Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conservation agriculture and gendered livelihoods in Northwestern Cambodia: decision-making, space and access

Agriculture and Human Values volume 34, pages 347–362 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

Smallholder farmers in Rattanakmondol District, Battambang Province, Cambodia face challenges related to soil erosion, declining yields, climate change, and unsustainable tillage-based farming practices in their efforts to increase food production within maize-based systems. In 2010, research for development programs began introducing agricultural production systems based on conservation agriculture (CA) to smallholder farmers located in four communities within Rattanakmondol District as a pathway for addressing these issues. Understanding gendered practices and perspectives is integral to adapting CA technologies to the needs of local communities. This research identifies how gender differences regarding farmers’ access to assets, practices, and engagement in intra-household negotiations could constrain or facilitate the dissemination of CA. Our mixed-methods approach includes focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews, famer field visits, and a household survey. Gender differences in access to key productive assets may affect men’s and women’s individual ability to adapt CA. Farmers perceive the practices and technologies of CA as labor-saving, with the potential to reduce men’s and women’s labor burden in land-preparation activities. However, when considered in relation to the full array of productive and reproductive livelihood activities, CA can disproportionately affect men’s and women’s labor. Decisions about agricultural livelihoods were not always made jointly, with socio-cultural norms and responsibilities structuring an individual’s ability to participate in intra-household negotiations. While gender differences in power relations affect intra-household decision-making, men and women household members collectively negotiate the transition to CA-based production systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

39,95 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. Gender refers to the dynamic socially constructed roles, rights, and responsibilities of men and women and the relations between them that are dependent upon age, social status, class, race, ethnicity, and culture (Doss 2001).

  2. SANREM IL was funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under cooperative agreement No. EPP-A-00-0400013-00.

  3. See Husson et al. (2015) for a detailed description of the DATE approach.

  4. Productive activities can include household subsistence agriculture, cash crop production, wage/salary employment, and small business. Reproductive activities refer to domestic activities and childcare. Community activities refer to roles in maintaining social relations and networks (Momsen 2010; Beuchelt and Badstue 2013).

  5. Future publication.

  6. We classified households in terms of whether there are both male & female adults, only female adults, or only male adults present (Alkire et al. 2013).

  7. Access is where individuals, households, or groups are able use assets and resources to generate benefits; control is the power relations (formal and informal) that affect the mechanisms used to access resources (Ribot and Peluso 2003).

  8. Farmers working with SANREM IL for more than 2 years are not eligible for the interest-free credit and the credit is only applied to 3 ha/farm). This program was available to farmers implementing CA from 2010 to 2012 and pre-financed the cost of agricultural inputs and services (sowing and spraying) on average amounting to 313 USD/ha. Farmers that produced more than 4.5 T/ha had to reimburse the full amount of the credit; for farmers with lower yields their reimbursement was based on their yield with the amount of 35 USD/ha deducted from every 250 kg/ha for a maximum subsidy of 175 USD for yields less than 3.5 T/ha.

  9. These are typically issued by village, commune, or district chiefs and recognize land ownership but are not formally registered at the national level.

Abbreviations

CA:

Conservation agriculture

CIRAD:

Centre de Coopération International en Recherche pour le Développement

DMC:

Direct-seeding mulch based cropping systems

FGD:

Focus group discussion

FPE:

Feminist political ecology

KHR:

Cambodian Riel

KR:

Khmer Rouge

MAFF:

Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Fishers

MFI:

Micro-finance institution

OIRED:

Office of International Research, Education and Development

PADAC:

Projet d’Appui à la Diversification Agricole du Cambodge

SANREM IL:

Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Innovation Lab

USAID:

United States Agency for International Development

WEAI:

Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index

References

  • Affholder, F., D. Jourdain, D. Dinh Quang, T. Phu Tuong, M. Morize, and A. Ricome. 2010. Constraints to farmers’ adoption of direct-seeding mulch-based cropping systems: A farm scale modeling approach applied to the mountainous slopes of Vietnam. Agricultural Systems 103(1): 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alkire, S.R., R. Meinzen-Dick, A. Peterman, A. Quisumbing, G. Seymour, and A. Vaz. 2013. The women’s empowerment in agriculture index. World Development 52: 71–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basset, T. 2002. Women’s cotton and the spaces of gender politics in northern Côte d’Ivoire. Gender, Place, and Culture 9(4): 351–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belfield, S., R. Martin, and J. Scott. 2013. Alternative cropping systems for Northwest Cambodia. International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development 4(1): 209–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, H. 2006. Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, 4th ed. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beuchelt, T., and L. Badstue. 2013. Gender, nutrition-and climate-smart food production: Opportunities and trade-offs. Food Security 5(5): 709–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bomuhangi, A., C. Doss, and R. Meinzen-Dick. 2011. Who owns the land? Perspectives from rural Ugandans and implications for land acquisitions. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) Discussion Paper 01136. Washington, DC: IFPRI.

