Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Gender and Climate Change: Does It Matter?

197 views

Published on

Senior Research Fellow Claudia Ringler presented this at COP23 on behalf of IFPRI and CCAFS.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Gender and Climate Change: Does It Matter?

  1. 1. Gender and Climate Change: Does it matter? Claudia Ringler Deputy Division Director Environment and Production Technology Division, IFPRI
  2. 2. Claudia Ringler, IFPRI Claudia is Deputy Division Director of the Environment and Production Technology Division at IFPRI. She manages the Institute’s Natural Resource Theme and co-leads its water research program and is also a flagship co-lead under the CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). Over the last two decades, Claudia’s research has focused on the implications of and trade-offs between growing natural resource scarcity and water, energy and food security in developing counties. She has more than 100 publications in these areas. Claudia holds an M.A. degree in International and Development Economics from Yale University and a Ph.D. in Agricultural Economics from the Center for Development Research, University of Bonn, Germany.
  3. 3. Insights from two projects 1. Enhancing Women's Assets to Manage Risk under Climate Change: Potential for Group-Based Approaches (2011-2014, Germany) 2. Increasing Women’s Resilience to Confront Climate Change (2012-2014, CCAFS)
  4. 4. Key Questions How are climate change, agriculture and gender equality linked? Is it worth while to invest in gendered activities for climate resilience? Which climate-resilient agricultural practices are preferred by women and men?
  5. 5. Source: SOFA 2010-11. Why does gender matter for agriculture?
  6. 6. CASESTUDIES:“BASIN/NATIONAL”GROUPBASEDAPPROACHESTO ADDRSSCLIMATERISK 1 Framework 1 Example Ethiopia 7 Key Messages + Stakeholder Analysis
  7. 7. Project summary  Duration: 03/2011-09/2014  4 Country Case Studies: Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya and Mali  Mixed methods: Econometrics, Stakeholder mapping, Qualitative Analyses, including KAP survey and Net Map Analyses  Partners: o DATA, Bangladesh o U. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (+ PhD student) o KARI, Kenya o IER/IPA, Mali o ZEF (+ PhD students for Bangladesh and Kenya)
  8. 8. Framework on Gender-Climate Change Linkages  User characteristics: Livelihood activities, assets, gender and cognitive abilities  Biophysical characteristics: Sensitivity of physical and ecological systems, on which people depend (water, land resources, etc. )  Information and technologies: Access to climate information and other climate- resilient technologies  Institutions: Markets, laws, strategies, organizations, social and cultural norms influence how individuals, households and communities perceive climate change, to what extent they are affected and how they respond Sources: Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) Framework (DfID 2001), the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework (Ostrom 2005), the IFPRI Gender and Assets (GAAP) framework (Meinzen-Dick et al. 2010), and Third Assessment Report of the IPCC (IPCC 2001)
  9. 9. Share of households that experienced a climatic shock over the last 5 years (%), Ethiopia 67 25 12 12 1 0 29 ANY SHOCK DROUGHT FLOOD ERRATIC RAINFALL FIRE LANDSLIDE HAILSTORM Source: IFPRI-AEMFI 2013
  10. 10. Response to climatic shocks (relative frequency), Ethiopia 18 34 100 51 1 4 29 6 3 8 3 4 10 50 50 28 18 15 45 25 11 9 72 77 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Sold livestock Borrowed from relatives HH head migrated to other rural area Sought off-farm employment Ate less Ate different foods Sold crops Male family member Female family member Husband and wife Household Source: IFPRI-AEMFI 2013
  11. 11. 2 15 10 35 35 4 23 11 30 23 NOT AT ALL CONCERNED NOT VERY CONCERNED INDIFFERENT SOMEWHAT CONCERNED VERY CONCERNED Household heads Spouses Source: IFPRI-AEMFI 2013 Are you concerned about climate change? (%, Ethiopia)
  12. 12. 5 24 25 19 22 6 38 20 14 14 NOT AT ALL INFORMED NOT VERY INFORMED AVERAGELY INFORMED RELATIVELY WELL INFORMED VERY WELL INFORMED Household heads Spouses Source: IFPRI-AEMFI 2013 How well are you informed about climate change?
