J6-ii_GESI_Literature_Review_for_KISAN_II.pdf

Gender Equality and Social Inclusion Literature Review for Knowledge-Based Integrated

Sustainable Agriculture in Nepal (KISAN) II

Global Best Practices

July 2016

Prepared by Catherine Bollinger (USAID/ASIA/SPO, Gender Advisor)

Background

USAID’s Knowledge-based Integrated Sustainable Agriculture and Nutrition (KISAN) project works with the Government of Nepal (GoN) to sustainably improve food security and increase incomes through integrated agriculture activities. The KISAN project, part of USAID’s global Feed the Future (FtF) initiative, is a $20 million 55 months program working to advance food security objectives by increasing agricultural productivity. Nepal was one of 19 countries chosen for the Presidential FtF Initiative in 2010. KISAN builds the capacity of private sector and community-based organizations to improve the availability of quality farm inputs; increase access to credit, extension and other services; and improve the competitiveness and efficiency of processors and other buyers. In parallel, KISAN facilitates market linkages between farmers and input providers, service providers, and buyers. KISAN engages with a wide range of public, private, and civil society stakeholders including farmers, NGOs, academic and research institutions, businesses and training centers. The project works in close coordination with the GoN’s

Ministry of Agricultural Development (MOAD) and is aligned with the other FtF projects in Nepal, including the Cereal System Initiative for South Asia (CSISA) and the Innovation Lab (IL) programs. KISAN collaborates with USAID’s Business Literacy Program – which is increasing the business literacy of

53,000 KISAN beneficiaries – and with USAID’s Suaahara project, which is improving the health and nutrition of Nepalis within FtF Zone of Influence (ZOI-I) comprising of 20 districts in Far-Western, Mid-

Western and Western regions of the country.

This literature review will look at global best practices as related to gender equality and social inclusion in the FtF ZOI-I. The intent is to inform a gender equality and social inclusion analysis that will feed into the future programming of Knowledge-based Integrated Sustainable Agriculture in Nepal (KISAN II). The outline of what will be covered includes:

● Section 1: Gender and Social Identity in Agricultural Value Chains

○ 1a. Gender

○ 1b. Indigenous Populations

○ 1c. Minority Groups and Minority Language Speaking Groups

● Section 2: Gender and Social Disparities

○ 2a. Education and Literacy

○ 2b.Household Obligations and Dynamics

○ 2c. Leadership/Management

○ 2d. Power Disparities and Decision-Making

○ 2e. Social Transformations: Changing roles for youth and women

● Section 3: Access to Resources

○ 3a. Access to Land

○ 3b. Finance and control of income

○ 3c. Access to Knowledge

○ 3d. Access to Networks

○ 3e. Access to Technology

● Section 4: Access to Markets

○ 4a. Technology

○ 4b. Commercial Relationships

○ 4c. Market Facilitation Techniques

● Section 5: Opportunities and Constraints related to:

○ 5a. Accessing Mechanization Services

○ 5b. Diversification into off-farm SMEs

○ 5c. Platforms that improve market linkages

● Section 6: Key Suggestions

○ 6a. Take into account lessons learned on the effectiveness of value chain upgrading strategies

○ 6b. Reform Policies, Laws, and Governance

○ 6c. Mitigate Risks, Including GBV

○ 6d. Gender and Social Inclusion Analysis to inform context-specific interventions

○ 6d. Monitoring and Evaluation

● Section 7: References

Section 1. Gender and Social Identity in Agricultural Value Chains

Social determinants including gender or whether someone is from a particular indigenous group or minority-speaking language group can have a significant impact on factors related to agricultural productivity, including access to resources, access to knowledge, access to networks, and upward mobility in value chains. Value chains can be understood as a framework “to conceptualise the differential interaction of poor rural men and women with agricultural markets. In agricultural value chains, primary actors perform a selection of (primary) functions, which typically include input supply, production, processing, storage, wholesale (including export), retail and consumption” (Coles 2011: 2). This section will discuss dynamics related to social identity.

1a. Gender

Agriculture is the most important source of employment for women and men in many rural areas but women are more likely to hold low-wage, part-time, seasonal employment and they often are paid less even when they have similar qualifications. It has been estimated that closing the gender gap could increase agricultural yields on women-run farms by 20-30% and raise the total agricultural output in developing countries by 2.5-4% (World Bank 2015). As such, inequalities related to gender, poverty, and other social factors can limit the ability of certain groups to participate in, benefit from, and have upward mobility in value chains. Improvements in value chains can have positive impacts on gender equality and women’s empowerment as well as household poverty income more broadly. Interventions should be designed around context-specific socio-cultural norms, which can be understood through a thorough gender analysis (Coles 2011: 0). A range of context-specific factors influence the ability of women and other marginalized groups to benefit from agricultural value chain interventions including the different levels at which men and women participate in value chains and how the benefits are distributed (GIZ

2013: 1).

