November 10, 2016 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by CAMRIS International.

GENDER EQUALITY SOCIAL INCLUSION ANALYSIS

KNOWLEDGE BASED INTEGRATED SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE IN NEPAL (KISAN II)

i

GENDER EQUALITY SOCIAL INCLUSION ANALYSIS

KNOWLEDGE BASED INTEGRATED SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE IN NEPAL (KISAN II)

November 10, 2016

Contract Number: AID-367-C-15-00001

DISCLAIMER: The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ 1

Team Members ............................................................................................................................................. 2

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3

The Context ................................................................................................................................................. 10

Findings ....................................................................................................................................................... 14

Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 39

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 41

Appendix I: References ............................................................................................................................... 44

Appendix II: Key Stakeholders Interviewed in Kathmandu ......................................................................... 48

Appendix III: KISAN Project Staff Met in the Field ...................................................................................... 49

Appendix VI: Primary Stakeholders (Met, Interviewed, FGDs held and some Case Studies conducted) ... 50

Appendix V: Composite Semi Structured Questionnaire & Checklist ......................................................... 54

1

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank AMTs Agricultural Marketing Technicians ANSAB Asia Network for Sustainable Agriculture and Bio-resources AVC Agricultural Value Chain DAG Disadvantaged Group DFID Department for International Development FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FGD Focus Group Discussion FtF Feed the Future GESI Gender Equality and Social Inclusion GoN Government of Nepal HDI Human Development Index ICT Information and Communication Technologies IGA Income Generation Activities IPM Integrated Pest Management JT Junior Technicians JTA Junior Technical Assistants KISAN Knowledge-based Integrated Sustainable Agriculture and Nutrition KSA Knowledge, Skills, Attitude MoAD Ministry of Agriculture Development MoI Ministry of Industry MDGs Millennium Development Goals MPC Marketing Planning Committee NGO Non-Governmental Organization NTFP Non-Timber Forest Products PPP Public Private Partnership SDC Swiss Development Cooperation SDGs Sustainable Development Goals TYP Three-Year Plans UN United Nations USAID United States Agency for International Development VDC Village Development Committee WEAI Women's Empowerment in Agriculture Index ZOI-I Zone of Influence-I

2

TEAM MEMBERS Ms. Indira M. Shrestha, Team Leader, Shtrii Shakti Mr. Deepak D. Tamang, Field Study Coordinator, Shtrii Shakti Ms. Maya Lohani, Field Research Officer, Shtrii Shakti Ms. Una Maya Tamang, Field Researcher, Shtrii Shakti Ms. Nanu Ghatani, Field Researcher, Shtrii Shakti Mr. Jitendra Shrestha, Field Researcher, Shtrii Shakti Ms. Manorama Adhikari, Evaluation Specialist, USAID Nepal MEL ProjectMr. Elliot Signorelli, Deputy Project Manager, USAID Nepal MEL ProjectMs. Ankeeta Shrestha, Program Officer, USAID Nepal MEL ProjectDr. Shibesh Chandra Regmi, Deputy Chief of Party, USAID Nepal MEL Project

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND

A key objective of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in Nepal is inclusive and sustainable economic growth through programs, projects and activities focused on increasing agricultural productivity, strengthening value chains and developing small-scale enterprises. In concert with the U.S. Government's Feed the Future Initiative, USAID/Nepal is pursuing these objectives through activities that increase rural incomes and improve nutrition in 20 districts in Far-Western, Mid-Western and Western regions of the country, referred to as the Zone of Influence-I (ZOI-I). GESI is a critical cross-cutting issue in all of these interventions and is considered to be integral to the success and impact of USAID/Nepal programs. The USAID-funded Knowledge Based Integrated Sustainable Agriculture and Nutrition (KISAN) project is implemented in 20 districts of Western, Mid-Western and Far-Western middle hills and Terai regions. These districts constitute the ZOI-I for the project. These are the districts that often suffer severe cereal deficits (more than 30 percent below requirement). Many of the deficit districts in the Mid- and Far-West are among the poorest, with low human development index. The region, particularly the hills and mountains, face problems of connectivity and suffer from serious infrastructure deficits. Even in the relatively more accessible Terai, there are many pockets of poverty. Evidence shows that there is little marketable surplus in the area. Keeping with the national trend, the region also is becoming increasingly reliant on imports of agricultural products, due to an increase in income and population coupled with shifting consumption patterns. Local and indigenous varieties of food and seeds are disappearing. Market surveys indicate a shift in food consumption patterns of grains, as people are demanding more and better-quality rice. The shift appears to be primarily fueled by an increase in remittances. As population grows, incomes improve and new road networks open, more consumers now rely on markets and, in particular, imports (USAID, 2013).

PURPOSE

KISAN has been one of USAID/Nepal’s largest activities to promote agricultural productivity in the ZOI-I via the development of rice, maize and high-value vegetable value chains. As the Mission looks towards funding for KISAN II, it is commissioning various assessments to formulate the design process, including a GESI analysis. The purpose of this GESI analysis is to assist USAID/Nepal as follows:

1. To provide a concise overview of gender and social disparities that limit opportunities for women and disadvantaged groups. The goal is to increase productivity of rice, maize and high-value vegetables and to diversify into other promising crops and off-farm enterprises in the ZOI-I by improving value chains. How do these disparities affect inclusive value chain development? What have been some effective strategies for reducing these disparities? This overview includes:

Key factors that affect access to resources for increasing productivity (land, labor,

inputs, technologies and financial services).

Key factors that limit access to markets.

4

Key factors—such as trust and information flow—that affect the ability of women and

other disadvantaged groups to develop strong commercial relationships in value chains.

How social transformations are changing the role of women and marginalized groups in

agriculture in the ZOI-I; for example, the outmigration of males and the feminization of

agriculture in the ZOI-I. How are these dynamics affecting opportunities and constraints

for women in the rice, maize, high-value vegetable and other promising agricultural

value chains?

2. To identify social norms that define the roles of women and socially excluded groups in these

value chains as producers, input suppliers, extension services, transporters, processors and buyers. How do these socially defined roles affect incentives or disincentives for women to participate in and benefit from value chain development? How are these roles changing, especially for young people? What are some promising strategies for changing social norms that currently limit the broader participation of women and socially excluded groups in agricultural market systems?

3. To pinpoint specific opportunities and constraints for the inclusion of women and disadvantaged groups in 1) accessing mechanization services and other productivity-enhancing technologies and 2) diversification into off-farm micro, small and medium scale enterprises (e.g., agro processing, storage, mechanization services, technical services or other value-addition enterprises supporting these value chains)? 3) platforms that improve market linkages within value chains (e.g., cooperatives, Market Planning Committees (MPCs) and other platforms that support access to inputs, technology, aggregation services, storage and markets).

4. To enhance understanding of key areas of women’s disempowerment identified by USAID’s Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI) data: autonomy over production, access to and decisions about credit and other resources, leadership and participation in groups, and time use. [2013 Feed the Future Baseline Study].

5. To suggest promising/innovative strategies for promoting the inclusion of women and disadvantaged groups in agriculture market systems - specifically those related to rice, maize, high-value vegetable and other promising value chains - in the ZOI-I.

METHODOLOGY

The GESI analysis was conducted through a literature review of relevant material concerning constraints on and opportunities for GESI in agricultural value chains (AVCs) in the global, regional and national context; interviews with key stakeholders in Kathmandu; and field research in four districts in the ZOI-I (see Appendices II, III and IV). A purposive sampling method was adopted in consultation with USAID/Nepal, CAMRIS International and KISAN project headquarters in Kathmandu. Final selection of value chain actors, including women and some men producer groups, was carried out from Terai and hills. A representative diverse ethnic and gender composition was considered when choosing the sample districts. Four out of 20 districts were chosen from the ZOI-I sites. These were Dailekh, Banke, Dadeldhura and Kanchanpur. Samples of AVC actors were chosen in each district after consultation with KISAN staff there. They included up to six representative women farmers’ groups, up to five cooperatives, area-based district agricultural extension staff—e.g., Junior Technicians and Junior

5

Technical Assistants (JTs/JTAs) from the District Agriculture Development Office (DADO); local support providers; local collectors; members of the local collection team; local traders; millers/threshers/haulers; transporters; wholesalers; retailers; agro-vets; and district-level traders. The GESI analysis team consisting of three women and two men, including the study coordinator, visited these districts from 28 April to 12 May, 2016. A team of two members visited the Mid-West region (Team A); and another team (Team B) visited the Far-West region. The field study coordinator rotated his time between these two teams in all four districts. At the onset of each visit, the team members visited the district headquarters and met with the KISAN district coordinators and the project staff and planned a detailed study for the field visits accordingly, based on the project guidance (see Appendix X). A representative sample of around 20–25 percent of the relevant AVC actors was drawn for the study (see Appendix XI). The team also met relevant government line agencies staffs from DADO, the Women Development Office (WDO), the district chapters of the Federation of District Chambers of Commerce and Industries (FNCCI), international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) and projects (see Appendix III). Besides these stakeholders in the districts, the team also met members of the KISAN project in Kathmandu for discussion (see Appendix II). The team also visited 10 relevant agencies working in the field of AVCs and interacted with 22 members in Kathmandu (see Appendix II). Furthermore, frequent consultations and meetings with relevant staff members of USAID - GESI Advisor, Agriculture and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Specialists, and CAMRIS International staff members - informed and shaped the GESI analysis. USAID staffs’ feedback and meticulous comments have been invaluable. Various tools were used including Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), including semi-structured questionnaires, focus groups discussions (FGDs), key informant interviews, transect, participant observation and case studies. The literature reviews and interviews in Kathmandu provided added information for analysis.

LIMITATIONS

There were a number of practical limitations encountered during the GESI analysis. First was the inclement and extremely hot weather encountered in the field during the month of May. Summer heat was most intense during field work, at times reaching a sweltering 44 degrees Celsius. Second, it was the busy plantation season of major cereals and vegetable crops in all four districts. Lastly, the training and extension duties of the KISAN project staff during these assessment days kept key senior members extremely busy with their own field work, desk work, reporting and visits to various districts or to HQs in Kathmandu.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Gender and social disparities do exist in the FtF ZOI-I, including the four districts visited. Following are the major findings and conclusions.

The project area represents a complex heterogeneous socio-economic zone where patriarchal culture is strong. It is also an area where there is high concentration of Dalits, DAGs and highly marginalized groups

Male migration is higher in the FtF ZOI-I , which is an important driver for women’s increased work burden and feminization of agriculture

6

Women across the socio-economic spectrum are getter exposure and taking up more responsibilities beyond the household economy

Socio-economic disparities are notable and women producers tend to get less than fair price for their farm produce

Agricultural extension can be more inclusive, responsive, accountable and transparent to women and men from Dalits, Janajatis and DAGs

Social prejudice, lack of trust prevails and equality and inclusion are below desired levels

Women, Dalits, DAGs and to lesser extent Janajatis are excluded from higher level of AVCs

Young women although better informed and educated are not yet effectively mobilized in AVCs

Productive asset and services for increasing agricultural productivity of women, Dalits and DAGs are not equitably distributed along GESI and AVCs

Women, Dalits and DAGs experience severe levels of cultural, social and structural violence

Agrarian inputs including financial loans are not adequately and equitably addressing women, Dalits and DAGs

There is a need to improve harmonious and collaborative working relationship between project and government staff in order to promote and sustain GESI and GESI related to AVCs

Key factors that limits women, Dalits and DAGs’ access to market are women’s traditional role as home maker, lack of time, information, mobility, financial capital, networking, market platforms, distance from market, transportation and storage facilities

Women in general are also poorly represented in cooperatives and AVCs to effectively market their products

There is a need for mindset change among women and men in a highly patriarchal society in the project area in order to facilitate and ensure GESI

Feminization of agriculture is substantial in the project area thereby burdening women with more responsibilities. Hence, there is a need to ensure that women and particularly women from Dalit and DAGs are included in project activities and that appropriate measures, technologies and management know how applied benefits them.

Social norms such as untouchability and Chaupadi system is strong and there needs to be robust response in terms of awareness, education, advocacy and regulatory framework to overcome such barriers and disparities

Women in general and from Dalit and DAGs can be provided with labor saving devices and support in the form of modern technology and mechanization services

Women’s empowerment can be further enhanced in production level decision making, AVCs, access to resources, business literacy, control over their earned income, group participation and leadership, time and task burden mitigation through modern technology and mechanization devices

Innovative strategies for production augmentation in rice, maize, and high value vegetables in AVCs can be enhanced through quality inputs, efficient production technologies, building capacity for management and entrepreneurship, improved market platforms, know-how, new technologies and new value added products, improved infrastructure and connectivity and good governance and finally

Better practice and stronger internalization of GESI and GESI related AVCs ideologies in the project itself is required

7

RECOMMENDATIONS

Detailed recommendations are presented in six major areas as below.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO GENDER AND SOCIAL DISPARITIES

Recommendation 1: Guarantee fair farm gate-price in line with government policies based on market rate to farmers for their products and ensure prompt payment system. Recommendation 2: Guarantee women, Dalits and DAGs gets equal and equitable services and benefits when providing agrarian services in kind, cash and know-how from the project. Recommendation 3: Design and deliver training programs, skills training, market related activities and AVCs responsibilities such as collection or market visits by women based on the most vulnerable women group members time constraints and work burden, i.e. Dalits, single mother, female household heads, and DAGs in the project. Recommendation 4: Guarantee maximum representation of women, women headed households, single mothers, and Dalits in AVCs through a policy guideline of “positive discrimination” in the project. These are in position of collection, MPCs, processors, traders, transporters and whole sellers. Recommendation 5: Through policy advocacy and working closely with government service providers and commercial banks, ensure that women, Dalits and DAGs are able to obtain financial loans, information on markets and agricultural inputs. Recommendation 6: Ensure that young women are part of GESI and AVCs development in the project area by collecting baseline data, training, skilling and linking them with project activities. Recommendation 7: Carry out awareness and education campaigns to eradicate social prejudice, lack of trust and “untouchability” with the “duty bearers” and general society members using multi-pronged media such as radio and TV programs, print media and creative arts. Recommendation 8: Primary Baseline Data-Set on GESI in the FtF ZOI-I is not available. Carry out such a survey research before the next project commences.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO SOCIAL NORMS THAT DEFINE THE ROLE OF WOMEN AND SOCIALLY EXCLUDED GROUPS

Recommendation 9: Ensure that the strong patriarchal culture existing in the project area is mitigated

and replaced by Equality and Social Justice provided in the Constitution of Nepal. This can be done by

training and changing the mind-set of “Duty Bearers” through a “Rights Based Approach” to strengthen

GESI and GESI in AVCs.

8

Recommendation 10: Design and implement future project based on an Empowerment approach which

considers AVCs from a perspective of women, Dalits and DAGs.

Recommendation 11: Built the capacity and confidence of Dalit, Women and DAGs groups in their small

groups first and then attempt this in their larger Cooperatives next.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO MECHANIZATION SERVICES, MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM SCALE ENTERPRISES, MARKET PLATFORMS

Recommendation 12: Introduce simple mechanization services such as light hand held tractors for

women, Dalits and DAGs in each of the project district. Start small, i.e. 10 units in each district.

Recommendation 13: Introduce other labor savings and production enhancing devices, such as, corn-

shellers, threshers, haulers, grinders, hoe, sickle and implements. Train village artisans to maintain and

manufacture them in the village. Begin small with 10-15 such devices in the first year in each project

district. Increase the portfolios each year through trial and error and experiential learning approach.

Recommendation 14: Introduce a common transportation pool in each district in order to market

agricultural produce. Begin with one pick-up jeep in one district and let it be run on cost/benefit basis by

Farmers Cooperative. If it succeeds increase the transport pool together with the farmers ensuring a

GESI approach but based on cost center principle.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO STRATEGIES FOR PROMOTING INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND DAGS IN MARKET SYSTEMS

Recommendations 15: Guarantee one third number of women and DAGs in the decision making

position, i.e. Management Committees of existing market related platforms developed by the project

such as MCPs, Cooperatives and women’s groups. This can be carried out through a positive

discrimination policy anchored in GESI and GESI in AVCs principles. Enforce this through a robust policy

advocacy and guiding principles in the project’s management and implementation manual.

Recommendations 16: Lobby and influence local chamber of commerce, business persons and the private sector in order to secure financial and technical inputs, aggregation services, storage and market access in the private sector in each district. Ensure that these initiatives are responsive and relevant to women, Dalits and DAGs.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO WOMEN’S EMPOWERMENT

Recommendations 17: Develop three key indicators for a women’s empowerment approach specifically

relevant to AVCs . The key indicators should have appropriate gender markers against the five WEAI

components such as what is to be achieved by the project measured along with (a) decision making over

9

production, (b) access to resources, (c) access to mechanization services, (d) controls over income, (d)

participation in group leadership, and time allocation. Develop a monitoring system in the project with

these indicators and components.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES IN AGRICULTURAL MARKET SYSTEMS

Recommendations 18: Set up a modest Research and Development Fund to support major action

research activities on new inputs such as high head drip irrigation; climate resilient agricultural crops,

mechanization services, promoting small business development, NTFPs, product development, etc. (3-5

percent of project cost)

Recommendation 19: Utilizing such R&D fund, develop value added processed agricultural products,

which can be sold in the markets all over Nepal, especially in the urban centers. Ensure through policy

and guiding principles that women, Dalits and DAGs producers are targeted specifically with such action

research.