  13. 13. Access to information relevant for adaptation Source: IFPRI-AEMFI 2013 40 59 85 86 71 76 62 14 28 44 73 81 62 72 57 8 0 20 40 60 80 100 Forecast of extreme events (e.g. drought and flood) Forecast for the start of the rains (seasonal forecasts) Information on climate change Information on crop production Information on livestock production Information on tree management and agroforestry Information on marketing Information on processing and adding value Spouses Household heads
  14. 14. What types of information are being used? Source: IFPRI-AEMFI 2013 78 90 82 90 76 80 72 56 82 93 81 92 78 91 75 65 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Forecast of extreme events (e.g. drought and flood) Forecast for the start of the rains (seasonal forecasts) Information on climate change Information on crop production and management Information on livestock production and management Information on tree management and agroforestry Information on marketing of crop/livestock Information on processing and adding value added Spouses Household heads
  15. 15. Planned Adaptation Strategies (%) 4 4 4 6 6 8 9 9 10 15 17 17 17 28 35 36 1 5 7 7 4 5 12 12 12 15 21 15 13 15 50 39 BUILD A WATER HARVESTING SCHEME CHANGE PLANTING DATES CHANGE FROM LIVESTOCK TO CROP PRODUCTION CHANGE FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS SUPPLEMENT LIVESTOCK FEEDS CHANGE CROP TYPE MIX CROP AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION INCREASE AMOUNT OF LAND UNDER PRODUCTION PLANT INDIGENOUS CROPS INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LIVESTOCK CHANGE CROP VARIETY USE MORE WATER FOR IRRIGATION INCREASE FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS PLANT TREES INCREASE PLANTING OF TREES IMPLEMENT SWC Spouses Household heads Source: IFPRI-AEMFI 2013
  16. 16. Desired Adaptation Strategies (%) 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 12 12 16 22 26 6 11 2 9 2 19 0 9 11 19 17 36 11 CHANGE FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS CHANGE CROP TYPE SUPPLEMENT LIVESTOCK FEEDS CHANGE ANIMAL BREEDS CHANGE CROP VARIETY PLANT TREES BUILD A WATER HARVESTING SCHEME IMPLEMENT SWC INCREASE PLANTING OF TREES INCREASE FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS INCREASE AMOUNT OF LAND UNDER PRODUCTION INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LIVESTOCK USE MORE WATER FOR IRRIGATION Spouses Household heads
  17. 17. Summary - Ethiopia 1. Wives are less aware of climate change 2. Wives have less access to climate information; women with access use such information 3. Responses to climatic extreme events are gendered 4. Both planned and desired climate adaptation strategies are similarly gendered 5. Additionally, in 2013 more households reported that they undertake adaptation strategies (82%) compared to 2005 (63%) 6. Adaptation strategies changed over time, more households report growing trees, use more fertilizers, use new varieties and soil and water management strategies Source: Ringler et al. 2014.
  18. 18. Are gendered approaches worthwhile? 7x Yes! 1. There is a gender gap in what men and women own, and women’s assets are often sold to cope with climatic shocks Generally men hold most agricultural assets, including land. Women’s assets are smaller in value and generally have higher liquidity – and are thus more easily sold (Rakib and Matz, 2015; Quisumbing et al. 2017). 2. Climate information, which is essential for adaptation, is not equally available to men and women Access to climate information shapes climate change perceptions and responses. Husbands are more likely to report having access to climate information, particularly from formal sources, such as agricultural extension agents, radio broadcasts and community meetings (Bernier et al. 2015; Bryan et al. 2013). Source: Ringler et al. 2014.
