This article was downloaded by: [University of Cape Town Libraries]

On: 6 June 2011

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 931414159]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Agenda

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t929906840

Women, income and poverty: Gendered access to resources in PostApartheid South Africa

Dorrit Poselab; Michael Roganb

a
National Research Foundation (NRF), b School of Development Studies at the University of KwaZuluNatal, Durban
Online publication date: 03 May 2011

To cite this Article Posel, Dorrit and Rogan, Michael(2009) 'Women, income and poverty: Gendered access to resources in

Post-Apartheid South Africa', Agenda, 23: 81, 25 34

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/10130950.2009.9676251
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10130950.2009.9676251

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Women, income and poverty: Gendered access

to resources in Post-Apartheid South Africa

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

Dorrit Posel and Michael Rogan

abstract
__

___

_- -

__

---

- __ -

Far-reaching changes in the post-apartheid period in South Africa are likely to have affected gendered access to resources In
thisArt,c/e. we use nationally representative household survey data to examine whether trends in the extent of income poverty
over a recent ten-year period have been gendered We find that females are more likely than males to live in poor households
Poverty rates have fallen from 1997 to 2006. and particularly following the expansion of the social grant system However, the
decline in poverty rates has been larger among males than among females Higher levels of unemployment and lower earnings
among women, as well as changes in household structure, help explain why the gender gap in poverty rates has widened
over the period We find also that femaleheaded households are far more vulnerable to income poverty than maleheaded
households and further, that the extent of poverty has fallen by more among households headed by men However, we show
that there are significant differences in poverty risks not only among femaleheaded households, but also among maleheaded
households, depending on the employment status of household members

keywords
~

gender; poverty; femaleheaded households; South Africa

Introduction
In this Article, we investigate whether trends
in the extent of income poverty in South Africa
over the past decade have been gendered. The
post-apartheid period has been characterised by
complex changes in all sectors of society and
many of these changes are likely to have affected
gendered access to resources. On one hand,
the past decade has seen employment growth
for women (Casale and Posel, 2002; Casale and

Posel, 2005),the introduction of equal opportunity

legislation and protective labour legislation
(including the extension of minimum wages to
domestic workers) (Casale and Posel, 2005).
and the expansion of a relatively comprehensive
social security system which includes a social
pension as well as several grants to support
the caregivers of children. On the other hand,
this period has seen a number of changes that
might be expected to affect women's well-being

Women, income and poverty: Gendered access to resources in Post-Apartheid South Africa

25

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

adversely. These changes include the gendered

impact of the HIV/AIDS epidemic (Bentley, 2004;
Schatz and Ogunmefun, 20071, declining marital
rates (Casale and Posel, 2002). rising rates of
female unemployment (Casale and Posel, 2002;
Casale, 2004). and women increasingly overrepresented in the informal economy and in jobs
with very low earnings (Casale, 2004).
Since 1994, nationallyrepresentativehousehold
surveys have been conducted regularly by the
official statistical agency in South Africa (Statistics
South Africa).' These surveys collect detailed
information on individuals and the households
in which they live. However. in many of the
surveys, comprehensive information has not been
collected on all sources of income earned or
received by individuals in households. Much of
the poverty literature in South Africa therefore has
focused on which data sets are used to measure
individual or household well-being, and on the
adjustments that are made to account for the
inherent limitations (and in particular, the possible
under-reporting of income) in the available data
sources (Seekings, 2007).

There is considerable empirical evidence which shows

that on average, female-headed households are more
vulnerable to poverty than households headed by men
These data constraints notwithstanding, most
studies which have investigated how the incidence
of poverty has changed since the end of apartheid,
typically have found that, overall, income poverty
increased slightly or remained constant between
1995 and 2000 (Leibbrandt and Woolard. 2001;
Bhorat and Kanbur, 2005; Hoogeveen and Ozler,
2005; Leibbrandt et a/, 2006; Seekings. 2007;
Bhorat and van der Westhuizen. 2008; van der
Berg et al, 2008). During the 2000s. and coinciding
with a sizeable increase in government expenditure
on social grants, poverty rates started to decline,
although the extent of this decline remains debated
(Meth, 2006; van der Berg era/, 2008).

26

AGENDA 81 2009

Given the legacy of apartheid, the emphasis in

describing poverty trends over the past decade has
been on changes by "population group" or race,
and there has been relatively little consideration
of whether poverty trends have been gendered.
Measuringindividual access to resources by gender
(or across household members more generally) is
complicated by a lack of information on intrahousehold resource allocations. Conventional
poverty measures estimate individual well-being
in the household by assuming that all resources
in the household are equally (or equivalently)
shared. Women and men, therefore, are identified
as being poor if they live in households where
average per capita (or per adult equivalent) income
is below an individual (or adult) poverty line.
However, when resources are not equatly shared,
individual poverty may be incorrectly measured.
For example, if unequal access to resources in
non-poor households pushes women below the
poverty line, this will not be detected in estimates
of poverty incidence.
In many studies, both internationally and in
South Africa, gender differences in poverty have
been explored further through a comparison of
the economic well-being of female- and maleheaded households. If female-headed households
are found to rely primarily on income earned
or received by women, then a comparison of
economic status by the gender of the household
head can highlight the nature and extent of
gender differences in access to resources.
Although female- and male-headed households
are not homogenous types of households, there is
considerable empirical evidence which shows that
on average, female-headed households are more
vulnerable to poverty than households headed by
men (see Buvinic and Gupta, 1997 and Lampietti
and Stalker, 2000, for a broad review of studies
from developing countries).
An analysis of the gendered nature of poverty,
however, cannot rely only on describingdifferences
in poverty rates among female- and male-headed

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

households. Because male-headed householdsare

mom common than female-headed households,
rtreny more poor women may live in households
headedby men, even if female-headed households
mtypically poorer. Furthermore, because women
m maleheaded households are not the household
heads, their access to income may be further
constrained. In fact, female heads in some settings
have indicated that they feel less vulnerable even
with lower income due to the greater control over
resources that they enjoy (Chant. 2003).
In this Arficfe, we explore gendered
income poverty trends in South Africa using
two approaches. First, we investigate whether
m a l e s are more likely than males to live in poor
households and whether this has changed over
tbne. Second, we examine how the economic
well-being of households has changed according
tothe gender of the householdhead. In light of the
heterogeneity among female- and male-headed
households, we also consider differences among
both female and male-headed households.
We analyse the income and expenditure data
provided in two sets of nationally representative
household surveys, which have been relatively
under-utilised in poverty studies thus far: the
1997 and 1999 October Household Surveys and
the 2004 and 2006 General Household Surveys.
These surveys have the advantage that they
consistently collect information on the individual
receipt of both earned income and social grant
income. Estimates of social grant spending derived
from these household surveys are reasonably in
line with administrative records, although there
may be some under-reporting of grant receipt.2
Moreover, the surveys do not capture information
on other sources of income such as private
pensions and remittance transfers. To address
these limitations, we augment the measure of
household income using information collected on
household expenditure3in each of the surveys in
order to provide a more comprehensive measure
of economic resources in the household.

Poverty in South Africa

9)

To compare poverty rates by gender, we first

estimate poverty at the level of the individual.
Individuals are identified as being poor if they

c)

live in households where average per capita

monthly household income is below the poverty
line of 322 Rand measured in 2000 prices (or
approximately 515 Rand in 2008 prices)? In 1997,
our data suggest that approximately 59.5% of the
population, or 24.7 million individuals, lived in poor
households in South Africa (see Table 1). By 2006,
poverty rates had decreased by 3.5 percentage
points to 56%. Although the number of poor
people increased over the period to about 26.5
million, this increase was less than the increase
in the total population, and the share of the
population which was poor therefore fell.

1997 1999 2004 204g

Number of poor (millions) 24.7

Poverty rate 1% poor)

27.6 28.6 26.5

59.5 63.6 61.6 56.0

Source: Own calculations from the 1997and 1999 October

Household Surveys and the 2 w 4 and 2006 General Household
surveys

A key factor accounting for the decrease in

poverty rates, particularly over the 2000s. has
been the expansion of the social grant system.
Between 2001 and 2006, government spending
on social grants increased from 20.5 billion
Rand to 56.9 billion Rand per annum (or from
19.4 billion to 41.8 billion Rand in 2000 prices,
representing a 115% increase) (National Treasuw,
2007). Over this period, the total number of
grants issued grew from approximately3.6 million
to 12 million. Some of the notable changes in
individual grant allocation between 2001 and
2006 include: an increase in the number of
government pension recipients from 1.9 million
to 2.2 million (representing a rise in annual
expenditure from 12.2 billion to 16 billion Rand
in real terms); a doubling of disabitity grant

Women, income and poverty: Gendered access to resources in Post-Apartheid South Africa

