Gender Land and Asset SurveyUGANDA Acknowledgements Funders An Anonymous Donor Partners Associates Research Uganda, Limited University of KwaZulu-Natal The International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) gratefully acknowledges the contributions of Hema Swaminathan, Margaret Rugadya, Herbert Kamusiime, Christine Kajumba, Solomon Kabanda, Charles Mukasa, Lawrence Lubyayi, Fred Kalema, Urmilla Bob, Vadi Moodley, Nitesh Poona, Zola Dyasi , Dorah Ncobo, Jyoti Jaggernath, Sazile Mtshali, Innocent Shezi, Humayrah Bassa, Timothy Wiggill, Ms Zaakirah Bassa , Roshini Bob, Juan Muñoz, and Rodrigo Muñoz. Special thanks to the community members who participated in the evaluation research. Several colleagues at ICRW provided tremendous input into the research: Meredith Saggers, Gwennan Hollingworth, Rekha Mehra, Mary Ellsberg, Ellen Weiss, and Sandy Won. We also thank our editor, Margo Young. © 2011 International Center for Research on Women (ICRW). Portions of this report may be reproduced without express permission from but with acknowledgment to ICRW. Cover photo by Krista Jacobs Design: Barbieri & Green Gender Differences in Asset Rights in Central Uganda Aslihan Kes Krista Jacobs Sophie Namy and Ozler 2006; Hallman 2005; Swami- ecent studies have affirmed the importance of women’s nathan, Walker, and Rugadya 2006). Other studies have established that as- asset ownership, including land, housing, and other sets may protect women from experi- R encing domestic violence (Panda and assets, for economic development and social security. Agarwal 2005; Bhatla, Chakraborty, and Duvvury 2006; Swaminathan, Walker, Though data showing the importance of Given the evidence from other contexts and Rugadya 2006). asset ownership for women are proving suggesting a link between women’s valuable in raising awareness about the rights over assets and domestic violence, At the macro level, gender equality in need to recognize and enforce women’s the study also examines whether asset ownership is shown to improve rights, awareness-raising is only a first women’s asset rights influence their ex- agricultural productivity, bolster resist- step. Deeper analysis is needed to un- perience of intimate partner violence in ance to economic shocks, and foster derstand individuals’ engagement with central Uganda. economic growth (Deere and Doss 2006). assets beyond ownership and into use and decision-making, how women’s en- gagement with assets differs from Background men’s, and why asset rights are impor- For individuals and households, asset Current Knowledge on tant. This entails building an under- ownership translates to a secure place Gender and Asset Rights standing of the factors that may be to live, means to earn a livelihood, and in Uganda correlated with women’s asset rights. A the ability to mitigate the economic and The literature on men’s and women’s more specific understanding of these social risks associated with natural dis- asset rights in sub-Saharan Africa is factors in turn will allow movement from asters, disease, and economic shocks quite limited and for the most part fo- awareness to action by providing the (Doss, Grown, and Deere 2008). cused on land. Evidence from these data needed to guide programs and pol- studies points to a substantial and per- icy decisions that will ensure these A growing literature demonstrates the vasive gender gap in asset ownership, rights are upheld. particular benefits of women’s asset with women owning less land than men ownership, not only for themselves, but that is of lower quality (Doss 2006; 2 To provide some of this more in-depth also for their families and the economy Mason and Carlsson 2004; SOFA Team detail on determinants of women’s asset as a whole. In various studies, women’s 2011). Data on assets beyond land are rights, ICRW and Associates Research asset ownership has been linked to in- even scarcer, though general trends Uganda Limited. developed and piloted a creased spending on food, housing, and again suggest a strong advantage survey methodology for collecting and durable goods, and children’s schooling among men in terms of assets such as analyzing individual- and household- (Katz and Chamorro 2003; Quisumbing farm animals and transport vehicles level quantitative data on women’s and Maluccio 2003; Doss 2006). Duflo (Doss, Grown, and Deere 2008). rights over assets.1,2 The Gender, Land, (2000) and Thomas (1990) also found that and Asset Survey (GLAS) is one of the asset ownership by mothers can im- Evidence from Uganda is similar to what first studies to undertake a quantitative prove children’s health outcomes, in- has been found elsewhere in the region. and gendered assessment of men’s and cluding survival rates, and long-term Despite their significant role in the agri- women’s rights over assets – including and short-term nutritional status. cultural sector,3 only about 16 percent of ownership, documentation, and degree Women with more assets are also found Ugandan women own land in their own of control over use, transfer, and