Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gender and Social Capital for Agricultural Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Gender in Agriculture

Abstract

Social capital comprises the range of relationships, networks, and institutions that allow people to build trust and cooperation. This chapter documents gender differences in social capital related to agricultural development, defined as group membership and social networks, based on a critical literature review of key issues and a review of published and unpublished empirical studies conducted between 1999 and 2011. The authors focus on the types of groups and social networks that women and men join, the extent of their participation, as well as the gender-specific barriers that may affect women’s full-scale participation. The analysis goes beyond simple dichotomies of men’s and women’s groups and networks to investigate whether, and under what circumstances, mixed-sex groups may be more effective than single-sex groups in achieving their development objectives. Following this, the authors examine the effects of women’s participation on both group performance and extant gender relations and discuss what development actors can do to help realize gains in these areas. The chapter concludes with a summary of the evidence on whether women are disadvantaged in comparison to men in the accumulation of social capital, and if so, the extent to which programs are helping to overcome this gap.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Interestingly, in detailed case studies, Sultana and Thompson found that an all-women’s group formed a men’s advisory committee, whereas the all-male group did not have a separate advisory committee.

  2. 2.

    James-Sebro (2005) defines gender equality in four stages: (1) engagement of women to come out of isolation; (2) empowerment through acquired ideas, knowledge, skills, and resources; (3) enhancement of lives in households and communities; and (4) emergence into the public sphere.

References

  • Acharya KP, Gentle P (2006) Improving the effectiveness of collective action: sharing experiences from community forestry in Nepal. CAPRi working paper 54. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Adkins L (2005) Social capital: the anatomy of a troubled concept. Feminist Theory 6(2):195–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal B (2000) Conceptualizing environmental collective action: why gender matters. Camb J Econ 24(3):283–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal B (2001) Participatory exclusions, community forestry, and gender: an analysis for South Asia and a conceptual framework. World Dev 29(10):1623–1648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal B (2007) Gender inequality, cooperation, and environmental sustainability. In: Baland JM, Bardhan PK, Bowles S (eds) Inequality, cooperation, and environmental sustainability. Russell Sage Foundation/Princeton University Press, New York/Princeton, pp 274–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal B (2009) Gender and forest conservation: the impact of women's participation in community forest governance. Ecol Econ 68(11):2785–2799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal B (2010) Gender and green governance: the political economy of women’s presence within and beyond community forestry. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal A, Chhatre A (2006) Explaining success on the commons: community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya. World Dev 34(1):149–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal A, Yadama G, Andrade R, Bhattacharya A (2006) Decentralization and environmental conservation: gender effects from participation in joint forest management. CAPRi working paper 53. Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A, La Ferrara E (2000) Participation in heterogeneous communities. Q J Econ 115(3):847–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alsop R, Heinsohn N (2005) Measuring empowerment in practice: Structuring analysis and framing indicators. World Bank policy research working paper no. 3510. World Bank, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Andujar A (2005) When women say enough is enough: the struggle for drinking water in Villa Jardin, Argentina. Paper presented at the CAPRi international research workshop on gender and collective action, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 17–21 October

    Google Scholar 

  • Arganosa-Matienzo EL (2005) When collective action leads to overburdening of rural women. Paper presented at the CAPRi international research workshop on gender and collective action, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 17–21 October

    Google Scholar 

  • Badstue LB, Bellon MR, Berthaud J, Ramírez A, Flores D, Juárez X (2007) The dynamics of farmers’ maize seed supply practices in the Central Valleys of Oaxaca, Mexico. World Dev 35(9):1579–1593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beard VA (2005) Individual determinants of participation in community development in Indonesia. Environ Plann C Gov Policy 23(1):21–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chant S (2003) New contributions to the analysis of poverty: methodological and conceptual challenges to understanding poverty from a gender perspective. United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, New York, http://www.eclac.cl/publicaciones/UnidadMujer/5/LCL1955/lcl1955i.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen M (2008) A spreading banyan tree: the self-employed women’s association, India. In: Mathie A, Cunningham G (eds) From clients to citizens: communities changing the course of their own development. Practical Action, Rugby

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornwall A (2001) Making a difference? Gender and participatory development. IDS discussion paper no. 378. Institute of Development Studies, Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis K, Negash M (2007) Gender, wealth, and participation in community groups in Meru Central District, Kenya. CAPRi working paper series 65. Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dercon S, Hoddinott J, Krishnan P, Woldehannna T (2011) Burial societies in rural Ethiopia. In: Mwangi E, Markelova H, Meinzen-Dick R (eds) Collective action and property rights for poverty reduction: insights from Africa and Asia. Penn Press for the International Food Policy Research Institute, Philadelphia, pp 51–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond N, Sims Feldstein H, Gambill D, Hill Rojas M (1997) A working session on communities, institutions, and policies: moving from environmental research to results. WIDTECH, Washington, DC, photocopy

    Google Scholar 

  • Dikito-Wachtmeister M (2001) Social capital. In: Quisumbing AR, Meinzen-Dick RS (eds) Empowering women to achieve food security. 2020 Focus 6. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Durlauf SN, Fafchamps M (2005) Social capital. In: Aghion P, Durlauf SN (eds) Handbook of economic growth, vol 1. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1639–1699