27

Q,

beneficiaries from 700 000 to 1.4 million (an

Gender and poverty

increase in annual expenditure from 4.4 billion

to 11.6 billion Rand in real terms); and a dramatic
expansion in the number of child support
grants paid out from 1.1 million to 7.9 million (an
increase in annual expenditure from 1.3 billion to
12.4billion Rand in real terms) (National Treasury,

The risk of living in a poor household in South

Africa is not distributed equally by gender. Rather,
females are significantly more likely than males
to live in households where average per capita
income is below the poverty line. In 1997, for
example, we estimate that almost 62% of
females were poor compared to just over 579/0
of males (Table 2). Furthermore, poverty rates
among males decreased considerably over the
period (from 57.146 to 52.39/0),
while the extent
of poverty among females only fell from 61.8%
to 59.6%.

.
I

,111)

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

2007).
The increased coverage of these grants is
reflected in the proportion of households receiving
social grantsupport.Inthe 1997October Household
Survey (OHS), approximately one quarter of all
households reported receiving at least one social
grant. In the 2006 General Household Survey
(GHS). this had risen to more than two fifths of
households.
If households had relied only on income from
employment, then poverty rates over the period
would have been far higher, and the fall in the
poverty rates from 1997 to 2006 would have
been considerably smaller. Figure 1 shows that
in 1997,65.39/0of individuals lived in households
where average earnings were insufficient to lift
household members above the poverty line. By
2006,this had fallen, but only by one percentage
point to 64.3%. Including social grant income into
a measure of total income, however, significantly
lowers poverty rates and results in a decline in the
extent of poverty over the 2000s.

Table 2: Poverty rates by gender in South Africa

1997

1-

2004

2006

All South Africans

Male

57.1

61.3

Female

61.8

65.8

58.4
64.7

52.3
59.6

Africans
Male

67.3

70 1

67.6

606

Female

72.6

75.7

74.7

69.0

Source: Own calculations from the 1997 and 7999 OHSs and the
2004 and 2 w 6 GHSs

Among all South Africans, African females

face the highest risk of poverty. In 1997, an
alarming 72.6% of African females lived in poor
households and by 2006 the proportion only fell
to 69Y0 (a 3.6 percentage point drop, compared
to a 6.7percentage point decrease among African
males). Consequently, gender differences in the
risk of living in poverty widened particularly among
Africans over the decade.

Gender differences in income

- 1

Source: Own calculations from the 7997 and 7999 OHSs and the
2004 and 2006 GHSs

28

AGENDA 81 2009

Gender differences in poverty rates are explained

partly by gender differences in earnings. On
average, women who are employed earn
significantly less than men who are employed
(Table 3).In 1997, average earnings for women
were about 69% of average earnings for men.
From 1997 to 2006, this gender gap in average

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

earnings narrowed, so that by 2006, women's

average earnings were about 75% of men's
average earnings.
However, the gender gap in median earnings
widened over the period. Because earnings are
very unequally distributed in South Africa, average
earnings are considerably higher than median
earnings (or earnings received by individuals at
the 50th percentile of the earnings distribution). In
1997,thefemale-male ratio of medianearnings was
0.65;by2006 it had dropped to 0.61, indicatingthat
the median earnings of employed women were
only 61% of the median earnings of employed
men..Although women's employment has grown
over the last decade, women are also increasingly
over-mpresented among low-wage workers. In
1997,53% of all those earning less than 600 Rand
a month in 2000 prices (or approximately 1 140
Rand in 2008 prices) were women; by 2006, this
had < i n to 57% (although women accounted for
only 40% of all the employed in that year).
Women not only earn less than men, but they
are also far less likely than men to find employment.
Over the decade, female unemployment rates
were consistently and significantly higher than male
unemployment rates (Table 4). By 2006, almost
50% ofall women who reported that they wanted
to work did not have employment, compared to

about 32% of men. Furthermore, a much larger

proportion of women than men is not participating
in the labour market (as part of the employed
or the unemployed), because women bear the
overwhelming responsibility for childcare. Perhaps
not surprisingly then, women are more likely than
men to be social grant recipients. In the 2006 GHS,
almost 15% of all women aged 15 years and older
were reportedas receiving a social grant compared
to less than 10% of men.
Although total social grant payments have
increased considerably over the decade, the value
of social grant income is considerably lower than
the value of earnings. In 2006, for example, the
maximum value of the child support grant was
142 Rand (in 2000 prices), whereas median
real earnings in that year were about 820 Rand
for women and 1,340 Rand for men. Given
gender differences in access to employment
and earnings, and in the reliance on social grant
income, women have significantly lower levels of
income than men in South Africa. Consequently,
individuals face a greater likelihood of poverty
if they live in households which depend on the
income received by women.
Females in South Africa are more likely than
males to live in households which depend on
women's earnings or which have no access

