One way to find out if someone understands the economic miracle of asian women empowerment (how mainly a billion asian women ended poverty 2020-1970) particularly the bangladesh model is to see if that person knows the research consequences of metavillages
whilst fazle abed is well known for the bon mots- small may be beautioful but in bangladesh larges scale solutions are absolkutely essential - less well known is that from 1972 he accesses 100.000 person plus metavilages for testing ideas before scaling them
the first one he had spent his life savings on in rebuilding 15000 homes - start of brac 1972
this post is about matlab a meta-vilage set up by abed's founding helath partnership ICDDR B once known as East Pakistan Cholera Lab. ICDDR,B is the nations most auspicious research lab. Its where oral rehydeation was scientifically discovered as a cure but not implemented until Abed took it nationwide as a lesson every vilage mother needed to apply to prevent infants dying from diarrhea- neraly one quarter of all vilage infants died of diarrhea until mothers knew how to mix boiled water sugar and salt in correct proporions to end diarrhea.
As the paper below shows by the mid 1990s icddr,b had set up a rural area with 200000 population across which it monitored variius health and food programs. Brac partnered in what became a librady of over 25 reserach papers. Later a hew yeras after brac opened a university in 2001, its number 1 college was named james grant college of public health after the unicef leader who had supported oral rehydration scaling across bangaldesh and tropical rural china. The colege's location was chose in the ICDDRB campus.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.589.989&rep=rep1&type=pdf
extracts from this 1998 paper
Paper Foreword
Empirical evidence point to a causal relationship between the socioeconomic status of individuals and
communities and their health. Indeed improvement in health is expected to follow socioeconomic
development. Yet this hypothesis has rarely been tested; at least it has not undergone the scrutiny of
scientific inquiry. Even less understood are the processes and mechanisms by which the changes are
brought about.
The Rural Development Programme (RDP) of BRAC is a multisectoral integrated programme for
poverty alleviation directed at women and the landless poor. It consists of mobilization of the poor,
provision of non-formal education, skill training and income generation opportunities and credit
facilities. The programme is the result of 20 years of experience through trial and error. However
evaluation of its impact on human well-being including health has not been convincingly undertaken.
The Matlab field station of ICDDR,B is an area with a population of 200,000, half of whom are
recipients of an intensive maternal and child health and family planning services. The entire
population is part of the Center's demographic surveillance system where health and occasionally
socioeconomic indicators have been collected prospectively since 1966.
A unique opportunity arose when BRAC decided to extent its field operations (RDP) to Matlab.
ICDDR,B and BRAC joined hands to seize this golden occasion. A joint research project was
designed to study the impact of BRAC's socioeconomic interventions on the well-being of the rural
poor, especially of women and children, and to study the mechanism through which this impact is
mediated.
In order to share the progress of the project and its early results, a working paper series has been
initiated. This paper is an important addition in this endeavour. The project staff will appreciate
critical comments from the readers.
Fazle Hasan Abed BRAC
Robert M. Suskind ICDDR,B
working paper 25 by Rita Das Roy
SM Ziauddin Hyder
Mushtaque Chowdhury
Alayne Adams
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was done under the auspices of the BRAC-ICDDR,B joint research project, Matlab. The
project is currently supported by the Aga Khan Foundation and the Ford Foundation. The BRAC
and ICDDR,B are supported by countries and agencies which share their concern for health and
development problems of developing countries. Current ICDDR,B and BRAC donors include: the
aid agencies of the Governments of Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, China, Germany,
Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, Switzerland, the United
Kingdom and the United States; international organizations including Arab Gulf Fund, Asian
Development Bank, European Union, International Atomic Energy Centre, the United Nation'
s
Children's Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United
Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the World Health Organization; private foundations
including Aga Khan Foundation, Child Health Foundation, Ford Foundation, Population Council,
Rockefeller Foundation, NORAD, OXFAM, Pathfinder International, and the Sasakawa Foundation;
and private organizations including American Express Bank, Bayer A.G., CARE, Family Health
International, Helen Keller International, the John Hopkins University, Procter Gamble, RAND
Corporation, SANDOZ, Swiss Red Cross, the University of California Davis, and others.
