The A-WEAI

Photo credits: Chiara Kovarik and Katie Sproule

Hazel Malapit - Research Coordinator/IFPRIA-WEAI Online Webinar, September 23, 2015

Overview• Creating the A-WEAI• 10 indicator vs 6 indicator WEAI comparison • Indicator by indicator highlights from the pilot– Modifications to questionnaire– What changes to adopt and why

• FAQs

p. 2

Creating the A-WEAI• USAID Goals

– Streamline survey– Reduce time to administer by ~30% – Improve problematic modules (time use, autonomy in production, credit,

and speaking in public) • Process

– Developed pilot questionnaire (2013-early 2014)– Conducted cognitive testing (summer 2014)– Pilot fieldwork in Bangladesh and Uganda (summer-fall 2014)– Analyzed data from pilots (early 2015)

• Outcomes– Version of WEAI with 6 indicators and streamlined questions– Intended for use by USAID, other donors, and potentially by national

statistical systems for household surveys

DOMAIN INDICATORS WEIGHT

1 Production Input in productive decisions

1/5

2 Resources Ownership of assetsAccess to and decisions on credit

2/15

1/15

3 Income Control over use of income

1/5

4 Leadership Group membership 1/5

5 Time Workload 1/5

TOTAL 100%

DOMAIN INDICATORS WEIGHT1 Production Input in productive

decisionsAutonomy in production

1/10

1/10

2 Resources Ownership of assetsPurchase, sale, or transfer of assetsAccess to and decisions on credit

1/15

1/15

1/15

3 Income Control over use of income

1/5

4 Leadership Group membershipSpeaking in public

1/101/10

5 Time WorkloadLeisure

1/101/10

TOTAL 100%

Original WEAI vs A-WEAIOriginal: 5 domains, 10 indicators A-WEAI: 5 domains, 6 indicators

Original WEAI vs A-WEAI:5DE decomposition

10 6 10 6Female Male

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

17.107.80 8.30 1.09

23.50

24.9014.80

17.30

14.40

13.17

13.00

7.61

31.5036.59

39.80

45.65

13.30 17.5624.10 28.26

Bangladesh: 10 vs 6 indicators

Production Resources IncomeLeadership Time

10 6 10 6Female Male

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1530.0% 18.6% 2170.0% 17.5%

1900.0% 17.9%1740.0% 21.1%

2630.0% 23.3%870.0% 5.3%

1440.0% 17.1%

2600.0% 31.6%

2500.0% 23.3% 2600.0% 24.6%

Uganda: 10 vs 6 indicators

Production Resources IncomeLeadership Time

Top contributors to disempowerment*

Bangladesh Uganda Indicators Women Men Women Men Original WEAI (10 indicators)

1. group member

2. credit3. speaking in

public

1. group member

2. workload3. control over

income

1. control over income

2. workload3. credit

1. group member

2. workload3. credit

A-WEAI (6 indicators)

1. group member

2. credit3. workload

1. group member

2. workload3. credit

1. workload2. control over

income3. input in

decisions

1. group member

2. workload3. credit

Original WEAI vs A-WEAI:Indicator rankings

*Using pilot data 2.0.

• Pros: – Shorter administration time compared with the original WEAI (reduced by 30%)– Does not include some of the more problematic modules from original

baselines– When compared to the original WEAI using the second pilot data, the top two

constraints contributing to women’s and men’s disempowerment remained the same

• Cons: – Measures fewer indicators of empowerment; dropping four indicators– Only comparable to original baselines if analysis is restricted to 6 indicators – When compared to the original WEAI using the second pilot data, one of the

top three indicators contributing to women’s and men’s disempowerment changed

CAVEAT: Pilots are based on small samples in 2 countries, so results are only indicative

A-WEAI

ProductionIndicator 1: Input in productive decisions

Indicator 2: Autonomy in production

• Pilot modifications– Input in productive decisions: no significant

modifications piloted – Autonomy in production: tested original autonomy

questions against a series of vignettes that ask about autonomy in various agricultural activities

