| Women in Agriculture |
Tape #214 -
Transfer of Technology
Rural development
planning. He is attending the School of
Environment Resources and Development at the Asian Institute of Technology in
Bangkok Thailand. He is a Bangladesh citizen
nationality and his work has included being a senior staff economist for research
and evaluation division at Doka Bangladesh and this is a national
non-governmental organization. His
previous qualifications include a master of science degree in agricultural
systems from Chang My University in Thailand in 1993 and he also has a bachelor
of science degree in agricultural economics and this is a honorary one from
Bangladesh Agricultural University in Bangladesh and that was in 1987. So please join me in welcoming our speaker
[inaudible]
[Applause]
Good afternoon
everybody. Thank you for your
introduction so maybe you disappointed to see me I'm must have missed
[inaudible] anyway but I guess the topic covers the point. This is the topic I must talking about
technological change and demand for women living [inaudible] agriculture. The key word is technological change
right? Bangladesh maybe I will
introduce something about Bangladesh.
Many of you may not know it, it's a rather small country and one of the
most crowded countries and it is classified among one of the poorest in the
world. The density is about 787 persons
per square kilometer. And agriculture
is the main stay of the population.
And technological
change means I try to put it as a proxies for the green revolution. [inaudible] change in agriculture production
that was introduced in 1960's to satisfy the food deficit which we run about
10% of the domestic demand all the year round.
And [inaudible] technological change which is supported with all types
of extension of activities is it will increase productivity. It will generate employment and subsequently
income. So its a part of PH.D. research
is not a full one it's a subsection from the implement effect of technological
change. After 30 years of introduction
so and I would like to elaborate on the employment effect on women using the
primary data.
This is Bangladesh
and the study is based on a sample survey for two periods. One is 1989 crop year, the other one is
1996. My main thesis deals with the
1996 data, but the current study deals with both. So the upper part the [inaudible] region is a flat farm
region. From here about seven villages
were intensively surveyed for the crop year 1989 and this is [inaudible] another flat plane and [inaudible]
The total area is
about 144 square kilometers. And my
study based on this [inaudible] regions.
The results will come from this.
First, just I would
like to show some basis statistics in the change in the level of technological
division in the study area. You will see
that [inaudible] is terribly small compared to many countries [inaudible] and
you have to earn your livelihood with this much of land. The family size is about 5.3. The difference is mainly here in the span of
seven years, the area and the modern variety that is which is we are calling
the most technological change in the period has changed from 42 to 75 in one
region. But the other region did not
increase so much.
And you should know
that for Bangladesh it is a rice base green revolution. It is not the same like in Latin American
and African countries which is rice based.
And also not in India. It is a
wheat based. For Bangladesh it was from
the beginning because the rice eating [inaudible] and 80% of the total in the
rice production for three seasons.
We have two basic
seasons. One is an [inaudible] season
with completely [inaudible] which is the major breakthrough in the
technological change period. And this
is to show the unfortunate I don't have the data for [inaudible] period. This is [inaudible]
Even if it is
similar, the difference in the level of division is very sharp. Now
[inaudible -
question from the audience]
Yes. The presentation is - Because what I'm
trying to say is the looking at the employment effect of technological change
in women right. So I am just explaining
the data first that how much level of technology has been defused, then I will
be showing the effect of I said that this is the scenario.
There was a village
in the southeastern region that woman do not participate in agriculture
production. If you look at the level
for survey it's not including the paper what I just put up in background. That this not considered a agriculture work
so the total population in the labor force is very small, but after 1989 the
total count moved very sharply. Just
because the definition has been changed not that they become suddenly involved
in agriculture work. This is the
scenario of crop production of various crops.
This is the measure one hundred, this too are the measure
population. You can see that.
The woman not
involve in agriculture is not established case. There is no further study on it.
But the most interesting part is here.
The main argument for promoting technological changes generate
employment and employment is actually generated but only for women. That is a
part, but overall the contribute about 20% of the total employment total farm
production.
I will explain so it
will be little more clear. The total
level used is either family or high. So
the family are divided into men and woman.
It said that 41% these are the group of crops and individually you can
see the simple size [inaudible] and it shows that 41% of total 156 for one hector of rice is from the
family. And [inaudible] are women but
in the case of hired, it is 47% of men are hired, but women are not hired. The total of the country 12% of the total
production.
This [inaudible]
classified men and women, but it really is a total estimate which is not
different. So overall the level of
input if we look at it for agriculture production, we considered is same, but
it underestimate the contribution of women because it is not divided into
two. But once you divide it does not
over estimate the total level of input but it underestimates the contribution
of women farmer. That is what I want to
place.
