1

WORK INTENSITY, GENDERAND

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Richard Palmer-Jones and Cecile Jackson

School of Development Studies

University of East Anglia

03/05/96

Abstract:

Is labour intensive employment compatible with social justice andenvironmental sustainability? This paper examines the question of how far smallscale, intermediate technology based on energy intensive human work, which iscentral to prescriptions for poverty alleviation and sustainable development, iscompatible with development objectives emphasising gender equity. Workintensity is a neglected characteristic of labour but significant in thedetermination of human well-being and in the intrahousehold distribution ofwelfare. The intensification of energy expenditure does not affect men andwomen in a uniform way and needs to be gender disaggregated in order toreveal potential tradeoffs between development strategies based upon 'labourintensive growth' and the well-being of men and women. The paper draws uponthe experience with treadle pumps for irrigation in Bangladesh as an illustrationof such a potential tradeoffs and argues for more rigorous analyses of genderdivisions of labour which include work intensity in combination with timeallocation.

1

Introduction:

This paper is motivated by concerns, arising from policy interests and observations, that many innovative approaches

to poverty alleviation and sustainable development emphasise labour intensive technologies, but in a number of cases

these technologies are not sustainable in the marketplace. Nevertheless the literature continues to advocate these

technologies and development projects continue to support them and claim success for their efforts. However, a

crucial dimension to employment is neglected in these prescriptions; we need to make a distinction between time

intensive and effort intensive technologies and employment, and, when this is done it becomes clear that employment

technologies have to be analysed more rigorously taking particular account of their effort intensity and gendered

impact. Effort intensive technologies are unlikely to be popular and may not be useful contributors to either poverty

alleviation, sustainable development, or gender equity. Work intensity is a significant but neglected feature of work

activities which promises to illuminate important social phenomena and policy questions, e.g. how mortality and

morbidity are related to work and what are the underpinnings of gender divisions of labour. It may help to resolve

choices of technology scale, power source, and ownership of new technologies.

This paper will discuss the issues of the intensity of work done by different genders amongst the poor who are

particularly dependent on energy intensive livelihood strategies, with particular emphasis on how men and women

experience peaks and distribution of energy expenditure, the productivity of their work, and the control of income and

expenditure. It draws attention to the well-being outcomes and the implications of these for poverty alleviation and

environmental policy. The paper is structured as follows: first we summarise familiar arguments for labour intensive

growth as a means of poverty alleviation and sustainable development. Next we present some material on a particular

case of employment intensive technology, the treadle pump for irrigation, in the context of Bangladesh, which

appears to fit well with these prescriptions, and then offer a reading of recent nutritional and economic theories of

work and well-being which bear on the issues of work intensity which we raise. Finally we draw out some

implications for gender analysis, and poverty alleviation and sustainable development. We conclude that nutritional

and economic theory and empirical findings support the notion that effort intensive employment is of ambiguous

benefit and may actually harm at least some members of households.

2

Poverty Alleviation, Sustainable Development, and Gender

Poverty reduction, gender equity, and sustainability are important objectives for development (UNDP, 1995).

The widely accepted 'new poverty agenda' entails employment intensive growth, self-targeted social security

and welfare policies and projects (World Bank, 1990, UNDP, 1990, Lipton and Maxwell, 1992, Lipton and

van der Gaag, 1993). In poor societies much of the envisaged employment will be 'effort intensive', and the

'labour test' is one of the key methods of self-targeting of social security, and will almost necessarily involve

effort intensive activities, for example earth moving.

Many of the linkages assumed in the so called 'Washington Consensus’ on a 'New Poverty Agenda', adopted by the

World Bank and many bilateral development agencies, are poorly understood. Here we explore some of the processes

involved, and begin to integrate a gender analysis (of both men and women) into the policy debates surrounding the

New Poverty Agenda. The case for labour intensive growth is generally taken as self evident by this consensus for

areas of apparent labour abundance such as the densely settled rural areas of Bangladesh, but we would like to

examine more closely the extent to which different kinds of labour (more or less arduous and energy intensive) and

their gender/class distribution might cast a different light on this self-evident truth. Our argument is placed in the

context of Bangladesh because of its regional concentration of poverty, and because labour intensive approaches to

poverty reduction, which we question, have been taken for granted in such labour-abundant rural economies.

The emphasis on sustainability often involves an implication of reduced reliance on non-renewable sources of

energy and intermediate technology both of which may involve increased exertion of human energy. In poor

rural societies this may mean increased reliance on human energy for livelihoods as use of fossil fuel intensive

mechanical or electrical power and agro-chemicals are de-emphasised. Also, environmental degradation can

have serious effects on the well-being of the poor through (a) increasing the burden of work (greater time and

effort to collect water or firewood) and reducing the return to effort (through lower productivity of land, water,

and so on), and (b) deterioration in the health environment (pollution). Adaptations and remedies are often

effort intensive.

Recent analyses of poverty and the environment have emphasised the dependence of the poor on the environment,

their vulnerability to its degradation, and in particular the way poverty drives rural people to over-exploit natural

resources (Leach and Mearns nd, Broad, 1994). Synergistic or 'win-win' opportunities have therefore been perceived

3

in policies which reduce poverty by promoting labour intensive employment and thereby relieving pressure on natural

resources. Such an approach has considerable similarity with the 'eco-Narodism' of many advocates of appropriate

technology (Martinez-Alier, 1987). Such authors tend to take for granted the ecological friendliness of 'traditional' or

'indigenous' natural resource management practices (e.g. Banuri and Apffel-Marglin 1993). They also often assert a

synergy between women and the environment, and imply that promoting women's interests and increasing their

participation will contribute to sustainability (e.g. Dankelman and Davidson 1988). Whilst not entering into these

debates directly we would like to examine the outcomes of scale of technology 'choices' at the household level and

suggest that if human energy based appropriate technology does not improve the well being of women then the

assumed environmental benefits may be uncertain at least.

Energy accounting has been used to show that peasant farming systems are more energy efficient than the fossil fuel

dependent agriculture of the West, and sustainable development thinking emphasises low external input approaches

to agricultural development (Reijntes et al. 1992). Fossil fuels are non-renewable and contribute to global climate

change, and are seen as less environment friendly than renewable energy sources, including human energy.

Traditional farming systems are often admired in this context because of their low dependence on external inputs, and

modern agriculture is seen as less environmentally benign. However the claim (Barbier 1987) that energy efficient

smallholder systems are also equity-enhancing and socially just is, in our view, questionable. Here we use a gender

analysis of water pumping technologies in Bangladesh to examine this proposition.

The appropriate technology movement which developed in the 1970s out of the work of Schumacher in particular

(1973) has, in parallel, emphasised the environmental credentials of small scale technologies; in a discussion of the

characteristics of appropriate technology (viz. Stewart, 1987, p 3). In addition to the emphasis on small scale

technology from environmentalists there is a convergence of opinion favouring small scale technology in development

policy.

Perhaps the most common plank on which the claim that women are disadvantaged in society is based is the

argument that, when domestic labour is properly accounted for, women contribute more hours of work than

men and yet suffer significant economic, social and political disabilities (UNDP, 1995). In part this relates to

the nature of women's work in the household or other unpaid work, while men's work is publicly recognised.

4

Most empirical studies on the burden of work are based on time allocation studies and neglect other

characteristics of work, in particular the effort involved in work, or work intensity.

Together, the promotion of labour intensive growth, sustainable production systems, appropriate technology

and greater recognised employment for women, may result in significant increases in the burden of work,

especially for women, without significantly improving many aspects of the environment whose deterioration is

driven by consumption in developed countries rather than poverty in less developed ones.

An example of the dilemmas in technology choice posed by gender analysis is illustrated by the debate about the

welfare effects of mechanised grain milling in Asia. Crudely, some have seen this as negative on the grounds of the

employment displacing effects on poor women (e.g. Harriss, 1979 for Bangladesh) and have argued for small scale

intermediate technology approaches to milling (Ahmad and Jenkins, 1989). Although never a complete consensus

(Greeley, 1983), over the years since mechanised milling was introduced in 70s, this view has undergone a quiet re-

evaluation (e.g. White, 1992, Lewis, 1991) since such mills have proven accessible to and popular with all women

(including the poor) for their ability to reduce drudgery. This illustrates the possible problems with the focus on

'labour intensive growth' in the New Poverty Agenda, for small scale technology is not always positive for women. An

improved understanding of the objective and perceived costs of energy intensive work will allow better decision

making by institutions concerned with technical change.

Labour Time and Effort

Labour endowments are central to the well-being of the poor (Sen, 1981, Dasgupta, 1993) and assumptions about

labour allocation within households are also central to a great many development interventions, yet we still work with

the simple notion of time inputs as a proxy for both these phenomena (Dixon-Mueller, 1985). In earlier gender

scholarship work on divisions of labour has been dominated by a large number of time input studies, which despite

their variations are generally glossed as showing that crudely 'women do most of the work'. The study of time

allocation has made a major contribution to conceptual understandings of how livelihoods and well-being are

gendered and the implications of these studies for health and population policies have been recognised (McGuire and

Popkin, 1988) in both bilateral and multilateral programmes.

