FOOD SECURITY IN ZAMBIA...how does food insecurity youth's worksforce?

The Norwegian University Of Life Sciences
Department of International Environment and Development Studies
Name: Progress Hanzwida Nyanga
Student number: 965946
Course: EDS370 Gender and Development
Term paper: January block
Teacher responsible: Prof. Ingrid Nyborg
Date of submission: 01.02.06

Title: IMPACT OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY CHANGES ON FOOD SECURITY IN MANYEPA VILLAGE, CHOMA- ZAMBIA: A FOCUS ON GENDER

Table of contents Page

1.0 Introduction. 1
2.0 Conceptual frame work. 2
2.1 Concept of Gender 2
2.2 Food security. 4
2.3 Gender relations in food security. 4
2.4 General causes of food insecurity. 5
3.0 Methodology. 5
3.1 Respondent selection and data collection methods. 5
3.2 Wealth ranking and Poverty level classification. 6
3.3 Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions. 6
4.0 Research findings and Discussion. 7
5.0 Conclusion. 12
6.0 References. 12





IMPACT OF AGRICULTURAL POLICY CHANGES ON FOOD SECURITY IN MANYEPA VILLAGE, CHOMA- ZAMBIA: A FOCUS ON GENDER

1.0 Introduction
Over the last 25 years, farmers in Zambia have experienced major shifts in the national agricultural policies. These policies have gone from an extreme full state control regime to the other extreme of market liberalization and commercialization of agriculture. Since independence to mid 1980s the government had monopoly over the supply of inputs, crop marketing, fixed crop prices and heavily subsidized the processes of production and marketing. However, the continued declining copper prices on which the economy depended and increase in oil prices made it increasingly difficult for the government to sustain the subsidies (Wood et al 1990).
The change of governments in 1991 led to full implementation of liberal policies that have continued to dictate the agricultural development approaches in Zambia. Currently, the central focus of agricultural development in Zambia is based on the Millennium Development Goals and Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (MFNP 2004). The Zambian government in its poverty reduction strategy programme recognizes the great potential for agricultural development and the critical role of agriculture in addressing the millennium development goals and poverty reduction (MFNP 2004).
A long these policy changes the national, the national population has increased from 8.4 million in 1990 to the current estimate of 10.6 million (CSO 2004; FAO 2005). On the contrary, food deprivation in terms of number of undernourished people has risen from 4 million in 1990 to 5.2 million in 2002 (FAO 2005). The country has equally suffered from poor rain pattern especially in the southern region.
Consequently, an integrated effect of political changes coupled with economic changes and environmental factors has led to serious food security concerns in the nation.
It is against such a background that a research in the southern part of Zambia was undertaken among small scale farmers with an objective of assessing the perceptions of small scale farmers on the impact of agricultural policy changes on food security.
This paper attempts to address the following research questions:
What have been the effects of policy changes in agricultural sector on maize production among women and male small scale farmers?
How has the gender food security gap changed over the past 25 years?
2.0 Conceptual frame work
2.1 Concept of Gender
Gender is a concept that identifies social relations between men and women. Gender attributes are culturally and socially constructed, contextually specific and often change in response to altering circumstances (Moser, 1993: NCFAW 2004). The construction of gender occurs through the society’s differential assignment of roles and an inculcation of different modes of expected behavior between boys and girls and as they graduate into adults (NCFAW 2004). Hence, gender refers to different roles and social relationships between men and women. The gender roles[1] which define what each set, men or women, should do in society closely relates to various social, economic, political and environmental institutions in society. Social relations between men and women in these institutions are coupled with power distribution such as who has access and control to resources, who makes decisions and all this constitutes gender relations. More often than not, gender relations tend to disadvantage women and girls in society (NCFAW 2004; Westermann et al 2005).
Literature has shown that women in many societies have been associated to nature due to their responsibilities to the family and concern for the well being of the community and the future generations (Manion, 2002; Martine& Villarreal, 1997; Jackson, 1993; Jackson, 1998,). On the contrary, men have been associated with culture that is claimed to be superior to nature resulting into male dominance and women subordination in society (Ortner in Agarwal 1992).
The gender roles for women have mostly been viewed as falling under three dimensions of reproduction, production and community related work (Moser 1988 in Boellstorff 1996). Most of this work is more time consuming, repetitive, unpaid unlike men’s work. Therefore it is not surprising that most of the development policies often do not capture women’s work (Momsen 2004; Westermann et al 2005).
In the process of addressing gender gaps in development, there has been an evolution of several approaches ranging from welfare approach in the early 1970’s to gender mainstreaming, the current rhetoric approach (Momsen 2004). Gender mainstreaming is a strategy that has been adopted by most countries and development agencies in trying to achieve broad-based gender equality[2]. This approach seeks to integrate gender issues into the mainstream in all institutions through out society. Therefore gender mainstreaming could be viewed as one of the tools for achieving full equitable distribution of resources, power, benefits and participation of all members in the process of development (Momsen 2004; NCFAW 2004).
2.2 Food security
The definition and understanding of food security has been changing over time. In the early 1970’s food was understood in terms of cereals and a bulk of literature defined the concept of food security from a supply perspective of adequate levels of cereal stocks (Reutlinger 1977a; Valdés and Siamwalla 1981; Konandreas et al. 1978; Stringer in Ghosh 2001). However, this conceptualization of food security had no emphasis put on the significant attribute of access. Research has shown that while food supply is of great significance, access to food by households and individuals is of greater importance (Sen 1981; Ravallion 1987; Drèze and Sen 1989, 1990; Ravallion 1997; Stringer in Ghosh 2001).
In the 1980’s an additional enrichment to the concept of food security emerged. The significance of nutritional security for a healthy life as a component of food security in addition to the World Health Organization targeted daily calories consumption levels was realized (Stringer in Ghosh 2001). Empirical evidence indicates that micronutrient deficiencies, infections, diseases and environmental factors contributed to malnutrition as much as calorie deficiencies. (Strauss and Thomas 1998; Del Rosso 1992; Tomkins and Watson 1989; Stringer in Ghosh 2001).
The current understanding of the concept of food security uses the Rome declaration on World Food Security definition that encompasses fundamental components of sufficiency, access, nutrition and choice. In this declaration food security is understood as a state when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life (FAO 2005; FAO 1996). In the same context, the inability to have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet dietary needs and food preferences at all times for an active and healthy life at all times amounts to food insecurity (FAO 1998; FAO1996).
2.3 Gender relations in food security
Though men and women may have complementary roles, in crop production, livestock rearing and fishing, the investment in terms of labor and time to the roles differ. A study in sub-Saharan Africa showed that men are often responsible for land clearing, burning and plowing, while women are engaged in more time consuming weeding, transplanting, post-harvest work and, in some areas, land preparation, and both take part in seeding and harvesting (FAO 2006).
Furthermore, the cultural and social orientation of cash crops and large livestock as being under men’s control while crops for household subsistence and small livestock falls under women’s domain equally illustrates food security as a highly gendered concept (Stringer in Dhosh 2001). The underpinning factors and causes of a gendered perception of food security are all closely related to the fundamental triple role of women in society.
2.4 General causes of food insecurity
Food security concept is cross-sectoral ranging from an individual level through household, national and regional levels to global levels (Haug and Nyborg 1994). There are several causes of food insecurity that apply across and at each of these levels. Factors that would constrain availability and access to food contribute directly to food insecurity. A negative impact on availability and access to food by population growth, economic changes, government policies, income levels, health, nutrition, gender, environmental degradation, resource ownership, natural disasters, civil strife, terrorism, and corruption contributes to the existence food insecurity (FAO 1996; Stringer in Ghosh 2001).
3.0 Methodology
3.1 Respondent selection and data collection methods
In a focus group discussion with traditional leaders[3], the terms household and household head were defined. A household was defined as a group of persons living and eating together. In polygamous households, the husband was assigned to the most senior wife’s household so as to avoid double counting in cases were the wives were identified as separate household (CSO 2004). A household head was defined as a person whom all members of the household regard as one who normally makes decisions pertaining day to day the running of the household (CSO 2004). Using an updated village register, a total of 105 households were listed and later categorized into four poverty levels. Those households with heads of 30 years of age and above were purposively selected to constitute the respondents after having classified them into various poverty levels. The age criterion was important so as to get people’s perceptions on trends in food security over a period of at least 20 years.
3.2 Wealth ranking and Poverty level classification
In order to get perceptions from different people belonging to different poverty levels, a wealth or well-being ranking was done. Poverty is a complex multidimensional concept whose classification has a cultural orientation that would be captured through participatory tools such as wealth ranking for households (Mikkelsen 2005, Grandin 1988). It is recommended that wealth and well being ranking be carried out by at least three informants (Pretty el tal 1995). Hence, two individual key informants and a focus group discussion were used in this study so as to take into account of local perceptions of poverty levels. This method used in household poverty level classification did not require absolute household data on household income which could not be accurately obtained due to lack of accurate records and resource limitation.
Names of Household heads were written one on each card and a female key informant sorted the cards into defined poverty levels. The process of poverty level classification was repeated with a male key informant and finally with a larger group in a focus group discussion. The criteria used to define each level were listed and collectively agreed upon. Households were then sorted into the defined poverty levels using cards as shown in figure 1 and figure 2.
3.3 Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions
Semi-structured interviews were used to get the perceptions on the agricultural production trend for the past 25 years among 73 respondents of which 58% were women. This was followed by use of, focus group discussions, group interviews and informal interviews with individual key informants for in-depth understanding changes in gender relations and food security (Bryman, 2004 Mikkelson, 2005 Pretty el tal 1995 Chambers2002).
Despite having more women (one more than men) in the process of wealth ranking, male domination was evident. It could have been much better to either have separated the men from the women or further increased the number of women or repeated the exercise with women alone so as to have an equal opportunity for the women to fully express their views.
Figure 1: Wealth ranking process in Manyepa village










