How do gender-specific roles and responsibilities in farming communities affect the ability of women and men to access and adopt sustainable livelihood interventions in response to climate change?
Short answer
Key finding
Women and men adapt differently to climate change based on their existing gender roles, responsibilities, and access to resources. Gender intersects with factors such as age, education, household power dynamics, and social status in shaping adaptation strategies. Women are more concerned about climate change but face greater constraints in accessing resources, financial support, and agricultural training. Their adaptation strategies tend to focus on maintaining household food security and livelihood diversification, while men engage in strategies that maximize economic gains.
Short summary
This systematic review examines gendered perceptions of climate change and adaptation strategies in agriculture across multiple countries. Women and men adopt distinct approaches to climate adaptation due to differences in access to resources, social networks, and local institutions. Women commonly engage in structural adaptations like water harvesting, well-digging, and trench construction, while men focus on preventive measures such as conservation agriculture and flood control. Financial strategies include asset sales and credit-taking, with managerial adaptations varying by gender: women prioritize crop diversification and fertilizer use, while men focus on livestock feed and conservation. Socio-cultural adaptations include meal reduction and reliance on wild plants for food security. Migration patterns also differ, with more women engaging in circular migration for livelihood support while maintaining agricultural productivity.
Long answer
Long summary
What is this summary about?
This summary presents evidence on gendered differences in climate change adaptation strategies within farming communities and how these strategies are shaped by societal roles and resource access.
What evidence is this summary based on?
This summary is based on one systematic review:
Haque, A. S., Kumar, L., & Bhullar, N. (2023). Gendered perceptions of climate change and agricultural adaptation practices: a systematic review. Climate and Development, 15(10), 885-902. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/17565529.2023.2176185?needAccess=true
What are the main findings?
Women are generally more concerned and fatalistic about climate change than men. They adopt different adaptation strategies, often constrained by limited access to financial resources, training, and institutional support. While men tend to focus on technical and agronomic adaptation strategies that enhance economic returns, women prioritize household food security and livelihood diversification through non-farm activities. Structural adaptation strategies among women include water harvesting, well-digging, and fire control trench construction, whereas men invest in flood prevention infrastructure. Women engage in managerial adaptation by modifying cropping patterns and fertilizer use, while men prioritize conservation agriculture and livestock feed improvements. Socio-cultural adaptations include meal reduction and reliance on wild plants during droughts. Migration strategies also vary by gender; women engage in circular migration to maintain agricultural productivity while supplementing household income, whereas men migrate for longer periods to urban centers and abroad.
This review highlights how gender-specific roles and responsibilities influence access to and adoption of sustainable livelihood interventions. Women face systemic barriers, including lower access to financial and institutional resources, restricted mobility, and an increased workload due to the feminization of agriculture following male outmigration. These constraints limit their ability to adopt proactive adaptation measures and force them into reactive strategies such as informal labor or reliance on social networks for survival. Men, on the other hand, benefit from better access to institutional support and financial capital, allowing them to implement economically beneficial adaptation strategies. The review underscores the need for gender-responsive policies that address these disparities by improving women's access to agricultural training, financial credit, and institutional support to enhance their adaptive capacity.
Review summaries
Gendered perceptions of climate change and agricultural adaptation practices: a systematic review
Review
Geography
Year
Citation
Number of included studies
Review type
Critical appraisal of included studies
Assessment review
1. Key finding
Overall
Climate change perceptions and adaptation strategies are highly contextual and vary significantly by gender. Women were found to be more concerned and fatalistic about climate change, adopting different adaptation strategies compared to men.
Women and girls related
Women were found to be more concerned and fatalistic about climate change than men, facing significant constraints in accessing resources, financial support, and agricultural training, which limited their adaptation options. They were more likely to engage in structural adaptation strategies such as water harvesting, pen reinforcement, well-digging, and constructing water tanks and trenches. In managerial adaptation, women prioritized changes in cropping patterns and fertilizer use, while men leaned toward conservation agriculture and livestock feed improvements. Socio-cultural adaptations among women included reducing meal frequency and relying on wild plants for food security during droughts. Women played a crucial role in diversifying household income through non-farm activities such as petty business, house-help, food processing, and charcoal production. Additionally, female farmers were more likely than men to engage in circular migration to support household resilience while maintaining agricultural productivity. The feminization of agriculture due to male outmigration further increased the workload on women, requiring them to take on additional farming and livestock management responsibilities.
