Presentation by Dr. Sabina Alkire at the WEAI Stakeholder Convening at the International Food Policy Research Institute

1. Autonomy in the WEAI
Sabina Alkire, IFPRI/USAID meeting
27 May 2015

2. Survey options – background
• The Global MPI uses 39 questions of the 625 in an
average DHS. However those 39 questions gather
information in addition to that used in the MPI. It takes
quite a bit of time.
• OPHI have also made a ‘MPI-lite’ survey for NGOs and
institutions that only want to use the survey data to
construct an MPI. Changes include: shortened response
structure, precise definitions. Cut in time is more than
50%.
• Both have the same indicators, weights, and cutoffs.

3. How to measure women’s agency
• Increasing women’s voice and agency is widely
recognized as a key strategy to reduce gender inequalities
and improve development outcomes.
• “New indicators on agency are needed”
Voice and Agency: Empowering Women and Girls for Shared Prosperity.
Klugman et al. 2014
• Existing measures are seen to be seriously flawed in terms
of comparability, policy relevance, and monitoring.

4. Decision-making
and Autonomy
constitute
‘Production’
Domain

5. - In the mid-term review, Autonomy was a ‘top’ contributor
to disempowerment in 4 countries (Nepal, Tajikistan,
Haiti, Liberia).
- Input in productive decisions was the top contributor to
disempowerment in 1 country (Liberia).
Malapit et al. (2014) Measuring Progress towards Empowerment.
WEAI Baseline Report
5

6. In the mid-term review, Autonomy contributed more than
decision-making to productive decisions in 5 countries; had
roughly equal contributions in 3 countries, and contributed
less in 5 countries. The contribution of Production to
WEAI will change, in some cases dramatically, if
Autonomy is dropped and only decision-making used.
Malapit et al. (2014) Measuring Progress towards Empowerment.
WEAI Baseline Report
6

7. Decision-making
• Furthermore, there are concerns whether decision-
making will change over time, or is a stock variable.
• Inertia and consistency A DHS study across 23 countries of decision making
reported: ‘a surprising amount of consistency across countries in the type of
decisions in which women participate.’ (Can FtF improve it? Stock/flow)
• Contextual rather than Comparable: The DHS report concluded: “This
makes it difficult to treat decisionmaking as a single indicator of
empowerment; to treat participation of any type in one decision as being similar
to participation of the same type in any other decision; and, for a given decision,
to treat participation of one type as equivalent to participation of another type.
Thus, if women‘s participation in decisionmaking is to be used as an indicator of
empowerment, theory and context must drive the definition of what type of
decisionmaking in what type of decisions constitutes empowerment.”

8. Decision-making
• There are concerns about this indicator:
– Do not capture constraints to agency that might arise
outside the household; only reflects intra-hh constraints.
– Not suitable to female headed-households (by definition, all
female-household are empowered in decision-making)
– Do not see whether a woman values making all decisions or
prefers her partner to do this particular job.
– Women’s and Men’s responses don’t match, raising questions
about accuracy. (Seymour) (non-sampling measurement
error).

9. In Sum: concerns for only using
decision-making in WEAI.
1. The Contribution of Production to WEAI will change
considerably in at least 10 countries.
2. Deprivations in Production will be much less visible
in over one-third of countries.
3. It is not clear whether decision-making will monitor
or show improvements from Feed the Future: it may
be a stock variable.
4. Interpretation of decision-making is well-known to
require deep contextual nuance.

10. What about autonomy?
1. There were concerns in the pilot tests regarding
autonomy, because it was unfamiliar to enumerators.
2. This led to online resources to support WEAI survey
teams, with mixed uptake and success.
3. Cognitive tests of WEAI showed a balance of benefits
and issues, and suggested avenues for review.
4. The Vignettes were developed based on experience to
date with Autonomy, and consultations with other
experts on SDT.

11. Autonomy
• The Vignettes appear to have solved the key issue from cognitive
explorations.
• (Material taken from 12 Dec 2014 presentation by Katie Sproule & Chiara Kovarik)
• Large discrepancies in percentage of respondents who found the question difficult
themselves versus how difficult they thought others would find it. In Uganda,
between 7-14% said they found the questions difficult, versus 29-60% saying they
thought others would find the questions difficult. In Bangladesh, very few
respondents noted these questions as being difficult to answer but between 29-
39% said they thought others would find the question difficult.
• Modification: Better training of enumerators
• Results of modification: In Uganda, the rates dropped dramatically for the second
round of cognitive interviews with just one respondent (3.1%) reporting difficulty
and only 3.1-12.5% of respondents saying others would have difficulty. In
Bangladesh respondents again did not find questions difficult and the number of
respondents reporting others would find it difficult dropped.
•
p. 11

12. Autonomy
• Cognitive testing for both 1.1 autonomy
questions and 2.0 vignettes
• Two-part process for asking autonomy questions
– 1.1 process implemented by enumerators but not
reflected in questionnaire
– 2.0 process is included in questionnaire
• Field teams’ feedback
– Took longer to implement (Ban: 16 mins, Uga: 8 mins),
but respondents enjoyed stories (help build rapport?)
– Field teams think the vignettes are better understood
than the original, more concrete
p. 12

13. The RAI: designed to measure change
• The Relative Autonomy Index (RAI) is a measure
of motivational autonomy developed by
psychologists working in Self-Determination
Theory, and is extensively documented.
(Chirkov, Ryan, & Deci, 2011; Ryan and Deci, 2000, 2012).
• The RAI was designed to monitor change, and its
ability to do so is widely confirmed
• The RAI is domain-specific, as are measures of
women’s empowerment.

