Women are the majority of the world's food producers.They make up 60 to 80 percent of agricultural workers in Africa and Asia and more than 40 percent in Latin America.1 Women all over the world have always worked in agriculture and in food preserving, preparing and cooking. They plant, weed, supply water for irrigation, harvest, thresh, winnow, tend poultry and animals, store foods, grind flour and meal, preserve foods as sauces, syrups, juices and in many other ways.
The work they do depends not only on where they live but on their place within the rural economy: are they landless or landowning, tenant farmers or sharecroppers, members of a cooperative or communal farm; what is the size of their landholdings; do they have their own plots, their own income from the cooperative, or are these reserved for a male "head of the family"? These are some of the factors which determine women's work.
A characteristic common to most of these women is a long, hard day. The African Training and Research Centre for Women (ATRCW) describes a farmer's day like this:
She rises before dawn and walks to the fields. In the busy seasons, she spends some nine to ten hours hoeing, planting, weeding or harvesting. She brings food and fuel home from the farm, walks long distances for water carrying a pot which may weigh 20 kilograms or more, grinds and pounds grains, cleans the house, cooks while nursing her infants, washes the dishes and the clothes, minds the children, and generally cares for the household. She processes and stores food and markets excess produce, often walking long distances with heavy loads in difficult terrain. She must also attend to the family's social obligations such as weddings and funerals. She may have to provide fully for herself and her children. During much of the year she may labour for 15 to 16 hours each day and she works this way until the day she delivers her baby, frequently resuming work within a day or two of delivery.2
The Bambara women of Mali, in the villages around Segou, share all the tasks on the family worked fields, spreading organic fertilizers, weeding, banking, securing the fields against predators, harvesting and transporting crops. In addition, they work individual plots, to provide food for their families,"early in the morning when they are not cooking; before beginning to work on the collective field, or when the sun is high and when they have ceased working on the collective field in order to rest. "They gather leaves and fruit and beverages,cakes, sauces, butter and soap; raise poultry and small grazing animals; market surplus foods, drinks and cotton goods. They practice the crafts traditional to their family: pottery, dyeing or basket weaving. Cloth weaving, tool making, sewing and embroidery are done by men.3
Landless Harijan women in a Punjabi village of India told an interviewer:
We are up at daybreak and we don't get to see our beds until late in the night. We are on our feet all day... We have not only to harvest the crop but also tie it into bundles. If a bundle gets scattered or you take an extra minute over it, the men shower you with filthy abuses... Cooking the food, tending the cattle, fetching firewood on the way home from the fields, cooking again at night and managing the whole house, the children-it's all on our shoulders - and it's twice as much work as a man does. The pace of work is almost bewildering - there's not a moment's respite all day.4
In spite of these long hours, women have very little control, very little say in decisions about food production. They produce the world's food, cook it and serve it, yet they are malnourished. Food is distributed unequally, not only among countries and social lasses, but within the family. Men eat first women and children get the leftovers, in many places. Women's nutritional needs are greatest because of their work, childbearing and breastfeeding, but they get less food, fewer calories, less of the best available than men.5
development and women
Given women's essential role in food production and the great amount of work they do, it would appear to make sense that development programs would be directed to women to help them improve their farming methods, reduce their work load, and give them access to rural services such as water and fuel supplies, credit, training, land and markets. But no, rural development projects for the improvement of agriculture are directed almost exclusively to men.
Ever since Ester Boserup clearly pointed this out in 1970 in her classic book Women's Role in Economic Development, many others have tried to discover the causes of this and to propose solutions. The call to integrate women into development is an attempt to rectify previous neglect of women by development planners and to fit women into plans where they have been left out. Boserup and many after her appear to assume that the benefits of modernization can be extended to women. But has modernization really been so beneficial to the majority of men? How can women fit into development models which by their very nature marginalize women and do not promote the well-being of all people?