Source: Own field work 2005
Food security indicators are variable and need to be carefully selected in any development process with due considerations of the local contexts (Haug and Nyborg 1994). Due to different gender roles and different gender needs[4], participatory method in getting the respondents’ understanding of food security was fundamental in assessing gender-household food security gaps in this community. In order to get the gender dimensions men and women developed separate lists of attributes that constitute food security in two respective groups.
4.0 Research findings and Discussion
From a focus group discussion, four levels of poverty that apply in the village were identified as resource rich, variably resource rich, resource poor and extremely resource poor. There were very minimal differences on how a male key informant and female one defined poverty levels. The identified four categories of poverty and the characteristics of each level listed is shown in table 1 below.


Table 1: Poverty levels and their characteristics in Manyepa village
Resource Rich
Variably Resource poor
Resource Poor
Extremely resource
Ø Have Cattle 10-50
Ø Goats 18-25
Ø Pigs 2-5
Ø Chickens more than 20
Ø Can feed their family all year round.
Ø Have oxen tools.
Ø Can grow and sale other crops apart from maize.
Ø Support other people and their children to school
Ø Cattle less than 10
Ø Goats 10-18
Ø Pigs 5-10.
Ø Have farming implements.
Ø Feed their families from their harvest for 9-10 months.
Ø Chickens 10-20.
Ø Apart from maize they grow other crops like cotton, beans and sunflower
Ø Can keep goats not more than 5
Ø Keep not more 5 pigs.
Ø have no cattle
Ø Have chickens not more than 10
Ø Can feed their families often for 5-6 months
Ø Good planning for their families
Ø Have hand tools (hoes and axes)

Ø Have no implements (cattle, plow, hoes etc.)
Ø Don’t put due attention on what they do
Ø Do not plan for their work and living
Ø lack knowledge on crop husbandry and livestock
Ø Don’t have land
Ø Don’t have livestock

The outcomes of the wealth ranking were in line with feminization of poverty a concept that assumes female headed households dominate as the poverty levels deepen (Murthy et al 2003).
Figure 2: Village gender-poverty level composition in Manyepa village
Village gender-poverty level composition
0 %
10 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
50 %
60 %
70 %
80 %
90 %
100 %
Resource
Rich
Variably
Resource
Rich
Resource
Poor
Extremely
Resource
Poor
Poverty levels
Males headed households


Female headed households
Such a situation was attributed to women’s lack of ownership and control of productive assets and access to credit facilities. Furthermore, HIV-AIDS has increased burden has increased the women’s burden of caring for the sick in a family, orphans and this makes women more vulnerable to poverty.
With regard to attributes of food security, there were similarities in the aspect of sufficiency, while a major difference in nutritional understanding. Women included the need for health food, having a variety of food for children to prevent diseases which indicates a closer link to their role of cooking and child caring. The table below shows the gender perception of food security and the global perspective.
Table 2: Local Gender Perceptions on food security in Manyepa village and the conventional global view of food security
Men’s perspective of food security
Women’s perspective of food security
Global perspective of food security- Rome declaration
Having enough food to eat
Having money to buy food
Having 3 meals per day
Having enough wealth (livestock especially cattle) which can be used to produce food
-Having enough food in a home.
-When everyone especially children and men get satisfied each time I cook
-Having health foods for the body to be fine
-Having a variety of foods and nice ones for children to prevent diseases.
Having at least some food also for visitors.
Having physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life by all people at all times (FAO 1996)

Though the proportion of female headed households is high and could be increasing, the research showed that the household food security for women headed households has been steadily improving as shown in figure 3 below
women
Men Figure 3: Trend in gender food security gap in Manyepa village.

