Icrw assetrights i2a
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 
  • 1,166 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,166
Views on SlideShare
1,166
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Icrw assetrights i2a Icrw assetrights i2a Presentation Transcript

  • Advancing Women’s Asset Rights: ICRW’s Research & Programming
    • June 23rd, 2011
    • Krista Jacobs
    • Meredith Saggers
  • Why Asset Rights & Gender
    • Asset rights economically empower women
    • Women’s asset rights can benefit families & communities
    • Women’s ownership of assets, especially land, is limited
      • Worldwide, women own 1-2% of registered land
      • Although women in Uganda produce ¾ of agricultural output, only 16% own land (Rugadya 2010, Bikaako-Kajura et al. 2006)
  • Why Asset Rights & Gender
    • Many women do not exercise their asset rights despite favorable laws
      • Lack of awareness of women’s rights
      • Customary norms and attitudes discourage women having property
  • Gaps in the Field of Women’s Asset Rights
    • What are women’s asset rights in practice?
    • What factors strengthen/weaken women’s asset rights?
    • How to promote awareness and exercising of women’s asset rights?
  •  
  • Gender, Land, & Asset Survey (GLAS): Project Overview
    • Design a quantitative survey that measures the current state of women’s asset rights
    • Implement survey in South Africa and Uganda
    • Analyze data to understand
      • differences in women’s & men’s asset rights
      • factors that influence women’s & men’s asset rights
    • Partners: Associates Research, University of KwaZulu-Natal
  • What is new about the GLAS?
    • Quantitative data
    • Range of asset types
    • Individual-level data for both women & men
    • Spectrum of asset rights - ownership, documentation, use, decision-making, control of returns
  • Gender, Land, and Asset Survey (GLAS) Quantitative Questionnaire
  • Gender, Land, and Asset Survey (GLAS) Quantitative Questionnaire
  • What is new about the GLAS?
    • Quantitative data
    • Range of asset types
    • Individual-level data for both women & men
    • Spectrum of asset rights - ownership, documentation, use, decision-making, control of returns
  • Spectrum of asset rights
  • GLAS: Location
    • Survey implemented in THREE locations
      • UGANDA:
        • Rural Site: Butenga sub-county in Bukomansimbi District, Central Region
      • SOUTH AFRICA:
        • Rural Site: KwaDube in KwaZulu-Natal Province
        • Peri-Urban Site: Inanda in KwaZulu-Natal Province
    • Rationale
      • Pilot methods in different tenure systems
      • Explore differences in rural & peri-urban locations
  • GLAS: Sampling
    • Random selection of household from within each survey site.
    • Within the household, up to TWO people interviewed
        • Household head
        • Randomly chosen woman
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • There are gender-asset gaps in ownership of assets
    but not necessarily in use
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • There are gender-asset gaps in documentation of assets
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • There are gender-asset gaps in decision-making over assets
    Decision-making over land & housing in South Africa
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • The gender-asset gap is mitigated by headship (female & male heads have similar asset rights)
    • Women who are not household heads appear, on average, more asset poor and more dependent on joint assets or assets owned by others
    Ownership
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • The gender-asset gap is mitigated by headship (female & male heads have similar asset rights)
    • Women who are not household heads appear, on average, more asset poor and more dependent on joint assets or assets owned by others
    Documentation
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • The gender-asset gap is mitigated by headship (female & male heads have similar asset rights)
    Decision-making over land & housing in South Africa
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • Joint ownership is present
    • But it is unclear how “joint” or how “equal” it is
    • Example: joint housing ownership in Uganda
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • Joint ownership is present
    • But it is unclear how “joint” or how “equal” it is
    • Example: peri-urban South Africa site
    • Joint asset ownership is important to women’s asset holdings
      • 31% of women who own land do so jointly
      • 53% of women who own housing do so jointly
    • There is large disagreement within couples about whether land and house are jointly owned
      • In the 44 couples where at least one person reported owning land jointly, 68% of couples had different responses
      • In the 61 couples where at least person reported owning the house jointly, 46% of couples had different responses
    • Women who own land or house jointly have weaker decision-making power over them than men who own land or house jointly
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • The same factors can have different relationships with women’s & men’s asset rights
    Stronger PR(+) Stronger PR(+) Weaker PR(-) Weaker PR(-) Livestock Rights Material Asset Rights Example: Marriage in Uganda Female Male Land Rights
  • GLAS: Key Findings
    • People’s understanding and experience of land tenure does not align with statutory definitions in the law
    Uganda
  • GLAS: Summary of Key Findings
    • Gender-asset gaps exist in ownership and in documentation and decision-making
    • The gender-asset gap is mitigated by headship
    • Women who are not household heads appear, on average, more asset poor and more dependent on joint assets or assets owned by others
    • Joint ownership is present, but it is unclear how “joint” or how “equal” it is
    • Socioeconomic and structural factors (ex. marriage) can relate differently to women’s and men’s asset rights
    • People’s understanding and experience of land tenure does not align with how land tenure is defined in the law
  • GLAS: Research Recommendations
    • Examine differences in asset rights among women of different status
      • Household heads
      • Widows
      • Women in male-headed households
      • Different stages of life-cycle
    • Investigate joint asset ownership
      • What fraction of women’s wealth is held jointly? Which assets?
      • Who sees the ownership as joint?
      • How equal are rights between parties within joint ownership?