    Google Scholar 

  • Fafchamps M, Gubert F (2004) The formation of risk sharing networks. University of Oxford, UK. Photocopy

    Google Scholar 

  • Fafchamps M, Lund S (2003) Risk-sharing networks in rural Philippines. J Develop Econ 71(2):261–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletschner D, Carter M (2008) Constructing and reconstructing gender: reference group effects and women’s demand for entrepreneurial capital. J Socio-Econ 37(2):672–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godquin M, Quisumbing AR (2008) “Separate but equal? The gendered nature of social capital in rural Philippine communities. J Int Develop 20(1):13–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotschi E, Njuki J, Delve R (2009) Equal numbers, equal chances? A case study of gender differences in the distribution of social capital in smallholder farmer groups in Búzi District, Mozambique. Eur J Develop Res 21(2):264–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grootaert C (1997) Social capital: the missing link? In: Indicators and Environmental Valuation Unit (ed) Expanding the measure of wealth: indicators of environmentally sustainable development. ESD studies and monographs series no. 17. World Bank, Washington, DC, pp 77–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddad L, Maluccio J (2003) Trust, membership in groups, and household welfare: evidence from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Econ Develop Cult Change 51(3):573–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallman K, Lewis D, Begum S (2007) Assessing the impact of vegetable and fishpond technologies on poverty in rural Bangladesh. In: Adato M, Meinzen-Dick R (eds) Agricultural research, livelihoods, and poverty: studies of economic and social impacts in six countries. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, pp 103–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambly Odame H (2002) Men in women’s groups: a gender and agency analysis of local institutions. In: Cleaver F (ed) Masculinity matters! Men, gender, and development. Zed Press, London, pp 138–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann R, Tyson LD, Zahidi S (2007) The global gender gap report 2006. World Economic Forum, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoddinot J, Dercon S, Krishnan P (2005) Networks and informal mutual support in fifteen Ethiopian villages: a description. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagger P, Pender J (2006) Influences of programs and organizations on the adoption of sustainable land management technologies in Uganda. In: Pender J, Place F, Ehui S (eds) Strategies for sustainable land management in the East African Highlands. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, pp 277–308

    Google Scholar 

  • James-Sebro M (2005) Revealing the power of gender mainstreaming: enhancing development effectiveness of nongovernmental organizations in Africa. InterAction, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewitt S (2000) Unequal knowledge in Jharkhand, India: de-romanticizing women’s agroecological expertise. Develop Change 31(5):961–985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kariuki G, Place F (2005) Initiatives for rural development through collective action: the case of household participation in group activities in the Highlands of Central Kenya. CAPRi working paper 43. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Katungi E, Edmeades S, Smale M (2008) Gender, social capital, and information exchange in rural Uganda. J Int Develop 20(1):35–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar N, Quisumbing AR (2011) Access, adoption, and diffusion: understanding the long-term impacts of improved vegetable and fish technologies in Bangladesh. J Develop Eff 3(2):193–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauby J, Stark O (1988) Individual migration as a family strategy: young women in the Philippines. Popul Stud 42(3):476–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leino J (2007) Ladies first? Gender and the community management of water infrastructure in Kenya. University of California, Berkeley, CA, US. Electronic copy

    Google Scholar 

  • Maluccio J, Haddad L, May J (2003) Social capital and gender in South Africa, 1993–1998. In: Quisumbing AR (ed) Household decisions, gender, and development: a synthesis of recent research. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, pp 145–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Meinzen-Dick RS, Zwarteveen M (1998) Gendered participation in water management: issues and illustrations from water users associations in South Asia. Agric Hum Values 15(4):337–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meinzen-Dick RS, Knox A, Di Gregorio M (eds) (2001) Collective action, property rights, and devolution of natural resource management: exchange of knowledge and implications for policy. Feldafing, Germany: Zentralstelle für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft. Available online at http://www.capri.cgiar.org/workshop_devolution.asp

  • Molyneux M (2002) Gender and the silences of social capital: lessons from Latin America. Dev Chang 33:167–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mwangi E, Meinzen-Dick R, Sun Y (2011) Gender and sustainable forest management in East Africa and Latin America. Ecol Soc 16(1):17. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art17/

  • Naved RT (2000) Intrahousehold impact of transfer of modern agricultural technology: a gender perspective. Food consumption and nutrition division discussion paper 85. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Njuki JM, Mapila MT, Zingore S, Delve R (2008) The dynamics of social capital in influencing use of soil management options in the Chinyanja Triangle of Southern Africa. Ecol Soc 13(2):9. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art9/

