Associations between gender equity in income and food security, diets and nutritional status
| Exposure | Analysis | Year | N | Equity gap | Effect | 95% CI | Standardised effect | Standardised 95% CI | |
| Outcome: food share (not included in meta-analysis) | |||||||||
| Lachaud31 | Women’s share of household income | 2-stage tobit | 1994 | 4744 | 0.26* | 2.36 | 0.25 to 4.47 | 0.62 | 0.07 to 1.18 |
| McCarthy and Kilic35 | Women earn all unpooled income versus men earn all | SUR | 2010–2013 | 3858 | 0.06† | 0.70 | −1.46 to 2.85 | 0.00 | −0.00 to 0.00 |
| Outcome: Ln (food expenditure) | |||||||||
| Hopkins et al23 | Women’s income versus men’s | 2SLS | 1990 | 452 | 45 808† | 0.00 | – | 0.01 | – |
| Duflo and Udry29 | Change in women’s income versus change in men’s | 2SLS | 1985–1988 | 973 | 0.71† | 0.17 | – | 0.12 | – |
| Josephson34 | Change in women's Ln agricultural income versus men's | DiD, IV | 2010–2013 | 693 | 0.89† | 0.15 | – | 0.13 | – |
| Aromolaran28 | Women’s share of household income | 2SLS | 1999–2000 | 2573 | 0.20* | −0.13 | −0.23 to −0.03 | −0.03 | −0.05 to −0.01 |
| Outcome: food expenditure | |||||||||
| McCarthy and Kilic35 | Women earn all unpooled income versus men earn all | OLS FE | 2010–2013 | 3858 | 0.06† | 0.06 | −0.04 to 0.17 | 0.03 | −0.00 to 0.00 |
| Outcome: Household Food Insecurity Access Scale | |||||||||
| Van den Broeck et al30 | Women’s employment in agricultural export sector versus men’s | DiD | 2013–2016 | 461 | −0.07‡ | −0.15 | – | 0.01 | – |
| Outcome: child’s energy adequacy ratio (intakes/requirements) | |||||||||
| Senauer and Garcia27 | Mother’s wage versus father’s | 2SLS | 1983–1984 | 2320 | 0.01† | 0.07 | – | 0.00 | – |
| Outcome: height-for-age z-score | |||||||||
| Senauer and Garcia27 | Mother’s wage versus father’s | 2SLS | 1983–1984 | 2320 | 0.01† | 0.38 | – | 0.00 | – |
| Marinda32 | Mothers’ income minus men’s | 2SLS | 2003 | 129 | – | −0.00 | – | – | – |
| Outcome: low height-for-age | |||||||||
| Gaiha and Kulkarni25 | Male–female wage difference | Poisson | 1994 | 26 854 | 1.06† | −0.07 | −0.01 to −0.13 | −0.08 | −0.14 to −0.01 |
| Lachaud31 | Women’s share of household income | 2-stage probit | 1994 | 1352 | 0.28* | −0.23 | −0.43 to −0.03 | −0.03 | −0.06 to −0.00 |
| Outcome: weight-for-height z-score | |||||||||
| Senauer and Garcia27 | Mother’s wage versus father’s | 2SLS | 1983–1984 | 2320 | 0.01† | −0.19 | – | −0.00 | – |
| Outcome: low weight-for height | |||||||||
| Lachaud31 | Women’s share of household income | Probit | 1994 | 1352 | 0.28* | −0.09 | −0.43 to 0.25 | −0.00 | −0.01 to 0.01 |
| Outcome: weight-for-age z-score | |||||||||
| Shoo33 | Mother has a non-farming source of income versus father | OLS | 2011 | 152 | – | −0.04 | – | – | – |
| Outcome: low weight-for-age | |||||||||
| Lachaud31 | Women’s share of household income | Probit | 1994 | 1352 | 0.28* | −0.27 | −0.47 to −0.07 | −0.04 | −0.06 to −0.01 |
*Difference between observed level of exposure and perfect equity, defined as 0.5.
†Half of the difference between men and women.
‡Calculated in a Bayesian combination as the difference in probability that a man versus a woman works in the horticultural export sector.
DiD, difference-in-difference; FE, fixed effects; IV, instrumental variable; Ln, Natural logarithm; OLS, ordinary least squares; 2SLS, two-stage least squares; SUR, seemingly unrelated panel regression.