Hiding in Plain Sight Gender and GM crops
description
Transcript of Hiding in Plain Sight Gender and GM crops
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Hiding in Plain Sight Gender and GM crops
Patricia Zambrano, IFPRIIsidore Lobnibe, Western Oregon University,
Daylinda B. Cabanilla, UPLB, Jorge H. Maldonado, U. de Los Andes
Jose Falck Zepeda, IFPRI17th ICABR Conference Ravello, June 21, 2013
Outline• Is gender relevant? • Why use a qualitative approach?• Burkina Faso, Colombia, and the Philippines
gender pilot case studies• Similarities and differences• Future research?
“Farmers”
• Gender neutral, but mainly male
• Household as unit of analysis
• Sole and efficient HH decision- makers
Misspecification: Biased and inconsistent models
Policy implications
Gender
• Gender roles are determined by cultural, ideological, religious, economic and social relationship between men and women and affect the distribution of resources between men and women
• It is one of the determinants in technology adoption
bEcon Economics Literature about the
Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops
in Developing Economies
http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/landingpage/collection/p15738coll6
Compiled by Indira Yerramareddy, Patricia Zambrano, and Jose Falck Zepeda
bEcon
Gender and GM
Of the 135 papers in bEcon than that assess the economic impact of GM crops on farmers we found only a handful that made explicit references to gender.
To explore whether gender affects access to and use of GM cotton, we developed and tested a qualitative approach in Colombia, as well as Burkina Faso and later for GM maize in the Philippines
Burkina FasoLobnibe, I., Zambrano, P., and Biermayr-Jenzano, P. 2012. Field Report on
Gender and GM cotton in Burkina Faso. Project report. Washington DC.ColombiaZambrano, P., J. H. Maldonado, S. L. Mendoza, L. Ruiz, L.A. Fonseca, and I.
Cardona. 2011. Women cotton farmers: Their perceptions and experiences with transgenic varieties. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01118. Washington, D.C. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
Zambrano, P., M. Smale, J. H. Maldonado, and S. L. Mendoza. 2012. Unweaving the Threads: The Experiences of Female Farmers with Biotech Cotton in Colombia. AgBioForum 15(2): 125-137
PhilippinesYorobe, M., Jr., and D. Cabanilla. 2013. Gender Impacts from the adoption
of genetically modified maize in the Philippines. Draft final report submitted to the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Project report. Los Banos, the Philippines.
Page 8
Economic assessment of commercialized GM crops in Burkina Faso, Colombia, and Philippines
Documented economic benefits
Page 9
Absence of gender considerations
FieldworkColombia, 2010 Burkina Faso, 2011
Cerete, Cordoba andEl Espinal, Tolma
Dahoun, Hounde, Dimikuy, and Bereba in Tuy Province Dano in Ioba Province
GM cotton
Philippines, 2012
• u
Barangay Olympog in General Santos City ,South Cotabato, Barangay Cabisera 5 in Ilagan, Isabela
GM Maize
2011 indicators
Burkina Faso Colombia Philippines
Population, total mill 17.0 46.9 94.9
GDP per capita (constant 2000 US$) 286.1 3,362.5 1,413.4
Urban population (% of total) 26.5 75.3 48.9
Agriculture, value added (% of GDP) 33.8 7.0 12.8
Employment in agriculture (% of total employment) 84.8* 17.9 33.0
Labor force participation rate, female (% of female population ages 15-64) 79.7 59.4 51.2
Agricultural raw materials exports (% of merchandise exports) 51.7 2.5 1.1
• Small group discussion (SGD)• Participant observation• Expert opinion interviews • One-to-one interviews• Secondary data collection
Qualitative Research Design
Disclosure
Corroboration of the comparative qualitative findings presented here need to be followed up with quantitative studies to confirm the extent and representativeness of these observations.
Page 14
Activity/Issue Burkina Faso Colombia Philippines Inheritance rights Access to land Granted by head of
HH Access to credit, farm inputs Ability to hire personnel Access to information, extension services Limited Equal partners with head of HH as crop producers Work contribution in HH/male plots Active participation in overall crop operation Invisible or undervalued crop-related activities Control and responsibility over HH finances Limited
Control of crop operation Limited Limited Limited
A new focus?
Access and control of assets are key determinant in technology adoption
The comparison between Burkina, and Colombia/Philippines suggests that
even when women have such access they still have other binding limitations
– Social and cultural norms Time and other limitations
SimilaritiesQualitative methods uncovered many activities that show women involvement in the overall cotton and maize operation
GM varieties have introduced changes in farming practices that affect women and men differently
Similarities• Overall men and women perceive GM as beneficial • Men and women perceive costs and benefits of GM
differently, although women who have planted GM varieties tend to agree more with their male counterparts
• Both male and female farmers identified the lack of adequate and timely information about GM as a disadvantage
• Lack of knowledge about the technology is more prevalent among female non-adopters than male non-adopters
Other similarities
For female farmers the fact that GM is a labor-saving technology seems to be the most beneficial Absence of gender considerations aspect of the technologies
Differences in how male and female farmers use additional income and time saved that the technology can generate
Women’s constraints
– Most limiting one appear to be time. Women are constrained by their domestic workload and responsibilities
– Limited access to agronomic and technology information, even compared to their male counterparts
– Limited or no access or even no knowledge of the technology that can potentially benefit them.
Potential areas for future research• Understand the determinants of women versus
men’s decision to grow GM crops• Understand heterogeneity among male and female
clients• Quantify “invisible threads”: multiple tasks
performed by women that are many times perceived as “invisible” or of insignificant social or cultural value
• Assess ”indirect “ benefits of GM: reduced drudgery • Assess how women and men spend saved time and
additional resources
Bt cotton in Burkina Faso, advantages
Labor-saving technologies
• Reduction in insecticide application from 6 to 2 applications- Some estimates:
– Water saved: 18 to 20 gallons of water by ha.– Time saved: Women have saved 3 trips to the well for
every savedinsecticide application, for a total of 12 trips or 36 miles
– Health implication: Average water weight per trip ~20 kg
• Women play an important role in proction• Different perceptions]• Not all women are the same• What youmen and women do with additional
resources.