1. SESSION 4: IMPLICATIONS FOR DATA COLLECTION Carmen Diana Deere University of Florida Gender Asset Gap Project World Bank Workshop on Gender & Assets, Gender and Development Group, June 14, 2012

2. Issues in Collecting Individual-level Asset Data 1. Minimum questions required 2. How many assets? 3. Who should be interviewed? 4. If interview two people, how resolve differences?

3. 1. Minimum Questions Required For Gender Asset Gap, only two questions required beyond the normal household assets inventory: Who are the owners of the asset, with space for multiple owners to capture joint owners GAG project had three spaces, with codes for “all HH members” or non- HH members who might be joint owners Whose names are on the ownership document where appropriate For Gender Wealth Gap, besides above, need at least one measure of valuation for each asset See Doss et al (2011), Lessons from the Field, available at http://genderassetgap.iimb.ernet.in

4. 2. How Many Assets? Country% Four Major Assets Ecuador89.9 Ghana81.6 Karnataka, India92.5 Table 1: Share of Gross Physical Household Wealth represented by the four major assets: Principal residence, agricultural land, other real estate and non-farm businesses

5. How Many Assets? Ecuador (US$) Ghana (PPP US$) Karnataka (PPP US$) Physical assets 82. 2 b.104.5 b. 423.6 b. %97.694.7 95.1 Financial assets 2.0 b. 5.8 b. 19.9 b. %2.45.3 4.5 Total Gross Wealth 84.2 b. 110.3 b.443.5 b. %100.0 Table 2. Composition of Gross Household Wealth (preliminary) Note: Karnataka, India estimate excludes Bangalore

6. Problems in estimating Gross Household Wealth with the GAG data sets 1. By design, only solicited information on financial assets in the individual questionnaire to ensure privacy, thus not a household measure 2. Ecuador & India ended up with truncated samples due to refusals among upper income groups 3. Many missing values on financial assets Usual problem of reluctance to disclose savings/cash (distrust) 4. Problems for comparative analysis: Insurance instruments different, not valued consistently Have not yet analyzed pensions

7. Potential information for imputation of financial assets Country Couples’ Share of Wealth (%) Ecuador88.1 (n=1981) Ghana95.8 (n=994) India83.0 (n=3066) Table 3. Share of Physical Wealth of Principal Couple in Couple-headed Households

8. 3. Who Should Be Interviewed? Bardasi, Beegle, Dillon & Serneels (2010) – Tanzania (n=1344) Experimental design to test labor force participation questions and respondent selection Self-reporting provides more accurate information than proxy Fisher, Reimer & Carr (2010) – Malawi (n=130) Husbands underestimate wives’ income Disagree on her income in 94% of couple households Cloke (2009) – Nicaragua (n=359) Gendered reporting bias among couples in who is property titleholder and credit holder Husbands and wives both more likely to report themselves as the owner rather than their partner Fletschner and Mesbah (2011) – Paraguay (n=210) Spouses do not fully share information Wives less likely to have information on financial institutions

9. Differences in Survey Design The three surveys aimed to interview most knowledgeable person(s) regarding assets owned by HH members Ghana & India: Principal respondent – completed HH asset inventory & individual questionnaire Secondary respondent – spouse, if present, or other adult of opposite sex; completed only individual questionnaire and some of asset ownership & valuation questions re-asked during individual interview. Ecuador: HH asset inventory completed by the principal couple together whenever possible (dual-headed households) or if the case, the sole male/female head Each then completed the individual questionnaire separately If spouse not available for HH inventory, then asset ownership & valuation questions always asked again during individual interview

10. Benefit of Interviewing 2 people separately: More assets? AssetEcuadorGhana Karnataka, India Principal dwelling0.40na Agricultural parcels 1.360.350.15 Other real estate3.910.410.35 Non-farm businesses 0.521.040.12 Table 4a. Major Assets added by interviewing a second respondent (% added to Inventory) AssetEcuadorGhanaKarnataka, India Principal dwellingna Agricultural parcels 02.250.97 Other real estatena1.222.82 Non-farm businesses na0.800.68 Table 4b. Major Assets added by asking the Primary Respondent about ownership twice (% added to Inventory)

11. Benefit of interviewing 2 people/the couple separately: Allows gender analysis Men and women may have different perceptions of ownership related to: Differences in legal knowledge Different understandings of the bundle of property rights Gender socialization Men and women may have different perceptions of the value of their assets related to: Whether markets exist and degree of integration to markets Gender differences in mobility and social networks