The authors highly acknowledge the contribution of all the researchers and consultants involved in
the joint research team since beginning of the project for their valuable inputs in designing the
research, planning and implementing the field work and data analyses. Nevertheless, special thanks
go to the interviewers and inhabitants of Matlab whose active and honest participation made this
research project a success.
Table of contents
ABSTRACT ......................................................... .......................................................................... ii
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................ 2
METHODS AND MATERIALS .................................................................................................. 2
Study area and population ............................................................................................................... 2
Sample selection ............................................................................................................................... 3
Data collection ........................................................................................................................... ..... 3
Survey ............................................................................................................................................... 3
Mealtime observation ....................................................................................................................... 3
Focus group discussion (FGD) ........................................................................................................ 4
Definition of terms ........................................................................................................................... 4
RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 5
Survey findings ................................................................................................................................. 5
Direct mealtime observation ................................................................ ........................................... 8
Mother's perception ................................................................................................................... 9
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................. 10
REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................
11
ii
ABSTRACT
This study assessed the sex preferences in intra-household food distribution among school going siblings
in a rural area of Bangladesh. The study also examines the effect of women's involvement in BRAC's
rural development programme in reducing gender gaps in intra-household food allocation. The study
was conducted in 14 villages of Matlab as one of the sub-studies of the BRAC-ICDDR,B joint
research project. A total of 376 school-going siblings (188 brothers and 188 sisters) aged 10-14 years
from BRAC member and non-member households were included in this study. Both quantitative, i.e.,
survey, and qualitative, i.e., observation and focus group discussion, research methods were used for
data collection. One of the villages was chosen for direct observations of food distribution behaviour.
Six focus group discussions were also conducted with mothers of the siblings in two selected villages.
The survey found no significant sex bias in food distribution during 3 major daily meals. However, boys
were given preference in the distribution of special foods such as meat, fish and milk products. Brothers
consumed greater amounts of special foods compared to their sisters (p<0.001). Direct observations of
food distribution and focus group discussions indicated a preferential food distribution pattern favouring
sons, that was consistent across the socioeconomic classes. Observational data suggested that food was
more equitably distributed between sons and daughters within BRAC member households compared to
non-member households.
1
INTRODUCTION
In Bangladesh, female children are disadvantaged within the family compared to their male counterparts
in terms of care and food resulting in lower nutritional status and higher mortality (1). Because of
maldistribution of food and other resources, availability of food at the household level often does not
ensure the availability of adequate food for all household members. Among various reasons of the
unequal distribution, sex is considered as one of the leading factors rooted in the culture of many
societies. In Matlab, Chen et al. have documented absolute differences in food intake between male and
female children (aged 0-4 years). They argued that it was not only the access to food but health and
medical care that results in sex differentials in survival and nutritional status (7). In consequence,
females remain nutritionally vulnerable during whole length of their life cycle, and furthermore, when
male and female children are not treated equally, it affects not only the physical growth of the females
but also their psychological and mental development.
Although a number of studies have attempted to document food allocation patterns within the
household, it (7-10) their measurement has presented many methodological challenges. In urban
Guatemala, Engle and Nieves observed dietary patterns and mealtime behaviour, and used a method of
direct weighing of foods for the main meal (8). Chen et al. in Bangladesh collected prospective data on
anthropometry, morbidity and nutrient intake of the under-five children within a household (7). In
rural Nepal an interesting methodology was applied to explore intra-household food allocation pattern
between male and female family members which focused on the mealtime behaviour of both food
servers and consumers (9). Abdullah documented intra-household food distribution in a rural area of
Bangladesh using direct weighing of foods of all household members eaten for 3 consecutive days in
four different seasons (10). Beyond the usual operational limitations associated with food intake
assessment, most of these methodologies emphasis the quantity of food consumed, and pay secondary
importance to the behavioural and cultural issues surrounding food distribution and consumption. The
Nepalese study is innovative in this respect, gathering data on both quantity of food consumed and
mealtime behaviour. The methodology developed and applied in this study is complex and time
consuming; regarding considerable expertise is required in both qualitative and quantitative data
collection, analysis and interpretation.
This study is part of the larger BRAC-ICDDR,B joint research project, which aims to assess the impact
of BRAC's rural development interventions on health and human well-being (11). BRAC's rural
development programme attempts to improve the socioeconomic situation of the rural poor through
organizational development, training, credit, education, income generation and social development
activities. It is expected that participation in BRAC programme would not only improve socioeconomic
status of the village organization (VO) members, it would also increase participation of women in
household decision making and enhance favourable attitudes towards women and girl children.
