Skip to main content

FW: Analytical and empirical linkages between poverty, employment, agricultural growth and gender

Analytical and empirical linkages between poverty, employment, agricultural growth and gender

 

Introduction:

·   Gender disparities in basic rights; in access to schooling, credit, and jobs  take their most direct toll on women and girls, the evidence shows that gender inequality ultimately hinders economic growth.

·   Gender differentials in other areas such as access to land and complementary agricultural inputs, labour force participation and labour productivity also matter for economic growth.

 

Who is the Poor?

·   Farmers and self-employed- small ‘substance farmers’, people living in rural areas ( Africa 60% to 80%a)-smallholders, substance and peasant categories, considered as homogenous , sharing  the characteristics of poverty, Female Headed Households

·   Poverty and gender: a) women as self-employed farmers, including women working on their own family’s farm, or b) Female headed Household in rural areas.

 

Facts (Sender and  Abhijit et al)

·   changes in women ‘s employment patterns  due access to non--agriculture employment, increased casualisation in the labour force, access to education, e.g. women aspire non-agriculture jobs or  non self-employment jobs.

·   Men continue to benefit priced inputs including access to credits and fertilisers.

·   Women lack of secure, sufficient and fertile lands. Solution: promote non-farm self-employment; e.g. retailing enterprises, food processing, hairdressing, etc.

·   Shift to non-agricultural employment  resulting from the inability of agriculture to generate the means  for adequate livelihood to those born in farming families

·   Increase share of agriculture is accompanied by decrease in rural employment rates ( particularly for daily status) along with casual labour contracts

 

Policy responses

·     Role of the state in creating the environment for particular patterns to emerge and moulding specific changes in employment behaviour (India )

·   The poor will benefit when policies are introduced to provide them with prices incentives.

·   Priced inputs into farming operations e.g.- seeds, planting materials, fertilisers and agro-chemicals, micro-credit programmes, new techniques, improved varieties , pests and diseases threats, etc.

·   constraints:  distorted , discriminatory rural credits  market

·   Promoting self-employment, market deregulation, decentralisation to ensure capital inflows.  But self-employment and price incentives to increase farm outputs in reducing in reducing female poverty is unsatisfactory.

·   State intervention in rural markets for poverty reduction (e.g. stabilising of price of grains has played a key role in reducing rural poverty since 1950s( India)

·   State investments to increase the stability of the rate of growth of agriculture production – water control and irrigation programmes.

 

Challenges:

·   Insufficient of country-level work that will help in assembling robust country-level evidence on the links between gender equality and economic growth and poverty reduction and on the efficacy of alternative public actions to address the key aspects of gender inequality.

·   Limitations of existing analytical tools and methods are still a constraint in building such an evidence base at the country level. Insufficient knowledge about the impacts of specific policies.

·   Lack of reliable sex-disaggregated data continues to be a serious problem, particularly in low-income countries. – Need to improve statistical systems at the country level and to adapt the design of household surveys. (World Bank)

·   Lack for reliable data of  those employed in small–scale farms and rural enterprises , especially on the wages of those who are irregularly, seasonably , or casually employed-More research to  trends in rural female wages ( J. Sender).

 

Discussion:

 

Promoting self-employment may not be a sustainable solution e.g. waste of time and resources to promote the sector.  Poverty reduction is possible when labour force become employed for wages ( e.g. OECD countries)

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OIF : Louise Mushikiwabo, une candidature embarrassante pour un troisième mandat de trop

C'était en novembre 2025, à Kigali. En marge de la 46e Conférence ministérielle de la Francophonie, Louise Mushikiwabo prenait la parole avec l'assurance de celle qui n'a rien à craindre : de nombreux pays, affirmait-elle, lui avaient demandé de se représenter. Spontanément. Naturellement. Unanimement presque. Sauf que les faits racontent une tout autre histoire. L'annonce qui ne devait pas avoir lieu si tôt Novembre 2025. Le Centre de Conventions de Kigali accueille plus de 400 délégués des 90 États membres de l'Organisation internationale de la Francophonie. Le thème officiel porte sur les femmes et l'égalité des genres, trente ans après Pékin. Mais en marge des séances plénières, c'est une autre affaire qui agite les couloirs : Louise Mushikiwabo vient d'annoncer qu'elle souhaite briguer un troisième mandat. L'annonce est prématurée. Délibérément. Les candidatures ne ferment qu'en avril 2026. Aucun autre pays n'a encore ...

Pourquoi les sanctions américaines ne fonctionnent pas contre le Rwanda

Pourquoi Paul Kagame a ignoré les sanctions américaines et la Résolution 2773 du Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU Entre février 2025 et mars 2026, le Trésor américain a imposé deux séries de sanctions ciblant directement la machine de guerre du Rwanda dans l'est du Congo : d'abord James Kabarebe, ministre d'État rwandais et principal intermédiaire du régime auprès du M23, puis les Forces de défense rwandaises en tant qu'entité, ainsi que quatre de leurs hauts responsables. Chacun des individus sanctionnés est demeuré en poste. Les FDR ne se sont pas retirées. Cette analyse examine pourquoi les mesures de Washington n'ont pas modifié la conduite du Rwanda — et pourquoi, selon les propres mots de Kagame, elles sont rejetées comme l'œuvre des « simplement stupides ».     Introduction : des sanctions sans conséquence La campagne de sanctions de Washington contre les opérations militaires du Rwanda dans l'est du Congo s'...

Paul Kagame: “We refuse to remove defensive measures"

Paul Kagame Refuses to Implement the Washington Accords and UN Security Council Resolution 2773: Analysis and Implications In an exclusive interview published on 3 April 2026, President Paul Kagame of Rwanda openly confirmed that Rwandan forces are deployed in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, rejected calls for their withdrawal, dismissed US sanctions as illegitimate, and signalled clear satisfaction with the current military status quo. This briefing examines what Kagame said, what his remarks mean for the Washington Accords, and what concrete steps the United States must now take if it wishes to restore credibility to its diplomacy in the Great Lakes region. Introduction: A Confession Wrapped in Grievance The interview, conducted by François Soudan and published in Jeune Afrique on 3 April 2026, is one of the most candid public statements Paul Kagame has made on Rwanda's military role in the DRC. Its significance does not lie in revealing something previously unknown. Th...

BBC News

Africanews

UNDP - Africa Job Vacancies

How We Made It In Africa – Insight into business in Africa

Migration Policy Institute