5

Where the distinction between time and effort is acknowledged the discussion often emphasises the additional

burden faced by women; for example:

'[i]t is not just the quantity of time but the intensity of effort (and its drudgery) that are also important

- though missing - dimensions.... With time a scarce resource relative to the tasks that need to be

done, the frequent alternative is to heighten the intensity of work. This is particularly the problem

among poor women. .. Conventional measures of well-being, which focus on the production of

goods and services, neglect this debilitating aspect of intense work. A human development perspective

cannot afford to overlook it.' (UNDP, 1995:90-1)

However, the authors of the Human Development Report go on to present the results of time use studies, equate

time with burden, and conclude:

'Several features of the total time women and men spend in market and non-market activities are

worth noting from the 13 surveys .. The overall burden of work varies ... women work longer hours

than men in all countries. .. Of the total burden of work, women carry 53% and men 47% .. '

(ibid:91-2; the text continues in this vein)

The use of time-allocation alone to assess differences in the burden of work by gender, and in calculations of

well-being, is probably inadequate where physical or management intensity, discomfort, or the social relations

of work affect the experience of work. The limited empirical assessments of physical work intensity suggest

that some poor rural men frequently engage in more effort intensive activities and exert more effort per day on

average, than women, that the burden of effort of men is greater in relation to their food energy intake than

that of women, and that adult men are more wasted than women (see further below, and Gillespie and

McNeill, 1992, Kynch, 1994). The burden of work is not just a matter of energy balance; the repetitiveness,

posture, pace and intervals of activity and rest are also significant. The simultaneous execution of several

activities may also contribute to work intensity, and is often seen as a particular feature of women's work:

'[W]omen in particular have developed a facility for juggling many activities at once, such as

carrying a child while sweeping up or washing clothes while cooking food' (UNDP, 1995: 90).

6

But this does not establish that such patterns or work are more effort intensive or stressful, although this may

be the case, and it is relatively straightforward to model the way in which increasing the incidence of multiple

activities is induced by poverty and is associated with reduced well-being (Floro, 1995)1. There is a real need

for further research on the gendered work experiences of the poor in order to better understand relationships

between labour and well-being (c.f. Thompson, 1967).

We will now look at the case of treadle pumps for irrigation in Bangladesh as an example of how sustainable

development based on human energy technologies can negatively affect the well-being of the poor, and of women in

particular; in this case study the effort characteristic of work plays a central role.

Pumps and power in rural Bangladesh:

This section briefly reviews agricultural growth and poverty alleviation in Bangladesh in relation to technology

choices over recent decades. This indicates that the two main technologies - larger scale Deep Tubewells (DTW) and

manually powered irrigation (MOSTI) - promoted in the development literature have been marginal to the notable

achievements in both areas; the main sources of growth and poverty alleviation have been medium scale mechanically

powered Shallow Tubewells (STW). This serves as a background to a discussion of the gendered experience of

irrigation technologies.

Since the late 1970s agricultural growth in Bangladesh has exceeded expectations by a wide margin, and has been

associated with substantial reduction in absolute poverty, although much remains to be done (Palmer-Jones, 1992;

Rahman and Hossain, 1992). Water control - groundwater based irrigation in particular - has driven agricultural

growth Most of the growth of irrigation has been due to the spread of privately owned Shallow Tubewells (STWs)

(Palmer-Jones, 1992). Bangladesh has achieved staple food self sufficiency and reduced absolute poverty (Rahman

and Hossain, 1992) through increased own food production by small farmers and increased and improved seasonal

availability of rural employment at non-decreasing (probably increasing) real wages (Palmer-Jones 1993, 1994, Wood

and Palmer-Jones, 1991).

However, it has been and still is argued that STWs are inappropriate for the labour abundant factor proportions in

Bangladesh and the agrarian structure characterised by numerous very small farms with high degrees of plot

1 Floro does not address other forms of intensification of work besides multi-tasking, and does not really

7

fragmentation, and significant tenancy, landlessness and inequality (Jansen, 1979, Hannah, 1976, Boyce, 1987, Orr et

al. 1991). Adopting widely held views about the causes of poverty in eastern India (Bhaduri, 1973, Rogaly et al, 1995)

the agrarian structure has been widely presumed to be an obstacle to agricultural growth because of the

incompatibility between such a structure and the requirements of mechanical irrigation for larger amounts of

contiguous land under an individual's control to achieve a minimum economic scale of STW. Arguments made

familiar in the critique of the Green Revolution (Griffen, 1974, Pearce, 1981) have been widely arrayed against

private ownership of STW, especially in Eastern India, namely that they would be adopted only by (relatively few)

larger farmers, would increase social differentiation and absolute poverty; only larger farmers would invest in STWs,

and to the extent that water was sold for use on neighbouring plots, this would be on monopolistic and exploitive

terms; landlessness would increase, and land would be less efficiently cultivated by the larger farmers (Jansen, 1979,

Boyce, 1987). These arguments are still being debated (Rogaly et al., 1995).

Reformist policy responses to this dilemma, for example by the World Bank (World Bank, 1982), were on the one

hand cooperative management of Deep Tubewells (DTWs), which would ensure efficient and equitable distribution of

water and optimum exploitation of the groundwater resource, and on the other hand manual irrigation - Manually

Operated Tubewells for Irrigation or MOSTI - which was compatible, it was argued (Howes, 1985), in scale and

factor proportions to the small plot sizes and abundant labour. STWs were promoted by the World Bank but it was not

expected that they would be the dominant technology as only the minority of farmers who had sufficient land in one

location would find them economic. However, STW numbers have increased from some 40,000 at the beginning of

the 1970s to 340,000 in 1993, and account for most of the increase in irrigated area and production (GoB, 1993).

Cooperative and other innovative institutional forms for the management of DTWs, including the various NGO

sponsored landless owned irrigation projects (Wood and Palmer-Jones, 1991, von Koppen and Mahmud, 1995) and

the commercially managed Grameen Bank initiated DTW project, have all failed to be sustainable when subsidies

are removed. The new DTW technologies promoted in the World Bank's latest minor irrigation project have also met

with little success.

MOSTI, which are lever operated by hand, turned out to be both more labour and more capital intensive than STWs,

but a new approach to human energy based irrigation technology emerged in the 1980s when the Treadle Pump (TP)

explain why multi-tasking might be restricted to women.

8

was introduced. Its steady development has resulted in large numbers being bought and used for irrigation, although

the overall area irrigated is still very small compared to STWs. The TP is foot operated and economises on effort

compared to MOSTI and is also cheaper in relation to its potential command area (Orr et al. 1991), and hence is

strongly promoted in some quarters as an appropriate technology, especially for small and marginal farmers, in the

fragmented farm structure of Bangladesh (SDE and IDE, nd).

Treadle pump enthusiasts envisage that the poor and marginal farmers, and even the landless who can rent in land,

'equipped with Treadle Pumps' could produce 50% of Bangladesh's food grain requirements' (SDE and IDE nd, pp5)

and one NGO promoting the treadle pump cites a Bangladesh Rice Research Institute study (1987/8) to conclude that

the treadle pump 'is a good example of appropriate technology for small farmers' (Orr et al 1991,p74). The TP was

observed to increase cropping intensity and the use of family labour which was found to contribute 70% of pumping

labour (op. cit. p 74). Although the TP is easier to operate than the MOSTI which preceded it similar problems of

effort intensity remain.

The operation of hand pumps was criticised by Mandal who observed that 'it is not practically possible for a single

man to pump uninterruptedly for more than 3-4 hours for several days in succession... I have observed that three or

even four labourers are required alternately to pump a tubewell day and night' (Mandal, 1978, pp112-3). The

involvement of women in MOSTI was seen to be unproblematic by some; thus, Jansen remarks that since women

traditionally pump and carry drinking water from the hand pumps they have also become involved in pumping for

irrigation, and he anticipates that 'much income can be earned by women through operating the handpumps'

(1979:80). The question of which family members do the TP work has received little explicit attention and is not clear

from the published literature. For example, Orr et al. (1991) present technical and economic assessment of the TP

(discharge rates and economic returns) in terms of an average male operator, even though the text reports that all

family members operate the pumps and the photograph on the cover shows a woman operator.

Environmental considerations have played an important part in attempts to influence the choice of groundwater

technology in Bangladesh; throughout the 1970s and 1980s experts anticipated pervasive watertable drawdowns and

advocated Deep Tubewells (DTW) and control of siting of DTW and STW, and other water extraction mechanisms

(WEM). The DTW promoted in Bangladesh by groundwater development experts, as elsewhere in Asia, were

larger capacity (2 cusec) force mode mechanisms; the arguments in favour of this technology were based on (a)

9

supposed technical efficiency (b) social appropriateness. Larger capacity DTW have lower costs per unit of

water at the well-head; when combined with either cooperative ownership or management by a state agency it

was assumed that DTW would be able to overcome the barriers posed by the agrarian structure. Neither

assumption has turned out to be appropriate (Palmer-Jones, 1995). Control of the siting of STW and of DTW

was supported by the need to regulate groundwater extraction to avoid over-abstraction (and to prevent the

emergence of ‘water lords’). In 1983 a panic occured as discharge from a number of STW in some parts of the

north-west of Bangladesh reduced and some ceased operation altogether; this turned out to be a relatively

isolated occurrence due to early cessation of the monsoon in 1982. Such a rainfall pattern is likely to be

infrequent and largely confined to the extreme west of Bangladesh; the panic owed much to political economy

factors especially hostility to market processes generally rationalised by critiques of agricultural

commercialisation on equity and poverty alleviation grounds, and to resistance by state bureaucracies to loss of

their constituencies to the private sector.

Controls on groundwater exploitation for agriculture were withdrawn in 1986 and this was followed by

dramatic expansion of STW based groundwater irrigation leading to a sort of food self-sufficiency in

Bangladesh by 1991. Nevertheless fear of groundwater drawdowns has recurred frequently and been associated

with calls for reintroduction of controls on STW siting in particular. Inter-year groundwater drawdowns have

occurred only infrequently and, in limited areas; indigenous adaptation of STW to seasonal drawdowns in the water

table have been made in the form of ‘deep-setting’. Many hand-pumps used for domestic water sources experience

seasonal water table drawdown problems as water tables dropped below suction limits, but access to still functioning

domestic water sources and the installation deep-set hand pumps has largely resolved these problems.