    • Describe land tenure systems from people’s perspective
      • To ask more useful questions and create more relevant measures of land rights, invest in understanding the systems people see themselves as operating in whether or not they align with law
  • GLAS: Policy Recommendations
    • Policies in land and economic development need to consider
      • differences between women and men
      • differences among women of varied statuses
    • Land law & family law may need to
      • clarify rules around joint ownership
      • address asset rights within marriage/cohabitation
    • Educate communities about statutory land tenure systems to improve understanding of women’s and men’s legal rights over land
  •  
  • Community-based Rights Workers Program: Project Development
    • Many Ugandan women do not exercise their asset rights:
      • Lack of awareness
      • Norms and attitudes
    • Earlier ICRW work identified community-based legal aid and rights workers as a promising strategy
    • ICRW’s Needs Assessment of programs in Uganda found
      • Limited training on women’s asset rights or gender
      • Few organizations collect readily usable information about rights workers’ activities
  • Community-based Rights Workers Program: Project Overview
    • Training
      • Created Property Rights & Gender Training Toolkit and used it to train community rights workers
    • Monitoring
      • Developed system to monitor rights workers and ULA’s activities and built capacity of participants in its use
    • Assessment
      • How do rights workers operate?
      • Gaps in knowledge & attitudes around women’s asset rights in communities
      • Benefits to rights workers & clients
    • Partners: Uganda Land Alliance, Centre for Basic Research
  • Property Rights & Gender Training Toolkit
    • Integrated gender into discussions of Human Rights, Land Law, Marriage & Family Law, Inheritance & Succession Law
    • Created opportunities to discuss cultural norms about women’s asset rights
    • Used participatory methods and case studies
  • Who are Rights Workers?
    • Volunteers
    • Women & men
    • Chosen by their communities
    • With some leadership experience or community involvement
    • Informally provide education & mediation
  • Monitoring
    • ICRW helped ULA & rights workers develop a monitoring system.
    • Data was used to help the team to:
      • Identify common conflicts in the area
      • Understand the program activities
      • Improve service provision
    Data Entry Fill In Monitoring Forms Reporting Turn in Forms Analyze Data
  • Common cases brought to rights workers 2 16 18 Land Grabbing/Trespass 14 5 19 Property damage/other disputes Case Topic Total Male Client Female Client Land Boundary Dispute 28 16 12 Domestic violence 14 3 11 Marital Problem 14 6 8 Child Abuse/Neglect 13 1 12 Inheritance 9 5 4
  • Assessment
    • Goals
      • Identify gaps in knowledge & attitudes around the law and women’s asset rights
      • Analyze the benefits of rights workers and make recommendations for improvements
      • Determine how rights workers operate in their communities
    • Data Sources:
      • Quantitative survey interviews with community members
      • Qualitative interviews with rights workers, clients, and leaders
      • Monitoring data from LLRAA & ULA activities
  • How Do Right Workers Programs Operate?
    • Client Cases
      • Handled 166 cases: 86 men, 80 women across 72 villages
      • Clients come to rights workers after:
        • Meeting them at an education event
        • Referral from local leaders
      • Centered around mediation
    • Education Events
      • Held 129 education events in 64 communities with 2,503 men, 2,969 women in attendance
      • Two main types of events
        • Speak at existing event
        • Hold separate event
      • Demand driven
  • How Do Rights Workers Programs Operate?
    • Resolve cases quickly
    38% 44% 10% 27% 46% Resolved 67% 8 Trespass 50% 9 Inheritance 100% 10 Land Grabbing 67% 11 Property damage 86% 28 Land Boundary Dispute Resolved on Same Day Total Case Topic
  • How do Rights Workers Programs work?
    • Legal education activities implemented in a scattered fashion with no defined workplan
    1.2 24 28 Landlord-tenant relations 13 13 14 15 16 Number of Events 1.3 10 Land tenure systems 1.4 9 Children’s rights 1.3 11 Marriage and property rights 1.2 13 Will writing 1 16 Women’s rights Average # of visits Number of villages Event Topic
  • Program Achievements
    • Benefits to rights workers
      • Empowerment (esp. confidence and knowledge)
      • Visibility
      • “ [Being a rights worker], it has helped me so much. Because even to speak in a meeting, it is not easy. But now I can address anything to the people without fear…And even my community is recognizing me. If I stand up to speak [or] talk about something, all the people they listen to me…” (Rights worker, male, 31 years old)
  • Program Achievements
    • Benefits to clients
      • Resolved clients’ cases quickly, conveniently, amicably, and free of charge
      • Gained knowledge of the law
      • Empowerment
      • “ I did not know that a widow is entitled to the house once the husband is dead. But now I know…I did not know that when I lose my husband I am entitled to his property and land. Now I know all those things….There is no one now who can take me for granted or deceive me about the law…” (Client, female, 50 years old)
  • Program Achievements
    • Benefits to community
      • Rights workers can serve as local legal experts
      • Reduce land-related violence
      • “ Indeed many things have been destroyed because of land wrangles, people have been killed, families have separated because of land. So it is worthwhile to talk about it daily.” (Client, female, 48 years old)
  • Gaps in Knowledge
    • People did not know…
    • What constitutes legal marriage and divorce
    • Marriage certificate are available for customary marriages
    • Couples who live together but are not married do not have legal claims to each other’s property
    • Women and girls have a legal right to inherit
    • What land tenure systems exist and the rules of those systems
    • Legal rights and responsibilities of landlords and tenants in the predominant local land tenure system
  • Future Actions
    • Systematize & intensify rights workers’ legal education events
    • Strengthen relationships with local leaders and institutions
    • Tailor legal education to fill knowledge gaps in communities
    • Support and strengthen monitoring efforts focusing on using information to improve programs and advocacy
    • THANK YOU!
    • QUESTIONS?
    • Publications available at www.icrw.org