6. Rural poverty
Number of rural poor (millions) (<US$1.25 per day)
“… there are serious and growing
threats to the productivity and
resilience of the Green Revolution
lands. Equitability has also been
low. The larger landowners have
reaped most of the benefits, while
the poor and landless have missed
out.” (Conway 2012)
8. MekongMekong The Coral Triangle
GBM*GBM*
ZambeziZambezi
Population living on <$1.25/day,
per grid cell (resolution : 9 km at
the equator)
NigerNiger
Lakes
Victoria
-Kyoga
Lakes
Victoria
-Kyoga
Source of poverty map: CGIAR SRF
Domain Analysis Spatial Team (2009)
*GBM: Ganges-Brahmaputra-
Megna delta
(where learning from Coral
Triangle will be scaled out)
South Pacific Community
African Inland
Asia mega deltas
• High numbers of poor and/or
High % of total population dependent on AAS
• High vulnerability to change (climate/sea level/water)
• Potential to scale out
Geographical Focus
African Coastal
9. People using AAS
System Area (km²) People <US$1.25/day
Africa – f’water 800,000 70m 43m
Africa - coastal 300,000 12m 7m
Asian Deltas 50,000 100m 40m
Islands SEA + Pfc 650,000 54m 22m
236m 112m
Source: Bené & Teoh, in prep.
13. Integrated themes:
Gender
Health & Nutrition
Learning/Sharing/Communication
Engagement & Empowerment
Effective Partnerships
High potential NRM
value chains
Fish
Aquatic Plants
Farm productivity &
diversification
Diversified farming systems
Dietary diversification
Baseline studies
Ecosystem services
Agrobiodiversity
Agric. Knowledge + info
systems
Governance
High potential agric. value
chains
Cattle
Rice
HUB strategic initiatives
Flood risk management
Gender transformative
approach
Awareness + communication
in schools
Canal management
Program
operations
Governance
Management
Communications
Capacity building for
implementation
Community
level initiatives
Barotse Hub,
Zambia
14. Research Themes
• Sustainable increases in productivity
• Improved access to markets
• Strengthened resilience and adaptive capacity
• Enhanced gender equality in access to and control
of resources and decision making
• Improved policies and institutions
• Scaling up (knowledge sharing and learning)
16. Gender gaps in Agriculture
• Sticky gaps
• Raises big questions…how to close this gap? Is ‘closing
the gap’ enough to lead to lasting, positive
development outcomes?
• Consequences of inequality being addressed, but not
17. Gender equality and Economic growth
• Asymmetrical relationship
• More consistent and robust evidence that
gender equality contributes to economic growth
– less the other way (Kabeer and Natali 2013)
• Interrelationships too weak to be self-sustaining
(Duflo 2011)
18.
19. Closing gender gaps
Economic empowerment
Changes in social norms and attitudes
Need a two- pronged approach to push both the levers
Sustainable
? Inter-
generational
?
Wider
impacts?
20. Key features of Gender Transformative Approach in
AAS
• Integrates transformative interventions with
agricultural systems interventions
• Understands people and social diversity in their
context
• Engages with both women and men
• Enables critical learning, reflection & questioning
• Dynamic & iterative
• Multi-scale
21. Impact Pathway
Gender and
development
analysis,
methods and
tools focused
on AAS
development
challenges
Analysis, tools
and methods
used to design
and implement
gender
transformative
RinD strategies
and interventions
in AAS
Changes in gender
roles and norms
Increased access to
assets, resources,
knowledge, skills,
social networks,
markets and
services
Equity enabling
policies and
institutions
Improved range and
quality of life choices
Control of
decision-making
Enhanced
engagement in
markets
Enhanced
benefits from use
of assets,
resources
Gender equitable
systems and
structures
Higher participation
and leadership in
community initiatives
Reduced
poverty
Increased
food
security
Improved
nutrition
Sustainable
NRM
Research
outputs
Research
outcomes
Development outcomes SLOs
22. AAS Gender Research Agenda
• How do social norms and gender relations influence
agricultural development outcomes for marginalized
social groups?
– In-depth social and gender analysis
• What combinations of technical and transformative
interventions foster gender transformative change in
different contexts?
– Design of technical + transformative interventions based on the analysis
and Participatory development of Theories of change
– Integration of transformative interventions in Participatory Action Research
under various initiatives in program
– Systematic testing of combinations of interventions
• How do these transformative changes contribute to
agricultural development outcomes like poverty
reduction, food and nutrition security?