Traditionally women are in-charge of household food preparation and distribution. It was assumed that
membership in BRAC's Rural Development Programme (RDP) would positively affect women's
behaviour regarding the allocation of food and other household resources. Because of the complexity of
the type of information needed to assess the behaviour in relation to food distribution, this in-depth study
was undertaken using both qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques.
2
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to investigate sex differentials in intra-household food distribution among schoolgoing siblings in a rural area of Bangladesh and to assess mother's knowledge and behaviour with
respect to intra- household food distribution. The study also examined the effect of women's
involvement in BRAC's rural development programme on reducing gender gaps in intra household food
allocation.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
The methodology applied in the study is a much simplified version of Gittelsohn's approach to
measuring on intra-household food distribution develop for application in Nepal (9). Gittelsohn applied
both anthropology and nutritional science to obtain a wide range of data pertaining to intra-household
food distribution behaviour. The study focused on food distribution and consumption of all the family
members. The present study gathered data from siblings aged 10-14 years. A pilot study was conducted
to test the feasibility and accuracy of the method to obtain the required information. Based on the pilot
study, some appropriate modifications were made in the methodology in order to make the data
collection procedure simpler and quicker (12).
Study area and population
The study was conducted in the Matlab Demographic Surveillance System (DSS) area (13) as a part of
the BRAC-ICDDR,B joint research project. This project was initiative in 1992 with a baseline survey of
60 villages. Further in-depth survey work was conducted in 1995 on a sub-sample of 14 villages. The
present study draws its sample from two sub-sets of villages. Sample selection was based on the
following criteria:
Age: Siblings aged between 10 and 14 years were eligible for inclusion in the study. According to the
Bangladesh RDA (recommended dietary allowance), differences in the major nutritional requirements of
male and female children of this age group is minimal based on considerations of body size and activity
levels (14).
School-going children: A further criteria for inclusion in the study was that the sibling pair be currently
enrolled in a non-formal or formal school. A sibling pair was selected if they attended the same school
and thus had similar exposure to the school environment, in terms of knowledge and awareness.
Moreover, it was assumed that school-going children in the age group would have the capacity to
provide reliable information regarding the quality and adequacy of their food consumption including
their perception about food distribution at home.
BRAC and non-BRAC: Sibling pairs were selected from BRAC and non-BRAC households i.e.
households with or without a BRAC member. Eligibility for participation in BRAC is based on two
main criteria: that the household owns less than 50 decimals of land and the principal earner sells manual
labour for at least 100 days over the last one year. It was assumed that, in addition to other credit-based
programme inputs of BRAC, skill training, legal awareness and health education components would
influence mother's knowledge and behaviour such that she places equal emphasis in caring for sons and
daughters, with the results of reducing gender gaps in intra-household food distribution.
3
Sample selection
In 1995, a nutrition survey was carried out in 14 villages of Matlab which included a total of 2,076
households (13). From the sample, 203 households were identified based on the availability of eligible
sibling pairs and the informed consent of their mothers to participate in the study. Of the 203
households, 63 were BRAC member and 140 were non-member households. From the sample, all
siblings’ pairs from BRAC households were retained for the study. For non-BRAC sibling pairs a
random sampling technique was employed to select 125 out of 140 non-member households. The final
sample composed 188 brother-sister sibling pairs from 188 households: 63 BRAC member and 125 nonmember pairs.
Based on the level of previous interactions and rapport with the villagers, one village was selected
from the survey area to conduct direct mealtime observation to record the behaviour related to food
distribution and consumption of the food servers and consumers. Focus group discussion (FGD) was
also conducted in this village, and a neighbouring one. In total, six FGDs were conducted on separates
groups of mother representing BRAC and non-member households.
Data collection
Data were collected during October-December, 1996 through survey, observation and focus group
discussions.
Survey
Questionnaire survey: A structured questionnaire was prepared and finalyzed during school and
household visits to obtain data on the previous day's food intake of the sibling pairs and their
socioeconomic background. Interviewed separately, brothers and sisters were asked to recall the
previous day's food intake including main meals taken at home, meal taken outside home and snacks.
