IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae15/212600.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What do we mean by 'women's crops'? Commercialisation, gender, and the power to name

Author

Listed:
  • Orr, Alastair
  • Tsusaka, Takuji W.
  • Kee-Tui, Sabine
  • Msere, Harry

Abstract

We explore the relationship between commercialisation and gender for groundnuts in Eastern Province, Zambia, using a mixed methods approach. Women saw themselves as having greater control over groundnuts than other crops, and both sexes saw groundnuts as controlled by women. Focus Group Discussions reported higher levels of control than found in a household survey. Propensity Score Matching showed that the machine shelling and higher sales did not reduce women’s perceived level of control over groundnuts. Women welcomed greater male participation in machine shelling because it reduced the drudgery of shelling by hand. This suggests that commercialisation did not disempower women.

Suggested Citation

  • Orr, Alastair & Tsusaka, Takuji W. & Kee-Tui, Sabine & Msere, Harry, 2015. "What do we mean by 'women's crops'? Commercialisation, gender, and the power to name," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212600, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae15:212600
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.212600
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/212600/files/Orr-What%20do%20we%20mean%20by%20womens%20crops-169.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kumar, Shubh K., 1994. "Adoption of hybrid maize in Zambia: effects on gender roles, food consumption, and nutrition," Research reports 100, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Doss, Cheryl R., 2002. "Men's Crops? Women's Crops? The Gender Patterns of Cropping in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 1987-2000, November.
    3. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    4. Alkire, Sabina & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Peterman, Amber & Quisumbing, Agnes & Seymour, Greg & Vaz, Ana, 2013. "The Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 71-91.
    5. Chambers, Robert, 1994. "Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Analysis of experience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    6. Howard, Patricia L. & Nabanoga, Gorettie, 2007. "Are there Customary Rights to Plants? An Inquiry among the Baganda (Uganda), with Special Attention to Gender," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1542-1563, September.
    7. Peter Davis & Bob Baulch, 2011. "Parallel Realities: Exploring Poverty Dynamics Using Mixed Methods in Rural Bangladesh," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(1), pages 118-142.
    8. Sascha O. Becker & Marco Caliendo, 2007. "Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(1), pages 71-83, February.
    9. Mofya-Mukuka, Rhoda & Shipekesa, Arthur M., 2013. "Value Chain Analysis of the Groundnuts Sector in the Eastern Province of Zambia," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 171869, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    10. Lim, Sung Soo & Winter-Nelson, Alex & Arends-Kuenning, Mary, 2007. "Household Bargaining Power and Agricultural Supply Response: Evidence from Ethiopian Coffee Growers," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1204-1220, July.
    11. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
    12. Dey, Jennie, 1982. "Development planning in The Gambia: The gap between planners' and farmers' perceptions, expectations and objectives," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 377-396, May.
    13. DiPrete, Thomas A. & Gangl, Markus, 2004. "Assessing bias in the estimation of causal effects: Rosenbaum bounds on matching estimators and instrumental variables estimation with imperfect instruments," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Labor Market Policy and Employment SP I 2004-101, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    14. C. Dolan, 2001. "The 'Good Wife': Struggles over Resources in the Kenyan Horticultural Sector," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 39-70.
    15. Dehejia, Rajeev, 2005. "Practical propensity score matching: a reply to Smith and Todd," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 355-364.
    16. Gladwin, Christina H. & Peterson, Jennifer S. & Mwale, Abiud C., 2002. "The Quality of Science in Participatory Research: A Case Study from Eastern Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 523-543, April.
    17. Chambers, Robert, 1994. "The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 953-969, July.
    18. Judith Carney, 1998. "Women‘s land rights in Gambian irrigated rice schemes: Constraints and opportunities," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 15(4), pages 325-336, December.
    19. Sascha O. Becker & Andrea Ichino, 2002. "Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(4), pages 358-377, November.
    20. Shipekesa, Arthur M. & Jayne, Thomas S., 2012. "Gender Control and Labour Input: Who Controls the Proceeds from Staple Crop Production among Zambian Farmers?," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 140904, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Noora-Lisa Aberman & Terry Roopnaraine, 2020. "To sell or consume? Gendered household decision-making on crop production, consumption, and sale in Malawi," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(2), pages 433-447, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics; Crop Production/Industries; Labor and Human Capital;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:iaae15:212600. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.