Report from Pilot Survey Study
1 INTRODUCTION
A time use survey will generate information that may give a clear idea about the time that females and males spend on various socio-economic and political activities in the course of a normal day. This information is very important for discourses on female’s welfare, on female’s role in community development, and in building knowledge about the female’s situation. Such knowledge is in great demand in Tanzania, as well as in several other African countries. Time use information may be used by planners, health officials, community-based and various non-government organizations for developing policies geared towards improving the people’s welfare and especially in analyzing and confronting poverty.
One pilot survey on the time use was carried out in Morogoro and Iringa regions, from 17 October 2003 to 28 October 2003. The objectives of the pilot survey were to test:
- the questionnaire in a field situation;
- field logistics;
2 FIELD OPERATIONS
Two clusters, one urban and one rural were selected for the pilot survey. In all, 40 households were selected systematically from each cluster. In each household two members, the head of the household and the spouse were interviewed. That is, in each household a male and a female were interviewed. If the head of the household happened to be a female then her spouse or the oldest male in that household was also interviewed. Similarly, if the head of the household happened to be a male then his spouse or the oldest female in that household was also interviewed. Two staff members, each assisted by two research assistants did the interviews using the mobile team approach.
3 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS
Data entry, processing, and analysis was done using SPSS version 10.0. However, the plan is to use ACCESS for data entry for the main survey.
4 PROBLEMS
Two main problems were noted in administering the questionnaire. Firstly, respondents seemed to be irritated by being asked about both normal everyday activities and previous day activities. They were of the opinion that these were the same activities and, therefore, that these two questions were repetitious and thus wasted their valuable time. Secondly, some respondents regarded the questionnaire to be a bit too long. The average time taken to administer one questionnaire was noted to be about 40 minutes. Apart from the problems with the instrument itself, there was also a problem with data entry of the time, arising from the way the interviewers recorded the responses. The interviewers, in most cases, did not differentiate clearly between morning, evening, and night hours when recording responses. Just like the hour 7 may be either 7 a.m. or 7 p.m. in English, the hour 7 may be either 1 a.m. or 1 p.m. in Kiswahili if it is not clearly specified. Unfortunately, there were a number of cases where guesses had to be made at the data cleaning stage to fix the time of the day that was supposedly meant by respondents. Such a problem should not have occurred if the interviewers had been extra careful in recording the responses.
5 OTHER LESSONS FOR THE MAIN SURVEY
It was noted that research clearance at all stages took some considerable time and, therefore, it is imperative that enough time be allowed for all the stages of research clearance before the timing of the fieldwork of the main survey itself. Closely related to this, it is also suggested that for smooth execution of the main survey it will be necessary to give wide and early publicity of the survey. Finally, it is vital to give very clear instructions to interviewers on how to record the time on the questionnaire, if individual hours will have to be recorded. Alternatively, pre-coded time periods may be adopted for the main survey questionnaire.
6 FINDINGS
This section presents findings of the pilot survey bearing in mind the objective of the main survey of studying how females and males in households in Tanzania spend their time.
The treatment by gender will be at the heads of household and non-heads of household levels. One reason for making this distinction is that many household studies use the head of the household to represent all members of the household. That is, the head of the household is used as a proxy criterion for a household in that members of the household should acknowledge the authority of a single head of household. It is argued that being the key decisionmaker, the head of the household is the person most aware of what is happening in the household. On the other hand, there have been a number of studies focusing on female heads of household using the argument that in the absence of adult males in the household, female heads of household will have to fend for themselves and thus have to spent much more time working for the livelihood of the household at the expense of some other necessary activities such as leisure, personal hygiene, and recreation.
