Teaching Module: Gendered Knowledge

Teaching module: gendered knowledge / September 1, 2010

Teaching Module: Gendered Knowledge

September 1, 2010

Women in International Development Program

Office of International Research, Education and Development (OIRED)

Virginia Tech

Objective:

This module is designed to help readers develop an understanding of the concept of gendered knowledge and its relevance within the study of gender, conservation, and the environment. Readings will provide information on how women’s knowledge differs from men’s knowledge; the processes that contribute to the acquisition, use, and communication of knowledge; and criticisms of an overemphasis on women’s knowledge within the development discourse and development programs. Readers should be able to identify the main constraints women face in accumulating and articulating their knowledge, how women’s knowledge contributes to biodiversity conservation, and criticisms and suggestions for approaches to involve women’s knowledge in development programs.

Readings:

Howard, P. (2003) The Major Importance of ‘Minor’ Resources: Women and Plant Biodiversity. In Gatekeeper Series, edited by Natural Resources Group. International Institute for Environment and Development (iied).
Turner, N. (2003) ‘Passing on the News’: Women’s Work, Traditional Knowledge and Plant Resource Management in Indigenous Societies of North-western North America. In Women and Plants: Gender Relations in Biodiversity Management and Conservation, edited by P. Howard. New York: Zed Books.
Jewitt, S. (2000) Unequal Knowledges in Jharkhand, India: De-Romanticizing Women’s Agroecological Expertise. Development and Change 31(5): 961-985.
Gururani, S. (2002) Construction of Third World Women’s Knowledge in the Development Discourse. International Social Science Journal 54(173): 313-323.
Huvio, T. (1999) Gender and Local Knowledge. ACC Network on Rural Development and Food Security.
Voeks, R.A. (2007) Are Women Reservoirs of Traditional Plant Knowledge? Gender, Ethnobotony and Globalization in Northeast Brazil. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 28: 7-20.

Study questions:

How is knowledge gendered?
Where is gendered knowledge learned, applied, and disseminated?
What constraints do women face in acquiring, articulating, transferring, and utilizing their knowledge?
How does gendered knowledge impact biodiversity conservation?
What is the relationship between women and local, traditional, and indigenous knowledges?
What are the criticisms of Women Environment and Development (WED)/ecofeminist approaches to examining and incorporating women’s knowledge in development projects?
How do women’s practices, knowledge, and control and access to resources affect their participation in development projects?
What suggestions do the authors make to address the issue of gendered knowledge in the development discourse and development projects?

Primary Readings:

Howard, P. (2003) The Major Importance of ‘Minor’ Resources: Women and Plant Biodiversity. In Gatekeeper Series, edited by Natural Resources Group. International Institute for Environment and Development (iied).

Executive Summary:

“Understanding women’s influence on plant biodiversity is essential to our ability to conserve plant genetic resources, especially those plants that are useful to humans. Contrary to previous thinking, it is becoming clear that women know most about these plants because, throughout history, women’s daily work has required more of this knowledge.

“This paper describes how women predominate in plant biodiversity management in their roles as housewives, plant gatherers, homegardeners, herbalists, seed custodians and informal plant breeders. But because most plant use, management and conservation occurs within the domestic realm, and because the principal values of plant genetic resources are localized and non-monetary, they are largely invisible to outsiders and are easily undervalued. Gender bias has prevailed in scientific research about people-plant relationships, and conservation policies and programmes are still largely blind to the importance of the domestic sphere, of women and of gender relations for biodiversity conservation, and to the importance of plant biodiversity for women’s status and welfare. Traditional knowledge and indigenous rights to plants are everywhere sex-differentiated, and gender inequalities are also implicated in processes leading to biological erosion.

“Achieving the goals of the Convention on Biological Diversity, particularly those related to sustainable use and to benefit sharing, will require much greater attention to women’s knowledge, management and rights, and to the domestic sphere. Examples of positive steps needed include: prioritizing the conservation of plants that are important to women curators and reversing dynamics that lead to their erosion; recognizing, valuing and promoting the inter-generational transmission of women’s traditional knowledge and practices; recognizing indigenous rights systems and, within these, women’s rights to plants and land resources that sustain these plants; ensuring women’s full participation in decisions and policies that affect plant rights and the status and welfare that they derive from plant resources; and promoting and disseminating research that enhances our knowledge of the above.”

Women know the most about plant biodiversity and conservation because of their multiple roles within the household and community, but their knowledge from such activities is disregarded and undervalued as it primarily occurs within the domestic realm.
“In many cultural and economic contexts, local wild and cultivated plant varieties are considered to be ‘minor’ resources, secondary to major staple crops and forest products; women are also seen as ‘minor’ actors, secondary to men who are presumed to be the knowledge holders, managers and preservers of most plant resources that are thought to be ‘valuable’, particularly to outsiders” (3).
Women’s multiple roles necessitate and perpetuate the development of unique knowledge and skills which are essential to maintaining and conserving plant biodiversity.
As housewives:
“In spite of its reputation as the site of human ‘reproduction’, the domestic sphere is tremendously productive. It involves a highly demanding and holistic level of traditional technical knowledge and skills that require, in many instances, at least a third of a lifetime to accrue. It also requires frequent innovation to respond to external and internal change” (4).
“Culinary traditions are perpetuated by the careful transmission of knowledge and skills from mother to daughter. Culinary preferences, as well as the post-harvest processes that are required in order to provide edible and culturally acceptable food, are probably the single most important reason for people’s knowledge, selection, use and conservation of plant biodiversity… [A]s culinary traditions are lost, the principal reason that people maintain a large amount of plant biodiversity is also lost” (5).
Women’s knowledge of traditional food processing methods reflects processes that scientific research has found to be most efficient and safe.
As gatherers:
“Men and women have different needs and responsibilities for gathered plants, and different knowledge and preferences… [W]omen have greater knowledge of the usefulness of wild plants than men and perceive their usefulness differently… The idea held by many conservationists that plants growing in natural environments are ‘wild’, is also often mistaken: many are not strictly either ‘gathered’ or ‘wild’ but are selectively managed and harvested (Box 2)” (6).
From Box 2: “But women’s ethnobotanical knowledge of wild plant management was essential for the survival of these tribes for at least several centuries, and essential to the relatively high status that women enjoyed in these societies” (7).
As gardeners:
Homegardens “… have far greater species diversity than cultivated fields, and hence should be recognized as the single most important repository of cultivar diversity” (7).
“Homegardens are also essential to the transmission of knowledge across generations. For example, among the Maya in highland Guatemala, “Women educate children through the chores of the garden. They teach how to use farm tools, what plants need to thrive, and how to manage crops, especially through weeding and harvesting” (Keys, 1999)” (8).
As herbalists:
“Women’s ethnobotanical knowledge and medicinal roles are often unexplored by ethnobotanists, who tend to make a beeline for the shaman or medicine man. But awareness is growing that the ‘common’ knowledge of lay women actually predominates in traditional health care systems (McClain, 1989; Good, 1987)” (9).
“Knowledge of herbal remedies is often passed along the female line; for example girls learn to observe and treat minor illnesses while caring for siblings (Howard-Borjas, 2002)” (9).
As plant breeders and seed custodians:
“Women often have a broader set of varietal selection criteria than men, since they use plant materials in more diverse ways: for example, rice not only provides food, but also straw for thatching, mat-making and fodder, husks for fuel, and leaves for relishes (Jiggins, 1986)” (9-10).
Gender bias (assuming that a few men represent the knowledge of an entire culture or using men to interpret women) in ethnobotony and other sciences leads to incorrect findings and misinterpretations of knowledge and people-plant relationships.
“Where women have more knowledge of plants than men, not interviewing them means that these species and varieties will be omitted, thus under-estimating biological diversity and its uses” (11).
“Numerous studies have shown that women are often better able to correctly identify these parameters [identification of plants, their management, characteristics, uses or names] than men, particularly for plants that fall more directly into their domain (eg. Zimmerer, 1991)” (12).
Recommendations
“This cannot, however, imply that ‘poor’ indigenous farmers and rural forest dwellers should be cordoned off in culture-nature reserves and expected to maintain biodiversity for the benefit of humankind and of the plant and animal kingdom, while the rest of the globe enjoys the genetic and aesthetic by-products of their knowledge and labour. Rather, it is the forces that are driving the loss of biological diversity as well as eroding the majority of human cultures that must be addressed” (15).
“Productivist, globalised agro-food systems and an economic and social order that devalues women and the domestic sphere are socially, environmentally and economically unsustainable… This in turn implies that local people will have to be enabled and empowered, including through the recognition of their rights to access, control and knowledge. This is impossible to accomplish without ensuring that these resource managers, particularly women, are able to achieve a culturally and physically acceptable level of welfare from their interactions with the environment and society” (16).
“Recognising and documenting the value of women’s indigenous technical knowledge of plant resources and promoting its use and transmission in all appropriate spheres, including formal and informal education, training and extension” (16).

Turner, N. (2003) ‘Passing on the News’: Women’s Work, Traditional Knowledge and Plant Resource Management in Indigenous Societies of North-western North America. In Women and Plants: Gender Relations in Biodiversity Management and Conservation, edited by P. Howard. New York: Zed Books.

From p. 133

“This chapter explores indigenous women’s traditional botanical knowledge as it relates to harvesting, use, promotion and management of plant resources in north-western North America. It recognizes, at the outset, that this knowledge is part of a larger, complex, culturally mediated, applied knowledge system that inextricably links humans to the environment. The ways in which this knowledge is acquired and communicated are discussed and, finally, the contributions of women’s activities to local plant resource management in the study region are examined.”

Women’s Activities
Gendered knowledge has been historically based on, and perpetuated by, the different experiences and activities that men and women participate in based on the gendered division of labor.
Researchhas underestimated “the complexity and sophistication of the knowledge that women have held and applied as food producers, herbal medicine specialists and resource managers…” (134).
See Table 7.1
Women’s activities varied by time, place, and changing needs, but usually demanded extensive commitments of time and energy.
Women’s work was largely altered by European colonization, but women adapted their skills and knowledge to make them viable participants in the new systems of production and processing of natural resources.
Women’s Knowledge
Women’s activities required “an immense and complex base of knowledge and practical skills…” including:
Ecosystems and natural cycles and processes
Species and habitats
Names, categories, and behaviors of plants and wildlife
Survival skills
Processing techniques for food and medicinal herbs
Cultural knowledge and social norms
See complete list on pp. 138-139
Men and women shared some similar knowledge, but women were responsible for applying and passing on a large amount.
Teaching and Learning Women’s Knowledge
Much of the acquisition of knowledge and skills occurred through intergenerational interaction.
Through observation and participation
At culturally significant occasions or periods of time (ex. Puberty)
To instruct in care and management of resources
Through traditional stories, songs, or games
“Traditional education also incorporates experimentation and effective adaptation to new conditions and circumstances, and hence is responsible for maintaining a cultural groups’ resilience or ability to change while retaining its essential characteristics” (142).
Women as Resource Managers
Women’s knowledge and practices of resource use occurred within specific guidelines which helped to protect the ecological diversity of plants.
“culturally prescribed constraints against overharvesting” (143)
“proprietorship or ‘ownership’ of resources or resource harvesting sites” (143)
“timing of root harvesting is important in terms of seed dispersal” (144)
“pruning, coppicing and selective harvesting to maintain and enhance berry bushes and basketry species” (144)
Recommendations
Women’s traditional skills and knowledge of sustainable natural resource management must be recognized and re-instituted.
Support must be provided for indigenous women who have maintained such skills and knowledge to use it and to educate others.

Jewitt, S. (2000) Unequal Knowledges in Jharkhand, India: De-Romanticizing Women’s Agroecological Expertise. Development and Change 31(5): 961-985.

Abstract:

“Taking the Jharkhand region of India as a case study, this article uses empirical data to intervene in ‘women, environment and development’ and ecofeminist debates regarding women’s environmental knowledge. The article first outlines the adoption of gender/environmental issues into development planning and considers the dangers of overestimating women’s agroecological knowledges and assuming that they can easily participate in development projects. It then highlights the local complexities of environmental knowledge possession and control with reference to gender and other variations in agricultural participation, decision-making and knowledge transfers between villagers’ natal and marital places. Particular emphases is placed on the economic, socio-cultural and ‘actor’ related factors that supplement gender as an influence on task allocation, decision-making, knowledge distribution and knowledge articulation. The article concludes that given the socio-cultural constraints women face in accumulating and vocalizing environmental knowledge, simplistic participatory approaches are unlikely to empower them. Instead, more flexible, site-specific development initiatives (coupled with wider structural change) are required if opportunities are to be created for women to develop and use their agroecological knowledges.”

