The fifth Sustainable Development Goal—to “achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls”—reflects a growing consensus that these are key objectives of development policy in their own right, while also contributing to improved productivity and increased efficiency, especially in agriculture and food production. To deliver on this commitment to women’s empowerment in development calls for appropriate measures that can be used to diagnose the scope and major sources of disempowerment and to measure progress. The Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI) is a survey-based tool codeveloped by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (Alkire et al. 2013). The index was originally designed as a monitoring and evaluation tool for the U.S. government’s Feed the Future initiative to directly capture women’s empowerment and inclusion levels in the agricultural sector. Since its launch in February 2012, the WEAI has been implemented in the 19 Feed the Future focus countries. As with any new metric, pilot testing in a few selected countries with limited sample sizes is insufficient to demonstrate how the WEAI would perform when rolled out on a wider scale. Concerns expressed by users of the WEAI led to the creation of an abbreviated version—the A-WEAI. This paper begins by presenting a brief overview of the WEAI and its construction. It then proceeds to discuss (1) the background and motivation behind the creation of the A-WEAI; (2) the steps taken to develop the AWEAI— namely, cognitive testing and piloting of different modules, particularly those that were difficult to administer in the field; (3) analysis of the pilot data from Bangladesh and Uganda; (4) domain-specific comparisons of the different pilot versions; and (5) robustness checks and empowerment diagnostics from the A-WEAI as compared with the original WEAI. The paper concludes by summarizing the modifications to the original WEAI and discussing possibilities for further development of empowerment metrics based on the WEAI.

In this paper, the authors describe the adaptation and validation of a project-level WEAI (or pro-WEAI) that agricultural development projects can use to identify key areas of women’s (and men’s) disempowerment, design appropriate strategies to address identified deficiencies, and monitor project outcomes related to women’s empowerment. The 12 pro-WEAI indicators are mapped to three domains: intrinsic agency (power within), instrumental agency (power to), and collective agency (power with). A gender parity index compares the empowerment scores of men and women in the same household. The authors describe the development of pro-WEAI, including: (1) pro-WEAI’s distinctiveness from other versions of the WEAI; (2) the process of piloting pro-WEAI in 13 agricultural development projects during the Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project, phase 2 (GAAP2); (3) analysis of quantitative data from the GAAP2 projects, including intrahousehold patterns of empowerment; and (4) a summary of the findings from the qualitative work exploring concepts of women’s empowerment in the project sites. The paper concludes with a discussion of lessons learned from pro-WEAI and possibilities for further development of empowerment metrics.

Inclusive agricultural value chains (VCs) are potential drivers for poverty reduction, food security, and women’s empowerment. This report assesses the implementation of the Agricultural Technical and Vocational Education Training for Women Program (ATVET4Women) that aims to support women with vocational training and market linkages in priority agricultural value chains. This report focuses on Malawi, one of the six pilot countries of the ATVET4Women; and focuses on vegetable value chains in which some non-formal training sessions have been conducted as of October 2019. This report presents (1) program experience of stakeholders; (2) evidence of program benefits and challenges among ATVET4Women non-formal training graduates; and (3) baseline data on value chain and empowerment indicators, using a pilot household survey-based instrument for measuring women’s empowerment in agricultural value chains (pro-WEAI for market inclusion) and supplementary qualitative research. Results show graduates’ satisfaction and appreciation of the training provided, and some graduates reported having access to more lucrative markets as a result of the training. However, positive changes in several outcome indicators were reported by only some graduates: 30 percent of graduates reported increased production and sales. There is no significant difference in the reported changes and levels of vegetable production and income between graduates and non-graduates. Qualitative findings suggest that constraints to accessing agricultural inputs and funds to upgrade their production may be why there are no measured differences. Results on empowerment status reveal that 73 percent of women and 85 percent of men in the sample are empowered, and 73 percent of the sample households achieved gender parity. The main contributor of disempowerment among women and men is lack of work balance and autonomy in income. Fewer women achieved adequacy in work balance than men. Adequacies in attitudes about domestic violence, respect among household members, input in productive decisions, and asset ownership are generally high for both women and men, but significantly lower for women. While this report is mainly descriptive and further analysis is ongoing, it offers some lessons and practical implications for improving ATVET4Women program implementation and its outcomes on women’s market access, incomes, and empowerment.

In the past years, there has been steady growth in work relating to agroecology. People-centred, knowledge-intensive and rooted to sustainability, it is now well established that agroecology matches the transformative approach called for by the 2030 Agenda; a transition to sustainable food and agriculture systems that ensures food security and nutrition for all, provides social and economic equity, and conserves biodiversity and the ecosystem services on which agriculture depends. Although not a new concept, agroecology is today gaining interest worldwide among a wide range of actors as an effective answer to climate change and the interrelated challenges facing food systems, finding expression in the practices of food producers, in grassroots social processes for sustainability and the public policies of many countries around the world.

