IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/fcndbr/109.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does cash crop adoption detract from childcare provision?

Author

Listed:
  • Haddad, Lawrence James
  • Hallman, Kelly
  • Paolisso, Michael J.
  • Regmi, Shibesh

Abstract

Using data from fieldwork conducted in Nepal, the impact of a project designed to commercialize vegetables and fruits — the Vegetable and Fruit Cash Crop Program (VFC)— on male and female time allocation is examined. Using a rigorous time collection methodology, activity patterns in households that adopt and do not adopt the new technology are profiled. Very few studies examine changing activity patterns of both men and women in response to commercialization of agriculture. Though women's time is valuable in agriculture, it is also valuable in the production of child nutrition. The recent evolution in thinking as to the causes of child malnutrition—the three pillars being food intake, health, and time to care—warrants further analyses of the time trade-offs that women and men face when adopting new agricultural technologies. The VFC program was successful at targeting both men and women farmers in the sense that household participation resulted in increased head male and head female time spent growing vegetables and fruits. The responses varied, however, by the number of preschool children in residence. In households with more than one preschooler, the time trade-offs associated with VFC participation were not sizeable for the care of children under 5 years. In households with just one preschooler, the trade-offs were more important. In these households, preschoolers received less care from the male and female heads, who spent more time in both the cash crop and in the food crop. In these same households, the nonwork (leisure) time of men increased as a result of VFC participation, but for women, leisure time was unaffected. Thus in the short run, there is perhaps scope for protecting childcare time by reducing time to leisure. In the medium run, benefits may well accrue to unborn preschoolers if VFC participation empowers women.

Suggested Citation

  • Haddad, Lawrence James & Hallman, Kelly & Paolisso, Michael J. & Regmi, Shibesh, 2001. "Does cash crop adoption detract from childcare provision?," FCND briefs 109, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:fcndbr:109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/fcnbr109.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jones, Andrew D. & Cruz Agudo, Yesmina & Galway, Lindsay & Bentley, Jeffery & Pinstrup-Andersen, Per, 2012. "Heavy agricultural workloads and low crop diversity are strong barriers to improving child feeding practices in the Bolivian Andes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(9), pages 1673-1684.
    2. Díaz-Bonilla, Eugenio & Robinson, Sherman & Thomas, Marcelle, 2002. "On boxes, contents, and users: food security and the WTO negotiations," TMD discussion papers 82, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. McClafferty, Bonnie & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2006. "Using gender research in development: food security in practice," Food security in practice technical guide series 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Todd, Petra E., 2012. "Effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving women's employability and quality of work : a critical review," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6189, The World Bank.
    5. Díaz-Bonilla, Eugenio & Ron, Juan Francisco, 2010. "Food Security, Price Volatility and Trade: Some Reflections for Developing Countries," Price Volatility and Beyond 320195, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD).

    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:fpr:fcndbr:109. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.