Households headed by women – A study

Women members of the family have no other choice but move to towns when their spouses fail to send remittances on a regular basis.  According to one study, nearly thirty percent of the world’s households have women as their heads (Chant, 1991) and it is a proven fact that women-headed households are more common in urban than in rural areas in the South. For example According to  Bolles (1986) women dominated households were more common in metropolitan Kingston than in rural Jamaica, while As per Joekes (1995) nearly 21 percent of urban households in Morocco were headed by women, despite the fact that such a scenario is very rare in a country like Morocco.

South Africa is another country where it is quite common to find more women heading the family in rural than in urban areas due to the male migrant labour system but at the same time, there has been an increase in the proportion of urban female-headed households. Studies have shown that in  Soweto near Johannesburg there has been an increase in female household leadership from 14 to 29 percent between 1962 and 1985 which has been cited in Muthwa, 1995. It has been found that in low-income urban communities households run by female heads are more vulnerable economically than male-headed households, in other words, a higher proportion are in lower-income bands or have less secure incomes.

Such households are primarily tagged as “particularly vulnerable” and require urgent attention in order to satisfy their need, which has to be framed by the planners, based on a number of, and laid down characteristics. These do not necessarily match the perceptions or problems of the women themselves. A thorough study conducted by Sylvia Chant (1997), 1998) had shown that a direct linking of women-headed households to poverty is not always appropriate. Despite being socially vulnerable, in terms of economic wellbeing it has come to the fore that because of factors such as the contributions from children and the different distribution and use of resources within the household, female-headed households are not vulnerable as the study otherwise suggest. Probably there is considerable variance in the scenario of such households.

A study by Unisa and Datta (2005) shows the incidence of female ownership and the characteristic of these households. Secondly, the paper desires to delve into the impact of female ownership on the life of women as well as on the life of other members of the household. For the present study, the National Health and Family Survey, 1998-99 is used. The incidence of female-headed households was relatively higher in South and East India than in other regions. Female headship has resulted in a positive influence on the health of women, education of children and autonomy, and it has a negative relationship with economic conditions.

Recent studies have revealed that women-headed household is in poor economic condition according to Peters, 1983; Varley, 1996. The reason for the poor condition of female-headed households is given by Desai and Ahmad (1998) which is female heads are at receiving end because of their limited access to job market due to less education, they are mostly engaged in low wage jobs, and are vulnerable to child care demands. This has resulted in no choice for them to choose rather than going for low-paid and less time-consuming jobs that could lead to a lower standard of living. Parthasarthy (1982) in a survey of female-headed households in Andhra Pradesh found that in every caste group, the percentage of the poorest of the poor form a higher proportion among the female heads of households as compared to the corresponding percentage of the total households.

Wages paid to labour was the major source of income for them as compared to other members in the same income group. Bharat (1988) carried out a study of single-parent families in Bombay slum in 1986 the majority of them being widows. She found that the absence of a male spouse led to a sharp fall in the income level of the family. She further noted that the emotional problems of single mothers were not due to the absence of the spouse per se but due to resulting socio-economic hardships and anxiety regarding children’s future. Other findings showed that women heads have lower education levels, possess little or no land and households headed by them have significantly lower monthly expenditure than those with male heads.

A study was conducted on the socio-economic challenges and the survival mechanisms of female-headed households in Bophelong Township. The study focused on three areas namely, female-headed households, socio-economic challenges, and survival strategies. The study followed a literature survey first, then an experimental study. The literature study was undertaken to provide a theoretical framework for the empirical work. The survey process was undertaken in two phases. In the first phase, a sample survey of the whole area of Bophelong was undertaken. Female-headed households were identified from this sample. In the second phase, a household survey on the female-headed households serving the purpose of this study was undertaken.

According to the study results, poverty levels amongst female-headed households in Bophelong are high. About 77% of sampled female-headed households in Bophelong were poor. The poverty gap index in these households was 0.53; which means that on average poor households need 53% of their income to reach their poverty line. The high unemployment rate was most prevalent amongst female-headed households in Bophelong, where the rate of 65% was recorded. This high unemployment rate was possibly the cause of poverty in these households together with low educational qualifications among household members; only 2% were found to have a postgraduate qualification.

Female-headed households in Bophelong Township are literally struggling to survive. These households have come with a novel idea to beat unemployment and at the same time educate themselves about the various means of survival. These include the search for wild fruits in the nearby areas, immigration to another region and the benefit of school feeding schemes. When it comes to the sources of household income, government grants were found to play an important role in the maintenance of these households. The average household income was calculated at R1760 per month. The average dependency ratio, which measures the number of unemployed who depend on sole income earner, was 5.5. Finally, the study recommends a more detailed and deeper analysis relating to the socio-economic challenges faced by female-headed households. It was necessary to explore the survival means of such households to direct policy actions aimed at addressing socio-economic issues relating to female-headed households in general.