12. AssetCountryN (assets) % who disagree Dwelling Ecuador45035.1 Ghana5107.7 Agricultural land Ecuador9430.9 Ghana8733.3 Other real estate Ecuador16420.1 Ghana4137.8 Non-farm businesses Ecuador53422.3 Ghana6411.6 Table 5: Disagreements among Couples over who owns the asset

13. AssetCountry Disagree on Market value (%) Disagree on Replacement value (%) Disagree on Rental Value (%) Dwelling Ecuador60.465.657.0 (n=358)(n=356)(n=358) Karnataka84.0-- (n=1718) Ag Land Ecuador70.0-- (n=80) Karnataka 80.0-- (n=1528) Other Real Estate Ecuador51.260.745.6 (n=123)(n=61)(n=103) Karnataka 79.0 (n=495) Non-farm Business Ecuador64.2-- (n=212) Karnataka 80.0-- (n=459) Table 6: Disagreement among couples over valuation of the same asset

14. KARNATAKA (in INR) ECUADOR (in US$) HusbandsWivesHusbandsWives N1667 272 Mean263,621204,289***30,77128,964 (s.d.)(480032)(459869)(31854)(28695) Median100,000 20,000 Table 7a: Estimates of market value of principal residence by husbands and wives KARNATAKA (in INR) ECUADOR (in US$) HusbandsWivesHusbandsWives N1516 56 Mean386,577299,950***14,57510,793** (s.d.)(800700)(581056)(18386)(12979) Median170,000120,0006,5005,000 Table 7b: Estimates of market value of agricultural parcels by husbands and wives KARNATAKA (in INR) ECUADOR (in US$) HusbandsWivesHusbandsWives N494 63 Mean173,784176,85525,24425,014 (s.d.)(556717)(512959)(33367)(33995) Median50,000 10,000 Table 7c: Estimates of market value of other real estate by husbands and wives KARNATAKA (in INR) ECUADOR (in US$) HusbandsWivesHusbandsWives N457 136 Mean136,92755,169*9,4599,737 (s.d.)(1166042)(325317)(22743)(22982) Median8,0005,0001,0001,075 Table 7d: Estimates of market value of non-farm businesses by husbands and wives

15. 4. Main problem of interviewing couple separately: How to reconcile responses? 1. Ownership disagreements (Ecuador’s rules) a) Solved by title (if had document & names agreed with report of one of respondents) b) Solved by “combination” (if document didn’t agree with either report, or no document, included all mentioned as joint owners) Ghana (where few documents) followed latter rule Potential problems: Ownership question worded differently in individual questionnaire and HH Inventory Bias towards respondent who answered HH Inventory since title information only asked in this section Introduces/exacerbates bias towards joint ownership Alternative: Estimate ownership based on characteristics of individual and joint owners in full sample?

16. Ownership disagreements: Impact of Rules Table 8a. Ecuador - Disagreements on Home Ownership and How Resolved by Sex DisagreementFrequency % Between Spouses158 35.1 Solved by Title89 19.8 Siding with Male42 9.3 Siding with Female47 10.4 Solved by Combination56 12.4 With Title20 4.4 Without Title36 8.0 Over Status of Home13 2.9 Male says Owned6 1.3 Female says Owned7 1.6 No Disagreement292 64.9 Total Homes with Separate Responses 450 100.0 Table 8b. Ecuador - Home Ownership in Household Inventory vs. After Resolution of Disagreements by Rules Type of Ownership Frequency according to Household Inventory % Frequency following Final Resolution % Sole Male 4931.02918.4 Sole Female 3220.32314.6 Principle Couple 4327.26943.7 Principle Couple and Other 2113.32515.8 Male and Other 53.25 Female and Other 31.921.3 Other 53.25 Total 158100.0158100.0

17. How to reconcile different responses? 2. Disagreements over value of asset (Ecuador’s rules) a) If ownership resolved by title and only 1 owner, took that person’s response; if couple was joint owner, averaged their estimates b) If ownership resolved by “combination rule”, averaged the estimates of the couple Potential problems: Assumes ‘real owner’ knows value of his/her asset best Did not remove outliers since planned to average, thus may overestimate ‘true’ value Would be useful to have administrative data as benchmark

18. 5. Tentative conclusions: Interviewing both spouses, second person in general, minimally increased total assets captured In household context probably harder to hide assets than income Most similar situation to income are financial assets: If spouse doesn’t know precisely what you earn, easier to hide savings than other assets For that & other reasons, financial assets most difficult to capture fully even when guaranteeing privacy & confidentiality of responses Value of interviewing 2 people rests on capturing gender differences in perceptions

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