Female participation in household decision-making: an analysis of consumer durables' acquisition in Pakistan.

Mujahid-Mukhtar, Eshya ; Mukhtar, Hanid

In order to understand the status of women in a society, it is essential to analyse their role not only in the public sphere but also within the domestic domain. This is, in particular, of great importance in a society like that of Pakistan, where due to high levels of conservatism, the majority of women seldom interact in the public sphere. Hence, their level of "emancipation" (and related well-being) to a certain extent can be assessed from their degree of participation in household decision-making and their ability not only to decide about their own preferences and needs but also about those of others.

Household decisions range from economic decisions such as expenditure on various consumer items (e.g. durables and non-durables) to social decisions, such as those related to children's education, marriage, etc. Due to their "lifelong" nature and the magnitude of expense involved, decisions regarding the acquisition of consumer durables are considered to be of greater importance than most other routine decisions e.g. daily purchase of food, clothing, etc.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the nature and degree of participation of women in decision-making related to the acquisition of consumer durables in Pakistani households and to identify those factors which enable a woman (or women as a group) to play a more active role in this process.

Several works (1) have focused on the distribution of decision-making power between spouses in the family, identifying a series of factors which determine this relative power. Most works analyse this issue with reference to the Cultural or the Resource theories. The former outlines a series of cultural factors e.g., location, family system, ethnicity, age, etc. as predetermining the relative roles of husband and wife in family decisions [Conklin (1981); Mukhtar and Mujahid-Mukhtar (1990, 1990a)], whereas the latter highlights the positive impact of personal endowments e.g., education, employment, income, etc., upon the relative power of the individual [Blood and Wolfe (1960); Mukhtar and Mujahid-Mukhtar (1990); Oppang (1970)]. Very limited effort, however, has been undertaken on the distribution of family power in Pakistani households [Mukhtar and Mujahid-Mukhtar (1990, 1990a); Mukhtar (1985)], with virtually no reference to consumer durables.

In the context of decision-making regarding the acquisition of consumer durables, one vital aspect which requires particular emphasis is the need factor. Unlike other family decisions e.g. routine household expenditure, children's education, marriage, etc., for which the need cannot be identified with reference to an individual or group, the need for most consumer durables is usually individual or group specific, and hence identifiable. An additional dimension to the analysis of the decision-making process is, therefore, obtained by the identification of this need, as it provides an idea about who was responsible for the initiation of the process; the final decision marks its culmination.

This study includes both the need as well as the final decision aspects in the decision-making analysis of consumer durables. It attempts to determine the extent of influence which women (as a group) in the household exert upon the decision-making process by analysing their role with reference to their ability to translate their own needs into decisions to acquire the durables or decide when the need is felt by the other group i.e. men.

As suggested by the popular cultural and resource theories, a series of selected factors were incorporated into the analysis to assess their impact upon the need felt and decision taken for acquisition of consumer durables. These include cultural variables such as location i.e. urban vs. rural, and family system i.e. nuclear vs. non-nuclear, and resource factors such as women's education, employment and income.

One expects that urban, as compared to rural, location provides the women with better opportunities of education and, consequently, formal employment and income which endows a woman with more decision-making ability. However, as regards the power patterns between the two family systems, it may be expected that due to an absence of other adult (especially, male) family members as well as a greater share of responsibility, women in nuclear families participate more in household decision-making. Also, most certainly, educated women are expected to be trusted with more power in household decisions. The employed women, due to their ability to interact well with the outside world, are generally believed to wield more authority in household decisions than unemployed women; a part of this power, however, can be attributed to their income-generating ability.

The data for this study was derived from the female module (2) of the nation-wide household survey conducted by the AERC for a study on housing [Mujahid-Mukhtar et al. (1989)], sponsored by the World Bank. Information was collected for twelve consumer durables (3) with queries about who had felt the need for each of the good acquired (or not acquired and who finally decided to acquire (or not acquire) it. (4) Although an effort was made to obtain information for all family members (spouses, parents, parents-in-law, siblings and siblings-in-law, etc.) in the survey, but for the purpose of this analysis, the responses were categorized by sex i.e., women and men.