14. Autonomy: part of a huge literature of
‘Self-Determination Theory’
Theoretical and Research Reviews
SDT Books
Basic Psychological Needs
Causality Orientations
Development and Parenting
Intrinsic Motivation
Goals, Values, and Aspirations
Internalization and Self-regulatory Styles
Mindfulness
Motivation and Self-Determination across
Cultures
Nonconscious Process and Priming
Well-being and Eudaimonia
Relationships
Self and Self-Esteem
Vitality and Energy
Biological and Neuropsychological
Education
Nature and Environmental Sustainability
Health Care
Organizations and Work
Marketing
Psychopathology
Psychotherapy and Counseling
Physical Activity and Exercise
Physical Education
Virtual Environment and Video games

15. Autonomy and Analysis
Academic studies on autonomy associated with WEAI and
available on its website have found interesting and policy-
relevant insights. It is hoped that other studies of WEAI
light might find other such policy relevant insights.

16. Bangladesh: Adds new information
• Examines the conceptual validity and reliability of Autonomy and
its scale in rural areas, and finds positive results.
• Investigates to if autonomy adds information:
– Neither age, education, nor income, are suitable proxies for
autonomy
– Women’s autonomy is often related to their occupation (might
Feed the Future may visibly affect autonomy of women farmers?)
– Not the same as decision-making: No robust evidence that the
decision-making indicator “feel can make decisions”, empowerment
indicator “power to make decisions”, and domain-specific indicator
“satisfaction with decisions made” constitute valid proxies for
autonomy
– Vaz, Alkire, Quisumbing and Sraboni (2014)

17. Nepal: Autonomy & Maternal/Child Outcomes
• ‘Women’s autonomy in production and hours worked
improve maternal and children’s dietary diversity and
height for age.
• ‘The positive and highly significant correlation between
women’s autonomy in agricultural production and nearly all
maternal and child outcomes is consistent with bargaining
models that suggest that individuals who have greater
decisionmaking power in the household receive a larger share
of the benefits from household resources, including nutritious
food.’
• Malapit, Kadiyala, Quisumbing, Cunningham, and Tyagi. 2013 ‘Women’s
Empowerment in Agriculture, Production Diversity, and Nutrition: Evidence
from Nepal.’ IFPRI Discussion Paper 01313.

18. Non-WEAI study in Chad
• Vaz, Pratley and Alkire (2014)
– Nationally representative data from Chad
– Highlights gender disparity: Women on average are
significantly less autonomously motivated across all domains
than men.
– Adds information: Neither education nor income are
reasonable proxies for women’s motivational autonomy.
– Community effects: Evidence that motivational autonomy at
the community-level is associated with likelihood of women’s
exclusive breastfeeding.

19. “What gets measured gets done”
If we keep Autonomy ~
1. The Measurement of Production will be more
balanced, less subject to measurement errors in decision-
making or autonomy.
2. It is likely that Autonomy indicators will monitor
improvements due to Feed the Future interventions.
3. Autonomy will capture the situation of female
households, and will reflect structural constraints.
4. National household surveys would then have a new and
better measure of women’s empowerment, which can be
applied to other domains also.

20. Thanks!

21. Autonomy in WEAI (1)
• Domains considered:
– Getting inputs for agricultural production
– Types of crops to grow for agricultural production
– Taking crops to the market (or not)
– Livestock raising
• Autonomy in production: individual is adequate if RAI>1
in AT LEAST ONE of the domains.

22. Autonomy in WEAI (2)
• Vignettes
STORY QUESTION
The types of
crops to
grow
“[PERSON’S NAME] can’t grow other types of crops here for consumption
and sale in market. Beans, sweet potato and maize are the only crops that grow
here.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] is a farmer and grows beans, sweet potato, and maize
because her spouse, or another person or group in her community tells her she
must grow these crops. She does what they tell her to do.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] grows the crops for agricultural production that her
family or community expect. She wants them to approve of her as a good farmer.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] chooses the crops that she personally wants to grow for
consumption and sale in market and thinks are best for her family and business.
She values growing these crops. If she changed her mind, she could act differently.”
Are you like
this person?

23. Autonomy in WEAI (2)
STORY QUESTION
Taking crops
to the
market
“There is no alternative to how much or how little of her crops [PERSON’S
NAME] can take to the market. She is taking the only possible amount.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] takes crops to the market because her spouse, or
another person or group in her community tell her she must sell them there. She
does what they tell her to do.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] takes the crops to the market that her family or
community expect. She wants them to approve of her as a good business woman.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] chooses to take the crops to market that she personally
wants to sell there, and thinks is best for her family and business. She values this
approach to sales. If she changed her mind, she could act differently.”
Are you like
this person?

24. Autonomy in WEAI (2)
STORY QUESTION
Livestock
raising
“[PERSON’S NAME] can’t raise any livestock other than what she has.
These are all that’s available.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] raises the types of livestock she does because her
spouse, or another person or group in her community tell her she must use these
breeds. She does what they tell her to do.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] buys the kinds of livestock that her family or
community expect. She wants them to approve of her as a good livestock raiser.”
Are you like
this person?
“[PERSON’S NAME] chooses the types of livestock that she personally wants
to raise and thinks are good for her family and business. She values raising these
types. If she changed her mind, she could act differently.”
Are you like
this person?