Presented by CIFOR Scientist Amy Duchelle on 14 December 2016 at a side event on Mainstreaming Gender Equality and Social Inclusion at CBD COP13 in Cancun, Mexico.

1. WOMEN, MEN AND THE
MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS
AND LANDSCAPES
Amy Duchelle – Scientist – Climate Change, Energy & Low Carbon Development
Event: “Mainstreaming Gender Equality and Social Inclusion”
Cancun, 14th December 2016

2. STRONG GENDER FOCUS IN NEW CIFOR STRATEGY
• Rural women play key
role in forestry sector in
many developing
countries
• Yet gender inequities
remain pervasive in
governance of forests
and landscapes
• Undermines local
resource conditions, and
constrains ability of
women to realize full
range of capabilities
foreststreesagroforestry.org/shedding-light-on-opportunities-and-challenges-for-rural-women/

3. GENDER INTEGRATION ACROSS RESEARCH THEMES
• Effect of women’s
participation on local
resource conditions
• Effect of migration on
women’s influence in
forestry decision-making
• Effect of agribusiness
expansion on women’s
livelihoods
• Nature of gender
inclusion in REDD+
• Role of women in timber
value chains

4. 1. GENDER COMPOSITION OF NATURAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT GROUPS
Systematic map: provides an overview of existing evidence
www1.cifor.org/ebf/

5. STUDY SELECTION
• 11,069 records by title/abstract => 113 for full review
=> 17 studies included in systematic map
Leisher et al. 2016

6. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
• All studies identified improvements in natural
resource governance – and 3 identified conservation
benefits – when women participated in management
groups
• Other influencers: landlessness, caste, wealth,
education, political/economic inequality
• Substantial gaps in the evidence base, yet clear
priorities for future research (work in regions beyond
South Asia, identifying causal pathways for theory of
change etc.)
Leisher et al. 2016

7. COMPLEMENTARY EVIDENCE
• Determinants of women’s
participation: less exclusive
institutions, more education, less
income inequality across genders
• Institutional outcomes associated
with women’s participation: less
disruptive conflict, but little effect on
perceived fairness of rules
• Mixed evidence of environmental
outcomes associated with women’s
participation

8. 2. POVERTY AND ENVIRONMENT NETWORK (PEN)
• Large, tropics-wide collection of detailed, high-quality &
comparable data by PhD students on the poverty-forest
(environment) nexus, coordinated by CIFOR, with partners
• Most comprehensive analysis of poverty-forest linkages to date
(24 countries ─ 364 villages ─ 8,000+ households)
www1.cifor.org/pen

9. MYTHS & REALITIES ABOUT MEN, WOMEN &
FOREST PRODUCT USE

10. IS HARVESTING OF FOREST PRODUCTS MAINLY
UNDERTAKEN BY WOMEN?
• The data do not
support this claim
• For unprocessed
products, this claim
only holds in Sub-
Saharan Africa
• For processed
products, it does not
hold in any
geographical location
Sunderland et al. 2014

11. DO WOMEN COLLECT PRIMARILY FOR SUBSISTENCE AND
MEN FOR SALE?
• Both women and men
collect predominantly
for subsistence use,
but …
• Men´s sale share is
higher than women´s
• However, in Sub-
Saharan Africa, the
share is almost equal
Sunderland et al. 2014

12. DO WOMEN COLLECT GREATER SHARE OF FOREST
PRODUCTS FROM LANDS UNDER COMMON PROPERTY
REGIMES THAN MEN?
• Vast majority of products
for men and women
collected under state
property tenure regimes
• In global sample,
proportion collected by
men and women from
common property is about
the same
• Conventional claim holds
for Latin America and
Asia, but not for Africa
Sunderland et al. 2014

13. SUMMARY OF PEN GENDER FINDINGS
• Large regional variation in both the shares of forest
products collected by women
• Even after controlling for most of the factors discussed in
the literature, as well as differences in level of market
integration, women in Africa collect a much larger share
of forest products than women in Asia and Latin America
• Many of the claims that originate from the gender and
forest literature do not hold using the PEN global data
sample
• Men play a much more important and diverse role in the
contribution of forest products to rural livelihoods than is
often reported
Sunderland et al. 2014

14. 3. GLOBAL COMPARATIVE STUDY (GCS) ON REDD+
• 6 countries
• 22 initiatives
• 150 villages
• 4,000 households
Comparison
(Control)
REDD+ site
(Intervention)
Before After
IMPACT
Intervention
After
Control
After
Intervention
Before
Control
Before
2010 / 2011 2013 / 2014
www.cifor.org/gcs

15. WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN EARLY REDD+ IMPLEMENTATION
Higher knowledge of and participation in early REDD+
initiatives reported from (male-dominated) village focus
groups compared to women’s focus groups

16. PARTICIPATION FINDINGS IN PHASE 2 (2013/14)
Larson et al. forthcoming, IUCN book
91%
63%
51%
92%
76% 75%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Knowledge of initiative Decision to implement Design & Implementation
%focusgroups(n=150)
Women Men

17. IMPACTS ON WELL-BEING
• Almost half of women’s focus groups said having
own source of income was important for women’s
well-being
• For those women who reported improved well-being
in Phase 2, the second most common reason given
(19% of villages) was gender equity/ women’s
empowerment
• Nevertheless, overall, preliminary evidence shows
REDD+ initiatives are not reducing – and in some
cases appear to be widening – gender gaps
Larson et al. in prep

18. NET CHANGE IN WELLBEING BY TYPE OF FOCUS GROUP
Being located in a REDD+ site had a significant (p < .10)
negative impact on women’s perceived wellbeing

19. REFLECTIONS ON COLLECTIVE FINDINGS
• Global comparative studies useful in understanding
gendered patterns of natural resource management,
since long-held gender assumptions hold true in
certain contexts but not others
• Participation only partial solution to addressing
women’s strategic needs in ways that could
strengthen their position in forestry and conservation
• Time to re-frame the consideration of gender equality
in forestry in terms of women's rights, rather than
justifying women's inclusion on the grounds that it
would lead to other beneficial outcomes

20. cifor.org
blog.cifor.org
ForestsTreesAgroforestry.org
THANK YOU
www.cifor.org/gender/
a.duchelle@cgiar.org