IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/140749.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A qualitative study exploring women’s empowerment in coffee cooperatives in Chiapas, Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Eissler, Sarah
  • Rubin, Deborah
  • de Anda, Victoria

Abstract

This study presents findings from a qualitative research study conducted in Chiapas, Mexico that is one component of a larger activity funded by the Walmart Foundation and implemented by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), titled Applying New Evidence for Women’s Empowerment (ANEW). ANEW seeks to generate evidence from mixed-methods evaluations of women’s empowerment in production and other entrepreneurial efforts at different nodes of agricultural value chains and aims to develop and validate measures of women’s empowerment that focus on agricultural marketing and collective empowerment at the group level, both of which build upon the project-level Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index for Market Inclusion (pro-WEAI+MI). In this report, we present findings of a qualitative study of coffee cooperatives supported by Root Capital in Chiapas, Mexico and how Root Capital engages with them to advance women’s economic empowerment, among other objectives. As part of this study, we aimed to describe the gender dynamics and roles and responsibilities of men and women in the coffee value chain in Chiapas, and the opportunities and barriers faced as a result of these dynamics. This study employed qualitative methods to collect primary data from types of respondents using individual and group interviews. Two coffee cooperatives in Chiapas that work with Root Capital were selected to participate in this study. From June to July 2023, 21 individual interviews and 9 group interviews were conducted with market actors, men and women coffee cooperative leaders, men and women cooperative members and their wives, and Root Capital staff from two municipalities in Chiapas. The data were transcribed into Spanish and then translated into English. These transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis in NVivo software. A codebook inclusive of inductive and deductive themes was developed to guide the thematic analysis. This study design adhered to best practices for ethical research and received approval from IFPRI’s IRB. Several limitations should be considered when reviewing the findings and conclusions of this study. There exist defined gender roles and divisions of labor at each node of the coffee value chain in Chiapas, and participants often described these roles as expected given social norms or perceived gender-specific limitations of natural abilities that would shape how men or women could engage in different activities. Men and women indicated that while men are in charge of coffee production activities, women do spend time contributing to cleaning and management activities, and that women are heavily involved in the coffee harvest. Both men and women explained that women are responsible for processing activities, which can be time consuming and laborious, but often occur close to the home. Although the coffee harvest activities require physical labor in picking and carrying the baskets of ripened cherries, there is a perception that women cannot participate in other post-harvesting activities, such as transporting bags of coffee, because the lifting is too physically heavy of a task for women. Men are responsible for managing the sale of coffee and directly negotiating with the buyer to the extent that a negotiation happens. In instances when buyers travel to the household as the point of sale, women can participate in sales, typically facilitating the sale under the direction of her husband. However, women still do not lift the coffee bags nor transport the bags for sale. And many coffee producing households prefer to or sometimes need to hire labor to help with coffee harvest activities; they tend to hire men as laborers more out of preference or their availability compared to women. Men and women interviewed for this study also described their perceptions and understanding of empowerment and elements of an empowered person with relation to engaging in the coffee value chain. Overall, while the concept of an empowered person was difficult for both men and women to relate to, they shared perceptions of how relations between men and women had changed over the years. Respecting women’s rights or the perception of respecting women’s rights was more acknowledged at the time of the interviews than in previous years, and it was more common to see men and women both generating incomes for the household. Men and women shared different perspectives regarding attitudes toward intimate partner violence, whereas both acknowledged men often mistreated their wives, but women discussed it as a private matter where men shared concerns over women’s reaction to the mistreatment rather than the mistreatment itself. Varying access to resources limited both men and women farmer’s ability to advance in the coffee value chain, particularly access to credit, which was limited for both men and women in the study areas. Limited access to credit with favorable or reasonable terms limited men’s and women’s ability to hire additional labor on their coffee farm or to purchase machines that would reduce specifically women’s time burdens within the household. Women’s time use is constrained by expectations