Other environmental problems associated with the wide spread of dry season groundwater based irrigation have been

more talked about than studied in detail (Khan, 1988, Pagiola, 1995).; drying up of surface water sources damaging

fisheries, vegetation, water born transportation and so on, declining productivity on double and triple cropped land,

health problems associated with agro-chemicals use, and so on depend mainly on the area of dry season irrigated rice

cultivated rather than the technology of irrigation, and the same problems would occur whether the irrigation source

was STW or TP. Of course, use of non-renewable fossil fuel and atmospheric pollution by pumping by mechanically

powered WEM is a difference between these technologies, but offsetting this is the calorie and other effort related

10

costs of the heavy and continuous pumping required by the TP. Use of the TP to irrigate the area currently irrigated by

STW would entail a massive increase in the use of human effort both through a scale effect and because it is likely

that present use of the TP is in areas with lower lifts and more favourable soil conditions so that the effort required on

much of the area currently STW irrigated would be greater than on presently TP irrigated areas. Such an agricultural

system is unlikely to occur when STW, fossil fuels and agro-chemicals are available at world prices even in such a

labour abundant country as Bangladesh, and, to the extent that preference for the TP was induced by altering these

prices, it would, as we have suggested, hardly constitute development.

Another environment related argument needs to be considered, namely the relation between development and

population growth; it is not implausible that effort intensive low productivity production systems (such as TP irrigated

rice) are associated with high fertility regimes since in these systems children become net producers at an early age

(Cain, 1977, Dasgupta, 1993, 1995). Improvements in well-being related to rapid spread of STW may facilitate

fertility transition, while effort dependent TP might maintain incentives for large families. In fact the evidence

worldwide, and from Bangladesh is not conclusive that it is changing economic systems that leads to fertility

transition (Cleland and Wilson, 1987, Cleland et al. 1994), and any conclusion on our part about what might happen

under alternative irrigation technology choices in Bangladesh would be speculative.

The next section explores questions of how the efforts entailed in the use of STW and TP are articulated by users, and

how intra-household processes appear to respond to these technologies, and distribute work intensity and well-being.

Reflections from the Field

How well do the concerns rehearsed above stand up to field investigations? A recent research visit to Lalmonirhat in

northern Bangladesh, provides support (see also RDRS, nd). The visit was facilitated by an NGO which had been

prominent in the development of the TP; its main activities, which are very similar to those of other rural

development NGOs in Bangladesh (Wood and Palmer-Jones, 1991, von Koppen and Mahmud, 1995), were to

facilitate the formation of small (single sex) groups of poor people for education, savings, and support in livelihood

activities. Ownership of TPs and latterly STWs had been promoted by the NGO. Interviews were conducted with

male and female group members about their evaluations of the TP and STWs. The households interviewed included

people who owned TPs and used them for rice or homestead vegetable production (sometimes both), and people who

did treadle pumping work for wages; they also included members of male and female groups which owned STW

11

through credit support from the NGO as well as members of groups and other poor households who purchased STW

water. Households in groups which owned STWs might purchase STW irrigation water for plots not covered by their

STW, and, or use TPs on some plots or on their homestead.

It was widely acknowledged that women do significantly more TP labour than men in most cases in this area,

although both men and women could be employed for wages on the treadle pump and it was particularly likely to be

the very poor, including female heads of household, who did TP work for wages, sometimes as part of a long term

employment relationship with a richer household (very similar to much manual rice husking employment). Women

reported (in the interview context) a strong preference for working within the homestead because of the cultural

disapproval of working outside under the gaze of men. Thus a very poor woman, who was the head of her household

with two children, was prepared to treadle all day in the season within the homestead of her permanent employers for

around 8 Taka per day even though she could have sought agricultural labour at 16 Taka per day. The situation was

somewhat less constrained for Hindu women compared to Muslim women since the taboo on being seen outside the

homestead was less, and, as members of very poor, marginalised communities the need of Hindu women to engage in

work (waged or household) outside the homestead was greater.

Some men (and a few women) suggested that the TP was easy to work and did not involve serious exhaustion or pain,

of short or long duration, either for themselves or for women, but others said that continuous treadling was not

possible and reported joint and muscle pain after treadling. Women initially were reluctant to talk about the

difficulties of their livelihood activities, but, on closer questioning, asserted that the TP did involve serious exhaustion

and pain which lasted for months even after the end of the TP season. One commonly encountered pattern was for

married women to do the treadling very early in the morning before doing domestic work and then again after dark.

Many remarked that their domestic work suffered when treadling was required. One group of women at Tajpur

explained that while some treadlers can rest for some time between bouts of several hours of treadling, by working

with another person who distributes the water and pumps in rotation, others work at it all day.

When women have to leave the homestead to operate TP, children are left with older siblings if available, otherwise

they are taken to the pumping site and women expressed unhappiness with the consequent neglect of their children

and risk of their ill health. Their worries included the likelihood of poor nutrition of infants when lactating mothers

experience reduced milk production when treadling. Some women asserted that men did not acknowledge the effort

12

involved and made no compensating allowances for their wives' increased work loads. Other women stated to the

contrary that their husbands did acknowledge the extra efforts and would themselves operate the TP, or would take

up domestic labour `that they could do', such as sweeping, washing, and feeding children in order to give them time to

pump. Women said that they lose weight and feel weak when treadling regularly and experience exhaustion and pains

in hands, legs, back, buttocks and feet. They also have special difficulties with treadling when pregnant or

menstruating. The recurrent phrases used by women about treadling were 'a painful business', 'continuous pain',

'immense pain'. Women viewed the treadling as the hardest work they had to do and said that although men do help

from time to time this is rare because 'they have their own work to do'.

Women varied in their reactions to this situation. One woman remarked that they do not like to admit to tiredness and

pain 'but it is there'; another said of treadling that 'people do these difficult things for their families', and a third that 'it

is tiring and painful, but what is to be done?' For these women treadling was part of a livelihood system and division

of labour which was not seen as exploitative. But not all women were as accepting as this - one exclaimed that

'Poor families are hungry ... how can you be expected to go for paddling [treadling]? It is inhuman! After

paddling we feel very hungry, we need more feeding, men do not understand anything, if his stomach is full

he is happy. Men try to use women like slaves for working!'

Respondents reported that exhaustion was especially likely if pumping was done for rice cultivation, since this

involved long periods of pumping most days, for weeks at a time, while homestead gardening involved only a few

hours on intermittent days. But it is women who treadle for wages who suffer most. One such woman was a widow

with two daughters to support who treadles all day, for Rs16, over an 8 month period and who reported continuous

pain which made it difficult for her to do even routine household tasks.

The NGO involved with promoting the TP had come to appreciate at least to some degree the effort and gender

problems entailed by using the treadle pump for staple food production; it recommend that women may be assisted by

children, and children should work the TP in pairs which reflects a recognition that women are likely to have

difficulty with the TP which has been designed around the weight and strength of an average male. It recommended

that the TP was used for homestead farming rather than staple food production. However, it had not gone so far as to

suggest that if the TP is to be used mainly by women it should be designed for a lower average power requirement

(although it was not unreceptive to this idea). Subsequent to this fieldwork RDRS conducted its own investigation

13

which came to broadly similar conclusions about the importance of household labour on the TP, its effort intensive

nature, conflict over the allocation of this work and control over its products, and differences between households in

these allocations (RDRS, nd). It also drew attention to differences in mechanical efficiency between TP designs.

Comparison with STW

The TP enables the poor to control the irrigation technology themselves, in particular the supply of water to their

crops; but the implications of the TP for different household members depends on the terms of access to markets.

Thus rice produced with the TP is controlled by men in the first instance, and vegetables produced by women which

are 'surplus' to household requirements are generally sold through men. STW water requires either cooperation with

other poor households in a group under the control of an NGO, or access through a market, which involves

possibilities of strategic vulnerabilities.

Respondents provided vigorous discussions of the relative merits of STWs and TPs. The TP was seen by both men

and women as being helpful, although hard work, in providing an assured supply of water under direct control of the

cultivator and thereby reducing the transaction costs of negotiations with water sellers, about the supplies of water

through group or `market' channels. The STW supplied more water, and more rice, at much less physical effort,

compared to the effort intensity of TPs. However, depending on the source of working capital, there were greater risks

involved in relying on STW water due to the cash intensity of the STW2, and, if the STW was not owned by the

group, to a perceived vulnerability of water buyers to the whims of water sellers3.

Management of group owned STWs was done mainly by men even in the Hindu women's group, and hence, access to

the product of STW water was through men, husbands in particular. This was not seen as a problem, although one

women group leader emphasised the need for supervision of the pump operator (who was the husband of another

group member). Women were not strong enough to start the diesel motors or carry them to the field, and going to the

2 Payment for STW water was generally by a fixed charge in cash per unit area (varying by crop) representinga rental charge for the equipment, which would be paid either in a lump sum at the beginning of the irrigationseason or in several instalments with the final instalment sometimes made after harvest. Fuel would beprovided by the cultivator. Repairs, maintenance and lubrication were the responsibility of the equipmentowners. Other cash costs - for seed, fertiliser, labour, tillage, pesticides and so on - were similar between ricegrown under STW and TP. The net effect however was to increase considerably the cash exposure of thosebuying STW water compared to those using their own labour with a TP.3 This may in part be related to the relatively recent development of water markets in this area compared to areaswhere STW spread earlier, although this needs empirical assessment.

14

field for STW and water management, and rice cultivation would conflict with household responsibilities, homestead

based work, and cultural preconceptions. Control of the product did not arise as a problem - more rice produced by the

household enhanced everyone's well-being - and the nutritional value of vegetables produced with TPs were well

known. Male control of rice produced in the field compared to vegetables produced on homestead plots by women

was not singled out as a problem of the STW, even though women often controlled the income from sales of 'surplus'

vegetables (mainly through men taking the vegetables to market), although differences in male and female

expenditure patterns were noted disapprovingly (women spending more on household and child requirements).

Ownership of the STW by a female group did not seem to yield superior benefits to female household members, either

in terms of control of production or income, compared to ownership of the STW by a men's group. In two STW

owning women's groups the fixed charge for STW use made to people outside the group was not levied on members.

