module 10 genderandnaturalresources management - world...

In the future, the natural resources needed to sustain thehuman population will exceed available resources atcurrent consumption levels.1 Unsustainable and uneven

consumption levels have resulted in an increasingly stressedenvironment, where natural disasters, desertification, andbiodiversity loss endanger humans as well as plant and ani-mal species. The challenge of reversing the degradation ofnatural resources while meeting increasing demands forthem involves significant changes in policies, institutions,and practices (FAO 2007a). Effective programming andpolicies require understanding and addressing the gender-specific relationships to natural resources use and manage-ment and highlighting the linkages between naturalresources, cultural values, and local knowledge. Addressingthe gender-specific aspects of natural resources will providepolicy makers with information for more effective naturalresource use and conservation policies and will provideguidance for equitable access to natural resources. Here, onemust assess the gender-differentiated impacts of environ-mental changes, including biodiversity loss, climate change,desertification, natural disasters, and energy development.

KEY ISSUES IN NATURAL RESOURCESMANAGEMENT

Natural resources provide a range of goods and services—food, fuel, medicines, fresh water, fisheries, and air and waterregulation—that support life on Earth. The rural poor indeveloping countries remain the most directly dependent on

natural resources for their food and livelihood security. Sub-sistence farmers, fishers, hunters and gatherers, and agricul-tural wage workers (more than 1.3 billion people) depend onthe availability of usable land, water, and plant and animalspecies for their livelihoods (FAO 2004). Thus, the agricul-tural livelihoods of poor rural women and men depend onthe condition of natural resources, particularly livelihoods ofpeople living on fragile lands (World Bank 2005).

Over the past 50 years, ecosystems have changed morerapidly than in any comparable period of time in human his-tory, largely because of the need to meet rapidly growingdemands for food, water, timber, fiber, and fuel (MEA 2005).Now climate change, caused largely by fossil fuel use, furtherthreatens ecosystems. One strategy to mitigate climatechange and reduce fossil fuel dependence emphasizesincreased use of bioenergy from crops, which is likely to putmore pressure on land, water, and species diversity. Thesechanges contribute to the degradation of natural resources,which exacerbates poverty for some groups of people, espe-cially people living in marginal environments (box 10.1).This Module identifies and addresses five major challengesfacing sustainable natural resource management and gender:

� Biodiversity conservation and adaptation� Mitigation of and adaptation to the effects of climate

change and variability� Bioenergy� Natural disasters� Land and water degradation and desertification.

423

Gender and Natural ResourcesManagement

Overview

MODULE 1 0

ubp_GAS_423-474.Qxd:01-FSB-Ch01 9/22/08 9:25 AM Page 423

Addressing these natural resource challenges requires anunderstanding of their underlying causes. According to theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA), the main driv-ers of change include the following:

� Climate change led by the burning of fossil fuels� Habitat and land-use change, primarily due to the

expansion of agriculture� Overexploitation of resources, especially overfishing� Deliberate and accidental introduction of invasive alien

species� Pollution, particularly nutrient loading, leading to a loss

of biodiversity, agricultural productivity, and increasedhuman health problems.

Understanding and changing natural resource tenureand governance as well as unequal patterns of access to andcontrol over natural resources lie at the heart of reversingnatural resource degradation. These issues are crucial toaddressing the gender dimension of natural resources.

In addition, efforts aimed at reversing natural resourcesdegradation must consider other factors, including the fol-lowing:

� Sociodemographic trends, including growth, migration,and diseases such as HIV and AIDS

� Economic trends, including economic growth, dispari-ties, and trade patterns

� Sociopolitical factors, ranging from equal participationin decision-making processes to conflicts

� Technological change that leads to increases in cropyields and agricultural intensification practices, withsevere consequences for natural resources.

Climate change, biodiversity loss, land and water degra-dation and desertification, and natural disasters share manycommon causes. Because a worldwide consensus recognizesthe acceleration of climate change, efforts to mitigate andadapt to climate change promise to have major conse-quences for natural resource availability and use. Many of

424 MODULE 10: GENDER AND NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Current changes in biodiversity are the fastest inhuman history, with species becoming extinct 100times as fast as the rate in the fossil record; 12 percentof birds, 23 percent of mammals, and 30 percent ofamphibians are threatened with extinction.

� The expected increase in biofuel feedstock pro-duction may lead to increased rates of geneticerosion.

� Global fish stocks classed as collapsed have roughlydoubled to 30 percent over the last 20 years.

� An increase in so-called dead zones, where marinelife can no longer live because of the depletion ofoxygen caused by pollutants like fertilizers isexpected.

� Annual emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels haverisen by about one-third since 1987.

� Eleven of the warmest years since records have beenkept occurred during the last 12 years.

� In the twentieth century the average temperatureincreased by 0.74°C, sea level increased by 17 cen-timeters, and a large part of the Northern Hemi-sphere snow cover vanished.

� There are 20 to 30 percent of plant and animalspecies that are in danger of extinction if the tem-perature increases 1.5 to 2.5°C.

� Only very large cuts in greenhouse gases of 60 to 80percent can stop irreversible change.

� Globally more than 2 million people die prema-turely every year because of outdoor and indoor airpollution.

� If present trends continue, 1.8 billion people willlive in countries or regions with absolute waterscarcity by 2025, and two-thirds of the people in theworld could be subject to water stress.

� Unsustainable land use and climate change driveland degradation, including soil erosion, nutrientdepletion, water scarcity, salinity, desertification,and the disruption of biological cycles.

� In the first half of 2006, 174 disaster eventsoccurred in 68 countries, affecting 28 million peo-ple and damaging property and assets valued atmore than $6 billion. Annual economic losses asso-ciated with such disasters averaged $75.5 billion inthe 1960s, $138.4 billion in the 1970s, $213.9 billionin the 1980s, and $659.9 billion in the 1990s.

Box 10.1 Key Trends in Biodiversity Loss, Climate Change, Bioenergy, Natural Disasters, and Desertification

Sources: IPCC 2007; MEA 2005; www.unep.org.


the solutions and problems of natural resources degrada-tion lie in agriculture. Agriculture, heavily dependent onnatural resources, also provides environmental services suchas carbon sequestration. Agriculture occupies 40 percent ofthe land surface, consumes 70 percent of global waterresources, and manages biodiversity at the genetic, species,and ecosystem levels (FAO 2007a). Agriculture contributesto soil erosion, agrochemical pollution, and climate change,accounting for about one-third of greenhouse gas emissions(World Bank 2007). Land and water degradation, shrinkingbiodiversity, and climate change threaten the viability offarming in various settings. Because of gender-differentiatedroles and responsibilities in natural resources management,interventions must address the specific needs and opportu-nities of rural women and men, particularly the poorest, toreduce inequalities, stimulate growth, and reverse environ-mental degradation.

KEY GENDER ISSUES

Improving natural resource management practices and pro-tecting the environment require reducing poverty andachieving livelihood and food security among rural womenand men. The following are some of the key gender issues innatural resources management interventions.

Rural women and men have different roles,responsibilities, and knowledge in managingnatural resources

Rural women’s and men’s different tasks and responsibilitiesin food production and provision result in different needs,priorities, and concerns. Although rural women’s and men’sroles and responsibilities vary across regions and cultures,they often follow similar gender divisions of labor. In mostregions men use natural resources in agriculture, logging,and fishing for commercial purposes more than women. Incrop production in many regions of the developing world,men tend to focus on market-oriented or cash crop produc-tion, whereas women often work with subsistence crops,minor crops, and vegetable gardens. Women often grow awider diversity of crops. In some cases men and women per-form complementary roles—for example, men clear land,women plant and tend crops, and men harvest and marketcrops. However, observers have come to learn that thesegender patterns are neither simplistic nor static. For exam-ple, women often work with their husbands in producingcash crops. In Kenya women grow green beans for the Euro-pean market, and in regions where men migrate, women

take over household cash crop production. Also, genderdivisions of labor vary substantially by age, race, ethnicity,and marital status. Consequently, their water use and man-agement will vary accordingly. For example, men use waterfor irrigation systems, whereas women may not have accessto irrigation systems for vegetable gardens and subsistencecrops. In livestock management men often care for cattleand larger animals, and women care for smaller animalssuch as poultry and small ruminants. In many instanceswomen also have responsibility for collecting fodder for ani-mals, often depending on common property resources thatare threatened in many cases.

Because women (and sometimes girls) are often respon-sible for providing their households with the basic neces-sities of life—food, fuel, and water—they rely heavily onnatural resources. Men seldom have responsibility for col-lecting and using natural resources for household use. Ear-lier development efforts assumed that women’s fuelwoodcollection and use led to deforestation, but it is now knownthat the major problems related to biomass collection includewomen’s and children’s exposure to indoor air pollution andheavy workloads for women and girls. Environmentaldegradation increases women’s time for labor-intensivehousehold tasks, such as having to walk longer distancesfor the collection of fuelwood and water. Decreases in agri-cultural production and household food security createadditional health problems related to their increasing work-load. Although both rural women and men play a criticalrole in natural resources management, women’s use, conser-vation, and knowledge of resources play a key role in shap-ing local biodiversity. Also degradation of natural resourcescan alter gender responsibilities and relations in householdsand communities.

Gender differences exist in rights and accessto natural resources, including land, trees, water,and animals

In most societies women typically have fewer ownershiprights than men (Rocheleau 1996). Women frequently havede facto or land-use rights as compared to men’s de jure orownership rights. Women often have use rights that aremediated by their relationships with men. Thus, whenwomen are widowed or divorced, they may lose these rights,as in recent cases of land grabbing from AIDS widows insouthern Africa. How men and women use resources reflectsgendered access. For example, women may collect branchesand limbs from trees, whereas men may have rights to har-vest trees, but for both men and women, insecure land

MODULE 10: GENDER AND NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 425


tenure reduces incentives to make the improvements infarming practices necessary to cope with environmentaldegradation. Without secure land rights, women and menfarmers have little or no access to credit to make investmentsin improved natural resource management and conserva-tion practices. Poor rural women lacking secure land tenureoften depend on common property resources for fuelwood,fodder, and food and, therefore, for the well-being of theirhouseholds. The depletion of common property resourcesposes a severe threat to the livelihoods and food security ofpoor rural women and men. Women household headsremain at a particular disadvantage in terms of access toland, water, and other natural resources. A key point is thatgendered relations and responsibilities in terms of naturalresources are dynamic and subject to change.

Access to new technology, information, and trainingrelated to natural resource management remainshighly gendered, with most of the related initiativestargeted to men

Despite numerous efforts to mainstream gender, many gov-ernments, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), anddevelopment agencies find these efforts particularly difficultin the agriculture and natural resource arenas. For example,extension personnel in agriculture and natural resourcesfrequently speak only to men, often erroneously expectingthat the men will convey information to their wives. Untilgender is successfully mainstreamed, women’s groups,organizations, and networks can increase women’s access toknowledge, information, and technologies (Agarwal 2003;Enarson and Meyreles 2004; Sachs 2007).

Degradation of the natural resource base can resultin new forms of cooperation, conflict, or controversybetween men and women or different ethnic groups

When natural resources become insufficient to support thelivelihoods of the population, drastic measures result, suchas men’s or women’s out-migration. Men’s out-migrationleaves women to assume men’s traditional roles and respon-sibilities, increasing their work burden, but leaving themwithout equal or direct access to financial, social, and tech-nological resources (Lambrou and Laub 2004). In someinstances of severe drought, women migrate to secure extraincome for their families (Alston 2006). The intrahouseholdreallocation of labor can lead to a decline in agriculturalproduction and in turn result in food insecurity and anoverall decrease in financial assets (FAO 2005).

Women are still absent from the climate change andnatural resource-related decision-making processesat all levels

Equal participation in community-based decision makingremains a complex and difficult goal to achieve, especially inthe contexts of highly unequal gender and class relations. Atthe local level, more natural resource projects and interven-tions emphasize community-level participation. Careful andthoughtful planning in relation to gender must be exercisedin the design of participatory projects. Community-levelparticipation often leaves women’s voices and concernsunacknowledged. Even when women attend meetings orevents, they may not feel free to voice their opinions, or theiropinions and needs may not be taken seriously (Agarwal2003; Prokopy 2004). Community participation often favorslocal elites, usually men, but sometimes elite women’s con-cerns directly conflict with and override poor women’s accessto resources such as fuel and water (Singh 2006; Sultana2006). Despite attempts to mainstream gender at thenational and international levels, few women participate.Gender is rarely a central issue in policy initiatives. Men tendto dominate in the newly emerging decision-making andpolicy arenas of climate change and bioenergy.Women’s lim-ited participation in decision-making processes at interna-tional and local levels restricts their capacity to engage inpolitical decisions that can impact their specific needs andvulnerabilities (Denton 2002; Masika 2002).

GENDER IN SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOODSFRAMEWORK

The Module applies a gender in sustainable livelihoods (SL)framework (see the SourcebookOverview for more details onthis framework). This framework conceptualizes the follow-ing elements as key in the livelihood strategies of the ruralpoor: assets, markets, information and organizations, riskand vulnerability, and policies and institutions.

The framework adopts a people-centered approach thatplaces at the center the agricultural livelihoods of ruralwomen and men and the natural resources managementstrategies they adopt. The SL framework also requires aholistic approach that integrates scientific, technical, andeconomic aspects with social and human dimensions. ThisModule applies the SL framework to natural resourcesmanagement to highlight key gender concerns in programsand projects, and aspects of the framework will be appliedin the different Thematic Notes as appropriate. To refrainfrom repetition, each component of the framework—assets, markets, information and organizations, risk and


ubp_GAS_423-474.Qxd:01-FSB-Ch01 9/22/08 9:25 AM 26

vulnerability, and policies and institutions—will not be dis-cussed in detail in each Thematic Note.

Assets

Rural women and men combine a range of assets to achievetheir agricultural livelihood outcomes. Assets critical torural women and men—not only for securing food and alivelihood for their household but also for the conservationand sustainable use and management of natural resources—include the following:

� Natural resource assets: land, water, forests, biodiversity� Financial assets: credit, capital, and income� Physical assets: technology, in particular labor-saving

technologies� Information assets: local knowledge, formal education,

access to information.

A rural household with a large range of assets at its disposalwill better cope with shocks and stresses, such as droughts.Poor rural women and men have very limited access to assets.Socially constructed gender roles and relations also influencewomen’s and men’s access to assets and the benefits obtainedfrom these assets. Gender-based inequalities often result inwomen’s and girls’ limited access to assets, which generatesimplications for natural resources management conservation.Women face a variety of gender-based constraints as farmersand managers of natural resources. In many societies discrim-inatory customary and social practices curtail women’s rightsto land; women generally receive the most marginal lands.Insecure land tenure reduces rural women’s and men’s incen-tives to improve natural resources management practices andconservation. Without secure land rights, women and menfarmers have little or no access to credit, which is essentialfor making investments in improved natural resources man-agement and conservation practices. Consequently the tech-nological advances yielding substantial gains in agriculturalproductivity over the last few decades have often bypassedwomen farmers and reduced their productivity.

Markets

Access to markets varies by gender and location.Women tendto sell in local markets where they find demand for traditionalvarieties of crops. Men tend to sell uniform and exotic vari-eties in export markets. These gender differences in marketaccess vary by location. Local trade can improve ruralwomen’s and men’s livelihoods by providing them with asource of income and, at the same time, an incentive to man-age, use, and conserve a variety of local indigenous plants.

However, women, in comparison to men, continue to facemany challenges in accessing and benefiting from markets.They face illiteracy, lack of market information, and transportto markets. At the national and global levels, unfair terms oftrade still disadvantage poor farmers, including women. Forinstance, the World Trade Organization’s Trade Related Intel-lectual Property Rights Agreement (see Thematic Note 1)poses direct challenges for poor farmers, particularly women,in accessing seeds for food production. Trade negotiationsrarely consider women’s and men’s different knowledge andskills. They often neglect their use of assets in determiningtheir livelihoods, and they overlook the potentially differentialimpact of their provisions on poor rural women and men.2

Information and organizations

Evidence from different regions shows that women often facemore obstacles than men in accessing agricultural services andinformation as well as in participating in organizations.Men relatives often mediate women’s access to information,markets, and credit. Fewer women than men participate infarmers’organizations and commercial networks. Furthermore,agricultural extension services and technology developmentfrequently target men, wrongly assuming men will conveyinformation to women (Lambrou and Laub 2004). Becausefew women own land in their own names, they rely heavily oncommon property resources. As women and men use andmanage natural resources in different ways, their full and equalparticipation in community-based decision-making processesremains critical for safeguarding local natural resources.

Risk and vulnerability

Degradation of natural resources disproportionately harmspoor rural women and men and sometimes is the principalcause of poverty. In turn, poverty can lead to the overexploita-tion of natural resources. Rural poor people rely the mostdirectly on natural resources and are the most vulnerable tochanges in ecosystems. Significant differences between theroles and rights of women and men in many societies lead toincreased vulnerability of women with the deterioration ofnatural resources. In some instances deterioration of naturalresources results in the renegotiation of gender roles.To designways to mitigate the negative impacts on rural women andmen, one must understand the context of their vulnerability.

Vulnerability depends on the types of resources womenand men rely on and their entitlement to mobilize theseresources. (Those with limited access to resources will havethe least capacity to cope with the impacts of natural



resources degradation and are thus the most vulnerable.)Natural resources degradation and natural disasters impactrural peoples’ ability to manage and conserve naturalresources. These have differential impacts on rural women’sand men’s livelihood strategies, which also vary according toage, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.

Policies and institutions

To understand the agricultural livelihood and naturalresources management strategies of women and men at thehousehold level, these strategies must be placed within thebroader political, socioeconomic, and environmental con-text. This involves analyzing the current and potentialimpacts of policies, processes, and institutions on ruralwomen’s and men’s livelihood strategies and outcomes. Thepolitical and institutional context includes the following:

� Policies: environmental, economic, energy/bioenergy,and trade agreements

� Legislation: such as land rights and intellectual prop-erty rights

� Incentives: such as for growing cash crops or improvedvarieties that could replace local varieties or for growingbiofuel feedstock

� Institutions: extension services that promote technologydevelopments and external innovations

� Culture: such as cultural norms and practices that mayinfluence women’s and men’s access rights and culturalvalues that may influence gender-based decision makingon crop, livestock, and fish selection and management.

Policies and institutional changes in sectors other thannatural resources and agriculture include economic andenergy development, demographic trends and migration pat-terns, incidence and impact of disease, and conflicts. Policies,processes, and institutions have different impacts on womenand men’s access to and control over livelihood assets.

BENEFITS FROM GENDER-RESPONSIVEACTIONS

Benefits from gender-responsive actions can be placed inseveral overarching categories.General:

� Overall improvement is seen in natural resources man-agement, use, and conservation and increased agricul-tural productivity.

� Rural women and men maximize their contributions tohousehold food security.

� Understanding and addressing the gender dimensions ofenvironment and energy programs ensure effective useof development resources.

� Gender relations improve and the social acceptance ofwomen in decision-making positions increases.

� By identifying gender-differentiated opportunities andconstraints, project implementers make better-informeddecisions and develop more effective environmental andbiodiversity conservation interventions.

� Intrahousehold relations improve with an increase inwomen’s control over household resources.

� Women’s market participation increases as they becomemore active and successful in negotiations and trade.

Biodiversity:

� Understanding rural women’s and men’s roles and tradi-tional knowledge of local biodiversity management,practices, and uses results in the development of innova-tions that meet farmers’ real needs and priorities.

� Development interventions that recognize propertyrights of rural women and men over their knowledge sys-tems and practices lead to the equal sharing of projectbenefits as well as increased biodiversity conservation.

� More effective biodiversity conservation interventionsresult from attention to gender-differentiated opportuni-ties and constraints in agrobiodiversity management.

� Biodiversity conservation increases through recognizingthe intellectual property rights of rural women and men.

Climate change:

� Households that are better equipped to cope with theimpacts of climate change or extreme weather events canbetter use, manage, and conserve natural resources.

� Efficient, cost-effective, and relevant interventions takeplace.

� Gender analysis helps clarify the specific and often differentneeds, vulnerabilities, and coping strategies of women andmen, so that they can be more adequately addressed inresponse to the impacts of climate change and variability.

� Programs create opportunities to transform gender rela-tions and empower women.

Bioenergy:

� Access to more efficient technologies and modern energysources reduces the health and safety problems associated



with energy acquisition and use. Such access lifts ruralwomen and men out of poverty and enables women andgirls to live more productive and healthy lives.

� The time burden of women and girls of walking long dis-tances, carrying heavy loads, and collecting fuel in dan-gerous areas is reduced.

� Access to more efficient technologies for household usecan reduce health and safety problems associated withindoor air pollution (UN-Energy 2007).

� Women who have access to modern fuels face a lightercooking burden, which frees up time for educational,social, and economic opportunities.

� Involving both men and women smallholders in bioen-ergy production offers the possibility of improvedincomes and livelihoods.

Natural disasters:

� Gender analysis helps to clarify the specific and oftendifferent needs, vulnerabilities, and coping strategies ofwomen and men to better respond to the impacts ofdisasters.

� Gender-responsive actions better equip households to copewith and recover earlier from the impacts of disasters.

� Postdisaster recovery efforts present opportunities totransform gender relations and empower women.

Land and water degradation and desertification:

� Affected households cope better with the impacts ofdesertification and more effectively manage and con-serve natural resources.

� Promoting the participation of women and men farmersin restoring ecosystem health facilitates the reestablish-ment of soil and land productivity.

� Strengthening the capacity of rural women and men indryland management enhances management of local

natural resources and protects the environment fromfurther stresses.

� Increasing women’s access to information and extensionservices strengthens their ability to cope with and recoverfrom dryland degradation.

MONITORINGAND EVALUATION

Monitoring and evaluation of natural resources manage-ment projects provide means for learning from past expe-rience, improving project formulation and implementa-tion, planning and allocating resources, and demonstratingresults as part of accountability to key stakeholders (WorldBank 2004).3 By measuring change in the status of womenand men over a period of time, gender-sensitive indicatorsassess progress in achieving gender equality. Researchershave little experience in the area of gender-sensitive indica-tors in the management of natural resources. To select anindicator, the cost of collecting and analyzing data againstthe quality and usefulness of the information in decisionmaking must be weighed. The indicator should be relevantto the needs of the users, clearly defined, sex disaggregated,and easy to understand and use (FAO 2007b). Both quanti-tative and qualitative indicators prove useful (see also Mod-ule 16). Examples of gender-sensitive indicators appear inthe Thematic Notes in this Module on biodiversity, climatechange, bioenergy, natural disasters, and land and water.However, Table 10.1 provides some example indicatorsacross the range of topics.

