This article is based on work undertaken as part of the Urban Livelihoods Study (ULS), a collaborative project between Proshika Manobik Unnayan Kendra, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the University of Bath. The study was funded by the UK Department for International Development. The authors wish to acknowledge the inputs of LSHTM Team Leader, Dr Jane Pryer, Proshika Study Director, Mr Md. Shahabuddin and Qualitative Adviser, Professor Geof Wood. We are also indebted to the ULS field staff for their hard work and to the respondents who generously gave their time and shared their experiences. We would also like to thank the two anonymous reviewers of this journal for their helpful suggestions.
Women's Employment in Urban Bangladesh: A Challenge to Gender Identity?
Article first published online: 13 MAY 2005
Development and Change
Volume 36, Issue 2, pages 317–349, March 2005
How to Cite
Salway, S., Jesmin, S. and Rahman, S. (2005), Women's Employment in Urban Bangladesh: A Challenge to Gender Identity?. Development and Change, 36: 317–349. doi: 10.1111/j.0012-155X.2005.00413.x
- Issue published online: 13 MAY 2005
- Article first published online: 13 MAY 2005
Drawing on survey and ethnographic data, this article presents empirical evidence regarding the impact of work participation on poor women's lives in urban Bangladesh. Working for pay is common among poor, married women in Dhaka and working women commonly make an important contribution to household income. There is evidence that working women are more likely to manage money, shop for household provisions and move about outside the home than non-working women. Working women also appear better able to accumulate personal assets and take steps to secure their own well-being. Despite such signs of challenge to ‘traditional’ gender identity, social and economic structures continue to be heavily weighted against women, limiting the impact of employment on other dimensions of their lives. In the acutely insecure urban setting, women (and men) are found to pursue multiple strategies aimed at both securing ‘centrality’ within their families, as well as protecting personal interests should familial entitlements prove unreliable.