Recommendation 20: Enforce and comply through a policy guideline and guiding principles GESI in the

future project itself.

10

CONTEXT

GLOBAL CONTEXT

Ensuring gender equity and Social Inclusion (GESI) means that programs and projects are able to more effectively identify and analyze gender, caste and ethnic disparities and ensure that reducing disparities and empowering disadvantaged/marginalized groups are considered throughout the design, planning, implementation, documentation, monitoring and evaluation of programs and activities. Disadvantaged groups include women, historically discriminated groups such as Dalits, marginalized groups such as Adivasi Janajatis, sexual minorities, Muslims and people with disabilities. These same groups are also referred to as marginalized groups. Globally, women contribute time, energy, creativity and knowledge as wage/unpaid workers, farm managers, processors and entrepreneurs to the production, processing and marketing of crops and livestock (FAO, 2011). Their involvement differs significantly across regions, specific crops and activities. Overall, women comprise 43 percent of the agricultural labor force in developing countries, ranging from 20 percent in Latin America to 50 percent in sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia (Deborah and Manfre, 2014). One defining characteristic of women in agriculture across the world is that they have less access than men to productive assets, resources and opportunities. This gender gap is leading to serious consequences in the agricultural sector, the broader economy, society, and women themselves. It is argued that more gender-centered policies and programs can ensure higher production and productivity in agriculture sector along with a range of social benefits (ibid). The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) attributes under-performance of agriculture to unequal access of women to required resources and opportunities (FAO 2011). Closing this gender gap in agriculture can generate significant gains for the agricultural sector as well as for society and the economy. Examining GESI in relation to AVCs in South Asia, Fanworth emphasizes the following: 1) understanding women’s and men’s roles and relationships in the chain, 2) examining gender differentials in access to, and control over, key productive assets necessary for participation in the chain and 3) analyzing how gender power relations affect economic rents among actors throughout the chain. It also means responding to the project cycle management appropriately, including considering differentiated roles and responsibilities for men, women and social groups.

Proponents of GESI in AVCs stress that if women had the same access to productive resources, it could significantly increase family yield. This would raise world food production, thereby reducing food deficit and hunger on the one hand and promoting food sufficiency and security on the other. Moreover, at the family and societal levels, it has the potential to strengthen gender equality, productivity and human welfare.

GENDER EQUALITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IN AGRICULTURAL VALUE CHAINS IN NEPAL

Generally, the desired GESI components in relation to AVCs outlined in the global context above are missing in Nepal. These gaps often lead to the phenomenon of elite capture of services and resources provided by the government and the international donor projects. The labor force participation rate of women in Nepal has stood consistently around 80 percent. Agriculture being the main source of Nepalese livelihoods, women are concentrated in this sector. Around 70.5 percent of women are employed in agriculture, compared to only 56.3 percent of men.

11

Women’s contribution to the agriculture economy is 60.5 percent, compared to 39.5 percent for men (Gurung and Bista, 2014). Nepalese women have acquired substantial knowledge and skills in farming systems and natural resource and biodiversity management in different agro-ecosystems. Education and health sector indicators suggest remarkable improvements in women's quality of life. Consequently, Nepalese women, even in the remote rural hinterlands, have improved their agency, mobility and earning capacity. Increasing numbers of women own enterprises and hold leadership positions at community and national levels. Other marginalized communities such as Dalits, Janajatis and disadvantaged groups are also seeing improvement in their quality of life. Despite this progress, disparities continue in education, access to information, skills, socio-economic services and social capital. Dignity and value of labor is also low in rural areas. The labor class who perform manual work are subjected to various forms of socio-economic, political and structural discrimination. As more male members migrate outside for employment, the agriculture sector has become tangibly feminized. Despite women's crucial role in agriculture, they are not considered farmers in their own right. They have less access, control and decision making agency regarding land and productive assets. Women also are effectively excluded from the benefits of whatever little agrarian reform there is in rural Nepal. This unsatisfactory situation has led to an increased workload for women, with multiple effects on their health, income, safety, nutrition, protection from violence and ultimately, their social, economic and political empowerment (Gurung and Bista, 2014). As a result, women are unable to substantively improve agricultural productivity on their parcels of land due to the factors mentioned above. In the absence of a male labor force, many women have begun to plough land, a role traditionally reserved for men. In addition, women continue to carry out weeding, manuring, pruning, harvesting, grading seeds, and food processing. Modest levels of mechanization are available, e.g., simple threshers, mechanical and electrical pumps, haulers and hand-held tractors. The participation of women in substantive AVCs adds more work to their quadruple roles in production, care, reproduction and civic responsibilities.1 Dalit women and those from vulnerable DAGs have even fewer choices to achieve socio-economic and civic empowerment. They are also disproportionately vulnerable to the impact of climate change due to the roles that society has prescribed for them. Women in all groups spend significant time carrying out their traditional roles of caregiving and reproduction. These factors inhibit them from improving their life situation, for example, through participation in business literacy sessions, training programs for building capacity and gainful economic activities like marketing, collection, retailing, wholesaling or trading. It is acknowledged that GESI in AVCs is a challenging and a recently emerging discipline in both a regional and global context. It needs time, persistent efforts and patience to take hold in rural Nepal. This is why projects such as KISAN can set certain performance standards and act as a role model for government agencies and other development projects to follow. In recent years, the Government of Nepal (GoN) has incorporated gender equality and social inclusion provisions in its plans and policies. Hence, government institutions have become more supportive and sensitive to GESI now than a decade ago. However, despite these positive trends, wide inequalities in

1 As more male members from rural households migrate to cities and third countries for employment, rural women are

left behind to shoulder the responsibilities of men. Women therefore provide “caregiving” to the family, often for small

children, plus their “reproductive role,” combined with the rural household “economic role” and added “civic and

political duties” at household and community level.

12

literacy rates, per capita income, involvement in economic and civic participation, and access to resources persists based on geographic location, ethnicity, caste and gender (USAID, 2011b). According to a study carried out by FAO in 2005, women in the high mountain areas contribute more in agricultural work than men, work more or equal in the middle hills, and work slightly less than men in the Terai (USAID, 2011b). Such work cultures are strongly anchored in social mores and dignity, or pratishta, ascribed to desirable professions. There is more dignity and desirability in out-migrating for jobs to urban areas and overseas than being tied to the farm, so trends in intra- and international migration have a negative impact on GESI and AVC for women and men from Janajatis, Dalits and DAGs. Women are more involved in minor and subsistence food crops production, such as millet, maize and soybean, while men are more involved in cash crops, such as rice grown on a larger scale in the Terai region (USAID, 2011b). Studies have reported that women work longer hours and have greater workloads than men. Men are busy only during peak seasons, while women are engaged throughout the season. Gender differentiation in farming activities exist within each region and across all socio-cultural parameters. On average, a Nepali woman works three hours longer a day than does a man (Gautam, 1999 in USAID, 2011b) and their activities are more concentrated in cereal crops and in planting, manuring, weeding, hoeing, harvesting, threshing, storage and livestock management. In post-harvest operations, their involvement is also greater than men's, especially in cleaning, grading, storing and packing for sale. Activities usually limited to men include land preparation and plowing, digging pits for orchard trees, irrigation, application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides/insecticides, and pruning orchards (USAID, 2011b). In Nepal, most value chain projects implemented to date have focused on agricultural commodities or products. This is logical given that 77 percent of the country’s population depends on the agricultural sector. Approaches applied in Nepal generally focus on high-value commodities, as defined by the per unit (kg) cost of these commodities. Within these value chains, projects have sought to transform value chain relationships in order to shift the balance of power through the formation and empowerment of groups, cooperatives, federations or associations. They also have tended to empower the private sector and improve value chain governance. High value crops, which are also appropriate in the context of small-holdings, can provide much higher income than cereal crops. They are often labor intensive and offer higher returns per hectares. Value chains around vegetables, tea and potatoes have attracted private investment in storage and processing, which has also strengthened value chains. In some instances, farmer groups have invested in modest local storage facilities that have helped bring better returns. Farm-to-highway linkages in the form of roads or bridges built and maintained by the community have provided substantial economic impact to communities. There is strong evidence that demonstrates that when stakeholders collaborate effectively, such actions lead to overcoming constraints along the market chain and realizing the benefits from high-value crops in Nepal (ADB undated). The actual number or percentage of women formally enrolled in value chain related interventions is difficult to establish, as is the case for the Dalit, Janajatis and other marginalized communities. In fact, they are increasingly being embedded in different agricultural value chains and sometimes in more than one chain. Their participation in these chains have both empowered them and improved their income status and agency. At the same time, it has added to their work load and time constraints. Natural disasters, soil degradation, water scarcity, decreasing agricultural production and sometimes crop failures also augment their stress and challenges (Gurung and Bista, 2014). Budget allocations are often silent on how to enhance women’s strategic position by recognizing them as independent and autonomous farmers, ensuring their access to the means of production, enhancing their competence

13

and acceptance as leaders, and improving their position in different structures of the government, non-government and private sectors (ADB, 2013). The feminization of agriculture, together with gender vulnerability to climate change has led to social distresses including gender-based violence (GBV), violence against women and girls (VAW), trafficking-in-persons (TIP), lack of quality health services and poor access to education for young women, girls and boys. Due to increased workload, drudgery and time constraints, women are being alienated from vital adaptive knowledge. They are also unable to grab opportunities to improve their knowledge, skills and livelihood strategies (Gurung and Bista, 2014).

GENDER EQUALITY AND SOCIAL INCLUSION IN FEED THE FUTURE ZOI-I AGRICULTURAL VALUE CHAINS

The 20 hill and Terai districts under the FtF ZOI-I represent a complex heterogeneous and highly polarized socio-economic scenario in Nepal. It is also a swathe of land in Nepal where patriarchal culture is dominant. So-called high-caste Brahmin/Chhetri and Thakuri men and women are at the top of the socio-economic pyramid as per existing social norms. These norms and mores also determine the values, roles, networks and images assigned to Janajatis, Dalits and DAGs. Furthermore, there are a sizable number of groups who are marginalized because of their traditional occupations despite legislation by the State to abolish such practices. Similarly, caste discrimination exists in the Terai as well against Muslims and Tharus. They are often perceived as inferior to mainstream communities, and some are designated as untouchables, limited by activities they can perform and making them unable to function fully within households, in temples and at the market. In addition, the practice of segregating/ostracizing women during their menstrual period continues unabated. Besides these groups, there are also a sizeable number of women-headed households, widows and persons with disabilities (PWD) in the FtF ZOI-I. The Status of Women in Nepal report (SOWN, 2012) notes a high degree of gender disparity in land ownership in all communities irrespective of caste or ethnicity across Nepal. The gender disparity in landholding size was also high, with average size for women at 0.05 hectares (ha) compared to 0.44 ha for men. Furthermore, the National Social Inclusion Survey, 2012 reports 14 percent of the hill and Terai Dalit groups, together with DAGs, are landless. Landlessness is as high as 40 percent in these groups (NSIS, 2012). Together, with landlessness, 31 percent of households of hill Dalits are headed by women in the absence of men. This is an important factor in AVCs, as reportedly 18 percent of households are headed by women in the overall FtF ZOI-I (NSIS, 2012). Women’s role in household decision-making is important for the AVC in rural Nepal. There is a general trend to take joint decisions regarding household economy, with 72–75 percent of decisions made jointly. Yet, in the Tharu communities, such as in Dang district, 65 percent decisions were made by men. This is due to the joint family system prevalent among Tharu households (SOWN, 2012). Moreover, 40 percent of men initiated the decision-making process compared to only 20 percent of women, especially when it is related to land, building or substantial investment efforts. Women across castes also lag behind in decision-making when it came to borrowing cash for agriculture, livestock management and handicrafts. Sale of cash crops and subsistence crops, milk, vegetables and cottage industries products also required male consent. Such situations exist in Kanchanpur, Bardiya, Banke and much of other hill and Terai districts as well. When decision-making roles favor men over women, much of the potential for GESI is obstructed in higher AVCs in the rural economy. The communities affected include not only Tharus but also Muslim, Dalit, and DAGs. The circumstances of the other highly marginalized groups,

14

e.g., Kamaiya, Kamalari, Haliya, Charauwa, Haruwa, Badis, and Deaukis, are equally challenging if not more vulnerable (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016). In this background of ingrained patriarchal culture, coupled with a set of complex gender disparities and socio-economic class/caste divisions, formidable challenges exist in the project to include GESI in AVCs. This is due to the fact that harmony, an atmosphere of trust and active mutual support, including community cohesions, are weak (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016). Therefore, development of AVCs in the FtF ZOI-I should consider the following:

Agricultural value chains are embedded in a relevant social context that reflects gender relations

from the household to the market level. Female-headed households and landless DAGs are given

priority during project activities such as building their capacity, enhancing their ownership of assets

or acquiring special skills.

Value chain development affects gender roles and relations and brings in shifts in allocation of

responsibilities in a household, often increasing demands on women’s labor. Consider scheduling

training and market-oriented activities according to women’s time and task convenience.

Gender equity and value chain competitiveness are mutually supportive goals. Ensure that project

activities are designed as affirmative actions, giving priority to women, women-headed households

and DAGs.

Include highly marginalized groups and DAGs without land into project activities, such as collectors,

processors, transporters and sellers in AVCs through affirmative actions.

FINDINGS Major findings of the GESI analysis are reported in the following sections (A) through (E): There are some noticeable differences between the general observations for the KISAN project, the ones drawn from reports and literature reviews (Chapter II) and the specific field study findings of the GESI analysis (Chapter III). These are noted below in each of the sub-headings from (A) through (F).

(A) OVERVIEW OF GENDER AND SOCIAL DISPARITIES

The main areas where gender disparities are significant are literacy and education and WEAI, a summary index of women's empowerment, agency and inclusion.2 The latter is reported in Chapter V below.

2 Out of 10 indicators used in WEAI, men and women were close at only one indicator: input in productive decisions.

This situation severely affects women's access to control over resources such as land labor, technologies and

financial services. The primary drivers of gender and social disparities in ZOI-I appear to be: a) different levels of

educational attainment, b) ownership and control over assets, c) group exposure, d) workload, e) access to decision

on credit, and f) autonomy on production.

15

Besides these other significant factors are: prompt payment for sale of agricultural products; fair farm-gate price; efficient extension; effective market planning committees (MPCs); fair trade by collectors, traders and wholesalers; enhancement of trust and mitigation of prejudicial behaviors; and inclusion of young women in AVCs.

Prompt payment and fair return on investment, including fair farm-gate price The GESI disparities mentioned in global and national contexts highlighted in the previous sections of this report conforms to the specific field-based trends reported in this section. Specifically, there are disparities in the ratio of returns of what women producers get as the farm-gate price, compared to what traders and retailers get for the same products from the market. At times, the market prices are 4–5 times the farm-gate price. Primary producers get discouraged when they come to know about this substantial difference. Women and DAGs in Dailekh, Banke, Dadeldhura and Kanchanpur reported that prompt payment and cash flows are a major bottleneck. They often get late payment from the wholesalers, traders and collectors. It is reported that it can take three to four days—or even months—for women and DAGs to get paid for their vegetables and cereals. In the case of sugar cane, it may take a full year in places such as Kanchanpur. The late payment issue was reported by all women producer groups the study team met in the four districts. The women respondents were unanimous in suggesting that it should change in the future for improved and prompt return on their product and investment. These included payment for labor and management towards the crops they produce and sell (see Appendix IV).3

Agricultural extension and discrimination in services provided Agricultural extensions, including an existing “agrarian package” of input(s) in FtF’s four assessment districts, play important roles in meeting the project goals. These goals include, among others, food security; enhanced livelihoods and employment; and the introduction of new technologies including seeds, fertilizers and pesticides for improved production leading to improved nutrition and discernible surplus for local markets.

Discrimination in agricultural inputs and financial services, including market outlet Another significant disparity reported is in extension and technical services, group organizing, information dissemination and financial services, which reportedly are usually provided to mainstream Brahmin/Chhetri women groups (including Janajatis, e.g., Magars and Tharus) compared to Dalits and Muslims. Dalits and Muslim women are excluded more severely from many forms of services available in adjacent Tharu or Magar communities. Similarly, a number of groups and cooperatives reported that the ones who produce lower volumes or values are ignored by collectors and traders. Their efforts are less lucrative, and women farmers are unable to obtain the services of the local collectors and active participation and facilitation from the local market planning committees (MPCs).4

3 This issue, as well as other emerging evidence from the KISAN project field study are based on the discussions,

response and evidence gathered from the four sampled districts: Dailekh and Banke (Mid-West) and Dadeldhura and

Kanchanpur (Far-West). These are the results of focus group discussions (FGDs), key informant person (KIP)

interviews and case studies, inter alia. These stakeholders represented between 20 and 30 percent of the value chain

actors (VCA) in the KISAN project. Women consisted of 75 percent of producers in the sampleThe details of the

primary and secondary stakeholders interviewed during the GESI field study assessment are given in Appendix XI.