Now, for agriculture
you can see when you look at the agriculture which are not very promoted and
this is the higher component for women which is very different from a part of
[inaudible] from the rice based crop.
Because vegetables is considered as the woman kitchen crop and [inaudible]
are now days promoting this vegetable production [inaudible] only women. So and cultivate very specialize crop grown
in only one region which hire very high [inaudible].
Now if we look at
the when we discuss about who makes the decision in crop production if you go
for a survey. People usually say me and
wife take the decision and others. So
when you take a survey it is not always not very, you cannot very really say
that what is the real picture but here I just try to double up a proxy valuable
which will show that [inaudible] making the decision. [inaudible]
The number of
working woman in the family [inaudible] influence [inaudible] decision. That means that if you have to many women
member in the family it does not influence your decision [inaudible] which is
level detensive.
The number of
working women in the family because the dependent variable here used is a
[inaudible] and this one shows the influence but at the same time is not very
significantly [inaudible] associated with the decision making. This is a use for a [inaudible] in the
family.
Because I again
mention the total is 80% area is under rice production only for three seasons
when you combine and wheat is about 10%, the rest is 10%.
[inaudible - comment
from audience]
What I am trying to
say is using modern varieties of rice on ... yes that what about. When you have too many levels in the family
as woman you don't think that they would complement the total production of
the [inaudible].
Before we go for the
employment effect of technological change this is the [inaudible] given for the
same amount of work. So you can see
that it is a significantly lower and you don't ask me why it is understood that
and you seen that regional difference for men is also a little bit cheaper or
whatever, but the difference between the men and woman the wage rates are
pretty [inaudible]
The final part of
this presentation is the effect of [inaudible] and I tried to separate it to
because in the simple size about 12% of the hire labor not all is very little
and I show you that level for women is less than 2%. Except cotton. So now I
try to put the total [inaudible] crop production.
So I have two time
table data. The first one has the male
and female demand for [inaudible] labor.
And this one I cannot separate into two because the data is not so
difficult to classify into two parts but I will put a proxy value for the last
one. So you can see the [inaudible] so
the difference in the value of the [inaudible] extent of potential generate
demand for the hired labor. For
example, the major argument in modern technology is that it increase employment
which is not false. It is true you can
look at it. The local rice [inaudible]
compared to the modern rice proficient.
It's almost double
and actually the total labor uses one and half times more than that. But the case it is not the highest. There are other crops which are more
employment generated potential, but not promoted, right here.
These are the major
crops under the growing season. These
are land ownership and standard variable so we are not concerned about
that. And only which is important I put
it, but for female you can see that they's similar structure, but the
coefficient are very weak. The reason
is the level of hiring is very small, but the tendency is simple. Did you get the difference? This one shows that it's also significantly
influenced the demand for women labor, but the total level proficient is very
very different. Because of the practice
of hiring less woman labor and the most striking feature is the regional
difference. It's exactly opposite
because you don't hire woman labor in [inaudible] region, you hire more men
labor in that place [inaudible]. So it's
not generalized. You cannot generalize
for the entire country, but there is a sub-regional difference and the basis of
the difference is [inaudible] region hire more woman labor because it is a
poverty stricken region. It has a very
high cropping in density, but at the same time it is [inaudible] so you have
more crops to be grown and labor is not enough so you use woman as well.
[inaudible]
Bangladesh is Muslim
dominated country and there is a socialist stigma that woman is not allowed to
work outside their home. That is part
of the system, but when poverty strikes very sharp. It does not remain very long.
Like now a days you can see brick breaking in the city mostly
women. Ten years ago I haven't seen
them. Same in the agriculture work may
be if it is ten years ago because what is strike me to do these studies
confidence done by International Rice [inaudible] institute, I saw only the proceeding
two years ago I think. It's 1983 and
there are 14 countries about the woman
and everywhere, but for Bangladesh its across everywhere. So that strikes me whether it is correct or
not. And even if you look at the
[inaudible].
I challenge the claim
that woman not involved in agricultural activities and underestimation of their
contribution, but its not regionally similar it has a regional dimension in
it.
Another important
variable is very debatable is the education.
You can see that the more higher the educated the farmers, the level of
hire is both for man and woman is significantly alike. Now the question is education of whom? This one is the education of the household
head who is the farmer. It's not the
proxy of the highest education level of the housing. Usually that is what we
use although some time use the expedience of the farmer, the age. This does not reflect the point we are
wanting to make here. And these are the
crops but so this is the final part which I want to show and the conclusions
drawn this.
[inaudible - from
audience]
What I want to say
two separate main functions. One is for
male labor and the other female labor.
