Property Rights and the Gender Distribution of Wealth: Evidence from Ecuador, Ghana and India

1. Property Rights and the Gender Distribution of Wealth: Evidence from Ecuador, Ghana and India Carmen Diana Deere Department of Food & Resource Economics Center for Latin American Studies University of Florida International Banquet, AAEA annual meetings, Seattle, August 13, 2012

2. The Gender Asset Gap Project A three-country comparative study, funded by the Dutch Foreign Ministry MDG3 Fund 5 co-PI’s: Ecuador – Carmen Diana Deere, University of Florida, with FLACSO-Ecuador Ghana – AbenaOduro, University of Ghana India – HemaSwaminathan, Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore Comparative - Cheryl Doss, Yale University Caren Grown, American University

3. Extensive qualitative field work

4. The Household Asset Surveys • Main objective: collect individual level asset ownership data suitable for gender analysis • Nationally representative surveys/ state level in India • Ecuador (n= 2892) • Ghana (n=2170) • Karnataka, India (n = 4110) • Rural & urban areas • Employed two instruments: Household and Individual questionnaires • Aimed to interview two principal adults in each household

5. Estimate of Gross Value of Physical Assets • Includes • Land • Housing • Other real estate • Livestock • Agricultural equipment & installations • Consumer durables • Business assets • Market prices

6. Results: The Gender Wealth Gap

7. FACTORS THAT CONDITION WOMEN’S ACCUMULATION OF ASSETS • Women’s property rights • Marital regime • Inheritance regime • Access to employment; education • Access to credit • International migration (savings & remittances) • Pro-gender equity policies (land, housing, micro-credit)

8. What we know: Married women’s property rights matter • To accumulate wealth, women need to have a legal personality to own & manage their own property, enter into contracts, write wills and receive bequests THE QUESTION: Once women have property rights, do specific marital and inheritance regimes make a difference to women’s ability to accumulate wealth?

9. Definitions • Marital regime: the specific rules governing the ownership and management of property during marriage and its distribution once it dissolves (death, divorce, separation) • Inheritance regime: the rules governing testaments (free vs. restricted) and intestate • If children inherit equally irrespective of sex • Rights of the surviving spouse to inherit

10. Historical perspective: Impact of the Married Women’s Property Acts in the US (1840s+) With end of coverture, married women gained a legal personality; associated with gradual increase in women’s share of wealth: 1860 US Census: • Women owned 7.2% of declared wealth (Soltow 1975) Probate Records & Wills (case studies) • By 1900 women owned around 25% of probate wealth Federal Estate Tax Returns (top wealth holders) • 1922 women’s share of wealth 24.5% • 1953 increased to 39.4% (Shammas 1994)

11. Explanations Shammas (1994; 1987): main change 19th c. was that father’s started willing property to daughters Geddes and Lueck (2005): adoption of MWP acts associated with increase in share of girls attending school relative to boys • Indirect effect: increase labor force participation of single women Other factors, 20th c.: • Growth in homeownership • Gender differences in life expectancies • Common law states began improving position of widows under interstate • Husbands began to favor wives as opposed to children in wills

12. What has not been examined How women fare under different marital and inheritance regimes • US provides a natural experiment • 8 western territories adopted partial community property (Hispanic and French legacy) when joined Union • Only evidence: Lapman (1962) Federal estate tax records for 1953 • In community property states: women owned 49% of estate wealth • In common law states (separation of property regime): women owned only 38%

13. Women’s Property Rights in Ecuador Marital Regime: partial community property

14. Women’s Property Rights in Ghana & India Marital Regime: separation of property

15. Inheritance Regimes Ecuador (civil code) • Restricted testamentary freedom: ¼ of estate can be willed • Intestate: children inherit equally irrespective of sex Ghana (statute) • Full testamentary freedom • Intestate: Since 1985, for self-acquired property, widow/children entitled to owned dwelling & chattels + residue to GHC 1,000; above that, includes parents of decadent India (Hindu) • Full testamentary freedom s.t. 1/3 to widow • Intestate: 1/3 to widow; since 2005, all children treated equally

16. Gender Division of Wealth & Forms of Property To examine potential impact of marital regime, now focus on the sub-sample of couples • Can also include financial assets • This information collected only on holdings of two principal respondents who answered individual questionnaire (not in HH inventory) • Focus is on the distribution of the assets owned by at least one of the spouses • Individual vs. joint property

18. Distribution of Owned Assets by Form of Ownership (%)

19. Distribution of Owned Assets by Form of Ownership (%)

20. Measures of gender inequality in inheritance • Inheritance by siblings • Full sample • Those with brothers & sisters where inheritance completed • Inheritance by form of property (individual vs. joint) • Couples sample

21. Did siblings inherit assets of equal value?

22. Inheritance in Karnataka, India • Asked of women: Did your brother(s) inherit land or a dwelling? 47% responded positively • Asked of men: Did your sister(s) inherit land or a dwelling: 3% responded positively

23. Share of assets that inherited/gifted, Couples sample (%)

24. Distribution of Inherited Assets (%)

25. Summing up Marital and Inheritance regimes make a difference: • Relatively high share of married women’s share of wealth (44%) in Ecuador related to partial community property in marriage and relatively gender equitable inheritance practices • Relatively low share of married women’s share of wealth in Ghana (19%) and Karnataka, India (9%) related to separation of property in marriage and male bias in inheritance

26. Differences between Ghana & India • In Ghana, joint ownership of major assets more common than in India • Inheritance in Ghana seems to be less biased than in India although only India (since 2005, but in Karnataka since 1995) stipulates that in intestate children of both sex should receive equal shares of parent’s estate • Everyday practice slow to change • Widows in Ghana also receive better treatment in intestate than in India

27. Positive news Both Ghana and India have pending legislation that would treat property acquired during marriage/consensual unions as community property in case of divorce • Also, contentious • Ghana’s 1992 constitution foreshadowed, but bill only introduced before parliament in 2009

28. Conclusions • As long as men and women have unequal opportunities with respect to schooling and in labor market (or such leads to unequal outcomes), community property regime more gender equitable • Community property implicitly recognizes wives contribution of domestic labor & child rearing

29. Conclusions • Long-standing debate over relationship between legal and social change • We provide evidence that legal (institutional) frameworks important • At same time, cultural change slow, doesn’t respond automatically • Finally, hope we have demonstrated importance of collecting individual-level asset ownership data in household surveys and asking about marital & inheritance regimes

30. For the country studies & comparative report see: http://genderassetgap.iimb.ernet.in Thank you!