However, if useful analysis is to be made at these two levels. it will be imperative to develop an appropriate sampling procedure for the main survey. It is known that there are only few female heads of households and, therefore, over-sampling with its associated disadvantages will have to be assessed. This vital step was not considered for the pilot survey and, therefore, the findings on gender at these two levels are simply indicative of the prevailing situation.6.1 Main and Secondary activities during the previous year
The findings indicate that the dominant main and secondary activities in the areas covered in the pilot survey are farm¬ related with farming and gardening as the mainstay for about 72 per cent of the households. This compares favourably well with the normally recorded figure of over 80 per cent for rural areas considering that the pilot survey covered both a rural and an urban component. The other activities captured, especially for male heads of household, are non-farm including being employees, engaging in specialized skill activities (technician, mechanic, shoe repairer, masonry, carpentry, tailoring, etc), teaching, being a guard/watchman, and engaging in commerce. As regards females, non-farm activities such as involvement in animal husbandry, making local brew, and engaging in specialized skill activities and commerce were recorded for main and secondary activities during the previous year. Table 1 below shows the previous year’s main activities by gender of head of household.
Table 1: Previous year’s main activity by gender of head of household
| Main activity during the previous year | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Agriculture | 18 | 53 | 71 |
| 2. Gardening | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 3. Working | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| 4. Skilled work | 1 | 9 | 10 |
| 5. Commerce | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| 6. Animal husbandry | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 7. Security Guard/Watchman | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 8. Teaching | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Total | 19 | 68 | 103 |
It is noted from Table 1 that almost all (18 out of 19) heads of household had agriculture as their main activity during the previous year. That is, taking column percentages, 94.7 per cent of the female heads of households in the areas covered by the pilot survey had agriculture as their main activity during the previous year. In contrast, only 63..1 per cent of the male heads of household had agriculture as their main activity during the previous year. The percentage rises slightly to 66.7 when you combine agriculture with gardening to get farm related activities. From the results in Table 1 it seems that a very high number, 94.7 percent, of the female heads of household had farm related activities compared to a slightly lower number, 66.7 percent of the male heads of household who had farm related activities as their main activity during the previous year. As regards non-farm activities, only a very small number, 5.3 per cent, of the female heads of household had non-farm activities compared to a slightly higher number, 33.3 percent of the male heads of household who had non-farm related activities as their main activity during the previous year.
Table 2 below shows the previous year’s secondary activities by gender of head of household.
Table 2: Previous year’s secondary activity by gender of head of household
| Secondary activity during the previous year | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Agriculture | 0 | 27 | 27 |
| 2. Gardening | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 3. Skilled work | 4 | 15 | 19 |
| 4. Brewing local beer | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| 5. Commerce | 2 | 11 | 13 |
| 6. Animal husbandry | 1 | 8 | 9 |
| 7. Security Guard/Watchman | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 8. Driver | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Total | 11 | 68 | 79 |
From the results in Table, a picture of the kind of activities that female and males engage starts to emerge. It seems that females are almost fully occupied with farm related and have just a bit of some time to spend on non-farm activities most probably to supplement the income from the other sources. Indeed, it may be said that female heads of household practice agriculture and combine it with other activities as they depend on agricultural output as “inputs”, for example, use of grain for local brew, and commerce. In contrast, it seems that males engage more in non-farm activities both as main and secondary activities. Furthermore, it is becoming evident that there are some activities that would involve a very small number of females than that of males. In the areas covered, for example, no female head of household was found to be a paid employee/worker, security guard/watchman, teacher, or driver.
6.2 Land ownership
As noted from the findings in the section above, rural growth will mostly depend on the productivity of agricultural and, to some extent, non-agricultural components, which in turn depend to a considerable extent on the quantity and quality of land available for those activities.
Information on land ownership was solicited in this pilot survey and the findings are presented in Tables 3 and 4 below.
Table 3: Previous year’s main activity by land ownership
| Main activity during the previous year | Does household own land? | ||
| Yes | No | Total | |
| 1. Agriculture | 46 | 23 | 71 |
| 2. Gardening | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| 3. Working | 6 | 2 | 8 |
| 4. Skilled work | 7 | 3 | 10 |
| 5. Commerce | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| 6. Animal husbandry | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 7. Security Guard/Watchman | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 8. Teaching | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Total | 67 | 34 | 101 |
The findings in Table 3 seem to indicate that a substantial number of heads of household, 33.8 per cent, who had agriculture and gardening as their main activity the previous year did not own land on which to carry out their activities. This could be a constraint against the improvement of the household’s welfare since decisions on how to use the land and the extent to which the land may be used will be made by the land owners.
