WERISE MALAWI COHORT

MONITORING
CASE STUDIES
WE-RISE ANNUAL REVIEW AND PLANNING WORKSHOP
1-7 May 2016
Arusha- Tanzania
Presentation by: Mark K Black WE-RISE Project Care
Malawi

COHORT STUDY PARTICIPANTS

Case study (COHORT)

Data Collection Methods
Survey tool to calculate womens
empowerment index
Qualitative inquiry
Photo documentation
The process included: administering
the questionnaire, data entry and
analysis for both quantitative and
qualitative

Domains of change in WIE

Womens access to Productive capital & credit

Women frequently do not have

equal access & authority over
productive assets, including land
The value of assets owned by
male-headed HHs is often double
that owned by female-headed HHs
Women typically have limited
access to credit

Leadership & community

Even when men and women are aware of
inequities within a community, there may
be barriers to speaking up about them
Group participation potentially promotes
solidarity, foments confidence, and
collective voice
Women may be excluded from some
groups.

Decision-making control
Income & Expenditures
Women and men often allocate
resources differently-resulting in a
differential impact on household welfare
Women often:
Allocate more resources to meet the
households basic needs than men
do
Lack equal access to and authority
over household financial resources

Mobility, Political participation

Women often have
Restrictions on the types of
employment they can pursue
Less access to off-farm economic
opportunities as a result of mobility
barriers
Limited access to political institutions
Little legal protection of assets
Limited legal protection from abuse

Perceptions of gender roles

Cultural norms may imply that women are
subservient
Women often see themselves as subservient
Women often are subject to sexual and
domestic abuse
Much of womens work is unpaid and/or
taken for granted
As a result, womens work is often not
counted and their contribution to
household livelihood security is undervalued

Self-confidence
Access to extension
Cultural norms may imply that women
dont have the capacity to handle money
effectively
Women are often taken advantage of in
terms of business, pricing, vendors,
harassment.
Limited access to timely agricultural
information and services

Empowerment index score = aggregate value of the 13 weighted indicators

Person is considered empowered if score is greater than .80
Gender equitable
roles
Input
to Productive decisions

Mobility
Autonomy in productive decisions
Time for leisure

ity
n
u
m
m
Co

Political participation

Self-confidence

Laurie's
Empower
Empowerment
ment
Score
Score

Ownership of household assets

Decisions for household assets

Public speaking

Credit

Group participation

Decisions for HH income and expentures

Income
Empowerment score below .80 is considered
not yet empowered

Domain

Indicator

Weight

Input in productive decisions

10%

Autonomy in production domains

10%

Sole or joint ownership of assets

6. 7%

Decision-making control over assets

6.7%

Access to and decisions on credit

6.7%

Control over household income and expenditures

20%

Group participation

5%

Speaking in public

5%

(20%)

Self-confidence
Political participation

5%
5%

TIME/

Satisfaction with time available for leisure

6.7%

Mobility

6.7%

Attitudes that support gender equitable roles in HH

6.7%

PRODUCTION
(20%)
RESOURCES
(20%)
INCOME
(20%)
LEADERSHIP
&
COMMUNITY

AUTONOMY
(20%)
Total

100%

WERISE MALAWI COMPARISON OF WOMEN EMPOWERMENT

INDEX AT BASELINE , MTR, ENDLINE AND FINAL COHORT

WOMEN EMPOWERMENT INDEX

1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
Empowerment score

0.40
0.20
0.00

Mark Kumbukani Black-M&E

Technical Advisor-WERISE Project

Conclusion
What have we learnt looking at the trends?
What should we do to people who scored
higher at baseline than at MTR/endline
What should we do to people who scored the
same at baseline and end line
What should we do to make sure that there
is positive change at next cohort study?
What have we learnt from cohort studies