In agriculture value chains, women are generally active in the subsistence economy and often focus on production of food crops for personal needs. Meanwhile, men dominate the cash crop economy - or the commercial cultivation of food (GIZ 2013:1). Agriculture in developing countries can also be characterized by dual value chains operating in parallel for the same product: an informal/traditional value chain and a formal/modern value chain. Informal chains usually involve smallholders and they usually bring products to local middlemen. Meanwhile, formal value chains will deliver the same product but of better or more uniform quality derived from larger farms or organized groups of small farmers to commercial wholesalers. Because these parallel value chains can limit the returns small producers are able to get through informal value chains, interventions can focus on integrating small producers into more modern value chains (Devex 2014). Significant gender disparities exist within modern versus traditional value chains. In modern agricultural value chains, men are usually concentrated in higher status, higher earning farming since they have control over key resources including land and labor. Meanwhile, women often work as wage-laborers. Further, women are usually pushed to parts of value chains that require relatively unskilled labor due to cultural stereotypes. These positions are lower paid and lack benefits and security.

Further, laws against gender discrimination and harassment pertaining to unskilled labor positions are often insufficient or not enforced (FAO 2010: 1).

1b. Indigenous Populations

In many rural areas, indigenous groups look for employment in sectors including agriculture, food processing, or mining and are often pushed towards informal economies. Indigenous employment is often low-paid with minimal social protections and is often high risk in terms of health and safety (IASG 2014:

5). Wage gaps exist between indigenous and non-indigenous groups as well as specifically between indigenous and non-indigenous women. Further, indigenous women often face multiple levels of discrimination due to gender biases and are at increased exposure to violence and sexual harassment at work. In Nepal and Bangladesh, increasing numbers of indigenous men and women are migrating to urban areas with indigenous women in Nepal often finding work in textiles (IASG 2014: 3). This type of migration can expose these groups to particular vulnerabilities including forced labor and trafficking due to higher levels of poverty, low rate of education and work opportunities, and limited access to birth and citizenship registration.

Another important area of note is the consideration of indigenous knowledge, including traditional and cultural knowledge, within agricultural practices. Knowledge of best practices related to land use, crops, and weather patterns are important inputs in agriculture, which can benefit growing practices. On the other hand, traditional growing practices can be out of sync with and/or limit uptake of modern technology to enhance productivity.

In Cambodia, particular efforts have been made to support indigenous groups’ land rights through a

“whole land-use system” perspective by which efforts support a coherent approach to ensuring interventions encourage livelihood development. Cambodia’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forest and Fisheries works with the Ministry of Land Management and Urban Planning and Construction as well as local communities and authorities to register property of indigenous communities and develop a national land-use map (IFAD 2012: 9). The NGO, Indigenous Peoples’ for Agriculture Development in Cambodia, also serves as a unifying voice to ensure the needs of this groups. In addition, the Indigenous Peoples Land

Rights Project in Cambodia works to protect the rights of indigenous peoples’ land, largely through a focus on economic land concessions.

1c. Minority Groups and Minority Language Speaking Groups

Minority groups, including minority language speaking groups, can experience heightened barriers in accessing and participating in agricultural value chains. Limited ability to read or speak the dominant language can limit access to critical knowledge, such as land procedures and land titling. In addition, it is necessary to take into account the different environments in which different ethnic groups live, which can influence agricultural and social systems and may make certain technologies and services less relevant for their environments. For example, lowland groups may practice permanent agriculture while high http://www.ngoforum.org.kh/index.php/indigenous-peoples-land-rights-project http://www.ngoforum.org.kh/index.php/indigenous-peoples-land-rights-project elevation groups may move seasonally. Agricultural interventions should take into account specific social customs, including gender dynamics, of that group - for example, as related to access and control over resources (Emerging Markets 2015: 11). Discrimination on the basis of caste or ethnicity, such as the

Dalits and Janajatis in Nepal, can further limit groups’ ability to participate in, influence, and access resources (PAHAL 2016: 3).

Further, these groups can have distinct constraints to their ability to build their economic potential.

Minority groups may have more limited social networks, resulting in reduced trust and thereby a limited ability to access loans with reasonable interest rates (PAHAL 2015:6). For example, USAID’s assessment report of its Promoting Agricultural Health, and Alternative Livelihoods project found that Dalits and

Janajatis in Nepal reported that they generally live on small plots of land unable to grow cash crops; live on government-owned land; and are less likely to know how to access extension services because they are excluded from access to this information. In addition, due to cultural stigmas, Dalits face constraints in accessing markets, leaving them unable to sell milk products and unable to use the same water sources as other groups.

