The Gender, Climate Change and Nutrition Integration Initiative (GCAN): A Framework for Analysis and...
-
Upload
international-food-policy-research-institute-ifpri -
Category
Education
-
view
265 -
download
5
Transcript of The Gender, Climate Change and Nutrition Integration Initiative (GCAN): A Framework for Analysis and...
The Gender, Climate Change and Nutrition Integration Initiative (GCAN): A Framework for
Analysis and Programming
Alex De Pinto, IFPRI
December 15, 2017
Answer the needs of todaySupport long-term policies that can deal with the contingencies of changing climate regimesAddress these needs in a potentially very different environment
Agricultural development must meet multiple challenges
Most evidence points to the need to “think bigger” than field-level activities
The DRC: Most often than not agriculture poses a problem insofar as it can cause deforestation while, comparatively, little damage is caused by its emissions (Li et al 2015,Gockowski and Sonwa 2011; Burney et al. 2010).
Colombia: policies that act on the interface pastureland/livestock and forests are key to achieving economic growth in the next 20 years (average ~ $50 Million per year) and GHG emissions reduction (average 90 Million tons CO2 e per year) (De Pinto et al.,2016).
Even CSA, when interpreted (reductively) as a set of agronomic practices and technologies: Best possible outcome considering maize, wheat, and rice (~41% of global harvested area and ~64% of GHG emission from crop production) ~ 10% of 1 Gt CO2e goal (De Pinto et al., Forthcoming).
Evidence on Gender and Climate Change
Men and women have different absorptive and adaptive capacityo Livelihood activities and assets
o Access to productive resources (Deere and Doss 2006; Perez et al. 2014; Peterman et al. 2014)
o Access to information (Bernier et al. 2015; Jost et al 2015; Tall et al. 2014)
o Different perceptions (Oloukoi et al., 2014; Twyman et al., 2014)
o Institutions (e.g. social norms) (Nielsen and Reenberg 2010)
Different preferences and needs for responding to shocks and stressors and different bargaining power (Bernier et al. 2015; Jost et al. 2015; Perez et al. 2014; Twyman et al. 2014)
Different outcomes: costs and benefits of climate shocks and response choices not equally distributed
o Climate shocks and asset dynamics (Dillon and Quinones 2011; Goh 2012; Quisumbing, Kumar, & Behrman 2011)
o What happens after technology adoption? (Beuchelt and Badstue 2013; Nelson and Stathers 2009; Theis et al. 2017)
Gender integration into programs and projects is often lacking (Bryan et al. 2017; Ragasa et al.
2013)
Climate Change and Nutrition Linkages
Undernutrition is a consequence of climate change (Phalkey et al. 2015; Springmann et al.
2016; Myers et al. 2017; Fanzo et al. 2017)
o Impacts on food availability and prices
o Impacts on consumption of healthy foods (fruits and vegetables)
Nutrition and health status also affect absorptive and adaptive capacity (Victora et al. 2008; Haas et al. 1995; Rivera et al. 1995)
o Physical capabilities and productivity
Link between diet choices and environmental outcomeso e.g. link between consumption of animal source foods and GHG emissions and water (Vetter et al.
2017; Ranganathan et al. 2016)
Value chains as a frame for thinking about climate-smart practices that maximize nutrition (Ruel et al. 2013; Fanzo et al. 2017)
o e.g. seed choice, food storage and processing, climate-proofing marketing distribution and retail to ensure supply side of nutrition
What are our available responses?
Current consumption and degradation of natural resources and ecosystems exceeds their regeneration rates and this pushes us against what are considered the safe planetary boundaries (Rockstrom et al. 2009, Steffen et al. 2015).
Productivity-based solutions “à la green revolution” are not sufficient to answer to the multi-dimensional problems we are facing.
Our thinking must be enriched with system-thinking (interactions of agricultural land with carbon-rich environments, include agroforestry, crop-livestock and silvopastoral systems). Think about post-harvest and off-farm losses, about value chains and food production-consumption systems. The role of trade.
We must recognize the multiple pathways through which nutrition, health, gender equality influence the set of available climate change responses and other development outcomes.
To be transformative our frameworks
must be inclusive
The Gender, Climate Change and Nutrition Integration Initiative (GCAN):
A Framework for Analysis and Programming
THE GENDER, CLIMATE CHANGE AND NUTRITION INTEGRATION INITIATIVE
1. Process/template for FTF focus countries to help understand climate science and implications for CSA programing that integrates nutrition and gender
2. Tool to think systematically about investments, data needs, knowledge gaps
3. Objective: enhance effectiveness and sustainability of investments in focus countries, based on country/mission tailored analyses and assessment of the potential for agricultural technologies
Bryan et al. 2017
Physical capabilities and productivity
Link between diet choices and environmental outcomes
CSA practices have implications for nutrition
Undernutrition as a consequence of cc
Bryan et al. 2017
Gender differences in capacities
Different preferences and decision-making power
Feedback loops may be different
Different impacts
Different influence on the pathways
Bryan et al. 2017
How We Use the GCAN Framework
Frame synthesis of literature on climate change, gender and nutrition in selected countries
Guide engagement with missions during week-long engagements
Identify research gaps on key elements and relationships in the country context
Support integration of gender and nutrition in climate risk screening activities
Develop tools for use during project implementation
Understand Climate Trends and Risks.E.g. percentage change in yields due to climate change based on four climate models, 2000–2050
Source: Devised by authors based on (Rosenzweig et al. 2014) using weights from
MapSPAM harvested area (You et al. 2014).