and normative tasks in ways that men are not constrained. Future research is needed and discussed to better understand these dynamics of gendered roles and relations and elements of empowerment in the coffee value chain in Chiapas. Men and women members of the two respective cooperatives shared differences in how they were able to participate in and benefit from their participation in each cooperative. One cooperative provided more opportunities for members to directly engage in meetings, social activities, and capacity building opportunities whereas the other operated through a more decentralized structure and did not offer opportunities for members to directly participate in decision-making or meetings beyond the representation of their delegate. Members of both cooperatives perceived their cooperatives to be consistent and reliable coffee buyers offering stable prices. The former cooperative was also perceived as a source of support and community for members to advance their coffee production and post-harvesting activities. Both cooperatives also addressed key barriers faced by members, such as providing consistent and reliable pricing. Some members reported that cooperatives offered higher prices than those offered by non-cooperative buyers. Cooperatives also provided transportation options for producers to sell their coffee, which also enables women to have more engagement in coffee sales. However, normative barriers, such as women’s existing time burdens and their need for their husbands’ permission, limits women’s full participation in the cooperatives. Finally, we explored the extent to which Root Capital’s engagement with the cooperatives had supported activities or changes that strengthen women’s empowerment by understanding members and leaders’ perceptions of this engagement. Overall, cooperative members were generally unaware of Root Capital and its engagement with the cooperative. Since Root Capital does not provide direct services to farmers or cooperative members, it was not surprising that many cooperative members were generally unaware of Root Capital and its engagement with the cooperative. However, a few were aware of Root Capital, knowing it had provided their cooperative a loan to purchase and maintain a truck, which was used to reduce barriers faced by producers to bring their coffee to the point of sale and had implications for shifting gender roles to manage coffee sales. Cooperative leaders reflected on the loan that facilitated increased transportation capacity, as well as other benefits from working with Root Capital. However, as Root Capital operates with a client-driven approach, adoption of the Gender Equity Advisory services was limited as these services only became recently available in 2021 and cooperatives opted not to prioritize these until 2023. Therefore, there was limited data to understand how these activities may be influencing cooperative operations, gender dynamics and roles, and perception of women engaged in the coffee value chain at the time of this study. We present several recommendations for areas of future research and considerations for Root Capital to strengthen its approach to gender equity programming.

Suggested Citation

  • Eissler, Sarah & Rubin, Deborah & de Anda, Victoria, 2024. "A qualitative study exploring women’s empowerment in coffee cooperatives in Chiapas, Mexico," IFPRI discussion papers 2248, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:140749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/140749
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malapit, Hazel J. & Heckert, Jessica & Adegbola, Patrice Ygué & Crinot, Geraud Fabrice & Eissler, Sarah & Faas, Simone & Gantoli, Geoffroy & Kalagho, Kenan & Martinez, Elena M. & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth S, 2023. "Measuring empowerment across the value chain: The evolution of the project-level Women’s Empowerment Index for Market Inclusion (pro-WEAI+MI)," IFPRI discussion papers 2172, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Sarah Lyon & Tad Mutersbaugh & Holly Worthen, 2017. "The triple burden: the impact of time poverty on women’s participation in coffee producer organizational governance in Mexico," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 317-331, June.
    3. Sarah Lyon & Tad Mutersbaugh & Holly Worthen, 2019. "Constructing the female coffee farmer: Do corporate smart‐economic initiatives promote gender equity within agricultural value chains?," Economic Anthropology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(1), pages 34-47, January.
    4. Mercedes Aguerrebere & Sonia M Frías & Mary C Smith Fawzi & Rocío López & Giuseppe Raviola, 2021. "Intimate partner violence types and symptoms of common mental disorders in a rural community of Chiapas, Mexico: Implications for global mental-health practice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-19, September.
    5. García-Morán, Ana & Yates, Julian S., 2022. "In between rights and power: Women’s land rights and the gendered politics of land ownership, use, and management in Mexican ejidos," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marije Schaafsma & Ilda Dreoni & Lacour Mody Ayompe & Benis Egoh & Dewa Putu Ekayana & Arilson Favareto & Sonny Mumbunan & Louise Nakagawa & Jonas Ngouhouo‐poufoun & Marieke Sassen & Thiago Kanashiro , 2023. "A framework to understand the social impacts of agricultural trade," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 138-150, February.
