gender and agriculture in trocaire programmes · for example, baseline assessments often aggregate...

Gender and Agriculturein Trócaire Programmes– Status and practical recommendations

Working for a just world.

Cover Images (Clockwise from bottom left):

1. Women weeding a potato field, Rwanda.2. Woman boiling water, Mandimu, Malawi.3. Child care – does it all automatically need to fall on women and girls?4. Women showing the huge range of forest fruits for which they hold specialist knowledge.5. Couple with goat-house where they share tasks.

All photos by Rose Hogan unless otherwise stated.

1

Gender and Agriculture 1

in Trócaire Programmes– Status and practical recommendations

1 Currently for Trócaire Livelihoods Programmes the term ‘Agriculture’ encompasses land, water and natural resourcesmanagement and livestock keeping as well as crop production.

n Rose Hogan, Sustainable Agriculture Adviser, January 2015with material, encouragement and comments from:

Mustapha AbuJosé AdanAskale AderawMary BaganiziCarol BallantineAbida BegumTeamrat BelaiSabrina BrettRaja ChakrabotiTom CrowleyCasandra DennehyFinola FinnanNiamh GarveyNemaya Jamba

Emmanuel KarulindaFarrah KellyAlexis LinaresNelly MaondeEmma Newbury Desiré NibagwireDeirdre Ní Cheallaigh Saah Lebreton Nyambe Francis EmoruEstela VidalCarol WrennAlexis WilliamsRonie Zamor

Trócaire Gender and Agriculture in Trócaire Programmes

2

Contents1. Why this document? 3

2. The problem – what we know 4

2.1 There is an Unequal ‘load’ on women and girls for all activities associated with running a rural household. 4

2.2 Women have less access to all resources 4

2.3 Unequal power between men and women 5

3. Why the need to tackle gender imbalance in agriculture? 6

3.1 Rights – Because women and girls have equal rights to men and boys. 6

3.2 Productivity – To Increase overall farm productivity 6

3.3 Economics – To improve rural households’ quality of life 6

3.4 Socio-economic – To reduce household dependency ratio 6

3.5. Human Survival – Sustaining natural resources. 6

4. How is gender imbalance tackled? 7

4.1 What has Trócaire SLEJ been doing? 7

4.2 Preliminary conclusions about SLEJ’s gender situation 9

5. What works to redress gender imbalance? 10

5.1 Sound gender analysis in the agricultural setting 10

5.2 Multifaceted interventions – not just a single one 11

5.3 Choose models of agriculture that are accessible to women 13

5.4 Reach women and girls where they are 14

5.4.1 Gendered analysis of information, education and communication needs 14

5.4.2 Recruit and retain more women in technical roles 14

5.4.3 Integrate Functional literacy 15

5.4.4 Translation and interpretation 15

5.5 Listen to and celebrate women in agriculture 16

5.6 Reach men – household approaches 16

5.7 Genderise Technology and equipment choices 17

5.7.1 Matching Physical size and strength 17

5.7.2 Communal Installations – equal skilling of the sexes 18

5.7.3 Costs – initial capital, recurrent and maintenance 18

5.7.4 Location-near home 18

5.8 Genderise livestock choices 19

5.9 Gender – sensitise income generating and value chain interventions 19

5.9.1 Women-only interventions 20

5.9.2 Cautious gendered intervention along the value chain 20

5.10 Promote policies which support women farmers 20

6. How to recognise success and unforeseen impacts? 21

7. References 23

Trócaire Status and Practical Recommendations

3

Trócaire programmes have been addressing genderissues in numerous ways throughout Trócaire’shistory and take pride in the many successes of ourpartnerships in highlighting gender imbalances andapplying interventions to redress them. Trócaire hasa specialised gender team with six programmes andalso mainstreams gender throughout all itsactivities from policy to implementation. The Sustainable Livelihoods and EnvironmentalJustice (SLEJ) programme mainstreams genderwhich forms a key deliverable (Box 1) on which theprogramme is evaluated.2

Rural livelihoods are largely based on producingfood and other products from a natural resourcebase and women are major players in this economy.However, Trócaire, together with other actors inrural livelihood support in ’developing’ countries, isstill challenged to change the subordinated positonof women in the rural economy. Even ensuring thatrural women benefit equally to rural men from theproject support we provide is a challenge. Thepurpose of this is document is to bring new energyto our SLEJ efforts by reviewing the problem(Section 2), recapping on why we need to re-invigorate our efforts to address it (Section 3),reviewing how Trócaire and others have beentackling the challenge (Section 4), highlightingsuccessful methods and providing somerecommendations (Section 5) and suggesting amenu of indicators which might help to measurechange (Section 6).

This document is ‘open’ to you as a SLEJProgramme Officer to improve through providingexamples, correcting inaccuracies or commentingon your own and partners’ experiences. You arewelcomed to contribute to improving thisdocument, by email, on Yammer and through Skypeor Webinar discussions organised by you orrequested by you.

Throughout the document questions are posed tostimulate your reflection.

1. Why this document?

BOX 1.

SLEJ Programme Deliverable 3

At least 75% of livelihoods programmes identifyand address gender differences, to a highstandard, in access to resources, livelihoodstrategies and outcomes.

2 Trócaire has several gender publications which include Trócaire 2012, Pradan 2012 and Panda et al. 2012 which are drawn upon for this documentand are also available on Yammer.

You will see the questionsin special callout bubbles. ?


4

Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka reminds us “Patriarchy isbestowed on men at birth. Whether you want it ornot, you have a privilege as a man, and you eitherfight against it and reject it by becoming a feministman, or you enjoy the privileges that come with it.”3

She is challenging world leaders to renew theirefforts to redress the imbalances that we haveinherited and are trying to address within ourprogrammes.

When inequity between women and men is notsuccessfully addressed, it is generally agreed thatthe following situations (2.1-2.3) persist.

2.1 There is an Unequal ‘load’ onwomen and girls for all activitiesassociated with running a ruralhousehold.

This includes:

n Sourcing food, fuel and water

n Preparing food which includes cleaning,peeling, chopping, pounding, winnowing,grinding, fermenting or other processes.

n Cooking food and beverages whichincludes maintaining the fire.

n Caring for dependent family members –nutrition, clothing, assisting, engaging,educating in home skills, healthmaintenance, protecting.

n Cleaning the homestead, washing utensils,clothes and bedding.

2.2 Women have less access to allresources:

n Natural (water, land, wild plants andanimals) – private or commonly held.Women’s share is always less than 20% andin some regions far below this. Also theresources that women own are usuallyinferior to those owned by men.

n Human – there are fewer productive adultsin Female Headed Households. Also,because of a host of entrenched gendernorms and biases throughout women’slives, the Female Headed Household hasless access to technical extension services,to information, education and networking.For example, data from 97 countries showsthat female farmers get only 5% ofagricultural extension services.

n Material – finance, equipment, farm inputs.Only 10 % of aid for agriculture and relatedenterprises goes to women. Even where wehave women’s economic empowermentprojects, women are rarely consulted aboutthe sale of the produce or the use of thehousehold income. (Panda et al, 2012).

n Time – because of their unequal workload inmanaging the household nutrition, energyand hygiene and caring for the dependentfamily, their opportunities to spend timeuplifting their education, their economicstatus or taking leisure are severely limited.