– Development of metrics to evaluate transformative change and its
23. Some transformative change
mechanisms
• Household approaches (SIDA, IFAD)
• Behavioural change communication and African
Transformation Methodology (Johns Hopkins University)
• Working with faith leaders (Channels of Hope – World Vision)
• Learning from Dimitra project on gender in communication
for development (FAO)
• Gender Equity Movement in Schools (GEMS – ICRW)
• Collective action and networks
24. Generating evidence to demonstrate
contributions
• Theory-based and participatory designs – understanding if and how change
happened
• Qualitative comparative and quasi-experimental designs will be woven in as
appropriate – to understand if and why the transformative approaches are
better and generate evidence base to scale out
– Context-specific treatments identified based on the results of social and gender
analysis
Examples:
• In Barotse Flood Plain, Zambia
-African Transformation methodology with randomly selected PAR groups
-Applying for WorldBank Gender innovation Lab funding
• In Bangladesh, where Feed the Future Program is operating
-Feed The Future, with GTA integrated in some communities
- Feed the Future, regular
25. An example - Livelihood choices, gender roles and
associated norms in Barotse Flood Plain, Zambia
Fish value chains
•Men fish using nets in deep waters and women using baskets in
shallow waters and when floods recede
•Women mainly engaged in selling fish without any value addition
– Women do not use nets as they are heavy and difficult for them to
handle and, going into deep waters is dangerous.
– ‘If a women fishes with a net, she cannot give birth.’
– ‘Bible stipulates the different roles of men and women and there is
no need for change in gender division of labour.’
– ‘Ladies come from the rib of the man and cannot consider
themselves to be equals.’
– Men and women take up roles based on
knowledge/awareness/training which they received as children
• Girls learn from their mothers and boys from their fathers
26. Cultures and norms are not static!
• Significant changes in norms and acceptance of
women going out fishing into deep waters and at
nights with their husbands
– ‘Women paddling is not a bad omen anymore.’
– ‘A good wife these days is someone who can earn some
money to take care of the family’.
• Men and women in village with multiple NGOs operating
seemed to be more open and accepting of changes in
social norms
• Increasing awareness of importance of education for girls –
most girls go to school now
27. Main actor
groups
Practice changesKAS changes needed
• Gender analysis integrated into
RinD process
• Gender analysis used to inform
RinD design, conduct, analysis and
M&E
• Gender-conscious outputs and
communication content /
techniques
• Implement programs using GTAs
• Become active acceptors of gender
integration & analysis (ie. actively
seek ways of integrating gender
concerns into R&D)
• Develop skills to integrate gender
into RinD programs
RinD collaborators
- Government orgs
- NGOs
- Research institutions
- Private sector
- Media
• Gender analysis integrated into
research process with adequate
resources allocated
• Gender analysis + transformative
approach used to inform research
design, conduct, analysis, outputs
and M&E
• Become active acceptors of
gender integration & analysis
(ie. actively seek ways of
integrating gender concerns
into research)
• Develop skills to integrate
gender into RinD programs
AAS Internal
- Implementing teams
- PLT + POP
• Accepting a wider range and
quality of life choices for men and
women (including changes in the
roles and responsibilities within
households and communities).
• Joint decision-making in
households and communities.
• Owing and controlling a wider
range of resources and assets by
women and other marginalized
groups
• Understanding and appreciating that
gender equality can be win-win
• Increased awareness and acceptance
of alternative gender roles
• Overcoming fears of changing norms
and roles
• Gaining confidence in exercising
alternative behaviours and practices
• Developing communication and
negotiation skills
• Communities
• - Different social
groups
• - Opinion leaders
Research to influence
- Government / policy
decision-makers
- Politicians
- Donors
- Private sector
-Media
-NGOs
• Become active acceptors of
relevance of gender equality to
programs, policy, achieving dev and
other goals
• Decrease fears of acting to change
norms
• Increased understanding of gender
• Change policies / institutions / legal
arrangements / regulations
• Allocate sufficient funding for
gender transformative programs
• Acknowledge and reward value of
both men and women in industry
• Change media portrayals of gender
roles
• Adopt GTA as std practice (NGOs)
•Instigate organizational change
processes
•Capacity-building programs
•Provide expertise and input to
research, or direct to resources
that can provide these
Program action
•Incentivize organizational change
processes
•Capacity-building programs
•Provide technical advice on
implementing a gender
transformative approach
•Persuasive communication of
gender research motivation,
approach and outputs
• Generate and communicate
evidence of effects of GTAs
•Partnerships with local policy
advocacy groups
•Portraying alternative gender roles /
Demonstrating positive deviance
• Social media and behavioural
change communication initiatives
•Household and gender relations
approaches
SOFA through the evidence it provided has had significant influence in catapulting gender back into the center-stage in ag R and D. Research and development programs often assume that access to resources leads to control or that higher income is transformative. It is not always true. It depends on social norms and agency of men and women. Not sure how many in the ag R and D field have seen or read this other report.
Results from the WorldBank study across 20 countries.
I might take out the sub-bullets under the three questions and just talk to the slide..
Taking the example of the Barotse value chain initiative, we would like to illustrate how social norms and beliefs restrict livelihood choices of women. There might be more remunerative livelihood options which they might want to and can pursue, but are constrained by the norms.
I will change this and try to make it more readable – but this is our outcome logic model for various sets of actors for GTA. Just to demonstrate that this intervention operates at multiple scales and we need behavioural change outcomes in more than just communities to get the dev outcomes and impacts we want.
Methodological frameworks and tools for conceptualization, contextualization, design, implementation and evaluation Capacity – developing a cap dev and org change approach Communication – key challenge – both internally and externally – developing a strategy Partnerships – key to all above + for scaling up and out – looking for expertise to work with at global and local levels