Given the rapid industrialization and urbanization on the one hand, and increase in poverty and unemployment on the other, women’s lifestyle across the world has undergone a significant change. All over the world, in terms of family life, women are slowly and steadily shifting away from joint families to the concept of being single-parent according to Chatterji, 1997.  Due to changes in women’s lifestyle, which differs from the traditional role she usually plays, women are now assuming the role of prime carers, educators, and even household income earners (Lehmann David, 2000). One of the major changes today one can see is the increasing number of families headed by women. About thirty-three percent of households, worldwide, is estimated to be headed by women (Praveen & Singh, 2008).

This increasing trend of patriarchal societies is usually the result of rapid industrialization, urbanization and socioeconomic changes that not only affect the family system and inter-generational social mobility but also disturbs family relationships and augment family breakdown such as divorce, separation, desertion, widowhood and so on. Households headed by women are an anomaly worldwide particularly in the latter half of the 20th and 21st century (Baros & Fox, 1997; Loi, 1996) there are suggestions that the household headed by an adult male member is under challenge since females have started accepting leadership roles within their family.

Female-headed households are increasing day in and day out and its increasing trend is a common feature of most of the countries. The patterns and nature of female headship is strongly influenced by demographic antecedents that may vary in different regions and even in different countries in the same region. Barring few households, there has been a significant increase in households headed by women in the developed world due to changes in lifestyle, the labour market, and fertility rate since the late 1960s (Heuveline et al., 2003; González, 2005). In the United States, Canada and many other developed countries of Europe, the percentage of female-headed households is due to the increase in the number of divorces, separations, single mother households and widowhood (Folbre, 1991) Blumberg 1993). The other reasons applicable to these regions are greater longevity of women compared with men, and larger percentage of women aged 60 and above (United Nations, 1995) and greater social acceptability of single mothers, female participation in the modern economy, and access to housing (Lichter et al., 1997; Moghadam, 2005; Shine, 2008)

African countries have a large number of female-headed households concentrated in rural areas that have been left behind because of male migration to urban areas. In Latin America, women migrate to cities that cause the rise in female headship in urban areas (Population Council and International Centre for Research on women, 1988). In South Asia (India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, etc.) Widows and “left behind” wives account for most of the female-headed households (Mencher & Okungwu, 1993). In the case of Sri Lanka female headship is due to war and displacement (Manchanda, 2004). The rise in the number of single female-headed households and increasing poverty amongst females has rendered many women-headed households among the poorest of the poor (Chant, 2007b).

If a woman prefers to head her household there are ample reasons for it and they may vary depending on her age, marital status, income, and occupation, the characteristics of the marriage market, socio-economic circumstances of her parental home, and a variety of other factors affecting household formation and dissolution (Alderman et al., 1995; Paul Schultz, 2001). Changes in the household form have a positive and negative impact on the aggregate level of a country. It has been found that foreign and domestic remittances provide better housing, and raise standard of living of the migrant households and has significant influence on the status of left-behind wives in the family (Leela, 1993; Sekhar, 1993; Hadi & Kamal, 1997; Ghosh & Sharma, 1995; Gerry, 2000) Singh, 2000, Gulati, 1993; Hugo, 1995; Hadi, 1999, Zachariah et.al (2001), Shylaja 2002, Shind,2008). In addition to it, women’s new roles created a shift in gender relations, but most women opine that they were more uncomfortable and dissatisfied with than empowered by, these new roles (McEvoy, 2008) Female-headed families have to face many problems which male-headed or married, normal families, both of the nuclear or of the joint, extended types do not have to face (Chatterji, 1997). It is a known fact that the economic, social, and cultural vulnerability associated with female-headed households without a male member resulted in many problems in the family headed by women heads. They can be economic, psychological, and social and child-related, which may cause serious consequences for the growth and development of younger generations (Carlson & Corcoran, 2001; Barros et al., 1997; Bachman et al., 2011).

According to Haddad’s (1991), analysis of the Living Standards in Ghana found that female-headed households have a higher incidence of being in the lowest food-share quintile than male-headed households. The Poverty Assessment “Ghana: Poverty Past, Present, and Future” as well as a study by Brown and Kerr (1997), found a higher incidence of poverty among males than female-headed households. Bhushan and Chao (1996) argue that the Poverty Assessment underestimated the numbers of female-headed households in poverty because it did not take into account economies of scale in household consumption. Canagarajah and Newman (1999) added that the incidence of poverty among female-headed households in rural areas of Ghana is declining faster as compared to male-headed households.