2. The problem – what we know

3 Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, Undersecretary-General and Executive Director, United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment ofWomen, World economic forum , Davos, January 2015


5

2.3 Unequal Power between womenand men – in household andcommunity decision-making.

Although power relations, especially domesticpower relations, are complex and although thereare some notable exceptions, it is generally agreedthat in most of our programme areas men are mostcommonly in the dominant and prominent positionsat all levels. This is usually because of cultural andsocietal norms and is true for many SLEJ projectsand partner teams. The SASA activist kit givesexplanations about existing norms and types ofpower and how to work towards promotingalternative beneficial norms and balancing power4.

Clear understanding of power inequalities and theircauses is often restricted by the way in which socio-economic studies are framed. For example, baselineassessments often aggregate data by household,reflecting standard economic models that viewhouseholds as key units. This hides the differencesbetween women and men in access to and controlover the natural (land, water, biodiversity) and otherassets (labour, finance, technical equipment,technical knowledge, communications networks)needed for securing household nutrition andlivelihoods.

4 http://raisingvoices.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/downloads/Sasa/SASA_Activist_Kit/START/OverallPieces/StartSASAIntroduction.pdf

BOX 2.

What inhibits women’s gainfulinvolvement in agriculture?Hlandze...DfiD 2014

n Limited access to all resources

n Time and energy

n Constraints to mobility, includingcultural constraints

n Information and technology deficit

n Constraints to communication

n Low literacy levels

n Limited decision-making power

Do you feel that yourpartners fully understandthe power dynamicsbetween the women andmen who participate intheir projects? ?


6

3.3 Economics – to improve ruralhouseholds’ quality of life.

Empowering women has positive impacts on rurallives and livelihoods, beginning with the household.This is because women are known to spend more onhousehold welfare (Hlandze, L. 2014) includingchildren’s health and education. Investments inwomen’s empowerment and gender equality makeeconomic sense (‘smart economics’), acting as a keylever for development impact and poverty reduction(World Bank, 2011).

3.4 Socio-economic – to reducehousehold dependency ratio.

As mentioned above, female headed households tendto have more dependents per adult. When women’seducation is improved the dependency ratio can bereduced in all households, because more highlyeducated women have lower fertility rates. (Hlandze,L. 2014). The woman’s and the household’s quality oflife can thus be improved.

3.5. Human Survival – sustaining naturalresources.

Women’s knowledge (through use and dailyfamiliarity) of natural resources for self-sufficiency inremote marginalised rural lands often becomes lostwhen ‘modern’ agriculture and medicine arepromoted and subsidised. Women grow a widervariety of crops, contributing to greater agro-biodiversity (Hlandze, 2014) which in turn increasesresilience to climatic shocks. It is internationallyrecognised that women’s knowledge of survival(nutrition, medicine, water, energy sources andquality) needs to be fore-fronted to inform climatechange adaptation efforts. It is also known thatwomen are often given extra burdens, such as caringfor the sick following a disaster or travelling further forwater during drought, as a result of Climate Changeimpacts (ODI/CDKN, 2014). Therefore women’s voicesand skills need to be heard in resilience, adaptationand mitigation-opportunity planning.

The reasons for the urgency in tackling the genderimbalance in agriculture are associated with rights,productivity, economics, socio-economics, andphysical survival. These reasons are justified in brief inthe following paragraphs.

3.1 Rights – because women and girlshave equal rights to men and boys.

The equal rights of women and girls are upheld inArticle 1 of the UN Universal Declaration on HumanRights which states “All human beings are born freeand equal in dignity and rights”. Women and girlshave equal rights to men and boys in ownership ofresources as per Article 17; - “1. Everyone has theright to own property alone as well as in associationwith others.” Likewise everyone has the right tofreedom, fair employment, leisure, education andinvolvement in cultural life and governance. Trócaire’sRights Based approach includes our programmes andpartners as duty bearers who, ethically, must act (withpartners) to uphold the rights of our beneficiaries bysupporting them to understand and demand theirrights. Therefore our interventions must integrateacting to uphold the rights of women and girls asequal rights to those of men and boys.

3.2 Productivity – to increase overallfarm productivity.

Women’s productivity can be at least equal to men’s ifthey are given the same opportunity (Hlandze, L.2014). The FAO estimates that up to 4% increase infood output could be achieved, if women had equalaccess to resources, and that this could reduce thenumbers of hungry people by up to 150million!5

“Empowered women and men are better, moresuccessful farmers who can make the most of theopportunities around them.” The returns to labour areimproved, giving women and girls options for moreleisure, education, creativity, self-development, socialengagement and community-development time.

3. Why the need to tackle genderimbalance in agriculture?

5 http://www.fao.org/gender/infographic/en/ visited 26.01.15


7

4.1 What has Trócaire SLEJ beendoing?

Trócaire has promoted gender mainstreaming inprogramme design6 in all SLEJ programmes. Effortshave also been made towards gendermainstreaming in budgeting. Gendermainstreaming is also adopted to a certain extent inSLEJ programme review, monitoring andevaluation and reporting systems.

SLEJ programmes are applying a variety ofapproaches and practices in different countries asfollows7:

4. How is gender imbalance tackled?

Gender Role Play at Global SLEJ Meeting 2014. Photo: Raja ChakrabortiMost Trócaire SLEJ programmes

are:

n Supporting women to grouptogether/cooperate for economicopportunities (savings, credit, enterprises,new technology/adding value).

n Having gender champions within Partneroffices (just started promoting for SLEJProgrammes globally).

n Designating gender champions withinTrócaire Office.

Ethiopia and Zimbabwe SLEJprogrammes are:

n Promoting gender equality in partnerfield teams e.g. Internship programme inEthiopia and staffing balance inZimbabwe.

n Establishing a gender working group atCST (CAFOD SCIAF Trócaire), Ethiopia tomonitor the dynamics within theorganisations and outside of theorganisation with partners (Ethiopia).

6 Trócaire’s Gender Mainstreaming Resource Pack: a practical guide for programming, published in 2012, explains ‘gender mainstreaming’. Itprovides seven ‘essentials’ for mainstreaming and practical methods for achieving them.

7 Data collected from Programme Officers during the SLEJ Global Meeting, Maynooth, September 2014.

SLEJ India is:

n Strengthening women’s self-help groupseconomically.

n Doing local advocacy for equal wages.

n Using the Family Unit approach.

n Ensuring engagement of women indecision-making.

SLEJ Guatemala partners are:

n Doing Gender Diagnostics incommunities.

n Working with women’s organisations toraise their capacity.

n Forming women’s structures withinmixed-gender projects.