Note: Seed represents food
secure households and
more seeds mean a higher
proportion of food secure
house holds and few seeds show
proportion of food secure house
households.
Source: Own Field work 2005
Of the food secure house holds, there has been a general decrease in the proportion of male headed households while an increase in the proportion of food secures female headed households. This was contrary to the feminization of poverty if food security could be used as an indicator of poverty. However, this situation was attributed to men’s tendency to sell household agricultural produce and the money is mostly spent on men’s private purposes. This outcome typically illustrates the impact of household gender relations in which women are not empowered[5] and have no control over the agricultural production and benefits. The lack of women empowerment in control of resources and decision making process in household resource allocation are translated into food insecurity for the entire household.
The changes in agricultural policies from government controlled input, credit supply and commodity marketing in the 1980s (where mostly men enjoyed a full rage of government subsidies and credit) to liberalization policies have further constrained men from the cultivation of maize, a major staple household food. Additionally, the low prices and difficult market for maize along with the loss of cattle due to tropical disease caused men to abandon maize growing opting for cotton growing with cheap and easy access to chemicals and market with good prices for the produce.
In further explaining the impact of policy changes, one of the female respondents said “the government before 1991 was very supportive in agriculture to our husbands such that they used to take good care of us and children.” She then bemoaned the current situation saying “our men in the village are failing to take care of their families because the government does not support them.” Another old lady in expressing the impact of agricultural policy changes on gender relation and food security stressed that men in the before 1991 used to say that the children in a home are theirs but now that there is hunger and life is hard, they are telling their wives the direct opposite. In this context, in order for women to feed the children they are increasing cultivation of maize and rearing of small livestock like pigs among other small livestock.



Figure 3 Gender and changing trends in maize growing


A respondent shading proportions of maize growing households in Manyepa village over the past 25 years.
Source: Own field work 2005
NOTE: Proportion of Male headed households is shown by the Yellow region while the Proportion of Female headed households is indicated by the blue region.

