April/May 1983 RAIN Page 9 DEVELOPMENT FOR WHOM? WOMEN’S UNRECOGNIZED ROLE by Rosalind Grigsby Riker In the rural areas of the Third World live the poorest of the poor, the forgotten resource — women. Women, who provide much of the food, clothing and shelter for their families, eire also responsible for potable water, primary health care, and fuel. Yet their work, categorized as only "household labor,” goes unrecognized in development planning. Despite the fact that rural women in developing countries account for over 50 percent of food production, and that in Africa as well as in the Himalayan region 60 to 80 percent of all agricultural work is done by women, development plans do not reflect their prominent role. For the past thirty years, development programs have been designed primarily by white, male experts in western countries for situations and societies distantly removed from them. Traditional sex roles and cultural differences have been overlooked. Because farmers and household heads are generally men in the United States and Europe (or at least that is the assumption, though many women hold these positions), agricultural progreims for the Third World have been ddfeigned for men. Development programs intended to increase food production have had a disproportionate effect on women. In traditional agricultural systems women tended to participate more than in the "modem” agricultural practices recently introduced in Third World countries. Yet the impact of the new agricultural programs is very complex. In some cases, women are relieved of their agricultural work, while in other situations women must carry a heavier workload. When new technologies are introduced in work traditionally done by women (agricultural or non-agricultural), men invariably take control of the technology and displace women. This displacement has been seen in rice milling, weaving, pottery making, and other hand crafts. Consequently, women may lose their primary source of income for the family and are forced to labor longer hours in lower paid jobs to try to make up their lost earnings. New technologies can also directly increase women’s labor. For instance, the introduction of a tractor to a community may create disproportionate workloads.The tractor enables the men, who traditionally prepare the land for planting, to plow twice as much land in less time. However, the women, who do all the weeding, watering, transplanting, and maintenance, are now required to spend over 16 hours laboring in the fields each day during peak harvest times. Such increased workloads also occur when development programs encourage the cultivation of cash crops. Women must do much of the work needed for the commercial crops as well as cultivate the home garden for family-consumption. This agricultural development tends to displace women from traditional income-generating activities, yet increase their work load on the small farm. Because women are the focal point of household life, when their workloads are increased, there are repercussions for husbands and children. Family stability, nutrition, children’s health and education, and fertility are all affected by women’s status. The new demands on women’s time have had an adverse impact on family nutrition as women substitute quicker but often less nutritious cooking practices for traditional preparation methods. Women may also select less labor intensive food crops, such as maliioc or other tubers, which have reduced nutritious quality. In addition to social pressures regarding family size, fertility may be increased by women’s work loads. During the peak labor season, many women with infants are forced to stop breast feeding, which endangers the infant’s health. Ending lactation hastens ovulation, and within a few months the woman becomes fertile and may conceive again. Then, next year during the peak labor period, the woman would be in an advanced stage of pregnancy, threatening her own health and the health of the unborn child. Infant mortality, a sensitive indicator of societal well-being, may increase under such circumstances. Children’s health, directly related to maternal health and family nutrition, may suffer likewise. Under such stress, family stability may be undermined. Recognizing some of the problems caused by development programs that have not considered the cultural specifics and women’s status, the United Nations declared 1975- 1985 the Decade for Women. The flurry of discussion and literature on women in the past eight years has enlightened us to their plight and increased development planners’ awareness of the complexity of their work. The result of this has been a focus on "women’s employment” programs. Yet these, too, disrupt women’s lives, assuming that the "proper role” for women is in the cash economy. Though the intention of improving women’s skills seems appropriate, that can only be decided in the specific context of the community. Development efforts must focus on small-scale, self- reliant programs where the Third World people who experience the outcome of the program also participate in its design and implementation. The constraints on women must be considered, including legal rights of ownership, inheritance, divorce, and political participation, as well as social status, fertility control, and education. When the people who are affected by a decision have a voice in the decision-making, the negative impacts of projects may be lessened by their own insight. Women, who know their own needs and hardships, must be recognized for the vital work they do and must be incorporated into the process of meeting their needs. Isn’t it time we understood the real value of women, their work, and their wisdom? □□ Rosalind Grigsby Riker is a Research Assocktte with The Institute of Sustainability in Davis, California. She spent last year in rural villages of Sri Lanka doing research on the impact of "green revolution” agricultural technologies on women.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz