IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/1609.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How do agricultural development projects aim to empower women?: Insights from an analysis of project strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Johnson, Nancy L.
  • Balagamwala, Mysbah
  • Pinkstaff, Crossley
  • Theis, Sophie
  • Meinzen-Dick, Ruth Suseela
  • Quisumbing, Agnes R.

Abstract

Increasing numbers of development agencies and individual projects espouse objectives of women’s empowerment, yet there has been little systematic work on mechanisms by which interventions can enhance women’s empowerment. This gap exists because of the lack of consensus on indicators as well as the lack of attention paid to measuring the effects of different types of interventions on empowerment. This paper identifies the types of strategies employed by 13 agricultural development projects within the International Food Policy Research Institute’s Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project Phase 2 (GAAP2) that have explicit objectives of empowering women. We distinguish between reach, benefit, and empowerment as objectives of agricultural development projects. Simply including women does not necessarily benefit them, and even activities that benefit do not necessarily empower. To identify strategies to empower women, we build on the domains included in the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI) and are working with the GAAP2 portfolio of projects to develop an empowerment metric that is applicable in the project setting (a project-level WEAI, or pro-WEAI). We have identified the following potential domains to be included in pro-WEAI: input into production decision making, control over resources, control over income, leadership, time, physical mobility, intrahousehold relationships, individual empowerment, reduction in gender-based violence, and decision making on nutrition. The GAAP2 projects address these domains through a wide variety of activities that can be grouped into four main types: (1) direct and indirect provision of goods and services; (2) forming or strengthening groups, organizations, or platforms and networks that involve women; (3) strengthening knowledge and capacity through agricultural extension, business and finance training, nutrition behavior change communication, and other training; and (4) changing gender norms through one-way awareness raising or two-way community conversations about gender issues and their implications. In general, projects with activities in more activity areas target more domains of empowerment, and most projects target a core set of six empowerment domains. With the exception of intrahousehold relationships, which is always targeted by activities designed to influence gender norms, projects target domains with different types of activities or combinations of activities. This setup suggests that there may be no one-to-one link between a specific activity and empowerment benefits, and that implementation modalities will determine whether and how an activity contributes to women’s empowerment. The effectiveness of these project strategies will be assessed using both quantitative and qualitative methods throughout the GAAP2 research project.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, Nancy L. & Balagamwala, Mysbah & Pinkstaff, Crossley & Theis, Sophie & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth Suseela & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2017. "How do agricultural development projects aim to empower women?: Insights from an analysis of project strategies," IFPRI discussion papers 1609, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:1609
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cdm15738.contentdm.oclc.org/utils/getfile/collection/p15738coll2/id/131074/filename/131285.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esther Duflo, 2012. "Women Empowerment and Economic Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(4), pages 1051-1079, December.
    2. Das, Narayan & Yasmin, Rabeya & Ara, Jinnat & Kamruzzaman, Md. & Davis, Peter & Behrman, Julia A. & Roy, Shalini & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2013. "How do intrahousehold dynamics change when assets are transferred to women? Evidence from BRAC’s Challenging the Frontiers of Poverty Reduction—Targeting the Ultra Poor program in Bangladesh:," IFPRI discussion papers 1317, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Santos, Florence & Fletschner, Diana & Savath, Vivien & Peterman, Amber, 2014. "Can Government-Allocated Land Contribute to Food Security? Intrahousehold Analysis of West Bengal’s Microplot Allocation Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 860-872.
    4. Mara van den Bold & Andrew Dillon & Deanna Olney & Marcellin Ouedraogo & Abdoulaye Pedehombga & Agnes Quisumbing, 2015. "Can Integrated Agriculture-Nutrition Programmes Change Gender Norms on Land and Asset Ownership? Evidence from Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(9), pages 1155-1174, September.
    5. Roy, Shalini & Ara, Jinnat & Das, Narayan & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2015. "“Flypaper effects” in transfers targeted to women: Evidence from BRAC's “Targeting the Ultra Poor” program in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 1-19.
    6. Talip Kilic & Paul Winters & Calogero Carletto, 2015. "Gender and agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: introduction to the special issue," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 281-284, May.
    7. Johnson, Nancy L. & Kovarik, Chiara & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Njuki, Jemimah & Quisumbing, Agnes, 2016. "Gender, Assets, and Agricultural Development: Lessons from Eight Projects," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 295-311.
    8. Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Roy, Shalini & Njuki, Jemimah & Tanvin, Kakuly & Waithanji, Elizabeth, 2013. "Can dairy value-chain projects change gender norms in rural Bangladesh? Impacts on assets, gender norms, and time use:," IFPRI discussion papers 1311, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Johnston, Deborah & Stevano, Sara & Malapit, Hazel J. & Hull, Elizabeth & Kadiyala, Suneetha, 2015. "Agriculture, gendered time use, and nutritional outcomes: A systematic review:," IFPRI discussion papers 1456, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. van den Bold, Mara & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Gillespie, Stuart, 2013. "Women’s empowerment and nutrition: An evidence review:," IFPRI discussion papers 1294, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Malapit, Hazel Jean L. & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2015. "What dimensions of women’s empowerment in agriculture matter for nutrition in Ghana?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 54-63.
    12. Neha Kumar & Agnes Quisumbing, 2011. "Access, adoption, and diffusion: understanding the long-term impacts of improved vegetable and fish technologies in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 193-219.
    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. Sophie Theis & Nicole Lefore & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Elizabeth Bryan, 2018. "What happens after technology adoption? Gendered aspects of small-scale irrigation technologies in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Tanzania," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(3), pages 671-684, September.