1997

1999

2004

2006

Average female earnings

2,251

2,398

2.222

2.405

Average male earnings

3,279

4.173

3,071

3.187

0.69

0.57

0.72

0.75

Median female earnings

1,066

825

921

821

Median male earnings

1,649

1,475

1.580

1,343

0.65

0.56

0.58

0.61

Female/mle average earnings

Femalehale median earnings

Source Own wlculatrons from the 1997 and 1999 OHSs and the 2004 and 2006 GHSs

Women, income and poverty Gendered access to resources in Post-Apartheid South Africa

29

3,
c)
(P

Table 4 Broad unemployment rates among

adults (15+) in South Africa

1997

1999

2M4

Part of the rise in the proportion of females

living in households with no employed men might

2006

be explained by the decline in marital rates among

YO men
unemployed

29.9

32 4

35.7

31 9

African women. Marital rates among African

women are significantly lower than marital rates

YO women
unemployed

45.8

47.3

50.9

49.5

among other women. Furthermore, whereas an

increasing proportion of non-African women were

Source. Own calculations from the 7997and 1999 OHSs and rhe

reported as married or cohabiting with partners

2004 and 2006 GHSs

from 1997 to 2006, marital rates among African

Note: The braad unemployment rare includes both the searching

women fell from about 36% to 34% (Figure 2).

and the non-searching unemployed.

The decline in marital rates over the period

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

is particularly pronounced among female heads

to earned income. This is because a far larger
percentage of females than males live in

of household. In 1997, about 32% of all female

households where there are no resident employed

with a male partner, but in 2006, this dropped to

men, and where there are only employed women

only 224b. The fall in marital rates among female

household heads were married or cohabiting

or where no resident household member has

heads has been driven by an increase in the

employment (Table 5). Furthermore, over the

decade, females have become more reliant on

proportion of female heads who have never

the income received by women. In 1997, about

married, rather than by an increase in divorce

or widowhood: the proportion of female heads

57% of females lived in households in which there

who had never married rose from roughly 27% to

were no male income-earners, compared to only

37% over the period, while the proportion who

were divorced or widowed remained constant
at about 42%.

46% of males. By 2006, almost 60% of all females

were living in households in which there were no
employed men.

Table 5: Employed household members by gender in South Africa, 1997

- 2006

Pem~ntegeof femalrr living in households where them are:

1997

1999

2001

Mo6

No employed members

37.9

35.3

37.3

37.2

Only employed women

18.8

22.5

23.2

22.3

Only employed men

22.9

20.5

20.1

20.7

Both employed men & women

20.4

21.7

19.4

19.8

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

No employed members

33.4

31.6

33.9

32.5

Only employed women

12.5

14.1

14.4

13.4

Only employed men

31.7

31.5

31.9

33.7

Both employed men &women

22.4

22.8

19.8

20.4

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

-P

of m r k IMng in household. where thsrs me:

Source: Own calculations from the 1997 and 1999 OHSs and the 2004 and 2006 GHSs

30

AGENDA81 2009

F w e 2: Marriage and cohabitation among South Africa

women (15 years and older)
70

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

1"

10 - '

1997

1999

2064

2006

Poverty rates among female and

male-headed households
As in other countries, female headship is on the

headed grew modestly over the period, from

35.2% to 37.5% of all households.
Female-headed households are far more likely
to be poor (have an average per capita income
in the household that is below the poverty line)
than male-headed households: between 1997
and 2006, poverty rates were consistently and
significantly higher in households headed by
women than in male-headed households (Table 7).

rise in South Africa. From 1997 t o 2006 there

has been a steady increase in the number of
households headed by women (Table 6). This
increase has been slightly larger than the rise in the
number of households overall and consequently
the proportion of all households which are female-