Table 1 presents an overview of the distribution of needs and decisions made by women and men for various consumer durables. In line with expectation, one observes that for all durables, more decisions are made by men than women, even for those items, e.g. sewing and washing machines, in which women feel more need than men. The limitations of women's power to decide are obvious from the fact that for neither durable, the incidence of their decision exceeds their needs.

A more interesting analysis of the decision-making process is demonstrated in Table 2. It indicates that for the total need felt for all durables by women, the majority of decisions (64.6 percent) on the aggregate are taken by men whereas women only decide for approximately one-third of their own needs (32.3 per cent). For men's needs, women only decide for a minor portion (3.0 percent) whereas men decide overwhelmingly for their own needs (92.9 percent).

To determine the effect of various cultural and economic factors upon the decision-making power of the women in the household, similar statistics were computed according to variations in location, family system, and women's education, employment and incomes. (5)

A comparison of women's decision-making power in urban versus rural locations indicates that urban women enjoy more power than rural women irrespective of who feels the need (Table 3). At a disaggregated level, in most low-price consumer durables e.g. sewing machine, fan, washing machine, black and white television and bicycle, urban women tend to enjoy more power than rural women not only in translating their needs into decisions to acquire durables but also in exerting their decisions when the need is felt by men. However, due to a limited number of rural observations on expensive items e.g. single observations for airconditioner and deep freezer, the proportions suffer from the problem of small-sample bias.

With regard to the impact of the family system upon the role of women in making decisions to acquire durables, overall statistics reveal that women in nuclear families wield more authority than those belong to extended families (Table 4).

Although the difference appears marginal, yet it is surprising to note that for cases where women feel the need, they enjoy more power in households with illiterate (woman) respondents in comparison to those with literate respondents (Table 5). (6) In cases where the need is felt by men (as well as by the 'unknown' group), literacy tends to positively influence the decision-making power of the women.

As expected, employed women exert a greater influence than unemployed on the acquisition of consumer durables, irrespective of whether the need was felt by them or by the men (Table 6). Further, the households where women earn more than Rs 2000 per month, represent the only sub-sample in the analysis where the power of women (62.6 percent) exceeds that exercised by men (31.1 percent) when the need is felt by women. This may be an outcome of her ability to acquire the durables on her own.

On the basis of this analysis it may be concluded that although the participation of women in household decision-making is limited yet there are a series of factors, both cultural and resource, which can improve this participation. Statistics indicate that, for most consumer durables, not only less needs are felt by women (as compared to men) but the bulk of the decisions pertaining to their own needs are taken by men. However, besides cultural effects such as urban residence and the nuclear family system, the decision-making power of the woman can be positively affected by her formal employment and own income.

Comments on "Female Participation in Household Decision-making: An Analysis of Consumer Durables' Acquisition in Pakistan"

The study of the two authors should be seen as a by-product of a nation-wide household survey on housing. This focal attention of the survey, probably, is the main reason why the data on which the study is based imposed at least two rather severe limitations on the research. First of all, the small sample size, which apart from leading to insignificant statements regarding more expensive goods (as indicated by the authors), questions the validity of nation-wide conclusions. Secondly, the study deals with adult women and men. However, in the case of nuclear families, women are equivalent to wives while for extended families, the term 'women' is used in a broader sense. This severely hampers the analysis of this cultural factor.

The fact that the study deals with acquired goods has two important implications. First, the decision to acquire a household item, which principally can be taken within the family, in practice may be equivalent to purchasing the item which is determined by cultural factors. Secondly, and even more important, the. decision to acquire a durable is subject to the household's income constraint, which includes the income shares spent on all consumer items, which in turn are influenced by their respective prices or marginal utilities.

In the analysis of personal resources, the authors only use women's personal characteristics as explanatory variables. Since decision-making in modern literature in the fields of micro-economic, sociology and anthropology is perceived as a bargaining process, personal endowments of men (or spouses for that matter) should also be taken into account. The usage of relative resources in my opinion would certainly improve the research and, most probably, affect the conclusions.

