Women’s control over income and household spending decisions: A rapid review

Often-cited studies show that when women influence or control household spending decisions, they tend to spend in ways that improve the welfare of their household. However, these studies are decades old, and the most recent review of this evidence was published over a decade ago (see Doss 2013). We present a rapid review of this literature since 2013 on women’s relative bargaining power over household resource allocation and its relationship with key well-being outcomes. Specifically, we review the evidence to answer the following questions: 1) Does women’s control over income within the household influence household expenditure patterns?; 2) Does the source of women’s income matter for spending decisions?; and 3) Does the amount of women’s income matter for spending decisions? We employ a rapid review approach to identify research published since 2013 that focuses on how women who have influence or control over spending decisions allocate those resources and associations with well-being outcomes. Utilizing key search terms and clear selection criteria, we identified 46 papers. Most studies represent sub-Saharan Africa. They employed a range of methods and represented a mix of observational and experimental (or quasi-experimental) designs. Most studies did not specify the source of income, but we did identify those focused on income from agricultural or off-farm activities, remittances, and cash transfers. Our review of the literature since 2013 has generally found evidence that is consistent with the research prior to 2013, but more convincing as there has been an increase in causal evidence published. Compared to men, women prioritize spending on investments in children, their education, food – including more diverse and nutrient-dense foods – and on healthcare regardless of income source. Overall, women’s influence over resource allocation decisions tend to promote equitable distribution of money to boy and girl children. We see mixed results around how women prioritize investing in savings compared to men; several studies indicated women prioritize savings more than men but do so for different reasons, although one study in a matrilineal society indicated that women prioritize food budgets at the expense of building savings. And finally, there is consistent evidence that the share of household budgets spent on adult goods or vices (primarily alcohol and tobacco) reduces when women have higher relative bargaining power over how these resources are allocated. Few studies considered how the amount of money influenced women’s ability to allocate it, suggesting that women may be able to influence spending over smaller amounts of resources compared to larger expenditures. To address gaps identified in the literature, future studies could look across income from different sources to understand whether women have greater influence or control over certain income streams compared to others, or how the source of income may influence how the money is allocated. They could also explore the relative amount of income women can control and how women’s control over income fluctuates as total household income changes. We recommend a systematic evidence review to assess the different levers influencing women’s relative bargaining power over resource allocation within a household and understanding the outcomes of women’s bargaining power.