2. Short summary
This systematic review explores gendered differences in climate change perception and adaptation in agriculture across various countries. Gender roles, age, education, marital status, household power structures, social status, and ethnicity intersect with climate adaptation strategies.
Access to resources, social networks, and local institutions also influence adaptation methods. Women favor structural adaptations such as water harvesting and well-digging, while men engage in larger-scale preventive measures. Financial adaptations primarily involve asset sales and credit. Managerial adaptations differ, with women focusing on crop change and fertilizer use, while men emphasize conservation and livestock feed diversification. Socio-cultural adaptations include meal reduction and the use of wild plants for sustenance. Livelihood adaptations reveal gendered differences, with men engaging in fisheries and agriculture, while women turn to non-farm activities. Seasonal migration is a key adaptation strategy, with differing patterns between men and women.
3. Long summary
3.1 PICOS
Population: Male and female farmers engaged in agriculture across multiple global regions.
Intervention: Examination of gendered perceptions of climate change and adaptation strategies within agricultural systems.
Outcomes: Various adaptation strategies adopted by men and women in response to climate change, including technical, financial, structural, managerial, socio-cultural, and livelihood adaptations, as well as migration.
Study design: Peer-reviewed qualitative and quantitative research articles published between January 1, 2005, and April 18, 2019, sourced from Web of Science and Scopus, ensuring a comprehensive review of gender-specific climate adaptation strategies.
3.2 Risk of bias Not assessed
3.3 Publication bias Not assessed
3.4 Findings
Gendered adaptation strategies to climate change span a range of technical, financial, structural, managerial, socio-cultural, and livelihood approaches, with regional and gender-specific variations. Technical adaptation, examined in 27 of 35 studies, included changing crop varieties, agricultural diversification, and adopting improved technologies. Financial strategies, analyzed in 17 studies, commonly involved asset sales and credit-taking. Structural adaptations revealed gendered roles: men typically built flood prevention structures, while women focused on water harvesting, digging wells, and constructing fire-control trenches. Managerial adaptations also differed, with women prioritizing crop changes and fertilizer use, while men emphasized conservation practices, improved feed, and composting; livestock strategies were similarly split by gender. Eight studies highlighted socio-cultural adaptations, such as women reducing meals or using wild plants during droughts, alongside a shift in agricultural roles as women took up small-scale livestock rearing amid male migration. Livelihood adaptations, covered in 20 studies, showed men engaging in fisheries, carpentry, and agriculture, while women turned to non-farm activities like food processing, charcoal production, and informal labor. Migration was another key adaptation, with men following traditional seasonal routes and women increasingly participating in circular migration between fishing areas to support resource recovery.
3.5 Sensitivity analysis Not assessed
4. AMSTAR 2 assessment of the review
| 1. | Did the review state clearly the components of PICOS (or appropriate equivalent)? | Yes | |
| 2. | Did the report of the review contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review and did the report justify any significant deviations from the protocol? (i.e. was there a protocol) | Yes | |
| 3. | Did the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy? | Yes | |
| 4. | Did the review authors perform study selection in duplicate? | Yes | |
| 5. | Did the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate? | Yes | |
| 6. | Did the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions? | Yes | |
| 7. | Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail? (Yes if table of included studies, partially if other descriptive overview) | Yes | |
| 8. | Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review? | No | |
| 9. | Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review? | Yes | |
| 10. | If meta-analysis was performed did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results? | Na | |
| 11. | Did the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review? | No | |
| 12. | If they performed quantitative synthesis did the review authors carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its likely impact on the results of the review? | No | |
| 13. | Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review? | Yes | |
| Overall (lowest rating on any critical item) | Medium |
5. Count of references to the following words
| Sex | 1 |
| Gender | 24 |
| Women | 3 |
| Intra-household | 0 |