IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Microcredit and Women’s Empowerment: Have We Been Looking at the Wrong Indicators?

  • Supriya Garikipati

Impact evaluation studies routinely find that lending to women benefits their households, but not necessarily the women concerned. The reasons for this paradox are not well understood. This, I argue, is partly because of the obsession with viewing women’s empowerment as outcomes alone and ignoring the processes leading to these. I investigate this paradox by examining the processes surrounding loan use for a case study from rural India. The way in which women’s loans are used is found to be critical to their empowerment. Specifically, women whose loans are invested in household assets can find the process disempowering. This is because women lack co-ownership in household’s productive assets. Where loan diversion by households cannot be controlled, women’s joint ownership of household assets emerges as integral to their empowerment. This paper cautions against the excessive focus on women’s outcomes as a measure of their empowerment.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/57623/1/wp10030.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series Working Papers CEB with number 10-030.

as
in new window

Length: 17 p.
Date of creation: Jan 2010
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published by:
Handle: RePEc:sol:wpaper:2013/57623
Contact details of provider: Postal: CP114/03, 42 avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 1050 Bruxelles
Phone: +32 (0)2 650.48.64
Fax: +32 (0)2 650.41.88
Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be
Email:


More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sol:wpaper:2013/57623. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Benoit Pauwels)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.