In the literature of the bargaining power of spouses it is generally acknowledged that its determination is a difficult task due to conceptual and methodological intricacies. In this respect, the efforts of the authors to improve our knowledge in the context of Pakistan should be appreciated. The analysis presented, however, suffers from severe data limitations and methodological shortcomings, which question the conclusions of the study. As a recommendation towards improving the study, it is strongly advised to at least supplement the descriptive analysis with a micro-economic analysis based on, for instance, the work of Nash (1953) or the more recent consumer analysis of Manser and Brown (1980), of McElroy and Horney (1981), of Jones (1983) or of Garcia (1990).

Geo A. Abbink

Pakistan/Netherlands Project on Human Resources, Islamabad.

REFERENCES

Garcia, M. (1990) Resource Allocation and Household Welfare. The Hague: Institute of Social Studies. (Thesis.)

Jones, C. (1983) The Mobilization of Women's Labour for Cash Crop Production: A Game Theoretic Approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 65 : 1049-59.

Manser, M., and M. Brown (1980) Marriage and Household Decision-making: A Bargaining Analysis. International Economic Review 21 : 32-43.

McElroy, M., and J. Homey (1981) Nash-Bargaining Household Decisions: Towards a Generalization of the Theory of Demand. International Economic Review 22 : 333-350.

Nash, J. F. (1953) Two Person Cooperative Games. Econometrica 21 : 155-162.

REFERENCES

Blood, R. O., and D. M. Wolfe (1960) Husbands and Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living. New York: The Free Press.

Conklin, George H. (1981) Cultural Determinants of Power for Women within the Family: A Neglected Aspect of Family Research. In G. Kurian and R. Ghosh (eds).

Foss, D., and M. Straus (1977) Culture, Crisis and Creativity of Families in Bombay, San Juan and Minneapolis. In Lenero-Otero (ed) Beyond the Nuclear Family Model: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Beverly Hills and London: Sage Publications.

Fox, G. L. (1973) Another Look at Comparative Resources Model: Assessing the Balance of Power in Turkish Families. Journal of Marriage and Family.

Kolenda, Pauline (1967) Regional Differences in Indian Family Structure. In Robert Crane (ed) Regions and Regionalism in South Asian Studies: An Exploratory Study. Durham, N. C.: Monograph Number Five of the Duke University Program on Southern Asia.

Kurian, G., and R. Ghosh (1981) Women in the Family and the Economy: An International Comparative Survey. Westport and London: Greenwood Press.

Mukhtar, H. (1985) Essays in Consumer Behaviour: Evidence from Pakistani Data. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Boston: Boston University. USA.

Mujahid-Mukhtar et al. (1989) The Role of Women in Housing and Housing Finance in Pakistan. Karachi: AERC/Washington, D. C.: World Bank. (Research Report.)

Mujahid-Mukhtar, E., N. Hasan and S. Khalil (1990) Determinants of Female Participation in Housing Activities: Evidence from Pakistani Data. Submitted to AERC Discussion Paper Series.

Mukhtar, H., and E. Mujahid-Mukhtar (1990) Expenditure Decisions and the Distribution of Power between Husband and Wife: A Case Study of Karachi Households. Karachi: Applied Economic Research Centre. (AERC Discussion Paper No. 123.)

Muldatar, H., and E. Mujahid-Mukhtar (1990a) Resource Theory and the Distribution of Power between Husband and Wife: A Critical Evaluation. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Meeting of the PSDE, Islamabad.

Oppang, C. (1970) Conjugal Power and Resources: An Urban African Experience. Journal of Marriage and Family.

(1) For studies on related topics see Foss and Strauss (1977); Fox (1973); Kolenda (1967); Kurian and Ghosh (1981); Mujahid-Mukhtar et al. (1989, 1990).

(2) The female module of the survey consisted of 829 households with 370 residing in the urban areas and 459 in the rural areas.

(3) The durables can be broadly categorized as follows:

(i) Household Goods: Sewing Machine, Washing Machine, Fan, Air- conditioner, Refrigerator and Deep Freezer;,

(ii) Recreational Goods: Television (colour), Television (B/W) and VCR; and

(iii) Transport Goods: Bicycle, Motorcycle and Car.

