No abstract

Men's violence against women is a global human rights issue, with domestic violence one of the most common forms (World Health Organization, 2017). The consequences of domestic violence include detrimental effects on victim-survivors' health, well-being, and sense of safety. To understand these impacts, the concept of 'space for action' seeks to evaluate how perpetrators of domestic violence narrow women's life choices, constraining their freedom (Kelly, 2003). In this article, we build upon the concept of 'space for action' by examining if, and how, rural geographical space and place can be used by perpetrators to constrict women's options for escape, or even shape the violence itself. In conducting a meta-synthesis of 32 global studies, we found similarities in rural women's experiences of violence. Perpetrators used both geographical space and rural social norms to constrain women's space for action. In particular, geographical and social isolation were used to hold women in literal captivity. Rural communities were often experienced as shaming and ostracizing. This provided women with few opportunities to help-seek and aided perpetrators in reducing women's spaces for safety. Women's space for action was also curtailed in the realms of finance, employment, and their ability to care for their children. These findings demonstrate that geographical place and space can be used by perpetrators to narrow and limit women's space for action. As such, rurality should be included in understanding how men's violence limits women's freedoms.

Sustainable food systems require sustainable agriculture. To achieve this, we argue, inclusive approaches are required that incorporate the voices and lived experiences of diverse social groups. In agriculture-based international development efforts (known as Agriculture for Development or A4D), it is increasingly being recognized that sustainable agriculture requires attention to gendered power relations. In the past, gender inequality has been a major barrier to developing inclusive, sustainable food systems, and continues to be so today. At the same time, however, gender is increasingly “on the agenda” in A4D. Yet what sort of agenda is being promoted and to what extent does it reflect progress in feminist scholarship? We examine the burgeoning “gender agenda” through the lens of policy materials produced by prominent A4D organizations. In doing so, we find problematic narratives that instrumentalise women in the name of sustainable agricultural development. However, we also find other more transformative discourses that, in troubling the drivers of gender inequality and promoting shared responsibility for change, reflect a deeper awareness of feminist scholarship. In any effort to advance sustainable agriculture, further progress is needed to address the myriad ways gender pervades not just development settings but development institutions and donor nations, and contributes to the production of as well as responses to global A4D challenges.

No abstract

No abstract