Human Development in India - NCAER

gender and family dynamics 153monetization of the economy. Women were also askedwhether they had any say in buying an expensive item forhousehold use. Again about 70 per cent replied affirmatively.While this data reflect positively on women’s participationin day-to-day decision making, when it comes to havingcontrol over these decisions or having control over largerfamily finances, the story is quite different. Only 11 per centwomen are primarily responsible for making decisions regardinglarge household purchases such as TVs or refrigerators.In households that have a bank account, only 18 per cent ofwomen have their names on the account; among householdsthat have rental or homeownership papers, only 15 per centof women have their names on the documents. These lattertwo facets of the household economy, in particular, reflectwomen’s vulnerability in the event of domestic discord or thehusband’s death. The likelihood of the woman being one ofthe owners (or the sole owner) of a bank account is greaterfor households with higher incomes, higher education, andurban residence. But this increased likelihood with income,education, and urban residence is far less marked in women’sownership of, or title to the residential property.Women’s access to and control over resources differsubstantially across states (see Table A.10.5b) with greatervariation across states than between different social and economiccategories. Gujarat and Uttarakhand rank the highestin women’s title to property, followed by Karnataka, Delhi,and the North-East.Control over Physical MobilityOne of the biggest challenges Indian women face incontrolling their own lives is a lack of physical mobilityand access to public space, which is caused by severalfactors. Cultural norms surrounding female seclusion andthe practice of purdah or ghunghat, familial control overwomen’s physical movement, reluctance of women as wellas families to allow them to venture alone into public spaces,and sexual harassment in public places. The IHDS askedwomen whether they practice purdah or ghunghat, whetherthey need permission to go to a health centre, and whetherthey could go alone to a health centre. For some women,such as those in Haryana or eastern Uttar Pradesh, ghunghatmay cover the face fully. For others, such as those in Gujarat,partial covering of the face is more a nod to propriety than alarge impediment. In the all India sample, 73 per cent needpermission from other household members to go to a healthcentre, and 34 per cent can’t or won’t go alone to the healthcentre. Education and urban residence seem to increasewomen’s control over their physical mobility and reduceseclusion. But even among college graduates, nearly 60per cent need permission to go to a health centre and17 per cent cannot or will not go alone (see Table A.10.5a).Regional differences in women’s physical mobility arevast (see Table A.10.5b). Purdah/ghunghat prevalence isextremely low (10–12 per cent) in Tamil Nadu, AndhraPradesh, and Karnataka. It is very high in Uttar Pradesh,Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan, with more than 85per cent of women practising purdah or ghunghat. In somestates, 40 –60 per cent of women cannot go to a health centrealone (see Box 10.1).It is important to note that this is a complex issue. Whenwomen respond to questions about their physical mobility,they are not reflecting dissatisfaction with the status quo, butrather are stating the realities of their lives in the contextof cultural norms governing appropriate behaviour. From apolicy perspective, however, it is important to note women’sexclusion from public spaces. For example, any restructuringof maternal and child health services must consider thatareas where women are more constrained have a far greaterneed of domiciliary services. In areas where women are freerto travel, it may be possible to concentrate on clinic-basedservices.WOMEN’S STRENGTHS AND VULNERABILITIESData on different markers of women’s lives for diverse socioeconomicgroups and across regional divides are difficult tocome by. While a large-scale survey like the IHDS has manyshortcomings and is often unable to probe to uncover hiddendimensions of gendered experiences, the kinds of questionsthe IHDS addresses are quite unique and provide an interestingsnapshot of different dimensions of gender inequality inIndia. Documenting these inequalities does not mean thatall Indian women are downtrodden or lack agency. In fact,we are surprised by the candour and confidence with whichmost women responded to the questions. The IHDS askedinterviewers to rate different dimensions of their interactionswith the respondents and found that a vast majorityof women were able to interact very well with the interviewers.Eighty one per cent had no difficulty understanding thequestions, 16 per cent had some difficulty, and 3 per centhad a lot of difficulty.Regarding knowledge of householdexpenditures—the most difficult set of questions for womento answer, given their lack of control over resources—only asmall minority had very little knowledge (9 per cent), andthe rest had either fairly good knowledge (41 per cent), orexcellent knowledge (51 per cent).These strengths are reflected in increasing levels ofwomen’s participation in a variety of government and nongovernmentactivities as well as a growing desire amongwomen to educate their daughters as much as their sons.Among the IHDS respondents, 85 per cent would like toeducate their sons and daughters equally, and 3 per centwould like to give more education to their daughters thanto their sons.