BIGD’s WEE-DiFine initiative launches first RFP

Find out more about the WEE-DiFine Initiative

Access to the internet and information and communication technologies (ICTs) has created new opportunities for financial inclusion. These digital financial services (DFS) have lower transaction costs, do not face the same geographic constraints, and tend to be safer than their traditional counterparts. Despite these technological advances, 1.7 billion adults are still unbanked; those without access to financial services tend to be poorer, and furthermore, globally, 56% of the unbanked are women.

Understanding what happens after women have access to DFS is of great interest to policymakers and technology designers and advocates. With this in mind, the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD) at Brac University in Dhaka, Bangladesh, formed the WEE-DiFine initiative. This initiative is aimed at generating a body of rigorous evidence that unpacks the causal mechanisms between DFS and women’s economic empowerment (WEE). The four-year initiative, which will provide research funding for five areas of research projects in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, is proud to announce its first request for proposals (RFP).

Why WEE-DiFine?

Financial inclusion is necessary for economic growth and lowering rates of poverty. Despite increased access to DFS, persistent divides still exist. Barriers to women’s digital financial access which can broadly be attributed to laws and regulations, limited digital financial infrastructure, and lack of access to IDs and technology needed to obtain an account.

Research suggests that financial inclusion can be transformative for women and their families. When women have the ability to save and access credit, we see greater household savings and investments in education as well as increased bargaining power for women. This growing body of work still leaves the causal mechanisms between DFS and WEE understudied. To help identify these research gaps, WEE-DiFine published a white paper that explores DFS and WEE in great detail, highlighting the areas where more research is needed. These priority areas and research questions are the main areas the RFP seeks to address.

Request for Proposals

Those interested in submitting a proposal are encouraged to read the full RFPs as well as the white paper. The RFP outlines the five areas of research projects ranging from pilot studies to greenfield RCTs.

While proposals will be accepted until November 25, 2020, this is just the first of several RFPs the initiative will publish.

This post was last updated on October 27, 2020. 

Handwashing Practice in the Context of the Pandemic in Bangladesh: What We Know So Far

Photo: BRAC

“To mark one era of the Global Handwashing Day, let’s wash hands with soap frequently and stop spreading the virus with clean hands” — certainly a warm invitation. However, we must think about the feasibility of doing so properly in the context of a developing country like Bangladesh.

Handwashing has been promoted as a preventive measure against many diseases for many years – the coronavirus pandemic has brought it into the spotlight. Handwashing is one of the three feasible preventive measures against the virus, as advised by experts; using face masks and maintaining physical distance are the other two measures. To help people adopt these behaviours, BRAC has been implementing a project under Hygiene and Behaviour Change Coalition (HBCC), jointly funded by Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) and Unilever. BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), in collaboration with Behavioural Insights Team (BIT) is working with BRAC on this project to design and disseminate behaviourally-informed messages for effective behavioural change. To this end, BIGD recently conducted a study to capture people’s knowledge, practices, and barriers to COVID-19 preventive practices.

Research Experience at the Heart of Coronavirus Pandemic

Like other countries, Bangladesh has restricted and limited social mobility to control the infection. Traditional applied qualitative techniques have become irrelevant in this new context. To comply with the public health guidelines to combat COVID-19, the research team adopted an alternative methodological approach.

There are two-fold challenges to adopt traditional anthropological research techniques and tools in this new normal environment—fear of community transmission and ethical dilemma as the researcher and respondents may have different mitigation capabilities.

So, we customized and contextualized the data collection process by using appropriate qualitative tools, particularly in-depth telephone interviews (IDIs), visual¹ and shadow² observations, and focus group discussions (FGDs) using virtual video communication platforms. Respondents were connected through telephones and often through live video, which allowed the researchers to collect observational data. This “new modality” of qualitative fieldwork is an innovative experience that has been emerging in the context of “COVID-19”.