2004

2006

1997

1999

Maleheaded

5 981 957

6 647 800

7 664 456

8 073 892

Female-headed

3 244 538

3 735 295

4520349

4858648

35.9

37.1

37.5

Percentage female-headed
(Iwn calculetions from the

35.2
1 B 7 and 1999 OH& and the 2004 and 2006 GHSs

1997

1999

2004

2006

All households5

48.6

50.9

48.2

43.6

Maleheaded

38.8

41.7

37.2

32.5

Femaleheaded

66.7

67.2

66.9

62.0

Sotme Own wlculations from the 1997 and 1999 OHSs and the 2004 and 2006 GHSs

Women, income and poverty: Gendered access to resources in Post-Apartheid South Africa

31

Q,
I

*e

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

(0

Moreover, the changes in poverty rates over the

period measured by the gender of the household
head have resulted in a widening of the poverty gap
between male- and female-headed households.
The extent of poverty decreased from 38.8% to
32.59/0among male-headed households (a relative
fall of 16%) but only from 66.7% to 62Y0 among
female-headed households (a relative fall of 7%).
In the majority of households in South
Africa, individuals who are reported as heads of
household are also the main income providers
in the household. Across the four surveys used
in this study, between 76% and 83Y0 of all
household heads earned or received the highest
level of income reported in the household.
Distinguishingamong households according to the
gender of the head therefore provides one means
of exploring the implications of gender differences
in access to income. A key reason why femaleheaded households face a higher risk of poverty is
because these households are far more likely than
male-headed households to rely on the income of
women.

Not all female-headed households, however,

are equally vulnerable to poverty and there are
important differences in poverty rates among
female-headed households, as well as among
male-headed households. Figure 3 illustrates
that both female- and male-headed households
face particularly high risks of poverty when these
households contain no resident members with
employment. Furthermore, poverty rates fall
significantly in both types of households as the
number of employed household members rises.
Nonetheless, controlling for the employment status
of household members, female-headed households
are consistently more likely to be poor than
male-headed households. Moreover, a far larger
proportionof femaleheaded households contain no
employed members. In 2006,for example, almost
5096 of all female-headed households reported no
household member with employment compared to
24% of maleheaded households. Less than 12%
of femaleheaded households reported more than
one employed household member, compared to
about 28% of male-headed households.

Figure 3: Poverty rates among female- and male-headed

honsehoh m South Africa, 2006

1 etllployed
More than 1
No employed
household member hous&old manber employed howhold
member

32

AGENDA 81 2009

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

Concluding comments
The money-metric poverty analysis presented in
this paper has demonstrated that females in South
Africa are more at risk of poverty than males.
Furthermore, although poverty rates have fallen for
both females and males over the ten-year period
from 1997 to 2006, the decline in the extent of
income poverty has been greater for males. While
a larger proportion of women have received social
grant support over the period, the small size of
the grants, the increasing gender gap in median
wages, relatively lower access to employment
for women, and a growing reliance on women's
income has meant that poverty rates have fallen
more slowly among females than among males.
Consequently, gender differences in poverty rates
have widened over the period.
To explore these gender differences in poverty
further, we compared the level of poverty in
female- and male-headed households. Although
there is considerable variation among these
household types, households headed by women
are far more likely to be poor than households
headed by men. This is because these households
are more reliant on income received by women.
Furthermore, over the period, poverty rates have
fallen by .less among female-headed households
than among maleheaded households.
Income poverty therefore remains a gendered
phenomenon in post-apartheidSouth Africa. Females
and those residing in femaleheaded households
have seen their contribution to overall income poverty
increase over the period. While income poverty
is only one measure of well-being, the findings
presented in this Article highlight the implications of
persistent gender inequality in the labour market and
a growing reliance on women's earnings.

Footnotes
1. The first nationally representative household survey in
South Africa was conducted in 1993 by the South African

Labour and Development Research Unit.

2 . For example, the value of total social grant expenditure
derived from the 2004 General Household Survey is

estimated at approximately 43 billion Rand. According

to the National Treasury (2007).the Department of
Social Development spent approximately 44.8 billion
Rand on grants in the 2004/5 fiscal year. Similarly, in 2006,
household survey data suggest that social grant spending
was about 51.5billion Rand, while administrative records
document spending at approximately 51.9billion Rand for
the 2005/6fiscal year and 56.9billion Rand for the 2006j7
fiscal year. Thus, household survey data do underestimate
social grant income, but not by a large amount. However,
there IS a weaker correspondence in the composition of
the grants.
We use household expenditure to approximate household
resources in households which report zero earned income
and zero social grant income.
In order to adjust for inflation, we use real income
expressed in 2000 prices. We adjust nominal income
in each of the four survey years using Statistics South
Africa's Consumer Price Indices. The poverty line of R322
in 2000 prices is a common poverty threshold used in a
number of South African poverty studies.
Because poorer individuals live in larger households in
South Africa, poverty measured at the household level
is considerably lower than poverty measured at the
individual level.

