The opinions expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
This case study is part of a series of working documents prepared for the workshop on "Gender and Participation in Agricultural Development Planning" to be held in Rome in December 1997. This workshop will bring together national officials from various countries in which FAO has supported institutions and rural communities to develop participatory planning designed to meet the needs and priorities of men and women, as well as those of national structures. The objectives of the workshop are:
· compare and exchange experiences aimed at reinforcing capacities in the use of participatory and open approaches to gender issues in agricultural planning;
· on the basis of these exchanges, draw up a framework or model for participatory planning in agricultural development concerned with gender equality;
· share this field experience with the competent technical divisions of FAO and examine the possibility of interaction with complementary FAO programmes, such as the Special Programme for Food Security (SPFS) and the Socio-Economic and Gender Analysis (SEAGA) Programme.
It is hoped that this case study will be of interest to all those who, in the framework of programmes and projects, are looking for ways to involve women, enhance their experiences and meet their priorities in the agricultural development planning process.
| ACSGDI | Associative and Cooperative Support for Grassroots Development Initiatives (Sahel/Norway/ILO Programme) |
| AGCN | African Gender and Creativity Network |
| AIEDP | African Institute for Economic Development and Planning |
| APRM | Accelerated Participatory Research Method |
| ATLNL | Association for Training and Literacy in National Languages |
| CCSIC | Canadian Centre for International Studies and Cooperation |
| CIDA | Canadian International Development Agency |
| CODESRIA | Council for the Development of Economic and Social Research in Africa |
| FAO | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations |
| GAD | Gender and Development |
| IDRC | International Development Research Centre (Canada) |
| IED | Institute for Economic Development |
| ILO | International Labour Office |
| LDMP | Land Development and Management Plan |
| LIV | League of Italian Volunteers |
| MRDW | Ministry of Rural Development and Water |
| MRP/EDF | Micro-Realization Project/European Development Fund |
| MWCF | Ministry for Women, Children and the Family |
| NGO | Non-Governmental Organization |
| NGOCDS | NGO Council for Development Support |
| NPAP | National Programme for Agricultural Popularization |
| NWAP | National Women's Action Plan |
| PREVINOBA | North-West Groundnut Basin Village Reafforestation Project |
| PROVOBIL | Village Afforestation Project in Louga and Mbacke |
| RSGFSA | Research and Support Group for Farmer Self-Advancement |
| SAGA | Social and Gender Analysis |
| SDR/WSC | Soil Defence and Restoration/Water and Soil Conservation |
| SEAGA | Socio-Economic and Gender Analysis |
| SFAP | Senegalese Forestry Action Plan |
| SMC | Senegalese Mutual Credit |
| SNADF | Senegalese National Agricultural Development Fund |
| SPFS | Special Programme on Food Security |
| SPWAG | Support Project for Women's Advancement Groups |
| UNDP | United Nations Development Programme |
| UNIFEM | United Nations Women's Development Fund |
| VDC | Village Development Committee |
| VLM | Village Land Management |
| WAG | Women's Advancement Group |
| WFHSCD | Water, Forest, Hunting and Soil Conservation Division |
| WVI | World Vision International |
The project strategy does not refer explicitly to adoption of an approach that is open to gender issues and the use of corresponding tools. However, the socio-demographic reality of the area covered by the project has had a certain effect on the content and implementation of the land development and management plan. In fact, the most numerous and most stable project representatives are women, and this has opened up the dynamics of the project to the issue of gender.
Over the last ten years, through partnership with PREVINOBA, women have acquired and/or reinforced substantial advantages: income diversification, technical, management and literacy training, improvements in domestic working conditions, information about and sensitization to development issues, improved negotiating capacity, participation in decision-making and the choice of action, etc.
Participatory approach tools, particularly those developed by the Research and Support Group for Farmer Self-Advancement (RSGFSA) 1, the use of rural radio 2 and, above all, application of the Accelerated Participatory Research Method (APRM) 3 , have progressively given women a voice and the means for participating fully in development planning, taking into account the priorities they themselves consider important.
However, it seems that some of the tools developed and widely used in an approach and analysis that takes into consideration male-female stakes meet with an unfavourable reception. In fact, in the rural context, socio-cultural and religious values are still very significant and are sometimes out of line with the hypotheses sustained by gender analysis tools.
Nevertheless, in terms of agricultural planning, information and education on the concept of gender, gender analysis and tools that take into account men-women specificities remain essential for the project team. The same is true for the partners and even more so for the institutions and others involved in agricultural and rural development. It is only through a perfect understanding of what is at stake in the gender approach that the lessons, already important in themselves, can be capitalized on and systematized in development planning exercises.
The participatory approach, a tool that permits the active and responsible participation of populations, grew out of recognition of the failure of intervention strategies advocated in the past as well as the relatively recent willingness of governments to integrate the "people's participation" dimension in rural development policies. It supports activities designed to encourage the decentralization of technical services, efforts to end State involvement and the privatization of production and management activities, including the exploitation of forest and natural resources.
In Senegal, the management of natural and forest resources is a driving element in land management because of the primary nature of the needs of rural populations and the exploitation of resources destined for agricultural, breeding or wood production use.
Complementary to the land approach, the participatory approach applied to the management of natural resources should be considered a tool that encourages an entire population to take effective control of land development activities. However, the participatory approach is not an end in itself but a methodological scheme that contributes to socio-economic development planning. It aims to modify the perception of everybody's role and to propose the sharing of responsibilities among different partners.
In this way a well-led participatory approach helps to identify all development actors, increase their standing and recognize their importance, even those who may have been "forgotten" from at the moment of project or programme design. PREVINOBA, firmly driven by a participatory strategy for concerted land management programming, is the example of a project open to gender issues, even though not necessarily "foreseen". Thanks to participatory approach tools, the identification of actors has shown that, contrary to widely held beliefs, rural forestry and land management is not just "men's business".
This case study aims to analyze the course of the project which, through adoption of a participatory approa ch and application of its tools, has obtained important results in rural planning, taking into account the priorities of men and women. These results, though not covering the whole range of concerns of gender analysis tools, can however inspire other experiences in comparable situations and help fine-tune gender analysis itself through the recognition of specific socio-cultural realities.
1 see Annex 1, technical data on RSGFSA
2 see Annex 1, technical data on rural radio
3 see Annex 1, technical data on APRM
4 In general terms, "land"
refers to the space exploited, managed and controlled by one or more rural
communities for agricultural production, breeding or wood production, or
for meeting their needs.