4 The “mosaic” of farmers groups in the four GESI assessment districts (Dailekh, Banke, Dadeldhura and

Kanchanpur) are as follows: KISAN projects normally promote women farmers, and the assessment team was

16

Social prejudices, lack of trust and exclusion There were also a number of cases illustrating how social prejudices and lack of trust and suspicion can be major impediments to inclusion in AVCs. For instance, an entire Dalit settlement next to a Tharu settlement was not considered for inclusion by the project in Kanchanpur. In another case, a Badi settlement in Dailekh bordering Accham was not included in the project activities. These DAGs were perceived by the project staff as too difficult to embrace and too challenging for community mobilization. Likewise, a community of re-settled Kamaiya in Kanchanpur next to a Tharu settlement was un-touched by the project activities. The project staff admitted that there are substantial opportunities for enhancing the inclusion of women and marginalized groups in the project area. (Based on GESI Analysis, May 2016 during District Validation Workshops in Dailekh, Dadeldhura, Kanchanpur.)

Exclusion of young women in AVCs A general trend of exclusion or discrimination is reported by young women and girls in all four districts (see Appendix IV). These include those who are newly married and have moved into their in-law’s home. Others are still living with their parents, waiting for marriage or opportunities for jobs and further studies. Besides them are adolescent girls who are school drop-outs and have no means to take up further studies or gainful employment. The married ones are discriminated by their in-laws and are confined to their homes - which is largely to do with cultural norms—so they are unable to contribute meaningfully in AVCs. The others are vulnerable and prone to sexual and domestic violence or TIP. They are thus unable to participate meaningfully in AVCs in the absence of a specific GESI focus (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016 and FGDs in the district, See also Appendices IV).

(A.1) KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECT ACCESS TO RESOURCES

The main factors that affect access to resources for increasing productivity are land, labor, extension services, inputs, new technologies and financial services.

Dalits, DAGs and single women or female-headed households have many more challenges obtaining resources for increasing productivity Caste-based prejudice towards the lower social status groups in a patriarchal society makes it much harder to obtain the necessary resources to improve agricultural productivity. The story of land-poor Dalit women who had emigrated with her family over a decade ago illustrates this case in point. But they are a resilient lot. The women and others like her not only have stood up to various forms of discrimination and prejudicial behaviors from group members, but have also managed to cope and provide material well-being to family members. They feel that by providing good education to their children, the future generations will be in a better position to deal with such challenges. Having traditional marketable skills like tailoring has also helped such groups supplement their family income.

informed that 90 percent were women and 10 percent were men. A negligible few were mixed women-men farmers

groups. In Dailekh, these were Brahmin/Chhetri, Magars and Dalits. In Banke, these were hill and Terai

Brahmin/Chhetris, Muslims, Tharus and Dalits. In Dadeldhura, these were most Chhetri/Thakuris and Dalits. In

Kanchanpur, these were Tharus, hill and Terai Brahmin/Chhetris, and Dalits. All four study sites reported high out-

migration of males to cities and third countries resulting in an added burden to women and women-headed

households. Feminization of agriculture was perceptible and high as observed and reported by the GESI assessment

team members (Based on GESI Field Assessment, May 2016).

17

Agrarian inputs are directed predominantly to men and socio-economic village elites Women, Dalits and DAGs often reported lack of access to agricultural extension generally, with negative impacts on adoption of inputs and new technologies. Agricultural extension and information on new technologies are often exclusively directed to men. Women may be favored in access to certain assets, such as microfinance, but overall, they are in a disadvantaged position compared to men. Such situations often result in a lower rate of interaction with extension agents and significantly weaken the bargaining power of women, Dalits and DAGs in negotiating and managing vertical and horizontal relationships. It is important to note that different social groups enjoy differential access to resources required for increasing productivity and face dissimilar barriers. Likewise, men and women across all caste and ethnic communities have different levels of access to educational and business opportunities in the value chains. In the four districts where the field study was conducted, women, DAGs and Janajatis were found to be confined to production-related activities. Janajati women, such as Magar women in Dailekh and Tharu and women in Kanchanpur and Banke, had progressed a bit further into AVCs and were able to run collection centers. The men were either residing outside the village as migrant workers or, in many cases, unhelpful in household activities due to alcoholism or gambling addictions (Hamrologni/purusmanche haru jandh khayara ya din rat teshai tashkheli basnu huncha). Women face physical problems from their daily chores or psychological or physical abuse from the men they are related to. These negative social traits act as impediments for the Dalits, Janajatis and DAGs to progress in AVCs (Based on GESI Analysis, May2016. Also see Appendix IV for women interviewed.) As mentioned in earlier paragraphs, besides land, another potential production factor is the agrarian package provided by DADO and the KISAN project. This includes informationrelated to the crop calendar; procuring quality seeds; planting, weeding and harvesting techniques; effective measures against insects and pests; pre- and post-harvest losses; new technologies; labor-saving devices, irrigation and soil improvements, etc. These services and benefits rarely reached most of the socio-economically disadvantaged groups, such as women of Dalit and DAG family members in all four assessment districts

Box 1: Case of a Coping Strategy by Dalit Women A Dalit woman in adjoining Village Development Committee (VDC) of the district headquarters Dadeldhura revealed an interesting fact on how a land-poor Dalit family copes with a difficult situation. A migrant from Doti, she has less than a ropani of land. She lives with her disabled husband (with one failed kidney) and her two sons aged 7 and 11. The boys study in a private boarding school three hours away from home. Her 14-year-old daughter studies in a local high school. The family earns around NRs. 45,000 annually gathering wild berries (kafal). The children help her fish from a local river which brings in a yearly income of NRs. 20,000. The couple stitch clothes to earn another NRs. 60,000 annually. She has obtained a loan of NRs. 25,000 from her group to run a tailoring business in the village. Likewise, with a bit of vegetable farming, she is able to make ends meet for her family. Although, this is a story of remarkable resilience, her eyes were full of tears when narrating her story of her struggle within the group she is affiliated with, which is dominated by Thakuri women. She had many tales of discrimination and prejudice that she endured to survive in such a precarious social environment. She revealed that she had managed to become treasurer, but due to disputes within the dominant Thakuri women-dominated group, she was relieved from her responsibilities, publicly “demonized” and humiliated. She was made to pay fines which she felt was unjust. She felt her social position in society makes it much more difficult for her and others like her to function effectively and obtain necessary input that would increase her productivity from agriculture.

18

and Muslim and Tharu women in Kanchanpur and Banke (Based on FGDs during GESI Analysis, May 2016. Also, see persons interviewed in four districts Appendix IV to reach these conclusions.) The field study assessment was that a patriarchal mentality dominated extension services in the project area. It demonstrated that male world-views on extension and AVCs dominated women’s preferences and choices. Generally, indigenous knowledge, indigenous culture, sensitivities, nuances and values of women, Janajatis and Dalits were often overlooked and not considered as important. In future, this warrants a more concerted effort to inculcate GESI ideology and its advantages and to ensure that the project and service delivery agencies, such as local government line agencies, are sensitized on GESI issues leading to improved monitoring, evaluation, accountability and responsiveness towards the DAGs mentioned above. Women, Dalits and DAGs are often viewed as not trustworthy with financial loans in male-dominated agricultural cooperatives Women across the caste spectrum reported that they have difficulties obtaining financial loans from their own cooperatives. There are few of them on management committees, so they are unable to assert or decide on their own. This situation is better within their smaller groups. Women from Dalit communities and DAGs are further disadvantaged in this respect. Such a situation in the project area

requires additional sensitivity towards GESI and internalization or accountability and responsive towards these groups.

Higher-caste women also discriminate against Dalits and DAGs A number of interviews and FGDs reveal interesting cases of Dalits and DAGs being discriminated against not only by higher-caste male members but also by women members within their own small groups. These cases of caste-based discrimination reveal how strong the caste-based patriarchal culture and social norms are in the project areas. Despite education, policies and programs, such barriers remain for Dalit women and DAGs.

`Box 2: Successful Case of a Women’s Struggle in a Male-dominated Cooperative Information gathered during an interview with a middle-aged Brahmin woman in Dailekh illustrates how women face difficulties in a male-dominated agricultural cooperative. In this case, a currently successful women cooperative leader was denied loans from her own male-dominated group when she was younger, widowed and with two young children. She was not considered "bankable" or "credit worthy." She struggled against prevalent male discrimination and managed to become a successful entrepreneur after nearly two decades of hard work. She currently owns a dairy and a mango orchard and carries out vegetable farming. She triumphantly stated, “Now the cooperative with the same male committee members requests me to take loans from them. They even say I am their role model.” She further added, “Currently I am happy that my children are grown up and have accomplished their schools.”

19

Violence against women

Multiple forms of VAW exist in the project area. They are normally underreported. Male members of society and project staff are often either untrained or overwhelmed when such cases confront them. VAW, such as described in Box 4, has detrimental effect on GESI and AVCs for all women across the social spectrum. Such VAWs are more prevalent and widespread among the weaker socio-economic groups, such as Dalits, Janajatis and DAGs, due to lack of awareness, poor education, social practices and extreme poverty (Based on GESI Field Study, 2016. Also see Appendix IV for interviews, KIPs and discussions on which this conclusion is based.)

Equal pay for equal work Contrary to trends and beliefs that women obtain less and unequal wages for same or similar work in agriculture, the assessment team was informed that there is no significant gender discrimination in, or difference in, wage rates in the four districts assessed. These assertions are also validated by current literature on the subject. (Based on GESI Field Study, 2016. and SOWN, 2015.)

Good relations and harmonious collaboration among project and government agencies (Duty Bearers) matters to ensure GESI in AVCs

Box 3: Cases of Higher-Caste Women Discriminating against Dalits and DAGs A Dalit women from Dailekh revealed how a migrant Dalit women was accused maliciously by her own mainstream Thakuri women members of embezzling funds when she was a treasurer and she was subsequently discriminated against getting fresh loans.

Another case involved a young Dalit woman who was divorced and living in her natal-home with two children. She revealed how she was not given a loan from her own group members when she wanted to invest in a sewing income-generating activity. The management committee did not trust her and her abilities to run a successful micro-enterprise. The management felt that being a divorcee with two young children was a major liability.

Box 4: Violence against Women

A young Magar woman with one-year-olddaughter in her arms in Dailekh reported a severe case of domestic violence from her husband and in-laws. Sobbing, she revealed how she was severely beaten until she became unconscious when her second child was in her womb. As a result, she aborted the child. She was thrown out of her house and currently lives with her parents and relatives. This woman reported suffering from repeated physical violence from her husband and her in-laws. Dowry was also a factor as she was unable to bring many ornaments or much money with her. Because she is unable to eke out a living, the women farmers group where she is a member is currently helping her with subsistence support and shelter. The group is allowing her to contribute her labor and receives payments in return [who does? From who?]. The group is also helping her take legal action against her husband and in-laws. She has beenthreatened not to claim any property from her in-laws, so the women's group is also assisting her to take legal action to claim her property for herself and her children. The woman’s quality of life and security is precarious and vulnerable given her circumstances.

20

Interactions with government project staff and government agencies, e.g., DADO, WDOs, LDOs and DDCs, revealed that there is room for improvement in collaboration and cooperation between the project and various line agencies of the government. This can be fostered by working closer with government agencies in the future. Knowledge, skills, attitude and change behaviors (KSA) from government and local government officials can be helpful for GESI in AVCs in the future. In order to do so, a much more concerted effort is required by project staff in order to strengthen and build trust and confidence with key duty holders of the government in the districts. In this respect, working more closely, providing further training, encouraging internalizing of GESI ideas and preparation of KSA such that the government agencies and local government staff take over some of these ideas and functions is important for sustainability of GESI in AVCs. The office of DADO, DDCs, DLMC and WDOs appear to be the relevant points in the district. Likewise, relevant departments and ministries in Kathmandu are also strategic points to ensure internalization of GESI in AVC ideologies (Based on GESI analysis, May 2016. Also see Appendix IV for stakeholders consulted.)

(A.2) KEY FACTORS THAT LIMIT ACCESS TO MARKETS

The key factors that limit women’s, Dalits’ and DAGs’ access to markets in the project are lack of time, distance from farm to markets, lack of financial capital to take part in marketing activities and developed platforms - e.g., marketing groups or active and fully developed MPCs, modern and efficient means of transport of vegetables and cereal crops and lack of good roads, among others.

Women’s role are confined primarily to production processes Women’s work often takes place in the least-valued parts of a value chain, such as home-based workers or informal workers (Laven & Verhart, 2011). Very few women own agro-vets or work as technicians, wholesalers and traders (ANSAB, 2011). According to Carr and Hartl (2008), most of the profits of the global value chains go to traders, distributors and retailers, who tend to be men from less remote and richer communities. Even while being confined at the production level, they argue, women are likely to work in the lowest-skilled and least-paid jobs. Given women’s major role in lifting themselves and their families out of poverty, any poverty reduction program should ensure that women can position themselves more favorably within these large and complex chains.

Women’s role in higher value chains is lacking Despite women’s important role in production processes, their involvement in market activity, especially

in cash transactions, is very low; they are confined to plantation, weeding, harvesting and post-

harvesting activities. Another hurdle includes lack of market linkages. There are also few women in

MPCs. A number of MPCs are also not fully functional in the project areas. These factors limit women

from gaining access to markets and fair prices.

Time is another important factors that limits women’s role in access to markets Women’s lack of time to work arises mainly due to her role as the prime caregiver and nurturer of the

family. Women also provide major labor to livestock management in the household, which makes

demands on her limited time and effort. Mass migration of male members of the house for work outside

the community creates further burdens on their time needed for household tasks, leaving little spare

time for marketing activities.

21

Distance from the market, lack of financial capital, transportation and storage facilities Distance from farm to markets, lack of financial capital to take part in marketing activities and

developed platforms, such as marketing groups or active and fully developed MPCs, are other major

constraints. Modern and efficient means of transport of vegetables and cereal crops and lack of good

roads create real barriers. Bulkier and heavier cereal crops such as maize, rice and wheat, and cash crops

such as potatoes and sugar cane, are difficult to be sent to market easily due to heavy bulk as well as

lack of transport facilities.

Perishability and lack of easy modes of storage, handling and transportation Vegetables such as tomatoes are perishable, and others, such as cucumbers, cabbage, cauliflowers,

squash and leafy vegetables, are easily damaged during transportation in bamboo/cane baskets (dokos),

and or they rot easily.

Lack of regular information on price, markets and contacts Lack of regular information on price, markets and contacts with wholesalers and retailers, including

adequate storage systems, are also factors that hamper women, Dalits and other DAGs in effective

marketing (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016.)

Patriarchal mindset and social norms confining women to home and hearth require a mindset change Discussions and KIP interviews revealed that women, Dalits, Muslims and DAGs in particular (and to

some extent Janajatis, e.g., Tharus and Magars) suffer from two key social/biological factors even

though these are rarely mentioned in development of AVC literature. One is the access of women to the

outside world beyond the home and hearth. This is controlled by the patriarchal mindset where women

Box 5: Need for Mindset Change in Men and Women

In Malika VDC, Dailekh, a two-member team of senior women in age, education and experience were conducting FGD related to GESI in AVCs. Another FGD of males consisting of collectors, an agro-vet and local vegetable traders was being conducted nearby. It was near the Shiva temple situated on the Karnal river bordering Dailekh and Accham. Unknown to the women GESI analysis team members, there was a discussion among all Chhetri women group members in the cooperative that morning whether it was a good idea to hold a meeting near the temple complex. When the assessment team arrived, the two women members suggested they sit and have FGDs near the temple complex, but a safe distance from the sacrosanct Shiva temple as it was a convenient location. The women were reluctant, posing a serious dilemma. The group members suggested an adjoining shop, as there were two women having their monthly periods at that time. The women then began to carry out their FGDs. As it was progressing, a snake appeared from the roof and slithered down near one of the assessment team members, its head dangling from overhead. There was a commotion, and everyone fled the room. The women and men soon began to gossip and interpreted this omen as a message from Lord Shiva himself who did not like the sanctity of the temple to be violated. Men in the adjoining room were also quick to comment, saying that because the GESI analysis team members had defied the sanctity of the Chaupadi Pratha, Lord Shiva had showed signs that he was annoyed. Social and cultural norms and practices such as the Chaupadi system strongly prevent women from playing effective roles in boosting their access to markets. This illustrates that social norms and behaviors change very gradually (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016.)

22

who interact with the outside world such as market activities are still seen and stigmatized as unvirtuous

individuals. This prevents the entire category of women described above from taking active part in

market activities, in contrast to men, who face no stigma (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016.)

The other factor is ritual/religious: Women are seen by men and women alike (after centuries of

socialization) as unclean during the menstrual period. This effectively prevents women from carrying out

AVC activities for a week every month.

(A.3) KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE ABILITY OF WOMEN AND OTHER DISADVANTAGED GROUPS

The key factors that affect the ability of women and other DAGs to develop strong commercial relationships in the value chain are lack of information, trust, and empathy with these groups. Lack of sensitivity from project staff, government extension agents and value chain actors in the private sectors are other strong mitigating factors.

Lack of trust, information and active mutual support towards women and DAGs Efforts to strengthen mutually beneficial linkages among actors and stakeholders are at the core of value chain development. This is important not only to build mutual trust for rewarding collective actions but also for creating economies of scale through increased coordination. Such environments helps actors in the chain understand each other, understand business process, appreciate each other's perspectives, recognize the importance of each other and also understand the role of various actors in the value chain governance. The GESI field analysis revealed is lack of transparent and adequate information at all levels of the value chain. This re-enforced lack of trust, lack of mutually beneficial relationships and lack of information sharing between women producers, collectors, MPC, traders and the whole sellers in the study sites. Women members complained saying… “This white notice board with price written in it is hastily, is put up just for your visit or other visitors like you. It will be wiped away after you go”. The feedback from women members were that collection centers were not regular in opening or closing, did not have standard operating procedures and information flow was erratic. This was evident in higher AVC chains when visiting scores of cooperatives, collection centers, agro-vets and whole sellers in Dailekh, Banke, Dadeldhura and Kanchanpur. These producer groups also have little or no information or contact with wholesalers and bigger traders located in bigger towns, such as Surkhet, Kohalpur, Nepalgunj, Dadeldhura bazaar, Atteraiya or Mahendranagar. Lack of information on the one hand and concentration of contacts in the hand of few male collectors, traders, wholesalers and transporters inhibits them from forging strong commercial marketing linkages and relationships. Records, documentations, white boards and other information systems were casual and there was substantial room for improved accountability, responsiveness and transparency towards women and men producers (Based on GESI Analysis, May 2016).

23

Women, Dalits and DAGs are poorly represented in MPCs, Cooperatives or higher AVCs FGDs revealed that women, Dalits and DAGs are poorly represented in the MPC. Furthermore, their opinions and voices are not taken seriously or heard in the cooperatives, when it comes to marketing strategies, market linkages, and market responsive mechanisms.

Time and task over load for women, Dalits and DAGs Extremely heavier domestic work burden on women in caring for their family, children including agriculture, livestock and social obligations leave little opportunity for women to develop commercial linkages in AVC marketing activities. Women, Dalits and DAGs are unable to obtain agency and build capacity for being effective marketing groups. In most cases, they are unable to take advantage of extension, training sessions and capacity building efforts of the government and the project (Based on GESI Field Study, May2016).

(A.4) CHANGING ROLE OF WOMEN AND MARGINALIZED GROUPS IN AGRICULTURE

The role of women and marginalized groups in agriculture are changing rapidly in the project area. Increased migration, feminization of agriculture, transport, communication and globalizing are affecting women and marginalized group’s role as well.

Agriculture based livelihoods decreasing in popularity Increasing fragmentation of land, declining fertility, poor agricultural practices and productivity, rising costs of living in rural areas, changing aspirations of young people, increasing monetization of economy combined with climate stress and other ecological pressures, are making agriculture based livelihoods increasingly less attractive to men and male youth. Rural households are increasingly looking for alternative livelihood strategies. The above mentioned factors are also the major drivers of migration. This situation has resulted in migration, particularly of male population. From the perspective of gender relations in agriculture, it had had many significant consequences. In the FTF ZOI-I labor migration and remittance is rife. Most reportedly go to India. This has led to feminization of agriculture and increased work burden on women.

Feminization of Agriculture by default This phenomenon of mass migration from rural to urban and third countries has left women with agricultural burden. On the other hand it has provided some opportunity for women to assert their participation and leadership in agricultural activities. GESI analysis in the four districts revealed that some women are emerging as entrepreneurs. They all are from the more privileged from higher Brahmin/Chhetri groups, followed by Janajatis such as Magars and Gurungs. On the other hand, women from Tharu, Dalit, Muslims and DAGs in the hills and Terai lagged behind in this respect (Based on GESI Analysis, May2016). Those who migrate leave behind their wives who then take center stage in agriculture and rural development as necessary compulsion.5 They have broadened and deepened their involvement in

5 At the moment, there is little if any disaggregated ward/community/district level data-set on who migrates, where

and for what purpose? Hence, even secondary data on caste, ethnicity, class, age or geographical location is not

available. No one has undertaken a primary census survey yet in the ZOI.

24

agricultural production. They are participating in the agricultural labor force as independent producers, as unremunerated family workers, or as agricultural wage workers. They are taking on more and more of the agricultural fieldwork and tasks and working longer hours on the farm. They also have begun to respond to economic opportunities in commercial agriculture. Women are taking over more of the agricultural tasks once done only by men such as land preparation and tilling. They are investing more work in cash crop production. Women are increasingly assuming leadership and decision making roles within households. On the positive side this situation has enhanced their independence, mobility, and control over their wages as well as expenditure. The ‘feminization of agriculture’ is a phenomenon fundamental to rural livelihoods in ZOI. Due to limited labor opportunities in these areas of Nepal, numerous males migrate out of the country in search of work. Food production, including planting, and harvesting, collecting fodder and caring for livestock falls on the shoulders of women. Women and DAGs in the project areas report that they are currently able to earn better income through higher value cash crops, i.e., potatoes, tomatoes, ginger, onions and vegetables they grow which is encouraged by the KISAN project. Most of these gains have come from higher inputs, improved skills, hybrid seeds and value chain development. They also report that cereals such a maize and rice are grown for home consumptions and dramatic improvements in income have not resulted from them. They also said that it is also difficult for women to handle cereals during transportation to the market as cereals are packed in 50 kgs jute or plastic bags and cumbersome to load and unload. The study notes that while agriculture has become feminized, the extension services and the value chain structures (human resources), still remain male dominated with traditional extension ideology targeting mostly male farmers in AVCs. This has created a fair degree of challenges to women farmers and DAGs as their aspirations, feedback and inputs are either not heard or resisted by the male extension agents. The women led leader farmers’ movement is also weak in the project area and can be strengthened. This will encourage women and DAGs to take up the challenging roles in AVCs such as collection, trading, adequate participations and representation in MPCs, transportation logistics, and marketing through retail and wholesale trade (Based on GESI Field Study, 2016).

(B) SOCIAL NORMS THAT DEFINE THE ROLES OF WOMEN AND SOCIALLY EXCLUDED GROUPS

Social norms often have a strong influence on household strategies and on the roles of women in the household. Normally, most of the childrearing, cooking, and household chores are the responsibilities of women, limiting their potential to take advantage of new farming, labor, or migration opportunities, reinforcing inequalities In the project areas social norms are based on dominant Hindu culture. Hence, patriarchal culture is strong. These norms are found to be particularly stronger in the comparatively isolated hill areas of ZOI. Low literacy and high fertility rates, poor connectivity and social restrictions on mobility and public interaction in the ZOI constraint the options available for women, Dalits and ethnic communities. In addition, many poor Dalit and disadvantaged Janajati women have little time to spare for group activities that have benefited other women. Patriarchy, son preference and consequent discrimination against girls are still strong in the region.

25

Severe marginalization of DAGs due to Patriarchal culture A number of harmful practices including child marriage, discrimination, Chaupadi system and gender based violence continue in the FTF ZOI-I. These age-old practices have far reaching harmful effects on women's health, quality of life and autonomy for activities in AVCs. Notorious practices such as Badi, Deuki, Jhuma, and Kamlari social systems are forms of extreme discrimination against girls and women which call for a comprehensive strategy to redress. The social norms that inhibited the empowerment of women, Dalits and DAGs in AVCs were starkly evident in the cooperatives where mixed women and men's group members constituted such institutions. Women, Dalits and DAGs were poorly represented and in the statutory executive committee of 13 members there would be one women (ca.7 percent), at the most in decision making positions. Often they were given only token/ceremonial roles as vice president(s) or a token membership in the executive committee, thus, making them virtual passengers in the AVCs. Those few were from Brahmin/Chhetri groups. They were, thus, expected to contribute labor inputs and confined to the production end of the AVCs rather than upgradation into higher lucrative chain actor positions. Cooperatives have the greatest potential to transform this stagnant statuesque in the AVCs but at the moment this is not the case (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

Improved Situation for Women’s in their own Smaller Groups The situation of women within their own smaller production groups was much more empowering and effective in the AVCs. This trend across the project suggests that women may need positive discrimination and be given the opportunity to function within the exclusive women's groups and women's cooperatives in KISAN II. This will ensure a level playing field before letting them face competition with men and male dominated agricultural cooperatives. At the same time, the women dominant groups (30 – 50 members) within the bigger conglomerate of agricultural cooperatives (600 – 800 members), which is the current norm in the districts, be provided organizational development (OD). They can be provided with other capacity building training in order to ensure their institutional sustainability, financial and program sustainability as well. Men on the other hand can be organized into Men’s Support Group in order to make them more GESI-sensitive, so that they become change agents in ensuring women’s active and meaningful participation in these local institutions.6

Younger women below 35 were more informed yet lacked upward mobility Younger women in the age group 35 years or below were found to be more informed, active, better educated and "entrepreneurial” including their ability to analyze and voice their opinions in the AVCs. Young women in their natal homes and newly married women in their husband's homes were well informed, able to grasp concepts of AVCs and contribute creative and critical ideas. Yet both these cohorts lacked the mobility and agency to contribute actively to the enhancement of AVCs due to conservative cultural norms. There was still strong social stigma attached to these "chori-buhari" working away from home and hearth. Hence, their energy and creativity were effectively "locked away". A fair group of young women were successfully selling fruits in Dadeldhura and Dailekh bazaar. This indicated that where markets were conveniently and easily accessible; young women were breaking

6 An innovative institutional development is being put in practice by a maternal and child health project currently in

Makwanpur. Supported by Feed the Minds (UK) and implemented by ETSC-Makwanpur, the project called

Community Health First (CHF), is supporting Women’s Health Group (WHCs) and Adolescent Girls Group (AGG) with

male members groups called the Men’s Support Groups drawn from husband/male relatives.

26

away from their traditional assigned feminine-mold and becoming small entrepreneurs. The KISAN II may take note of such changing trends and provide these young women with opportunities in the AVCs as collectors, wholesalers and retailers (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

(C) OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS FOR THE INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND DISADVANTAGED GROUPS IN SPECIFIC AREAS

1) Accessing mechanization services and other productivity enhancing technologies Access to and availability of mechanization services for women across the social spectrum in both the hills and Terai districts of FTF ZOI-I was limited. women farmers mentioned light and women friendly hand held tractors; electrical irrigation pumps, hand held sprinklers, drip or sprinkler irrigation, facility for increased tunnel farming, light vehicle or trolleys in small tractors for transporting agricultural produce, seeds, fertilizers and input, plus plastic containers and crates for vegetables. Likewise, women farmers wanted threshers, haulers and grinders and corn shellers, oil expellers and improved water mills and grinders. The main constraint faced by women and DAGs were reliable maintenance, and after-sale-services, spare parts, maintenance skills and reliable suppliers. Loans to purchase these machineries were also important considerations. In many villages, traditional agricultural implement and tool makers, i.e. Biswakarma’s were becoming rare and extinct due to lack of new skills, new generations taking up the trade, deforestation and lack of charcoal fuel etc. Hence, demand to reskill and retool such tool makers were requested. 2) Diversification into off farm micro, small and medium scale enterprises (e.g., agro processing, storage, mechanization services, technical services, or other value addition enterprises supporting these value chains)? Except for the Terai districts there was limited scope in adding substantial value to the primary agricultural products in the project area. Some of the scope mentioned were improved water-grinding mills, storage and transportation facilities for perishable products, crates and carts like dolly for transportation, mini-vans and 4wheel jeeps for transportation, training for maintenance and mechanics and bottles, bottle capping machines and preservatives for fruit processing, i.e. tomato ketchups, garlic, ginger and herbal spices, hand held or electricity operated noodle machines and expellers for manufacturing fruit juices. Cold storage facilities were also requested in addition to a number of such facilities put up by private traders. 3) Platforms that improve market linkages within value chains (e.g., cooperatives, Market Planning Committees, other platforms that support access to inputs, technology, aggregation services, storage and markets) Most of these platforms were developing rapidly in the project area. They were at an initial stage and needs to be supported so they become fully functional. The opportunities to include women and DAGs members are placement of at least one third number of women and DAGs in the decision making position, i.e. management committees of existing market related platforms developed by the project such as MCPs, Cooperatives and women’s groups.

27

Other more complex areas such as financial and technical inputs, aggregation services, storage and market access or expansion can be taken up with local commercial banks, chamber of commerce and industries and businessmen in the private sector in each district.

28

(D) WOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT

Enhance understanding of key areas of women’s disempowerment identified by USAID’s WEAI data -- autonomy over production, access to and decisions about credit and other resources, leadership and participation in groups, and time use.

DECISION-MAKING OVER PRODUCTION

Overwhelming majority (over 90 percent) of the beneficiaries are women farmers and they are receiving a number of skills training related to improved agronomic practices according to the objective of KISAN project.7 The extension services from the project are providing adequate services to the women farmers. On the other hand, the government's area based extension services, i.e., JT/JTAs can only provide limited outreach to women farmers due to lack of transport, mobility, technical and agronomic resources and financial budget available to them. The issue is not so much the lack of human resources (JT/JTA) with government agency but the approach of providing service from their stationary stations. This inhibits the extension approach of development and has unsatisfactory effects on AVCs when reaching farmers groups (women and men) with agrarian package.8 Availability of mobile phones have helped communications better, however, this modern technology can still be put to greater use for women's decision making in production processes by including useful market related information, price, planting and harvesting seasons, climate and agronomic information. Currently, women farmers across the social-spectrum are able to take part actively in the production end of the agronomic cropping activities promoted by KISAN project in vegetables and cereal crops. Currently, these are green vegetables, tomatoes, maize, wheat, rice and cash crops, i.e., potatoes and sugar cane in the Terai (due to presence of sugar mills). In terms of input for subsistence household production, i.e., fertilizers, weeding, management and harvesting, women are able to take their own decisions. They are also able to market their products through the women farmers’ groups and cooperatives locally. Independent decision making by women across the social-spectrum is prevalent at the level of the house hold economy, including subsistence agriculture and other subsistence coping activities. The decision making is carried out in joint consultation with men when higher levels of production such as cash-crops for commercial market are involved. Due to project's advocacy, social mobilization, extension efforts, building capacity, introduction of improved technology such as line planting, nursery bed, bamboo-plastic green house and drip irrigation including financial support; women across the social-spectrum are better organized, more confident, able to take joint or individual decisions more currently than before.9 Women groups across the socio-

7 Women farmers as producer groups in the four assessment districts and the ZOI are well represented in terms of

inclusion of population proportionate to population size. They are also well represented in terms of gender balance

and sex ratio (9:1). These districts are represented by Brahmin/Chhetri, Janajatis (Gurung/Magars), Tharus, Dalits

and DAGs. The four districts assessed have proportionate women representation along these ethnic mosaics.

8 Please refer to earlier discussions on “land reform” and “agrarian reform” package in preceding pages and

paragraphs.

9 As alluded to in earlier paragraphs, the Dalits and DAGs are slower to take advantage of the production

technologies, inputs and “agrarian package” offered by the KISAN project. This is true for individual or joint decisions

taking by women from these groups, at times together with men. Hence, by “default” these groups are excluded.

Awareness, education, self-confidence and entrepreneurial skills play important role in the slower uptake.

29

economic spectrum these days have small savings and are able to control their daily IG activities such as vegetable cash cropping and sustainable subsistence agricultural practices. The women farmers as a group and across the social-spectrum are gradually being empowered and are able to participate in public events; articulate their situations, negotiate, and speak up much more than before. They are also learning gradually but incrementally how to participate effectively in commercial agriculture. The Dalit and women from DAGs, are slower to take individual or joint decisions (together with their men-folk) and take advantage of the means of production offered by KISAN project. They are, thus, often excluded by default from obtaining optimum benefits in the AVCs (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

ACCESS TO RESOURCES

Women do currently have land rights, over their ancestral properties, since laws have changed to encompass the inheritance rights for women in Nepal. Besides, women have legal rights to half the property from her husband's endowment.10 In practice, however, both these provisions are rarely effective. Such newly introduced women's rights are being disseminated through business literacy classes in general. In terms of land, machinery and decision making such as cash crop farming, e.g. sugar cane plantation, more joint decisions are taken by women and men at the household level when accessing or allocating financial or material resources including land. This is carried out amicably, in most cases, to ensure family harmony and common socio-economic family welfare. The community groups’ and cooperatives’ savings are steadily rising as women farmers currently save in their small groups of 20-30. They also join in the bigger cooperatives with over 5-600 members across VDC. Although, there are limited financial resources available from private banks and savings and credit cooperatives, women farmers are able to obtain loans from their own savings and credit cooperatives and micro-finance institutions. In addition, most of the women (with the exceptions of poor, ultra/hardcore), join and save in 4-5 additional savings and credit programs in the villages. Women farmers are also getting financial education and business literacy through a number of projects such as USAID funded SUAAHARA project, inter alia.11 Women farmers across the social spectrum are, thus, becoming more mobile and taking on tasks and responsibilities which were normally undertaken by men. This is the result of the feminization of agriculture as men move out in search of remittance and employment. Furthermore, there are instances of women ploughing and using light hand held tractors to plough their field. This was done by men in Nepal as socio-cultural norm.12 Hence, although burdened

10

Recent legislations by the state has made provisions for equal share of parental property among sons and

daughters without discrimination. The “fine-print” conditionality is that the women should remain unmarried until 35

years to obtain her share. In case they marry, the property reverts back to the sons or parents. Likewise, provisions

in the law provide half the share of husband’s property to “legally” married wife. The legal provisions also exist to

have one lawful wife. In practice, however, this rarely happens or is effective. The socio-cultural context of Nepali

society and the institutional inefficiency/corruption prevents this happening in practice. There are few exceptions, off

course but it is not the norm.

11

KISAN and SUHARA are two separate projects supported by USAID and implemented by national NGOs. Activities

were coordinated by “default” more than by “design”. What is good is that the SUAAHARA projects business literacy

campaign is complementing KISAN project’s effort in the same project area.

12

In terms of socio-cultural practices in rural Nepal, Brahmins as priests and women from Hindu Brahmin/Chhetri

caste did not plough the field pulled by a pair of Oxen. These practices are breaking down rapidly due to shortage of

agriculture labour and introduction of modern technology. Hence, Brahmins and women across the social spectrum

are ploughing the fields using either traditional pair of oxen and ploughshares or with light hand held tractors (in the

case of flat land in the hills or the Terai).

30

with more drudgery and work load women are taking active part and accessing various resources for agricultural production in the project area including carrying their vegetables and fruits to the market on their own often on head13 (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

ACCESS TO MECHANIZATION SERVICES

Access to and availability of mechanization services for women across the social spectrum in both the hills and Terai districts of FtF ZOI-I was limited. There was little or if any mention of mechanized services in the four districts visited at all. Women farmers, when probed further, would say that if they were provided with light and women friendly hand held tractors it would help them greatly. In the rugged hill districts with intense terracing this was not relevant. In the lower river beds in the hills and in the Terai, women responded by saying that electrical irrigation pumps which were light and able to be operated by women, i.e., self-starter switches can be helpful compared to the existing heavy crank-shaft type starter irrigation pumps. Similarly, women producers across the social spectrum responded saying, hand held sprinklers, drip or sprinkler irrigation, facility for increased tunnel farming, light vehicle such as attachment in small tractors for transporting agricultural produce, seeds, fertilizers and input, and plastic containers for vegetables, inter alia, will be helpful and desirable to them. Likewise, women desired to obtain threshers, haulers and grinders with appropriate technology that they could handle. Mechanization services for women across the social spectrum, at this stage in KISAN, were not of exclusion or disparity but it was simply not there in required numbers. This is due to the early stage in the life cycle development of AVCs.

CONTROLS OVER INCOME EARNED BY WOMEN

A majority of women are able to earn income through farming and cash cropping activities. They also put aside their income in a number of savings schemes. These women affirmed that they are able to use the cash earned for educating their children, buying essential goods such as clothes, supplement family income and food supply, and invest in leisure activities or buy some jewelry for themselves as saving investments. Women across the social spectrum reported that they are able to utilize their own income without any hindrances from either the men-folk, men-household head or women-household head, if they themselves were not the household head. In substantial investments such as farm machinery, buying or selling of land or agricultural inputs, women do consult their male family members and take joint decisions. The women themselves were emphatic that his is a good practice to maintain family harmony. The women across the social spectrum reported that this new economic power, small as there are have given them pride, dignity, happiness and new assertiveness at the household and community level.14 Women, especially land poor women, take up wage employment and utilize the income to supplement household expenses and ensure food security for their children or invest in children’s' education, health and well-being. They also complement their income by gathering, fishing or collecting forest based non-timber products (NTFP/MAP), i.e., kafal (Myrica esculenta), edible mushrooms, gurans (Rhododendron),

13

Women use wicker-wick basket called Dhoko/Thumsi on straps balanced on their heads in the hills and open

basket called Tokori supported in the heads in the Terai to carry vegetables and loads.

14

Many women across the social spectrum enthusiastically reported during FGDs, they have Rupees 4 -500 in their

pockets and can use them at their discretion for personal, children’s and family welfare. They also affirmed that their

husband and men-folk in the community treat them with respect when they are able to earn on their own.

31

wild bees honey, edible wild fruits such as lapsi (Ascarious chorespondias) and fish from the rivers. Off-farm activities such as IGAs through sewing, knitting and dress making also supplement the income of women and women of Dalit community. In terms of small enterprises, women and their AVCs are still at a growing stage. It is confined to vegetable group production for cash-income and cereal for household sustenance. In the Terai, the non-poor women family members are able to cell cereal grains such as rice, wheat and maize as surplus to local collectors and millers. Therefore, entrepreneurship and small processing enterprises have not developed conspicuously, yet. The development of value added food processing items will require more efforts from KISAN project together with women producers and relevant AVC actors. Women members, especially from the Brahmin/Chhetri communities, reported that they are making pickles and masaura in Dailekh, and Dadeldhura districts. Surplus cereal grains are sold through local collectors and traders to whole-sellers. As a result of this new found yet limited economic freedom, women from non-poor families expressed that they are fairly empowered. They reported being emboldened to venture and participative in initiatives such as adult literacy/business literacy classes, group meetings and visits to local markets and fairs. The Dalit and women from DAGs were not as assertive in this respect. Women who are younger and comparatively better educated/literate age group, i.e., 20-35 years’ cohort – reported that they are also setting up stalls to sell fruits and vegetables in the urban market and emerging growth centers. This was noticeable in Dadeldhura, Mahendranagar, Kohalpur and Nepalgunj towns (based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

GROUP PARTICIPATION AND LEADERSHIP

Women farmers' participation across the social spectrum in groups and cooperatives are ubiquitous and near universal in the project areas. They participate in monthly savings and credit meetings, meetings related to collection of vegetables and fruits and also during training sessions or special meetings convened to impart knowledge, skills and relevant information. Leadership talents and management skills are also emerging in such women's groups and cooperatives.15 However, in the mixed groups and mixed cooperatives, women members are still marginalized and given positions in the executive committees bereft of major authority and responsibilities, i.e., without leadership, managerial or financial responsibilities. The effective participation of socially disadvantaged groups and minorities, especially Dalits and DAGs are low. Gradually, however, this trend is changing as women farmers are receiving business/functional adult literacy classes through KISAN and other NGOs or projects.16

15

The numbers and representation of women producers are proportionate to the size of the population in the ZOI.

Hence, Brahami/Chhetri, Janajatis, Daligs and DAGs are represented in a “sliding-scale progression” but equitably in

all KISAN project activities. Their “substantive participation” and “effective learning, utilization and benefits”, thereof,

varies and are found to be in the same “sliding-scale regression” as the dominant Brahmin/Chhetris and other groups

cited above.

16

Evidence gathered during the GESI assessment demonstrates that women producers are over-burdened with

“triple or four times” the work load burden, now, then what they carried, earlier, before the mass-scale

labour/remittance began in rural areas 10 years ago. They also narrate the fact that across the social spectrum, men

take this for granted and or not sensitive or sympathetic to help women with gendered household chores or even

agricultural works. Men perceive that it is women’s role and what is “lotted cannot be blotted”. They say “Aimaii le

gharko chulochauka harnaiparyo, bal-bacchaha rnaiparyo; bastubhauha rnaiparyo; ghas-daurogarnaiparyo; istamitra

rakhnaiparyo”. In effect, in a patriarchal society women have to carry all these burden in and around the household-

economy. Women respond by saying, “KeGarnay, Mahila le nagaray kash le garcha?” What can we do if women do

not do these works? The household will collapse and children will go to bed hungry. Men often while away their time,

gambling, drinking, gossiping or sleeping even during day. Thus, women are stoic and they carry these workloads

stoically with aplomb or even fatalistically. It makes it even worse, they say, when projects and NGOs constantly call

32

Women farmers across the social spectrum are therefore, gaining the agency, capability and confident to take on more managerial and leadership roles in the project area (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

TIME ALLOCATION

In almost all the project areas, whether be it the flat plains in the Terai or the mid-hills, women have very little time. As reported in several well documented task allocation studies, women work over 3 hours more than men in Nepal (see Re-visiting the Status of Women in Nepal (SOWN) -Shtrii Shakti, 2010). They are overburdened with care economy/work, productive agricultural and off-farm duties or civic and social engagements in the community and political life. Health project, elsewhere, such as the maternal health (MCH) project run by Feed the Minds (FTM), UK and ESTC, Makwanpur have initiated innovative the Men's Support Groups men’s support groups to assist women. This initiative facilitates sharing time burned by men with women in order to help women with maternal/primary health care services (Community Health First, March 2016). Such helpful gender roles and task sharing have not yet percolated to the agricultural sector or the male dominated household economy. Gradually, such equitable task/burden and time sharing efforts must be encouraged at the community and household level. The outmigration of male members for cash-income has put considerable work pressure on women in the project areas to the extent one observes land left fallow due to lack of farm-hands. The feminization of agriculture is evident in most of the project area and creative means must be attempted in order to improve the human condition and quality of life of women as well as the family members

(Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

them for meetings and training sessions which are not sensitive to their work burden or time allocation for duties

every day. The “gendered role” and “division of work” is more unbalanced on poorer households of Dalits and DAGs

vis-à-vis women and men who are left in the household. Men do not help out women with gendered sensitivity as a

rule except with few exceptional husbands and men who help out women with their work burden and “traditional role”

of “care giving” or farm household economic work.

33

(E) INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES IN AGRICULTURE MARKET SYSTEMS

A number of innovative strategies specifically related to rice, maize, high value vegetable, and other promising value chains in the ZOI-I can be taken up for future programing based on current learning and GESI Analysis. These are in a number of important areas, i.e. inputs, production, entrepreneurship development, access to markets, improved technology and know-how, infrastructure, organization and organizing, governance and empowerment.

Inputs In terms of input, women have low access and control over assets and resources, inadequate and irregular access to seeds, fertilizers, farm machineries, financial, managerial, and technical and market services. Agro-vets and extension services are also not readily available. Currently, the KISAN project led AVCs were at nascent stages of development, hence, both women and men farmers at household level were affected in similar manner. Needless to emphasize, that the poor, women, Dalits and DAGs were even more severely affected as traditional and project based extension services excluded them more. On the positive side, due to the interventions of KISAN project, the pocket areas within the projects area of influence are able to obtain better seeds, organize into groups and cooperatives and thus have improved negotiation and bargaining positions, are gradually shifting to commercial farming, taking part in value chain activities from seed beds to marketing and retailing, having new demonstration farms and technologies such as drip irrigation, mulching, line planting and making use of financial capital as group savings in cooperatives. Organizational development and capacity building in knowledge, skills, change behavior and practices are gradually taking place in commercial and self-sustained farming (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).17

Production

Landholdings are small and soil fertility is decreasing due to intense cropping of 3-4 major and minor crops. Soil/wind/rain/flood erosions lead to rapid land degradation and loss of productivity Furthermore, deforestation, over-grazing, gullying, landslides and river erosion adds to the challenge of managing land productivity in the four districts assessed. These are the general trends in other ZOI districts as well. Overpopulation and pressures on land due to human and livestock density exacerbates land productivity base severely. There is substantial number of land poor or landless families in the project area. These households depend on agriculture labor, livestock and homestead farming. These “ultra-poor” are Dalits, single women headed houses holds and DAGs.18 At one end there is considerable

17

The agency and capacity across KISAN project’s four assessed districts for the level of development of AVCs

varied as they were at different stages of life cycle. In the hill districts such as Dailekh and Dadeldhura, the life cycle

of AVCs was at ca. 3 years of maturity in a 4-year project phase. In the Terai, the life cycle of AVCs was at ca. 1.5

years of maturity in a 4-year project phase as activities here began later by 2 – 2.5 years. Hence, effectively the life

cycle of the AVCs in KISAN project was at infancy to early growth level. It had not reached a maturity stage yet, in

general terms.

18

As a general rule of thumb it would be helpful for the reader to refer to the operational definition of who are the

DAGs provided earlier. They are also the individual/households who have less than one ropani of land or just a

homestead with a rural rubble masonry thatched roof house over their head. Having a family size over 5.5 members

or the national average and either no food security or just enough for 3 months to eat from there on land.

34

land which is left fallow (bajo jamin) due to shortage of male agricultural labor, on the other, the land poor DAGs are not having land to cultivate. Heavy dependency on the monsoon rain or rain-fed agriculture is another challenge. The state of rural infrastructure development, i.e., road, electricity, irrigation and communication facilities etc., are rudimentary or severely lacking. Cultivation in the dry sandy riverine areas (bagar kheti) during winters are popular and provides additional income to “ultra-poor” families in the Terai.19 This was a practice that was normally taken up by land poor families from India but today it is increasingly being taken up by Nepali farm families including poor women or sub-letting/leasing out these small land parcels to contract workers from India. This type of cultivation is also due to soil erosion and erosion due to rivers changing courses during the monsoon period. Climate change is also affecting women farmers negatively in most of the time. There is also adverse effect on safety of women's health as a result of increased use of pesticides and agro-chemicals. Quality standards are poor and women are severely over worked with multiple tasks. Men migrate out to cities and third countries to cope with such situations and earn complementary income to their family farm enterprise. The multi-layered factors described above impoverish women and women within Dalit and DAG households. They are the ones who are most vulnerable to all of the bio-physical and socio-economic “shocks” in the production front (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016). These land poor farmers from poor women headed households, Dalits and DAGs should be given appropriate training, financial support and linked with institutions providing them modern technologies and know-how in cropping intensity, management and sustainable soil management.

Entrepreneurship

Compared to men who are able entrepreneurs in commercial agriculture especially vegetable growing near major towns in Nepal, women across the socio-economic spectrum in the KISAN project generally lack literacy/numeracy and simple business planning, skills related to operate simple labor saving or production enhancing technologies, management, risk taking, networking, public relations, human resources management, market related information, marketing skills and access to financial seed capital. These basic elements when strengthened through micro and small enterprise development schemes can make women more able entrepreneurs. Women belonging to Dalit, Janajatis and DAGs suffer even more due to exclusionary practices within the agricultural extension system in the project area. Networking with successful business-women within and outside the project area is also lacking. Small steps are being taken by women producers, however, with the assistance of the KISAN project. It is early stage of development, yet women groups in all the four districts assessed are organizing themselves into small self-help production groups, women farmers’ cooperatives and marketing groups. Gradually, entrepreneurship is emerging and women are able to sell their produce, especially, vegetables and fruits in the local markets now much more than before the KISAN project. Further attention is needed to help Dalit, female headed/single mother households and DAGs. They are

19

The concept of poverty used in this assessment is “pragmatic” and “qualitative” in nature. It is not “biometric” or

“nutritional” based on calories etc. The practical layers of poverty used in rural development for households are

adopted and these are: (a) non-poor, (b) poor, (c) ultra-poor and (d) hard-core poor. Non-poor are those who are

“well-off” in relative terms and have 12 months of food supply and can withstand major economic, environmental,

social or political shocks. Poor households are those that can feed their family members for 9-12 months. Ultra-poor

have less than 6 months of food supply and hard-core poor have less than 3 months. Both the groups are on the

fringes of society and extremely vulnerable to socio-economic and environmental shocks. Landless and land-poor

including displaced persons and refugees fall in the last category. The coping strategies vary for all these groups and

the severity of “shocks” and sufferings as well with the women absorbing the shocks even more than men. The Dalits

and DAGs form an overwhelming ultra-poor and hard-core poor in 4 districts assessed (based on GESI Field Study,

May 2016).