(4) In the event of a household possessing more than one item of any of the durable good, information was sought on the most recent acquisition. Also information Collected on the need and decision for goods not acquired was unsatisfactory and hence dropped from the analysis.

(5) Unlike employment and incomes, which refer to all women in the household, education pertains only to the literacy status of the respondent.

(6) Since the literacy variable reflects the literacy status of only the female respondent, therefore it is possible for 'illiterate' households to include literate members.

Eshya Mujahid-Mukhtar is Senior Research Economist, Applied Economics Research Centre, University of Karachi, Karachi and Hanid Mukhtar is Economist, World Bank Resident Mission in Pakistani Islamabad. Table 1 Distribution of Households by Need Felt and Decision Made an Aggregate Profile Need Felt by Decided by Woman Man Unknown * Woman Man Unknown Sewing Machine 63.40 19.06 17.55 25.66 54.72 19.62 Washing Machine 56.90 21.97 21.13 18.82 58.43 22.75 Fan 32.12 59.36 8.52 9.34 80.20 10.46 Air-conditioner 13.66 45.96 40.37 5.45 51.52 43.03 Refrigerator 34.79 46.65 18.56 13.92 66.49 19.59 Deep Freezer 20.00 24.17 55.83 6.61 35.54 57.85 Colour Television 21.36 58.25 20.39 7.40 68.81 23.79 B & W Television 15.85 56.23 27.92 6.42 64.15 29.43 VCR 11.67 50.56 37.78 8.79 52.75 38.46 Bicycle 3.97 68.95 27.08 2.52 66.55 30.94 Motorcycle 2.83 65.57 31.60 1.42 65.09 33.49 Car 7.28 58.25 34.47 3.37 59.62 37.02 * Cases where need and/or decision could not be determined. Table 2 Distribution of Households by Need Felt and Decision Made across Various Groups Need Felt by Woman Man and Decided by and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn * Wom. Man Unkwn * Sewing Machine 39.3 57.4 3.3 3.0 94.1 3.0 Washing Machine 29.7 66.8 3.5 7.7 91.0 1.3 Fan 24.3 73.9 1.7 2.6 94.6 2.8 Air-conditioner 31.8 63.6 4.5 2.7 94.6 2.7 Refrigerator 36.3 62.2 1.5 2.8 93.9 3.3 Deep Freezer 33.3 66.7 0 0 93.1 6.9 Colour Television 27.3 68.2 4.5 2.8 93.3 3.9 B & W Television 26.2 73.8 0 4.0 90.6 5.4 VCR 38.1 52.4 9.5 8.8 87.9 3.3 Bicycle 36.4 54.5 9.1 1.6 91.1 7.3 Motorcycle 16.7 66.7 16.7 1.4 92.8 5.8 Car 33.3 53.3 13.4 0.8 94.2 5.0 Sample 32.3 64.6 3.1 3.0 92.9 4.1 Need Felt by Unknown * and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn * Sewing Machine 1.1 2.2 96.8 Washing Machine 1.3 2.7 96.0 Fan 0 4.9 95.1 Air-conditioner 0 1.5 98.5 Refrigerator 0 5.6 94.4 Deep Freezer 0 0 100.0 Colour Television 0 1.6 98.4 B & W Television 0 5.4 94.6 VCR 0 5.9 94.1 Bicycle 0 5.3 94.7 Motorcycle 0 7.5 92.5 Car 1.4 2.8 95.8 Sample 0.4 3.8 95.8 * Cases where need and/or decision could not be determined. Table 3 Distribution of Households by Need Felt and Decision Made by Location Need Felt by Woman Man and Decided by and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Rural 30.7 66.7 2.6 2.2 97.8 0.0 Urban 46.2 50.0 3.8 3.6 91.1 5.3 Washing Machine Rural 23.3 73.3 3.