Table 4: Previous year’s secondary activity by land ownership
| Secondary activity during the previous year | Does household own land? | ||
| Yes | No | Total | |
| 1. Agriculture | 17 | 10 | 27 |
| 2. Gardening | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| 3. Skilled work | 9 | 10 | 19 |
| 4. Brewing local beer | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| 5. Commerce | 6 | 7 | 13 |
| 6. Animal husbandry | 6 | 3 | 9 |
| 7. Security Guard/Watchman | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 8. Driver | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 46 | 33 | 79 |
The findings in Table 4 seem to indicate roughly the same picture for the heads of household who had agriculture and gardening as their secondary activity the previous year. It is noted that 34.5 per cent of them did not own land on which to carry out their activities as compared to 33.8 per cent for those who had agriculture and gardening as their main activity the previous year.
6.3 Normal everyday activities
Although the question on normal everyday activities was left open-ended and unstructured for the pilot survey, it did not generate very many activities of every sort as might have been expected. Indeed, one of the reviewers of the draft questionnaire had pointed out that the question was far too open-ended and unstructured that there was likely to be great variation in what would be mentioned and how it would be described. Surprisingly enough, this did not happen but instead the various respondents reproduced almost the same activities. The 40 activities mentioned as normal everyday activities are:
- Wake up
- Brush teeth
- Drink tea/coffee
- Go to the farm
- Work on a plot
- Fetch water
- Cook food
- Go to work
- Feed animals
- Pray
- Eat food
- Take a walk
- Wash clothes
- Take a bath
- Let out the chicken
- Engage in carpentry, masonry
- Do some mechanic work
- Filter local brew
- Clean utensils
- Participate in commercial activities
- Stay at home/ do household activities
- Rest
- Prepare gravy, broth
- Collect firewood
- Clear a bush
- Cut grass
- Attend a funeral
- Carry loads
- Go to sleep
- Listen to a radio
- Watch television
- Work as a guard/watchman
- Do needle work/ knit/weave
- Make baskets
- Get school children ready for school
- Work as a driver
- Attend some entertainment
- Visit a local club
- Engage in conversation
- Read
When the gender of the head of the household is taken into account, the findings for the first two activities are as presented in Tables 5 and 6.
Table 5: The first activity in a normal day by gender
| First activity | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Wake up | 10 | 28 | 38 |
| 2. Brush the teeth | 6 | 20 | 26 |
| 3. Take tea/coffee | 0 | 12 | 12 |
| 4. Go for farm work | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| 5. Go for gardening | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 6. Fetch water | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 7. Cook food | 1 | 5 | 6 |
| 8. Go for work | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 9. Feed livestock | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 10. Listen to the radio/watch television | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 11. Pray | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 12. Do skilled work | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 18 | 84 | 102 |
Table 6: The second activity in a normal day by gender
| Second activity | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Brush the teeth | 7 | 18 | 25 |
| 2. Take tea/coffee | 2 | 23 | 25 |
| 3. Go for farm work | 1 | 19 | 20 |
| 4. Leisure/resting | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 5. Go for gardening | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 6. Fetch water | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| 7. Cook food | 3 | 6 | 9 |
| 8. Let out chicken | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 9. Go for work | 1 | 5 | 6 |
| 10. Feed livestock | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 11. Pray | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 12. Engage in commerce | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 13. Clear bush/cut grass | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 18 | 85 | 103 |
A number of things may be noted from the results in Tables 5 and 6. Firstly, it is unfortunate that waking up was taken as an activity. Secondly, it seems that the areas covered have water problems and therefore female heads of household have the activity of fetching water as their first or second activity. In contrast, male heads of household do not seem to engage in the activity of fetching water as either a first or a second activity.
6.4 Activities done the previous day
In terms of actual activities, the same list of activities emerged under activities done the previous day except for the order of performing them and their duration. This, indeed, corroborates the respondents’ irritation and, accordingly, it is advisable to focus on the activities done the previous day for the main survey using the recall method and to capture the normal everyday activities using the diary and observation methods.
