Okiror , J. J. (author), Twanza, B. (author), Orum, B. (author), Ebanyat, P. (author), Kule, E. B. (author), Tegbaru, A. (author), and Ayesiga, C. (author)
Format:
journal articles
Publication Date:
2021-10
Published:
Academic Journals
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D12402
12 pages, There is growing interest in gender analysis and value chain analysis as tools for ensuring equitable participation in agricultural commodity markets. This study examined the gender factors that influence the patterns and levels of participation by women and men in grain value chains in Uganda. Data were collected from six districts in three regions of Uganda using qualitative gender tools. Findings show that marked division of labour along gender-lines happens at postharvest handling stages where threshing and winnowing is mostly done by women while men supervise storage and also control marketing and incomes. Division of labour is due to socio-cultural ascriptions to the sexes at community level with women having to work for longer hours than their male counterparts. Groundnuts were regarded as women’s crop while soya beans were for men. Regional variations were not significant but there were marked behavioral differences between the poorer and richer households across entire value chains from production to marketing with the poor exercising more caution during marketing to spread risks to the next harvest while the rich preferred one-time bulk sales. Specific interventions are needed to upgrade women participation in grain-legume businesses and scale-up labour saving post-harvest technologies especially draught animals, threshers, tarpaulins and hullers to ease drudgery on women and increase men’s participation.
35 pages, We use data from a randomised experiment in Uganda to examine effects of incentives
on the decision to adopt drought-tolerant maize varieties (DTMVs) and mechanisms
through which effects occur. We find that social recognition (SR) incentives to a
random subset of trained farmers – disseminating farmers (DFs) – increase knowledge
transmission from DFs to their co-villagers and change information networks of both
DFs and their neighbours. SR also increases DFs’ likelihood of adopting DTMVs.
However, the corresponding results for private material rewards are not conclusively
strong. We find no evidence that incentives for knowledge diffusion increase the
likelihood of co-villagers adopting DTMVs