Depending on the country or region, it may also be rele-vant to consider ethnicity and caste alongside gender (bothas comparative indicators and when collecting data),because women of lower castes or ethnic minorities are usu-ally in the most disadvantaged situation.



430

Table 10.1 Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators for Gender and Natural Resources Management

Indicator Sources of verification and tools

Percentage of women and men actively participating in natural resource managementcommittees (including bank account signatory roles)

• Bank records• Committee meeting minutes• Interviews with stakeholders• Local traditional authorities (such as achief or local council)

• Program and project records

Over a set period, an increase of x percent in incomes from land-based activities (such asagriculture or forestry) among women-headed households in program areas

• Household surveys• Socioeconomic data from statistics office

Number of women and men in climate change planning institutions, processes, and research(including disaster preparedness and management) at the professional and lay-communitylevels

• Institutional and university staff records

Average number of hectares of land owned by women- and men-headed households • Land registration department records

Changes in productive hours spent by, or earnings of women and men, from, household-levelagroprocessing, fisheries-, or forest-based enterprises in comparison with baseline (or aspercentage of household income)

• Case studies• Sample surveys

Community satisfaction (disaggregated by gender) with changes in natural resourcesmanagement

• Interviews, before and after• Group interviews or focus groups

Number of women and men receiving training in natural resources management orinnovative agroforestry techniques

• Program and project records• Training records

Number of men and women producing bioenergy crops • Agricultural department statistics• Agricultural extension records• Cooperative records• Household surveys

Percentage of men and women farmers who have access to high-quality, locally adaptedplanting material

• Agricultural extension records• Interviews with stakeholders

Number of households headed by men, women, or couples benefiting from intellectualproperty rights

• Natural resources managementcommittee records and meeting minutes

Number of women and men receiving environmental services payments for protectingwatersheds or areas of high biodiversity

• Forestry or Natural ResourcesManagement Department records

• Global Environmental Facility records• Protected area management committeerecords and meeting minutes

• Protected area management contracts

Percentage of men and women owning and using energy-efficient technologies andlow-carbon practices

• Household surveys• Interviews with stakeholders

Source: Authors, with inputs from Pamela White, author of Module 16.


Biodiversity provides the basis for ecosystems andecosystem services upon which all people depend.1

Biodiversity in agriculture, forestry, and fisheriesunderpins agricultural and bioenergy production (FAO2007a; MEA 2005). Sustainable use and management ofbiodiversity result in global food security, environmentalconservation, and viable livelihoods for the rural poor. Forpoor rural households, in particular, biodiversity remains akey livelihood asset, because these households are the mostreliant on local ecosystems and often live in places most vul-nerable to ecosystem degradation. A wide portfolio ofgenetic resources proves crucial to adapting and developingagricultural production systems and for regulating localecosystems to meet the food needs of future generations.The challenges of environmental degradation, includingdesertification and climate change, underscore the need to

retain this adaptive capacity. Today the fundamental cause-and-effect relationship between biodiversity degradationand poverty has been recognized. Indeed, biodiversitymakes a vital contribution to meeting the UN MillenniumDevelopment Goals and will increase in significance in thecoming decades (FAO 2007a).

Yet genetic resources are being depleted at unprece-dented rates. As mentioned in box 10.1, species extinction ishappening 100 times as fast as the rate in the fossil record:12 percent of birds are threatened with extinction, as are23 percent of mammals and 30 percent of amphibians(www.unep.org; box 10.2). The main factors contributing tobiodiversity loss include unsustainable technologies,destructive land-use practices, invasive species, overexploita-tion, and pollution (FAO 2005).2 Climate change, driven byfossil fuel use, changes species ranges and behavior

431

Gender and Biodiversity

THEMAT I C NOTE 1

� Biomes with the highest rates of biodiversity loss inthe last half of the twentieth century are the follow-ing: temperate, tropical, and flooded grasslands andtropical dry forests (more than 14 percent lostbetween 1950 and 1990).

� Wide-ranging areas have seen particularly rapidchange over the last two decades: the Amazonbasin and Southeast Asia (deforestation andexpansion of croplands); Asia (land degradationin drylands); Bangladesh and parts of the MiddleEast and Central Asia, and the Great Lakes regionof Eastern Africa.

� Based on recorded extinctions of known species overthe past 100 years, extinction rates are approximately

100 times greater than those characteristic of thefossil record.

� Genetic diversity has declined globally, particularlyamong domestic species. A third of the 6,500 breedsof domesticated animals are threatened with extinc-tion because of small population sizes.

� Globally approximately 474 livestock breeds are clas-sified as rare, and about 617 have become extinct.

� Roughly 20 percent of the world’s coral reefs havebeen destroyed, and an additional 20 percent havebeen degraded.

� Some 35 percent of mangroves have been lost in thelast two decades in countries where we haveadequate data.

Box 10.2 Current Trends in Biodiversity Loss

Sources: FAO 2003, 2005; MEA 2005.


(www.unep.org). Unfortunately, one key solution to climatechange, the replacement of fossil fuel use with bioenergy,also threatens genetic diversity (see Thematic Note 3). Addi-tional influential forces include agricultural developmentapproaches that favor high-yield and uniform varieties ofcrops, the heavy use of agrochemicals, and the depreciationand devaluation of diversity and accumulated local knowl-edge (FAO 2003, 2007a; MEA 2005).

Poor rural households that depend heavily on biodiver-sity in forests, on common lands, and on their farms usediverse domesticated and wild plants for fuel, food, andbuilding materials. Current policies and economic systemsoften fail to incorporate the values of biodiversity effec-tively (www.unep.org). To limit these losses and address themultidimensional problems of biodiversity loss and ecosys-tem degradation, we need policies and programs that cutacross sectors and encompass the technical, economic, andsocial spheres. The human and social dimension of bio-diversity loss requires an understanding of its relation topoverty, as well as the gender-specific relationship to natu-ral resources management.

KEY GENDER ISSUES

Rural women and men play important roles in biodiversitymanagement, use, and conservation through their differenttasks and responsibilities in food production and provision.Consequently they have different needs, priorities, andknowledge about diverse crops, plants, and animals. As nat-ural resource managers, they influence the total amount ofgenetic diversity conserved and used. Women are typicallyinvolved in the selection, improvement, and adaptation oflocal plant varieties, as well as seed exchange, management,and saving. They often keep home gardens where they growtraditional varieties of vegetables, herbs, and spices selectedfor their nutritious, medicinal, and culinary advantages(box 10.3). Women, therefore, play an important role inmaintaining biodiversity, working against the decrease inbiodiversity caused in part by men favoring cash-orientedmonocultures, as in the Mexican Yucatan (Lope Alzina2007). Women are also the primary collectors of wild foodsthat provide important micronutrients in diets, are vital forthe survival of their households during food shortages, andmay also provide income. In the Kalahari Desert, fruits,gums, berries, and roots gathered by the Kung women pro-vide 60 percent of the daily calorie intake. In the Lao Peo-ple’s Democratic Republic, women gather 141 differenttypes of forest products (Momsen 2007). Women possessextensive, often unrecognized, knowledge of the location

and uses of these wild and domestic plants. Recent studiesemphasize the importance of garden vegetables, small live-

stock, and wild plants for achieving household food securityand nutritional well-being, especially among the rural poor.However, women’s roles and knowledge are often over-looked or underestimated in natural resource managementand related policies and programs (Howard 2003).

Local knowledge serves as a critical livelihood asset forpoor rural women and men for securing food, shelter, andmedicines.3 The different tasks and responsibilities ofrural women and men have enabled them to accumulatedifferent types of local knowledge and skills (FAO 2005).Some studies have expressed concern that local knowledgeis disappearing; women do not pass this information on totheir daughters, and men no longer pass it down to theirsons. Especially in women-headed households (because ofHIV and AIDS and migration), changing dietary habitslead to the erosion of women’s knowledge of processing,preparation, and storage and lead to the erosion of plantdiversity, family food security, and nutritional well-being(Howard 2003).

The type of knowledge farmers possess varies by age,gender, roles and responsibilities, socioeconomic status, andenvironment. Access to or control over resources as well aseducation, training, information, and control over the ben-efits of production also influence the type of knowledgerural women and men have. Experience-based local knowl-edge interweaves with cultural values and develops andadapts continuously to a gradually changing environment.Rural women’s and men’s local knowledge, skills, and inno-vations raise the issue of recognition and protection offarmers’ rights.


In Cameroon and Uganda, indigenous vegetablesplay an important role in both income generationand subsistence production. Indigenous vegetablesoffer a significant opportunity for poor womenand men to earn a living, as producers and traders,without requiring a large capital investment. Theindigenous vegetable market provides one of thefew opportunities for poor unemployed women tosecure a livelihood. Despite the growth in exoticvegetables, indigenous vegetables remain popularin rural areas, where people consider them moretasty and nutritious.

Source: FAO 2005.

Box 10.3 Cameroon and Uganda: IndigenousVegetables


Markets

Men tend to sell their crops in national or export markets(for uniform, exotic varieties), whereas women tend to sell inlocal markets where they find demand for traditional vari-eties (box 10.3). Trade can improve rural women’s and men’slivelihoods by providing them with income and, at the sametime, an incentive to manage, use, and conserve a variety oflocal indigenous plants. However, women, in contrast tomen, face challenges in accessing and benefiting from mar-kets. For example, in the Bamana region of Mali, men haveappropriated women’s vegetable gardens to establish market-gardening enterprises based on nontraditional foods (box10.4), which has led to a decline in nutritional well-being.

At the national and global levels, unfair trade disadvantagespoor farmers, many of whom are women. New agreementsunder the World Trade Organization influence biodiversityand have gendered impacts. Gender-based inequalities inaccess to and control over productive resources have concreteconsequences (Randriamaro 2006). Trade negotiations rarelyconsider women’s and men’s different knowledge, skills, and

uses of agrobiodiversity. The agreement on Trade-RelatedAspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) poses directchallenges for poor farmers, particularly women, to accessseeds for food production, food security, and nutritionalwell-being.4 Moreover, on the one hand, a shift toward pro-duction for the global market may be at the expense of localcrop varieties for domestic consumption.On the other hand,globalization can give women and men small-producers theopportunity to target niche markets for fair trade or organicproducts and may go far toward protecting biodiversity(Momsen 2007).

Risk and vulnerability

The impact of biodiversity loss, particularly within com-mon property resources, threatens household food securityand livelihoods. These resources prove particularly impor-tant for poor rural women, who lack secure land tenure anddepend on these common resources for fuelwood, fodder,and food and, therefore, the well-being of their households.

Commercialized agriculture often relies on the replace-ment of a wide range of locally adapted plant and livestockvarieties with a relatively small number of uniform, high-yielding varieties, causing the erosion of local plant andanimal genetic resources (FAO 1996).5 With the increasedcommercialization of agriculture, technological improve-ments have created farming systems that are highly depen-dent on external inputs such as agrochemicals, and thesesystems often bypass women. Because of their limited accessto financial resources, women may have difficulty acquiringseeds, technology, and fertilizers as well as information andtraining. These processes have negative impacts on smallfarmers, especially women, who rely on a wide variety ofgenetic diversity as part of their environmental risk man-agement strategy. In turn, this erosion of resources can alsolead to the loss of local knowledge and sometimes tochanges in gender roles (box 10.4).

Clearly, biodiversity loss entails different consequencesfor women and men in the performance of their productive,reproductive, and community roles (Lambrou and Laub2004). Coping strategies such as the improved managementof biodiversity should give options for poor rural womenand men to reduce their vulnerability to the effects of bio-diversity loss and to build the potential to react to furtherchanges (box 10.5).6 Poor rural women and men farmersoften spread risk by growing a wide variety of locally adaptedcrops, some of which will be resistant to drought or pests, andlivestock breeds that have adapted to the local agroecologi-cal zone (FAO/IPGRI 1996). Diversification, an important

THEMATIC NOTE 1: GENDER AND BIODIVERSITY 433

A case study of the Bamana region in Mali showshow men dismissed agrobiodiversity and the localknowledge held by women. The introduction ofexotic vegetables for market production, mainly amen-driven enterprise, led to a shift from subsis-tence production of a wide variety of indigenousfood plants to market gardening of a limited num-ber of exotic food varieties. This process has led toa change in gender roles, with men taking overwomen’s traditional vegetable gardens to establishcommercial enterprises. Although traditionallyresponsible for growing local plant varieties fordirect consumption, women were displaced tomarginal lands. This has implications for women’scontribution to the food security of their house-hold (reduced income and food production forhousehold consumption) and their social standingin the community. Moreover, women’s exclusionfrom the garden realm may lead to changes in culi-nary patterns, a possible decline in nutritional sta-tus, and a reduction in local plant diversity andoverall environmental stability.

Source:Wooten 2003.

Box 10.4 Mali: Changes in AgriculturalProduction, Gender Relations, andBiodiversity Loss


coping strategy adopted by poor rural households, will pro-tect them against climate change, desertification, and otherenvironmental stresses. Women, in comparison to men, areoften more vulnerable to the erosion of biodiversity, becausethey experience gender-based inequalities in accessing assetscritical to livelihood security (Lambrou and Laub 2004).

Women and men farmers’ full and equal participation inprograms and projects dealing with biodiversity conserva-tion, management, and use affects gender-responsive out-comes. Researchers and breeders often work in isolationfrom women and men farmers and are sometimes unawareof their needs and priorities beyond yield and resistance topests and diseases.7 Moreover, extension agents and researchorganizations tend to consider many local varieties andbreeds to be low-performing and inferior. National policiesthat provide incentives such as loans and direct payments forthe use of modern varieties and breeds contribute to the lossof genetic diversity and affect traditional gender roles.

POLICYAND IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

International policies and agreements regulate the manage-ment and use of biodiversity and agrobiodiversity.8 The

majority of these instruments do not highlight the potentialgender-differentiated impacts of their provisions. Only theConvention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the GlobalPlans of Action (box 10.6) recognize the key roles played byboth women and men, especially in the developing world, inthe management and use of biodiversity (Lambrou and Laub2004).9 Unfamiliar with these policy instruments, extensionworkers, development agents, and farmers working on bio-diversity and environmental conservation will find it chal-lenging to understand their impact and to implement therelevant provisions in their daily work (FAO 2005).

The CBD advocates the fair and equitable sharing ofgenetic resource benefits. It also establishes a connectionbetween sustainable conservation and development andthe rights of indigenous peoples and local communities10

(FAO 2005; Lambrou and Laub 2004). The InternationalTreaty on Plant Genetic Resources responds to the out-standing issues not covered by the CBD and formallyendorses farmers’ rights (box 10.7) through a legally bind-ing instrument at the global level. Observers have noted agrowing trend toward the recognition and creation ofindigenous rights over genetic resources and related knowl-edge (FAO 2005).

Despite the increased recognition of the linkagesbetween gender dynamics and biodiversity managementand use, little progress has been shown in translating theseinto programs and projects for agrobiodiversity manage-ment and conservation at the local level (FAO 2005). Ruralwomen’s vital contribution to the management of biodiver-sity, agricultural production, and household food securityremains misunderstood, ignored, or underestimated(Howard 2003).

GOOD PRACTICESAND LESSONS LEARNED

Experience shows that agricultural biodiversity manage-ment and related policies and programs have often failedto recognize the differences between rural women’s andmen’s labor, knowledge, needs, and priorities. This nega-tively affects biodiversity, local knowledge, and householdfood security.

Community seed fairs inTanzania

As part of the LinKS project, the Food and Agriculture Orga-nization (FAO) organized community seed fairs in Tanzaniato raise awareness about local crop diversity. The FAO pro-vided learning opportunities for the rural communities(including the younger generations), researchers, extension


Millions of households across Africa have beenaffected by HIV and AIDS. Rural women and menmay respond with a range of coping strategies. Forexample, in Uganda rural households change themix of farm products, focusing first on subsis-tence production and then on growing a surplus tosell in markets (Armstrong 1993). Another strat-egy is to reduce land under cultivation, resulting inreduced outputs (FAO 2003). In Uganda women-headed households cultivate only 1.3 acre, on aver-age, compared with affected men-headed house-holds, which cultivate 2.5 acres, on average (FAO2003). Some HIV- and AIDS-affected householdshave turned to livestock production as an alterna-tive to crop production.Other households sell live-stock to pay for medical bills and funeral expenses.A trend has been identified where households raisesmaller livestock (such as pigs and poultry)because they are less labor-intensive and oftenreadily available to women.

Source:White and Robinson 2000.

Box 10.5 HIV and AIDS—RuralWomen’s andMen’s Coping Strategies



staff, and organizations about the importance of crop diversityand local knowledge in food security. Women were the keycollectors and savers of seeds. Seed fairs provided farmers witha meeting place where they could buy, sell, and barter seed,thus encouraging the conservation of crop diversity and thespreading of local seed varieties among women and menfarmers. The seed fairs were organized on a local scale to makethem accessible and affordable for the rural communities.

After exchanging seed varieties, community members dis-cussed local practices. Seed fairs increased local networks, theappreciation of local knowledge, and the roles and responsi-bilities of farmers in managing agrobiodiversity. (See otherexamples in Module 12, in particular Thematic Note 2.)

Agroforestry domestication program

A program in Africa supported by the International Fundfor Agricultural Development (IFAD) has helped womenand men in the domestication, cultivation, and sale ofindigenous fruit and medicinal trees. The first phase ofthe program ran from 1999 to 2003 in Cameroon, theDemocratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea,Gabon, and Nigeria. Training on vegetative propagationtechniques enabled many farmers to establish their ownnurseries. As a result of project, average householdincomes increased, and women and men farmers acquirednew skills in propagation techniques, such as grafting andthe rooting of cuttings. The program has been particu-larly effective in improving the livelihoods and status ofwomen. Women’s groups have established nurseries,enabling women to participate in income-generatingactivities. This has led to an increase in school attendanceamong children. The tree domestication program has alsocontributed to increased nutritional well-being at thehousehold level, because the women also produce a vari-ety of food for household consumption previouslyunavailable to them (IFAD n.d.).

The Global Environment Facility (GEF), the financialmechanism for the Convention on Biological Diversity,helps countries fulfill their obligations under the CBD.Since 1991 the GEF has invested nearly $7.6 billion ingrants and cofinancing for biodiversity conservation indeveloping countries. The biodiversity portfolio sup-ports initiatives that promote in situ and sustainablebiodiversity conservation in protected areas and pro-duction landscapes as well as capacity building andknowledge dissemination (www.gefweb.org).The Global Plan of Action on Plant Genetic

Resources, adopted in 1996, provides a coherent frame-work, identifying priority activities in the field of in situand ex situ conservation, sustainable utilization, andcapacity building (FAO 1996). It develops activities and

measures to strengthen women’s capacity to sustainablymanage these resources (FAO 2005).The Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic

Resources, adopted in 2007, presents the first internation-ally agreed-to framework to halt the erosion of livestockdiversity and support the sustainable use, development,and conservation of animal genetic resources. The plansupports indigenous and local production systems andassociated knowledge systems. In this context, the plancalls for the provision of veterinary and extensionservices, delivery of microcredit for women in ruralareas, appropriate access to natural resources and to themarket, the resolution of land tenure issues, the recog-nition of cultural practices and values, and the additionof value to specialty products (FAO 2007c).

Box 10.6 Gender and Biodiversity in International Agreements

Farmers’ rights are based on the recognition thatfarmers play a crucial role in the management andconservation of plant and livestock geneticresources. These rights include the following:

� Protection of traditional knowledge relevant togenetic resources for food and agriculture

� Participatory decision making at the nationallevel on matters relating to the conservationand sustainable use of plant genetic resourcesfor food and agriculture

� The right to equitably participate in sharingbenefits arising from the use of plant and ani-mal genetic resources.

Source: FAO 2005.

Box 10.7 Farmers’ Rights—Protecting theKnowledge of Indigenous People andLocal Communities

ubp_GAS_423-474.Qxd:01-FSB-Ch01 9/22/08 2:41 PM Page 435


Guidelines for policy development on farm animalgenetic resources management

A joint FAO, South African Development Community(SADC), and United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) project in the SADC region developed policyguidelines that recognize women’s roles in livestock man-agement. Those guidelines assist SADC member states indesigning policies and a legal framework for the conserva-tion, sustainable use, and management of farm animalgenetic resources. The guidelines stress the need for theeffective participation of all stakeholders, with a particularfocus on women who own or manage a substantial amountof the genetic resources. In highlighting the vital role thatwomen play, the guidelines call for their full and equal par-ticipation at all levels of policy making and implementation.Furthermore, the project encourages the development ofpolicies that provide incentives to farmers for the conserva-tion and sustainable use of indigenous animal geneticresources, as well as for the protection of farmers’ rights andindigenous knowledge.

The Philippines: indigenous knowledge systems andintellectual property rights

Funded by IFAD and implemented by the InternationalResearch Centre for Agroforestry between 2003 and 2004,this project aimed to provide technical assistance in docu-menting the ethnobotanical knowledge of the Subanenindigenous communities, especially that of women. Theobjectives included identifying and documenting tradi-tional rice varieties and wild plants and animals, facilitatinglocal participatory planning of natural resource manage-ment, and establishing property rights of local communitiesover their knowledge systems and practices. Men andwomen participated equally in learning new skills of techni-cal documentation. The technical expertise of the Subanenmembers of the ethnobotanical documentation team, aswell as of concerned women, was enhanced significantly.Technical assistance helped the communities ensure thatdocumentation material that was produced guaranteedtheir intellectual property rights. A memorandum of under-standing signed by the government on behalf of the commu-nities and based on their specific requests and stipulationssecured their intellectual property rights and options forobtaining benefits from any future commercial or beneficialuse of their knowledge. The project also awakened a stronginterest in local women in continuing the reproduction ofthreatened rice varieties for in situ conservation and docu-mentation (IFAD 2004).