Researchers from many disciplines have contributed to understanding why women have been left out of the development process. Historians, sociologists and economists point out the roots of this in colonialism and the economic system. Feminists have made a valuable contribution by showing how sexist attitudes and male prejudices about women have affected the policies of both colonial administrators and development planners. Feminists have also shown the importance of analyzing women's role in reproduction and the family, as well as in production. Socialist feminists in particular stress the intertwining of gender relations and class relations, of reproduction and production. Both must be examined to discover the causes of women's subordination and both must be addressed to overcome the oppression of women. Feminist anthropologists and ethnographers have given insights into the division of labor, families, and roles of men and women. Finally, the people who are the objects of all this research and analysis have voiced their own needs and desires, have sought their own solutions, in struggling against sexist discrimination and structures, in resisting oppressive economic systems and working conditions, and in organizing themselves.
Some of these issues and contributions, as they relate to food production, are briefly surveyed here. The resource section reviews many more.
are women invisible?
Recent development literature talks about "invisible" women, but women are not invisible. It is the development planners who are blind to them. Women are there to be seen at work in the fields, gardens, yards, courtyards and homes for anyone who will take the trouble to look. Part of the problem is that development planners often only look at work in the modern, cash sector of the economy, ignoring the unwaged but essential work of women. Thus, it is men who make up the statistics of agricultural wage labor, and it is their production which figures in the Gross National Product (GNP).
colonial roots
The roots of this situation go back a long way. Some of them can be traced to 19th century colonialism when westerners introduced a money economy, wage labor and cash crops in some parts of Africa and Asia. They absorbed only men into the economy 'as wage earners in mines and plantations growing crops for export. These men were grossly exploited and women suffered as much or even more. With men no longer available to help in some of the such as clearing the land, women were left with all the work involved in food production, with little or no opportunity for an independent source of income.
In Africa,
the colonialists brought with them their own beliefs that women should stay at home with the children. They primarily sought male wage labor to do the heavy work on their mines and farms. The Europeans' preconceived perceptions fit nicely with the emerging colonial pattern in which women stayed home in the rural areas, using pre-existing technologies to grow the necessary food and raise the children. This provided a convenient rationale for paying the men wages barely adequate to support themselves alone.6
the pattern continues
This pattern continues today. Development planners and governments promote commercial fanning and cash crops for export, drawing mainly men into agricultural wage labor. They neglect the women engaged in subsistence farming, growing the food for their families. The work these women do is essential to society. ''Why then have their needs not been recognized by the chief architects of development?" two women officers of UNICEF ask.
Why have women, especially poor women, not been considered seriously in the formulation of action programmes? And why has legal discrimination persisted? A number of explanations can be proposed.
First, planners, administrators, legislators, and jurists have tended, for their image of women, to rely upon an elite derived model reinforced by Western middle-class stereotypes. Colonizers and later the mass media further strengthened these perspectives. In this view, women perform strictly domestic functions geared to family nurturance, while men undertake all the economic and political roles within both the family and the community. Moreover, those areas of customary or religious law most frequently incorporated into modem civil law have been marriage and inheritance customs, the most discriminatory areas in so far as women and property are concerned...
A second explanation for the failure to include women in development on equal terms stems from the monopoly by males of development planning, administrative, legislative, and juridical posts...
The problem is not strictly a sex-linked one, however; class positions also affect it-a third explanation. Because national leaders have almost universally come from the ranks of the educated elites, they have grown up alienated from the reality of poverty.... The heavy burden of women outside the home falls beyond their range of experience... A fourth explanation regarding the weak position allocated to poor women affirms the general failure of the development process to provide all poor people, women or men, with power...7
In her book, The Domestication of Women: Discrimination in Developing Societies,Barbara Rogers identifies the prejudices that male development planners have about women as a cause of the discrimination against women in development programs. She examines how these prejudices distort research and data collection.
worse off than before
The modernization of agriculture often leaves women food producers worse off than before. With the best land under cultivation for commercial crops, women must work harder on poorer and smaller plots of land. Not only does cash cropping deprive them of men's help, it brings them additional tasks and burdens. Once they could produce a surplus to barter or sell locally, but now they cannot compete with multinationals, commercial agriculture or cooperatives. If they cannot find the time or means to earn money or goods in other ways, they must go without.