6.5 Activities that take a lot of the respondent’s time
As we have already noted in sections 6.3 and 6.4, there are a considerable number of activities done by a respondent in the course of the day. Respondents were asked to rank activities according to the time they spend on activities starting with the activity on which they spend most of their time. The findings on the activities that take most of the time and the next longer time are presented in Tables 7 and 8.Table 7: Activity that takes most of the respondent’s time in a day or most days in a week
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | 1. Agriculture | 104 | 67.1 | 70.7 | 70.7 |
| 2. Gardening | 2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 72.1 | |
| 3. Household chores | 6 | 3.9 | 4.1 | 76.2 | |
| 4. Construction | 10 | 6.5 | 6.8 | 83.0 | |
| 5. Commerce | 10 | 6.5 | 6.8 | 89.8 | |
| 6. Leisure/Resting | 1 | .6 | .7 | 90.5 | |
| 7. Livestock keeping/Animal Husbandry | 5 | 3.2 | 3.4 | 93.9 | |
| 8. Sewing | 1 | .6 | .7 | 94.6 | |
| 9. Fetching water | 1 | .6 | .7 | 95.2 | |
| 10. Teaching | 2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 96.6 | |
| 11. Lesson preparation | 1 | .6 | .7 | 97.3 | |
| 12. Security guard/Watchman | 1 | .6 | .7 | 98.0 | |
| 13. Office work | 1 | .6 | .7 | 98.6 | |
| 14. Accountant | 1 | .6 | .7 | 99.3 | |
| 15. Driving | 1 | .6 | .7 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 147 | 94.8 | 100.0 | ||
| Missing | 99 | 8 | 5.2 | ||
| Total | 155 | 100.0 |
The results in Table 7 seem to suggest that, ignoring household chores, the activities that take most of the respondents’ time are farm related (agriculture and gardening), followed by non-farm activities of construction, commerce, and livestock keeping.
As expected, this seems to corroborate the findings about the main activity of the previous year. Household chores also feature out to a considerable extent as taking most of the respondents’ time although it did not feature among the main activities of the previous year.
Table 8: Activity that takes the respondent’s next longer time in a day or more days in a week
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | 1. Agriculture | 31 | 20 | 23.8 | 23.8 |
| 2. Gardening | 9 | 5.8 | 6.9 | 30.8 | |
| 3. Domestic chores | 19 | 12.3 | 14.6 | 45.4 | |
| 4. Fetching water | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 46.2 | |
| 5. Knitting | 3 | 1.9 | 2.3 | 48.5 | |
| 6. Construction | 10 | 6.5 | 7.7 | 56.2 | |
| 7. Protect the environment | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 56.9 | |
| 8. Local beer brewing | 11 | 7.1 | 8.5 | 65.4 | |
| 9. Commerce | 17 | 11 | 13.1 | 78.5 | |
| 10. Labourer | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 79.2 | |
| 11. Livestock keeping/Animal Husbandry | 17 | 11 | 13.1 | 92.3 | |
| 12. Sewing | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 93.1 | |
| 13. Lesson preparation | 2 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 94.6 | |
| 14. Knitting | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 95.4 | |
| 15. Security guard/Watchman | 2 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 96.9 | |
| 16. Driving | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 97.7 | |
| 17. Attendant | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 98.5 | |
| 18. Sports and games | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 99.2 | |
| 19. Pastor | 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 100 | |
| Total | 130 | 83.9 | 100 | ||
| Missing | 99 | 25 | 16.1 | ||
| Total | 155 | 100 |
The findings in Table 8 again pick out farm related activities, and non-farm activities of commerce, Livestock keeping/ Animal husbandry, local beer brewing, and construction. Household chores feature out prominently as taking the respondents’ next longer time although, again, it did not feature among the secondary activities of the previous year.
When the gender of the head of the household is taken into account the results presented in Tables 9 and 10 below are obtained.
Table 9: Activity that takes most of the respondent’s time in a day or most days in a week by gender of head of household
| Activity | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Agriculture | 16 | 50 | 66 |
| 2. Gardening | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 3. Household chores | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| 4. Construction | 1 | 8 | 9 |
| 5. Commerce | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| 6. Leisure/Resting | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 7. Livestock keeping/Animal husbandry | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| 8. Sewing | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 9. Teaching | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 10. Preparing lessons | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 11. SecurityGuard/Watchman | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 12. Office work | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 13. Driving | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 18 | 83 | 101 |
The results in Table 9 seem to indicate that the activities that take most of the time of the female heads of household are agriculture and construction as opposed to agriculture, construction, commerce, and livestock keeping.