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Urban 30.0 66.5 3.5 10.3 87.9 1.8 Fan Rural 15.7 83.3 1.0 1.8 96.0 2.2 Urban 31.2 66.4 2.4 3.5 93.0 3.5 Air-conditioner Rural 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Urban 30.0 65.0 5.0 2.9 94.1 3.0 Refrigerator Rural 47.1 47.1 5.8 5.7 90.6 3.7 Urban 33.9 65.2 0.9 1.6 95.2 3.2 Deep Freezer Rural 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Urban 30.4 69.6 0.0 0.0 92.9 7.1 TV (Colour) Rural 42.9 57.1 0.0 2.7 97.3 0.0 Urban 24.0 70.0 6.0 2.8 92.2 5.0 TV (B & W) Rural 10.0 90.0 0.0 3.0 89.4 7.6 Urban 31.3 68.7 0.0 4.9 91.5 3.6 VCR Rural 25.0 50.0 25.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 Urban 43.8 50.0 6.2 7.8 89.6 2.6 Bicycle Rural 33.3 66.7 0.0 2.5 87.7 9.8 Urban 37.5 50.0 12.5 0.9 93.4 5.7 Motorcycle Rural 33.3 33.3 33.4 2.9 91.2 5.9 Urban 0.0 100.0 0.0 1.0 93.2 5.8 Car Rural 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 100.0 0.0 Urban 33.3 66.7 0.0 1.0 93.0 6.0 Rural 26.7 70.1 3.2 2.6 93.8 3.6 Urban 34.8 62.3 3.0 3.1 92.6 4.3 Need Felt by Unknown and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Rural 1.8 0.0 98.2 Urban 0.0 5.4 94.6 Washing Machine Rural 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban 6.3 12.5 81.2 Fan Rural 0.0 5.0 95.0 Urban 0.0 4.8 95.2 Air-conditioner Rural 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban 0.0 11.1 88.9 Refrigerator Rural 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban 0.0 22.2 77.8 Deep Freezer Rural 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban 0.0 0.0 100.0 TV (Colour) Rural 0.0 0.0 100.0 Urban 0.0 8.3 91.7 TV (B & W) Rural 0.0 1.9 98.1 Urban 0.0 14.3 85.7 VCR Rural 0.0 1.8 98.2 Urban 0.0 25.0 75.0 Bicycle Rural 0.0 3.2 96.8 Urban 0.0 16.7 83.3 Motorcycle Rural 0.0 1.8 98.2 Urban 0.0 40.0 60.0 Car Rural 1.7 0.0 98.3 Urban 0.0 16.7 83.3 Rural 0.3 1.1 98.6 Urban 0.5 13.2 86.3 Table 4 Distribution of Households by Need Felt and Decision Made by Family System Need Felt by Woman Man and Decided by and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Nuclear 42.4 53.7 3.9 2.0 94.1 3.9 Extended 35.8 61.6 2.6 4.0 94.0 2.0 Washing Machine Nuclear 33.3 63.0 3.7 7.3 92.7 0.0 Extended 25.5 71.3 3.2 8.1 89.2 2.7 Fan Nuclear 26.5 71.7 1.8 1.8 95.6 2.6 Extended 22.2 76.1 1.7 3.5 93.5 3.0 Air-conditioner Nuclear 15.4 76.9 7.7 2.7 97.3 0.0 Extended 55.6 44.4 0.0 2.7 91.9 5.4 Refrigerator Nuclear 35.9 60.9 3.2 3.0 92.9 4.1 Extended 36.6 63.4 0.0 2.4 95.1 2.5 Deep Freezer Nuclear 9.1 90.9 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Extended 53.8 46.2 0.0 0.0 80.0 20.0 TV (Colour) Nuclear 27.8 63.9 8.3 3.7 93.8 2.5 Extended 26.7 73.3 0.0 2.0 92.9 5.1 TV (B & W) Nuclear 30.0 70.0 0.0 2.7 93.2 4.1 Extended 22.7 77.3 0.0 5.3 88.2 6.5 VCR Nuclear 28.6 