A few of the many available examples illustrate how "development" has detrimental effects on women:
With less time to spend on crops, travelling longer distances to reach the fields and working with poorer soil, women in Ghana began to substitute cassava for yams. Cassava may planted any time of the year and needs little weeding. Although this crop change resulted in less work, it brought other negative results. Cassava is less nutritious and also depletes the soil to such a degree that it cannot be inter-cropped with vegetables and legumes as was the practice with yams. The vegetables and legumes no longer grown are another valuable vitamin and protein source lost to the family. As a result of such dietary changes, kwashiokor, a severe nutritional disease affecting children, has begun to appear where it was unknown before.8
In Upper Volta, where development agencies have been promoting animal traction, weeding, hoeing and harvesting is still done by hand.
Whereas, previously a family would cultivate an average of 1.5 hectares, with animal traction it may cultivate at least three times as much. It follows that women's work in the fields has increased very considerably, and it goes without saying that it is men who use the plough... In a country where there are no agricultural labourers, the natural consequences of such a scheme are to maintain or increase polygamy and large families so that they can help with the agricultural work... Agricultural schemes have imposed other burdens on women. It is they who have to carry larger quantities of produce from the fields to the village or market, and to process the crop by hand when no manual or power operated machinery exists in the area.9
The "White Revolution" in India illustrates the manner in which an inherently good development -the introduction of dairies to improve the production and distribution of pasteurized whole milk to urban areas-can sometimes have seriously detrimental effects on rural women: In Gujarat State, women of the poorer castes used to graze the buffalo, milk them, market the butter in nearby towns and retain the skimmed butter milk for their families'diet. Now their marketing activity has largely been displaced and the dairies run by men. The meager independent earnings they used to receive have in some cases nearly disappeared (there are very few women employed by the dairies), the family no longer has the nutritional benefits of butter milk, cash is needed to buy the milk (or is foregone if whole milk is retained), and no alternative employment or income is available... In Kaira district, where the milk producers are women, they only form 10 per cent of the co-operatives' membership and thereby do not receive a fair share of the payments.10
Using standard economic indicators,the Maya lowlands of Belize appeared to be developing rapidly in the early 1970s, after the expansion of the sugarcane industry. A closer study shows that men working in the industry control most of the money which rapidly flows out for the purchase of trucks, liquor and other imported goods. With men no longer helping to clear the land, the women farmers produce less food for the table and less fodder for the poultry and small animals. Prestige and status now lie in the purchase of western goods, with the consequent devaluation of women's role. The nutritional level of women and children has dropped.11
The solution cannot lie in simply "extending the benefits of modernization" to women. Modernization does not benefit the majority of men either, when it is tied to an economic system in which certain countries of the world exploit others, and certain classes within a country profit from the exploitation of other men and women. To be of benefit to women, modernization would have to be adapted to the needs of women for both production and reproduction, not women to the needs of modernization, as is usually the case.
modernization and agribusiness
Agriculture has been modernized mainly in the cash crop sector. Governments, development agencies and international financial institutions, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, encourage export cash crops as a way for third world countries to earn foreign exchange. Multinational agribusiness buys up land from rich absentee landlords and governments, as well as from marginal and small holders, converting it for production of a single crop such as coffee, bananas, coconut or sugar, to export to richer countries. With limited and poor quality land left for local crops and subsistence farming, developing countries must import basic food for local consumption.12
Commercial agriculture draws mostly men into the workforce, training them in the use of new techniques, inputs and machines. With women continuing to feed their families through their subsistence agriculture, agribusiness can pay low wages to men. When agribusiness hires women, it is for the most tedious and lowest paid jobs, precarious seasonal work, and food processing and packaging. Agribusiness also keeps wages low by bringing in migrant workers from other states or countries, especially when local farmers begin to organize for their rights and for better wages.