SLEJ Uganda is:

n Including training by partners onWomen’s Rights Law.

n Developing a gender action learning tool(by partner).

SLEJ Nicaragua and Honduras are:

n Exchanging with different partners whoare specialists in gender (Nicaragua,Honduras).

n Doing ‘New Masculinities’ work menrecognising their subordination ofwomen and changing behaviourincluding sharing of domestic activities(Nicaragua).

n Budgeting-in gender specific activities(Nicaragua).

Pakistan and Rwanda

n Establishing women-only organisations

n e.g. women-only cooperatives(Rwanda).

n Women only Farmer Field Schools inPakistan.


8

Above: Man excitedly explaining thathe loved participating in genrdertraining, Honduras.

Top: Odelia, female Agronomist andDirector of Partner Organisation,Honduras.

Right: Woman Oxen trainer Rwanda.

Can you provide a photoof a female farming heroor a male domestic herofor this space? ?


9

4.2 Preliminary conclusions aboutSLEJ’s gender situation.

SLEJ programmes have successfully targetedfemale headed households and women asbeneficiaries. SLEJ programmes have also madegood headway in monitoring female and maleparticipation and their receipt of services andmaterial benefits from the projects. There isawareness – at varying degrees – of genderdisparity in access to the projects’ benefits e.g.access to training. There have been attempts, somesuccessful, at influencing the disparities. Notably inland titling policy in some country programmes(Northern Land Platform, Uganda, 2014). However,in the main, the SLEJ interventions have not beenappreciably successful in shifting power relations infavour of women’s autonomy over assets acquiredthrough the projects or in terms of greaterengagement as leaders in the community’sagricultural or overall development. For example,although it is women who run the irrigated plots, itis the men who run the solar pump irrigating thesite in Msiyamphanje, Malawi. Therefore thewomen who need the water are dependent on themen to ensure the pump is working and on themen’s decisions regarding water distribution.

SLEJ programmes have given limited attention tochanging the share of domestic (reproductive) rolesof which women carry the greatest burden. SLEJprogrammes tend to promote innovations andtechnologies without pre-assessing the impacts onthe women and the men’s current workloads. Anexample is the introduction of composting wherewomen become the main carriers of the materialsfrom the field or the water source to the heap, whilemen are not asked to take on some ’women’s’

chores in compensation. The design of projectsdoes not often support space for re-negotiation ofroles to provide for the time and energy needed forthe new innovation. Some SLEJ ProgrammeOfficers feel frustrated and exasperated from trying,without satisfactory impacts, to influence partners’attitudes to their internal gender disparities.

BOX 3.

Women’s participation at VillageLevel, Malawi 2013 and 2014

n CADECOMs (Trócaire’s partners) havemade strong efforts to ensure women areincluded on committees under all theFood Security and Livelihoodsinterventions supported by Trócaire.

n Women were present as members ofcommittees in all village meetings duringthis field visit and participated in varyingdegrees in terms of interjections andvoice-forcefulness.

n The districts are different in terms ofethnic and religious mixes, therefore thereare probably lots of practical ideas for thediocesan CADECOMs to exchange on howthey approach differing gender relationswith sensitivity to their particularsituations.

n The CADECOMs may have practicalstrategies for enhancing women’scapacity to attend trainings e.g. provisionof a crèche, which were not exploredduring this visit.

SAA, Trócaire, Field Visit Reports, 2013 & 2014.

Msiaphange Village Pumphouse.

Have you an example toshare about supportingpartners to improve genderbalances in their fieldstaffing? ?


10

The following paragraphs comprise a collection ofadvice from gender practitioners who say thatinterventions must be multi-faceted, must play towomen’s strengths, must reach them, beappropriate and manageable by them. They alsosay that the skills and achievements of girls andwomen should be acknowledged and celebratedpublicly.

5.1 Sound gender analysis in theagricultural setting.

First, take a fresh look at and learn more aboutwomen’s areas of knowledge, action and controlwithin the household and the agricultural setting.What resources does a rural woman in the agro-ecological and ethno-cultural zone of our workknow most about? Often women have the highestlevels of specialist knowledge of wild plants (forfood, medicines, dyes, crafts), water sources, woodfor fuel, for structures to preserve crops and otheruses. Women are commonly specialists in varietiesof crops for different soils, weather conditions,flavour, storage characteristics, pest and diseaseresistance. In many pastoralist and agro-pastoralistcommunities women are the experts in preservationof milk products and in the care of young and smallanimals. In many cultures there are ‘women’s crops’and ‘men’s crops8’, women often specialising inleguminous (protein) crops, small grains (e.g.millets, sorghum, Amaranthus and Eleusine), leafyand root vegetables (vitamin and mineral foods)and in wild foods. In fishing communities womenare often fishers of sardines and processors andtraders of fish. Such specialisms vary in differentcultures and it is important to understand suchdifferences for each place of partners’ work.

Second, deepen the understanding of theagricultural, natural resources care and livestocktasks done by women and men in the specificcultural and agro-ecological zones. Who normallydoes what? Most importantly, if we support a new

intervention e.g. composting or irrigation system,who will be doing what tasks related to it? To helpwith this deeper understanding there are tools suchas Gender Analysis Matrices (GAMs) which youmay have come across in your work. For example,the Ten Key Questions for a Gender Analysis fromTrócaire Gender Mainstreaming Resource Pack(Trócaire, 2012) as given in Box 5 (p.11). Othergender analysis tools are available from SarahLongwe, Caroline Moser, Oxfam‘s Suzanne Williams(Oxfam, 1994), Lorena Aguilar (Aguilar, 2013) andothers. The key is to consider the possible impactsof project interventions in a participatory way withwomen and men separately before adopting theintervention.

Third, make the study of gender relations andrecommendations for improving power and workbalances a more explicit task during AnnualProgramme Reviews, Monitoring and Evaluationactivities and during baseline studies. At Baseline,Mid-term and final reviews the minimum could beto check changes in knowledge, attitude andbehaviour on gender. Trócaire Gender Team canassist you with this.

Fourth, do a similar study with the partner –assessing its own gender strengths andweaknesses and making plans to challenge its ownweaknesses which have a timescale for action,monitoring and evaluation.

Such analyses help to deepen all participants’consciousness of power. A SLEJ Programme Officercan play a sensitive leadership role during suchanalyses asking some of the ten key questionswhere appropriate and gently disturbing theunequal norms.

5. What works to redress gender imbalance?

8 Men’s crops are usually commercial staple and non-edible crops. e.g. maize, cotton.


11

For example in relation to a water resources orirrigation project asking:

n What does a/the woman/women havecontrol over now?

n What, of the proposedinterventions/innovations are women likelyto retain control over?

n Will women help decide where the newresources will be located?

n Will women have the keys to the pumphouse or only the right to make water flowinto their plots when the men decide?

n Why not have a woman in charge of pumpmaintenance? Insist on women’s equalaccess to training on how to do it.