Table 10: Activity that takes the respondent’s next longer time in a day or more days in a week by gender of head of household
| Activity | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Agriculture | 0 | 21 | 21 |
| 2. Gardening | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| 3. Domestic chores | 6 | 8 | 14 |
| 4. Construction | 0 | 9 | 9 |
| 5. Protect the environment | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 6. Prepare local brew | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| 7. Commerce | 2 | 11 | 13 |
| 8. Livestock keeping/Animal husbandry | 1 | 10 | 11 |
| 9. Sewing | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 10. Lesson preparation | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 11. Knitting | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 12. Security guard/Watchman | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 13. Driving | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 14. Attendant | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 15. Sports and games | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 16. Pastor | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 14 | 72 | 86 |
The findings in Table 10 pick out non-farm activities of local beer brewing, commerce, for female heads of household as the activities that take the respondent’s next longer time in a day. It is also noted that domestic chores takes a considerable amount of time of the female heads of household. In contrast, the finds give farm related activities, and non-farm activities of livestock keeping, commerce, and construction for male heads of household as the activities that take the respondent’s next longer time in a day.
6.6 Education and literacy
Education is a major factor in determining the kind of activities that people will usually engage in. Generally, people with low levels of education will be pre-occupied with activities that require little or no skill. In most cases, these are low paying activities and are subject to frequent adverse variations in earnings. Indeed, it has been observed that abject poverty is highly correlated with low levels of education and implicitly with activities such people engage in. In contrast, people with high levels of education will be engaged in activities that require a lot of skill and these are usually high paying and as a source of stable favourable earnings.
The pilot survey findings indicate that the highest level of education of the respondents is primary school level, accounting for 84.4 per cent of the heads of household. Only 15.4 per cent of the heads of household had secondary school level of education.
Literacy, being a subset of education, is manifestly important in determining the activities that people engage in. Literacy level was assessed, in this pilot survey, by asking respondents to read a simple four-word sentence and to write a simple five-word sentence. The findings indicate that 81.3 per cent of the respondents read the given sentence correctly and 98.3 per cent of the respondents wrote the given sentence correctly. Overall, 97.5 per cent of the heads of households both read and wrote the given sentences correctly. These seem to be high percentages although it has to be noted that there was a considerably high non-response rate of 24 per cent of the respondents on these two questions.
Tables 11, 12, and 13 give the findings on education and literacy when the gender of the head of the household is taken into account.
Table 11: Education level by gender
| Education level | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Standard 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 2. Standard 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 3. Standard 4 | 2 | 17 | 19 |
| 4. Standard 5 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 5. Standard 7 | 10 | 33 | 43 |
| 6. Standard 8 | 3 | 10 | 13 |
| 7. Form 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 8. Form 4 | 0 | 10 | 10 |
| 9. Form 6 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 10. Degree | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 15 | 81 | 102 |
One glaring observation from Table 11 is that all female heads of household seem to have attained only primary level education whereas there are some male heads of household who had attained secondary and degree level education. Specifically, 14.7 per cent of the male heads of household had secondary and degree level education. This will tend to determine the kind of activities that females and males are engaged in.
Table 12: Reading a given sentence by gender
| Reading capacity | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Read the sentence correctly | 12 | 71 | 83 |
| 2. Pronounced some of the words | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| 3. Failed to read the sentence | 3 | 4 | 7 |
| 4. Did not have spectacles to read | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| 5. Refused to read the sentence | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 18 | 81 | 99 |
Again, the results in Table 12 indicate a similar tendency. It is noted that only 66.7 per cent of the female heads of household read the given sentence correctly as compared to 87.7 per cent of the male heads of household who read the sentence correctly. This is not surprising because reading is function of the level of education attained.
Table 13: Writing a given sentence by gender
| Reading capacity | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Wrote the sentence correctly | 12 | 73 | 85 |
| 2. Failed to write the sentence | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 13 | 73 | 86 |
The findings in Table 13, on writing a given sentence, seem to repeat the same tendency noted from Table 12. Some female heads of household failed to write the given sentence whereas all male heads of household wrote the sentence correctly.
