This report analyses PIM’s 391 peer-reviewed 2018 and 20191 publications. We highlight key gender findings and discuss the challenges faced by researchers in doing gender analysis, with a view to documenting lessons learned and improving practices. It is hoped that the gaps and strengths identified in this report will be useful inputs for future research under PIM and One CGIAR.
How do access to and control over inputs and resources affect productivity of men and women, and what other factors might explain observed differences in productivity? A range of studies under Flagship 6 consider how women’s empowerment and agency influence technical and allocative efficiency on the farm, analyzing a variety of sectors in countries including Bangladesh, Senegal, and Egypt. Evidence from Bangladesh (Seymour 2017) showed that reduced gender disparities, as measured by the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI), are associated with higher technical efficiency in farming, while complementary evidence from Senegal (Hoel et al. 2017) showed that low levels of spousal cooperation, measured by lab-inthe-field games, result in productive inefficiencies in dairy farming. This work highlights the value of gender equity for productivity and validates the ability of both the WEAI and games to predict productivity. Additional research (Bernard et al. 2017) showed that households in which women control contracts for milk were more likely to demand micronutrient-fortified milk, suggesting the value of women’s involvement. In Senegal, PIM-developed vignettes have been used in a survey to understand patterns of intrahousehold decision-making and the impacts on milk production. A set of papers on gender, land rights, and irrigation (Najjar et al. 2019 [journal article and policy brief] and Najjar et al. 2020) analyzes these relationships in Egypt, a country where little work has been done on women’s control over assets. The research demonstrates that women are much more involved in irrigation than is commonly believed.
Over the past 20 years, value chain development (VCD) initiatives and value chain research have increasingly integrated gender dimensions to allow for gender-differentiated employment and income opportunities and other benefits for women and men, and to address the exploitation of women’s labor (Pyburn and Kruijssen 2021). This research often addresses constraints to women’s participation in specific value chains, such as administrative procedures in transboundary fish trade (Ratner et al. 2018) or disproportionate harassment of women food traders by authorities in Nigeria (Resnick et al. 2019). This brief draws on research conducted under the CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM) to illustrate how VCD supports and constrains progress toward gender equality and women’s empowerment. In particular, the brief summarizes work from a portfolio of six PIM co-funded projects (2020–2021) on gender dynamics in value chains beyond the production node and single commodity analysis (Box 1), a book chapter in a CGIAR-wide gender publication (Pyburn and van Eerdewijk 2021), the Pro-WEAI (project-level Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index) for Market Inclusion, and other gender-integrated value chain work within PIM (Crimi 2018; Vos and Pyburn 2021), and provides an outlook for future research.
The evaluative study focuses primarily on PIM’s external partners; this includes partnerships where PIM is engaged by another organization as a service provider and trusted advisor. The objective is to undertake an in-depth analysis of PIM partnerships and to elicit lessons on the key factors contributing to their success in achieving outcomes. The aim is to generate: (1) an inventory of partnerships; (2) an understanding of the motivations for partnership formation, and of the partnership dynamics in promoting innovations and policy change; and (3) an assessment of strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities to foster stronger future partnerships. This evaluative study serves the dual purposes of accountability to CGIAR partners and funders and of learning. The primary intended users are CGIAR researchers and partners. The findings and lessons learned will also provide input into the implementation of new initiatives under One CGIAR.
In 2020, PIM findings contributed to seed policies in Nepal and Uganda, Malawi’s extension strategy and approval of insect-resistant cotton, a nationwide program aimed at improving the effectiveness of public service delivery in Uganda, social protection programs in Egypt, and school gardens for better nutrition in Papua New Guinea. At the global level, PIM research was used to shape strategic decisions of organizations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GIZ, the Inter-American Development Bank, the UK Government's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, the World Bank and the World Health Organization. PIM tools were incorporated in universities’ curricula in India and South Africa. Examples of PIM innovations scaled up by partners in 2020 are private sector seed marketing in Ethiopia, picture-based insurance in Ethiopia, India and Kenya, and tools for inclusive governance of natural resources in India and Peru.
This brief synthesizes approaches and findings from gender research conducted by the CGIAR Program on Policy, Institutions, and Markets (PIM). The focus of this work is the governance of natural resources and policy and institutions for improved natural resources management. This body of research analyzes how tenure security affects sustainable management and how individuals, groups, and communities govern land, water, fish stocks, and forests. An important focus of this work involves the following questions: (1) who has what rights with respect to these resources (particularly for women and members of marginalized groups), (2) what are their roles in managing natural resources, and (3) what livelihood benefits do they receive? Without a contextualized understanding of these questions, policies and practices can inadvertently exclude women, reinforce historical practices of gender injustice, or introduce new inequalities that worsen natural resource management and poverty.