El Salvador, Menjivar, and Trejos (1992) findings have revealed that the incidence of poverty is higher among female-headed households. The El Salvador Poverty Assessment indicates that female-headed households are exaggerated among the urban poor but not among the rural poor. The Bolivia Poverty Assessment finds that in rural (but not urban) areas female-headed households have a significantly higher incidence of poverty. There are ample reasons to conclude that the evidence is different for rural and urban areas, including differences in household formation, opportunities, and constraints. If we segregate female-headed households into urban and rural groups, we can see the connection between female headship and poverty.

Glewwe and Hall (1995) undertook two interpretations using panel data with observations before and after a macroeconomic shock that took place between 1985 and 1990. The first conclusion is that female-headed households are more vulnerable to poverty than their male counterparts are. The second conclusion is that households with a higher number of children are more vulnerable to poverty. They test their hypothesis by calculating the percentage change in living standards for each household (a change in the dependent variable) and then apply this on the characteristic of interest plus a constant term. They are of the opinion that while female-headed households are more prone to poverty, they are less vulnerable than male-headed households are.

The results are the same when households are defined as majority male versus majority female. However, as far as children are concerned, a different story emerges although the proportion of children is not correlated with poverty; it is strongly correlated with vulnerability.  The authors repeat the analysis of the vulnerability of female-headed households by adding a vector of variables to control for age, education, and other individual and household characteristics. Since females headship may be visceral, the authors ‘results should only be interpreted as suggestive. Study has revealed that in 1985, female-headed households were neither worse off nor better off than otherwise identical male-headed households in the same year. In 1990, they appear to be better off than otherwise identical households are. After checking the robustness of this result against alternative specifications, including a variable for the proportion of household members that are female, the authors opine that female-headed households appear to be less vulnerable than male-headed households in Peru are in the late 1980s. This finding is consistent with the assertion in the findings that poverty is more likely to be severe for women than for men.

Milazzo and Walle (2015) inspired the two known facts about poverty in Africa: female-headed households tend to be poorer, and poverty has been declining since the 1990s. These facts raise two questions: How have female-headed households progressed. In addition, what role have they played in Africa’s impressive aggregate growth and poverty reduction? On the basis of the data covering the entire region, the paper points out the current prevalence and characteristics of female-headed households and asks whether their prevalence has been rising over time, the causes that have been associated with such changes since the mid-1990s, and whether poverty has fallen equi-proportionately for male- and female-headed households. Rising gross domestic product has affected rising female headship.

However, other ingenious changes occurring across Africa like changes in marriage behavior, family formation, health, and education have put pressure on female headship, with the result that the share of female-headed households has been growing. This has been taking place along with declining aggregate poverty incidence. Despite being left behind, female-headed households have generally seen faster poverty reduction. As a whole, they have contributed almost as much to poverty reduction as compared to male-headed households, despite the smaller share of female-headed households in the population. Over and above it has been concluded that Africa has seen falling aggregate poverty prevalence (Chen & Ravallion, 2013; World Bank, 2015).

Moreover, Miller’s (1997) analysis of medical and nutritional studies finds that discrimination against females is worse in the higher than in the lower socioeconomic classes. This raises an alternative conclusion that, in poor households, the returns to investing in female health are the same or maybe even higher than in male health (Harriss, 1992). This could be the real scenario because women undertake multiple jobs, including child-care and income-generating activities, on behalf of poor households. The connection between health, gender, and poverty has been examined in several ways. For adults, this includes access to health care particularly during pregnancy, fertility, maternal mortality, and birth weight. These parameters can only be compared for women above and below the poverty line.  Mortality amongst women and access to health care are connected and reveal important differences between poor and non-poor women. Low birth weight is related to mother’s nutrition, but we include it here as it has implications for the future health of the infants. Premature fertility is positively connected with family size and we expect large differences in the fertility rates of poor and non-poor women.

Moreover, Rajaram (2009) has predicted whether female-headed households are poorer than their male-headed counterparts, using household data from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) for the year 2005-06.  Rajaram has used Poverty measures that reflect on people’s permanent income such as housing conditions, wealth index and standard of living index, and he is of the opinion that these measures could be more informative about the substandard living condition of people than the official measure based on consumption expenditure. It has been proved from the analysis that provides evidence that the relationship between female-headed households and poverty depends on the choice of poverty measure. Poverty measures based on the housing condition and the wealth indices show that female-headed households are less poor than male-headed households are. However, if we take the standard of living index measure of poverty, female-headed households are marginally poorer than their male-headed counterparts are