Quisumbing et al (2004) argue that the gender gap in access and control of economically productive assets is critical in feminization of food insecurity. However, women in Manyepa village felt empowered in matters of food security due to an increased number of small livestock under their control. On the other hand, the decline in number of cattle under men’s control seemed to be a blessing in disguise by narrowing the gender asset gap with respect to livestock. Agnes et al (2004), remark that closing the gender asset gap is more important for food and nutrition security in Africa than elsewhere because of women’s production key role in household food.
However, like in most developing countries productive assets such as land and credit in Manyepa village still remain mostly under the control of men while women have user right (FAO 2006). The Legal frame work especially customary laws in many countries treat women as minors, thereby restricting to own such assets yet household food security largely depends on the role of women (Quisumbing et al 2004).
5.0 Conclusion
Given the bias that exists against women in decision-making processes at the household, village and national levels in most cultures, women’s plight is often not reflected in policy-making processes and laws which are important for food security and environmental sustainability. Hence, gender mainstreaming at all levels and in all institutions of society needs to be strengthened in order to have a holistic approach to ensure food security. Agricultural Policy changes in Manyepa village impacted on the food security differently on female women and men headed households. This could be true to most parts of rural Zambia though it cannot be generalized.
6.0 References
Agrawal, B. (1992). The gender and environmental debate: Lessons from India. Feminist Studies, 18(1), 119–158.
Boellstorff (1996) Women in Development: the need for a grassroots gender planning approach. Women in development vol. 12, no. 1, 1995-1996 http://www.unl.edu/anthro/anthrogroup/nebraska_anthropologist/issue_archive/95_96/boellstorff.pdf#search= 29.01.06
Bryman (2004), Social Research Methods (Second Edition) Oxford University press, New York
Central Statistics Office (2004) Living conditions Monitoring Survey Report 2002-2003. Living conditions monitoring branch, Lusaka
Chambers R (2002): Participatory workshops. A sourcebook of 21 sets of ideas and activities. Earthscan, London.
FAO 1996 World Food Summit http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/docrep/003/w3613e/w3613e00.htm%2029.01.06
29.01.06
FAO (2005) Food security statistics-Zambia, FAOSTAT http://www.fao.org/es/ess/faostat/foodsecurity/Countries/EN/Zambia_e.pdf 27.01.06
FAO (2005) The state of Food Insecurity in the World ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/a0200e/a0200e.pdf 29.01.06
FAO (2006) Women and Food Security http://www.fao.org/focus/e/women/Sustin-e.htm%2027.01.06
FAO (1998) Rural women and food security: Current situation and perspectives http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/W8376E/W8376E00.HTM#Contents 29.01.06
Food Insecurity Vulnerability Information and Mapping System (FIVIMS)(2005) What is meant by food insecurity and vulnerability? FIVIMS http://www.fivims.net/static.jspx?lang=en&page=overview 29.01.06
Grandin (1988) Wealth ranking for smallholder communities: A field manual. ITDG, London
Haug R and Nyborg (1994) Food Security Indicators for Development Activities By Norwegian NGOs In Mali, Ethiopia and Eritrea Noragric Norway
Jackson, C. (1993). Doing what comes naturally? Women and environment in development, World Development, 21(12), 1947–1963
Jackson, C. (1998). Gender, irrigation and environment: arguing for agency. Agriculture and Human Values, (15), 313–324.
Manion, H. K. (2002) Ecofeminism within Gender and Development. Ecofem.org.The eJournal. http://www.lancs.ac.uk/staff/twine/ecofem/manion.pdf 29.01.06
Martine, G., & Villarreal, M (1997) Gender and sustainability: Re-assessing linkages and issues, sustainable development department (SD)—Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nation (FAO) http://www.fao.org/sd/wpdirect/wpan0018.htm 29.01.06
Mikkelsen (2005) Methods for development work and research: A new guide for practitioners, Sage, New Delhi
Ministry of Finance and National Planning (2004), Second PRSP Implementation Progress Report: July 2003 - June 2004. Government Republic of Zambia, Lusaka
Momsen (2004) Gender and Development, Routledge, London
Moser C (1989). Gender Planning in the Third World: Meeting Practical and Strategic Gender Needs. World Development Vol. 17, No. 11, pp 1799-1825
National committee for the advancement of women in Viet Nam(NCFAW), (2004) Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines in National Policy Formulation and Implementation NCFAW, Hanoi
Pretty J et al (1995), Participatory learning and action. A trainer’s guide. IIED, London
Quisumbing, et al (2004). Increasing the Effective Participation of Women in Food and Nutrition Security in Africa. 2020 Africa Conference Brief (Issue Brief) 4. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C.
Ranjani et al (2003) Denial and distress: Gender, Poverty and human rights in Asia. Zed Books, London
Westermann.O, Ashby J and Pretty J (2005) Gender and Social Capital: The Importance of Gender Differences for the Maturity and Effectiveness of Natural Resource Management Groups. World Development Vol. 33, No. 11, pp. 1783–1799
Wood (1990) Agricultural Pricing Policy Since Independence. In Wood et al (Eds) The Dynamics of Agricultural Policy and Reform in Zambia. Iowa, Iowa State University Press
[1] Gender roles are different from sex roles in that they are socially learnt behaviors, influenced by cultural, religious, economic factors in defining and shaping what it means to be a man or woman in a given society. Sex and sex roles are biologically determined.
[2] Gender equality does not mean equal numbers of men and women but means recognizing and equal valuation of similarities and differences between men and women, and giving equal opportunities to realize their full potentials and aspirations in life (Momsen 2004; NCFAW 2004).

[3] Acting village Headman, village secretary and one knowledgeable woman
[4] Gender needs are needs that arise from gender roles and are in two classes that is practical needs ( needs that are immediately perceived and more materialistic) and strategic needs
( needs that are more ideological due to gender relations and unequal power distribution)
Moser C 1989 "Gender Planning in the Third World: Meeting Practical and Strategic Gender Needs". World Development Vol. 17, No. 11 (1989).
[5] Agarwal 1995 in Meinzen-Dick et al (1997:1306) defines empowerment as: “a process which enhances the ability of disadvantaged (“powerless”) individuals or groups to challenge and change (in their favor) existing power relationships that place them in subordinate economic, social and political positions.”