IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/amu/wpaper/2012-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Use of Maternal Health Care in Tajikstan: A Bargaining Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Mieke Meurs
  • Lisa Giddings

Abstract

Post-socialist economic declines have included declines in women's use of maternal health care. This paper examines the use of maternal health care in Tajikistan, where such declines have occurred. The findings support previous evidence that women's use of services depends on women's education, household income, and proximity of services. Previous models have not specified who makes the care decision. Using education as a proxy for preferences, the findings show that women share decisionmaking with their spouse and the eldest female in the household. However, the data provides limited evidence that traditional proxies for bargaining power affect outcomes. The authors conclude that measures of bargaining power require tailoring to local conditions. Surveys evaluating the value of women's assets and their services in the home, as well as questions about decision-making, will allow researchers to more effectively measure bargaining power across contexts. The paper concludes with policy recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mieke Meurs & Lisa Giddings, 2012. "Use of Maternal Health Care in Tajikstan: A Bargaining Framework," Working Papers 2012-05, American University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:amu:wpaper:2012-05
    DOI: 10.17606/wgvs-y908
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.17606/wgvs-y908
    File Function: First version, 2012
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17606/wgvs-y908?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haddad, Lawrence & Hoddinott, John & Alderman, Harold & DEC, 1994. "Intrahousehold resource allocation : an overview," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1255, The World Bank.
    2. Shelah Bloom & David Wypij & Monica Gupta, 2001. "Dimensions of women’s autonomy and the influence on maternal health care utilization in a north indian city," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 38(1), pages 67-78, February.
    3. Doss, Cheryl R., 1996. "Testing among models of intrahousehold resource allocation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(10), pages 1597-1609, October.
    4. Nazim Habibov, 2009. "What determines healthcare utilization and related out-of-pocket expenditures in Tajikistan? Lessons from a national survey," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 54(4), pages 260-266, August.
    5. Celik, Yusuf & Hotchkiss, David R., 2000. "The socio-economic determinants of maternal health care utilization in Turkey," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 50(12), pages 1797-1806, June.
    6. Rasul, Imran, 2008. "Household bargaining over fertility: Theory and evidence from Malaysia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 215-241, June.
    7. Dabalen, Andrew & Wane, Waly, 2008. "Informal payments and moonlighting in Tajikistan's health sector," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4555, The World Bank.
    8. Michael Bittman & Paula England & Nancy Folbre & George Matheson, 2001. "When Gender Trumps Money: Bargaining and Time in Household Work," JCPR Working Papers 221, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    9. Joris Ghysels, 2004. "Work, Family and Childcare," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3504.
    10. Jane Falkingham, 2000. "A Profile of Poverty in Tajikistan," CASE Papers case39, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Smith, Lisa C. & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 1999. "Supply response of West African agricultural households," FCND discussion papers 69, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Bina Agarwal, 1997. "''Bargaining'' and Gender Relations: Within and Beyond the Household," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1-51.
    3. Biswajit Mandal, 2015. "Demand for maternal health inputs in West Bengal-Inference from NFHS 3 in India," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(4), pages 2685-2700.
    4. Almudena Sevilla-Sanz & Cristina Fernandez, 2006. "Social Norms and Household Time Allocation," Economics Series Working Papers 291, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    5. Mandal, Biswajit, 2015. "Demand for Maternal health inputs in West Bengal-Inference from NFHS 3," MPRA Paper 68224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Xu, Zeyu, 2007. "A survey on intra-household models and evidence," MPRA Paper 3763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Kerry MacQuarrie & Jeffrey Edmeades, 2015. "Whose Fertility Preferences Matter? Women, Husbands, In-laws, and Abortion in Madhya Pradesh, India," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 34(4), pages 615-639, August.
    8. Bowles, Hannah Riley & McGinn, Kathleen, 2008. "Gender in Job Negotiations: A Two-Level Game," Working Paper Series rwp08-027, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Keera Allendorf, 2012. "Women’s Agency and the Quality of Family Relationships in India," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 31(2), pages 187-206, April.
    10. Shandana Dar & Uzma Afzal, 2015. "Education and Maternal Health in Pakistan: The Pathways of Influence," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 20(2), pages 1-34, July-Dec.
    11. Dana A. Glei & Noreen Goldman & German Rodriguez, 2002. "Utilization of Care During Pregnancy in Rural Guatemala: Does Obstetrical Need Matters," Working Papers 308, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Office of Population Research..
    12. Holvoet, Nathalie, 2003. "Household matters: on the usefulness of an institutional approach for understanding intrahousehold allocation," IOB Discussion Papers 2003.03, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).
    13. Donni, Olivier & Molina, José Alberto, 2018. "Household Collective Models: Three Decades of Theoretical Contributions and Empirical Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 11915, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Branisa, Boris & Klasen, Stephan & Ziegler, Maria, 2013. "Gender Inequality in Social Institutions and Gendered Development Outcomes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 252-268.
    15. Haider, Hamza & Smale, Melinda & Theriault, Veronique, 2018. "Intensification and intrahousehold decisions: Fertilizer adoption in Burkina Faso," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 310-320.
    16. Barman, Bikash & Saha, Jay & Chouhan, Pradip, 2020. "Impact of education on the utilization of maternal health care services: An investigation from National Family Health Survey (2015–16) in India," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    17. Agarwal, Bina, 1997. ""Bargaining" and gender relations," FCND discussion papers 27, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Kamiya, Yusuke, 2011. "Women's autonomy and reproductive health care utilisation: Empirical evidence from Tajikistan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 304-313.
    19. Johar, Meliyanni & Soewondo, Prastuti & Pujisubekti, Retno & Satrio, Harsa Kunthara & Adji, Ardi, 2018. "Inequality in access to health care, health insurance and the role of supply factors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 134-145.
    20. S Anukriti & Catalina Herrera‐Almanza & Praveen K. Pathak & Mahesh Karra, 2020. "Curse of the Mummy‐ji: The Influence of Mothers‐in‐Law on Women in India†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(5), pages 1328-1351, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:amu:wpaper:2012-05. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Meal (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.american.edu/cas/economics/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.