Agribusiness has created new jobs for some people, but it has put many more out of work. Mechanization decreases the need for labor. Small farmers, driven off their land or out of business by big commercial farming, become impoverished or migrate to the cities in search of work, often in multinational industries such as textiles, electronics and tourism.
This process causes abrupt and enormous disruption of families and communities. Traditional culture and ways of life are torn apart as new values and goods are introduced and new divisions of labor are created. Women are deprived of sources of income and livelihood and are burdened with additional work. People of differing castes, colors, races, ages and sexes are pitted against each other as they try to eke out a living.
Agribusiness, governments and development agencies have introduced measures which lead to increased malnutrition, poverty and greater inequality in the distribution of income and food. High technology and inputs are usually available only to the better off farmers. The increased yields and profits of the richer farmers enable them to strengthen their positions and to squeeze out the poorer farmers, thereby sharpening class distinctions. Pursued in this manner, modernization of agriculture enables an international elite, the multinational corporations, to join hands with local and national elites to make still further inroads into the economy, at the expense of the poor.
women's lost knowledge
High technology agriculture depends heavily on imports from industrialized countries and on the multinational corporations which manufacture and market high yielding varieties of seeds (HYVs), pesticides, chemical fertilizers,tractors and other farm machinery. Since they monopolize and virtually control the production of these things, multinationals are making huge profits from high input agriculture. Genetic diversity -the number and varieties of plants and seeds - is decreasing rapidly as high yielding varieties push the others off the market. Since multinationals control the seed market, governments and farmers have no choice but to buy the HYVs. This has serious consequences when epidemics of plant diseases and pests sweep through areas where HYVs have replaced domestic seed varieties. While not as high yielding as the hybrids, traditional seed varieties have adapted to their habitat and have developed resistance to disease, pests, and climatic and geographical conditions. They usually do not require all the expensive inputs.13
Non-governmental organizations are campaigning for the preservation of traditional seed varieties in seed banks, set up by agencies such as the Food and Agricultural Organization. It is also necessary to preserve the traditional knowledge of how to cultivate these seeds, however. This resides with peasants and in oral tradition, not with the agricultural experts and technicians trained in high input agriculture. Women have been the traditional farmers and it is they who possess this knowledge. As Elise Boulding says: "Much valuable food- related technology is lost because it is in the hands of women and is not treated as a subject worthy & of study by development specialists."14
To be concerned with the negative effects of modernization and with the loss of traditional agricultural knowledge does not imply a desire to return to some imagined golden age of traditional agriculture. Agriculture can and should be improved, modernized &and made more productive. This however, can be done while using and building on the expertise and knowledge farmers already possess. The effects of modernization depend to a great extent upon the economic system and the development perspective within which it is used.
agrarian and land reform
Land is the essential resource for agriculture. The ownership, use and control of land determines who benefits from agricultural production. It is important for access to water, fuel, markets, credit and training as well as to membership and participation in cooperatives, community organizations and decision-making bodies.
Land reform, or changes in the land tenure system, must be a priority if the lot of the poorest rural food producers is to be improved. Whether these changes involve redistribution or collectivization of land, they touch issues of land ownership, power and control. Carried out within a larger program of agrarian reform, they also bring changes in access to energy, credit, markets, training and technology.
The interweaving of political, economic and patriarchal structures becomes evident in programs of agrarian and land reform. Even programs designed to alter radically the relations among rural classes may bring about or perpetuate the subordination of women.
The history of land policies, from those of colonial administrators through those of development planners and land reform programs, is the history of women losing their rights and access to land and the concomitant benefits.15 Only recently have development agencies begun to give attention to women's need for land. The World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (WCARRD) in 1979, recommended that governments consider action to:
Repeal those laws which discriminate against women in respect of rights of inheritance, ownership and control of property, and to promote understanding of the need for such measures.
Promote ownership rights for women, including joint ownership and co-ownership of land in entirety,to give women producers with absentee husbands & effective legal rights to take decisions on the land they manage.
Adopt measures to ensure women equitable access to land, livestock and other productive assets.16
A follow up workshop to WCARRD on the Integration of Women in Agricultural and Rural Development held in Hyderabad, India in 1980 reiterated:
The WACCRD Programme of Action, as related to rural women, requires the formulation of specific government policies, which would ensure equal access for rural women to land, water, energy, credit and cooperatives, inputs and marketing, training and social infrastructure.17
radical or cosmetic change?
Much of what passes for land reform is simply superficial change. An Oxfam report concludes:
Land tenure systems are bound up with national power structures and nothing will really change for the poor until these power structures are altered in their favour. To be successful a land reform needs continuing support after it has been implemented. This support has to be political, as well as technical and financial, for the reform to remain successful...
Nearly every developing country has introduced a programme which it has described as land reform. However, most of them have produced negligible results because they have not been designed to change the power structure. Only a very few countries have achieved this.18
There is some skepticism as to whether intergovernmental conferences such as WCARRD, and the statements they issue, are of much use. A critical group of researchers and non-governmental organizations from both third world and industrialized countries issued the Rome Declaration at the time of WCARRD, in which they stated:
Through WCARRD, many governments hope to divert attention from themselves as causes of rural suffering. They hope to lay the blame elsewhere on obstinate local rural elites, on the scarcity of funds, on unavoidable conflicts in priorities, and on unfair international terms of trade. Moreover, many governments hope to legitimate their promotion of modernization, trade, foreign aid and transnational corporate investment even though such activities are already contributing to increased landlessness and hunger. ..
Many so called land reforms have been inspired and carried out by dominant groups to serve their own interests, not those of the rural poor. Such reforms have ignored those most in need the many poor workers totally deprived of land. They have exempted those who put land into production for export. At best they have allowed tenants often a pitifully small number to buy land from their landlords, often under onerous terms. The net effect has been to strengthen the existing rural power structure, not dislodge it. Such pseudo reforms must never be confused with the redistribution of economic and political power carried out with the active participation of the rural dispossessed.
Genuine agrarian reform and rural development commence only once people struggle to create their own institutions, responsive to their needs. While recognizing the critical role to be played by leadership accountable to the people, it must be understood that agrarian reform cannot be done to people. Nor can it be done for people. The process of reform is as important as the reform itself.19
Researchers point out cases of superficial or pseudo land reform as in Venezuela where this "involved the widespread purchase of land for distribution. The price paid to landowners was extremely favourable and the 'reform has been seen as little more than a bonus for the landowning class and a means of payment to the peasant clients of the two main political parties."20 An Oxfam America report contends that El Salvador's land reform program is intended to encourage landlords, who will be generously compensated for their land, to move into the modem commercial and industrial sectors. The real beneficiaries of improved crop production will not be poor peasants but middlemen and export companies.21 In the Philippines, the land reform program has intensified the conversion of land to export crops, as such land is exempt from redistribution. After seven years, only 2,000 peasants had obtained clear title to their land, due to the difficult terms. There was not a single poor peasant among them.22
Nevertheless, it can be claimed that official statements and recommendations from intergovernmental conferences and agencies can be used as ammunition and backing by those who do wish to institute real agrarian reform. While agreeing with the assertion that the majority of ruling elites have little interest in promoting radical change in rural power structures, it can also be argued that international terms of trade and the power of multinationals and the richer countries in the world economy, make it extremely difficult for those who would like to promote more equitable development in their countries. These factors also help keep progressive forces or opposition to the ruling elites powerless.
and women?