    2. Marije Schaafsma & Ilda Dreoni & Lacour Mody Ayompe & Benis N. Egoh & Dewa Putu Ekayana & Arilson Favareto & Sonny Mumbunan & Louise Nakagawa & Jonas Ngouhouo‐poufoun & Marieke Sassen & Thiago Kanashi, 2023. "Mapping social impacts of agricultural commodity trade onto the sustainable development goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(4), pages 2363-2385, August.
    3. Xia Ling & Yanhong Liu, 2023. "The Coordination of Environmental Protection and Female Discrimination Based on the Concept of Affirmative Action," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-10, February.
    4. Diksha Arora & Codrina Rada, 2020. "Gender norms and intrahousehold allocation of labor in Mozambique: A CGE application to household and agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(2), pages 259-272, March.
    5. Suchi Kapoor Malhotra & Swati Mantri & Neha Gupta & Ratika Bhandari & Ralph Nii Armah & Hamdiyah Alhassan & Sarah Young & Howard White & Ranjitha Puskur & Hugh Sharma Waddington & Edoardo Masset, 2024. "Value chain interventions for improving women's economic empowerment: A mixed‐methods systematic review and meta‐analysis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3), September.
    6. Shantanu Bhunia & Piyush Kumar Singh, 2025. "Producer organizations in the last 25 years: a bibliometric analysis and meta-review of the literature," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Araby Smyth, 2022. "Challenging the financialization of remittances agenda through Indigenous women’s practices in Oaxaca," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 54(4), pages 761-778, June.
    8. Li Zhang, 2020. "From left behind to leader: gender, agency, and food sovereignty in China," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(4), pages 1111-1123, December.
    9. Andres Barrios & Rodrigo Taborda & Ximena Rueda, 2025. "Time Poverty: An Unintended Consequence of Women Participation in Farmers’ Associations," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 225-253, May.
    10. Soto Alarcón, Jozelin María & Sato, Chizu, 2019. "Enacting peasant moral community economies for sustainable livelihoods: A case of women-led cooperatives in rural Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 120-131.
    11. Rina Vuciterna & Giordano Ruggeri & Chiara Mazzocchi & Sara Manzella & Stefano Corsi, 2024. "Women’s entrepreneurial journey in developed and developing countries: a bibliometric review," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 12(1), pages 1-34, December.
    12. Irene Y.H. Ng & Zhi Han Tan & Gerard Chung, 2024. "Time Poverty among the Young Working Poor: A Pathway from Low Wage to Psychological Well-being through Work-to-Family-Conflict," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 892-906, December.
    13. Bacon, Christopher M. & Sundstrom, William A. & Stewart, Iris T. & Maurer, Ed & Kelley, Lisa C., 2021. "Towards smallholder food and water security: Climate variability in the context of multiple livelihood hazards in Nicaragua," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    14. Budabin, Alexandra Cosima & Hudson, Natalie F., 2021. "Sisterhood partnerships for conflict-related sexual violence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    15. Francesca Campoverde & Micaela de las Casas & Dora Blitchtein-Winicki, 2022. "Is There an Association between Being a Victim of Physical Violence by Intimate Partner and Binge Drinking in Men and Women? Secondary Analysis of a National Study, Peru 2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-17, November.
    16. Abraham, Mathew & Verteramo Chiu, Leslie & Joshi, Ekta & Ali Ilahi, Muhammad & Pingali, Prabhu, 2022. "Aggregation models and small farm commercialization – A scoping review of the global literature," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    17. Ida Arff Tarjem & Ola Tveitereid Westengen & Poul Wisborg & Katharina Glaab, 2023. "“Whose demand?” The co-construction of markets, demand and gender in development-oriented crop breeding," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 83-100, March.
    18. N. Lalitha & P. K. Viswanathan & Soumya Vinayan, 2024. "Institutional Strengthening of Farmer Producer Organizations and Empowerment of Small Farmers in India: Evidence from a Case Study in Maharashtra," Millennial Asia, , vol. 15(2), pages 278-299, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:fpr:ifprid:140749. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    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.