    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. Johnson, Nancy L. & Kovarik, Chiara & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Njuki, Jemimah & Quisumbing, Agnes, 2016. "Gender, Assets, and Agricultural Development: Lessons from Eight Projects," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 295-311.
    2. Ruel, Marie T. & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Balagamwala, Mysbah, 2017. "Nutrition-sensitive agriculture: What have we learned and where do we go from here?:," IFPRI discussion papers 1681, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Malapit, Hazel J. & Sraboni, Esha & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Ahmed, Akhter U., 2015. "Gender empowerment gaps in agriculture and children’s well-being in Bangladesh:," IFPRI discussion papers 1470, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Agnes Quisumbing, 2018. "Response to Garcia and Wanner “gender inequality and food security: lessons for the gender-responsive work of the international food policy research institute and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(2), pages 247-251, April.
    5. Sophie Theis & Nicole Lefore & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Elizabeth Bryan, 2018. "What happens after technology adoption? Gendered aspects of small-scale irrigation technologies in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Tanzania," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(3), pages 671-684, September.
    6. Anderson, C. Leigh & Reynolds, Travis W. & Gugerty, Mary Kay, 2017. "Husband and Wife Perspectives on Farm Household Decision-making Authority and Evidence on Intra-household Accord in Rural Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 169-183.
    7. Komatsu, Hitomi & Malapit, Hazel Jean L. & Theis, Sophie, 2015. "How does women’s time in reproductive work and agriculture affect maternal and child nutrition? Evidence from Bangladesh, Cambodia, Ghana, Mozambique, and Nepal:," IFPRI discussion papers 1486, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Cheryl R. Doss & Agnes R. Quisumbing, 2020. "Understanding rural household behavior: Beyond Boserup and Becker," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 47-58, January.
    9. Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Quisumbing, Agnes & Doss, Cheryl & Theis, Sophie, 2019. "Women's land rights as a pathway to poverty reduction: Framework and review of available evidence," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 72-82.
    10. Doss, Cheryl & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth, 2020. "Land tenure security for women: A conceptual framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Nordhagen, Stella & Nielsen, Jennifer & van Mourik, Tom & Smith, Erin & Klemm, Rolf, 2019. "Fostering CHANGE: Lessons from implementing a multi-country, multi-sector nutrition-sensitive agriculture project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    12. Simone Passarelli & Dawit Mekonnen & Elizabeth Bryan & Claudia Ringler, 2018. "Evaluating the pathways from small-scale irrigation to dietary diversity: evidence from Ethiopia and Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(4), pages 981-997, August.
    13. Mara van den Bold & Andrew Dillon & Deanna Olney & Marcellin Ouedraogo & Abdoulaye Pedehombga & Agnes Quisumbing, 2015. "Can Integrated Agriculture-Nutrition Programmes Change Gender Norms on Land and Asset Ownership? Evidence from Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(9), pages 1155-1174, September.
    14. Constanza Gonzalez Parrao & Marta Moratti & Shannon Shisler & Birte Snilstveit & John Eyers, 2021. "PROTOCOL: Aquaculture for improving productivity, income, nutrition and women's empowerment in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review and meta‐analysis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), September.
    15. Gillespie, Stuart & Poole, Nigel & van den Bold, Mara & Bhavani, R.V. & Dangour, Alan D. & Shetty, Prakash, 2019. "Leveraging agriculture for nutrition in South Asia: What do we know, and what have we learned?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 3-12.
    16. Hazel Jean L. Malapit & Esha Sraboni & Agnes R. Quisumbing & Akhter U. Ahmed, 2019. "Intrahousehold empowerment gaps in agriculture and children's well‐being in Bangladesh," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 37(2), pages 176-203, March.
    17. Komatsu, Hitomi & Malapit, Hazel Jean L. & Theis, Sophie, 2018. "Does women’s time in domestic work and agriculture affect women’s and children’s dietary diversity? Evidence from Bangladesh, Nepal, Cambodia, Ghana, and Mozambique," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 256-270.
    18. Jones, Rebecca E. & Haardörfer, Regine & Ramakrishnan, Usha & Yount, Kathryn M. & Miedema, Stephanie S. & Roach, Timmie D. & Girard, Amy Webb, 2020. "Intrinsic and instrumental agency associated with nutritional status of East African women," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    19. Akter, Sonia & Rutsaert, Pieter & Luis, Joyce & Htwe, Nyo Me & San, Su Su & Raharjo, Budi & Pustika, Arlyna, 2017. "Women’s empowerment and gender equity in agriculture: A different perspective from Southeast Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 270-279.
    20. Kassie, M., 2018. "The nutrition impacts of women’s empowerment in Kenyan agriculture: Application of the multinomial endogenous switching treatment regression," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276003, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    indicators; women; empowerment; agricultural development; strategies; monitoring; evaluation; gender; nutrition; capacity building; women’s empowerment; agricultural development projects; project strategies; monitoring and evaluation;
    All these 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:1609. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.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 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: (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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.