If patriarchal structures and attitudes are not dealt with at the same time, even radical reforms redistributing power and control along with land rights may discriminate against women. An FAO report on The Legal Status of Rural Women states:"In many countries where land has been nationalized and landownership is no longer a factor, membership in cooperatives and collective organizations is often limited to heads of families, thereby eliminating the participation of the majority of rural women."23
In Ethiopia, where a radical land reform program has been implemented, Zene Tadesse writes:
Although land reform has brought significant socio-economic changes to the peasantry as a whole,its impact on women has been very limited and indirect. Due to the economic benefits emanating from land reform, peasant women now do not have to worry about where the next meal is coming from and are less restrained when asking their husbands to buy them new clothes or items for the house, etc. However,rural women are still dependent on their husbands economically and therefore their social and political position in society is still subordinate to men. Agrarian reform in Ethiopia cannot have a direct and meaningful impact on women until there is an all-out struggle against patriarchal authority.24
A study of a village in Vietnam with a cooperative system shows how women are still at a disadvantage in comparison to men:
Women have been greatly affected by the economic changes, it is true. The mere fact of the multiplication of harvests- two yearly harvests of rice and one of vegetables-has meant that the women are occupied all the year round in production tasks. A considerable amount of the work in the garden is carried out by women. Finally all the work in the home is always left to the women. They are therefore occupied from 10 to 14 hours and, at least in this village have little time to do other things.
This has several consequences. First, there is little participation by women in cultural and political activities... Meetings of the women's mass movement are not very frequent. This is not surprising, as women are now more heavily engaged in economic tasks without, however, having been relieved of their duties.25
The importance and the difficulties of overcoming patriarchal authority are illustrated by the Chipko movement, known for the courageousness of the hill women of India in saving their land from "development" that would have destroyed their sources of fuel, water and livelihood. Through nonviolent action in which the women would block the way to the forest and chipko, or embrace, the trees, they succeeded in keeping the forests from being felled. For this, they had to face harassment not only from those in power, but from men of their own class in the village who feared and resented the women's success. Gopa Joshi, after speaking with the women involved, reports:
The women feel an acute need for full-time women activists who can travel from village to village, counter rumours, erode fear and spread awareness among women about the harassment faced by women activists, so that resistance can be organized. Only united and organized women will be able to relish the fruits of their victory. If not united, they will continue to be harassed for hurting the ego of village men.26
integrating women
Women, then, are not some "vast untapped resource" to be integrated into, or maximized for, rural development. They are already participating in essential ways in agriculture and in the necessary work of reproduction and caring for people's basic needs. This work, and the knowledge women possess, must be recognized and valued.
Women working within development agencies and institutions can pressure these organizations to overcome the sexist attitudes and prejudices which distort data collection and statistics about women and women's work. More important, women are collecting their own data and statistics. They are documenting their own lives and sharing their knowledge and experiences with each other. On the basis of this, they will be able to decide, each in her own particular situation, how to work and struggle for self determination. If women are to have access to land, improved farming methods, rural services, training, credit and markets in a way that will lead to their greater self-determination, they need to recognize and, at the same time, organize against the economic and patriarchal structures that would exploit them. Organizing and mobilizing are essential for this. This was recognized at a meeting of the Asia and Pacific Centre for Women and Development on the Critical Needs of Women:
The organisation and mobilisation of groups in society is a highly political and sensitive issue, yet it is only through strong organisations that oppressed groups can hope to improve their situation. The traditional women's organisations, which had had a purely welfare approach to women's problems have, by-and-large, failed to improve the situation of the majority of women. These organisations need to be revitalised or replaced by more dynamic women's organisations...
The structural, financial and attitudinal change which must occur to satisfy women's needs and to enable them to contribute their extensive skills and talents will only come about as the result of strong and effective pressure groups. Thus women must be mobilised and organised.27
Organization and mobilization on the local level is crucial, but women must also develop networks and communication channels with each other in order to share their experiences and problems, break out of their isolation, and strengthen themselves:the forces they are faced with are so powerful that "only united and organized women will be able to relish the fruits of their victory,"as the struggle of the Chipko movement women shows.
Footnotes
1 WCARRD: A Turning Point for Rural Women (Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization,1980),p.6.
2 Quoted in "Women and the New International Economic Order," Development Issue Paper for the 1980s,no. 12 (New York: United Nations Development Programme),p.2.
