This document summarizes a presentation on gender and agricultural research in Ethiopia over the last decade. It finds that women farmers are 20-40% less productive than men due to various structural disadvantages, including less access to land, labor, inputs, extension services, markets, education, rural organizations, credit, and technology. Cultural norms also contribute to the productivity gap by reinforcing women's double work burden and limiting their roles. The presentation recommends improving gender-disaggregated data collection and analysis, studying the causes of productivity differences, women's time burdens, and their market participation. It also suggests reviewing women's access to extension services, organizations, land rights, and the impacts of economic growth on female farm managers.

1. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
A Review of Selected Topics of Gender
and Agricultural Research in Ethiopia
over the last Decade
James Warner, IFPRI-Addis Ababa
(j.warner@cgiar.org)
Gender and Agriculture: Reviewing the evidence and the way
forward
MoA WAD-ATA-IFPRI
June 17, 2016
Getfam Hotel, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

2. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Presentation Outline
 The Project Overview
 Major Findings (7)
 #5 Women’s Productivity Gap
 Drivers of the Production Gap
 Recommendations
Page 2

3. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
A Review of Selected Topics of Gender and Agr.
Research in Ethiopia over the Last Decade
I. Report Overview and Principal Themes
II. Production, Inputs, Technology and
Extension
III. Cooperatives and Informal Farm Groups
IV. Land Rights and Land Use
V. Value Chain Analysis
VI. Conclusion and Recommendations
Page 3

4. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Major Findings--Issues #1 and #2
#1 Gender Issues are not just Women’s Issues
-While sex-disaggregated data analysis will lead to
identifying the difference/similarities between male
and female farm managers, a gender analysis
explains why these differences exist (i.e. context
matters)
#2 Women in Agr. not a Homogenous Category
-Married women face different constraints than FHH
- “Top 20%” of FHH seem to have similar MHH asset
levels and input use characteristics
Page 4

5. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Major Findings--Issues #3 and #4
#3 Research Focus on Households not Women
-Mistake to Assume FHH represents all women-Data
Issues
(significant differences between FHH and female spouses)
-Female plot managers are rare in Ethiopian MHHs
(unlike other international studies)
#4 Existing Gender Research is “Uneven”
-Focuses on certain subjects (cooperatives,
extension, and land registration) but not others
(credit, marketing, grain traders)

6. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Major Findings--Issues #5, #6 and #7
#5 Productivity Gap-
Women 20% - 40% less Productive
-Women and men are equally productive except for
endowment and structural gaps (cultural norms)
-Sources of reducing the gap are interrelated and
should not be viewed in isolation (e.g. increasing
land by itself does not solve the problem).
#6 Productivity versus Equity
-Policies can emphasize both! Inputs to women who
are equally productive will increase output
#7 Double Work Burden—
-Women—HH & Prod. Men—focus on Prod.
Page 6

7. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
#5—Productivity Gap (cont.)
Page 7
Total Woman
Productivity
77%
Endowments
10%
Structural
Disadvantage
13%
Gap
23%
Source: Adapted from World Bank 2015

8. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
11 Interrelated Drivers of the
Production Gap
1-Land
2-Labor
3-Non-Labor Inputs
4-Information (extension services)
5-Access to Markets
6-Human Capital
7-Rural Organizations
8-Non-Farm Businesses
9-Credit
10-Mechanization
11-Cultural Norms and Practices
Page 8

9. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap
1. Land—60% of MHH, and more likely to
sharecrop out (lack inputs)
2. Labor/Labor Time—”Double Burden” and
approximately 2 less HH members
3. Non-Labor Inputs
i. Seed--Traditional vs. hybrid Issues—own
consumption, risk averse, affordability
ii. Irrigation—low overall rates, women use
less
iii. Fertilizer—lower access, less purchased, but
more intense usage, lower productivity (lack
information).
Page 9

10. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap (cont.)
4. Information (extension services)--79% of studies
(19 of 24 studies) found men have higher access
and 21% indicated women have more access.
Controlling for other factors (such as land size and
education), only 38% found men were more likely.
 Implication—men do receive more extension
service, but the gap narrows when controlling for
the relative size of the household and assets for
male and female farm managers. In other words,
smaller households, which are comprised
disproportionately of FHHs, tend to receive fewer
extension service visits.
Page 10

11. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap (cont.)
5. Marketing -- female holders produce less on
smaller amounts of land with fewer inputs, thus
women offer less produce for sale in the market.
 Men can take over crops if more lucrative (MHH)
 However, women do produce relatively small-
scale, high-value vegetables near their homes
 Several studies suggest that the boundaries
between women and men’s crops are less rigid
than they first appear and women respond to
price incentives as strongly as men.
Page 11

12. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap (cont.)
6. Human Capital - Women farmers lack formal
education, need alternative education to enhance
human capital for increased productivity. At primary
school level the gender gap is closing, but
secondary education is large.
 Example, one survey, determined literacy rate of
MHH is approx. 47%, while for FHH is 11%
 Designing appropriate gender-targeted extension
would need to take into consideration the
relatively lower levels of education and time
constraints of women recipients.
Page 12

13. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap (cont.)
7. Rural Organizations—Men are 6X more likely
to participate (24% to 4% respectively) and 5X
more likely to have a leadership position.
Women tend to join less formal groups that focus
on crops under their domain, credit and savings,
Self-Help Groups (SHGs).
8. Non-Farm Businesses—Important for women
and poorer rural households in Ethiopia.
However, because of a lack of alternatives,
women engage in low barriers to entry but low
profitability enterprises (ie. tej, tella, etc.).
Page 13

14. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap (cont.)
9. Credit– Surprisingly, there is relatively little
formal research on credit from a gendered
perspective. Micro-finance institutions (MFIs) do
lend to women but formal research not well
developed. Most focuses on credit availability
and not actual use.
Page 14

15. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap (cont.)
10.Mechanization— Benefits of new technology for
market-oriented agricultural growth can bypass
women.
 Positive impacts of technology, generally labor
saving.
 Risk aversion, typically associated more closely
with smaller producing agricultural producers
(including women),
 Technology adoption is not well studied in
Ethiopia.
 Research institutions do not incorporate women’s
particular needs
Page 15

16. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Drivers of the Production Gap (cont.)
11.Cultural Norms and Practices—Closing the
endowment gap isn’t enough
 Household work burden—HH maintenance
 Labor roles- Plowing and oxen use (allow women
to plow, improved ergonomics of plows, etc.) .
 Delicate balance between challenging and
respecting local gender norms “practical needs”
(i.e. work within cultural norms) versus women’s
broader “strategic” needs
 Cultural norms change over time
Page 16

17. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Recommendations
1. Intra-household agricultural survey data and
qualitative research needs to be collected
2. Develop a clear conceptual understanding of
when women and men are equally productive
3. Sex-disaggregated analysis needs to reflect
the significant heterogeneity of all women in
agriculture
4. An institutional review of Ethiopia’s current
research commitment to gender issues is
warranted
5. Study women’s double work burden and its
implication for agricultural productivity
Page 17

18. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Recommendations (cont.)
6. Detail the relationship between women and
the marketization of crops
7. Review both women’s participation and use
of extension services
8. Provide a detailed analysis of informal
collective action groups for women
9. Understanding the relationship between
women’s land rights and development
10. Research Ethiopia’s recent rapid economic
growth and the subsequent structural effects
on women farm managers (inclusive growth)
Page 18

19. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Moving Forward
Given the current state of agricultural gender
research in Ethiopia which areas should be
prioritized?
Issues to discuss
1) As an expert working in the country have you
seen any evidence of gender differences that
affect the agricultural sector?
2) What do you think are the specific causes of
productivity/production relations between male
and female farmers?
3) What can we do to better address these
identified gaps?
Page 19

20. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Thank You!
Page 20