  19. 19. Are gendered approaches worthwhile? 7x Yes! 3. Women have less access to agricultural technologies that support adaptation In Mali, irrigation allowed men to increase their value of production almost enough to offset the negative impact of climatic shocks. Women, on the other hand, had limited access to irrigation or other farm technology, such as motorized tillers that would increase productivity (Dillon and Gill 2014; Bernier et al. 2015). 4. Risk aversion negatively affects adaptation by rural women While our studies in Bangladesh and Ethiopia found that women are not more risk averse overall, we found that they were more risk averse when taking decisions on agriculture (Kumar and Clarke 2014; Berga et al. 2014). Source: Ringler et al. 2014.
  20. 20. Are gendered approaches worthwhile? 7x Yes! 5. Group-based approaches for climate change adaptation can support rural women In Bangladesh, women benefit from groups, such as credit groups, when climatic and other shocks occur, but women participate in fewer groups, spend fewer hours in group activities and are less active in decision-making (Rakib and Matz 2015). 6. Rural women value risk sharing In a Bangladesh case study, women valued insuring against agricultural risk faced by the household even though they are less involved in agricultural decision-making than men. But women had less education and lower financial literacy than their male counterparts, as well as less background in understanding agricultural risk. This placed them at a disadvantage when facing insurance purchase decisions (Kumar and Clarke 2014). Source: Ringler et al. 2014.
  21. 21. Are gendered approaches worthwhile? 7x Yes! 7. Laws and regulations are not sufficient for gender equality and resilience Even though Ethiopia implemented a highly successful reform of land rights that was gender sensitive, gender-related gaps in knowledge about the reform reduced women’s adoption of both soil conservation practices and the planting of tree crops and legumes, important practices for climate-smart agriculture (Quisumbing & Kumar 2014) Source: Ringler et al. 2014.
  22. 22. Who are key stakeholders for climate change adaptation in Ethiopia? Largely hub-and-spoke structure Key actors: Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD), & Prime Minister’s office (PM) Source: Aberman et al. 2015
  23. 23. Network is largely decentralized, clustered Three main clusters: national-level government organizations; research and policy organizations; and civil society organizations Source: Aberman et al. 2015 Who are key stakeholders for climate change adaptation in Mali?
  24. 24. Practitioners Survey (KAP)  What is the capacity of organizations in designing and implementing climate change adaptation activities in the 4 study countries?  What is the level of capacity and importance given by organizations to gender analysis related to climate change adaptation in the 4 focus countries?  What are the main barriers and constraints faced by organizations working on climate change issues in the 4 countries?
  25. 25. Responses to KAP survey  Strong awareness among practitioners of different aspects of climate change adaptation along the project cycle and presence of national strategies and action plans  No explicit and clearly defined policy and strategy within organizations outlining their role in and contribution to the national and collective efforts  No explicit and measurable targets and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system to track progress and outcomes over time.  Attention to gender issues is perceived by practitioners as important during the design and planning stage of climate change-related activities  ….But gender issues receive much less attention during implementation and even less during M&E.  ….Gender-disaggregated data collection, monitoring, and reporting are rarely done as part of their organizations’ climate change–related activities.
  26. 26. Government agencies do not yet “walk the talk” Perceived importance vs actual practice: gender-disaggregated data Bangladesh (14) Ethiopia (26) Kenya (36) Mali (11) Do not collect, analyze, or report gender-disaggregated data 25 76 72 59 Collect, analyze, or report data on women, men, girls, and boys in household 41 14 19 15 Collect, analyze, or report data on female-headed households and male-headed households 34 11 9 26 Source: Ragasa et al. 2013
  27. 27. References  Quisumbing, A. R., N, Kumar and J, A. Behrman. 2017. Do Shocks Affect Men’s and Women’s Assets Differently? Evidence from Bangladesh and Uganda, Development Policy Review, available online: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12235/full.  Ngigi, M., U. Mueller, and R. Birner. 2017. Gender Differences in Climate Change Adaptation Strategies and Participation in Group-based Approaches: An Intra-household Analysis From Rural Kenya. Ecological Economics. 138. 99-108. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915302275?via%3Dihub  Rakib, M. and J. A. Matz. 2016. The Impact of Shocks on Gender-differentiated Asset Dynamics in Bangladesh, The Journal of Development Studies, 52(3): 377-395, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2015.1093117  Clarke, D. J. and N. Kumar. 2016. Microinsurance Decisions: Gendered Evidence from Rural Bangladesh. Gender, Technology and Development, 20(2) 1–25. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0971852416639784  Aberman, N.L., R. Birner, E. Haglund, M. Ngigi, S. Ali, B. Okoba, D. Koné, and T. Alemu. 2015. Understanding the policy landscape for climate change adaptation: a cross-country comparison using the Net-Map method. IFPRI Discussion Paper, 01408. Washington DC: IFPRI. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01408.pdf  Aberman, N.L., S. Ali, J. Behrman, E. Bryan, P. Davis, A. Donnelly, V. Gathaara, D. Kone, T. Nganga, J. Ngugi, B. Okoba, and C. Roncoli. 2015. Climate change adaptation, assets and group-based approaches: gendered perceptions from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Mali and Kenya. IFPRI Discussion Paper, 01412. Washington DC: IFPRI. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01412.pdf  Clarke, D.J. and N. Kumar. 2015. Microinsurance Decisions: Gendered Evidence from rural Bangladesh. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1465. http://www.ifpri.org/publication/microinsurance- decisions-gendered-evidence-rural-bangladesh-0  Quisumbing, A.R. and N. Kumar. 2014. Land rights knowledge and conservation in rural Ethiopia: Mind the gender gap. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/publication/land-rights- knowledge-and-conservation-rural-ethiopia  Rakib, M. and J. Matz. 2014. Impact of shocks on gender differentiated asset dynamics in Bangladesh. IFPRI Discussion Paper, 1356. Washington, DC: IFPRI. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01356.pdf  Bryan, E. and J. Behrman. 2013. Community-based adaptation to climate change: a theoretical framework, overview of key issues and discussion of gender differentiated priorities and participation. CAPRi Working Paper, 109. Available at: http://www.capri.cgiar.org/wp/capriwp109.asp  Ragasa, C., Y. Sun, E. Bryan, C. Abate, A. Alemu and M. Namori Keita. 2013. Organizational and institutional issues in climate change adaptation and risk management. Insights from practitioners’ survey in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Kenya and Mali. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1279. Washington DC: IFPRI. http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01279.pdf  Davis, P, and S. Ali. 2013. Exploring local perceptions of climate-change impact and adaptation in rural Bangladesh. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1322. Washington DC: IFPRI. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01322.pdf  Goh, A.H.X. 2012. A literature review of the gender-differentiated impacts of climate change on women’s and men’s assets and well-being in developing countries. CAPRi Working Paper, 106. Available at: http://www.capri.cgiar.org/wp/capriwp106.asp  Quisumbing, A., N. Kumar, and J. Behrman. 2011. Do Shocks Affect Men’s and Women’s Assets Differently? Evidence from Bangladesh and Uganda. IFPRI Discussion Paper, 1113. Washington, DC: IFPRI. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/publication/do-shocks-affect-men-s-and-women-s-assets-differently  Ringler, C., A. Quisumbing, E. Bryan, and R. Meinzen-Dick (Eds). 2014. Enhancing women’s assets to manage risk under climate change: Potential for group-based approaches, Policy Note Series. Washington, DC: IFPRI. Available at: http://www.ifpri.org/publication/enhancing-women-s-assets-manage-risk-under-climate-change  Bryan, E., C. Kovarik, S. Passarelli, and K. Sproule. 2015. Project Toolkit: Research Guide for Gender-Disaggregated Analysis of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation. Available at: http://womenandclimate.ifpri.info/files/2015/02/BMZ_Toolkit_Final.pdf
  28. 28. CASESTUDIES:“BASIN/NATIONAL” New Data for 4 countries (Kenya, Senegal, Bangla- desh & Uganda) Which strategies do women prefer? INCREASINGWOMEN’SRESILIENCETO CONFRONTCLIMATECHANGE
  29. 29. What type of information do women and men access? Nyando, Kenya Wote, Kenya Rakai, Uganda Kaffrine, Senegal Women Men Women Men WomenMen Women Men Extension agents 40 42 98 99 30 67 2 12 NGOs 68 64 84 67 31 68 8 24 Community meetings 38 63 97 99 24 45 8 17 Farmer organizations 36 13 30 11 12 36 1 1 Religious groups 42 32 55 44 36 31 13 14 Agri-service providers 16 7 67 18 12 40 6 15 Family members 93 79 97 99 52 73 83 68 Neighbors 82 94 99 99 91 95 80 79 Radio 96 99 99 100 86 98 85 88 TV 15 45 5 15 2 14 10 8 Newspaper/bulletin 6 27 2 11 1 34 0 1 School 16 28 2 9 4 14 0 0 Cell phones 6 28 2 2 6 12 1 4 Internet 0 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 Traditional knowledge 81 93 91 90 74 75 88 94 Agricultural shows 3 11 4 11 1 20 0 0 Farmer field schools 8 11 57 41 6 12 0 0 Women have less access to infor- mation than men Source: IFPRI-CCAFS intra-household survey. KEY: Highlighted differences are statistically significant at the 10% level Men more likely to have information from source Women more likely to have information from source
  30. 30. Nyando, Kenya Wote, Kenya Rakai, Uganda Kaffrine, Senegal Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Agroforestry 52 76 98 100 98 98 93 95 Terraces/bunds 60 81 100 100 100 100 20 45 Water harvesting 39 72 94 95 58 93 7 26 Irrigation 72 77 85 92 100 100 90 94 Zai/planting pits 11 14 37 25 19 21 0 3 Crop residue mulching 94 88 96 97 100 99 44 66 Composting 20 43 27 48 97 96 10 47 Manure management 88 88 93 85 89 96 65 71 Efficient fertilizer use 64 73 12 35 53 86 60 80 Improved HYVs 85 62 94 99 96 98 29 67 Improved STVs 18 11 99 99 85 73 2 15 No/min tillage 56 72 7 34 96 54 54 67 Improved grain storage 56 48 98 98 82 98 46 48 Improved stoves 60 74 88 96 99 99 81 66 Improved feed management 33 39 68 74 88 92 34 50 Destocking 27 28 69 63 86 79 38 47 Cover cropping 40 24 13 4 6 25 28 39 Stress tolerant livestock 14 10 53 30 68 73 8 20 Rangeland management 20 5 31 2 76 99 30 41 IPM 6 4 0 5 83 77 1 6 Women know fewer climate- smart practices Which practices do women and men know? Source: IFPRI-CCAFS intra-household survey. KEY: Highlighted differences are statistically significant at the 10% level Men more likely to be aware of practice Women more likely to be aware of practice