Structural and Personal Barriers to Handwashing During COVID-19 Pandemic

BIGD research found that people already know about the importance of conventional practices of handwashing, e.g. before and after taking a meal and after using toilets and are also aware of the new practices in the corona context. However, the actual handwashing practices are diverse during the pandemic crisis. While some people are compliant, many others are reluctant to follow the guideline of frequent handwashing.

Economic, social, cultural, and even individual behavioural barriers prevent people from following the handwashing health guidelines properly. We can broadly categorize the barriers in two groups: personal (e.g. personal belief of no necessity of handwashing, habitual traits, and so on) and structural (insolvency of purchasing soap regularly, lack of access to handwashing facilities at home, and so on).

Structural barriers are often obvious, especially for a context like Bangladesh. Many people in peri-urban and urban slum areas use a shared handwashing facility. We found that many of them cannot afford to buy soap regularly and those who can afford, are not ready to share the soap. At workplaces, they do not have handwashing facilities. One respondent stated, “I don’t use hand sanitizer. Usually, I don’t wash my hand when I am outside. There are no handwashing facilities where I work. We also don’t wear masks at my workplace, to tell you the truth.”

Personal barriers are not always obvious, yet are all too important. Often they emerge from their personal beliefs, knowledge, behaviors and perceptions that result in different handwashing practices. In the following section, we focus on the identified personal barriers, particularly on the knowledge, awareness and practice (KAP) and community perception about handwashing.

Personal Barriers to Proper Handwashing Practice During the Pandemic

As mentioned earlier, overall, people seem to be aware of the health safety guidelines and the importance of handwashing. However, there are a variety of personal barriers.

We got many different perceptions from the diverse community of respondents; for example, a male respondent noted, “There is a fear in our minds of getting infected by the virus, which is why we are careful to stay protected from this deadly infection.” A female respondent also shared similar thoughts – that everybody would die one day, but dying from the Coronavirus would be an ill-fated demise, “I want just one thing from God: please do not give me ‘কু–মরা’ (bad death)” she said, “I want ‘সু–মরা’ (good death). That’s why I try to stay safe and wash my hands regularly. It was rather annoying to do so in the beginning, but now I am used to it.” The perception of ‘কু–মরা’ emerged from the newly adapted funeral practices for COVID deaths, where not even close family members, relatives, neighbours can attend the funeral. This is deemed unfortunate for an individual from the socio-emotional perspective.

But the majority of respondents informed that people are not as scared or worried about getting infected by the Coronavirus as they were at the beginning of the outbreak. As a result, reluctance to comply with the national health guidelines is increasing. This reluctance is stronger and more visible among rural people compared to the urban population. Our research found that people unequivocally agreed that the initial importance of handwashing at the outset of the pandemic is going down in their localities.

Many come up with their own rationale for not following the guidelines. For example, one respondent said “I don’t think it is possible to maintain 20 seconds of handwashing with soap all the time. I wash hands with water frequently and as I don’t go outside my house all that often, so it’s okay to sometimes skip handwashing with soap.” Many respondents also reported that they forget to wash their hands with soap. They also said that they cannot restrain themselves from regular practices such as picking noses or rubbing eyes – which means that personal traits determine compliance.

In addition, although people have ideas about the health guideline for coronavirus, they do not have clear knowledge about the concept of germs. As stated by a respondent, “Sneezing, cough and hand-touch of corona patients can spread corona germs. To be honest, I don’t have a proper idea about germs, but I think proper cleanliness can minimize the risk of exposure to many diseases.” Another respondent quoted, “Dirt and waste cause different kinds of diseases; for example, diarrhoea is caused by germs and germs are spread through the dirt.” The lack of clarity about germs also plays a role in preventing people from following health guidelines.

Another respondent said that there is no initiative from local administration to monitor or remind us whether we are washing hands. It indicates that people expect support from others to shape their behaviours.