The [inaudible] is small because I run for the whole set not for only
for the woman and in that case it would be larger, but the reality is
what? It is a total village survey so
the reality what should be all divided the all samples. So its only 20% of the household surveyed
implied some woman not exclusively women, but some. And others its 7% plus another implied one. And it is very intensive data collection
procedure. It's almost six months they
spent to collect the data because they send lots propose of study it's not only
this purpose.
[inaudible]
The general belief
is that if you are educated, education is a proxy for ability to make decisions
[inaudible]. So if you are educated and
if it is only intent to agricultural education then it will be more conducive
to agriculture [inaudible]. There is a
wide debate of one of other studies was done which shows that negative
influence on education on agriculture production. Once you become educated you want to go out of the farming. And go for non agriculture work. That is also another picture, but this case
is for higher level demand. But when
you look at the family level pattern, then you see that negative impact. Once you become educated you don't go for
farming, it goes out of the farming.
So one you go out,
you hired an labor to fulfill that requirement. So it has a positive influence on the hiring of the labor. And what I want to show here is hiring for
man labor as well as woman labor is significantly related. So one of the policy you can take is
promoted [inaudible]. It's not based on
just emotional statement, it's based on the practical condition.
Actually the
education systems and others did not change much from before separation from
East Pakistan to Bangladesh, but what is mainly we have a primary education
system and there are agriculture subjects, but not very specific. It's a general one in agriculture and only
we separate from a you choose agriculture study as a specificalize after your
college degrees whether you go to agriculture university and agriculture
colleges and another point is it's not actually very different from what it was
before.
[inaudible - from
audience]
Now, it's about --
then you have to look at the classification like in one ratio plus the drop out
ratio. When you look only the
[inaudible] is very high in primary.
Once you move to secondary the drop out ratio is very very short. It think it's {inaudible] very very low.
Even all graduates even male is very low in the country [inaudible] and
among them woman until my time when I was a student there was a quota. Because otherwise you cannot really compete
sometimes. So its a quota basis for
woman, but now it's not quota like that, but there are men in jobs we have some
quota involve women. But now, last six
years was a terrible difference, there was woman every where. It's not because there is policy changes and
many other factors. But during 70's to mid 80's there are direct competition
plus you had some quota advantage.
[inaudible - from
audience]
No what I'm saying
is that because unemployment the main reason for promoting technological like
the modern varieties ok, I can make it more state. The modern rice varieties is to increase production because we
are a food deficit country in the first place.
Second one is it will increase employment. It's not the problem with the technology because rice is grown by
many woman in other country, the same rice.
But it is the problem of their are cultural regions, but if we put
culture region all time even after 30 years of introduction then it doesn't help
much.
Because in
[inaudible] when there is a poverty stricken region, you hire a woman to
fulfill your work and productivity in [inaudible] is not less than its the
same. So it's the need that drives them
to come to the one and also it would be much better if you promote through
special programs like said that many [inaudible] now involved because the
nature of [inaudible] working in my country is very large.
In that case it's we
have a distribution system for seed farmer pick their own seed. So after putting this intellectual property
right system it is real debate in [inaudible] part mostly is brought by Indian
nation right, they protested very sharply because it's not very comfortable so
if you stick to that law you have to buy this.
Now what do you do
use the seed from one season to the other and that is once considered as one
point that going down the productivity because it generate [inaudible] not
maintained by the farmer. And the whole
distribution system we had a subsidy system for fertilizers and until 1992 it
was subsidized heavily since the 60's.
And when many study shows that it does not really increase [inaudible]
for the subsidy and the government cannot afford to [inaudible]. So that is debatable because I don't agree
to that subsidy program.
The other one is the
irrigation equipment. It is also
subsidized and totally agriculture system is based on T&V, like USDA and
the focus the farmer of the male farmer that is from the beginning. So the decision making, the farm, field the
working everywhere is the male. The
woman do the traditional system is says to this post harvest activities in the
home. But happen to the post harvest
activities. After the production
increase, the rice production suddenly increased because we have very high
growth population. But the food deficit is constant 10%. That means it is keeping up with population
growth, but it cannot meet of the deficit.
It just keeping the delict constant more or less. It's not exactly constance, but its more or
less 10% of the domestic demand.
[inaudible].
[inaudible]
I haven't really
dealt with that cultural issues.
Yeah. I think its not use of
technology [inaudible] education system need to be readjust very sharply. Because now woman are represented in the
highest administrative positions. Our
Prime Minister is a woman and the Opposition Leader is also a woman. Both are women. And plus we have used to have
many in terms of parliamentary presentation, our cases very very strong. We have many woman in the parliament from
the beginning not as a system.