Specific gender dynamics in minority and ethnic groups can exacerbate constraints faced by women, resulting in a double burden of discrimination and increased barriers when gender-specific limitations are combined with minority status.

Section 2. The Influence of Social Factors on Agricultural Practices

Social and cultural contexts have strong impacts on gender and social disparities related to agricultural practices and roles. This context influences who has which jobs, access to resources, and benefits derived from participation in value chains. These social disparities can have a significant impact on the competitiveness of value chains in the global market (USAID 2010: 1). Influential factors related to social disparities in agricultural value chains include education; family/household obligations;

leadership/management; control of income; power disparities; changing roles of youth; and the effects of social transformation.

2a. Education and Literacy

Women in many countries have lower literacy and education rates than do men. For example, in Nepal, according to UNESCO, 71.1% of males over age 15 are literate while only 46.7% of females are literate

(UNESCO 2011). This lower education level pushes these individuals into lower skilled roles in the value chain. Gendered education systems have multiple negative effects on participation in value chains. First, lower positions on value chains limits income generation. Second, less educated individuals have decreased access to training opportunities that would allow them to upgrade their skills and knowledge.

Finally, they are more limited access and understanding of market and financial information (Coles 2011:

7). As a result, women as a whole earn less than men even when they are in similar roles (World Bank

2007).

2b.Household Obligations and Dynamics

Family and domestic obligations have significant gendered impacts that disproportionately limit women’s time availability. In addition to shoulder the majority of domestic duties, rural infrastructure weaknesses

(roads, transport, water, electricity, and sanitation), common in Nepal, can increase the time burden of these tasks, thereby further reducing the time they can put towards work outside the home. These time constraints can have impacts on women’s availability to contribute to agricultural productively. For example, West African women harvest perishable vegetables in the late morning, after they have finished their domestic and child care tasks. This has negative impacts on the quality of the produce. Labor-saving equipment and childcare facilities can make important contributions to women’s time availability to grow their skills, participate in cooperatives, or otherwise contribute to agricultural productivity (FAO 2010: 2).

It is also important to highlight that certain crops are often seen as either “men’s crops” or “women’s crops” when in reality they take on different roles in production. As noted in the WEAI Intervention Guide, “When there is disagreement within a household, its resolution may depend on the bargaining power of individual household members. Sociocultural context and intrahousehold resource allocation rules determine who within the household has access to a particular resource and for what purpose. The sociocultural context and rules may also determine who benefits from the profits or consumption of the crop.” (ACDI/VOCA 2016: 28)

2c. Leadership/Management

Notable gender disparities exist in leadership and management roles in agricultural value chains. In contexts where men and women have unequal access to capital and property, as is the case in Nepal, men tend to dominate management roles while women generally participate in value addition activities.

Those women who are at the management level are often disempowered due to limited access to education and societal norms that restrict their ability to communicate with buyers and suppliers (Coles

2011: 5).

Leadership and participation in community groups and organizations can make substantial contributions to women’s ability to build their agricultural productivity through increasing access to information about technologies and market prices and building connectivity to support production and marketability. It is important that men and women have equal participation in these groups to ensure the likelihood that services provided will meet their needs. Unfortunately, data shows that women’s participation in community-based groups tends to decline as groups become increasingly formalized whereas men’s participation grows (ADCI/VOCA 2016: 60). Women are often limited from joining farmers’ organizations due to economic or social constraints, which can be linked to limited access to resources such as land.

For example, many women smallholder farmers do not own land, which prevents them from joining formal collectives. Discriminatory procedures such as only allowing heads of household to join collectives can also limit women’s participation. The same factors that limit women’s participation in these groups also restricts their ability to participate in leadership roles (ibid: 60).

Women’s only groups can be an important avenue for building solidarity around economic or social issues and can be places where women learn leadership skills - such as public speaking and voicing opinions.

However, restricting women’s participation in agricultural organizations to women’s only groups can also have detrimental effects on their ability to thrive as women’s groups tend to have less access to commercial networks and markets (ibid: 61). The Intervention Guide for the Women’s Empowerment in

Agriculture Index, produced by USAID and ADCI/VOCA, provides suggested interventions for building women’s participation and leadership in community groups and organizations.

