Humanitas Global Development Blog

What do we mean by “women’s empowerment in agriculture”?

 Guest blog post by Lindsey Jones, Global Gender Advisor, with ACDI/VOCA

“When I first came for the SHG (self-help group) training, I received a lot of abuse and scolding from my in-laws because they thought that other people will speak negatively about us. [I got the courage to go to the training despite my in-laws because I knew] I was a part of a group, and if there will be any problem, then I have all of the other group members to help; other women in the group do it so I can do it too. My family used to sell our entire crop to a middleman. But when I started going out of my house to the women’s center, I learned that the price in the market is higher than what we pay the middleman. So I started taking the crop to the market and selling it myself. I earn three times the profit than what I earn when we sell to the middleman.”— Woman Farmer, Uttar Pradesh, India

Recent initiatives such as the US Government’s Feed the Future strategy and efforts by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation show that development leaders in agriculture and food security are finally taking women’s empowerment seriously. New research also supports the critical relationship between improving gender inequality and reducing poverty and hunger: if women had the same access to productive resources as men, they could increase yields on their farms by 20–30 percent, which could raise total agricultural output in developing countries by 2.5–4 percent and feed up to 150 million more people. Yet in many ways the development community is still figuring out how to implement market-driven agricultural development programs in ways that bridge these gender inequality gaps and put women on a path to empowerment.

One such example is the Sunhara India program. In addition to receiving training on agricultural techniques and improving access to better seeds, farming resources and market opportunities, women farmers went through intensive gender and leadership training where they looked at the challenges they face historically as women and, with the support of a rural woman’s network, began to challenge social norms and their own notions of what it means to be a woman. Since then, the women – with the support of the Sunhara India program – established 250 self-help groups, which are organized into 14 village-level clusters and an overarching women’s federation, called Shakti Mahila Sangathan, meaning Women’s Organization for Strength.

Clearly, the women farmers were empowered. They increased their incomes, established personal and group bank accounts, and become more aware of their social and economic rights. Women who previously did not leave their villages are now literacy instructors at community learning centers or elected leaders of self-help groups.

Why did this program succeed? And what did we learn about that elusive word, “empowerment”? Here are a few of my observations:

1. Women’s empowerment was one of the core objectives of the program. The donor made women’s empowerment a cross-cutting objective and a core objective in its own right. That meant that the project was able to focus time and money on addressing the gender-based constraints that women face but men do not, such as establishing learning centers to address illiteracy, conducting intensive women-only leadership trainings, and strengthening the support structures of women’s self-help groups.
2. Project leaders know what they mean by empowerment. The word ‘empowerment’ is used a lot in our development community. But what do we mean by it? If you asked this question, you might find that your colleague has a different definition than you do. We may still have different philosophies about what empowerment means. It is important that a team at least defines the process of empowerment for themselves and the program.
3. Recognize and address the “personal” side of empowerment. Sunhara’s approach to empowerment emphasizes that a disempowered woman must first develop a sense of her own identity and recognition of the potential power of her own agency. Once she has done that, she then needs the ability to act upon that agency, such as through greater skills, networks, support structures, market opportunities, financing, and/or other factors. Many development programs skip the first step and go straight to the second. An ACDI/VOCA volunteer, Nancy Walker, summarized the importance of this empowerment approach best when she said that development should “concentrate less on growing an agricultural commodity and more on growing people! Do that and the ‘bottom-line’ will naturally follow along.”

Watch the stories of two women and the change they experienced in the video below.

 

For more about the Sunhara India approach to women’s empowerment, go here. Lindsey Jones is the Global Gender Advisor at ACDI/VOCA, a private, non-profit organization that promotes broad-based economic growth, higher living standards and vibrant communities in low-income countries and emerging democracies. This post reflects the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ACDI/VOCA or Humanitas Global. Follow Lindsey on Twitter at LindseyJonesR.

World Food Prize Laureate

By Erica Oakley, Humanitas Global Development

Annually since 1986, the World Food Prize has recognized the achievements of individuals that have improved “the quality, quantity or availability of food throughout the world.” This year, Dr. Daniel Hillel, an Israeli scientist, is the 2012 World Food Prize Laureate for "conceiving and implementing a radically new mode of bringing water to crops i­­n arid and dry land regions — known as 'micro-irrigation.'"

Dr. Hillel introduces drip irrigation and tensiometry in Japan, 1971.

Micro-irrigation has proven revolutionary and provided a more viable alternative to existing irrigation systems. Dr. Hillel’s technology entails the application of "water in small but continuous amounts directly to the plant roots." His system has allowed crop growth to occur in some of the world's most arid lands — impacting millions with advantages such as reduction in water and energy usage and increased crop output.

Dr. Hillel’s water management concepts — promoted by the FAO — have spread around the world and are now used in more than 30 countries, totaling more than 6 million hectares worldwide. His work has been ground-breaking and life-changing, particularly in regions with harsh, arid environments such as the Middle East where water is even more valuable than oil.  

These regions experience fluctuating availability of food and often suffer from inflating food prices — creating an environment that facilitates hunger, malnutrition, strife, and unrest. Water conservation is more than just a matter of environmental security, but also of human security. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), it is estimated that 47% of the world's population "could be living under severe water stress by 2050." And nearly 1 billion people do not have access to clean water around the globe. This translates into a millions suffering from preventable diseases and premature deaths.

Dr. Hillel's micro-irrigaiton system is one step toward ensuring that this precious resource is used wisely and sparingly. Given that we will need to produce 70% more food by 2050 to feed our ever-growing global population, water will become even more invaluable. Thus, Dr. Hillel's work is instrumental in getting more out of each drop. 

Congratulations to Dr. Hillel on his achievements in creating a brighter and more sustainable future for us all.