Information obtained during the interview included the type, amount and frequency of food items
consumed, perceptions of whether the food was equitably distributed, sibling meal order and whether
snacks were eaten. Sibling meal order was quantified by giving the following scores, 1 = eaten before;
0.50 = eaten together; 0.25 = eaten after and 0 = not eaten. A brother or a sister who ate before his/her
sibling was assumed to have received preference in terms of intra-household food distribution. Scores
to denote perceived adequacy of intake of individual meals were, 1= adequate; 0.50 = inadequate; and
0 = not eaten. Data on special foods were collected after determining what constitutes special foods. A
series of questions were also asked about the types of special foods cooked in the preceding three
days, and who received more and why. A list of food items, which were treated as special in the
community was prepared beforehand by discussing with the adult men and women in the same area.
The interview was done with each brother and sister separately on the same day and preferably at the
same location, i.e. at home.
Mealtime observation
Qualitative information on food serving and consumption behaviour was collected through direct
observation of one major meal using a checklist. Direct observations focused on the serving behaviour of
a food server. Five different types of serving behaviours such as, automatically served (AS), consumer
asked and served (CA), self (consumer) served (SS), served on demand (SD) and not served on demand
(NSD) were used during mealtime observation. Mealtime norms and attitude regarding food distribution
and consumption were also observed. Efforts were made to minimize disruption of regular/usual
mealtime behaviour, and to establish a friendly rapport such that mothers felt comfortable distributing
foods in front of the researcher. The observer selected a place in the house from where the activities
related to food distribution and consumption could be observed.
4
Focus group discussion (FGD)
Six FGDs were held with women (aged 22-45 years) belonging to eligible BRAC member, eligible nonmember, and non-eligible non-member groups. The FGDs were conducted in order to solicit mothers'
opinion and behaviour regarding food distribution to male and female children. Each session involved by
6 mothers and continued for nearly an hour.
Definition of terms
Special food: The terms `Special food' refer to food that is cooked only occasionally at home. A list of
special foods was prepared in consultation with the adult men and women in the study village. Food
considered as special included sweet rice, rice cake and shemai (noodles cooked in milk and sugar).
Big fish and meat cooked occasionally are also considered as special foods.
Snacks: Snacks included light foods eaten during morning, afternoon and in the school, in addition to
three regular meals. In the village context muri (puffed rice), biscuits, chanachur, gur (molasses),
achar (pickle) etc. are considered snacks.
Automatically served: A food server serves food without asking or without being requested by the
consumer.
Server asked and served: Server asks the consumer if she/he needs a second serving.
Consumer asked and served: Food is served in response to a consumer's request.
Self-served: A consumer takes food from the pot without server's help.
Not served when demanded: A consumer demands more food and is ignored by the server.
5
RESULTS
The mean age of the siblings was 12 years (range: 10-14 years). All of them were enrolled in schools
and were studying in grade three to four. Mean family size was 6.5.
Survey findings
24 hours food recall survey revealed that major food items consumed by the siblings were rice, pulses,
fish and vegetables. Food items such as meat and egg were rarely part of regular diet. Except for
pulses, no gender differences were evident in terms of types of the food items consumed. The
frequency of pulse intake was higher among brothers (11%) than sisters (4%) (p<0.01) (Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of respondents consuming different food items at least once a day by sex.
Food Items Brother (n=188)
% (n)
Sister (n=188)
% (n)
p-value
Rice 97.3 (183) 96.3 (181) 0.769
Pulses 11.2 (21) 3.7 (7) 0.010
Fish 56.4 (106) 65.4 (123) 0.090
Vegetables 61.2 (115) 61.2 (115) 0.178
Fruits 8.0 (15) 6.9 (13) 0.844
Milk 5.3 (10) 3.7 (7) 0.619
Others 15.4 (29) 13.3 (25) 0.659
Table 2 shows the mean score of the order of food intake by brothers and sisters. Brothers had a higher
mean score (0.63) compared to their sisters (0.57) for the order of morning meal intake although this
was not significant. No difference in the mean scores between brothers and sisters for noon and
evening meal was apparent (p>0.10).
Table 2. Mean score of the order of food intake.