References
Bentley K (2004) 'Women's human rights and the feminisation
of poverty in South Africa', in Review of African Political
Economy, 31,100:247-261.
Bhorat H & Kanbur R (2005) 'Poverty and w e i h i n g in postapartheid South Africa: An overview of data, outcomes
and policy', DPRU Working Paper OV101. Cape Town,
Development Policy Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
Bhorat H & van der Westhuizen C (2008)'Economic growth,
poverty and inequality in South Africa: The first decade
of democracy', Development Policy Research Unit
Conference 2008 - The Regulatory Environment and its
Impact on the Nature and Level of Economic Growth and
Development in South Africa, Gauteng.
Buvinic M & Gupta GR (1997)'Femaleheaded households
and female-maintained families: Are they worth targetting
to reduce poverty in developing countries?' in Economic
Development and Cultural Change, 45,2: 254280.
Casale D (20041 'What has the feminisation of the labour
force 'bought' women in South Africa? Trends in labour
force participation, employment and earnings, 19952001'.
DPRU Working Paper Series- No. 04/84,Development
Policy Research Unit- University of Cape Town.
Casale D & Pose1 D (2002)'The continued feminisation of the
labour force in South Africa: An analysis of recent data
and trends', in The South African Journal of Economics,
70, 1 : 156-184.

Women, income and poverty: Gendered access to resources in Post-ApartheidSouth Africa

33

9)

z5

*I .
c)

(D

Downloaded By: [University of Cape Town Libraries] At: 07:32 6 June 2011

Casale D & Pose1 D 12005)'Women and the economy: How

far have we come?' in Agenda, 64:21-29.
Chant S (2003)'Dangerous equations? How female-headed
households became the poorest of the poor: Causes,
consequences and cautions', in Gender Myths and
Feminist Fables: Repositioning Gender in Development
Policy and Practice, Institute of Development Studies,
Sussex.
Hoogeveen J & Ozler B (2005)'Not separate, not equal:
Poverty and inequality in post-apartheid South Africa',
William Davidson Institute Working Paper Number 739.
William Davidson Institute - University of Michigan.
Lampietti J & Stalker L (2000)'Consumption expenditure
and female poverty: A review of the evidence'. Policy
Research Report on Gender and Development Working
Paper Series No 1 1 Washington DC, The World Bank.
Leibbrandt M, Poswell L, Naidoo P & Welch M (2006)
'Measuring recent changes in South African inequality
and poverty using 1996 and 2001 census data', in H
Bhorat and R Kanbur (eds) Poverty and Policy in PostApartheid South Africa, Pretoria: HSRC Press.

Leibbrandt M & Woolard I (2001)

'Measuring poverty in South
Africa' in H Bhorat, M Leibbrandt, M Maziya. S van der
Berg & I Woolard (eds) Fighting Poverty: Labour Markets
and Inequality in South Africa, Cape Town: UCT Press.
Meth C (2006) 'Income poverty in 2004: A second
engagement with the van der Berg et al. figures', School
of Development Studies Working Paper 47, Durban.
School of Development Studies, University of KwaZuluNatal.
National Treasuw (2007)'Intergovernmental Fiscal Review',
Pretoria.
Schatz E & Ogunmefun C (2007)'Caring and contributing:
The role of older women in rural South African multigenerational households in the HIV/AIDS era', in World
Development, 35,8: 1390-1403.
Seekings J (2007)'Poverty and inequality after apartheid'.
CSSR Working Paper No 200. Cape Town, Centre for
Social Science Research, University of Cape Town.
van der Berg S. Louw M & Yu D (2008)'Post-transition
poverty trends based on an alternative data source', in
South African Journal of Economics, 76,1: 5b-76.

DORRIT POSEL holds an National Research Foundation (NRF) Research Chair in

the School of Development Studies at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Durban.
Her research investigates questions in labour economics, migration. and the
economics of the household. Email: posel@ukzn.ac.za.
MICHAEL ROGAN is a PhD candidate in the School of Development Studies at
the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Durban. His research interests include: health,
gender and poverty. Email: rogan@ukzn.ac.za.

34

AGENDA 81 2009