  31. 31. Nyando, Kenya Wote, Kenya Rakai, Uganda Kaffrine, Senegal Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Agroforestry 33 25 70 93 90 93 96 95 Terraces/bunds 45 41 95 98 56 60 34 23 Water harvesting 37 22 28 31 30 8 4 0 Irrigation 21 14 9 10 21 29 6 6 Zai/planting pits 48 26 6 7 11 17 0 20 Crop residue mulching 92 67 75 87 100 95 85 82 Composting 63 24 28 30 33 21 16 10 Manure management 79 57 85 84 57 72 96 96 Efficient fertilizer use 60 56 0 13 34 50 80 74 Improved HYVs 87 82 91 99 22 56 78 59 Improved STVs 60 30 92 99 55 60 67 45 No/min tillage 47 18 8 0 21 48 58 50 Improved grain storage 32 18 66 49 62 48 70 67 Improved stoves 36 34 29 35 37 33 14 17 Improved feed management 42 23 65 36 71 22 83 88 Destocking 43 29 40 25 32 10 20 16 Cover cropping 60 48 38 0 17 5 85 65 Stress tolerant livestock 43 50 47 65 2 13 0 20 Rangeland management 78 33 41 33 5 1 57 55 IPM 33 14 0 78 75 29 100 83 If women do know the practices then they are as likely or more likely to use them Use of climate-resilient practices Source: IFPRI-CCAFS intra-household survey. KEY: Highlighted differences are statistically significant at the 10% level Men more likely to adopt practice conditional on awareness Women more likely to adopt practice conditional on awareness
  32. 32. References  Bryan, E., Q. Bernier, M. Espinal, and C. Ringler. 2017. Making climate change adaptation programs in Sub-Saharan Africa more gender-responsive: Insights from implementing organizations on the barriers and opportunities. Climate and Development, available online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2017.1301870.  Kristjanson, P., E. Bryan, Q. Bernier, J. Twyman, R.S. Meinzen-Dick, C. Kieran, C. Ringler, C. Jost, and C. Doss. 2017. Addressing gender in agricultural research for development in the face of a changing climate: Where are we and where should we be going? International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, available online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2017.1336411.  Bryan, E., Q. Bernier, M. Espinal, and C. Ringler. 2016. Integrating Gender into Climate Change Adaptation Programs: A Research and Capacity Needs Assessment for Sub-Saharan Africa. CCAFS Working Paper, 163. http://hdl.handle.net/10568/72482  Bernier Q, Meinzen-Dick R, Kristjanson P, Haglund E, Kovarik C, Bryan E, Ringler C, and Silvestri S. 2015. What Influences Awareness and Adoption of Climate-Smart Agricultural Practices? Evidence from Kenya. CCAFS Working Paper No. 79. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Available at: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/53043/retrieve  Twyman J, M. Green, Q. Bernier, P. Kristjanson, S. Russo, A. Tall, E. Ampaire, M. Nyasimi, J. Mango, S. McKune, C. Mwongera, and Y. Ndourba. 2014. Adaptation Actions in Africa: Evidence that Gender Matters. CCAFS Working Paper No. 83. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Available at: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/51391/WP83.pdf  Kristjanson, P., Q. Bernier, E. Bryan, C. Ringler, R. Meinzen-Dick, and J. Mango. 2015. Learning about adaptation possibilities by talking to Kenyan female and male farmers separately. IFPRI Project Note 1. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129755  Kristjanson, P., Q. Bernier, E. Bryan, C. Ringler, R. Meinzen-Dick, and Y. Ndour. 2015. Implications of gender-focused research in Senegal for farmer's adaption to climate change. IFPRI Project Note 2. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129754  Kristjanson, P., Q. Bernier, E. Bryan, C. Ringler, R. Meinzen-Dick, and E. Ampaire. 2015. Gender and climate change adaptation in Uganda: Insights from Rakai. IFPRI Project Note 3. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/129753
  33. 33. A few concluding remarks  Climate change, agriculture and gender equality are closely linked and gendered approaches pay off!  More information is needed about gendered, climate-resilient agricultural management approaches  A focus on technologies and management practices only, however, is problematic. The enabling environment and the policy space are equally important—education, gendered knowledge about access to land and water rights, information climate change, credit access options all matter  More capacity development is needed on gender in ministries of agriculture  M&E as well as ex-post evaluations are needed to better understand if and how gendered strategies achieve outcomes & impact  ..while achieving a shift from REACH to BENEFIT and EMPOWER
  34. 34. What is the end goal? Women’s empowerment through agriculture

×