Meal time Mean score
Brother Sister
p-value
Morning 0.63 0.57 0.09
Noon 0.58 0.60 0.50
Evening 0.53 0.53 0.89
The mean score for perceived adequacy of meal intake by brothers and sisters in shown in Table 3.
There was no significant difference between brothers and sisters in their perception of the adequacy of
food intake during morning, noon and evening meals.
Table 3. Mean score of perceived adequacy of food intake.
Meal time Mean score
Brother Sister
p-value
Morning 0.93 0.93 1.00
Noon 0.97 0.94 0.18
Evening 0.93 0.95 0.22
6
Among those that reported inadequate intake, respondents were asked to list the reasons why
this was so. The most common responses were that: not enough food was available at home,
they did not like certain food items, mothers favoured sons during food shortage and food
avoidance due to sickness. Sickness as a reason for inadequate food intake was reported
more frequently by sisters than brothers. Interestingly, 'girls should get lesser amount' as a
reason for inadequate food intake by sisters was mentioned by two brothers. The other
reasons for inadequate food intake mentioned only by sisters were: sisters favoured their
brothers, brothers got angry if not given larger share and the youngest brother should receive
a grater share (Table 4).
Table 4. Reasons for not getting adequate amount of regular food as stated by brothers
and sisters.
Reasons Brother (n=33)
% (n)
Sisters (n=36)
% (n)
Food was not adequate 60.6 (20) 47.2 (17)
Did not like the food 24.2 (8) 14.0 (5)
Mother favoured son 6.1 (2) 14.0 (5)
Felt sick 3.0 (1) 22.2 (8)
Girls should get lesser amount 6.1 (2) -
Sister favoured her brother - 5.5 (2)
Brother get angry if not given larger
share
- 8.3 (3)
Youngest brother should receive a
greater share
- 5.5 (2)
Special food: Survey results show that about 58% of the brothers and 61% of the sisters consumed
special food during the preceding three days.
Table 5. Proportion of brothers and sisters received special food.
Sibling Received special food
Yes (%) No (%)
p-value
Brother 57.5 42.5
Sister 60.6 39.4 0.53
Siblings were then asked about their perceived adequacy of special food consumption. According to
Table 6, 87.3% of the brothers and 38.4% of the sisters perceived that they consumed adequate
amounts of special foods. A similar pattern was found when the study population was categorized by
BRAC membership status. In all social groups, a significantly higher proportion of brothers compared
to their sisters stated that the amount of special food consumed by them was adequate (p<0.001)
(Table 6). The proportion of sisters who perceived that their consumption of special food was adequate
was higher in BRAC member households (40%).
7
Table 6. Distribution of siblings according to their perception on adequacy of special food intake.
Population type Brother
%
Sister
%
p-value
BRAC member 92.9 40.0 0.00
BRAC non-member 84.1 37.4 0.00
All 87.3 38.4 0.00
When sibling pairs were asked why they received inadequate special foods, the most common
response were that there was not enough food available at home and that mothers generally favoured
their sons when distributing special foods (Table7). Many sisters emphasised that brothers get angry if
they do not received a larger share of a special food item. It is not surprising to note that 36.8% of
sisters recognise and accept that they should get a lesser share of a special food compared to their
brothers.
Table 7. Reasons for not getting adequate amount of special food stated by brothers and sisters.
Reasons* Brother (n=14)
% (n)
Sisters (n=76)
% (n)
Food available is not adequate 28.6 (4) 15.8 (12)
Mothers favour sons 21.4 (3) 31.6 (24)
Brother gets angry if not given large
share
7.1 (1) 13.2 (10)
Sisters should get less food - 36.8 (28)
Youngest brother gets more food - 21.1 (16)
Other reasons 43.0 (6) 9.2 (7)
* Multiple answers were considered
Snack intake: Siblings were asked about their consumption of snacks in addition to the three major
meals. Muri (puffed rice), bread, peanuts, chanachure (fried snacks), and fruits were reported to be
the major snacks eaten by the sibling pairs regularly at home and school. There was a consistent trend of
high snack consumption by brothers than sisters across the population groups, however, the differences
were not statistically significant (p>0.10) (Table 8).
Table 8. Proportion of children taking snacks by household category and sex
Household category Brother Sister p-value
BRAC member 82.5 76.2 0.48
BRAC non-member 80.0 73.0 0.60
All 81.4 73.9 0.20
In the case of brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers were the main sources of money to buy snacks.
Some also reported that elder brothers, sisters and relatives provided money to buy snacks (Table 9).
8
Table 9. Sources of money for buying snacks
Source Brother
% (n)
Sister
% (n)
p-value
Father 54 (63) 51 (48) 0.74
Mother 31 (36) 35 (33) 0.63
Brother 6 (7) 8 (7) 0.08
Sister 1 (1) - -
Relatives 4 (4) 2 (2) 0.69
Others 4 (5) 4 (4) 1.00
Direct mealtime observation
Direct mealtime observations were performed to gain an in-depth understanding of food distribution
behaviour among food servers and consumers. Observations were made on 25 siblings in 25 households
in one selected village during a major meal. Distribution of one particular food item (i.e., curry) that was
perceived by mothers as special for that day in terms of preference, quality and price was observed in
particular.
Table 10 indicated food-serving patterns by household category and sex. For all 25 households, mothers
were food servers. The staple food was rice and curry cooked with vegetables and fish and spices.
Usually the first serving of rice and curry was served automatically by a mother without any observable
gender discrimination. However, when any one of these siblings wanted more food as a second serving,
boys were given preference. It was observed that frequency of self serving was higher among brothers
than sisters suggesting that compared to their sisters, brothers enjoy more freedom in self serving. Girl,
on the other hand, had to request a second serving more frequently than their brothers. It was also
observed that the frequency of refusal (not served when demanded) was higher in case of girls than boys,
which confirms the existence of gender bias in intra-household food distribution favouring male children
(Table 10).
Table 10. Frequency of food serving patterns by membership status and sex.
BRAC member
(n=12 HH)
BRAC non-member
(n=13 HH)
Serving pattern Total (n=50HH)
B S B S B S
Automatically served 12 12 12 13 24 25
Server asked and served - 2 1 2 1 4
Self (consumer) served 2 1 5 2 7 3
Served when demanded 6 3 2 4 8 7
Not served when
demanded
- 1 1 2 1 3
B= Brother, S=Sister
As shown in Figure 1, mealtime observations also suggested that food was not equally distributed
between boys and girls. Of the 25 households observed, an equal amount of food was served to boys
and girls 56% of households. Food was distributed more equally among boys and girl in BRAC
households (64%) compare to non-member households (17%).
9
Figure 1. Allocation of food to boys and girls at household level by BRAC membership status
64
36 37
63
56
44
0
20
40
60
80
BRAC member Non-member All
Equally distributed Favoured boys
Mothers' perception
Six FGDs were conducted in two villages to understand the food distribution behaviour of the
mothers. Among the 36 mothers that took part, only six had formal education. One mother was
involved with BRAC programme as a Shasthya shebika (SS) and all others worked in the home.
Participants were asked to discuss their role in intra-household food distribution, such as whether they
gave preference to certain people when serving meals. In general, women agreed that they had been
observing gender discrimination favouring males in food distribution from their very youth. They
reported having seen the very same practice among their mothers, mothers in law, and sisters-in-law.
They also agreed that it is likely that they will transfer these same practices to their own daughters.
Women agreed in common the practice of saving food for husbands followed by sons who were outside
the home during meal times irrespective of the total amount of food available for all household
members. They explained that it was important to maintain the good health of their husbands, as they
were the primary bread earners even if it meant depriving other household members, in most cases,
herself and her daughters, from having adequate food intake.
BRAC members emphasized that they usually did not discriminate between sons and daughters in terms
of food distribution. According to them:
“Nowadays girls also work outside home, so we give equal food to sons and daughters."
The more positive attitude of BRAC women is not surprising as they received social awareness training
through the 18 promises of BRAC. Through the promises, they learn about the importance of treating
boys and girls equally. During direct mealtime observations, it was found that compared to non-member
households, unequal food distribution occurred to a lesser degree in BRAC member households.
Nevertheless, group discussion revealed that women have yet to overcome traditional values, which give
preference to sons. According to a number of non-member women:
10
"Sons are the future security for parents and they also help their father at work so they deserve more
food."
They further added:
"The daughters are less demanding in asking for additional food."
One mother mentioned:
"If there is less food available at home and I have to choose between roti (bread) or bhat (rice) to be
served, if the roti is served to a daughter usually she does not complain. The rice has to be served to the
son or less he refuses to eat".