Nutrition profile
Priorities:
o Global Hunger Index 2016o Stunting in children under 5 years: (WHO cutoff ≥20%).o Wasting in children under 5 years: (WHO cutoff ≥5%)o Overweight and Obesity in women ≥20 years
Micronutrient deficiencies (varies with urban/rural, wealth quintile)
o Anemia in women of reproductive ageo Anemia in preschool-aged childreno Zinc deficiency in preschool-aged childreno Vit A deficiency in children and women
Absorptive and Adaptive Capacity: Key Gendered Factors Include:
Gender roles within and outside of agriculture
Perceptions of climate change and climate risk
Livelihood activities
Assets (tangible and intangible)
Access to productive resources
Access to information
Institutions (e.g. social norms, social protection programs etc.)
1,794 Kcal day-1
1,793 Kcal day-1
2,300 Kcal day-1
Source: De Pinto, Smith and Robertson: Risk, climate change and land-use choices. Some insights from Zambia. Forthcoming.
Risk aversion can be a deterrent to more resilient livelihoods. Most research works with trends and averages in precipitation and temperature and considers the effect of volatility a secondary effect.
Zambia: Climate-induced yield variability leads to shifts to less productive and less nutritive crops; better climate information and technologies that reduce yield variability can reduce this form of maladaptation
Risk affects dietary diversity
Think of Climate Change Responses that:
Input Supply
Production Post Harvest Storage
Processing Distribution Marketing and Retail
Consumption Food Utilization
Limited available land, soil
degradation, loss of biodiversity,
temperature and water stress, CO2
effects
Contamination, spoilage, increased electricity demands,
damage from extreme weather events
Improper processing of
foods, nutrient losses during
milling, combination
with unhealthy ingredients
Climate impacts on
transportation and retail
infrastructure, export/import
impacts on prices and availability
Lack of access to inputs (seeds,
fertilizer, irrigation, extension)
Advertising campaigns for
unhealthy foods, loss of
small food retailers
Lack of knowledge of
nutrition, nutrient losses
during preparation,
increased diarrhea &
enteropathy
Minimize nutrition “exiting” the value chain
Maximize nutrition “entering” the food value chain
New production locations,
diversification, CO2
fertilization, focus on women farmers,
extension
Aflatoxin control,
refrigeration
Fermentation, drying,
fortification, product
reformulation (reduce salt,
sugar, unhealthy fats)
Moving food from areas of shortage to
areas of surplus,
targeting of vulnerable
groups
Improved varieties, bio-fortification,
fertilizer, irrigation
Messaging on the
importance of nutrition and sustainability,
benefits of certain foods
Home fortification
(fish powders), training in
nutritious food preparation, time mgmt,
food preservation
Source: Fanzo, Downs and McLaren 2017
Men more likely to report planting trees
Both reported changing crop types, varieties and planting dates but preferences for crop types and varieties may be different
Insurance preferences are different
Women more likely to mention strategies such as food storage, starting an off-farm business, fuel efficient cookstoves
51
78
48
81
32
55
3
67
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Nyando,Kenya
Wote, Kenya Kaffrine,Senegal
Rakai,Uganda
Men Women
Responses to Climate Change: Different Preferences
% of Men and Women Adapting to Perceived Climate Change
Men and Women have Different Preferences for CSA Practices
Source: IFPRI-CCAFS intra-household survey.
Pathways: Influenced by Gender
• Production pathway: Who makes crop/production choices? Men and women may choose different crops and for different purposes (consumption or sale)—implications for nutrition
• Income pathway: Who controls income? Men and women have different consumption preferences
• Asset pathway: Gender-differentiated asset dynamics have implications for well-being outcomes for men and women
• Labor pathway: Different CSA practices have different time implications for men and women (e.g. women’s time burden affect their caring capacity—a key determinant of child nutritional status)
Climate Conditions and Responses Affect Food Prices and Nutritional Outcomes
• Food price volatility is
influenced by climate
conditions e.g. seasonality,
shocks, etc.
• Need to consider implications
of climate change on
production and the effects on
food prices
• Food price volatility poses
risks for everyone – from
farmers to consumersSources: Global Panel (2016); Hauenstein Swan, S., and B. Vaitla(2007); Hendrix, C. (2016); Breisinger, C. et al. (2012)
Outcomes: Will CSA Close or Exacerbate Gender Inequalities?
Source: ILSSI baseline survey data
Source: Bryan et al. 2017. unpublished
COUNTRYIrrigators Non-irrigators Contributors to
disempowermentWEAI Score WEAI Score
Ethiopia 0.82 0.85
•Group membership
•Leisure time
•Speaking in public
•Credit access
•Control over use of income
Ghana 0.82 0.80
•Credit access
•Workload
•Group membership
•Control over use of income
Tanzania 0.88 0.86
•Group membership
•Credit access
•Leisure time
•Speaking in public
•Autonomy in production
Thank you for listening!
Please visit our website for more information and materials: https://gcan.ifpri.info/
Email me with any questions: [email protected]