Actually that is one
thing I want to say that its not a Muslim [inaudible]. It's not that everybody every minister
should be replaced by woman. I don't feel bad about it, because if I'm not
competing and I fail in [inaudible] I won't mind.
[inaudible]
Rice covers 80% of
the total agriculture system that's what I'm saying.
Yes but its not rice
technology I'm telling. In this case
and provide that is a second qualifying [inaudible] opportunities of men and
woman and so in agriculture other non cereal production which can also have a
modern technology [inaudible] you use modern varieties of jute with other grain
techniques. In that case it will have
both.
[inaudible from
audience]
Because I told you
the unemployment problem is very prominent.
You can have modern technology in two ways, one is [inaudible] and the
other increase the productivity. The
problem we have is unemployment plus low production together. So technology should be such that it solves
both of them. But if you start
mechanizing the whole thing then you have a more production but higher
unemployment. It is very tricky
condition.
[inaudible from
audience]
That is what I
said. If you adopt agriculture
diversity efficient policy there it is I've shown that the amount of level of
hired for these crops, other crops compared to rice is higher. So if you promote that crop it automatically
accent more woman labor. Plus it is
also labor intensive. Non cereal crops
are not less labor using. It's highly
level intensive as well if you don't go for mechanization.
Put as a conclusion
that it is done in thesis research and not in here. It just a part of this.
The conclusions are drawn from this study plus what I have already in
other parts and that is maybe raise confusion to some extent. But the point that I wanted to make is the
employment of woman labor in agriculture sector is a priority because you cannot
absorb them in non-agriculture sector, not even men can be absorb because
[inaudible].
Because real wage
will
END OF SIDE 1
Yeah, it should have
to be quite because as I said agriculture diversity sufficient policy still has
a labor intensive potential because all the crops for growing non-cereals are
more labor intensive than the rice production and if you put the minimum wage
increase in the labor forces, it does not work practically. There is a minimum wage system, but it does
not work because one [inaudible] problem plus there are [inaudible] if we have
one part which has looked at the efficiency of labor use, but it's at the pick.
[inaudible]
It depends on the
elasticity of the labor demand, right?
It's not computed in this case but it is less than one. So that means it won't increase very sharply
it will have a you need a double effect.
It's [inaudible]. I did it in
other part. 76% effect. It's not increasing, that's what I'm
saying. But in my country the real
[inaudible] is almost flat for the last forty years.
It will have an
increase but not as strong as you would be expecting because it depends on the
elasticity that is the responsiveness of the level of use. And usually agriculture rice crop is an
elastic demand for prices. It won't
have a one to one relation, but it will increase by one or less than one.
[inaudible]
That is what I said
it has a social area that woman are not allowed to work but what it shows that
when the places where it is really have a shortage or some other cases, high
crop intensity means you have a total labor shortage. If there is no migration case.
In that case you hire labor so the culture problem is not very very
strict in that case. So if we push over
policy that puts up more employment potential for women so direct and indirect
policy is not that only the direct ones.
In that case it will automatically put in like I said that ten years I
haven't seen the brick breaking in the city by woman, but now it's possible
because [inaudible]
[inaudible from
audience]
What we have is
that's what I said if the reason we're moving from if I go for a cost
production case. The modern [inaudible]
the rising cost of everything is not as profitable as before. But the condition [inaudible] irrigated
field. It's a flat one and its in the
middle of the lake. If you know the
structure, in the middle you cannot do anything else. The others go for rice.
Because it is flat from the beginning.
But it still yields double than the local varieties. So if you look at the long run picture then
it is very bleak, but in a short run it's working because the most of the
farmers are landless, they're tenants and they don't have incentives to invest
in land and soil conservation. That is
another part.
And if the land
owner intends to be farming the persons plus have other activities and you know
how much is the water charge? How
much? Can you guess for the irrigation
charge. Make a charge.
For of the total
[inaudible] production how much it could be?
For Thailand I know it is five bucks because it's subsidized. You just pay token money to get your water
from kennels. When I first started my
thesis in Thailand so I was very surprised I cannot believe it. Because in my country the irrigation
charges 25% of the production.
It is more or less
20 to 25%. You have to get underground
water and the equipment is very stiff and that is one point. [inaudible]
It's privately
owned. Because public own the largest
irrigation how do I say, it's not as successful as expected. Because one of my study areas the
headquarters of technology changes I said it is an medium size flat country and
irrigation project.
[inaudible]
Ok, if there is not
any other questions, would you show your appreciations for the presentation
[applause]. And thank you all for
attending, you were a great audience, very lively and interested. Thank you.
END OF TAPE