Nepal and India: gender, genetic resources, andindigenous minorities

The International Development Research Centre (IDRC)carried out an action research project on agrobiodiversitymanagement among three ethnic groups in the easternHimalayas, with a special focus on gender. The three groupswere the Rai of east Nepal, the Lepchas of Sikkim andKalimpong, and the Chekasang and Angami of Nagaland,India. All three research teams received training workshopsin gender analysis and writing skills. In Nepal the team builton six years of community development experience in par-ticipatory plant breeding to undertake an action researchproject to develop seed technologies for maize. The IDRCprovided interested farmers with rudimentary plant-breedingskills (field isolation, plant selection, cob selection, storagepractices). The organization provided timely technicalaction for maintaining seed purity in the course of the cropcycle and was successful in generating new seeds for thecoming season. The organization also initiated similar activ-ities with 50 farmers in an adjacent community. After a visitto eastern Nepal, two agricultural scientists from neighbor-ing Sikkim and Kalimpong started a similar initiative with20 farmers in Kalimpong, focusing mainly on the develop-ment of a disease management strategy for ginger, based onbest practices from farmers.

GUIDELINESAND RECOMMENDATIONS FORPRACTITIONERS

Rural women’s and men’s vulnerability to biodiversity lossmust be understood, so planners can design ways to miti-gate the effects of decreasing biodiversity. This implies anunderstanding of the following issues:

� Rural women’s and men’s different local knowledge ofindigenous plant, fish, and livestock biodiversity uses andpractices, including their cultural values and belief sys-tems that influence their traditional knowledge and bio-diversity management practices

� The livelihood constraints and opportunities of ruralwomen and men who are managers and users of biodi-versity and, in particular, the gender-based inequalities inaccessing and controlling critical livelihood assets such asland, credit, technology, and information, as well as par-ticipation in farmers’ organizations and other decision-making processes

� The different ways rural women and men use biodiver-sity management practices to secure a livelihood in the



face of environmental stresses such as floods anddroughts and other shocks such as HIV and AIDS

� Strategies to improve farmers’ involvement and benefitsharing, in particular, the issues of farmers’ rights andobtaining prior informed consent, which should be con-sidered within a legal and ethical context11

� Eliminating incentives for uniform varieties and sup-porting rural women and men in accessing informationabout their rights to plant genetic resources (FAO 2005)

� Gender-sensitive participatory plant breeding, whichcontributes to the conservation and sustainable use ofplant and animal genetic resources;12 as women and menuse and manage agrobiodiversity in different ways, theirfull and equal participation in decision-making processesis critical for safeguarding local biodiversity.

Often the most appropriate solutions to local problemsand needs combine traditional and scientific methods. Thisfusion enhances the adoption and acceptance of the new

methods by the local community and provides methodsthat reflect the actual needs of women and men.


The following are examples of gender-sensitive indicatorsfor biodiversity (FAO 2007b):

� Percentage of men and women farmers who have accessto high-quality, locally adapted planting material

� Number of households headed by men, women, or cou-ples benefiting from intellectual property rights

� Ratio of men’s and women’s income from production ofhigh-value horticultural crops

� Ratio of the number of livestock owned by men andwomen

� Amount of credit and microcredit available to womenand men for improving livestock enterprises.


438

Global climate change is one of the greatest envi-ronmental challenges facing the world today. Inthe twentieth century the increase in global aver-

age temperature reached 0.74°C, the average sea levelincreased by 17 centimeters, and the Northern Hemisphereexperienced a considerable decrease in snow cover (IPCC2007). Eleven of the warmest years since records have beenkept have occurred during the last 12 years, representing anaccelerating warming trend. The Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC)1 projects additional globalwarming over the twenty-first century from 1.8 to 4.0°C.2

According to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, climatewarming is unequivocal, evident from observations ofincreases in global average air and ocean temperatures,widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising sea levels.Long-term changes in climate include widespread changesin precipitation, ocean salinity, wind patterns, and extremeweather events. Extreme weather events resulting from cli-mate change include droughts, heavy precipitation, heatwaves, and the intensity of tropical cyclones (IPCC 2007).

The increase in greenhouse gas3 concentrations accountsfor most of the observed increase in global average temper-atures since the mid-twentieth century.4 The internationalresponse to climate change focuses on mitigation measuresthat aim to reduce greenhouse gases and enhance carbonsinks. Carbon sinks are the natural ability of trees, otherplants, and the soil to soak up carbon dioxide and tem-porarily store the carbon in wood, roots, leaves, and the soil.However, in recent years many observers recognize adapta-tion strategies as critical elements in reducing the vulnera-bilities to climate-induced change to protect and enhancethe livelihoods of poor women and men (Soussain, Burton,and Hammil 2003). Even if we stabilize greenhouse gas con-centrations, climate change will continue for centuries, andthe ability of the most vulnerable to adapt will remain aserious issue (IPCC 2007).

Climate change poses a serious risk to poverty reduc-tion and development, with adverse impacts expected onthe environment, human health, food security, economicactivity, natural resources, and infrastructure.5 Globalwarming will have profound effects on agriculture, forestry,grasslands, livestock, and fisheries and, thus, on foodsecurity (FAO 2007). The IPCC assesses that 20 to 30 percentof plant and animal species are in danger of extinction ifthe rise in global average temperature exceeds 1.5 to2.5°C. The sharpest impact of a changing climate will bethe rise in incidence and severity of climate-related disas-ters such as increased flooding, particularly in Asia, aswell as fiercer storms and prolonged droughts (see The-matic Note 4). The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Reportwarned that global warming would cause widespreadfood shortages in the developing world (Harvey 2007;IPCC 2007).6

Although industrial countries’ use of fossil fuel andindustrial processes contributes inordinately to green-house gas concentrations, people living in developingcountries are most likely to suffer the consequences of cli-mate change (box 10.8). This uneven distribution of theimpacts of climate change occurs both between andwithin countries. Least-developed countries prove themost reliant on rain-fed agriculture and natural resourcesand are the most vulnerable to climate change. Thesecountries generally lack the necessary adaptive capacities,such as a stable economy, infrastructure, technology,information dissemination system, and equitable accessto resources. Poor people tend to live on marginal landsthat are most subject to droughts or floods and are mostlikely to be affected by small changes in climate variabil-ity. Because of gender-based inequalities in accessing crit-ical livelihood assets such as land, credit, technology,information, markets, and organizations, women havemore exposure to these risks.7

Gender Dimensions of Climate Change

THEMAT I C NOTE 2


THEMATIC NOTE 2: GENDER DIMENSIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE 439

KEY GENDER ISSUES

Until recently, international climate change policy makershave neglected the gender dimension of climate change(Lambrou and Piana 2006a). A focus on technical solutionshas ignored social and political factors (Masika 2002). Thesuccessful implementation of climate change policies andprojects requires an understanding of the gender-basedroles and relationships vis-à-vis natural resources, as well asthe gender-differentiated impacts of climate change and thedifferent risks and vulnerabilities of women and men. Thisincludes the structural constraints that curtail women’saccess, control, and ownership over assets (Denton 2002).Research must also identify who is responsible for CO2

emissions and how social, political, and planning conditionsmight affect emission reduction (Lambrou and Piana2006b). A discussion of some gender issues related to cli-mate change follows.

Climate change impacts

Climate change could alter the tasks people perform andtheir time use, affecting men and women differently. For

example, rural women, and girls to some extent, frequentlyprovide households with water and fuelwood for heating andcooking. The time needed for their work in gathering waterand fuel will likely increase with water shortages and deple-tion of forests. Decreasing the time available to women forfood production and preparation as well as participation inincome-generating activities will likely affect household foodsecurity and nutritional well-being (see also Module 1).

Another example of climate change that directly impactsmen and women differently is the effect of climate changeon water quality and supply. Children and pregnant womenare physically vulnerable to waterborne diseases, and theirrole in supplying household water and performing domes-tic chores makes them more vulnerable to diseases, such asdiarrhea and cholera, that thrive in conditions of degradedwater.8 Decreased water resources may also cause women’shealth to suffer as a result of the increased work burden andreduced nutritional status. For instance, in Peru followingthe 1997–98 El Niño events, malnutrition among womenwas a major cause of peripartum illness.

Adaptation

At the local level, farmers continuously adapt to climatevariability. They change crops or varieties, choose differentharvest and sowing dates, alter land management, andemploy water efficiency techniques (FAO 2007). Long-termclimate change poses a new set of challenges to farmersdependent on natural resources, and so at the national andinternational levels, governments and development agenciesplay a fundamental role in building the capacity of farmersto cope with and adapt to a changing environment (Sous-sain, Burton, and Hammil 2003).

The adaptive capacity of people depends on how theycan draw from resources to maximize their livelihood out-comes (Masika 2002), so adaptation depends on factorssuch as economic status, technology, health, education,information, skills, infrastructure, access to assets, and man-agement capabilities (IPCC 2001). Differentiated powerrelations between men and women and unequal access toand control over assets mean that men and women do nothave the same adaptive capacity; instead, women have dis-tinct vulnerability, exposure to risk, coping capacity, andability to recover from climate change impacts (Masika2002). Although women are generally more vulnerable tothe impacts of climate change, they play an active role inadapting to its impacts to secure food and a livelihood fortheir household.9

� A rise in sea level exposes many communities tosevere flooding from storm surges.

� A decline in water availability may leave billionsof people facing water shortages, especially inthe Middle East and Indian subcontinent.

� In the tropics and subtropics, even small tem-perature increases can impact crop production.

� Desertification (in particular in parts of Africa,Asia, and the Middle East) and depletion offorests (in particular in the tropics and sub-tropics) lead to a loss of biodiversity.

� Disruptive seasonal rainfall patterns lead todroughts and floods, impacting crop produc-tion and increasing food insecurity in manyparts of the developing world.

� Increased frequency and intensity of extremeweather events combined with constraints onmobility lead to loss of life, injury, populationdisplacement, and economic devastation in theleast-developed countries.

Sources: IPCC 2001, 2007; Martens 1998; Masika 2002.

Box 10.8 Examples of Projected NegativeImpacts of Climate Change


Gender components determine adaptation strategies interms of how men and women can contribute. For example,as a result of gender-differentiated roles in agrobiodiversitymanagement, women often have greater knowledge ofindigenous plant varieties with important nutritional andmedicinal values (FAO 2005). As the keepers of seeds,women often possess knowledge of a variety of geneticresources to adapt to varying climatic conditions such asresistance to drought or pests. However, because men havemore secure access to land or land tenure, they have moreincentive to contribute to effective natural resources man-agement, use, and contributions necessary for adaptation.10

Gender also often determines who receives inputs foradaptation strategies. Frequently new agricultural technolo-gies bypass women farmers, despite women’s knowledge.For example, extension personnel introducing new varietiesintended for higher drought or heat tolerance rarely speakdirectly with women farmers (Kurukulasuriya and Rosen-thal 2003).

Finally, a gender component exists for the adaptivestrategies that are pursued and the consequences of adapta-tion. For example, in New South Wales, Australia, womenmigrate away from farms for work, which enables men toremain in agriculture. In other regions impacted bydrought, men migrate, leaving women, who have fewerresources, to perform agriculture. In either case, the droughtstrains traditional gendered relationships (Alston 2006).

Mitigation

Mitigation has revolved around the reduction of green-house gases and the enhancement of carbon sinks to absorbthem (Boyd 2002).11 Although responsibility for carbonemissions resides primarily in industrial countries, fossilfuel use and industrial processes, rural poverty, and subsis-tence agriculture account for a portion of emissions of car-bon dioxide that stem from deforestation and land-usechange.12 In addition, rural poor women and men generallylack access to energy-efficient services that do not degradethe ecosystem or contribute to environmental change. Ruralhouseholds typically rely on biomass for cooking and heat-ing. Because women usually prepare food, their decisionsabout cooking fuels and efficiency can reduce carbon emis-sions. Households with lower average income and level ofeducation generate lower emissions; however, they also havea lower mitigation and adaptive capacity. Low educationallevels of women and men household members limit aware-ness of mitigation options, such as the use of energy-efficientdevices (Lambrou and Piana 2006a). Therefore, as issues of

sustainable energy development (renewable energy andenergy efficiency) and sustainable transportation receivemore attention, it is important to encourage and improve theactive involvement of key stakeholders. Women’s activeinvolvement in agriculture, and their dependence on biomassenergy, make them key stakeholders in effective environmen-tal management related to mitigation (Denton 2002).


Programs in Bolivia, Costa Rica, and India contribute togood practices and lessons learned.

Bolivia: Noel Kempff Climate Action Project

Unfortunately, many climate change projects fail to takegender into account. For example, in 1996, in the region ofSanta Cruz in the Bolivian Amazon, the Noel Kempff Cli-mate Action Project’s primary objective involved purchasinglogging concessions and expanding the Noel KempffNational Park to 1.5 million hectares for conservation andincreased carbon credits. However, the project failed to takeinto account a gender perspective that recognized the dif-ferent power relations and cultural practices as well as thegender bias in institutions (Boyd 2002). The project alsoaimed to improve local agricultural and forest managementpractices, stimulate employment, and obtain 400,000hectares of communal land for three key local communities.The project provided opportunities for the participation ofboth women and men, who successfully participated insome aspects of the project. The participants met somebasic necessities, such as trying new varieties of crops andaccessing credit. With a majority of men local and technicalstaff, women had little chance to join decision-makingprocesses relating to the future of the park, land title, andother project activities. Men dominated public meetings,overlooking women’s needs and concerns, which ultimatelywere not reflected in the project activities. Boyd (2002)stresses that the project did not challenge existing genderrelations and division of labor, nor did it empower women.The project’s enforcement of existing social structures andwide reliance on traditional norms in decision makingweakened women’s ability to participate.

Costa Rica: Carbon emission mitigation throughPayment for Environmental Services Programme

Since 1996 Costa Rica’s government has implemented thePayment for Environmental Services Programme (Programa



de Pago por Servicios Ambientales) to promote and encour-age conservation, reforestation, carbon emission mitigation,and sustainable management of Costa Rica’s naturalresources.13 The program offers economic rewards tolandowners who conserve the forests on their land. However,most landowners are men, and women have little access tothe economic rewards. To help resolve this problem, FON-AFIFO (National Fund for Forestry Finance), the nationalinstitution in charge of implementing the program and pro-moting gender equity, imposes a fee. This fee goes into afund to support women who want to become landowners.14

India: carbon sequestration project

An innovative agroforestry project in Gudibanda Taluk,Karnataka, India (implemented by the NGO Women ForSustainable Development [WSD]), supports local womenand men farmers in planting mango, tamarind, and jack-fruit tree orchards for harvest and carbon sequestration.15

The project supports women’s participation in decision-making processes. One way in which the project does this isby taking into account women’s time and cultural con-straints when establishing public forums. The project set upa prototype carbon marketing facility to sell the certifiedemissions reduction of the global environmental servicesthat the participants (poor rural women and men) pro-vide.16 Because farmers have an average annual income ofless than $100, they cannot afford to plant fruit trees with-out financial assistance. Success requires expensive irriga-tion changes and planting tools. Farmers will live on the car-bon sales from their mango plantations for the first fewyears, until they harvest their crop. Fruit production shouldstart about four years after planting, and one acre of cropwill at least triple their annual income. The program antici-pates sustainable incomes for women and men farmers, aswell as the additional benefits derived from the ecofriendlyfarming techniques. The project lifetime is 35 years, with anestimated CO2 benefit of 23 tons of carbon sequestrationper acre. The project target is 35,000 acres, for a totalsequestration of 575,000 tons of carbon.


The United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange (UNFCCC), the main international policy instru-ment to address climate change, aims to stabilize the con-centrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere within atime frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturallyto climate change. The UNFCCC, supported by the 1997

Kyoto Protocol, contains legally binding targets that dictatethat industrialized countries must reduce by 2008–12combined emissions of six key greenhouse gases by at least5 percent in relation to 1990 levels.17 The Global Environ-ment Facility and the Clean Development Mechanism(box 10.9) of the Kyoto Protocol play a role in climatechange mitigation and adaptation strategies.18


Awareness and understanding of the complex links betweengender roles and relations, the environment, and livelihoodsecurity will aid in the design of climate change mitigationand adaptation projects. To ensure women’s participation inclimate change mitigation and adaptation projects, we mustincorporate women’s needs and concerns in the design ofrelevant and successful climate change policies. Pinpointingspecific goals within the main climate policies and develop-ing corresponding indicators for monitoring and evalua-tion will help mainstream gender issues into climate changepolicies. Ways of incorporating women’s needs and concernsrelating to mitigation include the following:

� Analyze women’s and men’s energy use, transport use,and other consumption patterns impacting climate.

� Introduce more formal and informal education aboutthe environmental impacts of their current life styles toincrease men’s and women’s mitigation capacity (Lam-brou and Piana 2006b).

� Promote cleaner-burning fuel for household use toreduce harmful emissions, cut household energy costs,and reduce women’s and girls’ work burdens.

� Increase poor women’s and men’s access to payments forenvironmental services.

Goals and issues related to adaptation include the following:

� Many women prove to be proactive at local levels in mit-igating hazards and strengthening the disaster resilienceof households and communities.

� Make available to both men and women usable, science-based climate prediction information and incorporateexisting local knowledge (FAO 2007).

� Strengthen the capacity of rural institutions such asextension services to use appropriate tools and strategies,including participatory identification of current vulner-abilities and risk reduction measures, implementation ofprioritized community-based disaster risk reduction

THEMATIC NOTE 2: GENDER DIMENSIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE 441



activities, and increased capacity of communities tomanage their resources (FAO 2007).


Examples of gender-sensitive indicators in climate changeinclude (indicators are from Aguilar 2007; FAO 2007) thefollowing:

� Proportion of men and women who own and use non-motorized transport and use public transport

� Number of women owning and using energy-efficienttechnologies, using renewable energy, and involved in sus-tainable forest management (climate change mitigation)

� Number of women and women-headed householdsreceiving training and assistance related to disasters(such as the number of women who know how to swim)

� Participation of women in climate change–planninginstitutions, processes, and research (including disasterpreparedness and management) at the professional andlay-community levels.

In the Kyoto Protocol the Clean Development Mecha-nism allows for and addresses divergent objectives andpriorities between the North and South. A bilateralagreement between an industrialized country and adeveloping country mandates reduced greenhouse gasemissions under the convention. Under the CDMindustrialized countries invest in projects that increaseeconomic productivity and may reduce local environ-mental problems in developing countries (Denton 2002).

Those projects that focus on technologies relating tohousehold energy, food processing, forest manage-ment, and water pumping must target both ruralwomen and men and take into account their differentroles and responsibilities. However, extension servicesthat convey this technology typically target men, whoare perceived as the principal decision makers and usersof these technologies (for a more detailed discussion,see Denton 2002; Wamukonya and Skutsch 2001).

Box 10.9 The Potential of the Clean Development Mechanism


443

Over one-third of the world’s population, 2.4 billionpeople, rely on traditional biomass in the form offuelwood, agricultural residues, and animal

wastes for their primary energy needs (Sagar and Kartha2007). Use of traditional biomass poses many problems:poor health, heavy workloads, land degradation, deforesta-tion, biodiversity loss, and climate change. New forms ofbioenergy, primarily liquid biofuels, are rapidly being devel-oped as replacements for fossil fuels. Global interest inmodern bioenergy—which includes liquid biofuels, biogas,and solid biomass—has grown rapidly in recent years.1

(This Thematic Note focuses on modern bioenergy; for adetailed discussion on the wider issues of gender and energy,refer to Modules 9 and 15.)

At a time when energy analysts anticipate a period ofunpredictable oil markets, fossil fuel dependence poses amajor risk for many developing economies. Oil importsnow consume a large and unsustainable share of the meagerforeign exchange earnings of many poor nations, offsettingany gains from recent foreign debt elimination agreements.Unstable and unpredictable oil prices have complicated eco-nomic planning around the world and are further damagingpoor economies (UN-Energy 2007).

Available energy services currently fail to meet the needsof the world’s poor. Four out of five people without elec-tricity live in the rural areas of developing countries (UNDP2004; UN-Energy 2007). Extending an electricity supplygrid to remote households in rural areas is unlikely to occurquickly because of costs that are seven times the cost of pro-viding electricity in an urban area (FAO 2006).

Given plausible economic and institutional assumptions,this century could see a significant switch from fossil fuels tobioenergy, with agriculture and forestry as the leadingsources of biomass for biofuels (FAO 2005).2 Althoughincreased production of, and access to, bioenergy offers onlyone of the possible answers to climate change and energy

security challenges,3 a number of features make it an inter-esting but complicated option (FAO 2007). Locally producedbioenergy can supply energy for local agricultural, indus-trial, and household uses, in some instances at a lower costthan fossil fuels (UN-Energy 2007). Modern bioenergy, withappropriate policies, could help meet the needs of poorwomen and men who lack access to electricity, while gener-ating income and creating jobs in poorer areas of the world.

Although the rapid development of modern bioenergypresents a broad range of opportunities for achieving sus-tainable energy, it also entails multiple trade-offs and risks.The first concern relates to the impact of bioenergy on foodmarkets, food prices, and food security. Current biofuelsdepend on food crops, including corn, sugarcane, soybeans,rapeseed, and palm oil. The boom in bioenergy has alreadyresulted in some rises in food prices.4

A second concern is the impact of modern bioenergyproduction on sustainable livelihoods for rural house-holds. If production and processing of biofuels occurthrough large-scale, vertically integrated commoditychains, small farmers will be unlikely to benefit. Efforts touse biofuels to promote sustainable development mustinclude strategies to incorporate small producers (Sagarand Kartha 2007).

The rapid development of modern bioenergy requirescareful handling of key social, economic, and environmen-tal sustainability (UN-Energy 2007). New crops, farmingtechniques, and second-generation technologies (for exam-ple, fuels made from lignocellulosic biomass feedstock usingadvanced technical processes) now under development maymitigate some of the social, environmental, and economiccosts associated with large-scale production of liquid biofu-els and increase their potential and environmental benefits.5

Where we grow crops for energy purposes, use of large-scalemonocropping could lead to significant biodiversity loss, soilerosion, and nutrient leaching, with negative consequences

Gender and Bioenergy

THEMAT I C NOTE 3


for local rural women’s and men’s ability to secure food andtheir livelihoods.

Most likely, new bioenergy production will involve large-scale biomass production that does not necessarily benefitthe rural poor. The challenge is to develop small-scale bioen-ergy concepts and technologies that local people can use andsustain. A transitional solution uses improved cook stoves,which reduce indoor pollution and burn fuel much moreefficiently. Bioenergy options, such as small- and medium-scale biogas or gasifiers and power generators, operate withlocally available biomass resources. They may become themost economical and reliable providers of energy servicesfor poor rural women and men (UN-Energy 2007).

