High Food Prices

Feminization and Gender Differentiated Effects

by: Gustavo Anríquez Agricultural Development Economics Division

FAO

♂ ♀

Outline

• Feminization: Is it a growing phenomenon?

• Gender and poverty, a review of the available evidence.

• The gender differentiated effects of high food prices.

Feminization: Individuals

Feminization: Households

ALB05BFA03

BGD00

BGR01

BRA01

CHL03COL00 CRI01

ECU95

GHA98

GTM00

HND03

IDN00

IND99

KHM04

MDG01

MEX02

MWI04

NGA04

NIC01NPL03

PAK01

PAN03

PER02

PRY01

THA02

TZA00

UGA00

VNM01

510

1520

2530

% F

em

ale

He

aded

Hou

seh

olds

2000 4000 6000 800010000GDP per Capita (PPP)

Gender and Poverty: Why the Bias

• FHH are expected to be poorer because:– lower earnings for the “bread earner” and exclusion

from higher paying jobs.– higher dependency ratios for the household.– Women take lower paying jobs to accommodate to

the time constraints given by household duties.– Women sometimes face obstacles in the

accumulation of assets like land and education• Women overall could be poorer:

– lower participation in labor markets– lower earnings– different demographic composition of households

Hypothesis: FHH are over-represented among the poorest

Per- capita Welfare

FGT0Headcount

FGT1Poverty Gap FGT2

Male Equal Female Male Equal Female Male Equal Female

5% Poorest

NationalHH 15 5 13 15 4 14 14 7 12

Rural HH 11 8 14 14 7 12 16 8 9

Poorest Decile

NationalHH 16 4 13 15 3 15 14 5 14

Rural HH 12 7 14 13 7 13 14 8 11

Poorest Quintile

NationalHH 16 7 10 15 5 13 15 3 15

Rural HH 12 8 13 12 7 14 13 7 13

Hypothesis 2: Women are over-represented among the poorest.

Per Capita Welfare

FGT0Headcount

FGT1Poverty Gap FGT2

Male Equal Female Male Equal Female Male Equal Female

5% Poorest

NationalGender 7 16 10 3 24 6 2 26 5

RuralGender 1 22 10 1 26 6 0 29 4

Poorest Decile

NationalGender 8 18 7 7 17 9 4 22 7

RuralGender 4 19 10 1 23 9 1 27 5

Poorest Quintile

NationalGender 9 15 9 9 13 11 8 16 9

RuralGender 3 20 10 3 17 13 2 20 11

Poverty and Gender

• The evidence paints a nuanced picture. Neither FHH nor women are more likely to be poorer than MHH or males.

• Rural FHH appear to fare worse.• Since it is not always the case, the goal is

to understand when FHH and females are poorer and why.

• Poverty is not the “holy grail” of gender inequality indicators.

Gender and High Food Prices

• In the short-run the increase in the price of food item (i) can be shown to have an effect in welfare:

• ∆W = pi Qi – pi qi (Qi = production and qi = consumption)

• Net Seller / Net Buyer.

• At FAO we simulated a 10% increase in the price of the main food staples.

Welfare Effects of Price Changes

Urban

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

Bangla

desh

Pakist

an

Tajikis

tan

Albania

Vietnam

Guate

mala

Nicara

gua

Ghana

Mala

wi

% c

hang

e in

wel

fare

Welfare Effects of Price ChangesRural

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

Bangla

desh

Pakist

an

Tajikist

an

Alban

ia

Vietn

am

Gua

tem

ala

Nicara

gua

Gha

na

Mala

wi

Expendtiture quintiles

% c

hang

e in

wel

fare

Poorest 2 3 4 Richest

Welfare Effects of Price ChangesDifferences by Gender

-1.20

-1.00

-0.80

-0.60

-0.40

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

Bangla

desh

Pakist

anNepa

l

Tajikis

tan

Vietnam

Guate

mala

Nicara

gua

Panam

a

Ghana

Mala

wi

Albania

% C

hang

e in

wel

fare

(F

HH

-MH

H)

Rural Urban National

Why are FHH more affected

• FHH are more negatively affected from rising food prices because of two main reasons:

1. From the consumption side FHH for equivalent income levels tend to consume more food.

2. From the production side: FHH face numerous obstacles to produce at similar levels than MHH.

Gender Bias in the Access to Ag. Land-2

0-1

5-1

0-5

0

Ghana

98

Mad

agas

car9

3

Mala

wi04

Bangla

desh

00

Indo

nesia

00

Nepal9

6

Pakist

an01

Vietna

m98

Albania

05

Bulgar

ia01

Ecuad

or95

Guate

mala

00

Nicara

gua0

1

Panam

a03

% Land Owned by FHH - Prevalence of FHH% Landowning households that are FHH - Prevalence of FHH% Household renting-in land that are FHH -Prevalence of FHH

Conclusions

• Production constraints faced by FHH not only increase current welfare costs of spiking food prices; but also hinder the ability of FHH of participating in the benefits of any supply response from the agricultural sector.

• We need to better understand the link between gender and poverty, why conventional wisdom doesn’t always hold.

• The heterogeneous distribution of the gender imbalance both at the individual and household level call for care when making generalizations, be it descriptive or policy advice.