Fifth, during project design, make time and abudget for negotiation of women’s and men’sresponsibilities for the new tasks (both individualand communal). Time and resources will be neededthroughout the project cycle for re-negotiation, athousehold level, of the females’ and males’ share ofdomestic tasks in view of the new responsibilitiesfor project tasks.

5.2 Multifaceted interventions – notjust a single one.

It is widely agreed that “no single intervention isenough to achieve gender equality…..”. “We haveto develop complex interventions, either directly orin partnership, to empower women at all levels.Otherwise, gains will not be secured.” (Farnworth etal., 2013). Both agency9 and resource access need tobe improved simultaneously. For example, women’senterprise success needs to be accompanied withraised decision-making power in the market and inthe household. Trócaire’s work on women’s rights toland is such a multi-faceted approach which isworking on agency, structure and relations all atonce. Box 6 depicts such a multi-faceted approach.

Global studies show that where women’s access toland is insecure, the nutritional status of children isworst. Therefore supporting women’s secure accessto land is a very important contribution, not alone towomen’s self-determination but also to communityhealth and nutrition. Land reform is also considereda key route to transformation of gender relations.

BOX 5.

Key questions that make up a Gender Analysis (Trócaire, 2012)

GENDER ANALYSIS – 10 KEY QUESTIONS THESE RELATE TO:

Who does what? Activities

How? With what? Access to resources

Who owns what? Ownership of assets

Who is responsible for what? Roles and responsibilities

Who is entitled to what? Rights

Who controls what? Income and spending power

Who decides what? Power

Who gets what? Distribution

Who gains – who loses? Redistribution

Why? What is the basis for this situation? Rules and laws/Norms/Customs

Source: Tearfund UK

9 Agency is the ability to define one’s goals and act upon them.


12

Means to tackle the tendency of cash andcommercial enterprises being overtaken by menwho generally contribute less to domesticexpenses are also being explored in developmentprojects. For example, the Sustainable andEffective Economic Development (SEED) projectin Mozambique (Box 7) encouraged householdlevel discussions about income and expendituredecision-making. Many similar methodologies areapplied in Trócaire partner projects.

BOX 6.

Key Activities to support women’s rights to land (adapted from Farnworth et al.

AGENCY

n Training in law andhow to claim rights.

n Building confidenceto claim rights.

n Enabling women tojoin/establishwomen’s groupsand networks.

STRUCTURE

n Women’s rights enactedin law.

n Advocacy networkssupported in legalchallenges.

n Legal awareness-raisingteams, watchdog groups.

n Customary leadershipand men’s groupssupport women’s landrights.

RELATIONS

n Men (Spouses, village leaders)support women’s control anduse of land.

n Government extensiondepartments provide equalaccess to education, informationand technologies to women.

n Media, education andcommunications personnelrecognise and celebratewomen’s resource control andmanagement.

BOX 7.

SEED ‘s Two Strategies

SEED prioritised two women’s empowermentstrategies: (a) creating more economic opportunities for

women by increasing the participation ofwomen beneficiaries, and

(b) ensuring that the project benefits all familymembers through fair decision-making.

Specific steps included:n Ensuring services are known to women and

accessible to them in terms of time andlocation, and identifying barriers to women’sparticipation.

n Developing tools to demonstrate theadvantages of joint decision-making, such as

community theatre and the IncomeExpenditure Tree, which was used as abaseline and monitoring instrument to mapchanges in household decision-making overtime.

n Integrating women’s leadership training intoactivities.

n Ensuring human rights are reflected ingroup constitutions.

n Training “positive deviants” – supportivehusbands, vaccinators, communitymembers – in public speaking anddisseminating messages of changeregarding gender equality and women’sempowerment.

Farnworth et al. 2013, p 37

Do you have an example whichillustrates how a partner project hasnot alone supported women’sentrepreneurship, but also enabledwomen’s continued control ofthe usage of the income? ?


13

5.3 Choose models of agriculture thatare accessible to women.

There is evidence (from Brazil, India and Chile) thatLow-input, local, agroecological approaches havehigh potential to empower women, because they aremore accessible in terms of costs and fall within thetraditional knowledge base of women whichencompasses on-farm seed conservation, plant andother wild biodiversity knowledge. Agroecologicalapproaches are inherently transformative. But women’s empowerment is not automatic andwomen’s roles in the transformative processes needto be both publicly recognised and supported(Parmentier, 2014:57). If considered as ‘passivebeneficiaries’, their empowerment will not be ensured.

‘Conventional’, ‘Industrialised’, ‘Business as Usual’agriculture has created a distance betweenproduction and nutrition-security objectives and theagricultural market place has become a largely male-dominated sphere. At the same time men are notdeeply involved in the sphere of nutrition.

More balanced genderised thinking can help bringback balance to farming and food systems. Box 8explains how La Via Campesina is approaching thisfailure and how it is trying to genderise foodsovereignty10.

Apart from making the male link with food begin athousehold level and improving women’s control inthe food-market place (see 5.8 below), what practicalstrategies can our partners and programmes take tosupport the majority of small farmers, that is thewomen farmers, to sustain their rural livelihoods?

By prioritising:

n Self-sufficient and mixed farming overmonocultural, commercial, farming a mix offresh home-produced will be available at thehousehold or in the locality. This willincrease the chances that a woman canprovide balanced nourishment to the familywithout purchases.

n Local before exotic – because she knowsmore about it, often even more thanextension workers and academics!

n Enrichment of the land, water, biologicaldiversity of the farm and all the surroundingcommon property resources – the basis of allof a rural woman’s opportunities.

n Supporting women’s access, ownership andcontrol of the biological diversity (includingbio-enterprises from species for which theyhave specialist knowledge e.g. Shea butter,baobab and others not yet in globalcommerce), the land and the water resources.

10 “Food sovereignty”, a term coined by members of Via Campesina in 1996, asserts that the people who produce, distribute, and consume foodshould control the mechanisms and policies of food production and distribution, rather than the corporations and market institutions they believehave come to dominate the global food system.

BOX 8.

Gender focus to balance productionand nutrition

“La Via Campesina [the worldwide farmer,peasant, and landless people movement]is....working on a campaign to gender theconcept of food sovereignty. The challenge ishow to turn food sovereignty into a tool tostrengthen and empower peasant women.

Historically, women have been associated withfood. Since ancestral times they have cultivatedthe seeds, reproduced the seeds and hybridisedthem. They are alchemists; they find new waysto prepare food, whether in the peasant kitchenor by the campfire. However, when food passesfrom the private sphere to the public one, in theareas of marketing and distribution, men appearin the process, because the male link with foodhappens in the public area. It’s then that wereturn to the old dichotomy between the private-female-invisible and the public-male-visible.