It is clear that only providing handwashing facilities will not be enough, a well-structured behavioural change communication (BCC) strategy to change people’s knowledge, awareness, behaviours and community perceptions is needed to ensure that people adopt appropriate handwashing behaviour.

The Programmatic intervention of BRAC

To address these barriers, BRAC has taken an ambitious initiative. BRAC Communications team has been disseminating video messages to make people habituated with the practice of washing their hands with soap. Under this initiative, BRAC WASH programme aims to install 1,000 Hand Washing Stations (HWS) in public places across 20 sub-districts of Dhaka, Mymensingh, and Khulna divisions by the end of this year, and motivate people to wash hands with soap regularly. There are two-fold objectives – to begin with, people will have handwashing facilities outside their homes, and secondly, this will nudge people to develop handwashing habits at home.

However, since we are talking about behaviour change, it is better to integrate the interventions within existing good practices. Behaviours are hard to change – the adoption of entirely new behaviour is even harder. Adding nudges within the existing practices is one way of achieving this objective. For example, making soaps available in mosques and shared handwashing facilities, and conducting in-person demonstrations on handwashing using Behavioral Communication Change (BCC) materials in these facilities may inspire people to wash hands more frequently and accurately.


¹ Respondents were requested to capture some pictures and videos of their daily COVID-19 experiences and then asked them to send those visual contents to the researcher team using virtual social platforms.

² This study used some shadow observations through which we wanted to get some insights from BRAC field workers’ observation and perception.


Sonia Afrin and Tanvir Shatil are Research Associates and Atiya Rahman is a Senior Research Associate at the Economic Growth and Development team at BIGD, Brac University. 

Cash or Bytes? Garment Workers’ Payment Preferences

Before COVID-19, most garment workers in Bangladesh received wage payments from their factories in cash. Immediately after COVID-19, most garment workers started receiving their wages digitally. Now in the eighth month of the pandemic, a diminishing majority of workers are receiving digital wage payments, and an increasing minority are still receiving or have reverted to receiving cash payments (a very small share gets paid with a mix of cash and digital money).

This near-universal opportunity for garment workers to experience receiving digital wages has been unprecedented. And with eight months to reflect on their journey, MFO and SANEM wanted to know if garment workers had accumulated any preferences for cash or digital payments, and what sort of attitudes, if any, they’d cultivated towards the two forms of payment. Here’s what they told us:

Note: respondents could agree, disagree, strongly agree, strongly disagree, or neither agree nor disagree with a survey prompt (or select that the prompt was not applicable to them). Because most respondents selected either “agree” or “disagree”, we will conflate “strongly agree” and “strongly disagree” with “agree” and “disagree”, respectively, unless otherwise specified.

Safety Concerns with Cash vs. Digital Payouts

We asked garment workers if they felt safe when being paid in cash inside their factory, and if they felt safe carrying that cash back home. The majority of workers felt safe both receiving cash in the factory and carrying it back home, with women more likely than men to say they felt safe in both scenarios:

  • Seventy-one per cent of respondents agreed with the statement “When I am/was paid in cash I felt safe receiving the money in the factory”
    • Seventy-four per cent of women said they felt safe compared to 64 per cent of men
  • Fifty-eight per cent of respondents agreed with the statement “When I am/was paid in cash I felt safe carrying the cash from the factory to my home

For garment workers who receive digital wages, the majority head to the ATM or a mobile money agent and withdraw all or nearly all of it in cash. These respondents also said they felt safe both withdrawing cash and carrying it home, this time men being slightly more likely to feel safe:

  • Seventy-four per cent of workers agreed with the statement “When I am/was paid digitally I felt safe withdrawing the money from an agent or ATM
    • Seventy-three per cent of women said they felt safe compared to 77 per cent of men
  • Sixty-nine per cent of respondents agreed with the statement “When I am/was paid digitally I felt safe carrying the cash from the agent/ATM to my home”
    • Sixty-eight per cent of women said they felt safe compared to 73 per cent of men

