"Land reform policy must take into account pre-existing gender discriminations in inheritance and land ownership rights." So said Abhishek Chakravarty, professor at the University of Essex. Chakravarty visited the Navarra Center for International Development at Institute for Culture and Society of the University of Navarra to present his publication: 'Property Rights and Gender Bias: Evidence from Land Reform in West Bengal'.

The research, jointly conducted with Sonia Bhalotra (University of Essex), Dilip Mookherjee (Boston University) and Francisco J. Pino (University of Chile), studies how the formalization of land rights increases productivity but can have a large impact on gender inequality. The project uses two independent instructions of data from West Bengal, India, to analyze the effect that a land reform implemented in the late 1970s and early 1980s had on household child survival. The reform increased child survival in both Hindu and non-Hindu families, but the relative deterioration in girls' survival after the reform occurs only in Hindu families, which have a greater preference for sons for a variety of cultural reasons.

Professor Chakravarty explains that the results "provide conclusive evidence that gender bias in property rights can cause the formalization of land distribution to also amplify gender inequalities."

What was the main motivation for conducting the research on land reform and gender bias in West Bengal?

The formalization of property rights is considered a fundamental part of the growth process in less developed countries. However, the academic literature on this topic does not take into account the impact of gender discrimination on the strengthening of property rights in countries where women traditionally have fewer rights. This is of particular relevance in the case of agricultural land, since a very important part of the people in the countries at development make their living from the agricultural sector. In fact, land reforms can widen existing gender inequalities in issues such as health, in case institutional biases against women in land rights are not taken into account in the process of formalizing property rights. This means that the impact from a gender perspective of agrarian reform requires further study research.

What are the advantages of using two instructions from data?

Each has its advantages. The data of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) collects detailed information on the fertility of the women interviewed, allowing us to examine the impact of land reform at the individual child level by sex, birth order, sex of the eldest child in the family. The set of regional data , the second database, contains detailed information on the implementation of the reform at the village level, as well as immigration and land ownership cases for the interviewed households that allow us to examine the impact of the reform at the regional level.

Before approve a land reform policy, do you think policy makers should open a dialogue on how the law might affect gender inequality?

Land reform policies need to take into account pre-existing gender differences in inheritance and land ownership rights. In addition, the roots of such differences should be addressed as part of a broader diary of development of the country. This is especially important if these roots lie in cultural institutions.