Women and Agricultural Productivity: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?
Cheryl Doss ()
No 212153, Center Discussion Papers from Yale University, Economic Growth Center
Should agricultural development programs target women in order to increase productivity? This paper reviews the extensive literature on men’s and women’s relative productivity in agriculture, most of which concludes that controlling for access to inputs, plot and farmer characateristics, there are little or no gender gaps in productivity. In addition, the paper identifies the many challenges to disentangling individual level productivity. Most of the literature compares productivity on plots managed by women with those managed by men, ignoring the majority of agricultural households in which men and women are both involved in management and production. The empirical studies which have been done provide scant evidence for where the returns to project may be highest, in terms of who to target. Yet, programs that do not consider the gendered responsibilities, resources and constraints, are unlikely to succeed, either in terms of increasing productivity or benefitting men and women smallholder farmers.
Keywords: Agricultural and Food Policy; Food Security and Poverty; International Development; Productivity Analysis; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Working Paper: Women and Agricultural Productivity: What Does the Evidence Tell Us? (2015)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:yaleeg:212153
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Center Discussion Papers from Yale University, Economic Growth Center Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().