Message 52: Deepa Joshi

Dear Chris, Margaret and others reading this,

Nice to see a dialogue building up and hopefully a challenging round of discussions.

Chris, some thoughts in response to your food and fibre argument:

1. The concepts of a science of capabilities and entitlements (recipient of no less than a Nobel Prize for Economics) challenges the feasibility of improved food security for all solely - through improved agricultural productivity. At the heart of why improved food and fibre is not the end all of the problems in agriculture, lie issues of gender and equity. This is of course not accounting for the women as farmers facts – already brought to your note by Margaret and Barbara.
2. One can argue that systems of food distribution management should not be confused with the science of food production (agronomists etc. and the list is indeed long and all of the skills equally indispensable). One can also argue as you do, that conventional scientific knowledge and precision, is indeed a neutral (gender-bereft) technical entity. However, knowledge systems are like all other things – a close inter-twining of the technical, the economic, the social and the political. Which technical skills and knowledge gain precedence over others and how and why knowledge is developed, refined, acquired and practiced is closely determined by social and economic contexts. A key example is the water sector – described as masculine because policies and interventions have been designed and operated for decades by men driven to pursue objectives of improved economic growth and productivity in relative ignorance of other inter-related issues, like environmental sustainability, equity etc. Were these really forms of non-conventional assault on the science of agricultural technology? A quick look at the recent thinking on the links between equity, poverty and agriculture should answer your queries.

The issue here is not that a feminine water sector would have done better, i.e. more women, policies and practices that favour women etc. What would work better – as outlined by feminists was a focus on equitable well-being and equitable distribution and share of resources and assets. What that means in terms of organizations is a space of interaction which challenges the short-comings of acquired social conditionings as masculine and/or feminine and encourages individuals – both women and men, of different cultures and communities to go against the grain of existing practices of inequality both in their internal functioning and in their work - in favour of equality and equity for all. Issues of inequality by gender are never absent – they are mutually inter-dependent across institutional levels and therefore reiterated and reinforced at all levels of functioning and thinking – from the home to the class-rooms to laboratories to micro- and macro- politics, which drives technology and science amongst other things.

What matters here is - how much space and time are we willing to give (have we given) in order to really understand gender and its inevitable outcomes at different levels of work? How much resources are we willing to invest in understanding the social dimensions of technology and its impacts on equity – and therefore strengthen the thinking and writing on gender from its position of the anecdotal to a body of knowledge and science, which it indeed is.

The goal of addressing gender has remained elusive because it has far too often been placed at the bottom heap of development goals and objectives. Yes, adding gender words to a proposal and project were mandatory, but they had to fit in with the larger ‘technical demands on the project’. The answer to addressing gender is therefore not just in adding on more women (indeed this is also called for in the spirit of an equal and inclusive work place) but in enabling the understanding of gender thinking across the organization – both in its internal functioning and in its project goals and outputs. A huge attitudinal shift is called for – so that it becomes integral for the various agricultural specialists to understand their work will or can affect or impact inequality by gender. In response to your question on why the body of gender experts didn’t seem to work – addressing gender cannot be the task of a few women in an organization. Often the only way that such women have been able to achieve small gains and inroads is by being content to add the frills of gender to project peripheries and not challenge both - the need for a wider and uniform understanding and awareness and/or dominant project policies that might at their heart be contrary to concerns of equity.

My referral to the similar exercise 5 years ago – was to ask then as I ask now – are we going to do another round of paying lip-service to addressing gender in the hope of surviving in this competitive world. And is this really a women’s issue at all – as you rightly point out Chris. Why is this email discussion despite being open - primarily holding an exchange of thoughts amongst women – where are all the men? So thanks Chris for tuning in and raking up some sticky issues.

Finally, to add to my now long note – can a project really bring about social change and what expectations can be realistically levied on researchers, practitioners and in this group, especially the women entrusted with responsibilities for mainstreaming, backstopping gender? I’d like to add here, that bringing about change in entrenched cultures and practices of social injustice and gender inequality out there calls for collaborations with individuals and organisations who have long term stakes and interests in such changes. Bringing change within organisations can happen only when the institutional environment opens up with a real vision and demand for change – and not just because gender needs to be strongly worded in the project proposal/s and that a few women need to be showcased as gender persons. I can almost hear the oft-repeated comments - gender boxes ticked, this gender discussion done – now let us get on with the real work of managing water.

Deepa Joshi