6.5 Times of waking up and going for night sleep
The number of activities to be done in an effective working day and, to some extent, the amount of time to be devoted to each activity will depend on both the time of waking up and the time of going to bed for night sleep. The pilot survey findings indicate that the majority of the people, 91.3 per cent of the heads of household, in the areas covered by the survey wake up between 4:00 a.m. and 6:30 a.m. every day. As for going for night sleep, the findings indicate that 90.6 per cent of the heads of household go for night sleep between 9:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. When the findings are cross-tabulated, it is noted that 83.9 per cent of the heads of household wake up between 4:00 a.m. and 6:30 a.m. and go for night sleep between 9:00 and 10:00 p.m. This essentially means that about 84 per cent of heads of household have an 18-hour working day. Since most people consider the period between 5:30 a.m. and 7:30 p.m. to be an effective “working day”, it might be useful to find out and analyse specifically the kind of activities that people engage in between 4:00 a.m. and 5:30 a.m. and between 7:30 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. for the main survey.
When the gender of the head of the household is taken into account the results presented in Tables 14 and 15 below are obtained.
Table 14: Time of waking up by gender
| Time of waking up | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Very early morning (4 a.m. - 6:30 a.m.) | 16 | 74 | 90 |
| 2. Early morning (7 a.m. - 8 a.m.) | 2 | 10 | 12 |
| Total | 18 | 84 | 102 |
The findings in Table 14 seem to indicate that a larger number of female heads of household, constituting 88.9 per cent, wake up very early in the morning than that of male heads of household, that constitute 88.1 per cent.
Table 15: Time of going to bed for night sleep by gender
| Time of going to bed for night sleep | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Early night (7 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.) | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| 2. Normal hours of night (9 p.m. - 10 p.m.) | 17 | 73 | 90 |
| 3. Late night (10:30 p.m. - 12 p.m.) | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Total | 18 | 83 | 101 |
6.6 Information gathering and communication
It is frequently argued that people’s participation in certain activities very much depends on the information they have or can get about those activities. This means that the media may play a crucial role in determining people’s participation in certain activities.
In politics, for example, unless women’s voices are heard pushing for policies to be changed through regular political participation, they will remain poorly represented. But in order for all this to happen women have to first of all educate themselves on what it is they want to influence, they have to be aware, they have to understand the policy, because if they don’t understand it, they won’t know its shortcomings and if they go to influence somebody like that, then they won’t be able to do it. Women need confidence and most of this confidence is built on knowledge gained from formal or informal education. Mass media is one source of informal education. Indeed, information has been given as one of the indices that influence and determine the manner and extent to which men and women participate in the political system. Indeed, we often hear such questions as “Are women just as well informed as men about political issues?” and “What communication channels are more frequently used by women as compared to men?
The media may also influence women’s participation in decision-making on household matters.
In the pilot survey, respondents were asked whether they listened to the radio, watched television, and read newspapers.
A significant number of respondents, 66 per cent, are recorded to have listened to the radio everyday and mostly followed national issues, sports and games, and entertainment, in that order. It is gratifying to note that of the respondents who listened to the radio everyday, 56.5 per cent of them followed national issues. This suggests that the radio is an effective media of liking people to the state and its activities.
In contrast, only a very small number of respondents, 14.9 per cent, read newspapers every day. These mostly followed national issues, sports and games, and entertainment, in that order.
An even smaller number of respondents, 7.8 per cent, watched television every day. These mostly followed sports and games, national issues, and entertainment, in that order.
Tables 16, 17, and 18 give the findings on use of the media when the gender of the head of the household is taken into account.
Table 16: Listening to the radio by gender
| Frequency of listening to the radio | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Every day | 9 | 63 | 72 |
| 2. Three time a week | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| 3. Once a week | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 4. When there are special events | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 5. When there is an important thing | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| 6. Do not listen to the radio | 6 | 10 | 16 |
| Total | 18 | 83 | 101 |
The results in Table 16 seem to indicate that there are gender differences in listening to the radio. Specifically, it is noted that whereas 50 per cent of the female heads of household listened to the radio every day, 75.9 per cent of the male heads of household did so.