KEY GENDER ISSUES

Gender-differentiated issues related to bioenergy differ sub-stantially among traditional biomass, small-scale biofuelproduction, and large-scale biofuel production.

Gender and traditional bioenergy

Rural women shoulder the burden of traditional biomass(fuelwood, manure, agricultural residues) collection. Manywomen spend up to three to four hours a day collecting fuelfor household use, sometimes traveling 5 to 10 kilometers aday (WHO 2006). Women in women-headed householdsreport water and fuelwood collection as their most time-consuming tasks (FAO/IFAD 2003). In many African,Asian, and Latin American countries, rural women carryapproximately 20 kilograms of fuelwood every day (FAO2006). Increasing pressure on and degradation of theseresources result in women walking longer distances fromthe safety of their communities. This increases their workburden, limiting time available for food production andpreparation, household-related duties, and their participa-tion in income-generating activities and educationalopportunities.

Women’s limited access to fuelwood relates to the heavilygendered nature of rights and responsibilities with respectto trees. Mearns (1995) reports that in Kenya women areexpected to provide their households with daily supplies ofwood, but they lack access to tree farms. Men dominate treeplanting, and trees planted in woodlots typically fall undermen’s control. Rights to trees are tied to land ownership,which falls almost exclusively to men. Thus, although treesmay be nearby, women may lack access to them and there-fore walk long distances to gather wood or switch to othertypes of biomass for fuel, such as maize stalks or dung.

Reliance on traditional biomass further entrenches gen-der disparities. When women spend many hours collectingtraditional fuels, they do not receive education and trainingfor productive income-generating activities. When with-drawn from school to gather fuel and attend to otherdomestic chores, girls lose literacy opportunities and sufferlifelong harm. They also have less time to participate inorganizations and learn to negotiate in decision-makingprocesses. Household use of traditional bioenergy lockspeople in the developing world, women in particular, into acycle of poverty and ill health (UN-Energy 2007).

The most dramatic gender-differentiated and healthbenefits from the use of modern bioenergy relate to house-hold applications. Traditional bioenergy uses affect thehealth of women more severely than men, because womentraditionally bear responsibility for household-relatedduties, including food preparation (UN-Energy 2007).Rural people rely heavily on biomass as their primary cook-ing fuel: 93 percent in sub-Saharan Africa, 87 percent inIndia, and 93 percent in Indonesia (Sagar and Kartha 2007).Open fires in the household produce unventilated smokeand expose women and children, who are most oftenindoors, to high concentrations of carbon monoxide, nitro-gen oxides, and other pollutants (Lambrou and Piana 2006).Smoke inhalation from cooking indoors with traditionalbiomass increases the risk of major diseases and is the sixthlargest health risk in developing countries. The rural poor inSoutheast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa suffer the highestdeath toll (Schirnding and others 2000; UN-Energy 2007).

Many early efforts to reduce use of traditional biomassinvolved the development and introduction of improvedcook stoves. These efforts had limited success. Some of theimproved stoves were less efficient than claimed and wererelatively expensive. Women were reluctant to give up tradi-tional cook stoves because they preferred cooking withthem, and the stoves offered additional benefits of heatingand repelling insects. More recent cook stoves have achievedmore success, especially in China and India, with estimatesof 220 million improved cook stoves worldwide (Sagar andKartha 2007).

Gender and modern biofuels

Shifting basic energy uses from traditional bioenergy (whenused in unsustainable and health-damaging forms) to mod-ern fuels and electricity poses difficult challenges (UN-Energy 2007). When household income increases, peopletypically switch to more fuel-efficient technologies. Thepush to modern bioenergy offers both possibilities and



challenges for enhancing gender equity. Poor rural womenand men often lack the economic resources to use differentbioenergy options.6 The rural poor, a disproportionatenumber of whom are women, do not have the means topurchase modern energy services. The cost and efficiency ofa stove or other systems such as biogas or small gasifiersoften deter women more than the actual cost of fuel (UN-Energy 2007).

Modern bioenergy may take the form of small-scale pro-duction or large-scale plantation production. Small-scalebiofuel use has the potential to reduce women’s health risksfrom wood fires and reduce their work collecting fuelwood.Biofuels have the potential to reduce women’s work burden,but they may also generate additional work if women pro-duce the biomass to make the fuel (such as for biogas) (UN-Energy 2007).

The transition to liquid biofuels may especially harmwomen and men farmers who do not own their land and therural and urban poor who are net buyers of food. “At theirbest,” according to UN-Energy (2007: 24), “liquid biofuelprograms can enrich farmers by helping to add value totheir products. But at their worst, biofuel programs canresult in concentration of ownership that could drive theworld’s poorest farmers off their land and into deeperpoverty.” The rural poor, women in particular, typically donot have official title to their land. Driving small farmerswithout clear land titles from their land will destroy theirlivelihoods (UN-Energy 2007).

Large-scale bioenergy production

Several key gender issues that may result from the produc-tion of large-scale biofuels include the following:

� Biofuels require the intensive use of resources includingland, water, chemical fertilizers, and pesticides, to whichsmall farmers have limited access. Women, and particu-larly women in women-headed households, will facegreater barriers acquiring these resources and participat-ing in biofuel production (Rossi and Lambrou 2008).

� The large amount of land required for biofuel produc-tion will put pressure on marginal land and commonproperty resources. Marginal lands are particularlyimportant for women who raise food crops, collect fod-der and fuel, and graze livestock. The conversion of theselands to biofuel crops might result in the displacement ofwomen’s agricultural activities toward lands that are evenmore marginal, thus decreasing household food security(Rossi and Lambrou 2008).

� The potential loss of biodiversity from large-scale mono-culture plantations may affect women and men differently.The establishment of plantations on previously unculti-vated land may threaten wild edible plant species. Womenoften rely on the collection and preparation of wild plantspecies for food, fodder, and medicine.

� Livestock farmers will be particularly affected by biofuelproduction with the conversion of grazing land to cropland and the higher price of livestock feed. Livestock isespecially important for the food security of poor farm-ers. The potential reduction in the number of animals,especially ruminants (cattle, sheep, and goats), raised bysmall farmers, will reduce their livelihood strategies. Inmany regions men are primarily responsible for manag-ing cattle and buffalo, and their ability to raise these ani-mals will be affected (Rossi and Lambrou 2008).


The Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and the FourthWorld Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 recognizedthe need to design environmental and energy programs witha gender focus (Salazar 1999). In 2001 the Ninth Session ofthe Commission on Sustainable Development urged govern-ments to address the health and safety concerns of womenand children in rural areas related to the impacts of carryingloads of fuelwood over long distances and exposure to smokefrom indoor open fires. In addition, the commission recom-mended international cooperation to promote equal accessto energy through energy policy decision-making processes(Lambrou and Piana 2006).

In 2006 FAO launched the International BioenergyPlatform as a framework for bioenergy cooperation. Thisprogram aims to enhance access to energy services fromsustainable bioenergy systems, emphasizing the provisionof modern, gender-sensitive bioenergy services for localcommunities and the most vulnerable and poor.

In many developing countries, small-scale bioenergyprojects could face challenges obtaining financing fromtraditional financing institutions. Although these projectscould provide modern energy services to rural women andmen currently lacking access, they will likely require creditmechanisms at all stages of production.


Some observers have suggested that the rural poor, whohave a small environmental footprint, gained positive expe-riences with the decentralized and small-scale production

THEMATIC NOTE 3: GENDER AND BIOENERGY 445


and use of fuel crops. The production and use of liquidbiofuels from local feedstock improve access to sustainableand affordable energy for poor rural women and men(DESA 2007).

Zambia: Small-scale production of liquid biofuels

For the last seven years a group of Zambian women with thesupport from German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) havedeveloped a soap-making enterprise using jatropha oil.Between 2000 and 2001 the National Oilseeds DevelopmentProgram, under the Ministry of Agriculture and Coopera-tives of Zambia, carried out demonstrations on the varioususes of jatropha oil through national agricultural and com-mercial shows. This project used a bottom-up approach,promoting women’s participation and ownership. In 2006the Biofuels Association of Zambia mounted an awarenesscampaign on the potential of Jatropha curcas to providepractical substitutes for fossil fuels and its important impli-cations for meeting the demand for rural energy services.In its 2007 budget the Zambian government allocated$150,000 for research on J. curcas and other biofuels. Biofu-els predominate in new energy policies, which often setstandards for a specified minimum proportion of biofuelsin blends for all consumers. In this project rural women andmen are improving their livelihoods and generating incomethrough activities related to the production of jatropha oil.

Tanzania and Mali: Small-scale biofuel production

In Tanzania a project has sought to introduce and expandproduction of jatropha as a cash crop for raw material forplant-oil industries. They demonstrated its potential inreforestation, erosion control, and reclamation ofdegraded land. Working with local women’s groups, thegrantee (KAKUTE Ltd.) trained over 1,500 women andmen in jatropha management techniques and plantedmore than 400 hectares of jatropha on marginal landsdonated by the communities. The project successfullydemonstrated the livelihood benefits of the crop, helpinglaunch jatropha farming as a cash crop, while assistingothers to begin soap-making businesses. Seventeen differ-ent village-based women’s groups coordinated the project.Women produced the seedlings and cuttings for planting.In the first four years of the pilot project, they sold 52,000kilograms of seeds to oil processors for approximately$7,800, producing 5,125 liters of oil, worth about $10,250on the local market, and 3.5 tons of soap, worth $20,533.Although the amount of oil and soap produced does not

approximate the capacity of the land to produce jatrophaseeds, it goes a long way toward demonstrating the poten-tial profitability of the crop. The project aimed to improverural women’s and men’s livelihoods and income-generat-ing activities using bottom-up approaches and promotingwomen’s participation and ownership.

The Mali Folke Center in Mali works with local ruralwomen and men in developing plantations of jatropha.7

Working with the GTZ, they use a UNDP-led technology, amultifunctional apparatus called the Mali platform, whichcan run on crude jatropha oil. The platform generates elec-tricity for the whole community and powers water pumps,crushes the oil seeds, and provides energy for a weldingand carpentry shop. The Mali Folke Center converted itsToyota pickup truck to run on jatropha oil. Women, themain beneficiaries of the project, have cited the ability touse jatropha oil for soap making as more of an economicbenefit than the energy.

Nepal: Biogas program

The World Bank’s biogas project in Nepal aims to developbiogas use as a commercially viable, market-orientedindustry by bringing fuel for cooking and lighting to ruralhouseholds. Subsidies provide a key element in makingthese biogas plants accessible to poor households. Between2004 and 2009 the project will install 162,000 quality-controlled, small-size biogas plants in the Terai, hill, andmountain regions of Nepal. Revenue from the CommunityDevelopment Carbon Fund will reduce the dependency onlarge government and external donor subsidies and willhelp expand the biogas installation to more remote andpoorer areas. These biogas plants displace traditional fuelsources for cooking—fuelwood, kerosene, and agriculturalwaste. Each biogas plant can reduce 4.6 tons of carbondioxide equivalent annually. The project will generateapproximately 6.5 million tons of carbon dioxide equiva-lent during the 10-year crediting period. The CommunityDevelopment Carbon Fund expects to purchase a mini-mum of 1 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent withthe potential of additional purchase. The project engageshousehold members to understand their needs, the possi-bilities of the technology, and where to locate it. The proj-ect estimates that women will save three hours daily perhousehold using biogas for cooking versus cooking withcollected fuelwood. Women use this time for child care, lit-eracy training, and participation in community organiza-tions. Biogas-fueled stoves also dramatically reduce indoorair pollution.



THEMATIC NOTE 3: GENDER AND BIOENERGY 447

Costa Rica: Solar-powered cookers

The focus of a project implemented by the Fundación Sol deVida (Foundation of Sun and Life) in the Santa Cruz andNicoya counties of the Guanacaste region of Costa Rica is topromote the use of solar power for cooking and to buildwomen’s capacity for other activities through constructingand using solar cookers. Over 130 households have switchedfrom wood, electricity, or gas to solar cooking, therebyreducing greenhouse gas emissions. The project has reducedthe health risks associated with wood burning and reducedwomen’s workload because they no longer collect fuelwood.The project, led almost completely by women, has sup-ported and built women’s ability to take action, particu-larly regarding the environment and livelihood issues. Itswork illustrates how women’s solar energy can open upnew opportunities for women and improve their standingin the community. Because women build the stoves them-selves, the project covers only the costs of materials, inaddition to small amounts for transportation and instruc-tors for the workshops. After women learn how to buildthese cookers, they teach others to do the same. Sol deVida has exported this model to Guatemala, Honduras,and Nicaragua.

India: Large-scale biofuel production

India’s National Mission on Biofuels plans to bring 400,000hectares of marginal land under cultivation of jatropha forbiodiesel production (Rajagopal 2007). The biofuels planconsiders these marginal lands to be of little ecological oreconomic benefit. However, these lands, which are commonproperty resources, provide essential food, fuel, fodder, andbuilding materials for the rural poor, especially the mostvulnerable (Rajagopal 2007). In India common propertyresources contribute between 12 and 25 percent of a poorhousehold’s income. The poorest households, often headedby women, rely most heavily on these common propertyresources. Thus, without specific interventions to benefitand include poor men- and women-headed households inthe benefits of jatropha production, the livelihoods of therural poor are likely to decline (Rossi and Lambrou 2008).


Understanding and addressing the linkages among gen-der, environment, and energy undergird the success of

bioenergy project development and implementation(UNDP 2007).

� Rural women and men possess different needs and pri-orities vis-à-vis energy services. Multiple strategies forproviding energy to the rural poor are needed, includingpromoting more efficient and sustainable use of tradi-tional biomass and enabling poor women and men toswitch to modern fuels and technologies. The appropri-ate strategy will depend on local circumstances.

� We must reduce harmful emissions where dependency ontraditional fuels will likely continue—for example, in thenext two to three decades in Africa (UN-Energy 2007).

� Additional measures may be necessary for small-scalewomen and men farmers to be included in medium- orlarge-scale biofuel crop production, such as policies sup-porting decentralized production, local use of the energyproduced, and organization of cooperatives or otherforms of participation.

� Subsistence farmers, women in particular, remain lesslikely to shift their production to bioenergy, particularlyif they live in marginal areas and have fewer options tocounteract risks and higher discount rates. Organizingsmall-scale women and men producers’ groups canenhance local benefits. Cooperatives can play a usefulrole in linking large firms to independent growers (as inBrazil and Mauritius). However, projects require ruralwomen’s participation in these cooperatives to ensureattention to their needs and concerns.


Examples of gender-sensitive indicators in bioenergyinclude the following (FAO 2007; see also the Monitoringand Evaluation section in the Overview):

� Percentage of women-headed and men-headed ruralhouseholds with access to electricity, water, markets, andadequate storage facilities

� Percentage of men and women owning and usingenergy-efficient technologies and low-carbon practices

� Percentage of men and women who participate in deci-sions about biomass use for energy

� Number of hours spent by men and women in obtainingbiomass for household consumption and small-scaleenterprises

� Number of men and women producing bioenergy crops.


448

The incidence of natural disasters and related envi-ronmental disasters has escalated since the 1990s(UN 2001; UNDP 2004).1 In the first half of 2006

alone, 174 disaster events occurred in 68 countries, affecting28 million people and damaging property and assets valuedat more than $6 billion (UNDP 2007). The effects of earth-quakes, landslides, drought, floods, storms, and tropicalcyclones severely threaten human survival and sustainablelivelihoods and pose a challenge to achieving the UN Mil-lennium Development Goals (FAO/WFP 2005). Disasterscause major loss of human lives and livelihoods and destroyeconomic and social infrastructure (UN 2002). Climatechange, environmental mismanagement, and degradation(including unsustainable exploitation of natural resources)as well as unplanned urbanization and uneven distributionof assets cause increased risk and vulnerability to naturaldisasters (UN 2002). (The focus of this Thematic Note is onnatural disasters; for a wider discussion on crises relating toconflicts and wars, see Module 11. For more on climatechange, see Thematic Note 2.)

Natural disasters, often exacerbated by environmentaldegradation and mismanagement, adversely impact theenvironment. With sound management, the reverse provestrue, thus establishing a direct link between disaster mitiga-tion and environmental management (King 2002). Naturalresource degradation leads to an increased frequency ofsmall- or medium-impact disasters, such as recurrent floodsor minor landslides, as well as slow-onset disasters, such asland degradation and drought. Human activity has alteredecosystems. The ability to recover from natural disturbancehas diminished considerably. For instance, deforestationimpairs watersheds; raises the risk of fires, landslides, andfloods; exacerbates droughts; and contributes to climatechange. Destruction of coastal wetlands, dunes, and man-groves diminishes the environmental buffer system forcoastal storms. All these contribute to making at-risk areas

such as low-lying islands more vulnerable to extremeweather events (Abromovitz 2001). Although oftenexcluded from databases evaluating disaster impacts, small-scale disasters often account for more aggregate sufferingthan major ones (UN 2001). Scientists project that these willcontinue to increase as a result of climate change (Abro-movitz 2001).

A growing body of evidence links environmental degra-dation and competition for natural resources to many of theinternal and international conflicts that contribute to manycomplex emergencies (McNeely 2000). For example, deser-tification exacerbated the conflict in Darfur because itforced people to migrate from their homes into areas wherethey competed with others for scarce land and water(Harvey 2007). Severe environmental stress—when accom-panied by underlying social or ethnic conflict, poverty, andweak governance—contributes to violent conflict and com-plex emergencies (UN 2001, 2002).

Although natural disasters strike in the industrializedand developing worlds, developing countries remain themost vulnerable to these risks and sustain greater losses.Countries that face similar patterns of natural hazards—from floods to droughts—often experience widely differingimpacts when disasters occur. The impact depends inlarge part on previous investment in appropriate infra-structure, urban planning, and disaster risk managementand reduction policies (UNDP 2004).2 Within developingcountries, the poor and socially disadvantaged remain themost vulnerable. Often the rural poor occupy the mostmarginal lands, relying on areas prone to drought, flood-ing, and other hazards for precarious livelihoods. Theyalso face greater exposure to hazards resulting from poor-quality construction material and lack of access to infor-mation (Kumar-Range 2001). Rural poverty frequentlydetermines risk for disasters such as flooding or drought(UNDP 2004).

Gender and Natural Disasters

THEMAT I C NOTE 4


THEMATIC NOTE 4: GENDER AND NATURAL DISASTERS 449

Gender-based inequalities in access to livelihood assets,division of labor, and participation in decision-makingprocesses result in women’s and girls’ increased vulnerabil-ity to the risks of natural disasters.3 Disaster risk reductionand management interventions must take gender intoaccount to reduce vulnerability effectively. The impacts ofnatural disasters can be mitigated by using a gender per-spective to address their root causes, including social, polit-ical, economic, and cultural vulnerabilities (UN 2002).

KEY GENDER ISSUES

Key gender issues include risk and vulnerability to disasters,postdisaster vulnerability, and disaster mitigation, response,and recovery.

Risk and vulnerability to disasters

Natural disasters affect rural women and men differently.Women and girls have limited access to and control overcritical assets that provide livelihood security, protection,and recovery, and thus they remain most vulnerable to theimpacts of natural disasters. Understanding their differentroles and responsibilities—in agriculture, fisheries, andforestry, both within the household and at the communitylevel—can reveal women’s and men’s different vulnerabili-ties (Cannon 2002).

Disaster statistics, for which sex-disaggregated data exist,show that women are more likely to die or be injured whendisaster unfolds.4 Women and children are 14 times morelikely than men to die as a result of disasters (Aguilar 2008).Women’s disaster exposure results from their overrepresen-tation in highly vulnerable social groups, including the poorand elderly, that are less able to prepare for, survive, and copewith disaster (UN 2004). Additionally for, women do notreceive timely warnings or other information about hazardsand risks (Fothergill 1998; UN 2001). Mobility restrictions,dress codes, and culturally ascribed roles and behaviors dis-advantage women. A disproportionate number of womendied in the 1991 cyclone in Bangladesh because of culturalnorms restricting their mobility outside the household. Lesslikely than men to know how to swim, women had fewchances of escaping from the affected areas. More womenthan men died in the tsunami in Sri Lanka because they didnot know how to swim or climb trees (Sachs 2007). Recentevidence also suggests that many women who drowned inthe tsunami were looking for their children. Existinggender-based inequalities in the allocation of food withinthe household put women at risk (see also Module 1). For

instance, in Bangladesh women’s lower nutritional status inpredisaster situations worsened during crises (Cannon2002; Masika 2002). Because they lack mobility andresources, elderly women, those with disabilities, pregnantand nursing women, and those with small children remainmost at risk in cases of emergency.

Postdisaster vulnerability

In postdisaster situations women remain more vulnerablethan men. Women’s responsibilities in caring for householdmembers increase after a disaster, as access to resources forrecovery decreases. The daily work involved in providingfood, water, and fuel for households after a disaster requiresintensive labor. In the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch inHonduras and Nicaragua, women’s household and careresponsibilities increased, making it difficult for them toreturn to work (Nelson and others 2002).

In many parts of the developing world, discriminatorycustomary and social practices curtail women’s rights toland. This situation deteriorates after natural disasters. Nat-ural disasters such as hurricanes, tsunamis, and earthquakesdamage and destroy land vital to women’s and men’s liveli-hoods. Disasters disrupt land ownership and use patterns bykilling land titleholders, destroying land records, and eras-ing boundaries. Other efforts delay and impede the equi-table redistribution of land, including the location ofrefugee camps, the relocation of affected communities, andmeasures to increase future resilience such as no-construc-tion zones (Brown and Crawford 2006). Poor and margin-alized women and men often have little alternative but toremain in or return to disaster-prone areas (Masika 2002).

Natural disasters frequently result in the degradation ofwater sources. Children and pregnant women are particu-larly susceptible to diseases such as diarrhea and cholerathat thrive in such conditions. Because of their roles in man-aging household water supply and domestic chores, womentake greater risks.5 Women’s health may also suffer as aresult of reduced nutritional status when their workloadincreases. For instance, in Peru following the 1997–98 ElNiño events, malnutrition among women caused peripar-tum illness. Flooding or rise in temperature in highlandareas can extend the range of vector-borne diseases, such asmalaria. Also, HIV and AIDS and other diseases can exacer-bate the disaster risks brought on by climate change, urban-ization, marginalization, and conflict (UNDP 2004). Healthproblems during disasters have psychological componentsas well as physical ones. Rural women and men victims ofdisasters may suffer from a variety of psychological problems


related to loss of family members, trauma, unemployment,and identity (Graham 2001).

