Author
Abstract
Climate change is intensifying the frequency and severity of climatic hazards, disrupting agricultural systems and reshaping rural livelihoods worldwide. In climatevulnerable countries like Cambodia, these disruptions are also transforming gender roles within agriculture. While the feminisation of agriculture—where women assume greater agricultural responsibilities as men transition to non-farm work—has been widely observed, less is known about whether this trend also extends to women’s involvement in farm-level decision-making. This case study examines the relationship between climate change adaptation, climatic hazards, and the multidimensional feminisation of agriculture in Cambodia. Using nationally representative, sex-disaggregated data from the Cambodia Agriculture Survey (2019–2021), covering over 40,000 households, we analyse shifts in women’s roles as unpaid family labourers, hired workers, and decision-makers in agricultural production. Our findings show a significant increase in women’s participation in all aspects of agriculture during the study period. Feminisation was more pronounced in female-headed households, those heavily dependent on agriculture for income, and those exposed to climatic shocks—especially droughts and floods. We find that crop and livelihood diversification, key household adaptation strategies, are strongly associated with increased female labour and decision-making roles. By contrast, we find little evidence that male outmigration or non-climatic hazards (e.g., pests & diseases) are major drivers of feminisation in this context. These results highlight the need for gender-responsive agricultural and climate adaptation policies. In particular, agricultural extension programs should actively support women’s access to climate-smart technologies, training, and resources—especially in areas most affected by climate change—so that women’s growing role in agriculture translates into greater resilience rather than deepening the burdens of climate stress.
Suggested Citation
Handle:
RePEc:ags:cfcp25:391432
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.391432
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cfcp25:391432. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.crawfordfund.org/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.