The loan repayments were met out of women's savings from other activities. Women said that the extra rice produced

mainly by men with irrigation from their STWs increased their (women's) security and enabled them to increase their

income earning activities; men's assistance in these other activities (as input and output marketing intermediaries)

was also acknowledged (more extensive discussion of the impact on women of groundwater irrigation, which is

broadly in line with these findings, is given in von Koppen and Mahmud, 1995).

The experiences reported by women and men of the treadle pump, and their comparisons of this technology with

STW, supports the argument that effort is an important factor in the evaluation of these technologies, and that intra-

household processes, strongly influenced by social identities, play an important role in distributing the burdens and

benefits of their adoption. The TP involves considerable additional burdens, the significance of which depends on the

categories of people who do most of the work, and also on gendered perceptions of the nature of this work. Both

processes of allocation and assessment of work, and of the control and distribution of the products of that work vary

between households and, it appears, between social categories (Hindu/Muslim, ultra poor, poor, and so on). This

highlights the need to take work intensity seriously in attempts to understand household mediated development

interventions.

We now explore some theoretical literature pertinent to connections between work intensity and well-being, and draw

attention to some implications for research and policy.

15

Divisions of Labour, Effort Intensity and Well-being

We wish to assess the impact on the well-being of people of changes in activities and consumption due to

interventions - technologies or employments - suggested by the policy criteria of ‘labour intensive growth’ and

sustainability, where these interventions are also ‘effort intensive’. In particular we would like to make comparisons

of well-being between men and women in households which adopt alternative technologies such as the treadle pump,

and to see how such comparisons are represented in the cognitive world and intra-household bargaining of these

people. Work and work intensity are among the topics that are prominent in household level evaluations of well-

being. Do the returns to individuals from their efforts in intensive employment make them on balance better off? Do

some members of a household do relatively better than others when such employment is adopted, and how does this

compare with the impacts of other technologies and employments? How do the achieved nutritional and health

statuses of different household members at different stages in their life reflect contributions, deserts, entitlements,

capabilities, tastes, and bargaining powers? Our observations of the TP and STW in northern Bangladesh suggest that

these technologies have very different implications for work and well-being, and, relevant to our interest in effort

intensive employment, allocations of burdens and consumption following adoption of the TP are contentious within

households.

The measurement of individual well-being is conceptually and empirically difficult (Elster and Roemer, 1991);

the traditional approach of economists focusing on income or command over goods is clearly inadequate; at the

individual level there is much to recommend the capabilities approach which suggests that well-being can be

measured by the things you can do4 (Sen, 1979, UNDP, 1995, Nussbaum and Glover, 1995, Nussbaum and

Sen, 1993; but see Lipton and Ravallion, 1995: 2566-7). What is to count as ‘doing’ is broadly conceived, but

it includes both the quantity and quality of life - longevity, health, control of assets, participation in decision-

making, autonomy, self respect, and so on. By many of these indicators men do much better than women (Sen,

1990, UNDP, 1995), but it is not clear how well this assessment deals with issues of work intensity5.

4 Other common systems for evaluating welfare are basic needs (Streeten et al. 1981) and physical quality oflife Morris, 1979).5 Thus, one of the paradoxes of this modern understanding of gender disparities in well-being is the stubbornadvantage women have in terms of longevity notwithstanding the apparent disadvantage they experience inmany other spheres. The advantages in longevity of certain nations, or classes in society has become an

16

Much of the work on this aspect of well-being has been conducted in two rather separate spheres, the nutrition-health

area, recently summarised in Payne and Lipton (1994; see also Latham, 1993, Waterlow, 1992, Shetty and James,

1994), and economics (Dasgupta, 1993, Strauss, 1993, Alderman, 1994). In recent years economic historians have

introduced longer term perspectives (Floud et al., 1990, Fogel, 1995). One issue which both social and natural

scientists have addressed and has generated much controversy has been the idea of ‘adaptation’ to low command over

goods (Sukhatme, 1977, Seckler, 1982, Payne and Lipton, 1994). If poor people were able to adapt to low levels of

food intake then concern for unequal distributions of effort and well-being, whether between households or genders,

might be considerably reduced. This is not the place for an extended review of these extensive and complex

literatures, parts of which are strongly contested; rather we draw attention to the relative neglect of work intensity in

these approaches, and likely implications of taking work intensity more seriously (Osmani, 1991, Dreze and Sen,

1990, Dasgupta, 1993, Payne and Lipton, 1994, Dasgupta and Ray, 1990, contain extended discussions of the

‘adaptation’).

A very simplified account of the orthodox nutritional model of well-being suggests the importance of three variables -

height, body mass index (BMI) and physical capacity for work measured as maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max

explained below). Height is mainly determined before adulthood reflecting early health and nutritional experience,

important basis for assessing development and development interventions (Dreze and Sen, 1989, UNDP,1995), but the advantage of women in terms of longevity has little effect on gender comparisons because of theassumption of an ‘estimated global edge [of life expectancy of women over men] of five years’ (UNDP, 1995:2,see also Anand and Sen, forthcoming). Male disadvantage in longevity is pervasive in the mammalian world,and is found in developed countries, where, it is implied, gender differences in longevity are near to the ‘natural’.Nevertheless, there are social variations in the relative disadvantage of men in these countries (Waldron, 1995).Unfortunately, work on these variations generally lacks a socially comparative perspective and is not concerned withdevelopment policy and practice. The apparent disadvantage that men experience in well-being outcomes indeveloped countries (greater mortality) is generally attributed to gender specific ‘life-style’ whereby men’s behaviour,rather than their work patterns, results in their health disadvantage (ibid). Nevertheless, to the extent that thisbehaviour is socially constructed it could be legitimately the subject of social policy, and one might think that ingeneral there would be little objection to policies whose aim was to mitigate the ‘natural’ disadvantages of any groupin society. Moreover, it is not clear that the same explanations of male disadvantage in longevity apply in lessdeveloped countries where work patterns and so on are very different, and where it is certainly possible that workpatterns have more of a role to play in determining relative longevity (notwithstanding the reduced absolute longetivyadvantage of women in most poor countries). One reason for thinking this is the greater effort intensity of much workin these countries, especially for poor males.5 Height for age is a useful index of nutritional and health experience including parental status, and growth duringpregnancy and childhood (Waterlow et al. 1977, Eveleth and Tanner, 1976, Floud et al., 1990), height (for ageamong children) or as adults integrates longer term health and nutritional history, and achieved heights are comparedwith norms based on developed countries, low achieved heights among a population is termed stunting. Low height isapparently linked with greater vulnerability to disease (Waaler, 1984) and to lower absolute and relative (to bodyweight) productivity (as argued especially by Floud et al. 1990, and Fogel, 1994).

17

and cannot readily be used to compare many differences in well-being of adults within a group6. BMI is an indicator

of state of health or nutrition, while work and effort are processes7. A given BMI can be achieved at low or high

levels of energy expenditure and intake; clearly, generally, the higher the level of energy expenditure8 for a given

BMI (in the low range we are concerned with), the greater the effort. It is possible that there are other health effects of

greater energy expenditure, given BMI, such as impairment to the immune system and bodily wear and tear9.

But none of these variables corresponds to what is commonly understood by effort; in particular it neglects the

capacity for work. It would generally be presumed (perhaps incorrectly) that a person with high capacity for work

experiences less effort doing a given amount of mechanical work, than a person with lesser capacity. It seems natural,

as well as consistent with physiological understanding, that the physical capacity for physically demanding work can

be approximated by the maximum rate at which oxygen can be taken up (known as VO2max) (Astrand and Rodahl,

1977, Shephard, 1988, Barac-Nieto, 1987, Spurr, 1990)10. Expending energy consistently at a high level of VO2max

6 Height for age is a useful index of nutritional and health experience including parental status, and growth duringpregnancy and childhood (Waterlow et al. 1977, Eveleth and Tanner, 1976, Floud et al., 1990), height (for ageamong children) or as adults integrates longer term health and nutritional history, and achieved heights are comparedwith norms based on developed countries, low achieved heights among a population is termed stunting. Low height isapparently linked with greater vulnerability to disease (Waaler, 1984) and to lower absolute and relative (to bodyweight) productivity (as argued especially by Floud et al. 1990, and Fogel, 1994).7 BMI (weight - in kilogrammes - divided by height - in meters - squared) provides a measure of current nutritionalstatus that can be used to compare people of different height, with figures in the range 18.5 to 25 being considerednormal and values below 18.5 indicating Chronic Energy Deficiency (CED) (James et al., 1988, Shetty and James,1994). Low BMI is generally the result of low food intake in relation to energy requirements for body maintenance(Basal Metabolic Rate) - BMR - and energy required for growth (and other necessary physiological processesincluding pregnancy, lactation, recovery from injury and illness and so on) and activity. Low BMI is associated withrisk of illness and death (Waaler, 1984, Waterlow, 1992, Henry, 1990), as well as lower productivity (see Shetty andJames, 1994 for a summary).8 Energy expenditure can be measured in various ways; as the mechanical work done (E1), as the energy expended todo that work by the human concerned (E2 - differing from E1 depending on the efficiency with which that persondoes the work), or as the energy intake required to maintain the person while expending that energy (E3 - differingfrom E2 depending on the efficiency with which that person transforms food intakes into mechanical work). Theenergy expended (E2) can be measured by the level of oxygen uptake over that required for basic body maintenance(BMR); the energy intake required (E3) can be measured as the level intake to maintain body weight while doing thework. These measures and the ratios between them will differ among individuals depending on genetic and non-genetic characteristics (Hill et al. 1995).9 An example that played a role in stimulating this work is suggested by the existence of a hospital facilityspecialising in the rehabilitation of the knees of rickshaw pullers in Dhaka, Bangladesh.10 VO2max is positively but imperfectly associated with BMI (over the range with which we are concerned), and isreduced in stunted and wasted individuals (Spurr, 1990). By implication the effort involved in work will be positivelyrelated to the degree to which oxygen uptake during actual work approaches the individual’s VO2max (O2/VO2max). Aslight complication is that in the short run work can be done by anaerobic physiological processes without immediate

18

must entail great effort, but how does one compare the effort of a person who has low BMI, low VO2max, low intake

and low energy expenditure, with that of a person of similar BMI, with higher VO2max, higher intake and higher

expenditure? And how does one compare different time patterns of instantaneous ratio of actual oxygen uptake to

VO2max? For example, suppose there are two groups of people of equivalent nutritional status; one expends energy at

high levels for shorter periods while the other expends energy at lower levels for longer periods than the other; which

expends more effort and which is more nutritionally stressed? These questions raise further doubts about the

‘adaptation’ perspective; even if humans can adapt to low levels of nutrient intake it is not clear that this would not

entail greater ‘effort’ even if energy expenditure were lower, with consequent subjective feelings of effort.