To cope with small- and medium-scale, and slow-onsetdisasters, women (and girls to some extent) often take onadditional roles and responsibilities. With water shortagesand depletion of forests (as a result of wildfires, droughts,desertification, land degradation, and other occurrences),women and girls walk longer distances to collect water andfuelwood, sometimes far from the safety of their house-holds. This decreases the time available for food productionand preparation, with consequences for household foodsecurity and nutritional well-being. Girls sometimes leaveschool to help with the increased work burden. Food distri-bution in refugee camps has resulted in a significant drop ingirls’ schooling rates.

As a result of slow-onset disasters such as land degrada-tion and drought, men’s out-migration has increased insome parts of the developing world. In Brazil, for example,people call women household heads “widows of thedrought” (Branco 1995). Women left behind take on men’straditional roles and responsibilities, increasing their workburdens, but without having equal access to financial, tech-nological, and social resources (Lambrou and Laub 2004).In some regions women’s out-migration accompaniesdrought, such as in Australia, where women migrate tourban areas to seek additional income while their husbandsremain on the farm (Alston 2006).

According to some estimates, 25 million environmentalrefugees have lost their homes because of environmentaldegradation or localized conflicts related to competition forresources (Tickell 2001). Uprooted populations generallyencounter problems of protection and safety, with women inparticular suffering sexual and physical abuse. Areas outsidecamps where women gather fuelwood and water can presentdangers. Families frequently select girls to collect fuelwoodused for the preparation of food inside refugee camps, andgirls receive food in return.Women experience more violencewhile displaced than in normal circumstances, and violenceagainst women increases in postconflict situations(FAO/WFP 2005). When displaced, women in particular fre-quently find themselves stateless and dependent on externalassistance (Graham 2001). Gender and age determine entitle-ments to relief supplies, and access to food based on house-hold registration procedures favors men in some settings.

Disaster mitigation, response, and recovery

People regularly cope with all kinds of “daily” disasters andhave developed local strategies for reducing risk and

responding to natural disasters (UN 2001).6 Althoughwomen and children remain most vulnerable, many womenat local levels mitigate hazards and strengthen the disasterresilience of households and communities. In CentralAmerica, the Caribbean, and other regions where the pro-portion of women-headed households is high and womenactively engage in economic activities, women assume lead-ership roles in situations such as food distribution thatrequire organizational and administrative capacities, impar-tial judgment, and social commitment (Toscani 1998).

Responses by men and women before, during, and afterdisasters relate to their status, roles, and position in society(Kumar-Range 2001). Most studies show that women’s andmen’s responses to a disaster follow traditional gender lines(Fothergill 1998). Women take responsibility for child care,household, and supportive tasks, whereas men take leader-ship positions. Men usually participate in the public spherein formal emergency and planning operations, and they dis-courage women from participation in critical planning andpreparedness decisions.

Household organization also affects resilience. Inresponding to and recovering from disasters, social and kinnetworks determine available strategies (Kumar-Range2001). Women-headed households remain the most eco-nomically and politically disadvantaged in gaining access tothese networks (Graham 2001). In addition, rural poorwomen and men often lack savings or assets to ensure themagainst external shocks (Masika 2002).

Emergency decision-making processes after disastersoften exclude women. Women’s limited participationrestricts their engagement in political decisions that impacttheir specific needs and vulnerabilities. Relief workers viewwomen as victims rather than potential agents of change,which leads to the reconstruction of gender inequalities.For example, failure to recognize women’s informal sectorwork may reduce their access to economic recovery assis-tance and undermine perceptions of women as full con-tributors to the recovery process. To take an active part inshaping projects that meet their needs, women must par-ticipate. Men are also at risk. Failure to recognize men’ssocioeconomic and emotional needs may delay men’s long-term recovery (UN 2001, 2002).


Natural disasters and environmental management appearedon the international agenda throughout the InternationalDecade for Natural Disaster Reduction (1990–2000). TheYokohama Conference in 1994 strongly emphasized the



links between disaster reduction and sustainable develop-ment. It also recognized the need to stimulate communityinvolvement and the empowerment of women at all stagesof disaster management programs. Additionally, the BeijingPlatform for Action (1995) and the twenty-third special ses-sion of the United Nations General Assembly (2000) vieweda gender perspective as integral to natural disaster mitiga-tion (Enarson and Meyreles 2004). In 1999 the UnitedNations Inter-Agency Standing Committee issued a policystatement that requires all member organizations to main-stream gender when providing humanitarian assistance inemergencies. In 2005 the World Conference on DisasterReduction emphasized integrating a gender perspective intoall disaster risk management policies, plans, and decision-making processes.

A recognition of the social dimensions of disasters hasresulted in increased attention to community involvementand ownership. However, gender perspectives in policiesand strategies to prevent and respond to natural disasters(CSW 2002) have not yet received adequate attention.

Postdisaster reconstruction presents the opportunity tochallenge existing gender relations and empower womento better respond to this challenge. Immediately followinga disaster, the political climate lends itself to much-neededlegal, economic, and social change in such areas as gover-nance, land reform, skills development, employment,housing, and social solidarity (UN 2002). However, anexcessive focus on relief assistance may obscure or com-promise efforts to challenge these roles. Emergency reliefused inappropriately may discourage independence andundermine local coping strategies. These strategies resultin the reconstruction of vulnerability rather than the pro-motion of more equitable and sustainable conditions dur-ing the postdisaster window of opportunity for socialchange (UN 2001).

Major research gaps exist on the linkages among gender,environmental management, and disaster risk reduction atall levels—from climate change to local, small emergencies.Further work must examine gender-based differences invulnerability, livelihood impacts, and specific needs duringdisasters (UN 2001).


Interventions and life-saving strategies may succeed whengender differences have been properly understood andaddressed (FAO/WFP 2005). The following examples ofgood practices and lessons learned from relevant projectstake gender issues into account.

Safe access to fuelwood and alternative energy inhumanitarian settings

An interagency program aims to promote safe access to fuel-wood and alternative energy in humanitarian camps.7 Whenwomen leave camps to collect wood, they often experiencegender-based violence. In Chad all humanitarian effortsinclude efforts to reduce gender-based violence. In Rwandaand Tanzania programs support safety improvements. InSudan some women have successfully transitioned to the useof mud-based fuel-efficient stoves in the camps. In Indonesiapolicies promote access to sustainable timber and minimizeillegal logging caused by demand for shelter. Large concentra-tions of displaced populations in camps place excessive pres-sure on already degraded natural resources. This endangersthe food security and livelihood of nearby local communitiesand fosters resentment and controversial relations with thehost population. People compete for charcoal and wood forfuel and timber for shelter construction. Alternative sourcesof energy have had a positive impact on the livelihoods ofwomen and men. These alternative sources have reducedwomen’s and girls’ time and workload for fuelwood collectionand have reduced the risk of gender-based violence.

Nepal: Community-based disastermanagement project

The UNDP currently implements a community-based disas-ter management project in Nepal aimed at disaster risk reduc-tion. It represents a clear shift from postdisaster rescue andrelief to predisaster mitigation and preparedness and main-streaming disaster risk reduction. The main goals of the com-munity-based disaster management project are to enhancethe safety of women and men vulnerable to natural disastersand to protect common property and community resourcesin select disaster-prone districts. The project uses participa-tory approaches and capacity-building measures and aims toenhance the capacities of stakeholders at the community,district, and national levels in different aspects of disastermanagement. Additionally, the project focuses on supportingspecific disaster mitigation measures to reduce the vulnerabil-ity of women-headed, displaced, and poor households. Activ-ities include 50 percent women’s participation in training andeducation on HIV and AIDS, violence against women, andtrafficking related to vulnerability during natural disasters.

Pakistan: Building capacity to cope with disasters

Pattan, a local NGO in Pakistan, increases communitycapacity to cope with disasters through supporting social




organizations and developing local institutions. PreviouslyPattan worked in flood-prone areas that have unrepresenta-tive community organizations dominated by local powerelites, usually men. The NGO worked with the communityto organize representative, democratic forums called PattanDehi Tanzeems (PDTs) that made collective decisions.Barred by local tradition from joining the PDTs, womenformed separate PDTs and overcame resistance to their par-ticipation. Pattan used the disruptive nature of floods todevelop institutions enabling women to make key decisions.The 1992 floods completely destroyed many villages, and sothe NGO initiated a project to rehabilitate houses in whichwomen participated in the PDTs. In Pakistan women main-tain traditional (kacha) housing. The project involved womenin the design and construction of improved (pakka) housing.Households received loans, and women took responsibilityfor collecting money to repay loan installments. Initially, menobjected to giving women this responsibility, but the NGOdeveloped an easy-to-use monitoring system. The NGOintroduced the concept of joint ownership of the new pakkahousing. It took time for the concept to take hold, but meneventually saw the value in joint ownership. The experience ofthe housing project has given women confidence to take col-lective action in many other projects (Bari 1998).


Understanding the gender dimension in disaster-relateddevelopment processes requires addressing root causes andensuring equitable and efficient risk reduction measures(UN 2002). A gendered approach considers (1) the specificroles and responsibilities of men and women in food secu-rity and agriculture, (2) their main constraints and needs,and (3) their ability to carry out activities under emergencysituations and early rehabilitation (FAO/WFP 2005). Thefollowing are important principles of disaster management(see box 10.10 for additional guidelines):

� Understand gender-based differences in vulnerabilityand in livelihood impacts in natural disasters, includingsmall- and medium-scale and slow-onset disasters.

� Consider gender divisions of labor, time-use patterns,additional workload, and gender-based asymmetries inaccessing and controlling livelihood assets (FAO/WFP2005).

� Recognize that community-based preparedness andresponse must consider women’s and men’s differentphysical and socioeconomic vulnerabilities to reducetheir exposure to the adverse effects of climate change

� Create and implement, with the involvement ofcommunity groups and women’s groups, compre-hensive rural and urban development strategies andland-use plans that provide opportunities to miti-gate damages caused by hazards.

� Include gender-based hazard mapping and socialand environmental risk assessment at the appraisalstage of all development projects, involving womenand men equally at all levels of the assessment.

� Systematically include hazard proneness and gender-based vulnerabilities in environmental impact assess-ments and formulate disaster reduction measureswhere appropriate, with particular regard to the pro-tection of lifeline infrastructure and critical facilities.

� Promote agricultural technologies and give specificregard to addressing, from a gender perspective,environmental degradation hazards that threatenfood security.

� Recognize the expertise and local knowledge ofwomen and men disaster survivors and empower

them in the management of social and environmen-tal hazards and prevention of disasters.

� Target disadvantaged groups and households, andraise their awareness of women’s human rights andthe critical role women play in coping with naturaldisasters.

� Increase women’s access to risk management infor-mation through gender-sensitive early warning sys-tems and target specific social groups for warninginformation to address gender-specific needs andcircumstances.

� Collaborate in the creation of networks that pro-mote community access to gender-sensitive infor-mation and communication technologies that sup-port information exchange on environmentalmanagement and disaster risk reduction.

� Establish appropriate channels and mechanisms forinformation flow and dialogue that women andmen in disaster-affected areas may access.

Box 10.10 General Guidelines for Disaster Management

Source: UN 2001.



(Lambrou and Piana 2006). The participation and involve-ment of local women and men are essential.

� Create early warning systems and monitoring based ondetailed information to minimize exposure to vulnera-bilities and ensure preparedness. One strategy to increasepreparedness is the creation of risk maps, including gen-der-based hazard maps (UN 2002).

� Factor the effects of food aid, subsidies, and rehabilitationprograms on women as the principal providers of food forthe household. In documentation and registration proce-dures, women should have the right to register in theirown names. Devote attention to ensuring that womenhousehold heads receive benefits (FAO/WFP 2005).


Monitoring and evaluation processes enable staff to analyzethe performance of emergency operations. Indicatorsinclude the following (FAO/WFP 2005):

� Percentage of aid targeted to the different needs ofaffected men and women

� Percentage of women elected and appointed to villagecommittees

� Roles of women members in distribution committees(for example, weighing, rebagging, and monitoring thatpeople actually got their entitlements) and whether thismade the distribution fairer

� Percentage and number of women and men who bene-fited from the relief project

� Percentage of women and men who migrate and theimpact of migration on the recovery pace within thevillage

� Impact on women’s income and livelihood options (forexample, income-generating activities and new employ-ment opportunities)

� Ratio of the number of women to men who receivedemergency project relief and distributed food rations totheir families.


454

Land degradation affects more than 900 million peo-ple worldwide and as much as two-thirds of theworld’s agricultural land (UNDP 2007a). Unsustain-

able land use and climate change drive land degradation,including soil erosion, nutrient depletion, water scarcity,and desertification.1 Land degradation leads to the loss ofplant and livestock genetic and species diversity, importantsources of food, medicine, and commercial products(UNDP 2007a). Increased irrigation and expansion of agri-cultural land into former dry-season grazing areas exacer-bate land degradation (FAO 2002). In Africa, 36 countriesface dryland degradation or desertification (GEF 2003).

If present trends continue, 1.8 billion people will live incountries or regions with absolute water scarcity by 2025,and two-thirds of the people in the world could be subjectto water stress.2 The decline in quantity and quality of waterleads to overexploitation of surface and groundwaterresources and magnifies problems related to desertification.Water crises raise political tensions in many parts of theworld, particularly where people share rivers and lakesacross borders. Africans have the least access to clean water;the largest numbers of people with no access to basic sani-tation live in Asia (UNDP 2005). Competition for increas-ingly precious water resources has intensified dramaticallyover the past decades. Water shortages, water quality degra-dation, and aquatic ecosystem destruction seriously affecteconomic and social development, political stability, andecosystem integrity (UNDP 2005).

Desertification has emerged as one of the most pressingglobal environmental challenges facing the world today.3

Drylands occupy 41 percent of the Earth’s land area and arehome to more than 2 billion people, 90 percent of whomlive in developing countries.4 Dry and subhumid lands pre-sent unique landscapes containing a wide variety ofbiodiversity well adapted to the often harsh conditions thatcharacterize these areas (CBD 2007). Some 10 to 20 percent

of drylands have already degraded, with a much largernumber under threat from further desertification (MEA2005). Desertification, which leads to loss of productioncapacity, reduces the land’s resilience to natural climate vari-ability and may temporarily affect climate change (UNCCD2005). It results in persistent reductions in the capacity ofecosystems to provide services such as water, fuel, nutrients,soil fertility, and other necessities. Observers have seen amajor decline in the well-being of women and men living indrylands (MEA 2005). Desertification contributes signifi-cantly to food insecurity and famine, the internal displace-ment of people, and international migration, and it createsenvironmental refugees who add stress to areas that may notyet have degraded.5

Pastoralists and farmers in drylands try to maximizeherd size and crop production during good periods and tominimize losses and obtain some yield during periods ofdrought. Pastoralists may follow seasonal variations in veg-etation by moving their livestock, sometimes over long dis-tances. Resilience against fluctuations may mean bridgingdrought periods by drawing on local reserves, such as usingdifferent types of seeds or other adaptable geneticresources. Knowledge of local biodiversity minimizes risksin the face of land and water degradation. Rural womenand men’s reliance on a variety of genetic resources, includ-ing plant varieties and livestock breeds, allows them toadapt their agricultural systems to changing environmen-tal, economic, and social conditions. For instance, livestockhelps provide a safety net when other sources of income areno longer available.

Desertification causes rural poverty, just as rural povertycontributes to desertification. Poverty induces women andmen to increase pressure on deteriorating drylands and toexploit the natural resource base in unsustainable ways. Thisaccelerates land degradation, leading to a reduction in pro-ductivity and incomes while decreasing the livelihood

Gender Dimensions of Land andWater Degradation andDesertification

THEMAT I C NOTE 5


THEMATIC NOTE 5: GENDER DIMENSIONS OF LAND ANDWATER DEGRADATION AND DESERTIFICATION 455

options for poor rural women and men. The result is foodscarcity, malnutrition, and economic and social instability,which increase poverty and further exacerbate pressure onthe natural resource base.

Policies, programs, and projects implemented at thelocal, international, and national levels often fail to accountfor land and water degradation and desertification whenaddressing poverty and sustainable development.6 Landdegradation and desertification cannot be addressed in iso-lation from other efforts to protect biodiversity, waterresources, food security, and energy security and to combatclimate change.

KEY GENDER ISSUES

Combating desertification and reversing land and waterdegradation will help secure the livelihoods and overall well-being of women and men farmers and pastoralists. Land andwater degradation impacts poor rural women and men mostseverely, because they directly depend on these resources forsecuring food and livelihoods (Lambrou and Laub 2004).When drylands become degraded, rural women and menbecome vulnerable to food insecurity, malnutrition, dis-ease, and loss of livelihoods (FAO 2003). Gender-basedinequalities make rural women and girls more vulnerablethan men. Caste, ethnicity, and other socioeconomic consid-erations interact with gender to make certain groups ofwomen and men particularly vulnerable.

Rural women and men have different roles, responsibili-ties, and knowledge in managing natural resources. Conse-quently, the impact of land and water degradation on ruralhousehold members will vary according to gender. Thisdivision of labor results in women’s and men’s different pri-orities for water use and management. Men typically usewater for agricultural production, principally for irrigatingcash crops. Women play an important role in water man-agement as collectors, users, and managers of water (FAO2007a), and they use water for both agricultural and house-hold purposes. As previously discussed, the task of provid-ing domestic water almost always falls to women and girls.Women also water some subsistence crops and vegetablegardens and spend considerable time collecting water forhousehold use (for example, food preparation, drinking,and sanitation). Water collection makes up a large part ofrural women’s work in Asia and Africa. In Senegal womenspend 17.5 hours each week collecting water, whereas inMozambique they spend 15.3 hours in the dry season. InNepal girls play an important role collecting water, averag-ing five hours per week (Crow and Sultana 2002). In rural

Africa and India, 30 percent of women’s daily energy intakeis spent in carrying water (Ray 2007).

Depletion of land and water resources may place addi-tional burdens on women’s labor and health as they struggleto seek their livelihoods in a changing environment. Landdegradation, water degradation and scarcity, desertification,and deforestation often cause women and girls to walklonger distances to collect fuelwood and water, with conse-quences for their health and sometimes exposing them toviolence. In some cases, such as in Bangladesh, extraction ofgroundwater for irrigation has made drinking water pumpsdry up (Crow and Sultana 2002).

Through their different tasks and responsibilities, ruralwomen and men have accumulated knowledge and skillsconcerning the management and use of biodiversity in dry-land ecosystems. This includes knowledge of local crop vari-eties, animal breeds, tree species, agricultural systems, andthe medicinal and nutritional values of plants. Adept atmanaging their own scarce resources, rural women and menliving in drylands have developed coping strategies to dealwith periods of scarcity. Local knowledge provides a widerange of accumulated experience on how to manage naturalresources in farming and grazing (UNCCD 2005). Ruralwomen’s and men’s local knowledge proves crucial to theconservation, use, and management of drylands, includingits biodiversity.

In southern and eastern Africa, some HIV- and AIDS-affected households have turned to livestock production asan alternative to crop production. People adopted thisstrategy when soils became infertile and crop managementpractices too demanding for the available labor. Otherhouseholds sell cattle to pay for medical bills and funeralexpenses. In pastoral societies, in which milk provides amajor component of nutrition, selling cattle can con-tribute to malnutrition. Some households raise small live-stock, such as poultry, which is a less labor-intensivepractice and is often the responsibility of women (Whiteand Robinson 2000).

Insecure land tenure reduces rural women’s and men’sincentives to make long-term investments in soil rehabilita-tion and conservation, which are crucial to drylands man-agement. A reduction of agricultural productivity and morecompetition for relatively productive land leave womenwith the more marginal, fragile lands. The impact of envi-ronmental degradation on common property resources indrylands threatens household food security and livelihoods.Poor rural women who lack secure land tenure depend onthese common resources for fuelwood, fodder, and food—and, therefore, the well-being of their households.


The projected increase in freshwater scarcity will causegreater stresses in drylands.Water shortages not only under-mine agricultural production but also threaten the health ofaffected households. Local norms and customary practicescan limit women’s rights to water resources (Gender andWater Alliance 2003). Access to water depends on landrights, control over resources, and social networks, all ofwhich more severely restrict women than men (IFAD 2006).

Excluding women’s roles and perspectives in water andland management interventions will have adverse effects.For instance, an inappropriate design or location of tapstands or wells may increase the time women spend collect-ing water (FAO 2007a). Many projects emphasize participa-tion of men and women in water management associations.A study in India found that (1) even when women are onwater management boards, they choose not to attend meet-ings and send men relatives instead, and (2) women in dif-ferent castes often have different needs for water, with elitewomen’s preferences determining the placing of handpumps and thus decreasing poor women’s access to water(Singh 2006).

In southern and East Africa, HIV and AIDS have led toincreased tenure insecurity for women and children. Aswomen become widows and children lose their parents toAIDS, the incidence of “property grabbing” increases. Theperpetrators are not always women; in some regions ofNamibia and Zambia, sisters-in-laws are the main perpetra-tors (Izumi 2007). Most often, a husband’s relatives takeland and other productive assets from the deceased’s widowor children.


The international community has long recognized thatdesertification presents a major economic, social, and envi-ronmental concern to many countries in all regions of theworld. In 1977 the United Nations Conference on Deser-tification adopted its “Plan of Action to Combat Deser-tification.” The United Nations Environment Programmeconcluded in 1991 that the problem of land degradation inarid, semiarid, and dry subhumid areas had intensified(UNCCD 2005). To tackle the problem of desertificationwith renewed efforts, the international community adoptedthe United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification(UNCCD) in 1994. The convention stresses the importanceof a bottom-up participatory approach in identifying, imple-menting, monitoring, and evaluating projects that combatdesertification and mitigate the effects of drought. TheUNCCD recognizes the role of women in rural livelihoods,

explicitly encouraging the equal participation of womenand men (Lambrou and Laub 2004).