Harassment During Wage Collection

The good news here is that the vast majority of workers, both women and men, report that they themselves have never experienced harassment when either collecting cash wages in their factory, or when withdrawing wages at a mobile money agent or an ATM. However, workers were slightly more likely to have witnessed harassment than to have experienced it, and women were slightly more likely than men to have both experienced and witnessed harassment:

  • Ninety-eight per cent of respondents have never experienced harassment withdrawing wages at a mobile money agent or an ATM compared to 95 per cent of respondents who have never experienced harassment collecting wages in cash at their factory
  • Ninety-seven per cent of respondents have never witnessed harassment while withdrawing wages at a mobile money agent or an ATM compared to 94 per cent of respondents who have never witnessed harassment while collecting wages in cash at their factory

Knowledge of and Control over Finances

When it comes to knowing how much they are getting paid, having control over, and making decisions about their own finances, garment workers are mixed in their attitudes towards cash vs. digital payments. The picture is yet slightly more mixed when comparing women’s attitudes to men’s attitudes.

Garment workers are more likely to say it is easier to know if they have been paid the correct wage when receiving cash vs. digital payments:

  • Seventy-three per cent of respondents agreed with the statement “Being paid in cash makes it is easy to know if I got paid the right amount” vs. 57 per cent of respondents who agreed with the phrase “Being paid digitally makes it is easy to know if I got paid the right amount”

Garment workers are slightly more likely to say that they have more control over their finances if receiving wages digitally vs. cash, but this is driven by gender differences:

  • Sixty-two per cent of respondents agreed with the statement “Being paid digitally gives me control over my money” vs. 60 per cent who agreed with the statement “Being paid in cash gives me control over my money”
      • Fifty-nine per cent of women agreed that digital payments gave them control over their money and roughly the same share also agreed that cash gave them control over their money
      • On the other hand, 70 per cent of men said that digital payments gave them control over their money, far more than the 56 per cent of men who said that cash did

Saving for the Future

We asked workers whether how they were paid affected their ability to save. The results suggest that workers see digital payments as more likely to enable them to save. For these savings data, we analyzed survey results from respondents who had experience receiving cash and digital wage payments at some point in their jobs. This dual perspective yields important legitimacy to the expressed cash vs. digital preferences:

  • 31% of respondents agreed with the statement “I can save more money now as a result of receiving my salary in cash”, while 44% of respondents agreed with the statement “I can save more money now as a result of receiving my salary through a digital payment system”.

There were differences in responses from men and women, with men being more likely to point to digital as an enabler of savings than women:

  • Only 21% of men agreed that being paid in cash enabled them to save more, but 54% of them agreed that being paid digitally enabled them to do so.
  • The pattern was the same for women, but the differences between cash and digital payments was less stark: 34% of women agreed that being paid in cash enabled them to save more, and 41% said the same about digital payments.

Garment workers are only slightly more likely to agree that digital wage payments allow them to absorb future unexpected economic traumas, with the agreement driven largely by men:

  • 41% of respondents agree with the statement “Being paid digitally has enabled me to be prepared to face an unexpected economic hit” vs. 39% who agree with the statement “Being paid in cash has enabled me to be prepared to face an unexpected economic hit”
    • The same share of women as men, 41%, agreed that digital wage payments allow for greater future economic preparedness
    • 42% of women agreed that cash wage payments allow for greater future economic preparedness compared to just 28% of men who said the same

The data presented here come from interviews conducted over the phone with a pool of 1,283 workers. These workers are employed in factories spread across the five main industrial areas of Bangladesh (Chittagong, Dhaka City, Gazipur, Narayanganj, and Savar). Just over three-quarters of the working respondents are women, roughly representative of workers in the sector as a whole.


This blog has been reposted from The Garment Worker Diaries.