The average height and weight of poor Bangladeshis indicate that both men and women are severely stunted and

wasted (World Bank, 1992:11:19, ). It is often argued that sustained work only takes place at 30-40% of VO2max and

that consequently work intensity measured by O2/VO2max is of little relevance in assessing the burden of work11.

Treadle pumping appears to involve this level of energy expenditure12; however, the conclusion that this is does not

involve considerable effort or distress, especially for such poorly nourished people, would be to assume what must be

proven.

The general trend of nutritional and health investigation among the labouring poor in LDCs has been to show either

that higher nutritional status is associated with higher productivity and better health (epidemiological evidence), or

that improving nutritional status leads to improved productivity and health (experimental or intervention evidence).

In most cases the evidence and arguments are flawed (Chernichovsky, 1979, Strauss, 1993); for example, the

epidemiological evidence fails to account for variables which may determine both nutritional status and productivity

(ability to expend effort, or innate ‘healthiness’) which, when missed from the analysis, lead to a spurious association

between nutritional or health status and productivity. The experimental evidence (before and after, or with and

without an intervention) generally does not control in a satisfactory way for other variables which might influence the

O2 uptake, giving rise to an oxygen debt; however, this debt is limited and must be repaid by excess of O2 uptake overthat required for concurrent energy expenditure in necessary periods of rest after high level of energy expenditure.11 Payne and Lipton, 1994:60: ’ there is plenty of scope for adults with low VO2max (for example small adults)to produce as much physical work output as large adults, even at heavy work’.12 Orr et al. 1991:14 report that the work done (E1 above) in treadling is some 30 watts; of course E2 and E3will be somewhat greater. At 20% conversion efficiency of food into work done this would suggest 1200 kcalfood energy intake required for an 8 hours of treadling, or roughly a 75% increase in calorie intake aboveBMR.

19

nutrition or health-productivity relationship (for example, incentive or placebo effects). Neither pays sufficient

attention to the reverse causality, the effects of productivity on nutritional status .

While the nutritional literature relates well-being to standards which reflect the characteristics of more affluent

western populations, economic approaches relate work to well being through employment, productivity and income;

in the standard neo-classical model a competitive market economy leads to full employment with all factors of

production receiving the value of their marginal product. Jobs that require more effort are more highly rewarded

(given the supply and demand for type of work involved). People with greater ability to exert effort (perhaps those

with greater body size and strength) and those with a taste for work involving physical activity (or less of a disutility

of such work) will exert more of it, and more of it in relation to their physical capacity for work as defined above; but

those with a taste for effort will exert no more in relation to their taste for it than others. There is no possibility that

unemployment or low productivity will fail to generate an appropriate level of well-being, meet basic needs and so on.

For much of economics, the existence of households, to the extent that it is acknowledged, is accomodated through

assumptions or models in which the well-being of members of the household are equivalent and correspond to the

well-being of the whole household (Sen, 1983, Folbre, 1986). For every member of the household the marginal

disutility of effort will be equated to its marginal value product, which will be the same for every member of this

household.

Under these circumstances differences in outcomes such as the biological measures of well-being discussed above

(longevity, BMI, height for age, weight for height) could not be attributed to differences in contributions of effort or

rewards for effort - they would be seen as the outcomes of natural attributes of ability and taste13. This suggests that

neither differences in time spent working nor difference in longevity between men and women could be attributed to

unfair allocations of work and reward The orthodox model can thus readily ‘explain’ unequal outcomes within

households (Alderman et al, 1995). However, this simple story has long been seen as empirically and analytically

unsatisfactory; unemployment and poverty are pervasive phenomena, and households are comprised of individuals

who do not necessarily share goods and burdens equivalently. The sex bias in food and health expenditure allocation

to females in Bangladesh is widely refered to (Chen et al. 1981, Pryer, 1989).

20

Three relevant issues have been addressed by economists - health, nutrition and productivity relationships; efficiency

wages and labour market institutions; and household economics. The first two are concerned with the complex

interrelationships between poor nutrition and health and low income and hence low levels of well-being in

households, while the third, when it drops the unitary model of the household (Alderman et al., 1994, 1995), adds to

this the possibility that the intra-household allocation of well-being may be biased; the literature has emphasised the

disadvantages of girls and women. While analysis which takes the household as a single unit can suggest considerable

inequalities, treating the household as a collective, which seems both theoretically plausible and empirically realistic,

can yield somewhat different policy implications (ibid).

The mainstream of economic literature on the links between health, nutrition and well-being broadly accepts the

orthodox health and nutrition models (and rejects the ‘costless adaptation’ view), but it draws attention to the way

allocations of work and leisure, food consumption and health expenditure are choices made to achieve objectives of

humans, and that health, or nutrition, is also an input into the production processes which are both constitutive of

(process utility) and contributory to well-being outcomes. Human choices stand in between policy instruments and

results in ways that may sometimes bring about outcomes other than were intended (see Chernichovsky, 1984, or

Alderman et al. 1995, for hypothetical examples). Allocations of resources to health and nutrition are treated as

investments in human capital (Behrman and Deolalikar, 1988); this is similar to any form of ‘productive

consumption’ (Suen and Mo, 1994), including education, and even leisure, which can increase productivity but

reduce well-being by consuming resources, including time, the expected return to which plays a large role in

determining intra-household allocations. Nutrition and health are enhanced by food consumption, but, in unitary

households, preference is given to those who can expect to contribute more to household well-being.

Efficiency wage theories are of two sorts; there are those theories which specify a biologically determined link

between wages, nutrition and productivity, and those which emphasise the incentives to exert effort in the context of

agency problems (see Weiss 1990 for a survey). While the outcome may be similar - work effort provided at lower

cost - the mechanisms are quite different; the former is predicated on the ability of a better nourished worker to

produce effort in relation to the wage, or nutrition received, while the latter reflects the willingness of the better

13 ’We rarely observe capabilities, but rather certain ‘achievements’. The mapping from the former to thelatter is not unique, but depends on factors such as preferences. .. perhaps she preferred a short but merry life’(Lipton and Ravallion, 1995:2566)

21

nourished to do this. This willingness may be due to alteration of the preferences of workers who perceive wages

above a certain level as ‘gift-exchange’ (Akerlof, 1982, 1984), or to the threat of loss of future wages above their

opportunity cost (Shapiro and Stiglitz, 1984). But these are not mutually exclusive mechanisms; a better nourished

individual may be both more capable and more willing to exert effort because of reduced Hobbesian malfeasance

(Bowles and Gintis, 1993) and, or fear of loss of priviliges (Hart, 1993). Empirical exploration of the former involves

relating the level of wages, consumption and nutritional status to productivity while the latter is especially concerned

with the forms which rewards for effort takes (piece rates or time rates; short term or long term labour contracts, share

tenancy or owner cultivation).

Questions of abilities and incentives in the context of gender divisions of labour and unpaid household work are yet

more complex; effort and productivity in waged and domestic labour cannot readily be compared and there are limits

to the usefulness of incentives concepts which do not recognise the coercion present in divisions of labour. This is not

peculiar to intrahousehold divisions of labour - power is also important in employment relations (Bardhan, 1991,

Hart, 1995) - but there is possibly less carrot and more stick within households than commonly assumed, and some

members, particularly women, can be coerced rather more easily than others as a result of structurally weak

bargaining positions and the greater credibility of the threat of force by husbands against wives, as Sen (1987) has

argued14.. Bargaining models and Sen's modified cooperative-conflicts approach have gone some way towards

remedying some of the deficiencies of mainstream economic models of households (McElroy, 1990, Sen, 1987), and

the latter in particular emphasises the possibility that perceived contributions can lead to, or perpetuate, considerable

inequalities. Bargaining models can embody the inferior fallback position, or threat points, of women (e.g. lower

wages, lower remarriage probabilities), the invisibility of women’s work, and the strategic advantages of men in terms

of physical threats and formal and informal sanctions (Kabeer, 1991).

Increasing availability of large and more appropriate data sets and the application of more sophisticated econometrics

has generated a number of interesting results in relation to health, nutrition and productivity linkages, both types of

efficiency wage theory, and to intra-household allocations. Economists pointed out that much nutritional work (see

Latham, 1993, Shetty and James, 1994, Chapter 5) suffered methodological problems (Strauss, 1993, Strauss and

14 Lipton and Ravallion, when discussing equivalence scales comment (perhaps somewhat at odds with theirreference to preferences for a ‘short but merry life’) that, ‘What looks like a difference in ‘consumption needs’may well be due to discrimination based on unequal power’ (op. cit., 1995:2574).

22

Thomas, 1995), but claim that these problems can be overcome using alternative methods (Strauss, 1986, Deolaliker,

1988, Behrman and Deolalikar, 1988, Strauss, 1993, Strauss and Thomas, 1995a), ‘with promising results’ (Strauss,

1993:149, although see Strauss and Thomas, 1995b). The evidence for nutrition - health - productivity links appears

to well accepted, with both height and BMI causally related to productivity and wages (Dasgupta, 1993, Strauss and

Thomas, 1995b; but see Lipton and Payne, 1994, Lipton and Ravallion, 1995).

These recent works have much to say about allocations of work and welfare where households are important units of

production as well as consumption. Poor nutrition will affect farm, off-farm and household productivity (e.g. Pitt and

Rosenzweig, 1986), labour markets and labour market institutions (Foster and Rosenzweig, 1994), and the intra-

household allocation of work and well-being (Pitt et al. 1990). However, the problems in sorting out the empirical

relationships in free living populations using survey information are great (Strauss, 1993, Strauss and Thomas, 1995a

and b; Lipton and Ravallion, 1995). Much effort has been devoted to estimating the effects of prices and incomes on

household demand for health and nutrients, and the effects of household health and nutrition on labour supply,

production, and wages, and hence on incomes. The low income elasticity of demand for calories even among poor

households found in some studies (c.f. Alderman, 1993), which implies that nutritional stress is not a strong influence

on household decision making, has been taken seriously (Lipton and Ravallion, 1995), notwithstanding the empirical

difficulties. As noted by work refered to above, the empirical requirements are stringent and the relationshiops

complex. Even for studies using more sophisticated econometrics, ‘it is plausible that unobserved taste for work may

be correlated with taste for nutrients, although the sign of the correlation, and thus bias, is not obvious’ (Strauss and

Thomas, 1995b:1897).

Understanding household behaviour has progressed greatly (Singh, et al. 1986, Haddad, 1992, Dasgupta, 1993,

Strauss and Thomas, 1995), and the deficiencies of orthodox neo-classical models have been well rehearsed (Sen

1983; Folbre 1986). Gender analysis of the household has shown considerable disparities between the perception of

contributions by different household members and the work actually done, and in the control of income and

expenditure (Dwyer and Bruce 1988); partners have different spheres of responsibility, and somewhat separate

incomes and assets. Empirical analyses show that income pooling is not universal so that who controls assets and

income is an important determinant of expenditure and consumption (Pahl, 1983, Haddad, 1992, Alderman et al.

1994).

23

Despite the limitations of data and methods a number of interesting results have been produced. There is now

considerable evidence that health and nutritional status (for example height or BMI) do affect earnings (see

summaries in Strauss and Thomas, 1995a and b), that energy intensive work reduces health and nutritional status,

and that adult men (and children 6-12 years old) are more likely to work where effort (and nutrient consumption) is

rewarded, for example in piecework and own farm work (Pitt et al, 1990, Foster and Rosenzweig, 1994); they get

‘calorie reinforcement’ ,but not sufficient for them to maintain their nutritional status. All this is consistent with the

finding in South Asia that poor ‘provisioning’ men (men with childbearing wives) are more wasted than their wives

(Kynch, 1994, Gillespie and McNeil, 1992). This would seem to caution against development interventions which are

employment intensive and have low productivity; Pitt et al. (1990) point out that increasing women’s employment

may lead to increased consumption, but this will be offset by increased energy expenditure if these employment

opportunities are such that there is a close link between food consumption and productivity. This conclusion clearly

anticipates our arguments about effort intensive employment policies and technologies such as the treadle pump.

Conclusions

Gender potentially confounds the logic of tackling poverty through labour intensive growth; it is also problematic in

environmental policy. The World Bank (1992) and other development agencies assert a positive synergy between

environmental policies and development policies which are held to be mutually reinforcing. In this approach there are

no tradeoffs between the objectives of environmental protection, regeneration and conservation on the one hand and

development objectives such as poverty reduction and gender equity on the other. This 'win-win' position has been

criticised (Jackson, 1993a and b) on the grounds that the interests of women often profoundly conflict with the

synergistic policies as specified by the Bank. And, as became clear at UNCED, many Third World nations

(governments as well as citizens) are also unconvinced that the simultaneous pursuit of environmental and

developmental objectives is possible or desirable. The discussion here of the conflict between sustainable

development, human energy intensive technology and the well being of women is another part of this larger canvass.

If appropriate technology is expected to be a win-win strategy for sustainable development and poverty reduction,

what does a gender analysis suggest? Technology plays a crucial role in determining the implications of development

for women. Women in Development (WID) analysis has often portrayed women as passive victims of both

development and wider social subordination whilst gender analysts have been trying to understand not only the ways

24

in which conjugal contracts (and the divisions of labour they embody) disadvantage women but also how they struggle

to improve their position, to renegotiate implicit contracts and social relations and in this access to technology plays a

crucial role (Jackson, 1995). The interplay between energy intensity, technology and skill is an interesting arena for

such struggles. For example, it is not clear to what extent male tasks such as ploughing, which are regarded as 'heavy

work' but are undertaken with the use of ploughs and animal traction, indeed are energy intensive. Similarly, in wood

collection, women often headload whilst men use cycles or carts. Yet the belief that 'men do the heavy work' remains.

Once potentially heavy male gendered work, such as land preparation, becomes mechanised, effort intensity may

decline but skill or aptitude arguments can be deployed which exclude women from access to productivity enhancing

technology, and 'naturalise' divisions of labour. Similarly, when formerly female work such as post-harvest

processing, becomes mechanised, it often becomes male gendered. Conversely, in the case of the treadle pumps in

Bangladesh an energy intensive, unskilled and relatively unproductive technology has become 'women's work', but,

as the case study shows, this work is not valued as 'heavy' by those men who insist it is not hard work. Since women

do it, it cannot be heavy work. This logic is similar to that which labels women's work in developed countries as

unskilled (Phillips and Taylor, 1980) - the perception and designation of skilled/unskilled or heavy/light has as much

to do with the gender identity of the worker as the character of the work itself. Technology is a site of struggle, over

work as well as meanings.

The gender critique of appropriate technology has shown that design has often ignored women, that the social context

in which technologies are used has been neglected and that assumptions that women will use time released by labour

saving technologies in direct economic production are misplaced (Stamp 1989). The ergonomic unsuitability of

technologies designed for male operators, e.g. water pumps, has been commented on (Stamp, 1989, p59), but the

significance of this for the well-being of women depends in part upon the alternatives available, the institutional

context, the extent to which household women are able to influence the decision to adopt a particular technology and

the patterns of use. Take the case of water pumps for domestic or agricultural purposes: are there different

technologies and power sources? Does access come through particular institutions (such as the household), or

organisations linked to particular designs? Is a veto over the choice by women possible? Do wage workers use the

technology continuously, and under what relations of production - household, bonded, or waged?

25

Technology always has a social context; a technology may be designed with men in mind and this may appear to

disadvantage women. But, while in some cases such inappropriate designs lead to additional burdens for women, in

others the social context can confound these predictions, for example, if the ‘inappropriateness’ of the technology for

women leads to the tasks being re-allocated to men or redefined as male responsibilities (Jackson, 1995).

To summarise; the gender disaggregated nutrition, health, and safety implications of particular divisions of labour is

of practical value in anticipating the changes which follow agricultural intensification and understanding which social

groups, if any, are threatened by these changes. Given any tendency of the new poverty agenda, of environmental

concerns in development policy and of calls for sustainable (low input and frequently appropriate technology)

agriculture to increase effort intensity of livelihoods, it would seem wise to begin to ascertain more clearly what the

social costs and benefits of labour intensification are and for whom.

The different work patterns of men and women entail different intensities of energy expenditure which makes simple

comparisons of time spent working unreliable in assessments of food and health needs; similarly, we cannot read off

welfare implications from the total mechanical work done or, indeed the total energy costs of particular activity

patterns. Ultimately we need a better understanding of both 'manual' and 'mental' work intensity in order to

meaningfully link work with well-being. The simplifications involved in using time-allocation as a proxy for

burden have been useful in redirecting policy but there is now a need for greater rigour in not only the analysis of

time input data but also in looking at other aspects of labour which inform gender relations - in particular, physical

work intensity.

Recent development policy agendas envisage labour intensive economic growth as playing a synergistic role in both

sustainable development and poverty alleviation. Gender analyses of these agendas reveals numerous contradictions

which may lead to perverse outcomes. We have shown that effort intensity is an important dimension of labour

intensive technology which has clear but largely un-explored implications for household decision making that will

only be properly understood by taking a gender perspective. The interviews focusing on the relative merits of STWs

and TPs support the framework sketched out above for assessment of effort intensive activities, although this

exploratory work needs further investigation. Differential effort expenditure by men and women is acknowledged and

conflicting evaluations of this effort were more than hinted at. The possibility of negative perceived, and perhaps

unperceived, side effects also arose. Despite the rather harmonious perception of cooperation within households (at

26

least in the majority of cases and as articulated to outsiders), it is clear that there are struggles over the evaluation and

reward of effort by different household members. It is not clear that the evaluation of increased household food

security enabled by and enabling women's income earning activities had not been filtered through the lenses of

patriarchy, to the detriment of women's perceived contribution and achieved well-being.

A number of potential policy implications arise; firstly, advice that the TP is restricted to homestead cultivation rather

than paddy production could be emphasised. Secondly, alternatives to effort intensive self-selecting targeted welfare

and social security could be promoted15 . Thirdly, education in the financing and management of STW should be

provided to groups (especially female groups) to enable them to reap the appropriate reward from their contribution to

capital costs and to contain the possibilities of fraud by STW operators and managers.

There are clearly many aspects of the processes by which labour intensive technologies which differ in effort and cash

intensity, translate into improvements in well-being of different household members. Research is required especially

on the nature of the efforts, the production and risks involved, and the processes of intra-household bargaining about

the distributions of work, food consumption and health expenditure.

As we have argued above, intra-household relations are centrally important to assessing technology alternatives since,

as shown in other places, changed economic opportunities differentially available to household members lead to

reassessment and renegotiations of household contributions and rewards. People differentiated by gender and age in

households differentiated by class may evaluate these technologies differently; the distribution of work and

consumption arising from the adoption of the technology may differ between men and women (and by class), and they

may assess these contributions and returns differently. Thus, perhaps, patriarchal tactics adopted in household

bargaining strategies, may devalue not just the production contribution but also the effort involved in women's

increased work on the TP and may lead a failure to adequately compensate them for this. Of course, similar issues of

valuation can arise with increased male work; under-valuation of either the productivity or the nutritional and health

effects of men's effort intensive work may lead to inappropriate education and advocacy of intra-household

15 The crucial advantage of labour intensive public works for relief of poverty is that it is 'self-targeting' in thatonly those with low alternative opportunities for their labour will apply. While the net benefit of such work isless than the gross because some substitution takes place (Datt and Ravallion, 1994), there are furthercontradictions where the task is effort intensive. In such an approach some of the benefit may be dissipatedthrough the energy and health costs of the work, and it may select out those who are unable to do hard work, or

27

redistribution of food consumption, health expenditure, and social valuation in favour of women. These problems

arise from both the neglect of intrahousehold relations and transactions in evaluating and assessing technology

options and also from a general neglect of the effort intensive nature of much work by poor people and consequent

lack of understanding of what is involved (in addition to some irreducibly subjective, perhaps culturally defined,

aspects of work) in effort. Similar questions are raised by `labour intensive' public relief works, where there is not just

a question of the nutritional impact net of direct calorie expenditure and indirect substitution of other work, but of

indirect health impacts through exhaustion and biological damage to bodies due to this form of work.

The appropriateness of the TP is seen as deriving from it's labour intensity which suits it to a labour abundant

economy such as that of Bangladesh. The TP appears to fit well the call for labour intensive agricultural growth,

which, together with targeted welfare and safety nets constitute the main planks of the `New Poverty Agenda'. Like

labour intensive public works, the TP is `self-targeting' in that only those whose entitlements are mainly labour based

are likely to adopt it, and at the same time it directly raises food entitlements of the poor (World Bank, 1990, Dreze

and Sen, 1989). However, we have argued, one needs to make a distinction between effort intensive employment and

employment which is entitlement protecting and promoting. One of the significant problems associated with the TP

has been the effort involved, and recent observation suggests that much of the actual work is done by women and

children. In so far as it may divert women's time from other household and economic activities, and exhaust them, it

may reduce their net benefits, or actually harm them or their children if they have inadequate time or energy for

necessary household work. In this sense the TP is akin to manual paddy husking in being an effort intensive, low

productivity form of technology. Thus it may be contradictory with other planks in the sustainable poverty alleviation

platform since it may conflict with the enhancement of human resources.

We conclude that 'employment intensive' growth may not be entitlement or capability (Sen, 1981) intensive if that

employment is very low paid, has low productivity, and is energy intensive (or takes place in unhealthy or dangerous

circumstances). Study of the distributional consequences of energy intensive work reveals the circumstances, and

social groups, for whom intermediate technology is appropriate and those for whom it is not. It reveals who is likely to

do most of the work and who to get most of the benefit. Promotion of effort intensive livelihoods may not be a very

positive force for women; nor in the longer term may it be sustainable if poverty or population growth are not reduced

are culturally prevented from doing such work. An alternative is to use time intensive, but low productivitywork to target those who cannot benefit much from effort intensive work.

28

sufficiently rapidly. The TP is unlikely to be sustained in competition with alternative technologies unless the

economic incentives are altered drastically against fossil fuel intensive technologies, and even then, drudgerous

livelihoods are unlikely to constitute 'development'. Less effort intensive, more fossil fuel intensive technologies may

have an important role to play in achieving a sustainable economy.

29

ReferencesAhmad, M., and Jenkins, A., 1989, Traditional Paddy Husking - an Appropriate Technology under Pressure,

in Carr, M., ed., Women and the Food Cycle, London, Intermediate Technology Press.

Akerlof, G. A., 1982, Labour Contracts as Partial Gift Exchange, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 97,(4):542-69.

Alderman, H., Chiappori, P., Haddad, L., Hoddinott, J., and Kanbur, R., 1995, Unitary versus CollectiveModels of the Household: is it Time to Shift the Burden of Proof?, World Bank Research Observer,10, (1):1-19.

Alderman, H., Haddad, L., Hoddinott, J., and Vosti. S.A., 1994, Strengthening Agricultural and NaturalResource Policy through Intrahousehold Analysis: an Introduction, American Journal ofAgricultural Economics, 76, :1208-12.

Alderman, H., 1993, New Research on Poverty and Malnutrition: What are the Implications for Poverty, inLipton, M., van der Gaag, J., eds., Including the Poor, Washington, World Bank.

Astrand, P., and Rohdahl, K., 1986, Textbook on Work Physiology, London, McGraw Hill.

Banuri, T., and Apffel-Marglin, F., 1993, The Environmental Crisis and the Space for Alternatives: India,Finland and Maine, in Banuri, Tariq, Marglin, Frederique Apffel (Eds), London. Zed Books, UnitedNations University/World Institute for Development Economics Research.

Barac-Nieto, M., 1987, Physical Work Determinants and Nutrition, World Review of Nutrition and Diet, 49,:22-65.

Barbier, E., 1987, The Concept of Sustainable Development, Environmental Conservation, 14, (2):101-10.

Bardhan, P. K., 1991, The Concept of Power in Economics, Economics and Politics, 3, (3):265-77.

Behrman, J. R., and Deolalikar, A. B., 1988, Health and Nutrition, in Chenery, H., Srinivasan, T. N., eds.,Handbook of Development Economics, Volume 1, Amsterdam, North Holland.

Bhaduri, A., 1973, Economic Backwardness under Semi-Feudalism, Economic Journal, 83, :120-37.

Bowles, S., and Gintis, H., 1993, The Revenge of Homo Economicus: Contested Exchange and the Revival ofPolitical Economy, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7, (1):83-102.

Broad, R., 1994, The Poor and the Environment: Friends or Foes, World Development, 22, (6):811-22.

Cain, M., 1977, The Economic Activities of Children in a Village in Bangladesh, Population andDevelopment Review, 3, (3):201-27.

Chernichovsky, D., 1979, The Economic Theory of the Household and Impact Measurement of Nutrition andRelated Health Programs, in Klein, R., Read, M., Riecken, H., Brown, J., Pradilla, A., Daza, C., eds.,Evaluating the Impact of Nutrition and Health Programs, New York, Plenum Press.

Cleland, J., and Wilson, C., 1987, Demand Theories of the Fertility Transition: An Iconoclastic View,Population Studies, 41, (1):5-30.

Dankelman, I., and Davidson, J., 1988, Women and Environment in the Third World: Alliance for theFuture, London, Earthscan.

Dasgupta, P., 1993, An Inquiry into Well-being and Destitution, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Dasgupta, P., Ray, D., 1990, Adapting to Undernourishment: the Biological Evidence and its Implications, inDreze, J., Sen, A., eds., The Political Economy of Hunger: Volume 1: Entitlement and Well-being,Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Datt, G., and Ravallion, M., 1994, Income Gains for the Poor from Public Works Employment: Evidence fromTwo Indian Village, Washington, World Bank, LSMS Working Papers No 100.

30

Dixon-Mueller, R., 1985, Women's Work in Third World Agriculture, Geneva, ILO.

Drèze, J., and Sen, A., 1989, Hunger and Public Action, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Dwyer, D., and Bruce, J., 1988, A Home Divided: Women and Income in the Third World, Stanford,California, Stanford University Press.

Elster, J., and J.E.Roemer, 1991, Interpersonal Comparisons of Well-Being, Cambridge, CambridgeUniversity Press.

Floro, M. S., 1995, Women's Well-being, Poverty and Work Intensity, Feminist Economics, 1, (3):1-25.

Floud, R., Wachter, K., and Gregory, A., 1990, Height, Health and History: Nutritional Status in theUnited Kingdom, 1750-1980, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Fogel, R., 1994, Economic Growth, Population Theory and Physiology: the Bearing of Long-Term Processeson the Making of Economic Theory, American Economic Review, 84, (3):369-95.

Folbre, N., 1986, Hearts and Spades: Paradigms of Household Economics, World Development, 14, (2):245-255.

Foster, A. D., and Rosenzweig, M. R., 1994, A Test for Moral Hazard in the Labour Market: ContractualArrangements, Effort and Health, Review of Economics and Statistics, 76, (2):213-27.

Gillespie, S., and McNeill, G., 1992, Food, Health and Survival in India and Developing Countries, NewDelhi, Oxford University Press.

GoB (Government of Bangladesh), 1993, Census of Minor Irrigation 1993, Ministry of Agriculture, Dhaka.

Greeley, M., 1983, Patriarchy and Poverty: a Bangladesh Case Study, South Asia Research, 3, (1)

Griffen, K., 1974, The Political Economy of Agrarian Change, London, Macmillan.

Harriss, B., 1979, Post Harvest Processing Systems in Rural Bangladesh: Technology, Economics andEmployment, Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2, (1):23-50.

Hart, G., 1983, Productivity, Poverty, and Population Pressure: Female Labour Deployment in Rice Productionin Java and Bangladesh, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, :1037-1042.

Hart, O., 1995, Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Hill, J. O., Melby, C., Johnson, S. L., and Peters, J. C., 1995, Physical Activity and Energy Requirements,American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 62, (supplement):1059S-66S.

Howes, M., 1985, Whose Water? An Investigation of the Consequences of Alternative Approaches toSmall Scale Irrigation in Bangladesh, Dhaka, BIDS.

Jackson, C., 1995, From Conjugal Contracts to Environmental Relations: Some Thoughts on Labour andTechnology, Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 26, (1):33-9.

James, W. P. T., Ferro-Luzzi, A., and Waterlow, J. C., 1988, Definition of Chronic Energy Deficiency inAdults, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 42, :969-81.

Jansen, E. G., 1979, Choice of Irrigation Technology in Bangladesh: Implications for DependencyRelationships between Rich and Poor Farmers, Journal of Social Science, 5, :61-84.

