Gender relations in household grain storage management and marketing: the case of Binga District, Zimbabwe
This study uses the Locke and Okali gender analysis framework to explore gender relations surrounding grain storage management and marketing in Binga District of Zimbabwe. The study was conducted during one grain storage season and involved multiple visits to selected households, which were used as case studies. The main question that the study sought to address was: “What bargaining goes on between men and women in the area of stored grain management and marketing?” Data were collected from four households, fitting into the following categories: simple monogamous, complex monogamous (two scenarios), and polygamous. Participatory rural appraisal tools and techniques were extensively used and formed the backdrop of all the data collection. The study established that much bargaining and strategizing occurs within the household in order for women to exercise control over the use of stored grain. The bargaining process was found to be a complex one of give-and-take without an immediately recognizable winner. There is evidence that women use this bargaining power to exert influence on their relative position in the household in terms of independent income generation and management, seniority, and overall household food security policies. While bargaining between and within gender remains shrouded in subtleness, individuals in a household consciously use their skills to manipulate the situation to their best advantage. This article is expected to initiate broader debate in the area of gender roles and bargaining in grain post-harvest management, an area often kept private by smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. Copyright The Author(s) 2010
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 27 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
Web page: https://afhvs.wildapricot.org/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10460|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ellis, Frank, 2000. "Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198296966, December.
- Doss, Cheryl R., 2001. "Designing Agricultural Technology for African Women Farmers: Lessons from 25 Years of Experience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 2075-2092, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:27:y:2010:i:1:p:85-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.