We’re dealing with a struggle for visibility andacknowledgment of the equal value ofreproduction and the private world. But thisalone is not enough. It’s also necessary for mento get more involved with food sovereignty inthe early stages of reproduction, preparation,and preservation of food, and not only in thedistribution. This is the way that we’ll break thefalse dichotomy between the female and themale.”

http://otherworldsarepossible.org/gendering-peasant-movements-gendering-food-sovereignty


14

5.4 Reach women and girls where theyare.

Women and girls tend to be less mobile, less literateand have lower ownership and access to mediasuch as radios, mobile phones and newspapers.Therefore it is difficult for them to access theinformation they need for agriculture such as newtechnologies and varieties, weather forecasts, pestand disease forecasts, prices and market bulletins.

Here below are some ideas which may add to thosewhich your partners are already attempting.

5.4.1 Gendered analysis of information,education and communication needs.

Do separate consideration of women’s and men’sinformation, education and communication needsbecause women’s ownership of and access tomedia is different – usually less – than men’s. Forexample there are opportunities during programmedesign, baseline studies and preparation of‘dissemination strategies’ to find out aboutwomen’s current access to information andpreferred media and to make changes in order toensure that women and girls, as well as men andboys, receive and can use the information providedby the programme.

Project Information, Communications andEducation strategies can consider:

n Less emphasis on written materials andmore on audio and visual materials.

n Simpler and less text on written materials.

n More doing and less listening or watchingduring training. More interactive andpractical training (at least 80%) and lesstheoretical and classroom-based training.

n Using more gender sensitive and norm-challenging images and attitudes inmaterials e.g. depictions of women/girlsand men/boys in non-conventional roles.

n Running women-only training courses andwomen-only farmer field schools.

n Providing educational materials, equipmentand centres which can be accessed byindividual women at times other thanduring training sessions and other than viathe extension worker; – at home, in acommunity/group resource centre, ICTcentre or library. Radio, Audio-tapes, CDs,Video/DVD/MP3, mobile phones and hand-held computers backed up with solar and/orwind-up power may be appropriateequipment.

n Engaging gender-sensitive facilitators –who, at minimum, give equal speakingspace for women and men during fieldvisits, workshops, training and meetings.

5.4.2 Recruit and retain more women intechnical roles.

Much, perhaps too much, agricultural educationand training is delivered through extension workers.There is global evidence that when the extensionworker is female, women get increased access toextension services. Less male jealousy, less femaleshyness and more learning take place. (IIAASTD,2008). However it is very challenging to find femaletechnical staff with adequate agricultural fieldexperience, even for staff positions within Trócaire’sSLEJ Programmes! Trócaire has tried to support

How can women’s free andcontinued access totechnical, weather andmarket information beenhanced? ?

Gender and Communication Media – Malawi 2014

Women have less and different access to radio thanmen. For example, we were told that women listen inthe evening at 7pm or so, while men listen in theafternoon. Favoured stations mentioned were Zodiak,Radio 2, MBC, Radio Maria, BBC, Radio 1 and Galaxy.

ARH Field Visit Report 2014


15

partners to hire more female extension staff in avariety of ways including female graduateinternship programmes. However, partnerorganisations, even female directed organisations,are still challenged to retain the female staff. Moresupport for carrying out their reproductive roleswhile performing the work together with morepositive attitudes towards females in ‘male’professions are considered as crucial. Genderdiagnostics and gender audits, which Trócaireprogrammes are carrying out with partners, assistpartners to become aware of gender imbalancesand negative attitudes and to propose ways toaddress them. Such changes can also impactpositively on the government agricultural, water,forestry and lands departments with which partnersinteract.

5.4.3 Integrate Functional literacy.

In most of Trócaire’s programme areas, the levels ofliteracy of women and girls are lower than those ofmen and boys. Some community groups andcommittees established as part of our projects makeliteracy a condition for leadership roles. Thereforelow literacy hinders women’s capacity to benefitfrom projects. Some Trócaire SLEJ partners addressthe problem by:

n integrating literacy training into theirprogrammes.

n linking project participants withgovernment-run literacy programmes.

However, there is still need for increased attentionto raising women’s literacy to enable their increasedaccess to agricultural information and to leadershiproles in agricultural development.

5.4.4 Translation and interpretation.

As women’s and girls’ access to formal education islimited, they are often disadvantaged more thanmen and boys when information is provided in theirsecond (or third) language. Although some projectsand some partners are committed to using theparticipant’s first language, others have notadequately prepared for the cost and timeinvestment that translation and interpretationinvolves. How can this language barrier beaddressed?

n Design the project with the primaryparticipants’ first language as the baselanguage.

n Budget for translation and interpretationwhere needed by other stakeholders (M&Evisits, workshops, field visits).

What other literacyinterventions are youaware of? ?

BOX 9.

Technology is critical for universalaccess to education.

Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, January 2015

What other methods canyou suggest for breakingthrough language barriers? ?


16

5.5 Listen to and celebrate women inagriculture.

Individual role models can have wide scale impacton society regarding the value of women inagriculture. When women agricultural experts(farmers, field workers and academics) arerecognised publicly on mass media – radio/videoprogrammes, newspapers, there are gains both inmale respect for women’s knowledge and females’increased confidence and ambition as farmers andagricultural educators. For example, The FemaleFood Heroes competition supported by OxfamTanzania used a reality T.V. format to highlightwomen’s contribution to agriculture and raisednational attention towards rural women’s rightsissues11.

5.6 Reach men – householdapproaches.

Some of the most successful interventions forreducing inequalities between women and men arethose which have successfully engaged men.Trócaire’s partner the Association of Men againstViolence (AHCV) in Nicaragua has enabled men toreflect critically on their own behaviours, values andattitudes and to develop less patriarchal ways ofrelating to women and other men (Trócaire, 2014).Men have agreed to share the domestic work andreproductive/care-giving roles in order to facilitatetheir wives’ engagement in productive andcommunity activities. There is an increase in joint-decision making in the household. FundactionSemiente in Honduras has had similar successes.Men have realised that “shouting at and kicking mywife and children are not acceptable” and areworking towards more equal relations and “thehome is a happier place”. This resounds with theliterature which asserts that “men can quickly beengaged through approaches that focus onbehavioural change at the household level, becausethey see the benefits right away.” (Farnworth et al2013). Household approaches help the families andeven the wider communities to see that gender

inequalities have negative impacts on incomes andoverall well-being. Men begin to see that bettergender equality leads to better lives and livelihoods.Gender-based divisions within households, andcounterproductive rivalries, are replaced by acommon vision and collaboration (ibid.) Box 10provides an example of a household approach togender analysis and mentoring in Ethiopia.

11 http://www.oxfam.org/en/video/2012/female-food-heroes-tanzania

BOX 10.

Household Gender analysis forGender Transformation

Household Gender Analysis for GenderTransformation is a hybrid of gender analysisand participatory rural appraisal toolsdeveloped in 2004 by the Ethiopian gender staffof the Sida-Amhara Rural DevelopmentProgramme (SARDP).

