Barriers to Women’s Participation in Beekeeping in Papua New Guinea

Austin, Anneliese; Schouten, Cooper Nat; Hinton, Jordanna; Lloyd, David

doi:10.1080/0005772x.2020.1818465

Cited by 8 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many Maasai have diversified their income through off-farm payment, agriculture and other small-scale economic activities into their traditional pastoralist livelihoods (McCabe et al, 2010; Woodhouse & McCabe, 2018), which agrees with our findings. Beekeeping plays a vital role in improving biodiversity conservation, socio-economic development, food security and poverty reduction in many parts of the world and is an environmentally friendly economic activity for income addition (Abdullahi et al, 2011; Austin et al, 2020). Our observed involvement of more women as compared to men in beekeeping is mainly due to the support by TPW, albeit men were involved in some activities such as hive sitting, monitoring, honey harvesting, processing and finally marketing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of Maasai men saw beekeeping as income generation for poor households only, with very few or no cattle possession, a fact that has also been reported by (Lyver et al, 2014). This perception regarding beekeeping is mostly limited to Maasai pastoralists, as in most rural areas both men and women participate in beekeeping for their livelihood improvement (Nyunza, 2018), regardless beekeeping being stereotyped as a male activity in some culture (Austin et al, 2020). Our findings highlight the need for more education on beekeeping benefits among Maasai men inorder to promote their participation as beekeeping can be practiced alongside livestock keeping.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Balancing Bees and Livestock: Pastoralist Knowledge, Perceptions and Implications for Pollinator Conservation in Rangelands, Northern Tanzania

Mpondo

Ndakidemi

Treydte

2021

Tropical Conservation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insect pollinators provide numerous ecosystem services that support other living organisms. While pollinators play a large role in cropping systems, little is known about their presence and function in rangeland ecosystems, which have recently become fragmented and overexploited at an extraordinary rate. We assessed local Maasai knowledge on insect pollinators and how pollinators affect livelihood diversification in Simanjiro rangelands, Tanzania. Through questionnaires, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and field observations, we found varied insect knowledge among Maasai herders. Lasioglossum of sub genus Ipomalictus and Syriphidae were the least commonly recognized pollinators as only 24%, and 7% of participants could identify them, respectively. Responses varied significantly between men and women (F = 7.397, p = .007). Commiphora africana, Acacia mellifera and Albizia anthelmintica were noted as most important bee forage plants while observations showed Aspilia mossambicensis, Justicia debile and Acacia tortilis. Most (77%) of Maasai herders showed limited ability to link pollinators and rangeland wellbeing. Beekeeping contributed to livelihood diversification for 61% of respondents, with women participating more frequently than men (χ2 = 46.962, p = .0001). Beekeeping was positively influenced by education level ( R = .421, p < .0001) and occupation ( R = .194, p = .009). Pollinator declines were attributed to climate change (47%), agriculture (37%), and habitat destruction (8%). We conclude that Maasai have limited knowledge of common pollinator groups and their roles. Community outreach and training should bridge the knowledge gap in pastoralist communities to fully realize pollinator benefits and highlight the importance of rangeland health.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balancing Bees and Livestock: Pastoralist Knowledge, Perceptions and Implications for Pollinator Conservation in Rangelands, Northern Tanzania

Mpondo

Ndakidemi

Treydte

2021

Tropical Conservation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, women faced limitations on the type of livelihood activities they could engage in due to gender norms and expectations; such limitations further perpetuated gender inequalities (47,48,52,53). Male producers, for example, were typically given control over cash crops or high-value agricultural activities; in contrast, women were often assigned tasks related to subsistence farming or low-value crops (47,52).…”

Section: Findings/resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research demonstrates that in certain contexts, sociocultural factors shaped gender roles centered around responsibilities related to primary production (49,59,62). These gender roles reinforced power inequalities, and further perpetuated GBV (37,52,60,61,63). Of note, women's engagement in primary production activities was, at times, perceived by men as a threat to their traditional masculine identities (53,59).…”

Section: Sociocultural Beliefs Practices and Attitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The in uence of culturally appropriate and context speci c development programs, training initiatives, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) also played a protective role. For instance, in Papua New Guinea, men showed more support for women's involvement in beekeeping when they were engaged from the start of the program (52). In Brazil, however, women revealed resistance to the presence of men in agricultural training, as it hindered willingness to share their perspectives and experiences, including those related to GBV (38).…”

Section: Aggravating or Protective Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Scoping Review on the Nature and Impact of Gender Based Violence on Women Primary Producers.

