Twenty-Five Years of Research on Women Farmers in Africa:
Lessons and Implications for Agricultural Research Institutions
Cheryl R. Doss
Introduction
For years, activists, donors, and researchers have pushed
the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
(CIMMYT) and other centers of the Consultative Group
on International Agriculture Research (CGIAR) to do a
better job of targeting their research toward women,
especially toward women farmers in Africa. However, the
use of high-yielding varieties of maize and the adoption of
improved maize management systems in Africa continue to
be limited by choices and constraints at the household
level, frequently related to gender. After twenty-five years
of research on gender issues in African agriculture, we have
learned many lessons. We know that “gender matters” and,
as this paper demonstrates, we understand many of the
dimensions along which it matters. Gender affects farmers’
access to labor, land, and other agricultural inputs. Gender
may also affect farmers’ preferences concerning outputs.
We also know that gender relations are dynamic and
respond to economic incentives and opportunities. We
have relatively little ability, however, to predict a priori
what the dynamics of technology adoption will be within
households and communities. Nor can we predict how the
introduction of new technologies will affect the new
patterns of labor, land, and resource allocation between
men and women.
This paper reviews previous literature on the constraints
facing African smallholder farmers, with explicit attention
devoted to the different constraints faced by men and
women. In particular, it examines the literature on labor
allocation, access to land, access to other inputs,
preferences regarding outputs, and household decision-
making.
Three general conclusions can be drawn from the
available literature. First, there is enormous complexity and
heterogeneity among African households. Few lessons are
transferable across villages, much less across the continent.
Rather, the available literature tells us what issues may be
important in different contexts and what questions need to
be asked in any given location. Thus, it provides detailed
information about the dimensions along which gender
may matter.
Second, there is no simple way to summarize gender
roles within African households and communities. If we
seek to understand gender dynamics, it is not sufficient—
although it may be useful—to compare male and female
farmers or male- and female-headed households. Instead,
we need to understand entire systems of household
behavior as they are embedded in the agricultural and
nonagricultural economies. This is a forbiddingly complex
problem, but we must recognize that technology adoption
and technology impacts depend on intricate webs of
interaction that defy simple generalizations.
Third, gender roles and responsibilities are dynamic. In
particular, they change with new economic circumstances.
Thus, it is difficult to tell a priori what the effects of a
particular program will be on a group of people. As the
opportunities for one group of people increase—whether
they are women, children, or smallholder farmers—their
relationships with others in their households and
communities are renegotiated. In this vein, the studies
reviewed in this paper provide some insights into possible
effects in given contexts and to factors that may be
important. It is clear that individuals within the household
or community who have more power and access to
resources are initially better able to take advantage of new
circumstances, regardless of who is targeted by a project or
program. Thus, it is difficult to target programs and
technologies toward women or other groups.
Together, these three lessons provide a challenge for an
agricultural research institute concerned with bettering the
lives and livelihoods of African agricultural households.