Fighting for the Right to Contraception: One Step Closer to Women's Autonomy

By Erica Oakley with Humanitas Global Development

Women's right to contraception is a hot and contentious topic these days. The hashing out of issues regarding women's bodies by a group of mostly white men makes me feel like I sunk into the twilight zone and landed in the 1950s. 

Contraception is not just a contentious issue in the United States. Around the globe, a woman's right to make choices regarding her body are made by others—her husband, parents, and/or mother-in-law, and at a higher level, politicians. Some of these women—the lucky ones—are able to secretly obtain birth control, if needed, through methods such as injectables or an intrauterine device (IUD). Others are not so lucky.

What no one seems to understand—or take seriously is that the ability for a woman to determine when and how many children she has directly impacts her health, the health of her child, and the financial stability of her family—and ultimately impacts society as a whole. According to a 2011 UNDP Report, the progress made on the 5th Millennium Development Goal (MDGs) which focuses on maternal health has actually decelerated in approximately 77 percent of the countries for which there are indicators. It is apparent that maternal health is an afterthought in tackling the MDGs. Who are the advocates fighting for change?

One advocate, Melinda Gates from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a professed Catholic, used the TED platform to introduce their latest focus: contraception. As stated by Melinda, “This is a life-and-death crisis. Every year, 100,000 women who don’t want to be pregnant die in childbirth. About 600,000 women who don’t want to be pregnant give birth to a baby who dies in her first month of life.” 

According to the Gates-funded No Controversy website, these are the FACTS:

• 200 million people worldwide don't have access to contraception.
• Unintended pregnancy is the leading cause of death among teen girls worldwide. 
• If all women had access to contraception, 100K maternal deaths would be avoided each year.
• Increasing global access to contraception could reduce newborn deaths by nearly 50%. 
• Increased access to contraception has broad benefits, from reducing HIV to improving economies.

When will women get to decide how many children to have and when to have them? When will women be given autonomy over their bodies? 

As stated by Gates, “We’re not talking about abortion. We’re not talking about population control. What I’m talking about is giving women the power to save their lives, to save their children’s lives, and to give their families the best possible future.”

 

World Health Assembly recognises we must address early marriage. It’s now time for WHO action.

Crossposted with permission from Girls Not Brides, The Global Partnership to End Child Marriage

What does last week’s debate on early marriage and adolescent pregnancies at the World Health Assembly mean for teenage girls in the developing world? And what can the WHO do to support them?

---

On 25 May 2012, one of the world’s most credible, respected bodies on global health held a debate on early marriage, adolescent and youth pregnancies. The discussion at the World Health Assembly, a body that determines the policies of the World Health Organization (WHO), formally recognised that we need to act across all health sectors if we’re to achieve a reduction in early marriage and save the lives of millions of young mothers.

Early marriage and adolescent pregnancy are closely linked. Child brides are often pressured to prove their fertility soon after marriage and the consequences can be dangerous. The WHO finds that complications in pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of death in girls aged 15-19 in the developing world.

What happened at the World Health Assembly?

The annual World Health Assembly is attended by all countries that are members of the WHO. All Member States of the United Nations can be a member of the WHO, so wherever you’re from, it’s likely that your country was represented at last week’s Assembly.

At the Assembly, almost 30 countries from across the WHO’s six regions spoke during the discussion. Many highlighted the detrimental health and social consequences of early marriage on adolescent girls, their families and communities. They also welcomed a report submitted by the WHO secretariat – “Early marriages, adolescent and youth pregnancies” – and the WHO’s Guidelines on preventing early pregnancy and poor reproductive outcomes in adolescents in developing countries.

One of the recommendations made in the Guidelines is to reduce marriage before the age of 18 years. As part of this effort, the Guidelines call on political and community leaders to formulate and enforce laws and policies to prohibit the marriage of girls under 18.

The WHO Secretariat’s report also calls for action to influence family and community attitudes related to early marriage and to do more to keep girls in school, both at primary and secondary level. The implementation of sex education and improved access to contraceptives for adolescents, as well as the censuring of coerced sex, were also recommended by the WHO to address early marriage and poor maternal health outcomes for teenage girls.

Why does this matter?

It is very important that the WHO takes a lead in efforts to address both early marriage and adolescent pregnancy. According to its own findings, in low and middle-income countries still births and death in the first week and month of life are 50% higher among babies born to mothers younger than 20 years-old than those born to mothers aged 20-29 years. The younger the mother, the higher the risk to her children.

By noting the WHO report on early marriage and adolescent pregnancy, and by debating the two issues together, delegates at the World Health Assembly recognised that partnership and action across sectors is vital if we are to achieve better health outcomes for adolescent girls and their children.

Strong support by the World Health Assembly can also help to drive investment towards more programmes to prevent early marriage and to provide those girls who are already married with life-saving information.

So, what next?

The debate at the World Health Assembly was a welcome step, but the WHO needs to do more to put addressing child marriage at the top of its agenda. Only then will words translate into action for the girls who need it most.

As the WHO Secretariat noted in its report, adolescents face significant barriers to health services. This is particularly the case for child brides who are often isolated from their own family, are obliged to drop out of school or lack a voice in their relationship with older husbands.

The WHO can do much to overcome these obstacles by, for example, helping national governments where child marriage is prevalent to train health workers on how to reach child brides, making healthcare facilities adolescent-friendly and sensitising communities about the risks of early marriage.

More than 60 million women aged 20-24 years were married before the age of 18, calculates the WHO. Faced with the largest generation of adolescents in history, it is crucial to take action now to bring down that number. As an influential body that can have a direct impact on country health outcomes, it’s time that the WHO takes a lead in ending child marriage.