It should be noted that rice has higher prestige than roti in the traditional rural diets in Bangladesh. Other
mothers stated:
"Daughters finish a meal without complaining, but sons do not eat unless they are offered the best.
Sons get larger share even if there is only one type of available vegetable (shak) in the meal."
DISCUSSION
The survey revealed no significant difference in intra-household food distribution between brothers and
sisters in regular meals. Between both sexes, most report adequate food intake during regular meals.
However, in rural Bangladesh, girls generally do not disclose that they receive inadequate food due to
many complex social and cultural factors. FGDs revealed that mothers from all socioeconomic groups
give preference to sons in intra-household food distribution. Findings also revealed that sibling trend to
take their meals together. Both sisters and mothers felt that if a boy took more food he would grow-up
healthy and assist his father in income earning activities. Meal observations also indicate that if the food
cooked was not sufficient for all household members, mothers tented to serve more food to husbands
and sons. Usually her husband was given priority followed by male children. Mealtime observations
revealed that if fish was cooked boys were given a bigger share than their sisters. The children
themselves were aware of sex discrimination in intra-household food distribution. Not only did sisters
argued in favour of the existing gender differences, boys did not hesitate to disclose that at home they
get larger share of food compared to their sisters.
Sex difference were found in the consumption of special food and snacks. Special foods are cooked
occasionally, such as during religious occasions, when relatives come to visit, and during the harvesting
period. The amount of special food is usually limited in quantity. It was found that in the distribution of
special food mothers tented to give preference to sons. This is well recognised by both brothers and
sisters. Sisters from all socioeconomic classes highlighted that a brother was the future security of the
family, and they were willing to receive a lesser amount of food compared to their brothers. Mealtime
observations of food distribution behaviour and focus group discussions with the mothers also confirmed
the above findings.
In general, food distribution was found to be more equal among BRAC members although male-bias still
very prevalent in observed behaviours. Coming in expectations that greater income might result in less
gender discriminations in food distributions, observations and FGDs with relatively wealthy women
(non-eligible to participate in BRAC), yielded similar results.
11
REFERENCES
1. Jorgensen V. Poor women and health in Bangladesh, SIDA, 1983.
2. Koenig MA, D'Souza S. Sex differences and childhood mortality in rural Bangladesh. Soc Sci
Med 1986; 22: 15-22.
3. Gross DR, Underwood BA. Technological change and calorie costs: sisal agriculture in northeastern Brazil. Am Anthrop 1971; 73 : 725-40.
4. Nelson M. Distribution of nutrient intake within families. Br J Nutr 1986; 55: 267-77.
5. Deaton A. The allocation of goods within the household: adults, children, and gender. World
Bank, Living Standards Measurement Study, Working papers no 39, 1988.
6. Taha SA. Household food consumption in five villages in the Sudden. Ecol Food Nutr 1978;
7: 137-42.
7. Chen LC, Huq E, D'souza S. Sex bias in the family allocation of food and healthcare in rural
Bangladesh. Pop Dev Rev 1988; 7:55 - 70
8. Engel PL, Nieves I. Intra- household food distribution among Guatemalan families in
supplementary feeding program: behavior pattern. Soc Sci Med 1993; 36:1605 -12.
9. Gittelsohn J. Opening the box: Intra-household food allocation in rural Nepal. Soc Sci Med Vol
No 10, 1991; 33: 1141-54.
10. Abdullah M, Wheeler EF. Seasonal variations and the intrahousehold distribution of food in a
Bangladeshi village. Am J Clin Nutr1985;41:1305-13.
11. Chowdhury M, Bhuiya A. Effects of socioeconomic development on health status and
human well-being: determining impact and exploring pathways of change. BRACICDDR,B joint research project, Working paper 6, 1995.
12. Roy RD, and Hyder SMZ Pilot study on intrahousehold food distribution in a rural area
of Bangladesh. BRAC, RED, 1996.
13. Khatun M, MCkin A, Tarannum S, et al. Socioeconomic development and human wellbeing: seasonal survey report on nutrition: first round. BRAC-ICDDR,B joint research
project, 1996.
14. The health aspects of food and nutrition 3rd ed Manila World Health Organization,
Regional Office for the Western Pacific 1979.