3 Mariam Thiam, Case Study The Role of Women in Rural Development in the Segou Region Mali (Philadelphia: American Friends Service Committee,1979),pp.5-6.
4 "What is the Difference Between One Human Being and Another?" Manushi no. 4 (1980),p.18. This five page interview with landless Harijan women gives a good description of how these women see their daily lives, work, relationships with men, the community and development projects.
5 Alice Stewart Carloni, "Sex Disparities in the Distribution of Food Within Rural Households,Food and Nutrition vol.7,no. 1 (1981).
6 Ann Seidman, "Women and the Development of 'Underdevelopment': The African Experience,"Women and Technological Change in Developing Countries eds. Roslyn Dauber and Melinda L.Cain (Boulder,Colorado: Westview Press, 1981),p.112.
p 7 Mary Racelis Hollnsteiner and Hoda Badran,"Structures of Inequality,"Assignment Children nos. 49/50 (Spring 1980),pp.101-103
8 Bette Shertzer,'The Third World of Women,Food Monitor (January-February 1979),p.13.
9 David A. Mitchnik, The Role of Women in Rural Zaire and Upper Volta(Oxford: Oxfam,1977),p.20.
10 Martha F. Loutfi, Rural Women: Unequal Partners in Development(Geneva: International Labour Organisation, 1980),p.34.
11 See Olga Stavrakis and Marion Louise Marshall, "Women, Agriculture and Development in the Maya Lowlands: Profit or Progress," Proceedings and Papers of the International Conference on Women and Food, ed. Ann Bunzel Cowan (Washington: Consortium for International Development, 1978),pp. 157-174.
12 For a concise, but more detailed, description of development policies with regard to agriculture, rural needs, cash crops and the green revolution, see especially "Land - Food," ACFOA Development Dossier, no. 7 (October 1981), and Crisis Decade (London: International Coalition for Development Action, 1980).
13 See especially: Pat Roy Mooney,Seeds of the Earth (Ottawa: International Coalition for Development Action and Canadian Council for International Cooperation, 1980) Alternative News and Features and International Coalition for Development Action Press Packet for the International Symposium on World Food Security and Plant Genetic Erosion (November 1981) "Agribusiness," IDOC International Bulletin,nos. 3-4 (1982) and "Transnational Poisoning," IDOC International Bulletin, no.7 (July 1981).
14 Elise Boulding, "Women, Peripheries and Food Production,International Conference on Women and Food,p. 30.
15 See especially: Barbara Rogers, "Women and Land Rights,"ISIS International Bulletin, no. 11 (Spring 1979),pp.5-8.
16 World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development Report (Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization, 1979),p.10.
17 Report of the FAO/SIDA Workshop on the Integration of Women in Agriculture Rural Development (Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization,1981),p.11.
18 Claire Whittemore,Land for People: Land Tenure and the Very Poor (Oxford: Oxfam,1981),pp.19 and 21.
19 International Peace Research Association Food Policy Study Group, Circular Letter,no.6(1979),pp.3 and 5.
20 Whittemore, Land for People,p.22.
21 Laurence Simon and J. Stephens, El Salvador Land Reform: ImpactAudit(Boston: Oxfam America, 1981).
22 Charles-Henri Foubert, Les Philippines le reveil d'un archipel (Paris: L'Harmattan, 1980),p.71.
23 The Legal Status of Rural Women (Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization, 1979),p.60.
24 Zene Tadesse, The Impact of Land Reform on Women: The Case of Ethiopia, paper presented at the Informal Consultants' Meeting on Women and Development, International Labour Organisation, Geneva, May 1978.
25 Francois Houtart, "Problems of Social Transition: An Example from Vietnam,"Ideas and Action no.137 (1980),p.10.
26 Gopa Joshi, "Protecting the Sources of Community Life,"Manushino.7 (1981),p.24.
27 The Critical Needs of Women (Kuala Lumpur: Asian and Pacific Centre for Women and Development,1977),p.37.