Primary Outcomes (explanation)
To explore whether customized credit transfer program impacts on women’s influence in household decision making, information collected on whether women have influence in household decision making related to land purchasing, savings, children education, wedding, expenditure on treatment, food and nonfood consumption etc. The respondents were asked to report about who takes the decision on the above mentioned issues on a 1 to 5 point scale. The options are (1) woman solely decides, (2) she and her husband jointly decide, (3) her husband solely decides, (4) she and other family member jointly decide, and (5) other members decide. To assess the impact of the program on rural women’s attitude towards risk, the respondents were asked to participate in a hypothetical lottery and choose one of four options. Respondents were told that they have equal chance to win. The respondents have the chance to (1) get sure amount of money of Tk.100 if win or even fail to win, (2) get TK. 200 if win and get TK.60 if fail to win, (3) get TK. 300 if win and get TK.20 if fail to win, and (4) get TK. 400 if win and get nothing if fail to win. To investigate the impact of the program on time preference, respondents were asked to report how long they would like to wait to get a certain amount of money instead of accepting a lower amount of money today. Our survey asks the respondent to report whether they would like to (1) accept Tk. 200 today or Tk 250 after one month if they win a prize, (2) accept Tk. 200 today or Tk. 250 after two months if they win a prize. The respondents were also asked to report how long (in month) they would like to wait for Tk. 250. In addition to these two questions, in the follow up survey, we asked two more questions to the respondent following the choice-list method of elicitation of time-preference which involve opting between receiving a smaller payment at an earlier date and a larger payment at a later date (Bauer et al., 2012; Sutter et al., 2013).
Additionally we conduct an experiment in 2019 with 440 participants where participants involve playing simple economic games in a suitable venue such as their local school. The task involves throwing a tennis ball and the objective is to get it in a bucket that is placed at 3 meter distance from the participants. They have 10 tries. This task has 4 parts. All instructions were given in the local language (Bengali). These ‘economic games’ are based upon well-established methods used in experimental economics (e.g. Gneezy, K., Leonard, L., & List, AJ. 2009). Participation in the economic game(s) takes approximately 60 minutes.