It is a collaborative process in which win-winoutcomes for both women and men arenurtured. It starts with separate analysis bywomen and men of their roles.The community level mentors work with eachhousehold over several months to help themwork towards:

n equalizing the amount of labour contributedby women and men in all areas of work,

n promoting equity in intra-householddecision-making, and

n fostering mutual support.

Membership in a group with the ensuingsupport function is very important to helppeople to maintain change in their genderrelations without attracting scorn and also toprovide ideas and solutions. Householdresilience is improved by women and menlearning to carry out tasks heretofore labelledas ‘male’ or ‘female.


17

5.7 Genderise Technology andequipment choices.

Many projects and partners accept that theequipment available is the most suitable for thecountry and the context of the users and are oftenconstrained in terms of time and capacity toquestion the technological choices. Genderanalyses seldom give detailed attention to thedifferences between female and male physical ‘fit’of tools and equipment… a hand-hoe is a hand-hoe,…. rather than “Do hand hoes come with lighter,sharper metal parts and shorter handles?”.Genderised consideration of physical ‘fit’ togetherwith costs, location, portability, skilling are exploredin the following paragraphs.

5.7.1 Matching Physical size and strength.

Suppliers and designers of agricultural tools,equipment, machinery and protective clothingworldwide are biased towards male farmer needs.Have you ever searched for a pair of steel-tippedwork boots or strong work gloves in a women’ssize? Often agricultural equipment is physically, andsometimes culturally, difficult for women and girlsto use. The size, height and strength needed tocarry and use the equipment are pitched for maleanatomy and strength. SLEJ partners commonlysupport technological interventions for farmersincluding hand tools, winnowers, shellers, waterpumps, bicycles, mincers/grinders, animal tractionand transport equipment, animal housing, andothers. There are choices to be made in selectingand, sometimes in designing, such equipment. Thisis an opportunity to select, design or adaptequipment to fit women’s and girl’s needs. Suchadaptation need not necessarily exclude male use.

How can a partner ensure that new equipment isphysically suitable for women to use? Somesuggestions are provided here. Do you haveothers?

n Expose the options to women, for them tochoose the equipment for ‘women’s’ jobs.

n Provide opportunities for women and girlsto trial different types of equipment.

n Provide women and girls with opportunitiesto explain to designers and suppliers (at thelocal welding workshop or the agriculturalresearch station, or agricultural show) whatthey need to make the tool easier to use.

A Zambian farmer tests a nut sheller. What could be done to makeit more appropriate to this woman’s height and strength? Photo: Swathi Shridharan, ICRISAT.

How can a partner ensure thatnew equipment is physicallysuitable for women to use?

Do you have examples of equipmentwhich a partner designed towomen’s specifications which youcould share? ?

“Could you add an extensionto the handle of that sheller toincrease cranking efficiencyand reduce the powerrequirement?” ?

Rope and washer pump.Treadle pump-less efficientthan a rope and washer pump.


18

5.7.2 Communal Installations – equal skilling ofthe sexes.

Large machinery (milling machine, water pump) oran installation (solar irrigation system) designed toreduce the labour burden on women is unlikely tostay under the control of women unless:

i. It belongs to a women-only cooperative orgroup. Or

ii. women have been actively and equallyengaged with its installation from the outset.

Conventional misconceptions that women cannotbe mechanically or electrically capable are beingcountered by some partners in some programmes.For example, in Nicaragua in some cases womenare the maintenance and supervisory personnel forcommunity electrical water pump installations.

Such roles challenge norms and provide examplesfor others to follow. The cultural and timeconstraints for women’s continued engagement asmaintenance volunteers/staff for communalinstallations need attention during pre-projectgender analysis in order to negotiate a reduction indomestic/reproductive responsibilities and men’sagreement to support and not to ridicule womenwho take on ‘male’ roles.

5.7.3 Costs – initial capital, recurrent andmaintenance.

High recurrent costs, such as supply of fuel, havehampered the long-term sustainability of technicalinterventions to both individual households and

communal groups. As women’s access to cash isusually more constrained than men’s, low or norecurrent costs should be a primary selectioncriterion in choosing technology which will improvewomen’s lives. Fossil-fuel powered motorisedequipment (petrol or diesel driven) usually has highrecurrent energy costs and may be beyondwomen’s cash flow capacity as well as negativelyaffecting their profit margins. High capitalinvestment by the project in renewable (solar/wind)power and in energy-efficient equipment may be amore appropriate solution.

The simpler the piece of equipment and the morelocally made, the less likely that replacement ofparts will become a prohibitive cost or that findingthe spare part will result in loss of time or money. Itwill also be easier for the operator to repair herself.Needless to say the toolkit for repair should besupplied to her at delivery time!

5.7.4 Location – near home.

Women and girls are often constrained in leavingthe home by time, cultural and transport limitations.Their access to equipment is best when placed nearthe home. Nearby location reduces costs in terms oftime and travel to the equipment. This also reducessecurity costs as distant equipment may have to beprotected by a guard each night. Equipment that itis easy to carry about – light, collapsible – makessecurity and access easier. Such considerationsneed to be taken into account when designingirrigation interventions – for example, is one largecentrally located community irrigation plot betterfor women farmers than several smaller plotslocated closer to households? This question arosefor SLEJ Programme Officers in a comparison ofapproaches by partners in Zimbabwe and in Kenyaduring the Trócaire Water Resources Managementworkshop in Meru, Kenya in 2014.

Woman supervisor of community electricity and water pumpingsystem, Nicaragua.

Is one large plot better forwomen farmers than severalsmaller plots located closerto households? ?


19

5.8 Genderise livestock choices.

Livestock is seen as an instant solution to landfertility and human protein needs, but not allhouseholds are able to adopt livestock farming.Very poor households with labour constraints(female headed households are usually poorer andmore labour constrained than male headed) andthose which have never experienced livestockhusbandry are particularly constrained and may notbe able to manage livestock. Therefore we shouldnot assume that giving livestock is a better solutionfor such a household than, perhaps a social securitycredit scheme or a once-off grant. If, following athorough capacity check using a guide such as theConcern Worldwide Guide (Concern Worldwide,201312), a household is deemed to benefitsustainably from a livestock enterprise, the species,age/stage and breed of livestock should be carefullymatched to the capacity. Some genderconsiderations include that

n Women are not usually free to herdlivestock far from the home because ofother domestic chores, but are often morewilling than men to take on very smalllivestock and poultry within the homestead.

n Women are often specialists in processinganimal products and therefore in this case,investment in preservation (value-addition)may be more profitable than investment inprimary production.

n Women are often given the increasedburden of carrying water and fodder tostall-fed large animals, and of carrying themanure to the fields.

n Women are less likely to have cash forpurchase of compound feeds or medicinesfor livestock, but may know about herbalcures and preventative measures.

n The smaller the animal, the smaller thevalue of the risk and the wider the spread ofrisk – therefore choose several smalleranimals versus one big one for a female-headed poor household.