Table 17: Reading of newspapers by gender
| Frequency of reading newspapers | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Every day | 0 | 16 | 16 |
| 2. Once a week | 6 | 25 | 31 |
| 3. When newspapers are available | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| 4. When I see a newspaper | 4 | 16 | 20 |
| 5. Do not read newspapers | 6 | 20 | 26 |
| Total | 17 | 83 | 100 |
The findings in Table 17 seem to indicate that no female head of household read newspapers every day whereas 19.3 per cent of the male heads of household read newspapers every day. Even more striking is the observation that 35.3 per cent of the female heads of household do not read newspapers at all compared to only 24.1 per cent of the male heads of household who do not read newspapers at all.
Table 18: Watching television by gender
| Frequency of watching television | Gender of head of household | ||
| Female | Male | Total | |
| 1. Every day | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| 2. Three time a week | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| 3. Once a week | 1 | 7 | 8 |
| 4. When there are special events | 1 | 24 | 25 |
| 5. When there is an important thing | 4 | 9 | 13 |
| 6. Do not watch television | 9 | 26 | 35 |
| Total | 16 | 78 | 94 |
Although the findings on the frequency of watching television, as presented in Table 18, seem to almost mirror the findings in Table 17 on the frequency of reading newspapers, the situation is slightly worse. The findings seem to indicate that no female head of household watched television every day whereas 7.7 per cent of the male heads of household watched television every day. 56.3 per cent of the female heads of household do not watch television at all compared to only 33.3 per cent of the male heads of household who do not watch television at all.
7 EMERGING ISSUES
Since we plan also to relate some of our results to some of the results from the World Values Surveys, it is important to develop a way of capturing information specified in the questionnaire of the World Values Survey. The pilot survey findings give an indication that some people spend some time in having a conversation but, unfortunately, the question that generated this information is not specific enough for comparison with the five disaggregated questions in the World Values Survey. Specifically, the 1992 – 2002 World Values Survey questionnaire solicits for information on the extent the respondents
- spend time with parents or relatives
- spend time with friends
- spend time socially with colleagues from work or your profession
- spend time with people at your church, mosques, or synagogue
- spend time socially with people at sports clubs or voluntary or service organization
Another issue of concern is that some activities considered important for certain analyses were not mentioned by respondents covered in this pilot survey. For example, it is widely known that there are transport problems in many parts of Tanzania. Accordingly, it would be useful to find out how much time people spend waiting for transport to go to work, the time they take to get to work either on foot or in some means of transport. Similarly, it is often reported that there are wide spread health problems in Tanzania. It is a bit curious, therefore, that no respondent is recorded to have spent time at the hospital, either visiting a sick person or waiting for medication or treatment. Also, no respondent is recorded to have spent time caring for the sick. Perhaps, this might simply have been a case of a very small sample or just that this was a good period when only very few people fall sick in those two areas. All the same, these activities will have to be borne in mind for the main survey.
Furthermore, there is an interesting discussion point regarding people working in offices. One issue in mind is whether it would be worthwhile to record all the actual activities done in the offices and the time spent on each activity or simply to record the aggregate category “worker/employee”. Manifestly, it is known that there are daily routine activities such as taking morning and afternoon tea and taking lunch, apart from the main and secondary tasks done in offices. But, also, there are special meetings, events, and other scheduled unscheduled non-routine activities. Should special effort be made to capture such activities? Again, what about activities associated with specialized occupations such as those of a doctor, teacher or lecturer? In the case of a teacher or lecturer, for example, should the time spent on such activities as preparing lessons, teaching in class, marking homework, assignments, tests, and examinations be recorded and assessed?
Finally, there is the complication of activities that are done at the same time. It is highly conceivable that some people could do more than one activity at the same time. For example, cooking and reading a newspaper or watching television, cooking and holding a conversation; cooking, holding a conversation, and feeding a baby. How should these activities be treated? It is likely that in producing time budgets people engaged in several activities simultaneously may tend to choose the particular activity to report. Efforts need to be made to capture such activities and to adopt suitable methodology for analyzing them.