Introduction to the project, why is it important, why is it relevant to GAAP (1-2 slides)
AKS: These features came about only after Landesa intervention from 2009. Earlier, they were given land away from their present location, no garden support was considered, I am not sure if joint title actually existed on ground then. AKS: I suggest not to use the word encroaching. Firstly, I find it unethical to categorise them as encroachers, when state fails to protect its own poorest citizen, secondly, its also politically sensitive especially in the context of Odisha, can we use "families residing on government land...."
I have tried to make the quotes a bit larger font since they were pretty small. Spell out BDO.
The qualitative data overwhelmingly seemed to indicate that more and more diverse vegetables are being grown. Need quant analysis to understand causality. Will be a challenge to isolate the effect of land vs the ag extension pieces of the programs. **I have added a “had” in the quote—see if you agree!
>> if land impacts food security and food security changes are distributed unevely within the house we are concerned on an individual level. We think changes in FS might be distributed unevenly within the house because food itself is distributed unevenly and according to norms that disadvantage women.>> our exercise shows that under conditions of shock or food insecurity, women are the first to be deprived.
Plenty of activities are available to both genders:: road construction, other foraging, cultivation, NREGA, petty trading, livestock rearing (though gender divisions exist between types of livestock)
Landesa GAAP Presentation January 2013
Evaluation of Gender Effects ofMicro-Land Ownership for India’sLandless Agricultural Laborers, in Orissa and West Bengal Vivien Savath and Pinaki Halder Addis Ababa January 9-11, 2013
Motivation Women’s independent and secure rights to land are often overlooked and the interventions that address them tend to be remedial in nature Landesa is guiding the implementation of a number of innovative efforts to improve the conditions of women and girls through multi-faceted programs that enhance the security of their land rights Evaluating these efforts will provide key evidence on the impact of differential access to and control over assets by men and women as part of the GAAP portfolio
What type of assets? Land – in several forms: Access Perceived ownership Formally documented homestead land (as households) Women’s names on land documents (as individuals) Relative shares of ownership, or gender-gap in land
Odisha Program Features Vasundhara and GKP Features: regularizes land; residents are allocated land they are already on; emphasis on joint title; garden support Timeline: 2004-present; Landesa involved 2009-present Beneficiaries: households currently residing on government land (Vasundhara) and households on land that was collectively owned (GKP)
West Bengal Program Features CDPA Features: allocates land that was either purchased or vested; priority to female headed households; emphasis on joint title with women’s names first; basic support services drinking water, housing, sanitation and roads Timeline: 2006-2011 (now known as NGNB) Beneficiaries: families according to selection criteria that prioritizes scheduled tribes and castes, female-headed households, families who have been landless for 2 generations, etc.
Research questions Landesa hypothesizes household-level impacts on: Investments in human capital Agricultural production
Research questions Landesa hypothesizes individual-level impacts on: Women’s assets; Women’s participation in household decision- making; Women’s perceptions of the security of their land rights.
Quantitative DataBaseline: Timeline: 2010 (West Bengal); 2010-2011 (Odisha) Sample: representative sample of 1,373 households covering three districts (West Bengal); representative sample of 1, 730 households covering four districts (Odisha) Methods: survey questionnaire with head of household and repeated subset of questions with female spouse (if available)2012 GAAP data: Timeline: September-October 2012 (West Bengal and Odisha) Sample: same as baseline; with replacement Methods: survey questionnaire with female head of household
Qualitative Methods: DataKey Informant Interviews: Purpose: process information about the land regularization and allocation programs from implementers Sample: 15 in Ganjam, Odisha; 12 in Coochbehar, West Bengal. Selection: purposeful in qualitative study villages following up the chain of command in the implementing government departments. Tools: semi-structured interview guideLife History Interviews: Purpose: individual and household-level information about livelihood strategies and how they have changed over time Sample: 14 in Ganjam, Odisha,;11 in Coochbehar, West Bengal Selection: purposeful among program beneficiaries, including large minority groups, and to include different types of women. Tools: biographical interview guide and visual timeline
Qualitative Methods: DataFocus Group Discussion: Purpose: insight into community level norms about land ownership and use, and an understanding of the available livelihood activities within the village Sample: 7 in Ganjam, Odisha; 8 in Coochbehar, West Bengal Selection: purposeful. Groups of 4-8 conducted separately for female beneficiaries, male beneficiaries, female head of household beneficiaries, and females who were eligible, but non-beneficiaries. Tools: Focus group discussion guide and participatory exercise tools.