57.1 14.3 15.0 85.0 0.0 Extended 57.1 42.9 0.0 3.9 90.2 5.9 Bicycle Nuclear 42.9 42.9 14.2 2.1 91.8 6.1 Extended 25.0 75.0 0.0 1.1 90.4 8.5 Motorcycle Nuclear 0.0 0.0 100.0 1.7 91.4 6.9 Extended 20.0 80.0 0.0 1.2 93.8 5.0 Car Nuclear 20.0 60.0 20.0 1.8 94.5 3.7 Extended 40.0 50.0 10.0 0.0 93.8 6.2 Nuclear 33.6 62.2 4.2 3.1 93.6 3.3 Extended 31.0 67.1 1.9 2.8 92.3 4.9 Need Felt by Unknown and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Nuclear 2.8 0.0 97.2 Extended 0.0 3.5 96.5 Washing Machine Nuclear 3.1 0.0 96.9 Extended 0.0 4.7 95.3 Fan Nuclear 0.0 4.8 95.2 Extended 0.0 5.0 95.0 Air-conditioner Nuclear 0.0 3.4 96.6 Extended 0.0 0.0 100.0 Refrigerator Nuclear 0.0 3.7 96.3 Extended 0.0 6.7 93.3 Deep Freezer Nuclear 0.0 0.0 100.0 Extended 0.0 0.0 100.0 TV (Colour) Nuclear 0.0 3.6 96.4 Extended 0.0 0.0 100.0 TV (B & W) Nuclear 0.0 6.3 93.7 Extended 0.0 4.8 95.2 VCR Nuclear 0.0 9.7 90.3 Extended 0.0 2.7 97.3 Bicycle Nuclear 0.0 6.1 93.9 Extended 0.0 4.8 95.2 Motorcycle Nuclear 0.0 7.1 92.9 Extended 0.0 7.7 92.3 Car Nuclear 0.0 3.2 96.8 Extended 2.5 2.5 95.0 Nuclear 0.6 3.9 95.5 Extended 0.2 3.7 96.1 Table 5 Distribution of Households by Need Felt and Decision Made by Women's Literary Status Need Felt by Woman Man and Decided by and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Illiterate 36.3 60.1 3.6 4.3 92.8 2.9 Literate 47.6 50.0 2.4 0.0 96.9 3.1 Washing Machine Illiterate 31.5 63.0 5.5 4.3 95.7 0.0 Literate 24.7 75.3 0.0 13.3 83.3 3.4 Fan Illiterate 23.7 74.6 1.7 2.5 94.0 3.5 Literate 26.0 72.0 2.0 2.8 96.2 1.0 Air-conditioner Illiterate 44.4 44.4 11.2 0.0 96.7 3.3 Literate 25.0 75.0 0.0 4.5 93.2 2.3 Refrigerator Illiterate 40.0 57.5 2.5 3.6 92.8 3.6 Literate 28.8 71.2 0.0 1.5 95.6 2.9 Deep Freezer Illiterate 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Literate 27.8 72.2 0.0 0.0 89.5 10.5 TV (Colour) Illiterate 35.1 56.8 8.1 2.0 94.1 3.9 Literate 18.5 81.5 0.0 3.9 92.1 4.0 TV (B & W) Illiterate 25.9 74.1 0.0 3.3 91.7 5.0 Literate 26.7 73.3 0.0 7.1 85.7 7.2 VCR Illiterate 33.3 55.6 11.1 8.5 89.4 2.1 Literate 45.5 45.5 9.0 9.1 86.4 4.5 Bicycle Illiterate 50.0 37.5 12.5 1.4 90.3 8.3 Literate 0.0 100.0 0.0 2.4 92.9 4.7 Motorcycle Illiterate 25.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 94.3 5.7 Literate 0.0 100.0 0.0 4.0 90.0 6.0 Car Illiterate 37.5 37.5 25.0 0.0 90.2 9.8 Literate 28.6 71.4 0.0 1.4 97.1 1.5 Illiterate 32.7 63.3 4.0 2.6 93.0 4.5 Literate 31.1 67.8 1.1 3.8 92.8 3.5 Need Felt by Unknown and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Illiterate 1.2 2.4 96.4 Literate 0.0 0.0 100.0 Washing Machine Illiterate 0.0 1.6 98.4 Literate 7.1 7.1 85.8 Fan Illiterate 0.0 5.9 94.1 Literate 0.0 0.0 100.0 Air-conditioner Illiterate 0.0 0.0 100.0 Literate 0.0 16.7 83.3 Refrigerator Illiterate 0.0 6.6 93.4 Literate 0.0 0.0 100.0 Deep Freezer Illiterate 0.0 0.0 100.0 Literate 0.0 0.0 100.0 TV (Colour) Illiterate 0.0 0.0 100.0 Literate 0.0 10.0 90.0 TV (B & W) Illiterate 0.0 4.8 95.2 Literate 0.0 8.3 91.7 VCR Illiterate 0.0 1.8 98.2 Literate 0.0 25.0 75.0 Bicycle Illiterate 0.0 4.5 95.5 Literate 0.0 11.1 88.9 Motorcycle Illiterate 0.0 1.8 98.2 Literate 0.0 40.0 60.0 Car Illiterate 1.6 1.6 96.8 Literate 0.0 10.0 90.0 Illiterate 0.3 2.6 97.1 Literate 0.8 10.7 88.4 Table 6 Distribution of Households by Need Felt and Decision Made by Women's Employment Status Need Felt by Woman Man and Decided by and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Unemployed 38.3 58.7 3.0 3.3 93.4 3.3 Employed 47.2 47.2 5.6 0.0 100.0 0.0 Washing Machine Unemployed 28.8 68.2 3.0 7.0 91.5 1.5 Employed 34.4 59.4 6.2 14.3 85.7 0.0 Fan Unemployed 24.1 74.9 1.0 2.0 95.2 2.8 Employed 25.7 68.6 5.7 9.7 87.1 3.2 Air-conditioner Unemployed 31.6 63.2 5.2 0.0 96.8 3.2 Employed 33.3 66.7 0.0 18.2 81.8 0.0 Refrigerator Unemployed 32.4 66.7 0.9 1.8 95.1 3.1 Employed 54.2 41.7 4.1 11.8 82.4 5.8 Deep Freezer Unemployed 26.3 73.7 0.0 0.0 91.7 8.3 Employed 60.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 TV (Colour) Unemployed 23.6 72.7 3.7 1.3 95.0 3.7 Employed 45.5 45.5 9.0 14.3 81.0 4.7 TV (B & W) Unemployed 22.6 77.4 0.0 2.9 92.0 5.1 Employed 36.4 63.6 0.0 18.2 72.7 9.1 VCR Unemployed 34.8 59.6 5.6 8.0 89.3 2.7 Employed 33.3 33.3 33.4 12.5 81.3 6.2 Bicycle Unemployed 33.3 55.6 11.1 1.8 91.1 7.1 Employed 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 90.9 9.1 Motorcycle Unemployed 16.7 66.7 16.6 0.9 93.9 5.2 Employed 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 87.5 8.3 Car Unemployed 16.7 66.7 16.6 0.0 96.1 3.9 Employed 100.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 82.4 11.7 Unemployed 30.7 66.7 2.7 2.2 93.9 3.9 Employed 41.2 53.3 5.4 8.9 85.4 5.7 Need Felt by Unknown and Decided by Wom. Man Unkwn Sewing Machine Unemployed 1.2 2.4 96.4 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Washing Machine Unemployed 1.4 2.9 95.7 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Fan Unemployed 0.0 5.4 94.6 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Air-conditioner Unemployed 0.0 1.6 98.4 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Refrigerator Unemployed 0.0 6.0 94.0 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Deep Freezer Unemployed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 TV (Colour) Unemployed 0.0 1.7 98.3 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 TV (B & W) Unemployed 0.0 3.0 97.0 Employed 0.0 28.6 71.4 VCR Unemployed 0.0 6.3 93.7 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Bicycle Unemployed 0.0 5.7 94.3 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Motorcycle Unemployed 0.0 7.8 92.2 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Car Unemployed 1.5 2.9 95.6 Employed 0.0 0.0 100.0 Unemployed 0.4 3.8 95.8 Employed 0.0 3.6 96.4