The study assesses the effect of interactive radio programming on women’s empowerment and agricultural development, employing nationally representative household panel data and qualitative interviews in Malawi. Four major findings can be highlighted. First, radio programming is the preferred source of agricultural and nutrition advice among many subpopulations: younger women and men used radio more than other sources for their agricultural information needs, while younger and older men used radio more than other sources for nutrition education. Second, results show a positive impact of radio programming on technology awareness but a limited impact on actual adoption of most agricultural practices being promoted, except crop residue incorporation. Third, results show positive impacts on dietary diversity and adoption of other nutrition practices among the rural population. Fourth, results show a strong association between access to interactive radio programming and women’s and men’s empowerment scores. The association is greater for women’s empowerment and younger men’s empowerment, the latter being the most disempowered group in the sample.

Two key outputs of the Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project, Phase 2 (GAAP2) are the project-level Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (pro-WEAI) and the Reach, Benefit, Empower (RBE) framework. An e-survey was used to get a sense of awareness and use of the pro-WEAI and the RBE framework among a target population of potential users (A4NH program stakeholders). More than 30 semi-structured interviews were conducted with funders, implementers, and evaluators, mainly but not exclusively associated with GAAP2, to understand how tools were used at different stages of the program/project cycle, from influencing program objectives and outcomes to program/project design to impact evaluation. The evaluation found that even though the pro-WEAI and the RBE framework are relatively new and their use is not yet widespread, their use in projects is growing and they have contributed to changes in project priorities and in how projects seeking to empower women are designed and evaluated.

Food security satisfies people’s dietary needs by ensuring physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food. Nowadays, food security is of prime importance; because not only does it overcomes hunger, poverty and malnutrition, but it also determines the national security and political and economic sovereignty of states. However, according to the FAO report (2021), 2.37 billion people (nearly one in three people) in the world did not have adequate food availability in 2020. The green revolution created an era of extraordinary food production worldwide, but agriculture-oriented developing countries face adverse impacts such as loss of ecosystem quality and biodiversity and environmental degradation. Besides, several challenges such as population growth, pollution, natural resource depletion, agricultural land conversions and climate change are further developing concerns in achieving food security.

This paper compares the empowerment impacts of the UN Joint Program for Rural Women’s Economic Empowerment (JP RWEE) in Ethiopia, Niger, Nepal, and Kyrgyzstan using the Abbreviated Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (A-WEAI). We assess the extent of empowerment and gender parity, and decompose the sources of disempowerment, separately for men and women and for beneficiary and control groups. We then estimate program impacts on A-WEAI and its component indicators and assess whether estimated impacts are consistent with the activities implemented by the program. We interpret the quantitative results in the light of the qualitative studies undertaken as part of the impact evaluation. Despite the diversity in country and cultural contexts, in all four countries, women are more disempowered than men, although large proportions of men are themselves disempowered. Excessive workload is the most common major contributor to disempowerment, and so is lack of group membership. The program had positive impacts on aggregate empowerment measures for program participants in Niger, Nepal, and Kyrgyzstan. Nevertheless, gender parity improved only in Nepal. The group-based approach was a clear contributor to women’s empowerment in Ethiopia, Nepal, and Kyrgyzstan. In Kyrgyzstan, the GALS/BALI approach contributed to impacts across almost all indicators of empowerment. The positive impact of GALS and GALS/BALI on men and women alike in Kyrgyzstan is consistent with emerging evidence that involving both men and women in gender transformative approaches, rather than focusing on women alone, may be key to effective and sustainable programs. Although impacts on time use were insignificant in the quantitative study, the qualitative work pointed out negative impacts, emphasizing the unintended consequences of increased workload for women who participate in livelihood interventions.

In sub-Saharan Africa, female-managed plots often show a significant gap in productivity compared to men's plots. To examine these differences, a variable to determine who in the household controls agricultural plots is needed. There is variability in the ways in which gendered control over agricultural plots is defined and measured across studies. Many studies show that an in-depth analysis of intra-household relationships is necessary, as this is often a major unexplained factor in productivity differences. To contribute to filling this methodological gap, we estimate the productivity gap among male and female farmers in Uganda using three different identification approaches and conduct complementary qualitative research to investigate the underlying causes of these differences. The three approaches to define control over plots are: (1) gender of the plot manager, (2) gender of the main plot-level decision-maker and (3) on gender of decision-maker over income from the sale of crops. Results show significantly different gender productivity gaps of 16% (1), 43% (2) and 60% (3). Qualitative results confirm the variability in the way that households defined plot management, including multiple ways in which decisions are made or activities are distributed within households on jointly managed plots. Mixed-method research designs and improved gender variables for econometric models can contribute to a better understanding of gender productivity differences and better policy making aiming to reduce gender inequalities.