PIM had a productive final year centered on synthesizing findings while continuing to respond to demand on the impacts of COVID-19 and preparing the transition to the new CGIAR portfolio. PIM findings and engagement contributed to Myanmar’s response to COVID-19, South Africa’s policies on resilience to climate change, Tunisia's policies for pastoral development, a reform of Nigeria’s national agricultural research system, Ghana’s fish seed and farm certification system, gender strategies for three agricultural value chains in Honduras, and genome editing guidelines for the agricultural sector in four African countries. PIM research informed policy documents of FAO, IFAD, One CGIAR, the UK Government, the World Bank and the World Food Programme. PIM tools enabled more equitable co-management of 76 protected areas in Peru and informed World Bank social protection projects. Books on food security in Bangladesh and Malawi, trade in Latin America, African agricultural value chains and gender were published. 42 PIM synthesis briefs and notes were issued, summarizing research results in key thematic areas. PIM contributed 181 journal articles, 8 journal issues (on demand driven seed systems, China’s response to COVID-19, agriculture and food security in China under COVID-19, food loss and waste, landscape restoration, multistakeholder fora in forestry and two issues on gender), 15 book chapters and about 500 non-peer-reviewed outputs. 16 PIM webinars were organized. PIM’s contributions to the United Nations Food Systems Summit covered agricultural extension, food system innovations and digital technologies, the future of small farms, the science-policy interface, the cost of ending hunger by 2030, food waste and loss, management of the commons and gender. Building on past PIM investments in economywide modeling tools and social accounting matrices, PIM teams continued to assess the impacts of COVID-19 and policy responses at country level. Lessons learned from PIM country-level analyses on COVID-19’s impacts on food systems, poverty and diets are summarized in a chapter of the IFPRI 2022 book “COVID19 and global food security: Two years later”. A paper in partnership with the CGIAR COVID19 Hub reviewed the literature on agri-food value chains for evidence of fractures and resilience in response to the pandemic. The results of coordinated studies on the impacts of COVID-19 on value chains in different countries were published. Several cross-CGIAR outputs initiated by PIM speak to the fulfillment of PIM’s convening role as an integrating program: the CGIAR Foresight Report and CGIAR foresight website; several outputs produced through the CGIAR Community of Excellence on Seed Systems Development, and the CGIAR book “Advancing gender equality through agricultural and environmental research: Past, present, and future” are examples. Other examples of PIM global public goods produced in 2021 are 27 innovations at various stages of uptake, a cross-cutting effort to distill PIM lessons on migration; new or updated social accounting matrices for 25 countries; and lessons and tools on stakeholder platforms for natural resource governance. Independent reviews assessed the effectiveness of PIM’s partnerships and the use by partners of PIM’s work on economywide modelling, agricultural insurance, tenure and governance, and the Ag-Incentives database.
In addition to identifying gender gaps and other challenges and opportunities for entrepreneurship in agricultural growth and development, this brief focuses on potential for improvement in the key areas of (1) seed systems, (2) finance and market access, and (3) production and value chains. While gender norms and challenges are inherently context-specific, the underlying intention of this evidence brief is to provide an overview of research findings from low- and middle-income countries, to address key questions and challenges that can be generalized across contexts, and to offer suggestions of promising approaches and best practices.
Many development programs that aim to alleviate poverty and improve investments in human capital consider womens empowerment a key pathway by which to achieve impact and often target women as their main beneficiaries. Despite this, womens empowerment dimensions are often not rigorously measured and are at times merely assumed. This paper starts by reflecting on the concept and measurement of womens empowerment and then reviews some of the structural interventions that aim to influence underlying gender norms in society and eradicate gender discrimination. It then proceeds to review the evidence of the impact of three types of interventionscash transfer programs, agricultural interventions, and microfinance programson womens empowerment, nutrition, or both. Qualitative evidence on conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs generally points to positive impacts on womens empowerment, although quantitative research findings are more heterogenous. CCT programs produce mixed results on long-term nutritional status, and very limited evidence exists of their impacts on micronutrient status. The little evidence available on unconditional cash transters (UCT) indicates mixed impacts on womens empowerment and positive impacts on nutrition; however, recent reviews comparing CCT and UCT programs have found little difference in terms of their effects on stunting and they have found that conditionality is less important than other factors, such as access to healthcare and child age and sex. Evidence of cash transfer program impacts depending on the gender of the transfer recipient or on the conditionality is also mixed, although CCTs with non-health conditionalities seem to have negative impacts on nutritional status. The impacts of programs based on the gender of the transfer recipient show mixed results, but almost no experimental evidence exists of testing gender-differentiated impacts of a single program. Agricultural interventionsspecifically home gardening and dairy projectsshow mixed impacts on womens empowerment measures such as time, workload, and control over income; but they demonstrate very little impact on nutrition. Implementation modalities are shown to determine differential impacts in terms of empowerment and nutrition outcomes. With regard to the impact of microfinance on womens empowerment, evidence is also mixed, although more recent reviews do not find any impact on womens empowerment. The impact of microfinance on nutritional status is mixed, with no evidence of impact on micronutrient status. Across all three types of programs (cash transfer programs, agricultural interventions, and microfinance programs), very little evidence exists on pathways of impact, and evidence is often biased toward a particular region. The paper ends with a discussion of the findings and remaining evidence gaps and an outline of recommendations for research.
What are the drivers and consequences of tenure insecurity? PIM research under Flagship 5 addressed drivers and consequences of tenure insecurity from three angles: women’s rights, individual or household rights, and collective rights (where ownership or long-term use and/or management rights have been recognized or devolved to communities to some extent). Individual and household rights focus on agricultural land; collective rights on forests, rangelands, and water; and women’s rights consider the full range of resources.
