W orld Develop ment 24(3). 489-504.

Kabecr, N. (1994) Reversed R ealitiev. Gender Hierar-chies in Development Thought. Verso, London.

Kakwani, N. (1993) Measuring poverty: Definitions andsignificance tests with application to Cote dIvoire.In Including the Poor, cd. M. Lipton and J. van derGaag, pp. 43-66. The World Bank, Washington DC.

Klasen, S. (lY94) Missing women reconsidered.W orld Develop ment 22(7), 1061-1071.

Klascn, S. (1996) Nutrition. health and mortality insub-Saharan Africa: Is there a gender bias?. Journalof Develonm ent Stu dies 32(6\ , 913-932.

Lachaud, J: P. (1994) PauvretC et marche du travailurbain en Afrique subsaharienne: Analyse compara-tive. International Institute for Ldbour Studies,Geneva.

Lanjouw, P. and Ravallion, M. (1995) Poverty andhousehold size. The Econom ic Journal 105,1415-1434.

Mosse, D. (1994) Authority, gender and knowledge:Theoretical reflections on the practice of participa-tory rural appraisal. Development and Change 25.497-526.

Programme des Nations Unie pour le Developpement(PNUD) (1995) Etude diagnostic sur le pauvret et laparticipation populaire. Rapport Final. PNUD,Conakry, July.

Ravallion, M. (1994) Poverty Comparisons. Fundamen-tal s of Pure and Applied Econom ics. HarwoodAcademic Publishers, Chur, Switzerland.

Republique de GuinCe (RG) (1988) Etude socio-economique regionale, region de Haute Guinee.MPCIIPNUDIDGP, Dirasset.

Republique de GuinCe (RG) (1989a) Recensementgeneral de la population et de lhabitat. Analyse desresultats dtfinitifs. MPCIIDNSIIBNR, Conakry,December.

Republique de GuinCe (RG) (1989b). Perspectives dedeveloppement regionale, Haute GuinCe. MPCI/PNUDIDGP, Dirasset.

Republique de Guinte (RG) (1991) EnquCte sur lesinformations prioritaires: Rapport final et annexesstatistiques. MPFIPADSEIEPAM, Conakry, June.

Republiquc de Guinee (RG) (1995a) Enquetedemographique et de Sante en Guinee. 1092. DNSI/USAID/FNUAP, Conakry.

Republique de Guinte (RG) (1995b) Rapport nationalsur la situation des femmes en Republique deGuinCe. MPFE, Conakry, April.

Republique de GuinCe (RG) (1YYha) EIBC datadiskettes. The World Bank, Washington DC.

Republique de GuinCe (RG) (IYYhb) Un profil depauvretc cn Guinec. EIBC, MPCPADSEIEPAM,Conakry.

Roscnhouse, S. (1980) Identifying the poor. Isheadship a useful concept. LSMS Working PaperNo.%, The World Bank, Washington DC.

Scoones, I. (lY95) Investigating difference: Applica-tions of wealth ranking and household surveyapproaches among farming households in SouthernZimbabwe. Development and Change 26, 67-8X.

Sen, A. (1985) Well-being, agency and freedom. TheDewey Lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy82(4), 169-220.

Sen, A. ( 1992) Missing Women. British Medical Journal304.5X7-588.Shaffcr, P. (1996) lovrq rend Gender i n the Republic of

Guinea. CIDA Mission Report, CIDA, Toronto,November.

Shah, M. K. (1005) Using participatory methods tounderstand gender differences in perceptions ofpoverty, well-being and social change. Peoplesperspective from a village in Ghana. Mimeo,Brighton, U.K.

Svedberg, P. (lY90) Undernutrition in sub-SaharanAfrica: Is there a gender bias?. Journal of Develop-ment St udies 26(3), 469-486.

Taylor. C. (1985) Interpretation and the sciences ofman. In Philosophy and the Human S ciences, ed. C.Taylor, pp. 15-57. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Welbourne, A. (1991) RRA and the analysis of differ-ence. RRA Note.s 14, 14-23.