5.9 Gender – sensitise incomegenerating and value chaininterventions.

It is very difficult to promote women’s cash income-generating activities (especially those whichinvolve trade in crops) while ensuring that foodsecurity and nutrition objectives are maintained.Some governments issue directives to restrict tradein the staple crop. Some promote such self-restriction. For instance the Agricultural SupportProgramme (ASP) in Zambia trained women andmen farmers to calculate food needs and to storethat quantity before considering sales.

When women successfully turn crops which aretraditionally ‘women’s crops’ into commercialenterprises, there is no guarantee that the incomewill remain under the charge of the woman.

“Research over many decades into householddecision-making shows that there are no groundsfor assuming that increased incomes will result inmore and better food for all.”(Farnworth 20196:144). The reasons for this are that women andmen usually have different responsibilities in thehousehold and manage incomes from differentsources. Women are usually responsible for familynutrition but if they don’t have power over spendingthe money earned from the household’sinvolvement in a value chain project, they may notbe able to guarantee that the income is used forfamily nutrition.

12 Concern Worldwide, 2013. A Best Practice Guide to Livestock Distribution. SEDU Technical Briefing Paper Number 8. Trócaire Yammer SustainableLivelihoods Group resource.

Careful matching of animal species and breeds to women's needsis vital.


20

According to Farnworth et al. (2013), ZOPPA, theZimbabwe Organic Producers and PromotersAssociation found that the more men develop aninterest in cash-cropping, the less land is availablefor household food crops. “Conventional farmingdiscourages mixed and inter-cropping, and thus“women’s crops” are squeezed onto ever-smallerland parcels. As the economic situation worsens,men are dedicating more and more land tocommercial crops such as maize, tobacco andcotton.”

The following practical measures are suggested:

5.9.1 Women-only interventions.

In Trócaire’s Rwanda programme there is greatsuccess in value chain engagement by women inmixed sex and women-only cooperatives whichprocess and market staple and protein foods.Economic and educational improvement has beenachieved in both female headed and male headedhouseholds. However the link with improvements inhousehold nutrition seems most clear inhouseholds which belong to women-onlycooperatives. Perhaps this is because women’slivelihood responsibilities are more stronglyprioritised when women act without men’sinfluence? Therefore women-only interventionsmay still be appropriate.

5.9.2 Cautious gendered intervention along thevalue chain.

The further up the value chain, the moresophisticated the product, and the larger and themore distant the market the more likely that theprimary producer, in this case the rural women, willlose power over the enterprise and its profits. It isimportant to ask the following questions:

n When second level coops are formed howdoes the gender balance of decision-makerschange?

n When cooperative enterprises get bigenough to employ directors, technicalexperts and staff is gender balance apriority?

n When cooperatives get profitable enough tomechanise processes, should theymechanise or favour employment of ruralpeople?

5.10 Promote policies which supportwomen farmers.

New attention has been focused by governmentsand donors on the need for increased investment insmall holder agriculture. This makes for a wonderfulopportunity to use SLEJ policy and advocacyprojects to also draw attention to the facts that themajority of smallholder food producers are womenand that the poorest farmers are often women orfemale-headed householders. This while women’srepresentation in policy-making for agriculture andfood security is very low! A policy advisoryregarding the transformation of agriculturalinvestment by governments in Africa says“Advocacy for increase of budget to smallholderfarmers and which reaches women should highlightthe opportunity being missed by neglecting womenfarmers” (Curtis and Adama, 2013). Apart frompromoting increased national budgetary allocationsto smallholder women farmers, other policychanges which would improve women’s and girl’sopportunities in agriculture include:

n Facilitation of women’s heightenedparticipation in agricultural policy-making.

n Improved strategies for recruitment andretention of female technical staff.

n Gender-sensitising technological researchand education on; low-input sustainablefarming systems, machinery andequipment, seeds and breeds of ‘women’scrops’ and livestock, land protection andfertility restoration, processing, storage andvalue-addition, local food sovereignty andsystems, bio-enterprise, and on protectionand domestication of wild foods.

n Equal or positively-biased delivery ofagricultural education and communicationto women and girls.

n More accountability on gender in nationalagricultural development strategies.


21

Monitoring and evaluating changes in genderinequalities should be kept simple if it is to be easilycarried out within agricultural livelihoods projects.Trócaire’s gender and HIV team and its SLEJprogrammes have experience and skills in genderM and E which can be called upon. First the aimsregarding gender positions need to be clearly statedfrom the outset and be given targets and indicatorswhich can be measured for and by women andmen. For example, Pragati Koraput, one ofTrócaire’s partners in India studied ways to measureempowerment and provide practical tips.

Gender specialists advise that it is effective to havewomen develop empowerment indicatorsthemselves.

Indicators could be clustered under the followingheadings:

n Work,

n Resources,

n Education,

n Power relations,

n Social relations,

n Personal growth and quality of life,

n Organisational structure.

Table 11 (p.22) presents a collection of ideas forindicators-it is not exhaustive and should be usedonly as a menu/pick list to stimulate indicator ideasfor adaptation where stakeholders find applicable.

Women’s full and equal participation in monitoringand evaluation of the agriculture projects in whichthey are targeted as beneficiaries recogniseswomen as implementers and change agents andnot just beneficiaries. Trócaire’s Gender Programmeand Governance programme’s ongoing research ispromoting empowerment of women to choose theirstories to tell from their perspectives.

It is also recognised that both the female principaland the male principal should be consulted duringthe surveys. (Quisumbing, 2013).

The International Center for Research on Women’s(ICRW) guide for gender measurement inagricultural programmes (ICRW, 2011) has manyhelpful tips for measuring differences in women’sand men’s adoption of agricultural techniques aswell as differing access to project interventions andbenefits. The guide covers similar issues toTrócaire’s SLEJ programme including informationaccess, adoption of soil fertility practices andgender issues along the value chain and thereforecan assist in further genderizing Monitoring andEvaluation frameworks.