It is also critical to ensure full participation from ethnic minorities and marginalized castes. These groups need to be empowered as leaders and participants in policy formulation to ensure their rights are protected and their needs are taken into account as they have the best understanding of the impacts and benefits of particular land tenure systems on their communities. For example, common-property systems, which provide greater power to influence, can be more advantageous for indigenous and minority groups than individual land rights. In light of this, it can be more advantageous to minority groups to strengthen traditional administrative systems rather than create new, more formal land ownership systems.

http://acdivoca.org/sites/default/files/attach/technical-publications/WEAI-Intervention-Guide-2016.PDF http://acdivoca.org/sites/default/files/attach/technical-publications/WEAI-Intervention-Guide-2016.PDF

2d. Power Disparities and Decision-Making

Unequal power relations can be a strong determinant over who benefits from and engages in value chains, determining who controls factors of production, outputs, and income. This disparities often arise at the household level with gender norms and behaviors limiting women’s decision-making power related to time use, group participation, leadership, and control over resources including finance. Increasing access to extension and advisory services can positively impact their decision-making over production

(ACDI/VOCA 2016: 28). While some crops can be understood as “men’s crops” or “women’s crops” (see section c above), power disparities may come into play when certain crops become more profitable.

Increasing urban or export demand for crops traditionally produced and sold by women can lead to men taking control over these crops. For example, this was the case for groundnuts in Zambia, irrigated rice in

The Gambia, and leafy vegetables in Uganda (FAO 2010: 2). Evidence is mixed in relation to participation in value chain interventions and positive impact on household decision making. In fact, participation in these interventions has often been found to increase women’s workload (Riisgaard 2010: 23).

2e. Social Transformations: Changing roles for youth and women

Youth: The global population is expected to reach 9 billion by 2050, 14% of which will be youth aged 15-

24, employment opportunities for youth in developing countries’ rural areas is of poor quality. The FAO highlights that “rural youth are the future of food security. Yet around the world, few young people see a future for themselves in agriculture or rural areas.” (FAO 2014: v) Much of the world’s food is produced by older smallholder farmers in developing economies who are less inclined to adopt technologies to support environmental sustainability and feed a growing population. Despite the benefits of engaging youth in rural agriculture, many youth do not see a future in agriculture or rural areas. Challenges cited include:

limited access to land; inadequate access to financial services; insufficient access to knowledge;

information and education; difficulties in accessing green jobs; limited access to markets; and limited involvement in policy dialogue. In the FAO’s report on Youth and Agriculture, specific suggestions to engage youth include tailored educational programs that give rural youth needed skills; helping young farmers connect to markets; facilitating youth’s access to credit; and building self-esteem.

Outmigration and Feminization of Agriculture: As men in rural developing areas move towards off-farm paid work, more women are left to work in agriculture - a trend called the feminization of agriculture.

While this trend may limit women’s earnings in non-farm activities, it can also bring some potential advantages for the position of women in agriculture. Women whose husbands are away can participate in a wider reach of farm activities, make independent marketing decisions, and increase financial independence in the form of receiving wages. This financial independence can then have positive repercussions on freedom to choose whether to marry or where to work. However, because the feminization of agriculture is also associated with the decreased profitability of small-scale farming, it may also open up vulnerabilities for women such as engagement in insecure work, poor working conditions, an overburden of responsibilities, and conflicting tensions in the household due to changing roles (KIT

2012: 3).

Section 3. Access to Resources

The benefits derived from participation in agricultural value chains is largely dependent on access to resources. For example, women’s entrance into contract farming agreements is often limited by less access than men to assets, credit, markets, information on new technologies, and other needed knowledge. When differences in inputs are controlled for, however, there are no significant differences in http://www.youtheconomicopportunities.org/sites/default/files/uploads/resource/Youth%20and%20Agriculture%20-%20Key%20Challenges%20and%20Concrete%20Solutions.pdf male and female farmers’ productivity (FAO 2010: 2). This important point highlights the tremendous gains to be made through increasing women farmers’ access to agricultural inputs. Both tangible and intangible resources play a role in supporting well-being in terms of enabling pursuit of livelihood strategies, protecting against shocks, and building the reputation and power of those that have these resources (Peterman, Behrman and Quisumbing 2010: 22). The following sub-sections highlight key resources that constrain the opportunities of women and other vulnerable groups.

3a. Access to Land, Landlessness, and Land Poverty

Control over and ownership of land is a fundamental aspect of agricultural production. When farmers have secure land tenure, they are more likely to invest in increased land productivity. Land can be used as collateral to support access to finance, which can be put towards adoption of better technologies or other factors to increase productivity. Land ownership has also been shown to increase women’s bargaining status in the household. Further, land ownership is correlated with increased adoption of technology as ownership often justifies investments in land improvement technologies to build production

(ACDI/VOCA 2016: 35).

Landlessness and land poverty affect both men and women, often in different ways dependent on roles, responsibilities, and agency. A study in the Dry Zone in Myanmar, for example, found that 20% of female-headed household and only 6% of male-headed households were landless. Further, in households with land, women-headed households had on average 2.6 acres compared to 4.4 acres for male-headed households (Emerging Markets 2015: 9). This may, in part, be attributable to the increased constraints faced by women including the common practice of registering land in the name of a husband, even when land is registered jointly by spouses. In addition, women’s access to information on land issues and obtaining titles is often more limited due to higher rates of illiteracy, lower rates of education, and more limited access to information networks (ibid: 9). According to the WEAI Intervention Guide, potential interventions to support women’s ownership of and control over land includes “national-level, gender-sensitive land titling interventions and land-use certificates”.

Minority groups, who often experience similar limitations, can also have constraints in accessing land.

USAID’s report on “Value Chains for Rural Development Social and Gender Assessment” is a thorough case study of the impact of ethnic identity on agricultural factors.

3b. Finance and control of income

Control over income: Women generally have less access and control over income than men, largely due to gender norms which restrict women’s access to paid work, particularly in the formal sector. Control over income and spending is an important avenue to ensure a women is paid for her work and has control over how it is spent. This can also be a self-reinforcing mode of empowerment as women who earn more have increased ability to purchase, rent, or get credit for agricultural resources to grow their productivity.

In addition to economic benefits being related to roles within value chains, with the highest returns going to those who are in the most lucrative functions, household-level dynamics determine how men and women control income and expenditures and thereby benefit from economic activities in which they may not directly participate (Coles 2011: 6).

Related to this, income derived from non-agricultural activities can also be an important source of funds for investment in production-related activities (ADCI/VOCA 2016: 69). A USAID-funded Food for Peace project in East Africa, for example, found that 82% of vulnerable agricultural households surveyed reported their main source of income derived from casual labor, rather than farming (Fernandes 2013).

See the section below on “Diversification into off-farm SMEs” for additional information on this area. The http://acdivoca.org/sites/default/files/attach/technical-publications/WEAI-Intervention-Guide-2016.PDF http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00KVTB.pdf

Intervention Guide for the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index provides suggestions for interventions and gender analysis questions to support gender equality in control over income.

It is also important to highlight that women in particular may choose to a lower wage in lieu of a higher-earning job with less security and income reliability (Coles 2011: 6).

Access to Finance: Research shows that context-specific factors including gender differences in opportunities, responsibilities, roles, and access to resources impact how men and women invest and save. The World Bank’s Gender Action Plan (GAP) demonstrated important results related to investments in women’s economic empowerment. Between 2007-2010, the World Bank Group undertook an Action

Plan “Gender Equality as Smart Economics”, which was a commitment by the Bank to increase its work on gender equality, specifically through a focus on labor, land and agriculture, private sector development and finance, and infrastructure markets. Efforts focused on i) building awareness of gender issues in the

Bank’s economic sector operations and ii) influencing the gender and development discourse. Results in the four-year progress report showed both positive changes in the bank’s integration of gender issues into their business operations and also positive results in countries in which the bank worked. Related to agriculture, the GAP allocated $1.75 million to operations in agriculture and rural development in regions where the Bank worked. Activities funded included land rights, off-farm employment, access and management of water resources, access to markets, and decision making in rural and agricultural development projects in the regions. Specific to women’s land rights, activities assisted governments to gender-inform ongoing land reform processes and to build evidence on “the impacts of land-related laws and processes such as land titling on women’s access to finance, levels of agricultural productivity and household welfare” (World Bank 2011: 11). In addition, the Bank prioritized monitoring and evaluation of its results in order to understand best practices to inform future works. Along these lines, it supported gender-tailored impact evaluation trainings, which resulted in over 30 agriculture and rural development projects with gender-informed design, which included collection of sex-disaggregated data and analysis of

“gender effects of interventions” (World Bank 2011: 14). For example, 12.9 million women gained access to land rights in Ethiopia through joint titling and 2,500 women received US$86 million in loans through the IFC. (World Bank 2011:v). Such results demonstrate the positive impact that can be achieved, including in empowering women in agriculture, through a shift in organizational focus.

Cultural contexts significantly constrain women’s ability to access and utilize finance. As was discussed in section 3a, women’s more limited access to land restricts their ability to obtain collateral. Further, women farmers are often less aware of credit options and less willing to take on debt, thereby affecting their likelihood of taking out loans to build their livelihoods.As such, financial products can be better tailored to women through offering products that allow them to borrow without losing assets and more generally help them insure against risks (ADCI/VOCA 2016: 38).

