• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Partnership for Impact Event_Brussels Meinzen-Dick
 

Partnership for Impact Event_Brussels Meinzen-Dick

on

  • 348 views

"Partnering for Impact: IFPRI-European Research Collaboration for Improved Food and Nutrition Security" presentation by Ruth Meinzen-Dick, IFPRI, 25 November 2013 in Brussels, Belgium.

"Partnering for Impact: IFPRI-European Research Collaboration for Improved Food and Nutrition Security" presentation by Ruth Meinzen-Dick, IFPRI, 25 November 2013 in Brussels, Belgium.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
348
Views on SlideShare
347
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://unjobs.org 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • -Interesting patterns emerging from newly-collected WEAI dataNegative association with household hunger scorePositive associations with children receiving min. acceptable diet and exclusive breastfeedingResults are expected—as women’s empowerment scores increase, the prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger goes down
  • -Results are expected, as women’s empowerment increases, the percentage of children receiving a minimum acceptable diet also increases.
  • There are over 20 we considered, this is just a sampleFor Kenya, women are less aware than men for 11 of the 20 interventions and more aware than men for the remaining 9. However, for almost all of the interventions (19 out of 20) they are more likely to adopt if they are aware. For Bangladesh, women are less aware than men for all 20 of the interventions. If aware, they are less likely to adopt in 11 out of the 20 interventions and more likely to adopt in 9 out of the 20 interventions. We plan to look at some of the reasons why

Partnership for Impact Event_Brussels Meinzen-Dick Partnership for Impact Event_Brussels Meinzen-Dick Presentation Transcript

  • Integrating Gender across Research Programs Ruth Meinzen-Dick Partnering for Impact: IFPRI-European Research Collaboration for Improved Food and Nutrition Security November 25, 2013 Brussels
  • The path of gender research at IFPRI Early gender and intrahousehold research Gender Task Force Photo credit: Akram Ali/CARE Bangladesh Strengthening the Dairy Value Chain (SDVC) project Research program on gender and assets
  • IFPRI’s Gender Task Force  Established in 2004  One senior and one junior researcher from each research division  One representative from Communications  One representative from each regional office  Meets every 3 months Indeed, the evidence suggests that it is time to shift the burden of proof. Instead of having to establish why gender is relevant to a certain IFPRI research project, project leaders ought to reflect why gender might not be important if they have chosen not to address it. This is not to say that gender is a necessary component in all of IFPRI’s research but that we should always ask ourselves whether our research can be strengthened by paying attention to gender and what the different implications of our research may be for men and women. Director General Joachim Von Braun, email to IFPRI staff, 2005
  • The Results After Before • Inclusion of gender in a project is optional for project leaders • If gender is not included in a project, project leaders should explain why • Researchers interested in incorporating gender asked Ruth Meinzen-Dick or Agnes Quisumbing • Gender Task Force serves as informational body for researchers with focal points within divisions and country offices • New staff given no guidance on gender in research design • • Communications and outreach on gender research was limited New staff instructed in importance of incorporating gender in research design and pointed towards resources during orientation • Blogs, newsletters and other communication strategies to highlight gender research are developed
  • Gender and Assets • Jointly led by IFPRI and ILRI • Evaluating 8 projects in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia • Objectives: • Identify how development projects impact men's and women’s assets. • Clarify which strategies have been successful in reducing gender gaps in asset access, control and ownership. • Improve partner organization's abilities to measure and analyze qualitative and quantitative gender and assets data in their Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) plans for current and future projects.
  • The GAAP portfolio The Tools to End Poverty
  • GAAP case study: Land O’Lakes, Mozambique • Land O’Lakes Smallholder Dairy Development Program in Mozambique • Started in 2006 • In early stages of the program, not all household members were positively benefitting from the intervention • Program began requiring that two household members were trained in dairy production instead of one – But this actually proved problematic! It was adding to women’s workload even though the women didn’t own the cow or control the income from the cows. Some women intentionally neglected the cows.
  • GAAP case study continued… • Enter GAAP – Along with the Mozambique team, they collected data, facilitated focus group discussion and designed a monitoring and evaluation system • A new game plan: – Register cows given to household to at least one male and one female adult – Organize and train groups of farmers on gender relations and promote women’s leadership – Register both male and female adults in marketing cooperative – Include women in the cooperative management committee • Results: – More women own livestock, are more involved in making decisions about management of that livestock, and more women market milk and make income from its sale
  • Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI) • Developed in 2012 with Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI), USAID • Collected in 19 Feed the Future countries • Other organizations adapted WEAI for their own programs – Care, Oxfam, IFAD, ILRI • Diagnosing sources of disempowerment, correlates with nutrition, other outcomes
  • Household hunger scale Households experiencing moderate or severe hunger (score of 2 - 6) Prevalence of households with moderate or severe hunger, % 70 60 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 50 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 40 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 30 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 20 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 10 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 0 0.60 0.65 0.70 Legend: *Households with less than 2,122 and 1,805 kcal/person/day 0.75 0.80 WEAI Score * Please note – these findings are preliminary 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00
  • Minimum Acceptable Diet Children 6-23 months receiving MAD 50 [CELLRANGE] Children achieving minimum acceptable diet, % 45 40 [CELLRANGE] 35 30 25 [CELLRANGE] 20 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 15 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 10 [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 5 [CELLRANGE] 0 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 WEAI Score Legend: * Please note – these findings are preliminary 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00
  • Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) gender survey • Draws on IFPRI-ZEF-Hohenheim U project on gender and climate change to develop methods • 4 countries: Kenya, Uganda, Senegal, Bangladesh • Research questions: – How might men and women in rural areas be (differentially) affected by long-run climate change and short-term climate shocks? – What are the characteristics and causes of gender differentials in vulnerability/resilience to weather-related risk (e.g. assets, information, empowerment in decisionmaking, rights, etc.)? – Do men and women have different perceptions of climate change and climate risk? How do perceptions of climate change, climate risk, and personal values shape adaptation decisions and approaches? – What are the adaptation options, strategies, and approaches (individual, household, or collective) that are available to and preferred by men and women?
  • CCAFS Results: Kenya and Bangladesh % aware of specific climate smart interventions and, among those aware, % adopting specific intervention. 20 interventions total. Use of improved, Water Leaving crop high-yielding Harvesting Composting residue seeds Zai Pits Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Switching to drought tolerant varieties Male Female Percentage aware - Nyando 72.5 38 43.5 19.5 87 95 61 85.5 13.5 11.5 10 14 Percentage adopted - Nyando 21.4 38.2 24.1 61.5 67.2 91.6 82 86.5 25.9 47.8 50 42.9 Percentage aware - Bangladesh Percentage adopted - Bangladesh 26.4 24.5 17.8 11.0 81.2 37.7 71.3 39.6 58.6 42.4 52.8 41.2 63.6 55.1 41 46.1 6.49 8.3 1.47 16.7 6.54 8.3 1.71 14.3 Kenya: women somewhat less aware than men of interventions overall. However, for almost all of the interventions they are more likely to adopt if they are aware. Bangladesh: women are less aware than men for all 20 of the interventions. If aware, they are somewhat less likely to adopt.
  • Methods Research Impact • Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index • GAAP qualitative/quantitative toolkit • Gender and value chains clearinghouse • PIM and A4NH methods workshops this year • Methods to assess gender and climate change • IFPRI studies • Application of our methods in other CRPs • Application by non-CGIAR organizations (e.g. NGOs) • Understanding of differential needs of women and men • Better programs to meet the differential needs of women and men • Improved nutritional outcomes • Women’s empowerment