Gender and Value Chains Jemimah Njuki Poverty, Gender and Impact Group International Livestock Research Institute
Transcript
1. Gender and Value Chains Jemimah Njuki Poverty, Gender and
Impact GroupInternational Livestock Research Institute
2. Why gender and value chains? The agricultural landscape in
the region is changing Agriculture /livestock sector is becoming
more technologically sophisticated, commercially oriented and
globally integrated There is evidence however that as it gets more
commercialised, smallholder farmers, women, may not be able to
compete and benefit due to lower access to resources, capital,
capacity and other social barriers There are tremendous
opportunities from these changes if gender equality is integrated
into programs /projects aiming to take advantage of emerging
markets
3. Why gender and value chains? Existing gender disparities in
access to resources, market participation and capital accumulation
Although about 70% of smallholder farmers are women, they lack
secure rights to production resources (land, labor, capital), lower
educational levels Women are more likely to be unserved by formal
financial The extent of market participation (especially in formal
markets) by women is lower than that of their male counterparts.
Women are more likely to sell in informal markets Adoption rates
for new technology innovation among women is lower than for men
often making women less competitive
4. Why gender and value chains? The potential gains from
reducing gender disparities There is evidence that income under the
control of women is more likely to be used to improve family
welfare women spend upto 90% of their income on their families,
while men spend 30- 40% strengthening marital bargaining power and
"voice" within the household decision-making If women had the same
resources as men, they could increase yields on their farms by
20-30% raise agricultural output by 2.5-4% and reduce hungry people
by 100-150 million
5. What are the Key Issues and Data Needs?
6. 1. Men and Womens Access to Resources and Assets Total Women
and assets: Although domestic % of about 70% of smallholder and
livestock farmers are women, they lack livestock to total secure
rights to production index index resources (land, labor, Kenya Men
41.01 21.5 capital), lower educational levels Women 16.68 22.5
Joint 60.35 36 Disaggregated asset andTanzania Men 41.80 46.6
resource ownership data by Women 11.42 18.3 gender Joint 58.47 24.2
Gender and Asset Module.docx
7. 2. Men and Womens Participation MarketsHouseholds Level
Women and men face different constraints as they participate in
markets Patterns of market participation may vary across crops,
livestock and products Women more likely to sell to informal than
formal markets (often farm gate)
8. 2. Men and Womens Participation MarketsOther markets Womens
participation in markets along the whole value chain Womens
participation in trading and labour markets
9. 3. Types of markets that men and women commonly access Women
more likely to sell at farm gate to other farmers /brokers or
Variable Coeff z P>z traders Belong to group Types of markets
influenced be (1=yes) 1.026 2.48 0.013** womens access to
resources, assets to enable them participate Age of spouse 0.017
0.97 0.334 in markets Has communication Terms of trade in formal
markets asset (1=yes) 1.195 2.09 0.037** are not always conducive
for Has transport asset women e.g formal payment (1=yes) 1.856 3.26
0.001*** systems that require them to have back accounts Women
received training (1=yes) -0.544 -0.9 0.369 Women education=primary
0.104 0.23 0.822 education=post primary 0.483 0.65 0.515
acreage=> 5 acres 0.114 0.28 0.782 dependency ratio=>1 0.476
1.05 0.296 Constant -1.780 -1.83 0.067
10. 4. Constraints faced by men and women in participating in
markets Reasons for womens preferences for farm-gate markets Pay
better than sales to brokers /traders Saves time taken to go to
markets Traders at farm gate often purchase in large amounts and
pay in cash Shops pay poorly and have strict quality requirements
Broker patronage of other markets Constraints to farm gate markets
Not regular /consistent Payments not made at time of purchase
(especially neighbours) who also often buy in small quantities
11. 5. Patterns of income management by men, women and
jointlyUnitary Household Collective Model Household Model Common
welfare Non-Co-operative Cooperative function Pooling of resources
Head is altruist Individual autonomy Choice of acting as Individual
preferences individuals or joint Sub-economies mine, yours, ours
Focus of analysis is household level Focus of analysis is
individual level
12. Patterns of income management by men and women Influenced
by type of product, total income from product who sells, type of
market
13. What influences income management by women A general trend
of a rise in income share by women across the low income
commodities which changes with the higher income commodities high
income commodities such as potatoes and pigs showed lower income
share by women (some exceptions such as rice) In the lower income
categories, groundnuts and poultry had average incomes below USD
100 per annum and high income shares going to women (43.6% for
groundnuts and 52.7% for poultry)
14. Income management and where sold Women managed a higher
income share when product was sold at farm gate compared to when
sold at village markets or delivered to traders When women sold
(physically or did the transaction), they managed a higher income
share (for both products and species)
15. Income management and change of markets Malawi-Active
export market orientation-- decline in womens control of income
from the crop as total income (bar) increased. Thus as the beans
became more marketable, men tended to get interested and took
over.
16. Implications for research and data collection Standard
approaches of analyzing value chains can often miss the gender and
intra-household issues. Need to look within the households at men
and women, and jointness of activities, decisions and incomes
Identify indicators /evaluation criteria from men and women
Separate evaluation and tools between men and women to take into
account differences Who to ask questions, interview? Disaggregation
of data..what data and what level of disaggregation. Household
headship is not enough! Multiple tool (surveys, participatory value
chain mapping, case studies, panel studies etc)
17. Implications for Development Programs aimed at increasing
commercialization or using a value chain approach need to take into
account these gender and intra- household dynamics. Use of data and
evidence to inform gender strategies Gender sensitive value chain
or commodity selection and value chain analysis, monitoring and
evaluation helps to develop strategies to benefit men and women
without undermining the control of these commodities by either
18. Implications for Development Indicators for market and
value chain projects need to be gendered and to go beyond measuring
participation and household incomes and focus on distributional
impacts Working with both men and women in market development
Working on multiple value chains and multiple markets (both formal
and informal) and Integrating gender training in market development
can mitigate against negative intra-household effects from value
chain and market development programs