Working Papers of the
BRAC-ICDDR,B Joint Research Project at Matlab
1. The impact of social and economic development programme on health and well-being: a BRACICCDR,B collaborative project in Matlab -- Abbas Bhuiya and Mushtaque Chowdhury, 1995
2. Assessing change in women's lives: a conceptual framework -- Marty Chen and Simeen
Mahmud, 1995
3. Unpacking the black box: studying the relationship between socioeconomic development and
health -- Ian Scott, Tim Evans and Richard Cash, 1995
4. Formation of village organizations: the first three months -- Manzurul Mannan, Mushtaque
Chowdhury, Abbas Bhuiya and Masud Rana, 1995
5. Participatory methods to assess change in health and women's lives: an exploratory study --
Alayne Adams, Rita Das Roy and Amina Mahbub, 1995
6. Effects of socioeconomic development on health status and human well-being: determining
impact and exploring pathways of change: proposals for phase II of the BRAC-ICCDR,B
Matlab joint project 1996-2000 AD - Mushtaque Chowdhury, Abbas Bhuiya, Partrick Vaughan,
Alayne Adams and Simeen Mahmud, 1995
7. Profitability of BRAC-financed projects: a study of seven micro enterprises in Matlab --Hassan
Zaman, Saima Rahman, Shahed Hussain and Masud Rana. 1995
8. An inside look at two BRAC schools in Matlab -- Sabina Rashid, Mushtaque Chowdhury and
Abbas Bhuiya, 1995
9. Problems of women-headed households -- Naomi Hussain and Samiha Huda, 1995
10. A qualitative exploration of some socioeconomic issues in south Uddomdi, Matlab -- Amina
Mahbub, Maliha Mayeed and Rita Das Roy, 1995
11. Vulnerable of the vulnerables: the situation of divorced, abandoned and widowed women in a
rural area of Bangladesh -- Mehnaaz Momen. Abbas Bhuiya and Mushtaque Chowdhury, 1995
12. Micro credit programmes: who participates and to what extent? -- Hassan Zaman, 1996
13. An assessment of client's knowledge of family planning in Matlab -- Hashima-E-Nasreen,
Mushtaque Chowdhury, Abbas Bhuiya, AKM Masud Rana and Indrani Pieris-caldwell, 1996
14. Cultural construction of health and the institutional measures of change in rural Bangladesh: the
cases of the BRAC village organization and the ICDDR,B MCH-FP programmes in the selected
villages of Matlab --Monirul Islam Khan, Abbas Bhuiya and Mushtaque Chowdhury, 1996
15. Studies on the inputs of BRAC in Matlab: sanitary latrines, training, monthly meetings, legal
awareness and credit -- Sadhana Biswas, Syed Masud Ahmed, Sharmin Mahbuh, Manzurul
Mannan, Shahriar R Khan, Mahmuda Rahman Khan, Masud Rana, Samiha Huda, Shahed
Hussain and Karen Moore, 1996
16. Perspective of women about their own illness -- Amina Mahbub, Syed Masud Ahmed 1997
17. An inventory of the development programmes in the selected unions of Matlab by
Governmentand non-Goverment organizations (excluding BRAC and ICDDR,B) -- Monirul
Islam Khan, Mushtaque Chowdhury and Abbas Bhuiya, 1997
18. Poverty and BRAC's Microcredit Programme: Exploring some linkages – Hassan Zaman, 1997
19. Two studies on the impact of Meghna-Dhonagoda flood control, drainage and irrigation project,
1997
20. An Emic towards well-being – Amina Mahbub, Rita Das Roy, 1997
21. Three studies on HIV/AIDS, 1998
22. Two studies on Health care-seeking behaviour and Household sanitation practices of BRAC
member and non-member households in Matlab, Bangladesh – Syed Masud Ahmed, Mushtaque
Chowdhury, Abbas Bhuiya, 1998
23. Psychological well-being of rural women: developing measurement tools – Mohsina Khatun,
Nasreen Wadud, Abbas Bhuiya, Mushtaque Chowdhury 1998
24. Participation in BRAC's Rural Development Programme and the impact of group dynamics on
individual outcomes – Simeen Mahmud, Samiha Huda, 1998
![[Flag of Bangladesh]](https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/b/bd.gif)
