**<u>Table 14: Shapley Value Decomposition of FLFP Decision in Rural and Urban Areas in India</u>**

||||Shaple|yvalue|||||Percenta|ge share|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||(1993|‐94)|(200|4‐05)|(2011|‐12)|(1993‐9|4)|(2004|‐05)|(2011‐|12)|
||Rural<br>u|rban<br>|Rural|urban<br>R|ural|urban|Rural<br>ur|ban<br>R|ural<br>|urban<br>R|ural<br>u|rban|
|Group1|0.015|0.021|0.023|0.023|0.031|0.030|4.24%|5.66%|6.60%|6.21%|9.14%|7.50%|
|Group2|0.008|0.016|0.009|0.018|0.012|0.020|2.36%|4.44%|2.43%|4.85%|3.53%|4.97%|
|Group3|0.004|0.004|0.005|0.005|0.006|0.007|1.15%|1.09%|1.55%|1.36%|1.69%|1.73%|
|Group4|0.104|0.102|0.132|0.118|0.115|0.114|29.73%|27.44%|37.59%|31.53%|34.33%|28.60%|
|Group 5|0.015|0.075|0.021|0.094|0.032|0.119|4.23%|20.10%|5.86%|25.13%|9.60%|29.99%|
|Group 6|0.101|0.096|0.084|0.077|0.072|0.067|28.63%|25.96%|23.93%|20.71%|21.55%|16.73%|
|Group7|0.015|0.007|0.012|0.005|0.008|0.004|4.17%|1.83%|3.43%|1.34%|2.27%|0.99%|
|Group8|0.016|0.028|0.013|0.018|0.011|0.016|4.53%|7.42%|3.78%|4.75%|3.39%|3.99%|
|Group9|0.002|0.009|0.002|0.006|0.001|0.003|0.66%|2.55%|0.48%|1.50%|0.29%|0.70%|
|Group10|0.063|0.010|0.037|0.010|0.030|0.010|17.79%|2.71%|10.60%|2.55%|8.98%|2.51%|
|Total Explained|||||||||||||
|variation|0.35|0.371|0.35|0.373|0.34|0.398|100.00%|100.00%|100.00%|100.00%|100.00%|100.00%|
|Observations|105,669|63,662|123,905|66,590|92,822|60,226|||||||

**Group 1:** Four age groups (15-18; 18-25; 26-45 and 46-65 years). **Group 2:** Marital composition within the household (proportion of married, unmarried and unstable married females in the family).

**Group 3:** Status building role (marital status of the individual and the number of children in the family).

**Group 4:** Proportion of self-employed persons in the family.

**Group 5:** Proportion of regular wage earners in the family. **Group 6:** Proportion of casual labor and unemployed in the family **Group 7:** Social status (ST, SC and Others). **Group 8:** Educational Attainment (illiterate; below secondary; secondary and HS; college and above). **Group 9:** Income groups (five income quintiles). **Group 10:** All 35 States and UTs. *Regression estimates underlying the Shapley decomposition are presented in the annex. Source: Authors’ own estimate based on NSSO data.

Our narrower definition of the status building role of women, as indicated by individual marital status and the number of children in the household, plays no significant part in explaining individual FLFP decision. However, the overall marital composition of women within the household, as compared to individual marital status including child care responsibility, contributes more than twice towards women’s labor force participation decisions.

Perhaps the most important finding of this analysis is that it highlights the preeminent role of household level labor diversification on the individual labor force participation of women. Estimation of the relative contributions of employment composition in a family explains more than 60 percent of the variation in FLFP decisions— both spatially and inter-temporally. As mentioned earlier, we consider three major components of employment in our analysis— the proportion of 30