16/17


APPENDlX A7. POVERTY MEASURES persons and n the total population. When I isThe Foster, Greer and Thorbecke (FGT) assigned the value of zero, the index collapses to

(Foster ef ul., 1984, p. 763) measures of poverty y/n, the proportion of poor individuals in theincidence, intensity and severity may be repre- total population or poverty incidence. When x issented as: assigned the value of one, the index measuresthe normalized poverty gap, or population-&I i e

0x weighted average shortfall from the poverty line.P,=, provides a measure of the intensity of

17 I=1 z poverty. When x is assigned a value greater thanone, the index becomes distributionally sensitivewhere z is the poverty line; g, = z-J(, the as greater weight is assigned larger individualconsumption shortfall from the poverty line of poverty gaps. By convention, P, is assigned thethe ith poor person, q the number of poor value of two to gauge the severity of poverty.

APPENDIX B8. SENSITIVITY TESTSIn order to determine if results are sensitive to

choice of adult equivalent scale, the povertyindices have been recalculated using differentequivalence scales. Following Dreze and Srini-vasan (1997) (pp. 222-224), four different scaleshave been chosen which assign different weightsto men, women and children. The per capita(l,l,l) poverty line is scaled up by thepercentage increase in the consumption expendi-ture of a household of average compositionresulting from use of equivalent scales. Theresults, presented in Table 7, show that theMHH/FHH comparison is not sensitive to choiceof equivalence scale.

In order to assess the sensitivity of theMHH/FHH comparison to household economiesof scale, and the poverty indices have been recal-culated assigning different values to a scaleparameter. Following D&e and Srinivasan(1997) (pp. 224-226), scale-adjusted per-capitahousehold expenditure may be represented as:y* = Yl,lO

where Y is total household expenditure, n house-hold size and 0 a scale parameter ranging invalue between zero and one. As the value of 0increases from zero to one, the importance ofscale economies progressively decreases (at0 = 0. y* represents total household expendi-ture, whereas at 0 = 1, y* represents per capitahousehold expenditure).

The poverty line, z, is scaled up as 0 decreasesfrom one to zero according to the following rule:

where m is the average household size, 6.6, andz(1) is the per capita poverty line of 293714 FG.The results, presented in Table 8, show that rankreversals between MHHs and FHHs for thedifferent poverty indices begin at 0 values ofapproximately 0.6.It should be emphasized, however, that criticalvalue of 0.6 seems particularly high in poorhouseholds in the developing world where majoroutlays go on food. While one recent estimatefrom Pakistan found scale economies in the

Table Bl. Sensitivity tests: adult equh~ulence scalesEqu ivalence scales Poverty line Ultr aP overt y lineMan, Woman , Child ( < 18) P,I p, P? PiI p, p,

FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHHLlJ 0.297 0.416 0.091 0.137 0.039 0.060 0.084 0.135 0.021 0.032 0.006 0.0101,1,6 0.260 0.417 0.079 0.132 0.032 0.057 0.073 0.132 0.015 0.029 0.004 0.009l&6 0.251 0.422 0.076 0.133 0.057 0.031 0.073 0.133 0.015 0.029 0.004 0.0091,7,4 0.229 0.413 0.065 0.130 0.025 0.056 0.065 0.133 0.010 0.028 0.003 0.009Source: Calculated from RG (1995a).


17/17

GENDER, POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION 213s

Table B2. Scnsitiviy tests: econonzies of scaleEconomies of Poverty line UltraPoverty linescale parameter (0)

p,, p, PZ PC, PI p,FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHH FHH MHH

1 0.297 0.416 0.091 0.137 0.039 0.060 0.084 0.135 0.021 0.032 0.006 0.0100.8 0.316 0.390 0.103 0.121 0.044 0.050 0.096 0.121 0.023 0.023 0.007 0.0070.6 0.379 0.368 0.121 0.108 0.053 0.043 0.126 0.091 0.030 0.018 0.009 0.0050.4 0.408 0.343 0.144 0.099 0.066 0.039 0.153 0.086 0.039 0.017 0.013 0.0050.2 0.437 0.321 0.168 0.092 0.082 0.038 0.181 0.086 0.053 0.018 0.021 0.0060 0.473 0.302 0.193 0.091 0.101 0.038 0.234 0.089 0.071 0.020 0.031 0.007Source: Calculated from RG (1995a)

range of 0.6, it also came to the highly counter- economies of scale (Lanjouw and Ravallion,intuitive conclusion that household composition 1995). Great caution should be urged, therefore,variables are insignificant when accounting for before adjusting for scale economies.

Documents

Shaffer - Gender, Poverty and Deprivation Evidence From the Republic of Guinea