Asset, voice, leverage? Women’s property ownership and household decision-making in Colombia, Guatemala, and Honduras

Property ownership has long been associated with essential human development outcomes, yet globally, women continue to be at a significant disadvantage compared to men. While previous scholarship has theorized the importance of women’s land ownership, empirical studies have historically been more limited, leaving many relevant questions unanswered. Does asset ownership improve women’s lives? If so, how? When women own property, are they better able to make choices about their daily lives? About their own health? How does ownership increase women’s ability to negotiate at the household level? What does this relationship look like across different types of property, held in different ways? Using cross-sectional survey data from Colombia, Guatemala, and Honduras, this manuscript explores the relationship between women’s ownership of housing and land and their ability to participate in decision-making at the household level. Building on previous literature, I examine key differences in how assets are owned (i.e., sole ownership vs. joint ownership) and types of property (i.e., land vs. home). I find that while property ownership has the potential to increase women’s decision-making ability, it is critical to examine both how and what women own to understand this relationship. Further, I find ownership has a different relationship with empowerment across subcategories of women, such as rural or Indigenous women, highlighting the importance of an intersectional approach. This analysis provides a better understanding of the conditions under which asset ownership has the potential to increase women’s standing and improve their daily lives. • Women’s ownership of housing can have a stronger impact than land ownership. • Both sole and joint ownership can have a positive relationship with empowerment. • Rurality and Indigeneity attenuate empowerment outcomes in important ways. • Ability to participate in decision-making varies widely across type of decision. • Understanding gaps between law and household reality should shape future policy