• Recommendations– Input in productive decisions: keep– Autonomy in production: drop

Autonomy

missing

never true

not very true

somewhat true

always true

0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00

Distribution of responses to "no option" vignettes, by activity & sex of respondent, Bangladesh

Livestock raising femaleLivestock raising maleTaking crops to market femaleTaking crops to market maleTypes of crops to grow femaleTypes of crops to grow male

p. 9

ResourcesIndicator 1: Ownership of assets

Indicator 2: Purchase, sale or transfer of assetsIndicator 3: Access to and decisions on credit

• Pilot modifications– Ownership of assets

• Ownership definition changed from “who owns most” to “do you own any”? • Eliminated question asking for number of assets.

– Purchase, sale or transfer of assets: Tested combined rights question (sell, give away, mortgage, rent) versus separate rights questions as analysis of original pilot data suggested rights are bundled together.

– Access to and decisions on credit • Added question on hypothetical borrowing.

• Recommendations– Ownership of assets: keep, but modify – Purchase, sale or transfer of assets: drop – Access to and decisions on credit: keep original definition of adequacy, but

require additional question on hypothetical borrowing to facilitate analysis

ResourcesIndicator 1: Ownership of assets

Indicator 2: Purchase, sale or transfer of assetsIndicator 3: Access to and decisions on credit

UGANDAEmpowerment rates conditional on asset ownership empowerment

1.0 VERSION 1.1 VERSION 2.0 VERSION Men (%) Women (%) Men (%) Women (%) Men (%) Women (%)Asset rights indicator 94.36 89.61 97.79 91.41 97.92 86.7Credit indicator 33.21 25.41 64.39 65.36 78.68 75.28

Empowerment rates conditional on asset rights empowerment

1.0 VERSION 1.1 VERSION 2.0 VERSION Men (%) Women (%) Men (%) Women (%) Men (%) Women (%)Ownership indicator 99.60 93.88 100 100 100 99.39Credit indicator 32.80 25.86 64.34 65.71 79.1 79.35

Those who own assets also very likely to have rights over assets, and vice versa… …less so for credit

Ownership of assets: original questions

Original WEAI

A- WEAI:

1. Removes questions on decisions on assets

2. Eliminates question on number of assets

3. Changes question from “who owns most?” to “do you own any?”

A-WEAI

Ownership of assets: revised questions

IncomeIndicator 1: Control over use of income

• Pilot modifications – Combined into section with input in production decisions– Not clear if it saved time

• Recommendations – Control over use of income indicator: keep – Change definition: Adequate if there is at least one

domain where individual has some input in income decisions [or feels she/he can make decisions regarding wage, employment and minor hh expenditures; as long the only domain in which the individual feels that he/she makes decisions is not minor household expenditures]

Control over use of income: original questions

Original WEAI

Control over use of income: original questions

Original WEAI

A-WEAI

Control over use of income: revised questions

LeadershipIndicator 1: Group member

Indicator 2: Speaking in public

• Pilot modifications– Group member: Minor changes (changes in sequence in qx, group categories, added

DK as response)– Speaking in public: New questions designed to be more broad and less controversial;

new adequacy cutoff if reported comfort in speaking in public or has spoken up in last 3 months

• Recommendations– Group member indicator: keep – Speaking in public indicator: drop

• Rationale– Group member indicator emerged as a top constraint in 6 out of 13 countries from the

FtF WEAI baseline data – While the new speaking in public questions seem to do better than the old ones, this

indicator has not been useful in analyses and in many places has been sensitive to collect

TimeIndicator 1: Workload

Indicator 2: Leisure

• Pilot modifications– Workload: collected a 7-day recall (both last 7-day and typical 7-days), 24-hr recall w/ primary and

secondary activities and a 24-hr recall w/ primary activities only– Leisure: no change except sequence in qx

• Findings– 7 day recall faster to implement than 24 hr recall w/ primary and secondary; however, concern about

recall accuracy and burden on enumerators to calculate – 24 hr recall w/ primary only saves 2-3 minutes compared to 24 hr recall w/ primary and secondary – Both Uganda and Bangladesh teams prefer 24 hr recall to 7 day recall because of recall accuracy

concerns • Recommendations

– Workload indicator: keep -- collect 24 hr recall w/ primary activities only – Leisure indicator: drop

• Rationale– Workload indicator was identified as a top constraint in 6 out of 13 countries in the FtF WEAI baseline

data – Leisure indicator has not been useful for analyses because concern on women’s adaptive expectations

Workload 7dr vs 24hr

Average work hours by method, country and sex of respondentBangladesh Uganda

male female total male female totalPilot 1.1N 179 221 400 136 140 27624hr primary & secondary 9.4 8.8 9 8.1 10 9.124hr primary only 9.3 8.8 9 8.1 10 9.1

Pilot 2.0N 175 225 400 144 189 3337dr actual 8 8.7 8.4 8.7 13 117dr typical 9.8 11 10 11 14 13

N 175 225 400 142 149 29124hr primary only 8.5 8.9 8.7 6.3 9.1 7.7

p. 20

DOMAIN INDICATORS WEIGHT

1 Production Input in productive decisions

1/5

2 Resources Ownership of assetsAccess to and decisions on credit

2/15

1/15

3 Income Control over use of income

1/5

4 Leadership Group membership 1/5

5 Time Workload 1/5

TOTAL 100%

DOMAIN INDICATORS WEIGHT1 Production Input in productive

decisionsAutonomy in production

1/10

1/10

2 Resources Ownership of assetsPurchase, sale, or transfer of assetsAccess to and decisions on credit

1/15

1/15

1/15

3 Income Control over use of income

1/5

4 Leadership Group membershipSpeaking in public

1/101/10

5 Time WorkloadLeisure

1/101/10

TOTAL 100%

Original WEAI vs A-WEAI

Original: 5 domains, 10 indicators A-WEAI: 5 domains, 6 indicators

FAQsQuestion: We are not sure we have the time to collect the entire A-WEAI module. Is it possible to only measure particular domains of the A-WEAI and not administer the Index in its entirety without threats to validity and reliability? Answer: You can certainly measure particular domains (or even indicators) by themselves, but please note that doing so does not result in the A-WEAI. The A-WEAI is obtained by taking a weighted average of two subindexes, the 5DE and GPI, and both of them are obtained by taking the weighted average of the 6 indicators representing the 5 domains. These 6 indicators can each be interpreted on their own, so if you do not have time to administer the entire module but wish to collect some gender-relevant indicators, you can try to see which domains/indicators are most relevant to you. There is a discussion paper available that describes some of the validity testing that was done for the original indicators; please see: http://www.ifpri.org/publication/women-s-empowerment-agriculture-index. In addition, we recommend referring to the versions table to determine which version of the index is best for you.

FAQsQuestion: How much does it cost to collect the A-WEAI module? Answer: The second pilot cost $44-$83k but that included a longer module that included all the questions we were testing but didn’t use, as well as 2 rounds of cognitive testing. The original WEAI pilots cost between $36-$56k across the three countries. The Feed the Future baselines (which collected many more modules) were much more expensive. The Rwanda survey (2000 households) cost $160,000 but included two dietary diversity modules and the Household Hunger Scale. The Tajikistan survey (2000 households) cost $425,000 and collected many more modules on consumption, expenditure, dietary diversity, anthropometric measurement, etc.

Question: How long does it take to administer the A-WEAI?Answer: Based on IFPRI’s experience implementing the A-WEAI pilots, the final A-WEAI questionnaire is estimated to take 25-30 minutes per person. If the surveys are done concurrently with men and women, then the additional time per dual-adult household is also 25-30 minutes.

Thank you! Any questions?

Contact Hazel Malapit at h.malapit@cgiar.org

Visit the WEAI Resource Center:https://www.ifpri.org/topic/weai-resource-center