  • Boulakia, S., S. Chabierski, P. Kou, S. San, R. Kong, V. Leng, V. Sar, K. Chhit, and L. Séguy. 2012. Adaption of direct-seeding mulch-based cropping systems for annual cash crop production in Cambodian rainfed uplands. In Conservation agriculture and sustainable upland livelihoods innovations for, with and by farmers to adapt to local and global changes: Proceedings for the 3rd international conference on conservation agriculture in Southeast Asia, held in Hanoi, Vietnam 10th–15th December 2012, 92–108. Montpellier: CIRAD.

  • Brickell, K. 2011. The ‘stubborn stain’ on development: Gendered meanings of housework (non-) participation in Cambodia. The Journal of Development Studies 47(9): 821–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, I. 2007. Chi squared and Fisher–Irwin tests of two-by-two tables with small sample recommendations. Statistics in Medicine 26(19): 3661–3675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R., and G.R. Conway. 1991. Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century, IDS Discussion Paper No 296. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.

  • Corbeels, M., J. de Graaff, T. Hycenth Ndah, E. Penot, F. Baudron, K. Naudin, N. Andrieu, G. Chirat, J. Schuler, I. Nyagumbo, L. Rusinamhodzi, K. Traore, H. Dulla Mzoba, and I. Solomon Adolwa. 2014. Understanding the impact and adoption of conservation agriculture in Africa: A multi-scale analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 187: 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derpsch, R., T. Friedrich, A. Kassam, and L. Hongwen. 2010. Current status of adoption of no-till farming in the world and some of its main benefits. International Journal of Agriculture and Biological Engineering 32(2): 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doss, C. 2001. Designing agricultural technology for African women farmers: Lessons from 25 years of experience. World Development 29(12): 2075–2092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doss, C. 2013. Intrahousehold bargaining and resource allocation in developing countries. The World Bank Research Observer 28(1): 52–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doss, C., and R. Meinzen-Dick. 2015. Collective action within the household: Insights from natural resource management. World Development 74: 171–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, F. 2000. Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erenstein, O. 2003. Smallholder conservation farming in the tropics and sub-tropics: A guide to the development and dissemination of mulching with crop residues and cover crops. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 100(1): 17–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erenstein, O., K. Sayre, P. Wall, J. Hellin, and J. Dixon. 2012. Conservation agriculture in maize and wheat-based systems in the (sub)tropics: Lessons from adaptation initiatives in South Asia, Mexico, and Southern Africa. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 36(2): 180–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farnworth, C.R., F. Baudron, J. Anderson, M. Misiko, L. Badstue, and C. Stirling. 2015. Gender and conservation agriculture in East and Southern Africa: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 14(2): 142–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flora, C.B. 2001. Access and control of resources: Lessons from the SANREM CRSP. Agriculture and Human Values 18(1): 41–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giller, K., E. Witter, M. Corbeels, and P. Tittonell. 2009. Conservation agriculture and smallholder farming in Africa: The heretics’ view. Field Crops Research 114(1): 23–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halbrendt, J., A.H. Kimura, S. Gray, T. Radovich, B. Reed, and B.B. Tamang. 2014. Implications of conservation agriculture for men’s and women’s workloads among marginalized farmers in the central Middle Hills of Nepal. Mountain Research and Development 34(3): 214–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman Parks, M., M.E. Christie, and I. Bagares. 2015. Gender and conservation agriculture: Constraints and opportunities in the Philippines. GeoJournal 80(1): 61–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, P., K. Sayre, and R. Gupta. 2008. The role of conservation agriculture in sustainable agriculture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences 363(1491): 543–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husson, O., H. Quoc, S. Boulakia, and L. Séguy. 2015. Co-designing innovative cropping systems that match biophysical and socio-economic diversity: The DATE approach to Conservation Agriculture in Madagascar, Lao PDR and Cambodia. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 1: 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). 2014. How to do household methodologies: Gender, targeting and social inclusion. Rome: IFAD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. 2002. A framework for understanding on-farm environmental degradation and constraints to the adoption of soil conservation measures: Case studies from highland Tanzania and Thailand. World Development 30(9): 1607–1620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassam, A., T. Fredrich, F. Shaxon, and J. Petty. 2009. The spread of conservation agriculture: Justification, sustainability, and uptake. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 7(4): 292–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowler, D., and B. Bradshaw. 2007. Farmers’ adoption of conservation agriculture: A review and synthesis of recent research. Food Policy 32(1): 25–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lal, R. 2009. Challenges and opportunities in soil organic matter research. Journal of Soil Science 60(2): 158–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lestrelin, G., H. Quoc, F. Jullien, B. Rattanatray, C. Khamxaykhay, and F. Tivet. 2012. Conservation agriculture in Laos: Diffusion and determinants for adoption of direct seeding mulch-based cropping systems in smallholder agriculture. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 27(1): 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehrvar, M., K.S. Chhay, and S. My. 2008. Women’s perspectives: A case study of systematic land registration in Cambodia, 2nd ed. Phnom Penh: STC Printing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milder, J., T. Majanen, and S. Scherr. 2011. Performance and potential of conservation agriculture for climate change adaptation and mitigation in sub-Saharan Africa. http://www.foodgrainsbank.ca/uploads/CARE-WWF-EcoAgriculture_Conservation_Agriculture_in_Sub-Saharan_Afirca_FINAL_REPORT_2011-02-2811.pdf. Accessed 21 Sept 2013.

