Economic Benefits of Empowering Women in Agriculture: Assumptions and Evidence.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses generally focus on intervention impacts or outcomes. Less common, however, are reviews of the assumptions and theory underlying the pathways between intervention and outcome. We consider the hypothetical case for interventions to empower female farmers, either by...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Development Studies Vol. 57; no. 2; pp. 193 - 209 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
| Formato: | Literature Review |
| Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Feb2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=148859441&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 148859441 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00220388 JDS jtl: Journal of Development Studies issn: 00220388 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Feb2021 vid: 57 iid: 2 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd artinfo: ui: 148859441 10.1080/00220388.2020.1769071 ppf: 193 ppct: 16 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T db: hlh ui: 148859441 – @attributes: type: P db: hlh ui: 148859441 tig: atl: Economic Benefits of Empowering Women in Agriculture: Assumptions and Evidence. aug: au: Anderson, C. Leigh Reynolds, Travis W. Biscaye, Pierre Patwardhan, Vedavati Schmidt, Carly affil: Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Department of Community Development and Applied Economics, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California – Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA su: Behavior Decision making Agricultural resources Agriculture Evidence sug: subj: Behavior Decision making Agricultural resources Agriculture Evidence ab: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses generally focus on intervention impacts or outcomes. Less common, however, are reviews of the assumptions and theory underlying the pathways between intervention and outcome. We consider the hypothetical case for interventions to empower female farmers, either by prioritising women for new investments or re-allocating existing resources. Empowerment is defined as increased women's decision-making authority related to agricultural resources, management and production, and income. We hypothesise two avenues through which productivity or health benefits might arise: (i) eliminating female-male differences in, e.g. input access; or (ii) leveraging gendered risk, time, and social preferences leading women to differentially allocate resources. A review of evidence highlights the extent of support for the baseline, behaviour change, and economic benefit assumptions behind these hypothesised avenues. Findings suggest returns to investing in female farmers could be significant in various contexts but estimates of economic returns to empowering women in agriculture remain limited. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Literature Review src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|