trans- to use prenatal care at higher rates than right (Rugadya 2010). Their ownership of actions – and the implications thereof. women with fewer assets (Beegle, registered land is even lower at 7 percent Specifically, this study attempts to an- Frankenberg, and Thomas 2001). (Rugadya 2010; Bikaako and Ssenkumba swer the following questions in the con- 2003). Housing, often considered a com- text of central Uganda: Besides enhancing the well-being of bined asset with land, particularly in rural women and their families, asset owner- areas, is also overwhelmingly owned by • What are the differences in women’s ship is also found to empower women in men (Rugadya 2010). and men’s ownership, use, and deci- their relationships and to give them a sion-making over land, housing, mate- stronger voice in public forums (Katz About half of the farming households in rial assets, livestock, and financial and Chamorro 2003). A number of stud- Uganda are engaged in livestock rear- assets? ies exploring the pathways among ing (Nayenga 2008), which provides • Which socioeconomic/structural fac- women’s asset ownership, socioeco- them an additional source of livelihood. tors influence women’s and men’s nomic status, and HIV risk suggest that Differences also exist in ownership of asset rights and in what ways? asset inequality increases women’s vul- livestock between men and women as nerability to the HIV infection (Beegle well as in the types of livestock they own. Oluka et al.’s study of men’s and A fairly large literature is dedicated to nerability of women’s land rights (Drimie women’s livestock ownership in north- understanding the underpinnings of per- 2002; Izumi 2006). Recent studies reveal eastern Uganda finds a significant gen- sistent gender inequity in land rights, in the extent of property grabbing in HIV-af- der gap. The disparity is most severe in Uganda and elsewhere in sub-Saharan fected households; with about 30 percent cattle ownership with 62 percent of Africa. Commonly examined in this liter- of widows and orphans the victims of men and only 14 percent of women re- ature are customary laws and practices this practice following the death of a porting ownership, but also extends to that continue to shape many individuals’ spouse/parent (Ampaire et al. 2008). poultry and other small stock animals. relationship with land. Molded by soci- Only 22 percent of women versus 39 ety’s patriarchal norms, these laws and The limitations of the statutory legal percent of men indicate they own poul- practices give ownership of land to men framework that includes gender equality try, for instance, which is surprising or male heads of extended families, principles have also been discussed in given that it is often seen as a female while women enjoy “secondary” rights the literature (Cooper 2010). Although asset (Oluka et al. 2005). in the form of access to and use of land Uganda’s statutory laws grant men and through their husbands, fathers, broth- women equal rights to land and other Land, by virtue of being the main produc- ers, or other male relatives (Bikaako property regardless of their marital sta- tive asset and means of wealth accumula- and Ssenkumba 2003; Benschop 2002; tus, application of these laws has been tion for a majority of Ugandans, dominates Rugadya 2010). mired by a number of factors. First, legal the discourse on asset rights in the coun- pluralism that stems from the recognition try. Evidence on gender inequities in asset The implications for Ugandan women of of both customary and statutory land ownership, particularly land, has in recent the primacy of customary law is that tenure in the Constitution and the Land years helped move an extensive legal re- their rights over land and housing de- Act results in multiple conflicts between form process to define and protect pend significantly on the quality of their customary and statutory laws, which are women’s right to own, use, and transfer personal and social relationships, prima- often not mediated by statutory provi- land and other assets. This includes the rily with their intimate partners and to a sions as prescribed in the Constitution. ratification of a new Constitution and sev- lesser extent with other kinship groups The application of statutory laws is fur- eral pivotal pieces of legislation such as (Walker 2002). A number of factors, in- ther complicated by a number of factors, the 1998 Land Act and the pending reform cluding the weakening of the institution including lack of knowledge of the laws of the Succession Act. The draft National of marriage and increased scarcity of and the high costs of legal action to ad- 3 Land Policy further prescribes specific land, have contributed to the deteriora- minister an estate (Ampaire et al. 2008). strategies to ensure that constitutional tion of women’s rights under the custom- The weak institutional capacity of the rights and obligations with regard to gen- ary framework (Tripp 2004; Khadiagala legal system, particularly in rural areas, der equality are upheld, particularly 2002).