Defining Empowerment

In the literature, the term ‘empowerment’ has been defined and interpreted in different ways. While some scholars prefer to use the term by coming up with a list of quantifiable aspects, others argue that the value of the term lies in its vagueness and any attempt to quantify it may make it underspecified (Kabeer, 1999; Endeley, 2001). In the development discourse ‘empowerment’ is often used loosely to fit the objectives of the development programs; while, in policy-making the focus is more likely to be on defining the term based on quantitative measures (Malhotra et al., 2002). Though women may have some interests in common, and women’s empowerment may be defined based on women’s abilities to pursue these interests,

there is no agreement on what these interests are. Hence, there exists no universally applicable and theoretically acceptable explanation of women’s subordination from which a general definition of empowerment may be derived (Molyneux, 1985; Mosedale, 2005).

The complexities associated with defining empowerment also apply to developing a quantitative index for measuring it. Attempts to measure empowerment through specific indices are often criticized for failing to include different aspects of empowerment by compressing a lot of information into measurable indices. Women may be empowered in one aspect of their lives but not in others; such complexities may be masked in studies that do not differentiate between the various aspects of empowerment (Malhotra et al., 2002). Also, because empowerment is context-specific, it is difficult to make cross-regional and cross- cultural comparisons. For example, access to education may not be a good indicator of women’s empowerment in most of the developed world but it is one of the key measures in Nepal, as girls are often not sent to school. Additionally, since empowerment entails a process of change, it would be ideal to look at time-series data when conducting econometric analysis. However, given the difficulties measuring empowerment, such comparisons over time may not be possible.

Despite these complexities associated with conceptualizing and measuring empowerment, review of existing literature suggests a considerable consensus in studies attempting to define the term. Common themes in most of these studies revolve around notions of women’s abilities, their choices, their power to influence

household decisions, their control over household resources, and their participation in economic and social spheres, as illustrated by the definitions below.

“…process of removing obstacles of women’s active participation in all spheres in public and private life through full and equal share in economic, social, cultural and political decision-making” (Beijing Platform for Action, UN 1995).

“…control over material assets (physical, human, financial), intellectual resources (knowledge and information), and ideology (ability to generate, propagate and sustain specific sets of beliefs)”(Batliwala, 1994).

“…rights, resources and voice are key aspects of women’s empowerment” (World Bank, 2001). “…process by which women redefine gender roles in ways which extend their possibilities for being and doing” (Mosedale, 2005) Efforts to deter the maintenance of women’s subordination are often based on abolishing the sexual division of labor, removing institutionalized form of discrimination, attaining political equality, gaining freedom of choice over childbearing, adopting measures against male violence, and transforming structures and institutions that perpetuate gender discrimination (Batliwala, 1994; Molyneux, 1985). There is a general agreement on using measures such as women’s access to resources and ownership of assets (Quisumbing et al., 2000), decline in fertility rate (Morgan and Niraula, 1995; Sen, 1999), rise in women’s market participation (Lokshin and Glinskaya, 2008), decision-making power and autonomy (Desai and Banerjee, 2008), as indicators of empowerment.

One of the theories that incorporates these aspects and provides a broad framework for understanding empowerment is Kabeer’s (1999) work on gender, where empowerment is defined as the process through which those who have been

order to make choices, there need to be alternatives; for the poor who struggle with meeting basic necessities, this definition of exercising meaningful choices may not apply (p. 437). Also, sometimes differences in choices arise from difference in preferences and not from constraints. Since the notion of power is not relevant if the failure to achieve something comes from laziness or from preferential differences, analysis on women’s empowerment should examine if the differences in choices come from differences in constraints faced (p. 439).

Kabeer specifies resources, agency and achievements as the three main dimensions of empowerment (p. 437). Here, resources refer to access and future claims to resources, such as education, health care and employment; these set the pre-conditions for empowerment. Agency is described as the ability to define ones goals and act upon them; this includes aspects such as decision-making, bargaining, negotiation or deception and constitutes the process of empowerment. These two aspects of empowerment in Kabeer’s framework derive from Amartya Sen’s work on gender and development, where well-being and agency are identified as two central aspects of women’s movement (Sen, 1985). In Sen’s framework, well-being refers to a person’s functioning such as their ability to be well-nourished, to avoid mortality, to be literate and to participate in social life (p. 197). Agency, on the other hand, refers to objectives that a person may pursue if allowed to think and act freely (p. 204). Increased access to resources such as education, health care and employment can directly contribute to women’s well-being and increased ability to work outside home, make independent decisions and have ownership rights could add force to women’s voice and strengthen their agency (Sen, 1999). The third

category in Kabeer’s framework, achievement, refers to the outcomes of women’s empowerment; these may be seen as improvement in children’s or women’s well- being due to women’s empowered position (p. 438). Kabeer stresses that the three aspects of empowerment in her framework are closely tied (triangulation) and it is only through an inclusion of all these aspects that evaluations on empowerment can be made (p. 452). For example, a woman who gains access to or ownership of land but no control over its use may not see any change in her ability to make choices. Having access to the land is only a pre-condition for empowerment. Her ability to make choices may be expanded when she is able to exercise agency over the land she owns.

In her analysis, Kabeer suggests a framework under which empowerment may be quantified by looking into variables that provide a measure for each of its three dimensions. Resources could be measured by looking at differences in primary functionings such as nourishment, health, shelter, education, access to employment, and ownership of land and other fixed assets. Agency could be measured by looking into indices of decision-making, incidence of male violence, or women’s mobility in economic and social spheres. Indicators of women’s and children’s well-being such as literacy rate, child mortality rate or infant immunization rates could be used as indicators of women’s achievements. One of the main challenges in working with Kabeer’s framework is that there are no clear distinctions on what indicators to choose for each of the three dimensions, as these concepts are closely tied and inter-dependent. Malhotra et al. (2002) describe this problem by stating that,

“While distinctions such as those between ‘resources, agency and achievements’ … seem clear at the conceptual level, it is not always easy to completely separate them in developing empowerment indicators. And too, a given variable may function as an indicator of women’s access to resources (or an enabling factor) in one context, of women’s agency in another, and may represent an achievement in still other contexts.” (p. 9).

For example, wage-employment could be a measure of women’s access to labor market (resources) but it could also be interpreted as increased agency through mobility in economic sphere or an achievement from having access to labor market and being less dependent on other household members. Despite this complication, Kabeer’s framework is specific enough to distinguish it from the general concept of power, look into the different aspects of empowerment and interpret it as a process of change. It also offers researchers the flexibility of choosing specific indicators for empowerment based on the context of the study. Additionally, the framework facilitates the interpretation of empowerment using mixed-methods, as it provides a solid basis for measuring empowerment quantitatively while emphasizing on the need to ensure triangulation of the different dimensions of empowerment through deeper qualitative analysis.