Proposed AnalysisSpecific Hypothesis: Land ownership and documentation enablesadditional livelihood strategies and therefore improves food security.1. Draw upon qualitative and quantitative information to establish the landlessness or vulnerability context, and identify livelihood activities in the two states.2. Quantitatively and iteratively define livelihood strategies that best capture the combinations of activities undertaken by the households in our sample.3. Map every household to a particular livelihood strategy.4. Create household level indicators of food security and calculate mean levels of food security associated with the various livelihood strategies to arrive at a logical rank order for these strategies.5. Use multivariate analysis to assess whether households’ choice of livelihood strategies vary with land access and ownership.
Landlessness and Vulnerability Land sales to arrange cash dowry for a daughter’s marriage or to raise money for an illness or other negative income shock Other causes of landlessness are more prevalent by state Odisha - Displacement from large scale land acquisition Odisha – Scheduled Tribes mortgage away land West Bengal – high population density and land scarcity West Bengal – river erosion “People are very concerned about loss of houses, but what remains un-recorded is that-cultivable lands are going under water. We are losing good quality cultivable lands. –BDO West Bengal, age 32
Landlessness and Vulnerability Roughly half the focus groups concluded that both men and women use and earn from land but that land is understood to be owned by men All major respondent types acknowledged that men at times sell land without consulting their wives Researcher - “Government has issued joint pattas. The name of the wife has also been included in the patta, what are your feelings about that?” Respondent – “ It is good, we boys we don’t have much control over ourselves. The patta being on her name means we won’t lose that due to my foolishness.” –Men’s Focus Group, West Bengal
Land and Food Security Nearly all beneficiary respondents (qualitative) were growing vegetables in their backyard garden Mixed results on whether households were engaging in agriculture prior to obtaining the patta; causality Unable to isolate the effect of land from the agricultural extension and seeds Researcher: “What did you do after getting homestead patta?” Participant: “What did I do? Grew some chili and other vegetables and was fearless.” Researcher: “Fearless in the sense?” Participant: “In the sense if anyone would claim that this was their land then we would have [had] to leave this place.” –Life History, woman beneficiary, age 28
Intra-household Food Distribution Women are the food preparers Women will deprive themselves to feed the children under conditions of scarcity (and share equally between the boys and girls)“Children…are not mature enough to realize crisis. therefore it is wisedecision to not curtail from their quantity. Husbands need food becausethey work hard- then only wives can sacrifice their food.”–Women’s Focus Group, West Bengal Choice pieces (meat, fish heads) are usually reserved for the adult men or boy children Gender differences were slightly more pronounced in West Bengal; typical for women to eat off of the husband’s plate when he has finished
Livelihood Activities Respondents reported a range of livelihood activities that varied temporally (seasonally) or according to necessity Common activities in both states were agricultural labor on others’ fields (both wage and non-wage), rearing livestock, backyard cultivation of vegetables, non-agricultural labor, seasonal migration labor, and accessing the Public Distribution Scheme for subsidized rations
Gendered Livelihood Activities Livelihood activities (and the assets required to engage in them) varied by gender Women – firewood collection, “home work,” house-cleaning Men - weaving, rickshaw pulling, priestly duties, plowing
Livelihood Strategies (quant) [frequency table – only have data fromJagatsinghpur and Khorda (2/4) from Odisha ready]
Next Steps White paper – Does land ownership enable better livelihood strategies? Evidence from land titling and allocation interventions in Odisha and West Bengal, India World Bank paper - Can Government Allocated Land Contribute to Food Security? Intrahousehold Analysis of West Bengal’s Microplot Allocation Program