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1992) Crafting institutions for self-governing irrigation systems. Institute for Contemporary Studies Press, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Padmaja R, Bantilan MCS, Parthasarathy D, Gandhi BVJ (2006) Gender and social capital mediated technology adoption. Impact series no. 12. Patancheru 502 324, International Crops Research Institute for the Sem-Arid Tropics, Andhra Pradesh, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Padmanabhan M (2006) Collective action in agrobiodiversity management: gendered rules of reputation, trust, and reciprocity in Kerala, India. J Int Develop 20(1):83–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panda SM (2006) Women’s collective action and sustainable water management: case of SEWA’s water campaign in Gujarat, India. CAPRi working paper 61. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandey D (1993) Empowerment of women for environmentally sustainable development through participatory action research. In: Ahmed S (ed) Gendering the rural environment: concepts and issues for practice. Workshop report no. I. Institute of Rural Management Workshop proceedings, Anand, India, 23–24 April

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandolfelli L, Meinzen-Dick R, Dohrn S (2008) Gender and collective action: motivations, effectiveness, and impact. J Int Develop 20(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perdana A, Matakos K, Radin E (2006) Does it pay to participate? CSIS working paper series: WPI 095. Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Pretty J (2003) Social capital and the collective management of resources. Science 302(5652):1912–1914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam R (1995) Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. J Democr 6(1):65–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quisumbing AR (2009) Beyond the Bari: gender, groups, and social relations in rural Bangladesh. CAPRi working paper 96. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Quisumbing AR, Kumar N (2011) Does social capital build women’s assets? The long-term impacts of group-based and individual dissemination of agricultural technology in Bangladesh. J Develop Eff 3(2):220–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quisumbing AR, McNiven S, Godquin M (2011) Shocks, groups, and networks in Bukidnon, the Philippines. In: Mwangi E, Markelova H, Meinzen-Dick R (eds) Collective action and property rights for poverty reduction: insights from Africa and Asia. Penn Press for the International Food Policy Research Institute, Philadelphia, pp 79–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Rai B, Buchy M (2004) Institutional exclusion of women in community forestry: is women-only strategy a right answer? In: Kanel K, Mathema P, Kandel BR, Niraula DR, Sharma AR, Gautam M (eds) Twenty-five years of community forestry: contribution in Millennium Development goal, pp 399–408. Proceedings of the fourth national conference of community forestry international, Kathmandu, Nepal, 4–6 August

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarin M (1995) Regenerating India’s forests: reconciling gender equity with joint forest management. IDS Bull 26(1):83–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sultana P, Thompson P (2008) Gender and local floodplain management institutions: a case study from Bangladesh. J Int Develop 20(1):53–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USAID/IFPRI/OPHI (United States Agency for International Development/International Food Policy Research Institute/Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative) (2012) Women’s empowerment in agriculture index. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins CA (2009) Natural resource use strategies in a forest-adjacent Ugandan village. Hum Ecol 37(6):723–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westermann OJ, Ashby J, Pretty J (2005) Gender and social capital: the importance of gender differences for the maturity and effectiveness of natural resource management groups. World Dev 33(11):1783–1799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolcock M, Sweetser AT (2007) Social capital: the bonds that connect. Asian Development Bank, Manila

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank/IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) (2010) Gender and governance in rural services: insights from India, Ghana, and Ethiopia. Gender and Governance Author Team. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwarteveen M, Neupane N (1996) Free-riders or victims: women’s nonparticipation in irrigation management in Nepal’s Chhattis Mauja Irrigation Scheme. Research report no. 7. International Irrigation Management Institute, Colombo

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environment and Production Technology Division, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 2033 K Street, N.W, Washington, DC, 20006, USA

    Ruth Meinzen-Dick

  2. Department of Sociology, New York University, 295 Lafayette Street, 4th floor, New York, NY, 10012, USA

    Julia A. Behrman

  3. Evidence and Data for Gender Equality (EDGE), United Nations Statistics Division, Two United Nations Plaza, New York, NY, 10017, USA

    Lauren Pandolfelli (Statistician)

  4. Stony Brook University, 100 Nicolls Rd, Stony Brook, NY, 11790, USA

    Lauren Pandolfelli (Statistician)

  5. Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

    Amber Peterman

  6. Poverty, Health, and Nutrition Division, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 2033 K Street, N.W, Washington, DC, 20006, USA

    Agnes R. Quisumbing

Authors
  1. Ruth Meinzen-Dick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julia A. Behrman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lauren Pandolfelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amber Peterman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Agnes R. Quisumbing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruth Meinzen-Dick .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Poverty, Health, and Nutrition Division, International Food Policy Research Inst., Washington, District of Columbia, USA

    Agnes R. Quisumbing

  2. Environment and Production Technology Division, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, District of Columbia, USA

    Ruth Meinzen-Dick

  3. The State of Food and Agriculture, Agricultural Development Economics Division, Economic and Social Development Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy

    Terri L. Raney

  4. Agricultural Development Economics Division, Economic and Social Development Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy

    André Croppenstedt

  5. Department of Sociology, New York University, New York, New York, USA

    Julia A. Behrman

  6. Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

    Amber Peterman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Meinzen-Dick, R., Behrman, J.A., Pandolfelli, L., Peterman, A., Quisumbing, A.R. (2014). Gender and Social Capital for Agricultural Development. In: Quisumbing, A., Meinzen-Dick, R., Raney, T., Croppenstedt, A., Behrman, J., Peterman, A. (eds) Gender in Agriculture. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8616-4_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation