Journal articleAgricultural development efforts that do not address persistent gender gaps miss opportunities for greater impact. This synthesis reflects on key findings from integrated quantitative and qualitative analyses at the nexus of gender, agricultural development, and climate change. Linked farm household-, intrahousehold-, community-, and institutional-level data highlight significant and nuanced gender differences in adaptive capacity of individuals and communities to respond to climate change. The gender gap is also substantial in exposure to climate change and its impacts, and uptake of new practices that lower vulnerability. Women in agriculture will remain largely neglected by information and service providers unless their differing needs, access to, and control over resources are considered at policy and project design stage. Yet clear guidelines for addressing the needs of both men and women in different environments and agricultural systems are still lacking. Participatory ‘action research’ approaches with a focus on co-learning, and using innovative cell phone or social media-based approaches offer exciting new opportunities. Agricultural development decision-makers and project designers need to ‘design with gender in mind’. Equipping them with tools and knowledge of innovative gender-transformative practices and intervention options and creating accountability for serving women and men will be key.IFPRI3; ISI; CRP2EPTDPRCGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM); CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS

No abstract

No abstract

established in 1975, provides research-based policy solutions to sustainably reduce poverty and end hunger and malnutrition. The Institute conducts research, communicates results, optimizes partnerships, and builds capacity to ensure sustainable food production, promote healthy food systems, improve markets and trade, transform agriculture, build resilience, and strengthen institutions and governance. Gender is considered in all of the Institute's work. IFPRI collaborates with partners around the world, including development implementers, public institutions, the private sector, and farmers' organizations.

This paper reviews the central role of institutions for climate-smart agriculture (CSA), focusing on the role of institutions in promoting inclusivity, providing information, enabling local level innovation, encouraging investment, and offering insurance to enable smallholders, women, and poor resource-dependent communities to adopt and benefit from CSA. We discuss the role of state, collective action, and market institutions at multiple levels, with particular attention to the importance of local-level institutions and institutional linkages across levels.Working paperNon-PRIFPRI1; CAPRi; CRP7; CRP2EPTD; PIMClimate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS); CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM

This chapter focuses on a range of practices that have been identified as climate-smart and appropriate for adoption at the family farm level in the context of Bangladesh, based on input from stakeholders and a review of the literature, as well as a review of ongoing agricultural interventions aimed at enhancing agricultural productivity and climate resilience in the country. Sex-disaggregated data from two communities in Bangladesh are used to assess the gender differences in access to different sources and types of agricultural and climate information. The gender dimensions of awareness and adoption of these CSA practices are then explored in order to understand the extent to which information and knowledge gaps contribute to the adoption patterns of female and male farmers. Given that awareness is likely not the only determinant of adoption of CSA practices, a Heckman selectivity regression model was used to examine the correlates of adoption of specific CSA practices, taking into account the endogeneity of awareness. The chapter concludes by discussing the implications of the results and the need for increasing awareness and adoption of CSA practices by both women and men.

Did the novel planning arrangements in the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) enable stakeholders to substantively influence adaptation planning? If so, does the observed influence have potential for more transformational adaptation? We inform these questions by reviewing and coding the first 50 NAPAs, prepared by the world’s poorest nations with support from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). We then apply categorical statistics and qualitative comparative analysis to test for stakeholder influence on the planning process and outcomes. We find little evidence that the composition of stakeholder participation influenced climate vulnerability analysis or adaptation planning in the NAPAs. Although the NAPAs were designed to be participatory and country-driven, they were constrained by limited budgets, prescribed guidelines from the UNFCCC, and the challenges of cultivating effective stakeholder participation. Key aspects of NAPAs even worked against generating transformational adaptation. Chief amongst these, risk exposure and sensitivity were emphasized over adaptive capacity in assessing vulnerability, and cost- effectiveness and synergies with existing development and environmental policies were priorities for selecting adaptation actions. These barriers to effective stakeholder engagement and transformational adaptation are timely reminders for those countries currently in the process of preparing their National Adaptation Plans to the UNFCCC.

No abstract