When broadcaster Karen Davila recently said that economic empowerment is part of women’s empowerment, she emphasized the importance of women having the ability to earn their own income, own property, build businesses and make financial decisions.
Her argument is understandable. A woman who has her own financial resources may have greater freedom to make decisions without relying entirely on her husband.
But does a wife necessarily have to earn her own income to be financially empowered? Should a full-time homemaker be considered financially dependent simply because her husband earns the family’s money?
Economic research suggests that the answer is more complicated than it seems.
Consider two hypothetical married women. The first earns ₱100,000 monthly but spends practically her entire salary on household expenses and loan payments. She has little savings and owns few assets.
The second does not earn a salary because she takes care of the children and manages the household. However, she jointly owns the family home, has access to substantial savings and investments, and participates equally in financial decisions.
Which woman is more financially empowered? Although the first earns her own income, the second may have greater financial security and more control over family wealth. The comparison shows the difference between earning money and having economic resources.
The Economic Value of Being a Homemaker
Nobel Prize-winning economist Claudia Goldin examined the relationship between employment, marriage and family responsibilities in her 2021 book, Career and Family: Women’s Century-Long Journey toward Equity.
Goldin explained how demanding careers often reward employees who devote long hours to their jobs. For married couples with children, this can create pressure for one spouse to prioritize career advancement while the other assumes more caregiving responsibilities.
Such specialization can increase household earnings, but it may also create unequal career opportunities between spouses.
Her research raises an important financial question. If one spouse earns more because the other assumes responsibility for the home and children, should the resulting wealth be viewed primarily as the achievement of the income earner?
From an economic perspective, household work contributes to the family’s ability to generate income, even if that contribution does not appear in a paycheck.
This is why marriage should be viewed as an economic partnership rather than merely an arrangement between an income earner and a dependent spouse.
Why Property Ownership Matters More Than Income
The importance of ownership becomes clearer in the research of economist Bina Agarwal.
In her 1995 book, A Field of One’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia, Agarwal examined how women’s access to property affects their economic position and bargaining power within households.
Her central argument was that employment opportunities alone cannot substitute for effective property rights. A woman who owns productive assets may have greater economic security and influence over household decisions.
Although Agarwal focused primarily on land ownership in South Asia, the principle is relevant to modern financial planning.
A woman who does not receive a salary but owns substantial assets may enjoy greater financial security than someone who earns a high income without accumulating wealth.
Philippine law also recognizes that marriage can create shared economic interests. Under the Family Code, the default property regime for marriages covered by the Code, unless a valid marriage settlement provides otherwise, is absolute community of property. Subject to legal exceptions, many assets belong to the community regardless of which spouse earned the money used to acquire them.
Other marital property arrangements may apply, particularly to marriages celebrated under earlier laws. The important point is that a wife does not necessarily lose her economic rights simply because she does not receive employment income.
Who Really Controls the Family’s Money?
However, ownership alone does not guarantee financial empowerment.
In a 1997 study published in The Journal of Human Resources, economists Shelly Lundberg, Robert Pollak and Terence Wales examined a policy change in Britain that shifted child-benefit payments toward wives.
They found that the change coincided with greater household spending on women’s and children’s clothing relative to men’s clothing.
The study challenged the traditional assumption that families automatically pool all their financial resources and make spending decisions independently of which spouse receives the income.
In other words, who controls the money can influence how family resources are allocated. This finding is particularly relevant to married couples.
A wife may legally share ownership of family assets but still have little practical control if her husband manages all bank accounts, investments and major financial decisions.
Conversely, a homemaker who has access to family savings, understands household finances and participates in investment decisions may exercise considerable financial authority despite having no salary.
Research by economist Esther Duflo provides further evidence of why control matters.
In a 2003 study published in The World Bank Economic Review, Duflo examined South Africa’s old-age pension program and found that pensions received by women were associated with substantial improvements in the nutritional status of young girls. Similar effects were not found for pensions received by men.
The findings suggest that the identity of the person receiving financial resources can affect household outcomes. These studies do not establish that homemakers are automatically financially independent. Rather, they demonstrate why income, ownership and control must be considered separately.
Financial Independence Is About Having Choices
A full-time homemaker may have rights over a family home worth ₱10 million but still face financial difficulties if she has no access to liquid savings.
If her husband dies, becomes incapacitated or the marriage breaks down, property rights alone may not provide immediate funds for household expenses.
This is why financial planning should include emergency savings, appropriate insurance, accessible financial accounts, clear asset records and an understanding of each spouse’s legal rights.
Independent income can also be particularly important for women who experience financial control or abuse. The ability to earn and retain personal funds can provide practical options that shared property rights may not immediately deliver.
The objective should therefore not be to discourage women from pursuing careers or businesses. Economic opportunities remain important because they expand the choices available to women.
But neither should society assume that a woman who chooses to become a full-time homemaker is automatically economically powerless.
Financial empowerment should be measured by whether a woman has genuine access to resources, meaningful ownership rights, financial protection and the freedom to participate in decisions that affect her future.
Ultimately, a wife’s economic position cannot be determined simply by looking at whose name appears on the monthly paycheck.
A marriage may have one income earner but two financially empowered partners.
The real measure of empowerment is not merely the ability to earn money, but the ability to own, control and make choices about the wealth that both spouses help create.
