Understanding gender dimensions of climate-smart agriculture adoption in disaster-prone smallholder farming communities in Malawi and Zambia

Abstract

Purpose Through the application of traditional and contemporary feminist theories in gender mainstreaming, the purpose of this paper is to contribute to emergent debate on gender dimensions in climate-smart agriculture (CSA) adoption by smallholder farmers in disaster-prone regions. This is important to ensure that CSA strategies are tailored to farmer-specific gender equality goals. Design/methodology/approach An exploratory-sequential mixed methods research design which is qualitatively biased was applied. Key informant interviews and farmer focus group discussions in two study sites formed initial qualitative phase whose findings were explored in a quantitative cross-sectional household survey. Findings Findings shared in this paper indicate the predominant application of traditional gender mainstreaming approaches in CSA focusing on parochial gender dichotomy. Qualitative findings highlight perceptions that western gender approaches are not fully applicable to local contexts and realities, with gender mainstreaming in CSA seemingly to fulfil donor requirements, and ignorant of the heterogeneous nature of social groups. Quantitative findings establish that married men are majority adopters and non-adopters of CSA, while dis-adopters are predominantly de jure female household heads. The latter are more likely to adopt CSA than married women whose main role in CSA is implementers of spouse’s decisions. Access to education, intra-household power relations, productive asset and land ownership are socio-cultural dynamics shaping farmer profiles. Originality/value By incorporating African feminisms and intersectionality in CSA, value of this study lies in recommending gender policy reforms incorporating local gender contexts within the African socio-cultural milieu. This paper accentuates potential benefits of innovative blend of both contemporary and classic gender mainstreaming approaches in CSA research, practice and technology development in disaster-prone regions.

Rethinking Climate-Smart Agriculture Adoption for Resilience-Building Among Smallholder Farmers: Gender-Sensitive Adoption Framework

“…Previous work by Khoza et al (2019) shows that underlying gender inequality, patriarchy, and other social imbalances manifest as gender-differentiated, sociocultural, sociopsychological, and gendered vulnerability drivers that shape decisions on whether to adopt, dis-adopt, or not adopt CSA technologies. This emanates from a focus on CSA as solving the dilemma of climate change through technical fixes to increase food production.…”

“…In the context of smallholder farming in developing regions where CSA is promoted, it is key to recognize the heterogeneity of the farmers (Khoza et al 2019).…”

“…There is need for policies directly or indirectly linked to CSA to be assessed for their implications on different genders. This should include land tenure systems, marriage and property inheritance laws, technology development, as well as economic empowerment, which all affect CSA adoption decisions (Doss et al 2015;Khoza et al 2019).…”

“…However, this requires a transformation from traditional gender mainstreaming approaches that have shaped empowerment efforts in the past, toward an integrated approach that also considers contemporary approaches such as intersectionality, African feminisms, and positive masculinity (Arndt 2002;Davis 2008). Studies have shown insufficiencies of traditional gender mainstreaming approaches in addressing gender inequality and patriarchy in agriculture (Khoza et al 2019). The integration of traditional and contemporary approaches may compensate for the weaknesses of each approach applied on its own.…”

Livelihood and vulnerability in the wake of Typhoon Yolanda: lessons of community and resilience

“…There is also a tension between the need to devise sustainable livelihood strategies that ameliorate immediate and local shocks and stresses with the bigger picture of climate change. Thus far the literature on mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) and development has tended to focus broadly on agriculture (Trujillo and Bass 2015), the physical environment (Chmutina and Bosher 2015;Wamsler 2006), governance (Tanner et al 2019) and gender (Ginige et al 2009;Khoza et al 2019;Yumarni and Amaratunga 2018). A specific focus on the complexity of sustainable livelihood in both the 'ordinary' and 'extraordinary' is lacking.…”