Access to finance is critical to closing the productivity gap between men and women. All actors in agricultural value chains should have the tools and connections needed to control and access finance options. Providing the type of financial ecosystem which can reach marginalized populations, as well as both men and women, requires working with financial institutions to see the agricultural sector as a market for their services. ACDI/VODA accomplishes this through identifying finance gaps for vulnerable groups and training finance staff to understand agricultural finance, evaluate creditworthiness, and create financial products appropriate for these groups (ADCI/VOCA 2016: 1-2). These financial products should aim to minimize risks for borrowers. ACDI/VOCA’s Value Chain Finance Guide is a useful tool to support value chain development and agricultural finance programs. Participation in community groups can also http://acdivoca.org/sites/default/files/attach/technical-publications/WEAI-Intervention-Guide-2016.PDF http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/GAPNov2.pdf https://www.microlinks.org/library/field-report-13-value-chain-finance-guide provide individuals with financial support or credit for agricultural investments and can also provide access to insurance in the case of crop damage or failure.

Ensuring women and vulnerable populations have secure money storage mechanisms is also a critical component of making financial gains sustainable. Studies have found that having a secure place to store money increases savings and this is particularly true for married women. This may also be accomplished through mobile banking (ibid: 56).

3c. Access to Knowledge

Access to knowledge is interlinked with many of the factors highlighted in this review. Knowledge empowers individuals to make more informed decisions about their participation in value chains and opens opportunities to increase productivity. Investment in initiatives that increase agricultural knowledge such as knowledge on extension services, technologies, and microcredit schemes is critical to empowering vulnerable populations with information they may not have had access to before (GIZ 2013:

4).

There are often gender disparities as related to knowledge in agricultural value chains. Often neither women nor men have full understanding of the value chain’s workings. Promoting transparency and recognition of roles and responsibilities can stimulate the participation of women in the value chain and can also highlight where interventions can be targeted.

It is important to note that increased knowledge alone does not mean women are able to act to, for example, take steps to improve agricultural production. An enabling environment needs to be fostered.

For example, women’s participation in extension services can be restricted by the fact that these services may favor farmers with more land and access to other inputs (ADCI/VOCA 2016: 28). Cultural or religious norms may also serve as deterrents for women or other marginalized groups.

Specific activities which can help to build access to knowledge of production for women and marginalized groups include trainings for extension staff on gender issues; hiring gender-balanced extension staff team; or customizing curriculum to be more responsive to these groups (ADCI/VOCA 2016: 30).

3d. Access to Networks

Networks can be an important source of information, skills development opportunities, and market connectivity for rural farmers. Smallholders with strong social networks can utilize these networks to build their position in the value chain. For example, producer organizations or cooperatives can strengthen the bargaining power of smallholders by providing information on market information, business requirements, and helping them engage in high-value supply chains (A4I 2016). Networks can be particularly important for women producers who have often been excluded from or constrained from participating in organizations and networks. Establishing women’s organizations or helping them become more active in their own organizations can help women overcome networking hurdles and thereby improve access to services and resources and increase their status (Elbehri 2011: 1). The FAO’s publication on The Role of

Women Producer Organizations in Agricultural Value Chains provides lessons learned and suggestions on the role of including women’s organizations in value chains and how these organizations can support small-scale women farmers.

3e. Access to Technology

Technology has significant potential to support agricultural productivity, largely through increasing the availability of up-to-date information. This can be particularly important for women and marginalized http://www.fao.org/3/a-i2438e.pdf http://www.fao.org/3/a-i2438e.pdf groups who generally have less access to this type of knowledge. Data-enabled, mobile devices are becoming increasingly accessible to and affordable for lower income populations, thereby increasing their ability to reach more marginalized groups. This technology can be an important input for marginalized groups, enabling multimedia integration into agricultural extension services and access to relevant information in local languages. Further, mobile, remote wireless sensors, and identification technologies can help smallholders gather and monitor information relevant to agricultural production such as temperature, soil composition, and water levels. In addition, access to mobile networks provides rural smallholders with improved access to information including market price information; disease and meteorological information; and information on growing and marketing practices. Mobile services specific to certain agricultural functions are increasingly available, as is detailed in the chart below (Halewood

2012: 32).

Section 4. Access to Markets

Women’s access to markets is often restricted by many of the factors highlighted in sections 2 and 3 and can be further exacerbated by cultural travel barriers, limited child care availability, or lack of sanitary facilities. An inclusive market system development approach is: 1. Competitive - actors can innovate, upgrade, and increase their product/service value; 2. Inclusive - a range of actors including marginalized and poor populations receive a sustainable flow of benefits; and 3. Resilient - system actors are able to handle shocks related to markets, policy, resources, and other areas (MEDA 2014). As highlighted in the

WEAI Intervention Guide, a facilitation approach to market systems development “works to change relationships between local actors and introduces new practices that result in changes within the system that are sustainable after a development project is over” (ACDI/VODA 2016: 14). The diagram below illustrates the factors that feed into and benefit from increased access to new markets:

4a. Market Access and Technology

In addition to the technology benefits described in section 3e, mobile services can increase access to markets and other relevant actors in value chains. Improved data visibility positively impacts actors in value chains through improving their ability to coordinate transportation logistics either on websites or increasingly through mobile technology and also allowing products to be increasingly traceable (a benefit for both consumer and producer) (Halewood 2012: 37). Further, mobile phones can increase linkages between markets and stages of the value chain. Studies in multiple countries have confirmed this. For example, a study in remote communities in Uganda found that share of bananas sold were increased by

50-69% in communities who were provided with mobile network access. This did not prove true with maize, a less perishable crop (ibid: 37). Access to online networks can also provide information helpful in understanding current market dynamics which might influence decisions to switch to “riskier” crops - such as those that might be ruined if monsoon arrived too early. In addition, mobile technology allows rural smallholders to expand their networks and connect with a wider range of buyers, thereby allowing them to bring in a higher percentage of the crop’s value. Mobile service providers are catching onto the value of mobile networks for farmers. For example, TradeNet established an online platform called Esoko in

Ghana, which provides current market prices and a platform for buyers and sellers to connect. A follow-up study of 600 smallholder farmers found farmers have experienced a 10% revenue increase.

Technology-enabled access to markets can have particular benefits for women and vulnerable populations who: have limited access to networks, including suppliers; have less opportunities to travel outside the home to access market information; and more generally haven’t had the same opportunities to access knowledge. By providing immediate access to these areas, technology can bridge the access gap. On the other hand, those populations who have lower levels of literacy can be increasingly marginalized from the digital work - an argument for targeted interventions to ensure technology is accessible to the most marginalized populations.

4b. Commercial Relationships

The USAID-funded report on “Behavior Change Perspectives on Gender and Value Chain Development” identified factors that influence women’s participation and relationships in commercial market. Social capital (“the ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of membership in a social network”) was highlighted as one of those factors as a resource that can be developed and utilized as needed (Sebstad

2011: 20). “Bridging social capital” and “bonding capital” bring together smaller networks and increases https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1862/gender_and_value_chain.pdf their access to resources including markets or information in addition to providing support in crises. As these relationships are important to women, they may be less likely to strain the relationships through hard bargaining or declining commercial relationships in these networks. Building cooperation and trust in value chain relationships are important in building commercial networks that allow upgrading. Research in

Ghana and Kenya found that the influence of others whom women trust can be an important factor in promoting the social change needed for women to overcome factors that limit their participation in value chains (USAID 2011: v) Finally, behavioural factors influence women’s participation in commercial networks such as the influence of other people’s behavior (for example, in working with particular buyers).

4c. Market Facilitation Techniques

In order to facilitate inclusive, sustainable, and profitable market participation, implementing agencies should work to understand the incentives and priorities of actors in local contexts. Three suggested techniques for motivating change include (Markel 2015):

I. Make the business case: Persuade market actors that investing in women benefits markets, economies, communities, and individuals. This is accomplished through 1. Identifying market actors; 2. Identifying the business case that will appeal to business’ incentives; and 3.

documenting/communicating the business case.

II. Identify incentives in the market system to initiate and sustain changes.

III. Utilize implementing agencies’ partnership standards.

These techniques are further elaborated on in Making the Business Case: Women’s Economic

Empowerment in Market Systems.

Section 5. Opportunities and Constraints

5a. Accessing Mechanization Services

Mechanization in agricultural development has well-known benefits including contributing to agricultural production, productivity, and profitability through providing power inputs into farm operations.

Mechanization can support improvement in the efficiency and quality of operations, higher incomes, investment opportunities in the agricultural mechanization sector, and a “climate of optimism” that builds wages and opportunities (Ahmed 2015: 1). These can be particularly important inputs for a feminizing workforce that must rely on manual labor. Challenges to mechanization are plentiful and include https://www.microlinks.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/Making_the_Business_Case_508_Compliant.pdf https://www.microlinks.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/Making_the_Business_Case_508_Compliant.pdf affordability, low output leading to low demand for mechanization, lack of skills to adopt mechanization, limited supply in rural areas, and limited repair options. Agricultural mechanization can offer important opportunities for women in rural areas due to the increasing feminization of smallholder agriculture (ibid:

3). However, this can be a challenge given that women often do not control investment decisions related to more significant investments in areas such as mechanized equipment. Given that studies have found that women’s increased access to productive resources to equal men’s would increase farm yields by 20-

30%, the case for supporting women’s and other marginalized groups access to mechanization services is clear (ibid: 12). The impact of mechanization can vary substantially depending on the cultural context.

For example, in Nepal, where women focus on production of “women’s crops”, uptake of mechanized equipment may have less impact until the equipment has been designed with women’s practices in mind.