‘Women, environment and development’ (WED) approaches and the ecofeminist discourse often overestimate women’s environmental knowledge and fail to recognize the implications of socially constructed gender roles and power relationships in terms of women’s articulation and utilization of knowledge, as well as the benefits and detriments of development projects.
Mainstreaming gender issues without identifying the “‘social relations which limit [women’s] power to form environmental knowledges, or the right to express them and operate to exclude women from direct property relations’ (Jackson, 1994: 133)” (962) will lead to development projects which do not appropriately address the problems women face and may unintentionally increase women’s work load.
These approaches ignore power relationships based on age, socioeconomic status, etc. which influence bargaining strategies within and among households and women.
Ecofeminist/WED perspectives fail to fully recognize the socially constructed roles and structures which determine the use and management of natural resources. For example, women do not have the land rights or access to resources that men possess, and are therefore unable to expand their knowledge and skills in the ways that men can.
Such approaches do not acknowledge the cultural restrictions women face in expressing or acting upon their knowledge.
By overestimating women’s environmental knowledge, ecofeminist/WED approaches invisibilize men’s knowledge and their potential role in addressing environmental degradation.
In the case of Jharkhand, India, local complexities of environmental knowledge possession and control exist in the following areas:
Gendered division of labor and agricultural participation
“Most other agricultural tasks are not gender specific in theory, although in practice they usually reflect intra-household negotiating power as well as wider ‘social patterns of disadvantages of women’ (Joekes et al., 1994: 139), in that men can command access to transport such as bullock carts or cycles more easily than women” (968).
Within joint households, age and marital status significantly affect bargaining power and the division of labor. For example, homegardens are the domain of older women and their daughters, while new wives are given more tedious tasks.
Women in wealthier households tend to be more restricted by cultural norms and kept close to the home, while poorer women participate in field-based agriculture and forest gathering out of economic necessity.
Possession of knowledge
Patrilineal land rights cause men to have more long-term interest in land and natural resources, while women’s lesser concern for environmental conditions corresponds to their indirect access and lack of rights to land.
“An additional factor which reduces women’s ability to develop locally specific agricultural knowledge is the prevalence of patrilocal residence patterns in the region. These mean that men are not only much more familiar with the specific agroecology and pedology of the land that they farm, but also possess a lifetime of experience in growing different crops on it and using different combinations of inputs. Most married women, by contrast, have to learn these things from scratch when they move to their marital villages: a particularly difficult task for women coming either from town-based, non-agricultural families or from households that cultivated different crops” (971).
Decision-making
“… although these women were quite capable of managing the family’s agricultural land, their husbands would not give them the financial backing to do this. As a result, the only place that these women felt able to put their agricultural interest and knowledge to good use was in their homestead vegetable gardens” (973).
Knowledge transfer
Women hesitated to vocalize their agroecological knowledge or transfer skills and practices from their home villages because their husbands were not interested in agriculture, they felt less qualified to participate in agricultural decision-making, or they lacked land to grow new crops.
Women who did transfer knowledge had assertive personalities, support from their husbands, and an interest in participating in and experimenting with agriculture.
Articulation of knowledge
Men have more opportunities to accumulate and express agricultural knowledge, and do not face the cultural constraints (in terms of mobility and communication) that prevent women from accessing and articulating knowledge.
Other issues
“… [T]ribal widows often suffer from witchcraft accusations made by male relatives attempting to stake claims on their property. According to Kelkar and Nathan, the ever-present threat of witchcraft helps to reinforce men’s power over women and provides a means of restricting women’s ‘non-conformism or deviance’ (ibid.: 99) from accepted social norms” (967).
Recommendations
Development projects not only need to include women, but they must also work to identify the broader socio-cultural, economic, and political structures and inequalities which impact women’s access to and control of resources.
Specifically, restrictions on “women’s mobility, access to public places and control over environmental resources” (981) must be addressed.

Gururani, S. (2002) Construction of Third World women’s knowledge in the development discourse. International Social Science Journal 54(173): 313-323.