Forest GLOBAL GENDER AND ENVIRONMENT OUTLOOK Energy Chapter 2


in the organizations were expected to abide by rules about which they had little say. The women therefore preferred to participate through their own groups, where they felt more confident. While men in the formal organizations acknowledged that collaboration with women was important, this collaboration was to be realized through women joining the village organizations which the men believed to be neutral. The inclusion of women was often welcomed, but men in the associations were less inclined to address gender inequalities that left women out of decision-making in the first place. Including women could be perceived as a way to maintain and legitimize the gender status quo rather than a sincere effort to enhance the inclusiveness of forest decision-making. Inclusiveness is not always best achieved by including the excluded in mainstream institutions. It can also be achieved by making sure these institutions are able to relate to other, existing forms of organizations that represent women’s strategic and practical interests. Thus a gender analysis should aim at revealing how unequal practices are perpetuated in mainstream community forestry institutions, rather than assuming these institutions are always neutral and equal.


The benefits of gender-equal participation in forest management


Forest condition: Although research is limited, it suggests that women’s participation contributes to positive conservation outcomes (Box 2.6.7). Building on the International Forestry Resources and Institutions (IFRI) dataset, (Mwangi et al. 2011) analyzed the effects of different forest user group compositions on the likelihood these groups adopting behaviour enhancing forest resources in Bolivia, Kenya, Mexico and Uganda. They found that male-dominated and mixed groups performed better than female-dominated ones. However, they suggest these differences could be due to gender biases in access to technology, dual roles faced by women as productive labour as well as caregivers, and women’s lack of sanctioning authority. Based on the results of the study, the authors strongly caution against “essentializing women as ‘natural conservators’” (Mwangi et al. 2011).


162


Another study based on the IFRI database, which contains data on institutional effectiveness in forest commons in 14 countries in Latin America, East Africa and South-East Asia, suggests that women’s greater involvement in forest executive committees has a significant positive effect on forest cover (measured as


basal area) (Coleman and Mwangi 2015). Drawing on the same dataset as (Mwangi et al. 2011), the positive correlation between women’s involvement in executive committees (as opposed to forest user groups) underscores the importance of paying attention to the types of participation and institutional arrangements through which positive


achieved. According to Agarwal (2009), women at studied sites actively contributed to improved forest conservation outcomes through increased compliance with rules, which improved forest protection and led to significant decreases in illegal grazing and logging.


Although both women and men in forest-dependent communities possess traditional knowledge of the use of forest ecosystems, enhancing women’s roles in the protection and of biodiversity and forest ecosystems is crucial, including through preservation of indigenous seeds and medicinal plants (Mulyoutami et al. 2013; Voeks 2007). As women in many regions are under- represented as landholders, providing opportunities for their greater involvement in land management might help in this regard. When women are in decision-making positions but not fully informed, however, they can make decisions with negative environmental impacts. Villamor et al. (2014) have pointed out that “complex gender, land-use and multifunctionality intersects may not be obvious”. It is therefore important not to overestimate, romanticize or “essentialize” women’s environmental knowledge, especially in relation to development projects.


Distributional equity: An increase in the number of women on executive committees can bring about improved distributional equity for women and other disadvantaged


groups, as shown in a study on


community forestry groups in India and Nepal (Agarwal 2015). Where there was a higher proportion of women than men on these committees, the women argued more successfully for increased fuelwood extraction and were better at


reporting fuelwood shortages.


As wood is the most important cooking fuel (mostly collected by women and girls), the author considers that its availability and equitable distribution are an important marker of gender equality in India and Nepal. Active participation by women in local forest governance institutions has a negative correlation with disruptive conflict (Coleman and Mwangi 2013). However, men are more likely to win positions when council seats are acquired competitively, demonstrating that in many cases power relationships still favour men in forest management. Analyses of two global datasets


outcomes are likely to be


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204  |  Page 205  |  Page 206  |  Page 207  |  Page 208  |  Page 209  |  Page 210  |  Page 211  |  Page 212  |  Page 213  |  Page 214  |  Page 215  |  Page 216  |  Page 217  |  Page 218  |  Page 219  |  Page 220  |  Page 221  |  Page 222  |  Page 223  |  Page 224  |  Page 225  |  Page 226  |  Page 227  |  Page 228  |  Page 229  |  Page 230  |  Page 231  |  Page 232  |  Page 233  |  Page 234  |  Page 235  |  Page 236  |  Page 237  |  Page 238  |  Page 239  |  Page 240  |  Page 241  |  Page 242