  • Momsen, J. 2010. Introduction: Gender is a development issue. In Gender and development, 2nd ed. 1–19. New York, NY: Routledge.

  • National Institute of Statistics. 2011. General population census of Cambodia 2008 (GPCC 2008), version 1.0 of the public use dataset provided by the NIS National Data Archive. http://www.nis.gov.kh/nada. Accessed 3 Sept 2013.

  • Nightingale, A. 2003. A feminist in the forest: Situated knowledges and mixing methods in natural resource management. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographers 2(1): 77–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nightingale, A. 2006. The nature of gender: Work, gender, and environment. Environmental Planning D: Society and Space 24(2): 165–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyanga, P., F. Johnsen, and T. Kalinda. 2012. Gendered impacts of conservation agriculture and paradox of herbicide use among smallholder farmers. International Journal of Technology and Development Studies 3(1): 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pansak, W., T.H. Hilger, G. Dercon, T. Kongkaew, and G. Cadisch. 2008. Changes in the relationship between soil erosion and N loss pathways after establishing soil conservation systems in uplands of Northeast Thailand. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 128(3): 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quisumbing, A.R. 2003. Household decisions, gender, and development: A synthesis of recent research. Washington, DC: IFPRI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribot, J., and N. Peluso. 2003. A theory of access. Rural Sociology 68(2): 153–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricard, B. 2010. Agrarian diagnosis and characterization of farming systems in two villages in Battambang province (Cambodia) with the setup of a farming systems reference-monitoring network. MSc thesis. Montpellier, FR: SupAGro, Institut des Regions Chaudes.

  • Rocheleau, D., B. Thomas-Slayter, and E. Wangari. 1996. Feminist political ecology: Global issues and local experiences. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Séguy, L., S. Bouzinac, A. Trentini, and N. Cortes. 1998. Brazilian frontier agriculture. Agriculture et Développment Special Issue 64: 1–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thierfelder, C., and P. Wall. 2010. Investigating conservation agriculture (CA) systems in Zambia and Zimbabwe to mitigate future effects of climate change. Journal of Crop Improvement 24: 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Udry, C. 1996. Gender, agricultural production, and the theory of the household. The Journal of Political Economy 104(5): 1010–1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valdivia, C., and J. Gilles. 2001. Gender and resource management: Households and groups, strategies, and transitions. Agriculture and Human Values 18(1): 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall, P. 2007. Tailoring conservation agriculture to the needs of small farmers in developing countries: An analysis of issues. Journal of Crop Improvement 19(1–2): 137–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was made possible by the generous support of the American people, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and Feed the Future Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Innovation Lab for Collaborative Research (SANREM IL) under cooperative agreement number EPP-A-00-0400013-00. The authors would like to acknowledge the support of all the researchers and staff of the SANREM IL project in Cambodia, especially Dr. Manuel Reyes from North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University and Mr. Rada Kong from the Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Fishers (MAFF). The authors would also like to thank the two undergraduate research assistants from the University of Battambang, Ms. Sel Rechaney and Mr. Mao Rambo, who assisted with data collection activities.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of International Research, Education and Development, Virginia Tech, 526 Prices Fork Road, Blacksburg, VA, 24060, USA

    Daniel Sumner & Maria Elisa Christie

  2. Centre de Coopération International en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, El Aceituno - Carrera 5a n° 29-32 Officina 282, Centro Commercial la Quinta, Ibague, Colombia

    Stéphane Boulakia

Authors
  1. Daniel Sumner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Elisa Christie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stéphane Boulakia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Sumner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sumner, D., Christie, M.E. & Boulakia, S. Conservation agriculture and gendered livelihoods in Northwestern Cambodia: decision-making, space and access. Agric Hum Values 34, 347–362 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-016-9718-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-016-9718-z

Keywords

  • Gender
  • Livelihoods
  • Conservation agriculture
  • Decision-making
  • Cambodia

Search

Navigation