6. How to recognise success andunforeseen impacts?


22

Table 11. Indicator suggestions (adapted from Aguilar and Castaneda, 2001)

Behaviour

Positive change in women’s time spent in productive tasks. x x

Positive change in balance of women and men’s involvement in domestic and care tasks. x x x

Change in men’s time spent in productive & reproductive tasks. x x x

Partners hire gender sensitive staff & equal proportions of female/male field officers. x x x

Women are managing more of the project implementation. x x x

Action taken by local decision making bodies to promote women’s participation. x x x

% of leadership roles in decision-making bodies held by women. x x x

Number of women-led projects/ initiatives in their own communities. x x x

Women have increased direct access to agricultural and water resources technical information, laws, policies and strategies. x x x

Women have more secure access to a. land, b. water and c. good seed. x

Women are hired as repair officers on the irrigation scheme. x x x x x

Women a. own or have b. control or c. access to new equipment comparative to men. x x

Women participate more in leisure, sport and arts. x x x

Knowledge

Women know how to repair equipment e.g. irrigation pumps and canals. x x x x

Women are more literate. x x x

Women’s increased presence in open space. x x

Women’s participation in project activities has increased. x x x

Women hold positions in committees and community organisations. x x x

Attitudes

% of community women and men reporting gender equitable attitudes. x x x

Women’s opinions are respected in communal resources management. x x x x

Community members accept and admire women’s leadership. x x x x x

Women feel ready to lead. x x x

Men respect women’s leisure time. x x

Men understand gender and masculinity issues. x x x

Acceptance by men of women’s uptake of non-traditional tasks/occupations. x x x

Acceptance of women working outside the home. x x

Community recognition or recompense for women’s contribution to communal projects. x x x

Acceptance of men doing non-paid housework. x x x

Work

Possible indicator (level of/extent to which)Desired changes in Behaviour, Knowledge andAttitudes. Re

sources

Education

Power

relatio

ns

Social

relatio

ns

Person

algrow

th &

quality

of

life

Organ

isationa

lstructure


23

Aguilar, L. 2013. IUCN Framework for ConductingGender Responsive Analysis. IUCN – the WorldConservation Union (IUCN). Gland Switzerland.

Aguilar, l. and Castaneda, I., 2001. About fishermen,fisherwomen, Oceans and Tides: A GenderPerspective in Marine-Coastal Zones. IUCN, SanJose’, Costa Rica.

Asian Development Bank, 2013. Gender Equalityand Food Security: Women’s Empowerment as aTool against Hunger. The Philippines.

Concern Worldwide, 2013. A Best Practice Guide toLivestock Distribution. SEDU Technical BriefingPaper Number 8. Trócaire Yammer SustainableLivelihoods Group resource.

Curtis, M and Adama, D. 2013. Walking the talk -Why and how African governments shouldtransform their agriculture spending. Policy Brief.Action Aid.

Davis, L. 2014. ‘How to’ Guide to ManagingEconomic Empowerment Projects. Trócaire.

Farnworth, C., Fones Sundell, M., Nzioki, A.,Shivutse, V. and Davis, M. 2013. TransformingGender Relations in Agriculture in Sub-SaharanAfrica. SIDA / Swedish International AgriculturalNetwork Initiative (SIANI). Stockholm EnvironmentInstitute.

FAO, 2011. The State of Food and Agriculture 2010 –2011, Women in Agriculture: Closing the gender gapfor development. Rome, Italy.

FAO, 2016. Infographic.<http://www.fao.org/gender/infographic/en/>.Accessed 14 Jan 2016

Hlanze, L. 2014. Agriculture and Women -agriculture and growth evidence paper series. DfIDEvidence into Action Team June 2014.

Holtland, G., 2011. Cooperatives, SACCO’s andtraders in Borana Zone, Research report CTRTTrócaire, Ethiopia.

International Center for Research on Women(ICRW).2011. Capturing the Gender Effect: Guidancefor Gender Measurement in Agriculture Programs.Tanzania Gender and Agriculture Forum TaGAF.http://www.icrw.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICRW-TZ%20Gender%20%20Agri%20II%20v7-1FINAL.pdf

Northern Uganda Land Platform, 2014. Power andVulnerability in Land Dispute Resolution EvaluatingResponses to Domestic Land Grabbing in NorthernUganda. Trócaire, Concern Worldwide, Oxfam, Lira,Uganda.

ODI/CDKN, 2014. The IPCC’s Fifth AssessmentReport - What’s in it for Africa? OverseasDevelopment Institute, London.

Oxfam International, 2012. Female Food HeroesContest in Tanzaniahttp://www.oxfam.org/en/video/2012/female-food-heroes-tanzania. Accessed 19 Jan 2016

Parmentier, S., 2014. Scaling up agro ecologicalapproaches: what, why and how? Discussion paper.Oxfam-Solidarity, Belgium.

Pradan, P. 2012 Understanding the Impact of SelfHelp Groups on the Lives of Poor Women. A studyof six Trócaire Partner NGOs in Odisha. TrócaireIndia Programme, Odisha. India.

Panda, L. Pareno, N. and Subudhi, S.K. 2012. Self –Help Groups and women’s empowerment, thePRAGATI, Koraput experience. PRAGATI, Koraput,India and Trócaire, Ireland.

Quisumbing, A. 2013. Presentation at USAIDAGRILINKS GLEE meeting.http://agrilinks.org/library/gender-glee-2013-%E2%80%93-plenary-1

7. References


24

Raising Voices, 2008. The SASA! Activist Kit forPreventing Violence Against Women and HIV.Kampala, Uganda. <http://raisingvoices.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/downloads/Sasa/SASA_Activist_Kit/START/OverallPieces/StartSASAIntroduction.pdf>. Accessed 19 Jan 2016

Trócaire, 2012. Gender Mainstreaming ResourcePack: a practical guide for programming, Trócaire,Maynooth.

Trócaire, 2014. Engaging Men for the elimination ofgender based violence in Nicaragua. Learning Brief3 February 2014.

Trócaire, 2013-2014. Field Visit reports of theSustainable Agriculture Adviser. Internaldocuments. Available on the G drive and from thespecific country Programme Officer and the SAAdirectly.

The World Bank (2011). World Development Report2012: Gender Equality and Development.Washington, DC.http://go.worldbank.org/6R2KGVEXP0

The World Bank Gender in Agriculture Sourcebook,2009. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2008/10/21/000333037_20081021011611/Rendered/PDF/461620PUB0Box3101OFFICIAL0USE0ONLY1.pdf

UN Office of the Commissioner on Human Rights,http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf visited 08/08/14.

UNEP/Island Press 2009. Agriculture at aCrossroads- International assessment of agriculturalknowledge, science and technology fordevelopment (IAASTD, 2008).http://www.unep.org/dewa/agassessment/reports/IAASTD/EN/Agriculture%20at%20a%20Crossroads_Global%20Report%20%28English%29.pdf

Williams, S. 1994. The Oxfam Gender TrainingManual. Oxfam UK and Ireland, Oxford.

Images (Clockwise from top left):

1. Askale Aderaw, APO, Ethiopia presents on social andeconomic empowerement of women through business.

2. Long-term collaboration and mutual respect, Nicaragua.

3. A poster depicting Women's involvement in land titlingin Uganda programme.

4. Women planning.

5. Ronie Zamor, Programe Officer, Nicaragua, presentslessons on improving land access for rural women.

5. Food Preparation.

6. Girls doing childcare Rwanda.

7. Woman carrying a headload and firewood aroundLilongwe, Malawi.

All photos by Rose Hogan unless otherwise stated.

www.trocaire.org

Trócaire, Maynooth, Co. Kildare, IrelandT: +353 (0)1 629 3333, F: +353 (0)1 629 0661E: [email protected]