Presentation by Mamta Mehar, Mekkawy Wagdy, Cynthia McDougall and John Benzie at 7th Global Conference on Gender in Aquaculture & Fisheries (GAF7) held in Bangkok, Thailand on 18th October 2018

1. Gender-differentiated needs and
preferences of farmers for Rohu fish in
Bangladesh and India
Mamta Mehar, Mekkawy Wagdy, Cynthia McDougall and John Benzie
7th
Global Conference on Gender in Aquaculture & Fisheries (GAF7)
Oct. 18, 2018, Bangkok

2. Facts!
Aquaculture is
promising…
Fish is critical
to nutrition

3. Challenges?
Extensification

4. Genetics
• Genetics improved strain success (Benzie et al. 2012 and Gjedrem & Rye 2016)
• World aquaculture production could be doubled within 13 years if
selective breeding is applied to all aquatic species (Gjedrem et al. 2012)
• Less than 10% of global aquaculture production is based on genetically
improved fish from modern breeding programs (Olesen et al. 2015)
The wide adoption of improved strains depends on the benefits they provide to women and men
involved in production, consumption, and marketing

5. Breeders’ question
• Who they are breeding for?
• Feasible trait(s) with adoption and economic impact on a
large scale
• Potential trait(s) for all segments of society and across
countries
• Gender-responsive traits

6. Why Gender?
Source: Presentation by Jacqueline Ashby on 21 September 2017 as part of the webinar 'Design elements for gender-
responsive breeding’. Avialable at http://gender.cgiar.org/webinar-design-elements-gender-responsive-breeding/

7. Picture of Rohu, Tilapia & Silvercarp
Fish trait examples:
•Length (cm)
•Weight (g)
•Color
•Taste
•Body shape
•Firmness
•Bone texture

8. Study: India and Bangladesh
• What are the needs and preferences of farmers (both as
producers and consumers)?
• Do the needs or preferences for traits differ between
men and women? If yes, in what way and to what extent
do they differ?
• And what are the implications of these differences
for genetic improvement fish breeding programs?

9. A review of fish trait preferences by users:
implications for fish breeding
• Non-systematic search: No (fish) breeding program has social and gender inclusion
• Systematic search (Regions: Europe, Africa & Asia)
Reference: Revised reference is: Mehar et al. (in process). Fish trait preferences: A review of existing
knowledge and implications for breeding programs

10. Interdisciplinary team
Gender Genetics Sustainable
Aquaculture
Rural Sociology &
Mixed Methods
Rural Sociology
Economics
From left to right: Ann Tickmayer , Cynthia McDougall, John Benzie, Mamta Mehar, Wagdy Mekkaway, Jharendu Pant and Conner Bailey

11. Studied region

12. Methods

13. Results: outline
• Community level
• Focus group discussions
• Household level: Male & females separately
• Experimental choices (ranking using 1000minds app)
• Open-ended questions
• What they like/dislike
• What they would like to improve
• Household level: Producer
• Open-ended
• Preference with measures size (weight & length) and growth

14. Focus group discussion
Male and female preferences and needs vary:
•main income source of household
• Fish or rice farming
•Based on their involvement in fish activity at farm and household
• E.g. Feed management monitoring, especially water quality, cooking quality, consuming,
buying fry/fingerlings, no female involvement in harvesting & selling to market
“Male gives more times to paddy, so
female takes care of ponds”
- Respondent
“Despite female group [SHG working for fish], males go
to hatchery to buy fry/fingerlings, harvest & sell fish”
- Respondent

15. FGD (cont’d)
• Based on consumption preference and
family food security
• Rohu main fish, festival and ceremonies, nutrition and
total food intake of household, males eat head, children
cannot eat small rohu as it has more bones
• Based on decision-influence
• Trait preferences for what to cultivate and what to buy
"…When serving fish to the head of
the family (male), the female serves
his choice of fish."
- Respondent
“The mothers-in-law and husbands of individual farmers
usually decide which fish are cooked in the household”
- Respondent
"Women choose which particular
variety of fish to purchase for cooking."
- Respondent

16. Experimental choices: 1000minds01020304050
RelativeImportance%
W
eight_m
Length_m
Price_m
BodyShape_m
Taste_m
Violin Plot for Male Preferences
01020304050
RelativeImportance%
W
eight_F
Length_F
Price_f
BodyShape_F
Taste_f
Violin Plot for Female Preferences

17. Open-ended question
Female: What would you like to improve?Male: What would you like to improve?

18. What to improve (cont’d)

19. Preferences for size & growth
• Improve size (in length and weight)
• Growth strain:
• Short culture period with large size (more than 1 kg)
• Short culture period with same size (500-600 g)
Farmers preferences for size & cultivation period (%)
Duration
monthweight
500-800 g above 800 g
4-6 months 65.26 34.88
6-10 months 34.74 65.12

20. Trait preferences across farmers
(in progress…..)
Traits Farming
type
Inputs Management
Feed (type,
qty, timing)
Fertilizer Pond
management
Water quality
management

21. Summary
• Results from systematic literature review:
• No (fish) breeding program has social and gender inclusion
• Only 26 studies have explored trait preferences across users
• 6 studies have highlighted that male & female preferences differ significantly
• Results from field information:
• Men's & women’s needs & priorities are different (quali-FGD)
• No significant difference between male & female preferences (quant. )
• Common & divergent preferences of males & females (quant in quali
manner)

22. Eliciting, defining, communicating traits to
breeding program needs:
• No gold standard rule to find (feasible) trait(s)
• Use, sequencing & layering of different methods
• Mixed methods
• Make sense of information via analyzing 'inter-sectional
points' vis-à-vis culture concerns (e.g. norms, behaviour…)
• Focused interaction of different disciplines (Ragkot, 2018)

24. Thank You
m.mehar@cgiar.org