O'Mullan,

Sinai,

Kaphle

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are primary producers of subsistence food and significant contributors to the agricultural economy. Gender Based Violence (GBV) adversely impacts their capacity to contribute and sustain their families and undermines social, economic, and human capital. Addressing GBV, therefore, is critical to creating safe and inclusive environments for women as primary producers to participate fully in rural communities. The aim of this scoping review is to explore the existing evidence on GBV in the context of women primary producers in LMICs to inform research gaps and priorities. Methods A scoping review was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Ebscohost and Google Scholar using keywords related to GBV and women producers in LMICs. Peer-reviewed journal articles published between January 2012 and June 2022 were included in the review. Duplicates were removed, titles and abstracts were screened, and characteristics and main results of included studies were recorded in a data charting form. A total of 579 records were identified, of which 49 studies were eligible for inclusion in this study. Results Five major themes were identified from our analysis: (1) extent and nature of GBV, (2) the impact of GBV on agricultural/primary production livelihood activities, (3) sociocultural beliefs, practices, and attitudes, (4) aggravating or protective factors, and (5) GBV interventions. Addressing GBV in agriculture requires inclusive research approaches and targeted interventions to empower women producers, promote gender equality, enhance agricultural productivity, and contribute to broader societal development. Despite attempts by researchers to delve into this issue, the pervasive under-reporting of GBV remains a challenge. The true extent and nature of GBV perpetrated against women is far from fully understood in this context. Conclusion Despite the significant challenges posed by GBV to the health, economy and livelihoods of women primary producers in LMICs, there is a paucity in the current state of knowledge. To make meaningful progress, more research is required to understand the relationship between GBV and agricultural settings, and to gain nuanced insight into the nature and impact of GBV on women primary producers in different regions and contexts.

show abstract

Multiple values of beekeeping (with A. mellifera) as an element of diversified, agroecological coffee farms in Chiapas, Mexico

Anderzén,

Vandame,

Ocampo

et al. 2024

Renew. Agric. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Honeybees (Apis mellifera) and native bee species have ecological, economic, social, and cultural importance to smallholder coffee farmers. While the ecological contributions of bees to the sustainability of coffee systems are well documented, particularly in relation to the coffee crop, fewer studies have examined socio-economic dimensions of beekeeping for honey as an agroecological diversification strategy for coffee producers. Yet, understanding the multiple values of different diversification strategies is important as many coffee farmers in different parts of the world are finding it increasingly difficult to make a living on coffee alone and are adopting alternative strategies, such as on-farm diversification. In this Participatory Action Research (PAR) study, we examined the opportunities, limitations, and trade-offs of beekeeping (with A. mellifera) as an agroecological diversification option for smallholder coffee farmers in Chiapas, Mexico. We applied a mixed-methods approach, which consisted of monthly surveys with 25 beekeepers of Campesinos Ecológicos de la Sierra Madre de Chiapas (CESMACH)/Apicultores Miel Real del Triunfo (ART) producer cooperatives for 12 months and five focus groups between 2018 and 2019. We found that beekeeping is less labor-intensive than coffee, and there are opportunities to integrate beekeeping into the annual farming cycle of coffee and maize production without causing competing labor demands or additional time pressures. We also found that beekeeping could generate economic gains for peasant families; however, profitability hinged on various factors, such as the price for honey, yield per hive, and the number of beehives. Our results further show that beekeeping yielded multiple non-monetary benefits by contributing to the nutrition and health of farmer families and their communities, serving as a vehicle for horizontal learning and relationship building, and contributing to the emotional well-being of beekeepers. Finally, producers who hoped to gain economically from beekeeping were generally interested in growing their apiaries but expressed concerns about limited technical knowledge and the impacts of climate change. Given the multiple social, economic, and ecological benefits of beekeeping, it has great promise as a part of agroecological food and farming systems. We argue that efforts to promote beekeeping as a diversification strategy should take a holistic approach, underscoring the potential of apiculture to enhance the well-being and resilience of beekeeping families and strengthen food sovereignty and local economies (including solidarity economies) in peasant communities. These findings can be useful in supporting beekeepers and their organizations in strategic planning for enhancing the long-term sustainability of beekeeping.

show abstract

Barriers to Women’s Participation in Beekeeping in Papua New Guinea

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

Balancing Bees and Livestock: Pastoralist Knowledge, Perceptions and Implications for Pollinator Conservation in Rangelands, Northern Tanzania

Balancing Bees and Livestock: Pastoralist Knowledge, Perceptions and Implications for Pollinator Conservation in Rangelands, Northern Tanzania

A Scoping Review on the Nature and Impact of Gender Based Violence on Women Primary Producers.

Multiple values of beekeeping (with A. mellifera) as an element of diversified, agroecological coffee farms in Chiapas, Mexico

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About