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) alsoacknowledges the importance and uniqueness of the biodi-versity of dry and subhumid lands.7 In 2000 the CBD Con-ference of the Parties emphasized the importance ofincreasing the knowledge base and supporting best manage-ment practices on dry and subhumid lands; the CBD alsorecognized the need for the full participation of women atall levels of policy making and implementation.8 The WorldSummit on Sustainable Development reaffirmed landdegradation as one of the major global environment andsustainable development challenges of the twenty-first cen-tury, calling for action to address causes of desertificationand land degradation and to restore land and addresspoverty resulting from land degradation (GEF 2003).

Linkages among biodiversity, poverty alleviation, andgender issues remain intertwined with land and waterdegradation and desertification. Because they consider it“nonscientific” or inferior, practitioners overlook or ignorerural women’s and men’s local knowledge on the conserva-tion and sustainable use of natural resources.


Involving women in participatory land and water manage-ment promotes more sustainable land and water use, rever-sal of desertification, and improved socioeconomic condi-tions (Aswani and Weiant 2004; Nyssen and others 2004).Projects that adopt a bottom-up participatory approachcreate an “enabling environment,” designed to support localwomen and men in achieving livelihood security.

Asia: Farmer-Centered Agricultural ResourceManagement

Supported by the UNDP and implemented by FAO, theFarmer-Centered Agricultural Resource Management(FARM) program was implemented in China, India,Indonesia, Nepal, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, andVietnam.9 Between 1993 and 1998, the program aimed topromote sustainable use and management of naturalresources in agriculture and household food security in eco-logically fragile, rain-fed areas. Recognizing that womenfarmers contribute significantly to agriculture, the programpromoted women’s participation in decision-makingprocesses and other activities at all levels. FARM adopted aparticipatory assessment planning (PAP) approach thatincorporated a gender analysis tool—a practical tool for



THEMATIC NOTE 5: GENDER DIMENSIONS OF LAND ANDWATER DEGRADATION AND DESERTIFICATION 457

examining activities, problems, knowledge, and access tonatural resources of both women and men. The output ofthe PAP approach resulted in greater accountability andequitable sharing of benefits and ownership of assets. FARMalso carried out training of trainers under FAO’s Socio-eco-nomic and Gender Analysis Program (SEAGA). Theemphasis on gender has created awareness and improvedunderstanding of social-equity issues among communitymembers. Women have begun to play important roles indecision making and leadership management.

China:Wulin mountains minority-areasdevelopment project

This joint IFAD–World Food Programme project aimed toincrease food and cash crop production through a range ofland-improvement activities. These included the conversionof dryland to paddies, improvement of livestock and fishproduction, and literacy and numeracy training for women.Improved drinking water supply systems and the introduc-tion of labor- and time-saving technologies reducedwomen’s workloads. Small livestock husbandry providedadditional income for food, school fees, and clothing, anddrinking water systems and training improved hygiene andhealth. Women gained self-esteem and social position withtheir entrepreneurial success.

Egypt: Matruh Resources Management Project

The Matruh Resources Management Project, funded by theWorld Bank, seeks to break the cycle of natural resourcedegradation and poverty in the fragile ecosystem of Matruh,Egypt, in which Bedouin women play a critical role in ruralproduction and environmental management. The projectworks closely with community groups to define the needs ofwomen and men and ensure participation in preparing andimplementing local resource management plans. To fulfillthese objectives and enable the community groups toaddress gender issues effectively, project staff received earlygender training. In addition, women extension agents basedin each subproject area work directly with women.

The Gambia: Partial participation by women inirrigation program

Efforts undertaken through development initiatives haverarely succeeded in providing women farmers with secureaccess to irrigated assets.10 Sometimes women obtain accessindirectly or acquire irregular or seasonal access, but even

when they do obtain use of irrigated land, they may end uplosing this access. When IFAD-funded drylands projectsattempted to ensure better access for women to irrigatedland (for example, by designating the land only for women’scrops), men sometimes took over the crops, as in a rice irri-gation project in The Gambia. However, “partial participa-tion” by women in irrigation projects may still benefitwomen. Women’s consumption of water improved, eventhough their control of assets and status did not increase.Women may also use water for their livestock or theirdomestic needs, even though they cannot use it for theircrops. Indirect or limited access to irrigation water maysomewhat improve their livelihoods in the short term.

Mauritius and Rodrigues: Capacity-building forsustainable land management

The UNDP implemented this three-year, $1.38-millionproject (including a Global Environmental Facility grantof $600,000) to design sustainable land managementcapacities in appropriate government and civil societyinstitutions and user groups.11 The project’s long-termgoal was to ensure that agricultural, pasture, forest, andother land management efforts in Mauritius andRodrigues consist of sustainable, productive systems thatmaintain ecosystem productivity and ecological functionswhile contributing directly to economic and social well-being. Women participated actively in stakeholder consulta-tions during the project’s formulation. Women represented31 percent of overall participation at the inception work-shop, where they voiced their needs and contributed theirperspectives. Since that time, the project has ensured agood balance of women and men in training courses andother activities. A gender specialist conducts capacity-building exercises to ensure that the project takes genderissues into consideration in all UNDP-supported projects,including sustainable land management.

Niger:The Keita Project

The Keita Project, financed by the Italian Government andimplemented by FAO with support from the World FoodProgramme, aimed at combating desertification in the Keitaregion of Niger. The project adopted a gender-sensitive par-ticipatory approach that led to better understanding of localland-use systems and husbandry. Its aim was to facilitatewomen’s access to income-generating activities (garden andfruit production, sheep production) and promote their par-ticipation in local and national-level organizations and



activities. Time-saving technologies introduced by the proj-ect alleviated women’s work burden.


An assessment of gender-specific relationships to naturalresources and of gender-differentiated impacts of land andwater degradation and desertification will facilitate thedevelopment of effective projects related to land and waterdegradation and desertification. The following guidelinesare of particular importance:

� Understanding the gender-based inequalities in accessinglivelihood assets, in the division of labor, and in partici-pation in resource planning and management provides asound basis for the sustainable management of land andwater.

� To understand the gender-differentiated vulnerabilitiesand coping strategies in relation to land and water degra-dation and desertification, we must identify changes inland use, land scarcity, and the economy that affect theability of women and men to meet their livelihood needs.

� The success of sustainable land and water managementrequires women’s and men’s full and equal participation,through incorporating local women’s and men’s perspec-tives, needs, and priorities. In some cases, women canbenefit from partial participation. Efforts to encouragewomen’s participation in decision-making processes andorganizations should take into account women’s timeand mobility restrictions. Serious efforts should ensurethat women’s participation goes beyond tokenism. Inaddition, these efforts must acknowledge that womenfrom different castes and classes may have different inter-ests and power in making natural resource managementdecisions such as where to locate pumps.

� Strengthening the capacity of women and men usersand managers of drylands resources remains one of themost important factors in reversing land and waterdegradation. Participatory processes and innovations incommunity-based planning and decision making workbest to build capacity. Women must gain leadershippositions, participate in organizations, and gain accessto technology. Strengthening women’s group-basedlending has sometimes enabled women to overcomerequirements for collateral. Credit activities served asentry points for organizing women for broader activities(IFAD 2006).


Examples of gender-sensitive indicators include the follow-ing (FAO 2007b):12

Land:

� Average number of hectares of land owned by women-headed and men-headed households

� Percentage of women and men with de facto and de jureland rights

� Number of women and men with decision-makingauthority in cooperatives and marketing associations

� Ratio of number of men and women with access to creditbased on land rights.

Water:

� Ratio of women and men who are members of waterusers associations

� Ratio of number of irrigated farms managed by womenand men

� Change in the number of hours of labor required by menand women with the introduction of irrigation projects.


459

PROJECT OBJECTIVESAND DESCRIPTION

The goal of the LinKS project was to improve ruralwomen’s and men’s food security and promote thesustainable management of agrobiodiversity.1 To

achieve this goal, the organizers raised awareness of howrural men and women use and manage agrobiodiversityand promoted the importance of local knowledge for foodsecurity and sustainable agrobiodiversity at local, institu-tional, and policy levels. They worked with a range of stake-holders—development agents, researchers, and extensionservices—to strengthen their ability to recognize and valuewomen and men farmers’ knowledge and use gender-sensitive and participatory approaches in their policies,programs, and interventions.

Launched in 1997, the project, funded by the governmentof Norway and administered by FAO, operated in Mozam-bique, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe.Activities in Swaziland beganin 2000 and continued until the end of September 2005.

The main strategy of the project was to support, buildon, and strengthen the efforts of other groups alreadyworking on food security, indigenous knowledge, and agro-biodiversity issues in the four countries. These othergroups included NGOs, research, training, and academic

institutions; government agencies; and policy institutions.The project teams and management used participatoryapproaches in project design, formulation, and implemen-tation activities.

The project operated through three central areas ofactivities:

� Capacity building and training to raise awareness anddevelop tools and methods to enhance capacity, changedevelopment practitioners’ attitudes about rural womenand men’s local knowledge, and stress the importance ofthis knowledge for sustainable management of biodiver-sity and food security

� Research on gender-based differences in farmers’ knowledgeand management of biodiversity, highlighting the role ofagrobiodiversity management for food security, and thedifferent roles and responsibilities of rural women andmen in the use and management of agrobiodiversity

� Communication and advocacy to enhance the exchange ofinformation about the value of local knowledge in agri-culture between communities, as well as with institutionsthat work with farmers and policy makers.

INNOVATIVE FEATURES

The LinKS project was conceived in response to the emerg-ing international debates on the sustainable management ofnatural resources and participatory approaches during theearly 1990s culminating in the 1996 International TechnicalConference on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agri-culture. In the period leading up to 1996, the understandingof gender and local knowledge systems and the rich sourceof information embodied in the knowledge, skills, and prac-tices of women and men as managers and users of biodiver-sity were not very clear. Agricultural and rural developmentprograms and policies, in particular those related to naturalresources management, often failed to take into account

Gender, Biodiversity, and Local Indigenous KnowledgeSystems (LinKS) for Food Security

INNOVAT I V E ACT I V I T Y P ROF I L E 1

What’s innovative? The LinKS project played animportant role in shedding light on how foodsecurity will have to build much more on localknowledge and agrobiodiversity with a clearunderstanding of gender implications, keeping inmind the continuously changing global socioeco-nomic and political conditions. The participatorymanagement style, together with a holisticapproach, represented a new and innovativeapproach for FAO in project implementation.



rural women’s and men’s local knowledge systems in farm-ing activities (Rocheleau 1996; Shiva 1996). Furthermore,research, science, and national policies tend to underminethe value of local knowledge, capacities, skills, and innova-tions of local farming communities to sustain and manageagrobiodiversity and secure food. The misconception thatlocal knowledge proves inferior to scientific and technicalapproaches leads to a marginalization and loss of local prac-tices and knowledge.

The LinKS project evolved with the aim to bridge thisgap between local and scientific knowledge (box 10.11).

BENEFITSAND IMPACTS

The project enhanced the capacity of participants in under-standing the linkages between local knowledge, gender, andagrobiodiversity and incorporating these issues in theirwork through the use of gender-sensitive participatoryapproaches. Workshops organized to document traditionalpractices emphasized, first, the potential benefits and risksof sharing such knowledge, and, second, the responsibilitiesof researchers and development agents to record and docu-ment local knowledge. Several specific training workshopswere organized to strengthen knowledge and skills in imple-menting gender-sensitive participatory agricultural andlivestock research and training. Other capacity-buildingactivities included the following:

� About 1,125 people participated in the training workshopson gender, local knowledge, and biodiversity and theapplication of gender analysis and participatory methods.

� A training manual, Building on Local Knowledge, Genderand Biodiversity, highlighted the specific concepts andlinks between these issues from the perspective of sus-tainable livelihoods.

� A local pool of experienced trainers was built up to facil-itate with the training workshops on LinKS issues andgender-sensitive participatory approaches.

� Integration of local knowledge, gender, and agrobiodiver-sity issues in the educational curriculum of local trainingcolleges, universities, and other institutions of higherlearning (such as the Sokoine University of Agriculture).

� Visits provided farmers, researchers, NGO representatives,and development workers an opportunity to exchangeideas and experiences, and to take part in mutual learningexperiences. In Tanzania, as part of a research projectfocusing on the management of animal genetic resourcesby the Maasai, pastoralists from various study areasexchanged visits to share experiences and views.

The project also supported 28 research activities that doc-umented and increased understanding of the linkagesbetween local knowledge, gender, and agrobiodiversity; rein-forced collaboration between researchers and rural commu-nities; demonstrated the complementarities between thelocal and scientific systems of knowledge; and enhanced thepotential of developing approaches to increase food securityand agrobiodiversity. The stakeholders identified three broadtopics as particularly important: (1) traditional seed systems(box 10.12), (2) animal production and genetic diversity(box 10.13), and (3) the relation between HIV and AIDS andlocal knowledge systems (box 10.14).

Biodiversity serves as one of the most important natu-ral assets for poor rural women and men. They rely ona diverse range of natural resources—crops, trees, live-stock, fish—for subsistence production and sale. Yet,because of environmental stresses, introduction of newimproved varieties and marginalization of local knowl-edge, biodiversity is lost at a rapid rate, posing a gravethreat to long-term food security.

The different tasks and responsibilities of ruralwomen and men result in accumulation of differenttypes of local knowledge and skills. This local knowledge

shapes and influences plant and animal diversity at boththe gene and species levels. It also provides an importantcoping strategy for poor rural women and men vulnera-ble to the risk of environmental degradation and naturaldisasters. For instance, poor rural women and men farm-ers often spread risk by growing a wide variety of locallyadapted crops, some of which will be resistant todrought or pests.

Thus, local knowledge, gender, and agrobiodiversityare closely interrelated.

Box 10.11 Linkages between Local Knowledge, Biodiversity, Food Security, and Gender Issues

Source: FAO 2005.


INNOVATIVE ACTIVITY PROFILE 1: GENDER, BIODIVERSITY,AND LOCAL INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS FOR FOOD SECURITY 461

The project’s communication strategy increased the visi-bility of women’s and men’s knowledge among communities,development workers, and policy makers. Communicationactivities conducted through participatory processes includedthe following:

� A total of 787 researchers, policy makers, and developmentworkers participated in workshops and seminars organizedto raise awareness and facilitate discussion of the issues.

� Small workshops explored farmers’ rights and intellec-tual property rights. Through these workshops, the proj-ect fostered discussion of local knowledge and its link tobiodiversity conservation and food security in each ofthe project countries.

� Twenty short case-studies, 33 research reports, and twovideos were disseminated to project partners throughtraining workshops, seminars, and the LinKS projectmailing list.

� Agricultural fairs, contributions to national televisionand radio programs, national newspapers, and specialistmagazines were given support.

� A Web site (www.fao.org/sd/links/gebio.htm) providesuseful resources and links to information sources.

LESSONS LEARNEDAND ISSUES FORWIDERAPPLICABILITY

The project’s thematic focus and the scope of its activities,as well as the number of countries involved, made it a com-

Research activity on gender and biodiversity wasset up in the southern highlands of Tanzania, aregion heavily exposed to improved seed vari-eties. The goal was to improve the availability andaccessibility of high-quality seeds of crop vari-eties preferred by farmers to enhance householdfood security. The main findings at the end of theproject were the following: (1) some crop specieshad disappeared because of changes in weather,migration, government policies and interven-tions, or farmers’ preferences; (2) many varietieshad been introduced; (3) in general, agrobiodi-versity increased over the years; (4) levels of foodconsumption and their composition variedwithin the different socioeconomic groups; (5)food-secure households relied more on staplefood and less on natural and collected crops; and(6) the informal system provided a better sourceof seeds and information for many farmers thanthe formal seed system.

Source: Author.

Box 10.12 Tanzania:Traditional Seed Systems

In the Mbarali district, a study was conducted togauge local knowledge on breeding and selectionof livestock in the Maasai community. The studyexamined the types of animals (cattle, sheep,goats) preferred and the criteria used to achievethe desired traits. These preferences were analyzedin relation to gender and age, roles and responsi-bilities, decision making, and goals of food secu-rity and herd survival. The objective was to let theMaasai pastoralists identify the gaps and makecorrections. The threats or constraints to the pas-toralists’ local knowledge for the sustainable man-agement of indigenous livestock were identified,and possible solutions offered. The decreasinggrazing land and water for livestock in the Mbaralidistrict and livestock diseases were major con-straints. (See also Module 14.)

Box 10.13 Tanzania:Animal Production andGenetic Diversity

A study on the impact of HIV and AIDS on localseed systems in both Mozambique and Tanzaniashowed the gender specificity of local knowledge.Men and women are responsible for differentcrops; for example, a widower would not necessar-ily know or be able to produce, after his wife’sdemise, the local crops she had planted. Her spe-cific knowledge about local seed varieties would belost. HIV and AIDS constitute a severe threat toagrobiodiversity. At the request of four communi-ties in Tanzania, several local seed fairs enabledfarmers to share and exchange their local knowl-edge and local seed varieties.

Source: FAO 2005.

Box 10.14 The Relation between HIV and AIDSand Local Knowledge Systems



plex project to implement. Addressing and linking the mainthemes of gender, local knowledge, and agrobiodiversitybrought conceptual and analytical challenges as well.Gender-sensitive participatory approaches proved to be the most validapproach to achieve the project objectives.

The project adopted a holistic, interdisciplinaryapproach for understanding the linkages between gender,local knowledge systems, and agrobiodiversity manage-ment for food security. Research activities were designed ina process-oriented way to include the active involvement ofall disciplines in planning, implementation, analysis, andinterpretation. Because ministries, universities, and mostNGOs traditionally work within a sectoral approach, such amultidisciplinary approach proved extremely challenging,

Project partners experienced difficulties grasping theconceptual themes and applying them to their work.Despite intensive training, the application of concepts tofield work and data analysis remained unclear toresearchers. Consequently, researchers participated in pre-field training to ensure that they were able to documentlocal knowledge in such a way that local communities ben-efited. Training workshops focused on the application ofgender-sensitive participatory tools. It became clear thatworkshops were not sufficient to increase understanding ofthe concepts and their linkages; thus, a training manual wasdeveloped to address this gap.

The participatory management style of the project pre-sented limitations due to existing institutional frameworksand bureaucracy. To mitigate these limitations, LinKS set upa special project structure that entailed national coordina-tion teams with managerial responsibility for project activi-ties in each project country. National team offices within the

hosting institutions facilitated a closer collaboration withpartner institutions.

A major lesson learned was that training prior to under-taking research, although important, was not sufficient. Par-ticipants often stressed the need for postworkshop follow-up, monitoring, and mentoring. LinKS tried to address thisthrough intensive technical support throughout theresearch process, from research design, data collection, andanalysis to interpretation and presentation. Furthermore,many researchers found analyzing socioeconomic data chal-lenging and consequently failed to report research results ina coherent and eloquent manner, thus, pointing to the needfor capacity building and developing appropriate trainingmaterials.

Research activities were closely linked to capacity build-ing and advocacy. Government officers, researchers, andNGO staff who participated in the training and awarenessworkshops often developed research proposals for increas-ing recognition of the knowledge of men and women,documenting experiences, community-to-communityexchanges, or follow-up action. All research activitiesexplored the hypothesis that women are important custodi-ans of knowledge in the management of biodiversity. Com-munication at the rural community level, conductedthrough participatory research processes, encouraged dia-logue, feedback to communities, and follow-up action thatfurther enhanced learning and empowerment. Researchreports were shared with the local communities and stake-holders for feedback. Such feedback sessions were alsoimportant to identify follow-up action with the local com-munities and stakeholders to ensure that they benefitedfrom the studies.


463

PROJECT OBJECTIVESAND DESCRIPTION

The aim of the Karnataka Watershed DevelopmentProject (KWDP) is to improve the productivepotential of selected watersheds; the steps involved

include the following actions:

� Enhance production and livelihood systems.� Strengthen community and institutional arrangements

for natural resource management.� Promote participatory involvement of primary stake-

holders/beneficiaries.� Offer assistance to women, the landless, and other vul-

nerable groups by supporting investments in incomegeneration activities.

The project also aims to strengthen the capacity of com-munities to participate in planning, implementation, socialand environmental management, and maintenance ofassets. They will operate in a more socially inclusive mannerwithin the framework of a watershed development planimplemented through community groups.

The KWDP, initiated in 2001 and scheduled to end in2009, is being implemented in seven districts of Karnatakaby the Watershed Development Department of the govern-ment of Karnataka and funded by the World Bank. The

target districts are drought prone and dominated by rain-fed agriculture. High soil erosion leads to declining produc-tivity. Groundwater from existing tubewells is only for threeto four months after monsoon rains. Deterioration of com-mon lands results from poor management.

The project addresses (1) social mobilization and institu-tion building to help plan and implement participatorywatershed treatments, (2) farming system intensification andparticipatory research, (3) income generation activities tobenefit socially vulnerable and landless groups, and (4) capac-ity building, monitoring, and evaluation. The project isbeing implemented in a phased manner: phase 1 consists of10 subwatersheds, phase 2 covers 20 subwatersheds, andphase 3 covers the final 47 subwatersheds. The project is nowworking mainly on the phase 3 subwatershed.

The project uses a complex institutional structure todevelop critical partnerships between government techni-cal specialists, NGOs, communities, local authorities, andresearch organizations, for instance, through the formationof community-based organizations such as self-helpgroups (largely women and landless), area groups (mainlylandowning farmers), and a community-level executivecommittee. Self-help groups, the basic units of planning forincome generation activities, are consolidated at the micro-watershed level.

BENEFITSAND IMPACTS

On over 270,000 hectares, soil and water conservationimproved average crop yields to between 525 and 1,136 kilo-grams per hectare. Crop diversity, especially cash crops,increased to four to nine crops. Groundwater availabilityfollowing monsoon rains improved to four to six months.

The project established 4,300 farmer groups and 6,600new self-help groups to sustain participatory watershed man-agement across 7,000 communities in 742 microwatersheds.

India: KarnatakaWatershed Development Project

INNOVAT I V E ACT I V I T Y P ROF I L E 2

What’s innovative? Program design promotesgreater local participation and encompasses tradi-tional soil and water conservation as well as rurallivelihood development. The gender dimension ofKWDP aims at creating opportunities for vulnera-ble groups, including women’s economic activity,access to basic resources, and participation indecision-making processes.


The KWDP significantly impacts the lives of women.Visible impacts include increased self-esteem, confidence,and decision-making ability; improved livelihoods; andeconomic empowerment.