Kabeer, N., 1991, Gender Dimensions of Rural Poverty: Analysis from Bangladesh, Journal of PeasantStudies, 18, (2):241-262.

Khan, L. R., 1988, Environmental Aspects of Groundwater Development in Bangladesh: an Overview, ODI,London, ODI/IIMI Irrigation Management Network Paper 88/2c.

Kynch, J., 1994, Food and Human Growth in Palanpur, LSE, London, STICKERD, Discussion Paper No 57.

Latham, M. C., 1993, The Relationship of Nutrition to Well-Being and Productivity, in Pinstrup-Andersen, P.,ed., The Political Economy of Food and Nutrition Policies, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins UniversityPress.

31

Leach, M., and Mearns, R., n.d., Poverty and Environment in Developing Countries: An Overview Study,Final Report to ESRC and ODA, Brighton, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.

Lewis, D. J., 1991, Technologies and Transactions. A Study of the Interaction between New Technologyand Agrarian Structure in Bangladesh, Dhaka, Centre for Social Studies.

Lipton, M., and Ravallion, M., 1995, Poverty and Policy, in Behreman, J., Srinivasan, T. N., eds., Handbookof Development Economics, Volume 3B, Amsterdam, Elsevier.

Lipton, M., Maxwell, S., 1992, The New Poverty Agenda: an Overview, Brighton, Institute of DevelopmentStudies.

Lipton, M., Ravallion, M., 1995, Poverty and Policy, in Behreman, J., Srinivasan, T. N., eds., Handbook ofDevelopment Economics, Volume 3B, Amsterdam, Elsevier.

Lipton, M., van der Gaag, J., eds., 1993, Including the Poor, Washington, World Bank.

Lipton, Michael; Longhurst, Richard, 1989, New Seeds and Poor People, London, Unwin Hyman.

Mandal, M. A. S., 1978, Hand Pump Irrigation in Bangladesh: a Comment, Bangladesh DevelopmentStudies, 6, (1):111-4.

Martinez-Alier, J., 1987, Ecological Economics, Oxford, Blackwell.

McElroy, M. B., Fall 1990, The Empirical Content of Nash-Bargained Household Behaviour, The Journal ofHuman Resources, 25, (4):559-583.

McGuire, J., and Popkin, B. M., 1988, Beating the Zero-Sum Game: Women and Nutrition in the ThirdWorld, Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 10, (3):27-32.

Morris, M.D., 1979, Measuring the Condition of the Poor: The Physical Quality of Life Index, Oxford,Pergamon.

Orr, A., Islam, A.S.M.N., and Barnes, G., 1991, The Treadle Pump: Manual Irrigation for Small Farmersin Bangladesh, Dhaka., RDRS.

Pahl, J., 1983, The Allocation of Money within Marriage, Sociological Review, 32, :237-64.

Palmer-Jones, R. W., 1992, Sustaining Serendipity? Groundwater Irrigation, Growth of AgriculturalProduction, and Poverty in Bangladesh, Economic and Political Weekly, 28, (39):A-128-140.

Palmer-Jones, R. W., 1993, Agricultural Wages in Bangladesh: What the Figures Really Show?, Journal ofDevelopment Studies, 29, (2):277-300.

Palmer-Jones, R. W., 1995, Water Markets and Water Management in South Asia,

Phillips, A., and Taylor, B., 1980, Sex and Skill: Notes Towards a Feminist Economics, Feminist Review, 6,

Pitt, M. M., Rosenzweig, M. R., and Hassan, M. N., 1990, Productivity, Health, and Inequality in theIntrahousehold Distribution of Food in Low Income Countries, American Economic Review, 80,(5):1139-56.

Pitt, M., and Rosenzweig, M. R., 1986, Agricultural Prices, Food Consumption, sand the Health andProductivity of Indonesian Farmers, in Singh, I., Squire, L., Strauss, J., eds., Agricultural HouseholdModels: Extensions, Aplications and Policy, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.

Pryer, J., 1989, When Breadwinners Fall Ill: Preliminary Findings from a Case Study in Bangladesh, IDSBulletin, 20, (2):49-57.

Rahman, H. Z., and Hossain, M., eds., 1992, Re-Thinking Rural Poverty: a Case for Bangladesh, Dhaka,Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies.

Reintjes, C., Haverkort, B., and Waters-Beyer, A., 1992, Farming for the Future:, London, Macmillan forILEIA (Information Centre for Low-External-Input Sustainable Agriculture).

Rogaly, B., Harriss-White, B., and Bose, S., 1995, Sonar-Bangla: Agricultural Growth and AgriculturalChange in West Bengal and Bangladesh, Economic and Political Weekly, 30, (29):1862-66.

32

Schumacher, E., 1973, Small is Beautiful: a Study of Economics as if People Mattered, London, Blond andBriggs.

SDE, and IDE, nd (1992), The Treadle Pump: Economic Power to the Landless, Swiss DevelopmentCorporation (Geneva) and International Development Enterprises (Dhaka).

Sen, A. K., 1982, Choice, Welfare and Measurement, Oxford, Blackwell.

Sen, A., 1979, Equality of What?, (1979 Tanner Lecture), in McMurrin, 1980, and Sen, 1982.

Sen, A., 1981, Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation, Oxford, OxfordUniversity Press.

Sen, A., 1983, Economics and the Family, Asian Development Review, 1, (2):14-26.

Sen, A., 1990, More than a 100 Million Women are Missing, New York Review of Books, 37, :61-6.

Shapiro, C., and Stiglitz, J. E., 1984, Equilibrium Unemployment as a Worker Discipline Device, AmericanEconomic Review, 74, (3):433-44.

Shephard, R. J., 1988, Work Capacity: Methodology in a Tropical Environment, in Collins, K. J., Roberts, D.F., eds., Capacity for Work in the Tropics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Shetty, P. S., and James, W. P. T., 1994, Body Mass Index: a Measure of Chronic Energy Deficiency inAdults, Rome, FAO, Food and Nutrition Paper 56.

Singh, I. J., Squire, L., and Strauss, J., eds., 1986, Agricultural Household Models: Extensions,Applications and Policy, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.

Spurr, G. B., 1990, The Impact of Chronic Undernutirition on Physical Work Capacity and Daily EnergyExpenditure, in Harrison, G. A., Waterlow, J. C., eds., Diet and Disease in Traditional andDeveloping Countries, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Stamp, P., 1989, Technology, Gender, and Power in Africa, Ottawa, Canada, International DevelopmentResearch Centre.

Stewart, F., 1987, Macro Policies for Appropriate Technology in Developing Countries, Westview Press,Boulder, Colorado

Stewart, F., ed., 1987, Macro-policies for Appropriate Technology in Developing Countries, Boulder,Colorado, Westview Press.

Strauss, J., 1986, Appendix: The Theory and Comparative Statics of Agricultural Household Models: aGeneral Approach, in Singh, I., Squire, L., Strauss, J., eds., Agricultural Household Models:Extensions, Applications and Policy, Baltimore and London, Johns Hopkins University Press for theWorld Bank.

Strauss, J., 1993, The Impact of Improved Nutrition on Labour Productivity and Human ResourceDevelopment: an Economic Perspective, in Pinstrup-Andersen, P., ed., The Political Economy ofFood and Nutrition Policies, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.

Strauss, J., and Thomas, D., 1995, Food, Nutrition and Economic Development, paper presented at XIth WorldCongress of the International Economic Association, Dec. 1995, Tunis.

Strauss, J., and Thomas, D., 1995, Human Resources: Empirical Modelling of Household and FamilyDecisions, in Behreman, J., Srinivasan, T. N., eds., Handbook of Development Economics, Volume3A, Amsterdam, North Holland.

Streeten, P., S.J. Burki, M. ul Haq, N. Hicks, F. Stewart, 1981, First Things First: Meeting Basic HumanNeedsin Developing Countries, New York, Oxford University Press.

Suen, W., and Mo, P. H., 1994, Simple Analytics of Productive Consumption, Journal of Political Economy,102, (2):372-83.

Sukhatme, P. V., 1977, Incidence of Undernutrition, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 32,

33

Thompson, E. P., 1967, Time, Work-Discipline and Industrial Capitalism, Past and Present, 38,

UNDP, 1995, Human Development Report, 1995, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Waaler, H. T., 1984, Height, Weight, and Mortality: the Norwegian Experience, Acta Medica Scandinana,Suppplement No 679, (Stockholm)

Waldron, I., 1995, Contribution of Changing Gender Differences in Behaviour and Social Roles to ChangingGender Differences in Mortality, in Sabo. D., Gordon, D. F., eds., Men's Health and Illness: Gender,Power and the Body, Thousand Oaks, Cal., Sage.

Waterlow, J. C., Buzina, R., Keller, W., Lane, J., Nichaman, M., and Tanner, J. M., 1977, The Presentationand Use of Height and Weight Data for Comparing Nutritional Status of Groups of Children Underthe age of 10 Years, Bulletin of the World Health Organisation, 55, :489-98.

Waterlow, J. C., 1992, Protein-Energy Malnutrition, London, Edward Arnold.

White, S., 1992, Arguing with the Crocodile: Gender and Class in Bangladesh, London, Zed Press.

Wood, G. D., and Palmer-Jones, R. W., 1991, The Water Sellers: a Cooperative Venture by the RuralPoor, West Hartford, Kumarian Press.

World Bank, 1982, Bangladesh Minor Irrigation: a Joint Review by the Government of Bangladesh and theWorld Bank, Planning Commission, GoB, Dhaka.

World Bank, 1990, World Development Report 1990: Poverty, Oxford, Oxford University Press for theWorld Bank.

World Bank, 1992, Bangladesh Food Policy Review: Adjusting to the Green Revolution, 2 Volumes.Washington, World Bank

World Bank, 1992, World Development Report 1992: Development and the Environment, Oxford, OxfordUniversity Press for the World Bank.