Several factors can support uptake of new technologies, including mechanization services, including: 1.

access to information about new products, practices, and technologies; 2. access to inputs

(mechanization) and services (repairs); and 3. Supporting factors that lead to behaviour change. For instance, women may be more inclined to adopt a new practice if they understand the outcomes. This can be taken into account through providing information on products and ensuring related services are nearby, given that many women have time and mobility constraints (Sebstad 2011: iii).

5b. Diversification into off-farm SMEs

Supporting diversification into off-farm SMEs can increase income streams for women and vulnerable populations, thereby adding security to their finances. Given that agricultural income is vulnerable to pests, climate shocks, and seasonal changes, an income stream beyond the farm is important. This can be a particularly important source for women farmers who are often responsible for year-round expenses such as food or school fees. As many farming households are sustained through different sources of income, this is a useful area of support. One study found that nonfarm income accounts for between one-third and one-half of rural incomes in the developing world” (ACDI/VOCA 2016: 52). Alternate income streams can include seasonal farm labor, self-employment in micro-enterprises, and work in sectors such as transportation, construction, or domestic help.

This can include training in literacy and bookkeeping, entrepreneurial skills development, and building confidence. USAID’s WEAI Intervention Guide provides useful intervention suggestions for supporting the expansion of women’s economic opportunities. These include improving wage employment opportunities for women through linking women to profitable and safe wage employment opportunities during the agricultural off-season. In addition, support for female entrepreneurs can help them growth their businesses (ibid: 53). A number of interlinked factors are related to enabling expansion of business development opportunities including many discussed earlier including access to finance, access to networks, and access to information. Capacity building is another important factor that can provide needed skills.

Overall increased wages can allow women and other vulnerable populations to feed money back into their agricultural work, making it more sustainable and profitable.

5c. Platforms that Improve Market Linkages

Voluntary standards and certified value chains can have positive impacts on women and vulnerable populations even when these standards are not directly targeted towards women. Value chain upgrading strategies requires compliance with standard requirements that often address the areas where women and vulnerable populations are disadvantaged including networks, training access, and market access

(Riisgaard 2010: 23). Certified/verified value chains can similarly be an entry point for gender through http://acdivoca.org/sites/default/files/attach/technical-publications/WEAI-Intervention-Guide-2016.PDF utilizing the infrastructure developed in the certification process, such as traceability systems, to gather gender-specific information (GIZ 2013: 3).

Section 6. Key Suggestions

6a. Take into account lessons learned on the effectiveness of value chain upgrading strategies

Value chain upgrading strategies can improve gender equality outcomes when applied correctly. The appropriateness of strategies to different contexts should be considered. The FAO has assessed the effectiveness of varying upgrading strategies in its paper on “Gender and Agricultural Value Chains: A

Review of Current Knowledge and Practice and their Policy Implications” including horizontal coordination, vertical coordination, product and process upgrading, chain upgrading, functional upgrading, and chain management - each of which can have valuable impacts on gender equality.

6b. Reform Policies, Laws, and Governance

Addressing blockages in the enabling environment can make substantial outcomes to gender equality.

These interventions fall into three categories: 1. interventions that remove blockages where women participate; 2. targeted interventions that take into account women’s specific types of participation; 3.

actions to make specifically engage women such as increasing women’s presence in producers’ groups.

It should be noted that changes in the enabling environment will only be successful when other barriers -such as cultural restrictions - will not restrict these areas (Coles 2011: 10). Governments can also make efforts to ensure gender equality goals are integrated into ‘core public goods’ such as rural infrastructure, natural resource management, and labor legislation. Governments and other donor projects should look for opportunities to layer and sequence interventions with ongoing projects to maximize impact. Women should be educated on their employment rights; agricultural trade agreements should ensure enforcement of gender-sensitive labor standards; and gender-sensitive occupational health and safety measure should be in place. This needs to be accompanied by the active participation of women and vulnerable groups in decision-making processes to ensure their needs are represented and effectively addressed. This active participation should include participation in negotiations on trade and agricultural policy. Finally, social policies that protect poor farmers, especially women, should be ensured, again with the full participation of these groups (FAO 2010: 3-4).

6c. Mitigate Risks, Including GBV

Interventions can lead to unintended, negative outcomes if not carefully designed. Changes in gender dynamics and behavior, for example, can lead to power imbalances that fuel gender-based violence.

Interventions should either directly address GBV or ensure that proposed interventions will not increase the likelihood of it. A thorough gender analysis, described in section 6d below, will support this approach.

6d. Gender and Social Inclusion Analysis to inform context-specific interventions

A gender and social inclusion analysis prior to designing program activities is critical in inclusive value chain development. This will identify who participates in value chains, how they participate, benefits, gaps, and other areas critical to consider.