Annual household income increased to approximately$373. Self-help groups flourished with project support. Tak-ing into account member savings, project revolving funds,and leveraged commercial loans, the total potential capitalbase in these community groups is almost $13 million, whichis being used to help establish small businesses, particularlyamong women and the landless. The majority of membersare women. More than 60 percent of the self-help groups arelinked to commercial financial institutions. Moneylendersare no longer a major force in these communities.

The success of self-help groups in creating savings resultedin women’s economic empowerment. Women in self-helpgroups better articulate their needs and plan their livelihoodstrategies. The majority of women feel that the project hasoffered several new opportunities, such as a teleconference, asatellite-based training program, and demonstrations.

Approximately 70 percent of the women and landlessparticipating in the income-generating activity componentpreferred to enhance their incomes through livestock andpoultry production. The project partners agreed to intro-duce village-based private veterinary service providers,“Gopal Mitras,” to promote effective and low-cost service topeople. Field visits and monitoring and evaluation data con-firm the important role that the Gopal Mitras now play inmany communities. All Gopal Mitras use mobile phones tomake it easier for people in more distant villages to call viaa community call box. Earnings by the Gopal Mitras rangefrom $75 to $375 per month, with an average of $125.

Women’s role in decision making has improved consid-erably at both the family and the community/institutionlevels. More than 70 percent of women reported that theirlife has changed for the better with respect to education,financial matters, marriages, and other social issues. At theinstitutional level, about 70 percent of women feel thattheir status has improved, their views are respected, andtheir social acceptance level has increased.

LESSONS LEARNED

The discussion below surveys some of the lessons learnedfrom past experiences.

� Specific emphasis on women’s participation in capacitybuilding includes training programs and exposure visits.Group formation, leadership, conducting meetings, and

skill development modules stress women’s participation.This project strives to improve the status of women,increase their participation, and empower them to bemore self-reliant and self-confident. The project facilitatedwomen and vulnerable groups to participate and expresstheir views freely. Thus, the project addresses communityempowerment, social justice, and gender equality.

� The training provided by the project created a high levelof awareness and confidence among the executive com-mittee and self-help groups, but relatively less among thearea groups. The training knowledge is utilized primarilyfor microcredit management and income-generatingactivity rather than for watershed activity. Women viewaccess to credit as vital to their ability to earn income andto control their status and autonomy.

� Marginal and landless people are the major beneficiariesof demonstrations in the project (81 percent). However,the spread of knowledge about watersheds remains lim-ited. People conceive of the project as more of anincome-earning enterprise rather than spreading knowl-edge about watershed management.

� The increased financial stability through savings andemployment generation (at the self-help group level) hassubstantially reduced people’s dependency on money-lenders. The extra earnings and employment opportuni-ties have decreased out-migration, especially in theHaveri district and, to a lesser extent, in Chitradurga,Kolar, and Tumkur. Families now experience the oppor-tunity to live together with family members. However,long-term employment generation is yet to be realized.

� The Haveri and Kolar districts report slightly improvedaccess to fodder and fuel, and a few districts reportimproved drinking water facilities. However, these issueslargely depend on natural resource development andincreased biomass, which require a longer period to showresults.

� Reasons for the limited participation of women includethe nonsupportive social environment, cultural taboos,the presence of dominant caste and politically influentialmembers, illiteracy, and a lack of clarity of benefits.

CHALLENGES FORWIDERAPPLICABILITY

� Self-help groups should develop a sense of identity, cohe-siveness, and competence in areas such as managing theirfinances, taking up group income-generating activities(IGAs), and involvement in community affairs. IGAproducts produced under the project can be branded as“KWDP” as a unified marketing label.



� Women are usually unable to participate in communityactivities without the consent and support of men intheir families and in the community. Men, therefore,need to be more aware of the importance of the contri-bution of women to the project and to the developmentof the village.

� Women field guides can work effectively with women,and it is easier for women staff to interact with them inthe community. More women field guides are needed,and they need to be trained in facilitating women’s par-ticipation and technical aspects of the project.

� The involvement of women in project planning shouldbe ensured, especially with respect to how they are treated,participation in productive work, and benefits of produc-tion. Open-house meetings at regular intervals ensurebetter transparency and participation.

� Women committee members must be given specificresponsibilities and made signatories to the bankaccounts to emphasize the importance of their role.

� Equal opportunities in employment and equal wages formen and women commensurate with the nature of workmust be ensured.

� Women should be given rights over village commonproperty land to access the resources for their livelihood,and benefit-sharing mechanisms should be developedfor wider participation.

� Common property resources must meet daily householdneeds for fuel and fodder and provide livelihood optionsfor women. Social fencing creates hardships for vulnera-ble groups. To circumvent the long gestation period forrealizing the benefits, a buffer zone approach should beused to develop common property land.

NOTES

Overview

This Overview was prepared by Carolyn Sachs (PennsylvaniaState University) and Marina Laudazi (Consultant), withinputs from David Boerma, Dominique Lantieri, ReginaLaub, Sibyl Nelson, Andrea Rossi, and Reuben Sessa (FAO),and reviewed by Mary Hill Rojas (Consultant); Yianna Lam-brou (FAO); Ilaria Firmian, Maria Hartl, and Sheila Mwa-nundu (IFAD); and Erick Fernandes, Robin Mearns, andDaniel Sellen (World Bank).

1. “Global Environment Outlook 4,” www.unep.org.

2. Commonwealth/International Labour Organization,WTO TRIPS Agreement, Globalisation and Gender Briefs,Series 2, July, www.ilo.org/dyn/empent/docs/F1599852333/No%202%20-%20TRIPS.pdf.

3. For a full discussion on monitoring and evaluation, referto Module 16.

Thematic Note 1

This Thematic Note was prepared by Carolyn Sachs (Penn-sylvania State University) and Marina Laudazi (Consultant),with inputs from David Boerma, Dominique Lantieri,Regina Laub, Sibyl Nelson, Andrea Rossi, and Reuben Sessa(FAO), and reviewed by Mary Hill Rojas (Consultant);Yianna Lambrou (FAO); Ilaria Firmian, Maria Hartl, andSheila Mwanundu (IFAD); and Erick Fernandes, RobinMearns, and Daniel Sellen (World Bank).

1. “Global Environment Outlook 4,” www.unep.org. TheConvention on Biological Diversity defines biodiversity asthe variability among living organisms from all sources,including terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystemsand the ecological complexes they are part of; this includesdiversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems.The convention defines sustainable use as the use of compo-nents of biological diversity in a way and at a rate that doesnot lead to the long-term decline of biological diversity,thereby maintaining its potential to meet the needs andaspirations of present and future generations.

2. Over the last few decades, agricultural development hasbeen characterized by agricultural intensification andexpansion, achieved mainly through technological advance-ments and the replacement of local plant or livestock vari-eties with improved, high-yielding, uniform varieties, aswell as large-scale conversion of forests or other naturalhabitats to monocultural farming systems (FAO 2005).

3. Local knowledge is a collection of facts and relates to theentire system of concepts, beliefs, and perceptions that peo-ple hold about the world around them. This includes theway people observe and measure their surroundings, howthey solve problems, and how they validate new information(FAO 2004; Warburton and Martin 1999).

4. Note that there is some contention between TRIPS andthe CBD. TRIPS allows for the privatization of biologicalresources, but the CBD acknowledges that local communi-ties have rights over these resources and the indigenousknowledge involved in their usage (Sahai 2003).

5. High-yielding exotic crops are often less nutritious thanindigenous varieties. FAO’s 1996 State of the World’s PlantGenetic Resources for Food and Agriculture report states thatthe main cause of genetic erosion, reported by almost allcountries, is the replacement of local varieties by improvedor exotic varieties and species (FAO 2005).

6. “Poverty and Climate Change: Reducing the Vulnerabil-ity of the Poor through Adaptation,” www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/27/2502872.pdf.

MODULE 10: NOTES 465


7. Gerry Toomey, “Farmers as Researchers: The Rise ofParticipatory Plant Breeding,” International DevelopmentResearch Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, Project No. 950019,www.idrc.ca/en/ev-5559-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html.

8. In addition to the ones listed here, the legal instrumentsrelating to biodiversity include the International Undertak-ing on Plant Genetic Resources adopted by FAO in the early1980s to protect plant genetic resources; the InternationalTreaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture,which promotes conservation and sustainable use of plantgenetic resources for food and agriculture; and the GlobalStrategy for the Management of Farm Animal GeneticResources, which provides a technical and operationalframework for assisting countries. Further information onthese aspects is highlighted in Bragdon and others (2003).

9. Because of space limitations, the relevant policy instru-ments will not be discussed in detail here. For a discussionon these instruments from a gender-sensitive perspective,see Bragdon and others (2003); FAO (2005); Lambrou andLaub (2004).

10. For a full discussion on the intellectual property rightsof indigenous and local communities, see FAO (2005);Lambrou and Laub (2006).

11. For a full discussion on these issues, see FAO (2005).

12. Cathy Rozel Farnworth and Janice Jiggins, “Gender andParticipatory Plant Breeding,” CGIAR, Program on Partici-patory Research and Gender Analysis, www.prgaprogram.org/modules/DownloadsPlus/uploads/PRGA_Publications/General/Reports/PPBMonograph4.pdf. Conventionalbreeding programs are recognized to have brought littlebenefit to some marginalized groups of farmers. However,encouraging examples can be found of projects in whichwomen and men farmers are involved in crop improvementand breeding programs.

Thematic Note 2

This Thematic Note was prepared by Carolyn Sachs (Penn-sylvania State University) and Marina Laudazi (Consul-tant), with inputs from David Boerma, Dominique Lantieri,Regina Laub, Sibyl Nelson, Andrea Rossi, and Reuben Sessa(FAO), and reviewed by Mary Hill Rojas (Consultant);Yianna Lambrou (FAO); Ilaria Firmian, Maria Hartl, andSheila Mwanundu (IFAD); and Erick Fernandes, RobinMearns, and Daniel Sellen (World Bank).

1. The IPCC is a body of the world’s leading scientists con-vened by the United Nations. It has been established toassess scientific, technical, and socioeconomic informationrelevant for the understanding of climate change, its poten-tial impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation. TheIPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.

2. Continued greenhouse gas emissions at or above cur-rent rates would cause further warming and induce manychanges in the global climate system during the twenty-firstcentury that would very likely be larger than those observedduring the twentieth century.

3. The main human-produced greenhouse gases are car-bon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and chloroflurocar-bons. Because of space limitations, this Thematic Note willnot explore the scientific basis of climate change. For infor-mation, see the IPCC’s assessment reports at www.ipcc.ch.

4. This is an advance since the IPCC Third AssessmentReport (2001), which concluded that “most of the observedwarming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due tothe increase in greenhouse gas concentrations.”

5. See also “Poverty and Climate Change: Reducing theVulnerability of the Poor through Adaptation,” www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/27/2502872.pdf.

6. In this context, climate change was brought before theUN Security Council for the first time in April 2007, as theissue was identified as one of the key factors behind the con-flict in Darfur, because desertification had forced peoplefrom their homes and into areas where they competed withothers for scarce resources such as water (Harvey 2007).

7. See the Overview for this Module and the Key GenderIssues section in this Note.

8. See “Poverty and Climate Change: Reducing the Vulner-ability of the Poor through Adaptation,” www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/27/2502872.pdf.

9. FAO, IFAD, and the World Bank have provided evidencethrough a number of their studies and lessons learned. Seealso Thematic Notes 1 and 4 and Module 11.

10. Human activity has altered ecosystems so extensively thattheir ability to bounce back from natural disturbance hasdiminished considerably. For instance, deforestation impairswatersheds; raises the risk of fires, landslides, and floods;exacerbates droughts; and contributes to climate change.Destruction of coastal wetlands, dunes, and mangrovesdiminishes the environmental buffer system for coastalstorms. All these contribute to making at-risk areas (such aslow-lying islands) more vulnerable to extreme weather events(Abramovitz 2001); see also Thematic Note 4.

11. For a detailed discussion on mitigation policies aimed atreducing or avoiding greenhouse gas emissions in the areasof renewable energy and energy efficiency, see ThematicNote 3 and Module 15. The causes of global warming can bereduced either by reducing the emissions of greenhousegases or by subtracting carbon dioxide from the atmosphere(www.fao.org/clim).

12. www.fao.org/clim/mitigation_en.htm.

13. Payments for environmental services are a market-basedconservation tool in which land users are paid for the



environmental services they generate. The central principlesof this approach are that those who provide environmentalservices should be compensated for doing so and that thosewho receive these services should pay for their provision(see the Overview for more details).

14. www.fonafifo.com/index.htm.

15. For examples of best practices and lessons learned relat-ing to sustainable energy development (energy efficiencyand renewable energy), see Thematic Note 3 and Module 15.For natural disaster projects, see Thematic Note 4 andModule 11.

16. For more information on this mechanism, see ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/docs/misc37 or www.climateindia.com.

17. “United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange,”http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf.

18. For a full discussion on the Clean Development Mecha-nism and gender issues, see Denton (2002); Lambrou andPiana (2006a).

Thematic Note 3


1. This Thematic Note uses the following definitions: Bioen-ergy: energy produced from organic matter or biomass. Bioen-ergy includes all wood energy and all agroenergy resources(FAO 2006; UN-Energy 2007). Biomass:material of biologicalorigin (excluding material embedded in geological formationsand transformed to fossils), such as energy crops, agriculturaland forestry wastes, and by-products, manure, or microbialbiomass.Biofuel: fuel produced directly or indirectly from bio-mass, such as fuelwood, charcoal, bioethanol, biodiesel, biogas(methane), or biohydrogen. Modern bioenergy: biomass thatmay be burned directly, further processed into densified anddried solid fuel, or converted into liquid or gaseous fuels usingso-called first- or second-generation technologies, dependingon their level of development.

2. For a discussion on the plausible institutional and eco-nomic assumptions necessary for bioenergy development,see UN-Energy (2007). Projections to 2050 suggest thatbioenergy sources could supply 10 to 25 percent of totalenergy demand (FAO 2005, 2007).

3. As a low-carbon or carbon-neutral source of energy,biofuel systems with low-energy inputs into the production

process are already significantly contributing to climatechange mitigation by replacing fossil fuels and through car-bon sequestration in plants and soil biomass in perennialenergy plantations (FAO 2006).

4. The demand for corn for ethanol in the United Statesdoubled or tripled the price of corn in Mexico between 2006and 2007, which led to a tortilla crisis. Poor Mexicansreceive more than 40 percent of their protein from tortillas.In the United States, chicken feed costs increased 40 percentbetween 2006 and 2007 because of rising corn prices (Sagarand Kartha 2007).

5. The full cycle of greenhouse gas emissions of bioenergyvaries widely based on land-use changes, choice of feed-stock, agricultural practices, refining or conversionprocesses, and end-use practice. If, for example, forest isconverted into sugarcane, treated with chemical fertilizersand pesticides, and refined with coal and natural gas, theresulting biofuel could have a greater impact on climate overits life cycle than fossil fuels (UN-Energy 2007). A recentstudy estimates that when the amount of land cleared togrow corn, sugarcane, and soybeans for fuel crops is takeninto account, biofuels will have higher greenhouse gas emis-sions than fossil fuels (Fargione and others 2008).

6. Modern forms of energy such as electricity and petro-leum-based fuels account for only a fraction of the energyuse of poor rural communities. The expansion of the elec-tricity grid is costly and often not affordable for poor com-munities, particularly those in sub-Saharan Africa. Electricityfrom renewable energy sources such as small hydro, solar,and wind energy systems also has high capital costs. SeeUnited Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs(DESA), “Small-Scale Production and Use of Liquid Biofu-els in Sub-Saharan Africa: Perspectives for SustainableDevelopment,” Background Paper No. 2 for Commission onSustainable Development, Fifteenth Session, www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd/csd15/documents/csd15_bp2.pdf.

7. www.malifolkecenter.org.

Thematic Note 4


1. Annual economic losses associated with such disastersaveraged $75.5 billion in the 1960s, $138.4 billion in the1970s, $213.9 billion in the 1980s, and $659.9 billion in the1990s (UNDP 2004; a billion is 1,000 million).

MODULE 10: NOTES 467


2. The level of risk in relation to natural disasters in asociety is determined by the levels of vulnerability com-bined with the level of probability of the occurrence of anatural hazard (flood, drought, landslide, earthquake,volcanic eruptions, storm, cyclone) as well as the level andintensity of such a hazard. See United Nations Divisionfor the Advancement of Women (DAW), “EnvironmentalManagement and the Mitigation of Natural Disasters: AGender Perspective,” Report of the Expert Group Meeting,Ankara, Turkey, November 6–9, www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/env_manage/documents/EGM-Turkey-final-report.pdf.

3. Social vulnerability to disasters is a function of humanaction and behavior. It describes the degree to which asocioeconomic system or physical assets are either suscepti-ble or resilient to the impact of natural hazards and envi-ronmental changes (ibid.).

4. Whether it is a drought in Malawi (Vaughan 1987), acyclone in Bangladesh (Ikeda 1995), or an earthquake inMexico (Dufka 1988).

5. “Poverty and Climate Change: Reducing the Vulnerabil-ity of the Poor through Adaptation,” www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/27/2502872.pdf.

6. For a full discussion on disaster mitigation, response,and recovery, see Module 11.

7. The agencies taking part are the DPKO, FAO, IFRC,IOM, OCHA, OHCHR, UNDP, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF,UNIDO, WFP, and WHO.

Thematic Note 5


1. “Global Environment Outlook 4,” www.unep.org/geo/geo4/media.

2. Ibid.

3. United Nations University, “Experts Advise World Poli-cies to Cope with Causes, Rising Consequences of Creep-ing Desertification,” www.inweh.unu.edu/inweh/drylands/Algiers_news_release-Final.pdf.

4. Ibid. According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assess-ment (2005), drylands include all terrestrial regions wherethe production of crops, forage, wood, and other ecosys-tem services is limited by water. Formally, the definitionencompasses all lands where the climate is classified as dry

subhumid, semiarid, arid, or hyperarid. This classificationis based on Aridity Index values.

5. See note 56 above.

6. Ibid.

7. See Thematic Note 1 for details on the CBD.

8. “What Is Dry and Sub-humid Lands Biodiversity?”www.cbd.int/drylands/what.shtml.

9. FARM Programme, http://dbtindia.nic.in/FARM/page1.htm.

10. IFAD (2006).

11. UNDP (2007b).

12. For more on monitoring and evaluation of naturalresources management projects, see the Overview. For a fulldiscussion on monitoring and evaluation in general, seeModule 16.

Innovative Activity Profile 1

This Innovative Activity Profile was written by Marina Lau-dazi (FAO), based largely on Lambrou and Laub (2006), andreviewed by Catherine Ragasa and Mary Hill Rojas (Con-sultants) and Maria Hartl (IFAD).

1. Agrobiodiversity comprises the variety and variabilityof animals, plants, and microorganisms that are useddirectly or indirectly for food and agriculture, includingcrops, livestock, forestry, and fisheries. It comprises thediversity of genetic resources (varieties, breeds) andspecies used for food, fodder, fiber, fuel, and pharmaceuti-cals. It also includes the diversity of nonharvested speciesthat support production (soil microorganisms, predators,pollinators) and those in the wider environment that sup-port agroecosystems (agricultural, pastoral, forest, andaquatic) as well as the diversity of the agroecosystems.Local knowledge and culture can therefore be consideredas integral parts of agrobiodiversity, because it is thehuman activity of agriculture that shapes and conservesthis biodiversity.


This Innovative Activity Profile was written by Marina Lau-dazi (FAO), based largely on project documents, andreviewed by Catherine Ragasa and Mary Hill Rojas (Con-sultants) and Maria Hartl (IFAD).

REFERENCES

Overview

Agarwal, Bina. 2003. “Gender and Land Rights Revisited:Exploring New Prospects via the State, Family, and Mar-ket.” Journal of Agrarian Change 3 (1/2): 184–224.


ubp_GAS_423-474.Qxd:01-FSB-Ch01 9/22/08 9:25 AM 8

Alston, Margaret. 2006.“The Gendered Impact of Drought.”In Rural Gender Relations, ed. B. Bock and S. Shortall,165–80. London: CABI.

Denton, Fatma. 2002. “Climate Change Vulnerability,Impacts, and Adaptation: Why Does Gender Matter?”Gender and Development Journal 10 (2): 10–20.

Enarson, Elaine, and Lourdes Meyreles. 2004. “InternationalPerspectives on Gender and Disaster: Differences andPossibilities.” International Journal of Sociology and SocialPolicy 24 (10/11): 49–63.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2004. The Stateof Food and Agriculture 2003–2004. Rome: FAO.

———. 2005. Building on Gender, Agrobiodiversity andLocal Knowledge. Rome: FAO.

———. 2007a. “Environment and Agriculture.” Committeeon Agriculture, 20th Session, Rome, April.

———. 2007b. “Gender-Sensitive Indicators.” Draft, FAO,Rome.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007.“Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contributionof Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth AssessmentReport of the Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange.” IPCC, Geneva.

Lambrou, Yianna, and Regina Laub. 2004. Gender Perspec-tives on the Conventions on Biodiversity, Climate Changeand Desertification. Rome: Food and AgricultureOrganization.

Masika, Rachel. 2002. “Gender and Climate Change.” Gen-der and Development Journal 10 (2): 2–9.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). 2005. Millen-nium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington, DC: IslandPress. Also available at www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.aspx.

Prokopy, Linda Stalker. 2004. “Women’s Participation inRural Water Supply Projects in India: Is It Moving beyondTokenism and Does It Matter?”Water Policy 6: 103–16.

Rocheleau, Dianne. 1996. “Gender and Environment: AFeminist Political Ecology Perspective.” In Feminist Polit-ical Ecology: Global Issues and Local Experiences, ed.Dianne Rocheleau, Barbara Thomas-Slayter, and EstherWangari, 3–23. New York: Routledge.

Sachs, Carolyn. 2007. “Going Public: Networking Globallyand Locally.” Rural Sociology 72 (1): 2–24.

Singh, Nandita. 2006. “Women’s Participation in LocalWater Governance: Understanding Institutional Contra-dictions.” Gender Technology and Development 10 (1):61–76.

Sultana, Farhana. 2006. “Gendered Waters, Poisoned Wells:Political Ecology of the Arsenic Crisis in Bangladesh.” InFluid Bonds: Views on Gender and Water, ed. KuntalaLahiri-Dutt, 362–87. Kolkata: STREE.