35

dispersed and marginalized as they form part of the larger women’s group or mixed women-men’s cooperatives. Unlike Tharu or Janajati Magar women’s group who are more empowered, within their ethnic composition, these Dalits and DAG groups are more vulnerable and marginalized. This calls for positive discrimination from KISAN project in future in order to develop women entrepreneurship (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

Market Access

As alluded to above, the project’s efforts in AVCs in the FtF ZOI-I is at an infancy stage when analyzed from a AVCs life cycle perspective. Hence, it is too early to expect major outcomes and substantive effects in the life of women in general. Women and men in Dalit, Janajatis and DAG communities more disadvantaged currently. Generally, access to market centers, platforms for sales promotion and market networks are lacking for women across all social spectrum.20 Aggregation of agricultural products are currently undertaken by a few local traders who have contact and can liaison with “bigger” traders in regional centers, i.e., Surkhet, Kohalpur, Nepalgung, Mahendranagar or Kathmandu. As women are dominantly confined to producers’ role in the AVCs, local level marketing activities are undertaken on individual basis by women producers themselves. These are carried out in small dokos, back-packs, mules and porters back in the hills and buses, head baskets, rickshaw, e-rickshaws, bullock carts and bicycles in the Terai. The marketing operations are at an individual, unorganized, small volume level and lack organized marketing channels. Across the social spectrum, women themselves carry out the marketing. They are unable to trust other women or men to sell their produce due to lack of established transactional systems, price assurance or transparent and fair trade practices among themselves. Products are primary vegetables or cereals and not sorted or branded for quality. The goods are, therefore, mostly inferior in quality for sophisticated urban markets and caters to local consumption. Unlike forest products, i.e., timber or non-wood products (NTFPs); corn, maize wheat, vegetables, fruits and cereals are produced privately and relatively free from government’s cumbersome regulatory framework. Marketing agricultural products are, therefore, easier. Despite this reality, women from farm-households and women with less literacy/numeracy skills from Dalit, Janajatis, and DAG households are unable to take full advantage of available marketing opportunity of their surplus produce. This is due to lack adequate information on market demands, marketing channels, consumer preferences, pricing mechanisms and readily available transportation facilities. Women producers from Dalit and DAGs are less informed on food safety and quality control requirements compared to hill Brahmin/Chhetri women producers. Women producers in the hills are better informed than Terai women producers and women Janajatis, i.e., Magars and Gurungs from Dadeldhura or Dailekh are better informed and active than Tharu or Muslim from Kanchanpur or Banke. Across the social spectrum, women are at a disadvantage when marketing cereal crops such as maize, wheat, rice or even to some extent ginger and potatoes as these items come in bags of 50 kilos or more. It is a heavy load for village women to carry these goods to the market or arrange transportation. Selling some vegetable items such as tomatoes, cauliflowers, cabbages and green leafy vegetables, i.e., spinach, coriander, onion leaves and salads are also challenging for all women as these products perish easily. 20

The term “social spectrum” is used to denote women from all ethnic, caste and class groups, i.e. Brahmin, Chhetri,

Thakuri, Magar, Gurung, Dalit, Muslims and DAGs. It is also used to clarify and quality in this report, the term

“women” when used broadly to include all of these ethnic groups in ZOI.

36

Currently, the women’s group who are organized under the KISAN project, are becoming more aware and skilled in dealing with market related skills and challenges through business literacy training sessions, market planning committees, activities through cooperatives, dealing with individual collectors, extension of agro-vets, extension staff of the project as Agricultural Marketing Technicians (AMTs), traders, whole-sellers, retailers, millers and processors in the project areas (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016). Efforts in the above mentioned marketing areas must, therefore, continue with renewed vigor in the future. Specialization along specific crops and organizing producers into larger production group and small marketing group will also help assure their market access.

Know-how, Technology and Product Development

Considering the project area as a whole, there is inadequate access to extension services, knowledge on farming practices, poor access to production and post-harvest handling and storage technologies at farm and market level. Poor research and development activities and extension to improve women's knowledge, skills, attitude and improved farming practices characterize the ZOI project area. This is across the social spectrum whether hill or Terai Brahmin/Chhetris, Dalits, Janajatis or women and men from DAGs. The introduction of improved know-how, technology and production processes are, however, noteworthy in the project's own implementation areas. Women farmers across the “social spectrum” are able to obtain necessary support in these areas for vegetable and cereal crops for those organized into women’s groups and cooperatives. Irrigation facilities in the mid-hills are still scarce and major challenge to the women producer groups. Farmers had to depend upon rain-fed irrigation. Limited irrigation on river beds and valley floors are available through traditional construction methods mainly for paddy cultivation. The project has introduced modest HDPE piped irrigation systems for vegetable crops. This is providing some relief as incentives although never adequate as the financial amount is meagre. Where women groups (with the help of men are willing to provide labor and dig channels to bury HDPE pipes), it is helping both women and men from those community reap substantial benefits through cultivation of new cash crops. These as noted are potato, tomato, ginger, green leafy vegetables, onion garlic, okra, eggplant, capsicum/chilly etc. The project has introduced a number of new and innovative technologies at the farmers’ level for both women and men. Some of these technologies such as “plastic green” houses are introduced in the project area as demonstration and replication technology. Others such as drip-irrigation technology, mulching for moisture containment on the roots of vegetable plants, bio-pesticides and raised nursery beds are benefiting both women and men farmers. Notable trend is in comparison to women from Dalits and DAGs, Brahmin/Chhetri and Magar communities are early adaptors and adopt these technologies much better and faster. Education, awareness, stronger asset, self-help cohesive community culture and economic base of the Brahmin/Chhetri and Janajati groups facilitate this early adoption practices. In terms of product development, there was no significant product to note. There was one rare case of value addition, i.e., a group of Chhetri/Thakuri women were processing local masala from ginger, turmeric and chilly in Dadeldhura bazar. The low visibility of product development in the project area can be attributed to the infancy stage of AVCs life cycle in the FtF ZOI-I. The introduction of new know-how and technologies and efforts geared towards product development (in the hope of getting additional value from primary agricultural products) demonstrates that the Dalits and DAG members require special attention to receive project’s benefits (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016). At the same time new products based on primary agricultural raw material must continue to be strived for. One simple example being quality potato chips for local markets.

37

Infrastructure and Connectivity Women and men across the social spectrum lack access to basic infrastructures, i.e., road, irrigation and electricity. Lack of linkages between production sites, collection, processing, storage/cold storage facilities and market centers remain despite the efforts of the project within and outside the project's immediate are of influence. The GESI consideration in this sector is the social barriers for women to freely and frequently travel and make optimum use of these facilities. Women across the social spectrum were frequently owning and using personal cell/mobile phones. This was assisting in verbal communication with collectors, market retailers and whole sellers. The mobile phone technology, together with FM/medium wave radio programs, and television programs are providing limited but much needed knowledge and information on agriculture and market related issues. This technology benefits women and men equitably with the early adopters gaining more from such new technologies (based on GESI Field Study, May 2016). Such analysis, discourse and considerations in software and hardware facilities for women, Dalits and DAGs must be strengthened in the future.

Organization, Governance and Empowerment (Institutions in AVCs)

Institutions, formal and informal, as well as statutory government offices, i.e., area level DADO/DLHDO offices - staffed with both agriculture and livestock JT/JTAs are important stakeholders in AVCs in the project area. The government institution at this level was reactive rather than proactive and responded when women and men farmers came to their area offices. Men often visited these institutions rather than women for advice and extension services. These institutions were managed and governed by institutionalized government systems. They were dominantly staffed by men. Lack of financial, material and transport facilities and often with inadequate motivations and morale meant that these institutions functioned below their capacity and potentials. In future, project can work closely with government institutions to improve service delivery through policy advocacy and joint efforts such as technical, financial and managerial collaborations. The other AVCs are described in this report in a number of sections earlier. The women farmer producer groups are an important informal institution. They federate into a farmers’ cooperative and register formally with the government line agency. Generally, the nascent producer groups exhibit inadequate knowledge on modern management practices, i.e., record keeping, accounting, inventory or simple business planning. Poor organizational performance, advocacy and lobby works characterize women led cooperatives (600-800 members) or smaller farmers’ groups (30-50 members). This arises due to lack of information, knowledge, management skills and networking capabilities to act as effective counter-vailing pressure groups to the higher AVCs actors and institutions. The MPCs’ performance and effectiveness also vary. A majority of them can be improved and made more inclusive. Within the agricultural value chain links from producer to whole seller; GESI considerations are poor. These are clearly discernible from the project personnel to the collector, transporter, whole-seller, and buyer and retailer level are men. The GESI is clearly more visible at the women producer groups and cooperatives level. This is because four-fifths of the producers are women. Their informal institutions, i.e. The small producer groups and their formal institution, i.e. The cooperatives – must, therefore, be strengthen in order to make optimum use of the available opportunities (based on GESI Field Study, May 2016).

Internalization of GESI within FtF ZOI-I Despite policy advocacy and plans in the paper, there is inadequate awareness regarding GESI issues in the project itself. Clearly plans, programs and procedures z to integrate GESI with AVCs are missing. The

38

GESI as a concept, skill and tool, is new to many project. This is clearly visible when examining the staffing pattern from the central HQs of KISAN in Kathmandu to the field level. Discussion and interviews with project staff in Kathmandu, four district HQs field sites demonstrate this fact. GESI Analysis debriefing meetings with project related senior leaders and staff of APROSC and CEAPRED affirmed this fact. GESI an emerging discipline is natural to be poorly understood and inadequately internalized. Such a lacuna has led to inadequate/less-than-optimum services for women and men in AVCs. Besides, the GESI marker as a gender tool in project planning, management and monitoring was definitely below what was desirable (Based on GESI Field Study, May 2016). Hence, future project implementation must make GESI into an important agenda.

39

CONCLUSIONS Gender and social disparities do exist in the FtF ZOI-I, including the four districts visited. Following are the major findings and conclusions.

The project area represents a complex heterogeneous socio-economic zone where patriarchal culture is strong. It is also an area where there is high concentration of Dalits, DAGs and highly marginalized groups

Male migration is higher in the FtF ZOI-I , which is an important driver for women’s increased work burden and feminization of agriculture

Women across the socio-economic spectrum are getter exposure and taking up more responsibilities beyond the household economy

Socio-economic disparities are notable and women producers tend to get less than fair price for their farm produce

Agricultural extension can be more inclusive, responsive, accountable and transparent to women and men from Dalits, Janajatis and DAGs

Social prejudice, lack of trust prevails and equality and inclusion are below desired levels

Women, Dalits, DAGs and to lesser extent Janajatis are excluded from higher level of AVCs

Young women although better informed and educated are not yet effectively mobilized in AVCs

Productive asset and services for increasing agricultural productivity of women, Dalits and DAGs are not equitably distributed along GESI and AVCs

Women, Dalits and DAGs experience severe levels of cultural, social and structural violence

Agrarian inputs including financial loans are not adequately and equitably addressing women, Dalits and DAGs

There is a need to improve harmonious and collaborative working relationship between project and government staff in order to promote and sustain GESI and GESI related to AVCs

Key factors that limits women, Dalits and DAGs’ access to market are women’s traditional role as home maker, lack of time, information, mobility, financial capital, networking, market platforms, distance from market, transportation and storage facilities

Women in general are also poorly represented in cooperatives and AVCs to effectively market their products

There is a need for mindset change among women and men in a highly patriarchal society in the project area in order to facilitate and ensure GESI

Feminization of agriculture is substantial in the project area thereby burdening women with more responsibilities. Hence, there is a need to ensure that women and particularly women from Dalit and DAGs are included in project activities and that appropriate measures, technologies and management know how applied benefits them.

Social norms such as untouchability and Chaupadi system is strong and there needs to be robust response in terms of awareness, education, advocacy and regulatory framework to overcome such barriers and disparities

Women in general and from Dalit and DAGs can be provided with labor saving devices and support in the form of modern technology and mechanization services

Women’s empowerment can be further enhanced in production level decision making, AVCs, access to resources, business literacy, control over their earned income, group participation and leadership, time and task burden mitigation through modern technology and mechanization devices

40

Innovative strategies for production augmentation in rice, maize, and high value vegetables in AVCs can be enhanced through quality inputs, efficient production technologies, building capacity for management and entrepreneurship, improved market platforms, know-how, new technologies and new value added products, improved infrastructure and connectivity and good governance and finally

Better practice and stronger internalization of GESI and GESI related AVCs ideologies in the project itself is required

41

RECOMMENDATIONS

Detailed recommendations are presented in six major areas as below.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO GENDER AND SOCIAL DISPARITIES

Recommendation 1: Guarantee fair farm gate-price in line with government policies based on market rate to farmers for their products and ensure prompt payment system. Recommendation 2: Guarantee women, Dalits and DAGs gets equal and equitable services and benefits when providing agrarian services in kind, cash and know-how from the project. Recommendation 3: Design and deliver training programs, skills training, market related activities and AVCs responsibilities such as collection or market visits by women based on the most vulnerable women group members time constraints and work burden, i.e. Dalits, single mother, female household heads, and DAGs in the project. Recommendation 4: Guarantee maximum representation of women, women headed households, single mothers, and Dalits in AVCs through a policy guideline of “positive discrimination” in the project. These are in position of collection, MPCs, processors, traders, transporters and whole sellers. Recommendation 5: Through policy advocacy and working closely with government service providers and commercial banks, ensure that women, Dalits and DAGs are able to obtain financial loans, information on markets and agricultural inputs. Recommendation 6: Ensure that young women are part of GESI and AVCs development in the project area by collecting baseline data, training, skilling and linking them with project activities. Recommendation 7: Carry out awareness and education campaigns to eradicate social prejudice, lack of trust and “untouchability” with the “duty bearers” and general society members using multi-pronged media such as radio and TV programs, print media and creative arts. Recommendation 8: Primary Baseline Data-Set on GESI in the FtF ZOI-I is not available. Carry out such a survey research before the next project commences.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO SOCIAL NORMS THAT DEFINE THE ROLE OF WOMEN AND SOCIALLY EXCLUDED GROUPS

Recommendation 9: Ensure that the strong patriarchal culture existing in the project area is mitigated

and replaced by Equality and Social Justice provided in the Constitution of Nepal. This can be done by

training and changing the mind-set of “Duty Bearers” through a “Rights Based Approach” to strengthen

GESI and GESI in AVCs.

42

Recommendation 10: Design and implement future project based on an Empowerment approach which

considers AVCs from a perspective of women, Dalits and DAGs.

Recommendation 11: Build capacity and confidence of Dalit, Women and DAGs groups in their small

groups first and then attempt this in their larger Cooperatives next.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO MECHANIZATION SERVICES, MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM SCALE ENTERPRISES, MARKET PLATFORMS

Recommendation 12: Introduce simple mechanization services such as light hand held tractors for

women, Dalits and DAGs in each of the project district. Start small, i.e. 10 units in each district.

Recommendation 13: Introduce other labor savings and production enhancing devices, i.e. corn-

shellers, threshers, haulers, grinders, hoe, sickle and implements. Train village artisans to maintain and

manufacture them in the village. Begin small with 10-15 such devices in the first year in each project

district. Increase the portfolios each year through trial and error and experiential learning approach.

Recommendation 14: Introduce a common transportation pool in each district in order to market

agricultural produce. Begin with one pick-up jeep in one district and let it be run on cost/benefit basis by

Farmers Cooperative. If it succeeds increase the transport pool together with the farmers ensuring a

GESI approach but based on cost center principle.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO STRATEGIES FOR PROMOTING INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND DAGS IN MARKET SYSTEMS

Recommendations 15: Guarantee one third number of women and DAGs in the decision making

position, i.e. Management Committees of existing market related platforms developed by the project

such as MCPs, Cooperatives and women’s groups. This can be carried out through a positive

discrimination policy anchored in GESI and GESI in AVCs principles. Enforce this through a robust policy

advocacy and guiding principles in the project’s management and implementation manual.

Recommendations 16: Lobby and influence local chamber of commerce, business persons and the private sector in order to secure financial and technical inputs, aggregation services, storage and market access in the private sector in each district. Ensure that these initiatives are responsive and relevant to women, Dalits and DAGs.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO WOMEN’S EMPOWERMENT

Recommendations 17: Develop three key indicators for a women’s empowerment approach specifically

relevant to AVCs . The key indicators should have appropriate gender markers against the five WEAI

components such as what is to be achieved by the project measured along with (a) decision making over

43

production, (b) access to resources, (c) access to mechanization services, (d) controls over income, (d)

participation in group leadership, and € time allocation. Develop a monitoring system in the project with

these indicators and components.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES IN AGRICULTURAL MARKET SYSTEMS

Recommendations 18: Set up a modest Research and Development (R&D) Fund to support major action

research activities on new inputs such as high head drip irrigation; climate resilient agricultural crops,

mechanization services, promoting small business development, NTFPs, product development, etc. (3-5

percent of project cost)

Recommendation 19:Utilizing such R&D fund, develop value added processed agricultural products,

which can be sold in the markets all over Nepal, especially in the urban centers. Ensure through policy

and guiding principles that women, Dalits and DAGs producers are targeted specifically with such action

research.

Recommendation 20: Enforce and comply through a policy guideline and guiding principles GESI in the

future project itself.

44

APPENDIX I: REFERENCES

ADB 7762-NEP. 2013. Final Report. Technical Assistance for the Preparation of the Agricultural Development Strategy. Asian Development Bank, June 2013. ADB, 2013b. Country Partnership Strategy: Nepal (2013-2017) Private Sector Assessment Summary. ADB ADB. 2012. Support for Agricultural Value Chain Development: Evaluation Knowledge Study. Report of Independent Evaluation. Asian Development Bank. ADB.Undated.Agricultural Value Chain Analysis. High Mountain Agribusiness and Livelihood Improvement Project. Available at: www.adb.org/sites/default/files/.../37292-04-nep-oth-01; http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/.../37292-04-nep-oth-01.pdf

Alavi, Hamid R., AiraHtenas, Ron Kopicki, Andrew W. Sheperd and Ramon Clarete (eds) (2012), Trusting Trade and the Private Sector for Food Security in Southeast Asia Washington DC: The World Bank. Basnett, Y, Giles Henley, John Howell, Harry Jones, Alberto Lemma and Posh Raj Pandey. 2014. Structural Economic Transformation in Nepal. A diagnostic study report submitted to DFID Nepal. Bennett, L. 2005. Gender, Caste and Ethnic Exclusion in Nepal: Following the Policy Process from Analysis to Action. Conference Paper for Arusha Conference, “New Frontiers of Social Policy” – December 12-15, 2005 Bolwig, S., S. Ponte, A. du Toot, L. Riisgaard, and N. Halberg. 2010. Integrating poverty and environmental concerns into value-chain analysis: A conceptual framework. Dev Policy Rev. 28(2):173–194. Choudhary, Dyutiman, Bishnu H. Pandit, S. P. Kala , N. P. Todaria , S. Dasgupta & Michael Kollmair (2014) Upgrading Bay Leaf Farmers in Value Chains—Strategies for Improving Livelihoods and Poverty Reduction from Udayapur District of Nepal, Society & Natural Resources, 27:10, 1057-1073, DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2014.928392 Coles, Christopher and Jonathan Mitchell (2011).Gender and agricultural value chains A review of current knowledge and practice and their policy implications. ESA Working Paper No. 11-05. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations DDF. 2014. A Report on Market Data for Private Sector Investments in Nepal Agriculture Sector. Dolma Development Fund. duToit, A. (2008) ‘Living on The Margins: The Social Dynamics of Economic Marginalization’, Development Southern Africa 25 (2): 135-50.). FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2011) The State of Food and Agriculture 2010–11. Women in agriculture: closing the gender gap for development. FAO, Rome.

45

Feed the Future FEEDBACK. 2013. Feed the Future Nepal Zone of Influence Baseline Report. Rockville, MD: Westat.

Gurung, DD; Bisht S (2014) Women’s empowerment at the frontline of adaptation: Emerging issues, adaptive practices, and priorities in Nepal. ICIMOD Working Paper 2014/3. Kathmandu: ICIMOD GIZ, 2013.Gender and Value Chains. Deutsche GesellschaFtFürInternationaleZusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH GTZ, 2007.ValueLinksManual: The Methodology of Value Chain Promotion.GTZ. Downloaded from: www2.giz.de/wbf/4tDx9kw63gma/ValueLinks_Manual.pdf on 23 May 2016.Joekes, Susan (undated). Bringing Gender Analysis into the Value Chain Approach. Available at: www.ids.ac.uk/ids/global/conf/.../susanj.pd Haggblade, Steven, Veronique Theriault, John Staatz, NangoDembele and Boubacar Diallo.(2012). A Conceptual Framework for Promoting Inclusive Agricultural Value Chains.prepared for the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) available at: fsg.afre.msu.edu/IFAD-WA/conceptual_framework.pd Investment Board Nepal. 2016. Nepal Investment Guide 2016. Kathmandu: Office of the Investment Board. Jha, Chhaya and RajendraGiri.2014. Micro enterprise development program: Impact study on Empowerment of women, Dalits, indigenous nationalities and other hardcore poor through micro-enterprise development program. Joekes, Susan (undated). Bringing Gender Analysis into the Value Chain Approach. Available at: www.ids.ac.uk/ids/global/conf/.../susanj.pd Kaplinsky, R. and M. Morris. 2001. A Handbook for Value Chain Research. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre. Karki, Sanjaya, Josh DeWald and Keith Polo.Undated. Strengthening Cardamom and Ginger Value Chains in Eastern Nepal. Available at:www.prolinnova.net/.../15.%20Karki%20et%20al%20Strengthening%20ginger%20an Kolavalli, Shashidhara and Mensah-Bonsu, Akwasi and Zaman, Saima. (2015). Agricultural Value Chain Development in Practice: Private Sector-Led Smallholder Development. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1460. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2685303 Lastarria-Cornhiel, Susana. 2006. Feminization of Agriculture: Trends and Driving Forces. Rimisp-Latin American Center for Rural Development. Laven, Anna and Noortje Verhart.2011.Addressing gender equality in agricultural value chains: Sharing work in progress. On Track with Gender, Development Policy Review Network.

46

MoI/GoN and GIZ. 2014. Value Chain Development: Lessons Learnt from the Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (MAPs) Sub-sectors, Nepal. Inclusive Development of the Economy Program (INCLUDE) MoIGoN/GIZ. Mayoux, L. and G. Mackie. 2008. Making the Strongest Links: A practical guide to mainstreaming gender analysis in value chain development, Addis Ababa, United Nations International Labor Office. Mayoux, L. (2009). ‘Engendering benefits for all’, The Broker. Downloaded from http://www.thebrokeronline.eu/Special-Reports/Special-report-The-power-of-value-chains/Engendering-benefits-for-all on 23 May 2016. Michelini, Laura, and Daniela Fiorentino. (2012) "New business models for creating shared value", Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 8 Iss: 4, pp.561 - 577 MoAD. 2014. Agricultural Development Strategy (ADS), 2014. Kathmandu: Ministry of Agriculture Development, Government of Nepal. MoAD GoN.2012. Value Chain Status of Ginger in Mid-Western Development Region of Nepal. Kathmandu: Project for Agriculture Commercialization and Trade. Mutua, E., Njuki, J. and Waithanji, E. 2014.Review of gender and value chain analysis, development and evaluation toolkits. Nairobi: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). Nedelcovych, Mima and David Shiferaw. 2012. Private Sector Perspectives for Strengthening Agribusiness Value Chains in Africa: Case Studies from Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya and Mali. Partnership to Cut Hunger and Poverty in Africa. NPC.2014. Thirteenth Plan (2070/71-2072/73). Kathmandu: National Planning Commission. Reardon Thomas, Kevin Chen, Bart Minten and Lourdes Adriano. 2012. The Quiet Revolution in Staple Food Value Chains. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: ADB and IFPRI. Riisgaard, Lone, Escobar Fibla, Anna Maria, and Ponte, Stefano. 2010. Gender and Value Chain Development: Evaluation Study. Copenhagen: The Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS). Riisgaard, L., S. Bolwig, F. Matose, S. Ponte, A. du Toit and N. Halberg. 2008. A Strategic Framework and Toolbox for Action Research with Small Producers in Value Chains. DIIS Working Paper no. 2008/17. Copenhagen, Danish Institute for International Studies. Rubin, Deborah and Cristina Manfre. 2014. Promoting Gender-Equitable Agricultural Value Chains: Issues, Opportunities, and Next Steps. in A.R. Quisumbing et al. (eds.), Gender in Agriculture: Closing the Knowledge Gap. Food and Agriculture Organization.DOI 10.1007/978-94-017-8616-4_12. UN. 2009.2009 World Survey on the Role of Women in Development Women’s Control over Economic Resources and Access to Financial Resources, including Microfinance. New York: United Nations. UNDP. 2009. Nepal Human Development Report 2009: State Transformation and Human Development. Kathmandu.

47

UNEP, 2012, Green Economy Sectoral Study: BioTrade – Harnessing the potential for transitioning to a green economy – The Case of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants in Nepal.United Nations Environment Programme. UNFPA/ICRW.2014.Engaging Men and Boys, Communities and Parents to End Violence against Women, Child Marriage and Other Harmful Practices in Nepal.UNFPA/ICRW. UNIDO (2011).Pro-poor Value Chain Development: 25 guiding questions for designing and implementing agroindustry projects. United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). Vienna, Austria.

USAID. 2016. Mid-term Performance Evaluation of USAID Nepal's Knowledge-based Integrated Sustainable Agriculture and Nutrition (KISAN) Project. Report Prepared by CAMRIS International.

USAID.2012. Indonesia’s Private Agri-food Sector and Trade. What Roles in Food Security? USAID. 2011. Pathways out of Poverty: Applying Key Principles of the Value Chain Approach to Reach the Very Poor. Discussion Paper No. l73.United States Agency for International Development. USAID. 2011b. Gender Assessment: Nepal Economy, Agriculture and Trade Activity. USAID. USAID/Nepal.2011a. Value Chain/Market Analysis of Orthodox Tea Subsector in Nepal.USAID. USAID/Nepal.2011c. Value Chain /Market Analysis of the Off Season Vegetable Sector in Nepal.USAID. USAID/Nepal.2011d. Value Chain /Market Analysis of the Lentil Sub Sector in Nepal. USAID. USAID, 2011e.Understanding Private Sector Value: An Assessment of How USAID Measures the Value of Its Partnerships. USAID. USAID. 2009. Promoting Gender Equitable Opportunities in Agricultural Value Chain: A Handbook. USAID. USAID. 2005. Enhancing Women’s Access to Markets: An Overview of Donor Programs and Best Practices. Washington DC, United States Agency for International Development. USAID. 2006. Women in the Economy: A Review of the Recent Literature. Washington DC, United States Agency for International Development. The World Bank. 2013. Promoting Agribusiness Innovation in Nepal: Feasibility Assessment for an Agribusiness Innovation Center. infoDev, Finance and Private Sector Development Department. Washington, DC: World Bank. The World Bank. 2007. World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development. Washington, DC: World Bank.

48

APPENDIX II: KEY STAKEHOLDERS INTERVIEWED IN KATHMANDU

Organization Person interviewed Position Date

SABAH Chandni Joshi ShristiMalla

Former Regional Advisor to UN Women Entrepreneur

May 30th

BPW Bina Pradhan Sabita Maharjan

Senior Gender and Socio-Economist/Advisor, FBPWN Entrepreneur, supported by BSC/FBPWN

May 31st

IDE SulavPourdel Agriculture Program Coordinator

June 3rd

Komal Pradhan National Program Director

IFPRI Dr. Dev Bhakta Shakya

Consultant June 10

th

MEDEP Ramji Neupane National Program Manager

June 12th

SabitaDakhwa Senior Institutional Development and Strategy Specialist

CEAPRED Keshav Dutta Joshi Jaya MukundaKhanal

Program Director Executive Director

June 13th

HELVITAS Mona Sherpa Deputy Country Director June 13th

DEPROSC

Pitambar Prasad Acharya Toyanath Pandey BibekKandel Kailash Rijal

Executive Director Microfinance Coordinator/Program Coordinator of KISAN Finance Manager Director/Program Manager of Business Literacy Program

June 14th

SNV Sanjeev Shrestha Value Chain Development Advisor June 15th

SDC Yamuna Ghale Senior Program Officer – Gender and

Agriculture June 20

th

MSMBS Sumitra M. Gurung Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Mahila Sahayatra Microfinance Bittiya Sanstha Limited.

August 15th

October 5th

49

APPENDIX III: KISAN PROJECT STAFF MET Dadeldhura Ms. Bagmati Bista – AMT, Kisan Uma Prashad Tripathi- AMT Mr. Bhola Gautam – APO – Kisan Tek Raj Joshi – Account cum M&E Associate KISAN Mr. Hemant Neaupane (DC) – Absent Mr. Narendra Thagunna – Irrigation Technician Mr. Bhanu Dev Panta – MFI, Extension and Outreach Officer Kanchanpur Mr. Janak Acharaya, District Coordinator, KISAN Mohan Bhandari, AMT Upendra Chaudhary, AMT Padam Panta, AMT Ram Bdr. Chaudary, AMT Rita Jairu, AMT Dailekh Mr. Deepak Khaple – (DC) KISAN Mr. Bishal Adhikari – APO KISAN Hem Bahadur Shahi – Engineers KISAN Khadga Bahadur Sharu – LSP KISAN Ms. Bhagbati Dagi – AMT Mr. Bhatikishower Shrestha – Chair Person, Cooperative Ms .Ganga Devi Shrestha- Staff NGO Ms. Muna Thapa – Famer Mr. Shyam Bahadur Rana – Chair Person Tarakariutpadan cooperative Mr. Ramchandra Subedi – APO DADO Ms. Ratna Thapa – Member WFC DADO Mr. Bhaktisara Khatri – Technician DADO Mr. Dhirendra Bahadur B.C – Technician DADO Mr. Ramesh Kumar Thapa – Social Mobilize DADO Ms. Kalpana Thapa – National Development Volunteer Mr. Narendra K.C –NGO Mr. Ramesh K.C – Agro vet Ms. Bishomani Shrestha – WDO Mr. Pabi Raj Khatri – Vice Chair Person FNCCI Nepalgung Mr. Prem Prashad Bhatarai – DC KISAN Mr. Bhuban Chaudhari – APO KISAN Mr. Krishna Bahadur Basnet – DADO Mr. Jiban Kumar K.C – Planning Officer Mr. Prakash Sharma – APO DADO Mr. Shakil – Gender Focal Person

50

APPENDIX VI: PRIMARY STAKEHOLDERS (MET, INTERVIEWED, FGDS HELD AND SOME CASE STUDIES CONDUCTED) District: Dailekh Team A: (Maya Lohani, NanuGhatani, Deepak D. Tamang,) Location of study:

Dadaparajuli- Mathilo Dhungeshowri

Malika- Talla Dhungeshowri

Sheri-6, Gaibanna

Baraha-Ghodebas, Ritha

Gauri-3, Daha

Agencies Visited

Person Agency Post

Hari Maya Saru Magar Agriculture Collection Center, Gaibaana Director

SagarDahal Agriculture Collection Center, Mathilo Dungeshowr Bazar Director

BhisnuShahi Agriculture Collection Center, Tallo Dungeshowr Bazar Director

Gagan Hamal Agriculture Service Center Staff

SunitaSunar Cooperative (Kakretada Saving and Credit Ltd) Vice Chairman

Nanda Bhandari Cooperative (Kamal Saving and Credit Ltd) Chairman

Dipak Thapa Cooperatives Manager

Ramesh Chandra Subedi DADO, Dailekh

Bhavisara Khatri DADO, Dailekh JTA

BhagwatiDangi KISAN (AMT)

Jagadish Khatri KISAN AMT

BrijeetRawat KISAN LSP/AMT, Dadaparajuli

DurgaAryal LSP, Gauri

Khadga Bahadur Saru LSP, Sheri

BhadraBatshyal KISAN project

Hari Prasad Thapa Water Mill (Kakretada Cooperatives, Mathilo Dhungeshowr) Miller

Pavi Raj Khatri Udhyog Banijya Sang Vice Chairman

Dhir Hamal Udhyog Banijya Sang Treasurer

Gopi Prasad Dahal Udhyog Banijya Sang Counselor

DurgaAryal Udhyog Banijya Sang Counselor

51

Others Agencies Visited Suaahara Project, USAID, and WDO, Cooperatives Visited

SN Name Location

1. Kakretada Bahuudeshiya Sahakari Sanstha limited Mathilo Dhungeshowri

2. Mayur Agriculture and Animal farming Cooperatives limited Gaibanna

3. Jansebak Saving and Credit Cooperative Limited Baraha

4. Nawajyoti Agriculture Cooperatives Baraha

Vegetable Producer Groups

SN Name Location

1. Jarepani Fruits and Vegetable Producer Group Dadaparajuli-7

2. DigoJyoti Farmers Group Dadaparajuli

3. Adhikari Agriculture Group Malika VDC

4. Mayur Agriculture Fresh Vegetable Group Seri-7, Gaibanna

5. Chandra Kiran Maize Seed Production Group Baraha-4,5, Rittha

6. Lamshatada Farmers Group Gauri-3, Daha

Name of Group Address Members Participants Sex Caste

Jarepani Fruits and Vegetable Production Women Farmer Group

Dadaparajuli VDC-7 21 7 Female-7

Digojyoti Farmer Group Dandaparajuli VDC-7 20

Adhikari Farm Group Malika VDC-7 30 13 Female-10 Male-3

Mayur Fresh Vegetable Producer Group Baraha VDC-7 Barahasheri

18 13 Female-10 Male-3

Janajatis

Lamstada Fresh Vegetable Production Farm Women Group

Gauri VDC-3 25 7 Female-1 Male-6

Dalits-2 Others-23

Agro-Vets

SN Name Location

1. Jiwan Agro-vet Center Mathilo Dhungeshowr

2. Om Shanti Agro-vet Center Tallo Dhungeshowr

3. Malla Agro-vet Center Ghodebas

4. Rupakheti Agro-vet Center Dailekh Bazar

5. Jwala Agro-vet Center Dailekh Bazar

Respondent name Address Age Education

Hirakumari B.K Dadaparajuli VDC-7 25 Secondary (upto 8)

ChandrakalaSapkota Bageshowri-2

52

Agency Person Met District

UdhyogBanijya Sang Bhojraj Bhatta (Vice-Chairperson) Dadeldhura

LaxmiAgrovet Lokraj Panday (Proprietor) Dadeldhura

Bageshwori Vegetable Producer Group Bhagirathi Budaayir (Farmer ) Dadeldhura

Bageshwori Vegetable Producer Group Mamata Budaayer (Chairperson) Dadeldhura

Bhagawati Vegetable producer Group Saraswati Bhatta (Chairperson) Dadeldhura

Bhumiraj Vegetable Producer Group Gyanu Bhatta (Chairperson) Dadeldhura

Janaki Vegetable Production Management Committee Lok Bahadur Deuba (Chairperson) Dadeldhura

KISAN Tek Raj Joshi (Finance Officer) Dadeldhura

KISAN Hemant Neupane (Distirct Coordinator) Dadeldhura

Krisak Cooperative Ltd. Shiva Hari Bhatta (Chairperson) Dadeldhura

MahilaTaja Farmer Group SrijanaTamrakar Dadeldhura

MahilaTaja Vegetable Producer Group Kalpana Bhatta Dadeldhura

Radha Krishna Farmer Group NarvadaShahi Dadeldhura

SaraswatiGharbariVyavasthapan Farmer Group MaheshowriDeuba (Member) Dadeldhura

Shree BhumirajBhatmas Farmer Group Dharma B.K. Dadeldhura

Agency Person Met District

Agriculture Service Center Ajab Bhandari Kanchanpur

HaatBazzar Management Committee Dhan Bahadur Committee Kanchanpur

Kanchan PrangarikMaalKandUdhyog Chudamani Joshi (Proprietor) Kanchanpur

KISAN Janak Narayan Acharya (District Coordinator) Kanchanpur

Nava Kiran Saving and Credit Cooperative Ltd LaxmiChettri (Manager) Kanchanpur

Pashupati Women Saving Group Prema Chaudhary Kanchanpur

Pathak KhadhyaUdhyog Navaraj Joshi (Director) Kanchanpur

UnnatiMahila farmer Group Santi Chaudhary Kanchanpur

Vegetable Collection Center Ganeshdutta Bhatta (Collector) Kanchanpur

District: Banke Team A: (Maya Lohani, NanuGhatani, Deepak D. Tamang,) Location of study:

Sitapur VDC

Bageshwori VDC, Khajura

Nepalgunj Sub-metropolitan, Puraina&Kamdi

Rajhena VDC

Visited Agencies:

NepalgunjUdhyogBanijya Sang, Nepalgunj

DADO, Banke

SajhedariBikas Project, Banke

KISAN

Name Agency Post

Om Prakash Sharma Agriculture Service Center

Krishna Bahadur Basnet DADO

Jeevan Kumar K.C. DADO Planning Officer

Devbar Rice Mill, Khajura

53

BhuwanChaudhari KISAN AFO

Prem Prasad Bhattarai KISAN District Coordinator

BhagwatiDangi AMT

Hem Bahadur Shahi KISAN Engineer

Khadga Bahadur Saru LSP

Ganga Devi Shrestha NGO Staff

GyannendraPaudel Vegetable Collection Center, Khajura, Bageshwori

Collector

ChabilalBhattarai Vegetable Collection Center, Kohalpur, Banke Collector

Cooperatives Visited

SN Name Location

1. MilijuliSwabalamban Saving and Cooperative Ltd. Bageshwori

2. Sana Kisan Agriculture Cooperative Ltd. Kamdi

3. Bageshwori Cooperative Ltd. Khajura

Vegetable Producer Group Visited

Name of Group Address Members Participants Sex Caste

Ekata Women Farmer Group Sitapur VDC 20 11 Female-20 Dalits-2 Others-18

Hariyali Women Farmer Group

Puraina VDC 25 13 Female-25 Muslims

Milansar Farmers Group/ Krishna Women Farmers Group

Rajhena VDC 20 11 Female-20 Tharu, Chaudhary

Agro-Vets Visited

SN Name Person Location

1. PantaAgrovet Center Male owner Khajura

2. KisanAgrovet Center Male owner Khajura, Manakamana Chowk

Market Committee Visited

SN Name Location

1. BageshowriHaatBazzar Committee Khajura

2. KrishiUpaj Market Management Committee Kohalpur

Total respondent interviewed= 75 Respondent interviewed by Sex: Female = 5, Male=24 Respondent interviewed by Caste: Dalits = 5, Janajatis = 16

54

APPENDIX V: COMPOSITE SEMISTRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE & CHECKLIST (Instructions: Sentences in Italics and parenthesis are instructions directed to the Field Researchers)

GENDER AND SOCIAL INCLUSION (GESI) ANALYSIS FOR KISAN

Commissioned by CAMRIS International Funded by USAID Implemented by Shtrii Shakti May/June, 2016 Introduction and the purpose of the Interviews, FGDs, Case Studies or KIP Interviews. (Instruction to Field Researchers: Introduce yourself taking time to answer questions regarding the purpose of your visit by the respondents. Allow time and request the introduction of the respondents as well). Where in doubt validate with the English Questionnaire Checklist. Good morning or afternoon. My name is ………We are so and so…... and representing Shtrii Shakti, a national level NGO tasked to carry out GESI study for KISAN by CAMRIS International and USAID. May we request you for an interview in order to obtain your opinions and suggestions regarding how to ensure improved GESI (Gender and Social Inclusion) in KISAN Project? Let us begin our discussions and we may take 2 hours of your time the most. Getting Started…... (Note down names, functions, positions, institutions, locations, districts and what they do briefly). Let us make a list of the roles women play in VCD currently, elicited from this farmer’s group. Let us make a list of the roles men play in VCD currently, elicited from this farmers’ group. A: Relevant to GESI enquiry at the primary & secondary Production Function Level in the four sampled KISAN project districts. Context: Let us begin our Interview /FGD alright! This study is attempting to find out opportunities and barriers for women and disadvantaged groups to increase productivity in rice, maize, high value vegetable and other value chains and diversify into other promising crops and off-farm enterprises in this district. We are interviewing you because you have been part of this Project already. Various dimensions of inequality and discrimination this study will be looking at while applying the GESI lens are, i.e.,people living in remote areas, PWDs, women from migrants HHS, small-land holders, inter alia, are sampled in the data collection and analysis phase. • Can you tell us some of these disparities which affect inclusive value chain development? (Allow time for key operative words such as Inclusive Value Chain Development& disparities to sink in and allow them to ask you questions so you can clarify in simple terms with examples. Link your discussions and say….). • Explain to the women and farmers group that these inclusive VCD and disparities could be key factors that affect access to resources for increasing productivity (e.g. land, labor, inputs, technologies and financial services)? Who does what tasks in KISAN project related activities and who takes major decisions ultimately related to these ownership, tasks, and issues?

55

Who does what? Who takes decisions

Women Men Women Men

(Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority). • Can you tell me what are some key factors that limit your produce reaching the markets and can we list it down one by one? (Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority).

Constraining Factors

Household Collectors Wholesalers Retailers Consumers

• Can you tell me what are some of the social factors (i.e.,trust and information flow) that affect the ability of women and other disadvantaged groups to develop strong commercial relationships in value chains and gain benefit from trade of your produce to the local markets? (Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority for each topic and probe for responses related to various

trust and information factors which leads to constraints in VCD). • Can you tell me how are important social changes taking place in this area over the past 3-5 years? (Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority for each topic). • What are some of the important and visible changing roles of women and marginalized groups in agriculture due to such socio-economic changes? (Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority for each topic). • In your opinion, how are outmigration of males () affecting the roles of women and female headed households or widows in agriculture? (Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each topic). • In your opinion, how are these dynamics affecting opportunities and constraints for women in the rice, maize, high value vegetables and other promising agricultural value chains? (Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each topic). • Do you know if the KISAN projects have provided any capacity building activities in order to improve the KSA (knowledge, skills and attitude) of farmers group in order to improve the bargaining power/capacity of women and DAGs? If yes can you name three most important activities? • Can you tell me if you know of any effective strategies, adaptation or coping strategies or do you have any suggestions from your own experience for reducing these disparities that we talked about just now? (Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority). B. Value Chain Actors and Identification of Key Factors leading to GESI in KISAN This part will require - in addition to the helpful questions administered given below to women and men’s group - also participant observations, ocular observations, transect walks around farms, interviews with KIP and social leaders (i.e.,school teachers), and visits to and interviews (either individually or in some cases FGDs) with groups, cooperatives or value chain actors including, leader farmers, market planning committees, input suppliers,

56

extensions services, transporters, processors and buyers in the farmers market, vegetable markets, whole sale and retail markets and DADO staff plus district level KISAN, CEAPRED and DEPROSC staff). • Can you tell me, if you had to face various forms of discriminations, exclusion or constraints in the past 2-3 years because you were women, Dalit or from a Janajati group - in accessing inputs and support or when selling your agricultural produce in the market? (Write down 3 important factors in order of priority). • Can you elaborate and tell us what kind of challenges, constraints and discriminations did you face with i.e.,input suppliers, agro-vet, extension services such as JT/JTA, transporters, processors and mill owners or buyers in the wholesale, retail or traditional markets such as weekly Haat bazaars? Or any other institutions or statutory body such as the police, revenue, VDC or customs officials.

Discrimination/ Barriers

Actors Enablers

(Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority). INS: You may validate the same questions and ask the input suppliers, agro-vet, and extension services such as JT/JTA, transporters, MPC, processors and mill owners or buyers in the wholesale, retail or traditional markets such as weekly haat bazaars? Or any other institutions/statutory body such as the police, revenue, VDC or customs officials whether they have witnessed discriminations, barriers and challenges due to traditional social norms that define the roles of women and socially excluded groups in the VCA. This can be “triangulated” with the KISAN and implementing NGO staff as indicated above. (Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority). • Can you tell me how do these socially defined roles (for women, Dalit, Janajatis) affect incentives or disincentives for women to participate in and benefit from value chain development? (Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each issue). • How are these roles changing, especially for young people in the past 5 years? What are some promising strategies for changing social norms that currently limit the broader participation of women and socially excluded groups in agricultural market systems as we talked above or before? (Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each issue). • Can you tell me what are some specific opportunities and constraints for the inclusion of women and disadvantaged groups that you see in: (a) accessingmechanization services and other productivity enhancing technologies, and (b) diversification

into off farm micro, small and medium scale enterprises(e.g., agro processing, storage, mechanization services, technical services, or other value addition enterprises supporting these value chains)?

(c) platforms that improve market linkages within value chains (e.g., cooperatives, Market Planning Committees, other platforms that support access to inputs, technology, aggregation services, storage and markets).

(d) linkages and business relationships of various stakeholders of the value chains with women and marginalized groups on the one hand and disparities in dealings with men and elites on the other?

(Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each issue above).

57

C: Understanding Women’s Disempowerment Context: Recent studies in the FtF ZOI-I shows that due to lack of access to community leadership, group membership, heavy burden of work leading to little leisure time, inability to take autonomous decisions in production and lack of input in productive decisions including control of use of income – women are generally substantially more disempowered compared to men. In order to understand key areas of women’s disempowerment identified by USAID’s WEAI data, please ask these questions to women and KIPs in the selected women households and communities that you visit. • Can you tell me what are some of the barriers women face in becoming group members, leaders and decision makers in various groups such as savings and credit, farmer’sgroups, CFUGs or even Ward Committees? Which women face most barriers/challenges? (Write down 3-5 important factors in order of priority). • In terms of participation, speaking up and having the confidence to articulate your thoughts in public or group meetings what are some of the constraints that you face? Why? (Write down 3 important factors in order of priority). • How long do you work each day and what are the major tasks that you do in the day? If you recall your work hours, how many hours do you work during peak agricultural season, during monsoon, during festival months or during social occasions such as family gathering, marriage or other religious ceremonies?

In a normal Day (Hours)

Peak agricultural Season (Hours)

Winter (Hours) Festivals/Social Occasions (Hours)

(Write down 3- 4 peak seasons with hours spent per day). • What are the areas of agricultural production that you are able to make your own decisions? What are the issues in which you have to take either a joint decision or decision of a male member of the household? Why are these decisions made autonomously by you or with others in your household? Who provides you information about this?

Decision Making Process Areas of Agricultural Production

• Reasons • Information

Own Decision

Male Decision

Joint Decision

(Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each kind of decision making). • Can you tell me who makes decision regarding obtaining and utilizing productive resources such land, equipment, fertilizers, seeds, kind of crops to plant, new technology, small irrigation facilities or new investment? Who provides you information about these?

Decision Making Process Productive Resources

Reasons Information

Own Decision 1; 2; 3.

Male Decision

Joint Decision

(Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each kind of decision making)

58

• Can you tell me who makes decisions on ownership, purchase, sale and transfer of assets such as land, buildings or equipments? What do you want to change in this decision making? How?

Decision Making Process

Purchase/Sale/Transfer of land

Land/Building/Equipment Changes Needed & How?

Own Decision 1; 2; 3.

Male Decision

Joint Decision

(Write down 3 important factors in order of priority for each kind of decision making). • Can you tell me who has control over household income or your income from farm produce? What needs to

change? (Write down the disaggregated answers you may receive in this question) • • 25. Can you tell me who takes decisions in your household regarding taking credit or loans from

MFI/Cooperatives or banks? Do you have easy access and information regarding availability of loans and credits?

• Can you tell me what are some of the promising/innovative/inclusive and empowering strategies or ways of

working for promoting the inclusion of women and disadvantaged groups in agriculture market systems – specifically related to rice, maize, high value vegetables, and other promising value chains Crops?

PART D: KISANI AND THE ROLE OF PRIVATE SECTOR (FGDs) (Instructions: In addition to the above questions please raise these questions with women formers (Q31 only) and others to relevant VCD Actors & Enablers the following points relevant to them. See the Interview Implementation Matrix in the last part of this SSI and FGD Checklist) 31. Are the women farmers, being the permanent residents of the households/ communities, as well as farmer from excluded groups, who are the primary value chain actors, ready to work directly with the private sector? 32. What challenges/ barriers/ constraints that the KISANI project will encounter to increase women farmers’ as well as the farmers of the excluded groups’ participation in the KISANI project while aiming to engage them with the private sector? 33. What are the factors contributing to the participation of women farmers and the farmers of the excluded groups with the private sector in the KISANI project? 34. What are the opportunities available in the KISANI ZOI which need to be continued to ensure increased participation of women farmers and the farmers of the excluded communities with the private sector in the KISANI project? 35. What kind of preparation that the KISANI project need to make in developing linkages between women and excluded groups’ farmers and the private sector? 36. What are the implications in integrating GESI in RFPs prepared for the KISANI project so that the bidders can address these issues in their proposals? Concluding: We have now come to the end of our interview/FGDs or visit. Thank you for your time, effort and contributions. In the end, would you like to comment, suggest or mentioned anything that we may have missed out or that you would like us to note. Thank You. (Summarize your daily journal, notes, dairy and reflection each evening according to the question themes each evening and prepare yourself for the next day by making a checklist of what to do tomorrow).

59

Checklist Interviews &FGDs with Relevant Primary & Secondary Stakeholders (Field Level and Some Kathmandu Level)

Stakeholders (categorized by VCD actors)

Relevant Part of the Questionnaire to be administered

Mode of administration (Interview/Case Studies/FGD/KIP etc.)

Primary & Secondary Production Actors

• Women Farmers & Leader Farmers (Women, Dalits, Janajatis& others marginalized groups) & Farmers Groups-

(Q 1 – Q 31) SSI/FGDs/KIP/Case Study (6=Groups 3 female, 2 mixed, 1 male) 3 KIPs (Female) 3 Case Studies (Female) In each districts

• Change Agents (Facilitators/LSP/ Leader Farmer/JT/JTA)

(Q 2; 3; 12; 14) Part B & D

FGD/KIP

O3 Agro-Business Promoters Part B & D FGD/KIP

• Market Planning Committees (MPC) Part B & D FGD/KIP

• Savings and Credit Cooperatives (SACOS) Part B & D FGD/KIP

• Millers Part B & D FGD/KIP

• Storehouse /Warehouse Keepers Part B & D FGD/KIP

• Agro-Vet Outlets Part B & D FGD/KIP

Enablers & Supporters

• District Agricultural Development Officers & Extension Agents (JT/JTA)

Part B & D

FGD/KIP

• FNCCI/Other Chamber of Commerce Part B & D FGD/KIP

• Relevant district level NGOs Part B & D FGD/KIP

• Implementing NGOs (DEPROSC & CEAPRED) Part B, C & D FGD/KIP

• KISAN District Staff Part B & D Meeting

• SUAAHARA Part B & D Meeting

• HARIYO BAN Part B & D Meeting

• SAJEDARI Part B & D Meeting

• Central Level INGOs (Helvetas, SNV, MEDEP etc)

Meeting agenda

• Ministry of Agriculture (Department of Environment)

Meeting agenda

• CAMRIS International Meeting agenda

• USAID, GESI Advisor Meeting agenda

• KISAN Secretariat, Kathmandu Meeting agenda

Value Chain Development Continuum • Production Function 2. Primary & Secondary Actors 3. Enablers & Supporters