Our research challenges widely accepted assumptions regarding gendered patterns of labour: firstly, that capitalist development pulls women into non-agricultural employment and secondly, that women’s unpaid labour largely comprises the production of non-market goods and services within the home. Conventional demand and supply arguments on gender gaps in non-agricultural employment overlook the significance of patriarchal labour relations and the influence of women’s unpaid farm work on their participation in paid employment. Here we use cross-country panel data analysis and a case study from India with a difference-in-differences model to demonstrate that legal discrimination against women in land inheritance curtails female participation in non-agricultural paid employment. This occurs through several mechanisms, by: (1) keeping women in agriculture as unpaid family workers, (2) restricting women’s access to education, and (3) exacerbating the trend of rural women's marriage migration. Our research thereby contributes an explanation for the apparent paradox observed in developing countries where persistent gender gaps in non-agricultural paid employment coexist with economic growth. It also suggests that tackling barriers to female labour participation by using policies which focus solely on the provision of childcare is insufficient; rather, an exit package offering occupational training, guaranteed employment and housing is required to support women’s transition out of unpaid agricultural labour.