UN-Energy. 2007. Sustainable Bioenergy: A Framework forDecision-Makers. New York: United Nations.

World Bank. 2004. Monitoring and Evaluation: Some Tools,Methods, and Approaches.Washington, DC: World Bank.

———. 2005. Agriculture Investment Sourcebook. Washing-ton, DC: World Bank.

———. 2007. World Development Report 2008: Agriculturefor Development.Washington, DC: World Bank.

Thematic Note 1

Armstrong, S. 1993. “The Last Taboo.”World AIDS 29: 2.

Bragdon, Susan, Cary Fowler, Zenete Franca, and ElizabethGoldberg, eds. 2003. Law and Policy of Relevance to theManagement of Plant Genetic Rresources. The Hague:International Service for National Agricultural Research.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 1996. State of theWorld’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.Rome: FAO.

———. 2003. HIV/AIDS and Agriculture: Impacts andResponses. Case Studies from Namibia, Uganda and Zam-bia. Rome: FAO.

———. 2004. “What Is Local Knowledge.” Module 1, factsheet in Building on Gender, Agrobiodiversity and LocalKnowledge. Rome: FAO. Also available at www.fao.org/sd/links/documents_download/Manual.pdf.

———. 2005. Building on Gender, Agrobiodiversity andLocal Knowledge. Rome: FAO.

———. 2007a. “Environment and Agriculture.” Committeeon Agriculture, 20th Session, FAO, Rome, April.


———. 2007c. “Global Plan of Action for Animal GeneticResources” Draft, FAO, Rome.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)/InternationalPlant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI). 1996. “Work-ing Group Meeting,” International Plant Genetic ResourcesInstitute, Rome, October 1–4.

Howard, Patricia. 2003.Women and Plants, Gender Relationsin Biodiversity Management and Conservation. London:ZED Books.

International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).2004. “Enhancing the Role of Indigenous Women inSustainable Development: IFAD Experience with Indige-nous Women in Latin America and Asia.” Third Sessionof the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, IFAD,Rome.Also available at www.ifad.org/english/indigenous/pub/documents/indigenouswomenReport.pdf.

———. n.d. “Tree Domestic Programs in Africa Help Fam-ilies Out of Poverty.” IFAD, Rome. Also available atwww.ruralpovertyportal.org/.

MODULE 10: REFERENCES 469


Lambrou, Yianna, and Regina Laub. 2004.Gender Perspectiveson the Conventions on Biodiversity, Climate Change andDesertification. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.

———. 2006. “Gender, Local Knowledge and LessonsLearnt in Documenting and Conserving Agrobiodiver-sity.” United Nations University (UNU) Research PaperNo. 2006/69, UNU, Helsinki.

Lope Alzina, Diana Gabriela. 2007. “Gendered ProductionSpaces and CropVarietal Selection: Case Study in Yucatan,Mexico.” Journal of Tropical Geogaphy 28 (1): 21–38.

Millennium EcosystemAssessment (MEA). 2005.MillenniumEcosystem Assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press. Alsoavailable at www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.aspx.

Momsen, Janet. 2007. “Gender and Biodiversity: A NewApproach to Linking Environment and Development.”Geography Compass 1 (2): 149–62.

Randriamaro, Zo. 2006. Gender and Trade. Brighton, U.K.:BRIDGE/Institute of Development Studies. Also availableat www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/reports/CEP-Trade-OR.pdf.

Sahai, Suman. 2003. “India’s Plant Variety Protection andFarmers’ Rights Act.” Current Science 84 (3): 407–11.

Warburton, Hilary, and Adrienne Martin. 1999. “Local Peo-ple’s Knowledge in Natural Resources Research.” InSocio-Economic Methodologies for Natural ResourcesResearch. Chatham, U.K.: Natural Resources Institute.Also available at www.nri.org/publications/bpg/bpg05.pdf.

White, Joanna, and Elizabeth Robinson. 2000. HIV/AIDSand Rural Livelihoods in Sub-Saharan Africa. Greenwich,England: Natural Resources Institute, University ofGreenwich.

Wooten, Stephen. 2003. “Losing Ground: Gender Relations,Commercial Horticulture, and Threats to Local PlantDiversity in Rural Mali.” In Women and Plants, GenderRelations in Biodiversity Management and Conservation,ed. Patricia Howard, 229–42. London: ZED Books.

Thematic Note 2

Abramovitz, Janet. 2001. “Unnatural Disasters.”WorldwatchPapers 158, October, Worldwatch Institute, Washington,DC.

Aguilar, Lorena. 2007. Gender Indicators. Geneva: WorldConservation Union.

Alston,Margaret. 2006.“The Gendered Impact of Drought.”In Rural Gender Relations, eds. Bettina Bock and SallyShortall, 165–80. London: CABI.

Boyd, Emily. 2002. “The Noel Kempff Project in Bolivia:Gender, Power and Decision-Making in Climate Mitiga-tion.” Gender and Development 10 (2): 70–77.

Denton, Fatma. 2002. “Climate Change Vulnerability,Impacts, and Adaptation: Why Does Gender Matter?”Gender and Development 10 (2): 10–20.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2005. Buildingon Gender, Agrobiodiversity and Local Knowledge. Rome:FAO.

———. 2007. Adaptation to Climate Change in Agriculture,Forestry and Fisheries. Perspectives, Framework and Prior-ities. Rome: FAO.

Harvey, Fiona. 2007. “UN Climate Panel Detailed Potentialfor Global Conflict.” Financial Times, October 13.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001.Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerabil-ity. Contribution of Working Group II of the IPCC to theThird Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

———. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Con-tribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the FourthAssessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Cli-mate Change. Geneva: IPCC.

Kurukulasuriya, Pradeep, and Shane Rosenthal. 2003. “Cli-mate Change and Agriculture: A Review of Impacts andAdaptations.” Climate Change Series 91, Agriculture andRural Development Department and EnvironmentDepartment, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Lambrou,Yianna, and Grazia Piana. 2006a. Energy and Gen-der Issues in Rural Sustainable Development. Rome: Foodand Agriculture Organization.

———. 2006b. Gender: The Missing Component of theResponse to Climate Change. Rome: Food and AgricultureOrganization.

Martens, P. 1998. Health and Climate Change: Modeling theImpacts of Global Warming and Ozone Depletion. Lon-don: Earthscan.

Masika, Rachel. 2002. “Gender and Climate Change.” Gen-der and Development 10 (2): 2–9.

Soussain, J., Ian Burton, and Anne Hammil. 2003. “Liveli-hoods and Climate Change: Combining Disaster RiskReduction, Natural Resource Management and ClimateChange Adaptation in a New Approach to the Reductionof Vulnerability and Poverty.” Winnipeg: InternationalInstitute for Sustainable Development.

Wamukonya, Njeri, and Margaret Skutsch. 2001. “Is There aGender Angle to the Climate Change Negotiations?”Paperprepared for ENERGIA for the Commission on Sustain-able Development, Session 9, New York, April 16–27.

Thematic Note 3

Fargione, Joseph, Jason Hill, David Tilman, StephenPolasky, and Peter Hawthorn. 2008. “Land Clearing and



Biofuel Carbon.” Science Express Paper, 319 (5867) Feb-ruary 7: 1235–38.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)/InternationalFund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)/Interna-tional Land Coalition. 2003. “Rural Women’s Access toLand and Property in Selected Countries.” FAO Report,FAO, Rome. Also available at www.fao.org/sd/2003/PE07033_en.htm.

Food andAgricultureOrganization (FAO).2005.“Bioenergy—Committee on Agriculture,” 19th Session, Rome, April.

———. 2006. Introducing the International Bioenergy Plat-form. Rome: FAO.

———. 2007. Adaptation to Climate Change in Agriculture,Forestry and Fisheries. Perspectives, Framework and Prior-ities. Rome: FAO.

Lambrou, Yianna, and Grazia Piana. 2006. Energy and Gen-der Issues in Rural Sustainable Development. Rome: Foodand Agriculture Organization.

Mearns, Robin. 1995. Institutions and Natural ResourceManagement: Access to and Control over Woodfuel in EastAfrica, in People and Environment in Africa, ed. T. Binns.New York: John Wiley.

Rajagopal, Deepak. 2007. Rethinking Current Strategies forBiofuel Production in India. Paper presented at the Inter-national Conference “Linkages between Energy andWater Management for Agriculture in Developing Coun-tries,” Hyderabad, India, January 29–30.

Rossi, Andrea, and Yianna Lambrou. 2008. Gender andEquity Issues in Liquid Biofuels Production: Minimizingthe Risks to Maximize the Opportunities. Rome: Food andAgriculture Organization.

Sagar, Ambuj, and Sivan Kartha. 2007. “Bioenergy and Sus-tainable Development?”Annual Review of EnvironmentalResources 32: 131–67.

Salazar, R. H. 1999.“Mujer,medio ambiente: acuerdos inter-nacionales.” In Género, sustentabilidad y cambio social enel México rural.VerónicaVázquez, ed.Mexico: Colegio dePosgraduados.

Schirnding, Yasmin von, Nigel Bruce, Kirk Smith, GrantBallard-Tremeer, and Majid Ezzati. 2000. “Addressing theImpact of Household Energy and Indoor Air Pollutionon the Health of the Poor: Implications for Policy Actionand Intervention Measures.” Meeting Report, WorldHealth Organization, Geneva.

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs(DESA). 2007.“Small-Scale Production and Use of LiquidBiofuels in Sub-Saharan Africa: Perspectives for Sustain-able Development.” Prepared by Energy and TransportBranch Division for Sustainable Development, UNDESA. Commission on Sustainable Development, Fif-teenth Session, Background Paper Number 2, April

30–May 11, New York. Available at http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd/csd15/documents/csd15_bp2.pdf.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2004.Gender and Energy for Sustainable Development: A Toolkitand Resource Guide. New York: UN.

———. 2007. Gender Mainstreaming a Key Driver of Devel-opment in Environment and Energy. New York: UnitedNations.

UN-Energy. 2007. Sustainable Bioenergy: A Framework forDecision-Makers. New York: United Nations.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2006. Fuel for Life:Household Energy and Health. Geneva: WHO.

Thematic Note 4

Abramovitz, Janet. 2001. “Unnatural Disasters.”WorldwatchPapers 158, October, Worldwatch Institute, Washington,DC.

Aguilar, Lorena. 2008. “Acknowledging the Linkages: Gen-der and Climate Change.” Paper presented at SocialDimensions of Climate Change Conference,World Bank,Washington, DC, March 5.

Alston,Margaret. 2006.“The Gendered Impact of Drought.”In Rural Gender Relations, ed. Bettina Bock and SallyShortall, 165–80. London: CABI.

Bari, Farzana. 1998. “ Gender, Disaster and Empowerment:A Case Study from Pakistan.” In The Gendered Terrain ofDisaster: Through Women’s Eyes, ed. Elaine Enarson andBetty Hearn Morrow, 125–32. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Branco, Adelia de Melo. 1995.“Organizadas para Sobrevivir:El Caso de un Grupo de Mujeres del Sertao de Araripe.”In Sociedad y Disastres, vol. 5. Lima: LARED.

Brown, Oli, and Alec Crawford. 2006. “Addressing LandOwnership after Natural Disasters: An Agency Survey.”International Institute for Sustainable Development,Winnipeg, Canada.

Cannon, T. 2002. “Gender and Climate Hazards inBangladesh.”Gender and Development 10 (2): 45–50.

Commission on the Status ofWomen (CSW). 2002.“Women’sCommission Adopts Agreed Conclusions on Poverty andNatural Disasters.” Press release, United Nations,www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2002/ WOM1333.doc.htm.

Dufka, Corrine. 1988. “The Mexico City Earthquake Disas-ter, Social Casework.” Journal of Contemporary SocialWork 69: 162–70.

Enarson, Elaine, and Lourdes Meyreles. 2004. “InternationalPerspectives on Gender and Disaster: Differences andPossibilities.” International Journal of Sociology and SocialPolicy 24 (10/11): 49–63.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)/World FoodProgramme (WFP). 2005. SEAGA for Emergency andRehabilitation Programmes. Rome: FAO.

MODULE 10: REFERENCES 471


Fothergill, Alice. 1998. “The Neglect of Gender in DisasterWork: An Overview of the Literature.” In The GenderedTerrain of Disaster: Through Women’s Eyes, ed. ElaineEnarson and Betty Hearn Morrow, 11–25. Westport, CT:Praeger.

Graham, Angus. 2001. “Gender Mainstreaming Guidelinesfor Disasters Management Programmes—PrincipledSEAGA Approach.” Document EGM/NATDIS/2001/EP.1, United Nations Division for the Advancement ofWomen, UN, New York.

Harvey, Fiona. 2007. “UN Climate Panel Detailed Potentialfor Global Conflict.” Financial Times, October 13.

Ikeda, Keiko. 1995. “Gender Differences in Human Loss andVulnerability in Natural Disasters: A Case Study fromBangladesh.” Indian Journal of Gender Studies 2 (2):171–93.

King, Angela. 2002. Introductory Statement. Commissionon the Status of Women.46th Session, UN, New York.

Kumar-Range, S. 2001. “Environmental Management andDisaster Risk Reduction: A Gender Perspective.” Docu-ment EGM/NATDIS/2001/BP.1, United Nations Divisionfor the Advancement of Women, UN, New York.

Lambrou, Yianna, and Grazia Piana. 2006. Gender: TheMissing Component of the Response to Climate Change.Rome: FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization).

Lambrou, Yianna, and Regina Laub. 2004.Gender Perspectiveson the Conventions on Biodiversity, Climate Change andDesertification. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.

Masika, Rachel. 2002. “Gender and Climate Change.” Gen-der and Development 10 (2): 2–9.

McNeely, Jeffrey. 2000. “Biodiversity, War, and TropicalForests.”Paper presented to Conference onWar and Trop-ical Forests: New Perspectives on Conservation in Areas ofArmed Conflict, Yale School of Forestry and Environ-mental Studies, New Haven, CT, March 30–April 3.

Nelson, Valerie, Kate Meadows, Terry Cannon, John Mor-ton, and Adrienne Martin. 2002. “Uncertain Predictions,Invisible Impacts, and the Need to Mainstream Genderin Climate Change Adaptations.” Gender and Develop-ment 10 (2): 51–59.

Sachs, Carolyn. 2007. “Going Public: Networking Globallyand Locally.” Rural Sociology 72 (1): 2–24.

Tickell, Crispin. 2001. “Risks of Conflict: Resource and Pop-ulation Pressures.” In Environmental Change and SecurityProject Report, Issue No. 7, Woodrow Wilson Interna-tional Center, Princeton, NJ.

Toscani, Letizia. 1998. “Women’s Roles in Natural DisasterPreparation and Aid: A Central American View.” In TheGendered Terrain of Disaster: Through Women’s Eyes, ed.Elaine Enarson and Betty Hearn Morrow, 207–12.West-port, CT: Praeger.

United Nations (UN). 2001. “Environmental Managementand the Mitigation of Natural Disasters: A Gender Per-spective.” Document UN/ISDR, EGM/NATDIS/2001/Rep.1, United Nations Division for the Advancement ofWomen, UN, New York.

———. 2002. Commission on the Status of Women (CSW).Report of the 46th Session. E/2002/27, Economic andSocial Council, UN, New York.

———. 2004. Making Risky Environments Safer: WomenBuilding Sustainable and Disaster-Resilient Communities.New York: UN.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2004.Reducing Disaster Risk. A Challenge for Development.New York: Swift.

———. 2007. “Natural Disaster Preparedness and Oppor-tunities.” Paper prepared for Joint Meeting of the Execu-tive Boards of UNDP/UNFPA, UNICEF, and WFP, Janu-ary 19 and 22, New York: United Nations.

Vaughan,Megan. 1987.The Story of an African Famine: Gen-der and Famine in Twentieth Century Malawi. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thematic Note 5

Aswani, Shankar, and Pamela Weiant. 2004. “Scientific Eval-uation in Women’s Participatory Management.” HumanOrganization 63 (3): 301–19.

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 2007. “What isDry and Sub-humid Lands Biodiversity?” Available athttp://www.cbd.int/drylands/what.shtml.

Crow, Ben, and Farhana Sultana. 2002. “Gender, Class, andAccess to Water: Three Cases in a Poor and CrowdedDelta.” Society and Natural Resources 15 (8): 709–24.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2002. LandDegradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA). Rome: FAO.

———. 2003. Gender and Sustainable Development in Dry-lands: An Analysis of Field Experiences. Rome: FAO.

———. 2007a. “Gender Mainstreaming in Water Manage-ment—A Pocket Guide.” Draft, FAO, Rome.


Gender and Water Alliance. 2003. The Gender and WaterDevelopment Report: Gender Perspectives on Policies in theWater Ssector. The Netherlands: Gender and WaterAlliance Secretariat.

Global Environment Facility (GEF). 2003. Operational Pro-gramme on Sustainable Land Management. Washington,DC: GEF.

International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).2006. Gender and Desertification—Expanding Roles forWomen to Restore Drylands. Rome: IFAD.



Izumi, Kaori. 2007. “Gender-Based Violence and PropertyGrabbing in Africa: A Denial of Women’s Liberty andSecurity.”Gender and Development 15 (1): 11–23.

Lambrou, Yianna, and Regina Laub. 2004. Gender Perspec-tives on the Conventions on Biodiversity, ClimateChange and Desertification. Rome: Food and Agricul-ture Organization.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. MillenniumEcosystem Assessment.Washington, DC: Island Press.

Nyssen, Jan, Jean Poesen, Jan Moeyersons, Jozef Deckers,Mitiku Haile, and Andreas Lang. 2004. “Human Impacton the Environment in the Ethiopian and Eritrean High-lands: A State of the Art.” Earth Science Reviews 64 (3–4):273–320.

Ray, Isla. 2007. “Women, Water, and Development.” AnnualReview of Environmental Resources 32: 421–49.

Singh, Nandita. 2006. “Women’s Participation in LocalWater Governance: Understanding Institutional Contra-dictions.” Gender, Technology and Development 10 (1):61–76.

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification(UNCCD). 2005. Promotions of Traditional Knowledge. ACompilation of UNCCD Documents and Reports from1997–2003. Bonn: UNCCD.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2005.“Water Governance—The Gender Dimension.” Factsheet, UNDP, New York.

———. 2007a. Sustainable LandManagement: TheWhy andHow of Mainstreaming Gender in Sustainable Land Man-agement. New York: UNDP/GEF.

———. 2007b.Women and Sustainable Land Management.Gender Mainstreaming Guidance Series. New York:United Nations.

White, Joanna, and Elizabeth Robinson. 2000. HIV/AIDSand Rural Livelihoods in Sub-Saharan Africa. Greenwich,England: Natural Resources Institute, University ofGreenwich.


Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2005.Building onGender, Agrobiodiversity and Local Knowledge. Rome:FAO.

Rocheleau, Dianne. 1996. “Gender and Environment: AFeminist Political Ecology Perspective.” In Feminist Polit-ical Ecology: Global Issues and Local Experiences, ed.Dianne Rocheleau, Barbara Thomas Slayter, and EstherWangari, 3–23. New York: Routledge.

Shiva, Vandana. 1996. Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature andKnowledge. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

FURTHER READING

Overview

Alix, Jennifer, Alain De Janvry, and Elisabeth Sadoulet.2003. “Partial Cooperation Political Economy and Com-mon Property Resource Management: The Case ofDeforestation in Mexico.” University of California,Berkeley.

Convention on Biological Diversity: www.cbd.int.

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimina-tion against Women: www.un.org.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2001. Socio-Economic and Gender Analysis Programme (SEAGA).Rome: FAO. Also available at www.fao.org.

Landell-Mills, N., and I. Porras. 2002. “Silver Bullet orFools’ Gold? A Global Review of Markets for ForestEnvironmental Services and Their Impact on the Poor.”International Institute for Environment and Develop-ment, London.

Pagiola, Stefano, Agustin Arcenas, and Gunars Platais. 2005.“Can Payments for Environmental Services Help ReducePoverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidenceto Date from Latin America.”World Development 33 (2):237–53.

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification:www.unccd.int.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change:www.unfccc.int.

Thematic Note 1

Berg, Trygve, Ruth Haug, and Kjersti Larsen. 2000.“Research Guidelines: Gender Local Knowledge and PlantGenetic Resource Management.” Oslo: Agricultural Uni-versity of Norway. Available at www.fao.org/sd/LINKS/resources/resources.html.

Garí, Josep. 2003. “Local Agricultural Knowledge Key toFighting HIV-AIDS and Food Security.” United NationsOffice for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs–Integrated Regional Information Networks, PlusNews,September.

International Development Research Centre (IDRC). 1998.Gender and Biodiversity: Research Guidelines. Ottawa:IDRC.

International Institute for Rural Reconstruction (IIRR).1996.Recording and Using Indigenous Knowledge: A Man-ual. Silang, Philippines: IIRR.

Sachs, C., K. Gajurel, and M. Bianco. 1996. “Gender, Seeds,and Biodiversity.” In Women Working in the Environ-ment, ed. C. Sachs, 177–92. Washington, DC: Taylor andFrancis.

MODULE 10: FURTHER READING 473


Thematic Note 3

Lambrou, Yianna, and Grazia Piana. 2006. Gender: TheMissing Component of the Response to Climate Change.Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.

Swedish International Development Cooperation Authority(SIDA). 2003.“Energy Policy and Equality betweenWomenand Men.”Equality PromptNo. 9, SIDA, Stockholm.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2007.Sustainable Land Management: The Why and How ofMainstreaming Gender in Sustainable Land Management.New York: UN.

UN-Energy. 2005. The Energy Challenge for Achieving theMDGs. New York: UN.

Thematic Note 4

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2005. Building onGender, Agrobiodiversity and Local Knowledge. Rome: FAO.

Kumar, Shubh K., and David Hotchkiss. 1998. “Conse-quences of Deforestation for Women’s Time Allocation,Agricultural Production and Nutrition in Hill Areas ofNepal.” Research Report 69, International Food PolicyResearch Institute, Washington, DC.


Lambrou, Yianna, and Regina Laub. 2006. “Gender, LocalKnowledge and Lessons Learnt in Documenting andConserving Agrobiodiversity.” Research Paper No.2006/69, Helsinki: United Nations University–WorldInstitute for Development Economics Research.

LinKS training manual: www.fao.org/sd/LINKS/resources/resources.html.

LinKS Web site: www.fao.org/sd/links/gebio.htm.

