Untangling gender differentiated food security gaps in Bhutan: An application of exogenous switching treatment regression

• Author: Khondoker Abdul Mottaleb,Dil Bahadur Rahut,Jeetendra Prakash Aryal
• Date: 01 May 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12566
• Published date: 01 May 2019

REGULAR ARTICLE

Untangling gender differentiated food security gaps

in Bhutan: An application of exogenous switching

treatment regression

Jeetendra Prakash Aryal

|

Khondoker Abdul Mottaleb

|

Dil Bahadur Rahut

International Maize and Wheat

Improvement Center (CIMMYT), El

Batan, Mexico

Correspondence

Dil Bahadur Rahut, International Maize

and Wheat Improvement Center

(CIMMYT), Carretera Mex-Veracruz,

Km. 45, El Batan, Texcoco, Mexico, CP

56237

Emails: d.rahut@cgiar.org;

dilbhutan@gmail.com

Abstract

Using nationally r epresentative dat a from Bhutan, and

applying an exogenous switching treatment regression

model, this study assessed the food security status between

male‐headed households (MHHs) and female‐headed house-

holds (FHHs). The study demonstrates that there is no sig-

nificant difference between MHHs and FHHs in terms of

food security, but when MHHs are compared with de jure

FHHs, the food security is significantly lower among the de

jure FHHs. The food security gap between MHHs and de

jure FHHs is due to the differences in both observable and

unobservable characteristics of the households. The food

security gap between de facto and de jure FHHs can be

explained by the influence of connections and wider access

to off‐farm income. Mostof the previous studies consider all

FHHs as a homogenous entity and ignore the concept of de

jure FHHs (i.e., a household run by single, widowed, or

divorced woman) and de facto FHHs (i.e., a household

where there is a husband, but he is not physically present

because of his work off‐farm). As the present research takes

this into account, the econometric findings from our study,

thus have important implications in formulating special food

security policies targeting the most vulnerableFHHs.

KEYWORDS

gender, food security, gender inequality, exogenous switching treatment

regression

DOI: 10.1111/rode.12566

782

|

© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/rode Rev Dev Econ. 2019;23:782–802.

1

|

INTRODUCTION

Achieving gender parity by 2030 is one of the major objectives of the Sustainable Development

Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations (UN). For this reason a clearer understanding of gender

issues including gendered responsibilities, resources and constraints, is imperative to ensure the

welfare of female‐headed households in developing countries, who are in general considered in

the poorest‐of‐the‐poor group (Bastos, Casaca, Nunes, & Pereirinha, 2009; Doss, 2018; Elm-

elech & Lu, 2004; Fuwa, 2000; Mallick & Rafi, 2010; World Bank, 2012). It is often pointed

out that women in developing countries are mostly excluded from inheriting land and land

ownership (Kieran, Sproule, Doss, Quisumbing, & Kim, 2015; World Bank, 2012); they own

significantly fewer agricultural production assets than men (Quisumbing, Haddad, & Peña,

2001; Quisumbing & Maluccio, 2003; Quisumbing, Roy, Njuki, Tanvin, & Waithanji, 2013;

Sraboni, Malapit, Quisumbing, & Ahmed, 2014) and in general, have less access to information

and agricultural extension services than men (Quisumbing, 2010; Quisumbing & Pandolfelli,

2010).

As women in developing countries, in general, are mostly deprived of land ownership and pro-

ductive assets, and as female‐headed households are in general considered in the poorest‐of‐the‐

poor group in developing countries, questions remain in relation to the gender of the household

head and households’food security. For instance, are the female‐headed households more food

insecure than the male‐headed households? Is there any significant difference in terms of food

security between de facto and de jure female‐headed households? Given the fact that because of

gender‐differentiated access to productive assets including land and agricultural information, and

the responsibilities of the female in maintaining the household including household chores and

child care, FHHs are found to be more food insecure than MHHs (Food and Agriculture Organiza-

tion [FAO], 2011; Mallick & Rafi, 2010; Quisumbing et al., 2001). However, not all FHHs can be

equally disadvantaged and food insecure (Doss, 2018; FAO, 2011). For example, de jure FHHs

(i.e., divorced, separated or widowed FHHs) can be more food insecure and vulnerable compared

with de facto FHHs (i.e., when the husband has migrated for work), because de jure FHHs are

mostly single income earners (FAO, 2011; Fuwa, 2000). In addition, de facto FHHs may receive

remittances and extra income from their expatriate husband, while this may not be the case for de

jure FHHs. Therefore, de jure FHHs are more likely to be vulnerable to food insecurity. To ensure

food security of the FHHs in general, it is imperative to examine the association between food

security and gender and the issues of food security between, de facto and de jure FHHs. Empirical

studies seldom focus on this important issue.

In addition, the association between gender and food security is not so simple for two reasons:

first, unequal access to productive resources and information may reduce the agricultural produc-

tion in FHHs, and thus, increase their likelihood of being less food secure than MHHs; secondly,

FHHs are more likely to allocate family resources to food crops rather than cash crops (De Brauw,

2015; Kennedy & Peters, 1992) and a larger share of women's contribution to household income

is spent on food (Duflo & Udry, 2004), indicating that their food security status may be better

compared with MHHs. As a result, once the two effects are combined, it is hard to predict whether

FHHs would indeed be more or less food secure than MHHs. This is why this study provides an

empirical assessment.

The objective of the present study is to examine the gender‐differentiated food security issues

in Bhutan. The case is worth investigating for several reasons. Since 2000, Bhutan has made con-

siderable progress in closing gaps in gender inequality (Kotikula, 2013). In terms of the gender

ARYAL ET AL.

|

783