Value chain interventions for improving women's economic empowerment: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review

IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Campbell Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1002/cl2.1428
Suchi Kapoor Malhotra, Swati Mantri, Neha Gupta, Ratika Bhandari, Ralph Nii Armah, Hamdiyah Alhassan, Sarah Young, Howard White, Ranjitha Puskur, Hugh Sharma Waddington, Edoardo Masset
{"title":"Value chain interventions for improving women's economic empowerment: A mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review","authors":"Suchi Kapoor Malhotra,&nbsp;Swati Mantri,&nbsp;Neha Gupta,&nbsp;Ratika Bhandari,&nbsp;Ralph Nii Armah,&nbsp;Hamdiyah Alhassan,&nbsp;Sarah Young,&nbsp;Howard White,&nbsp;Ranjitha Puskur,&nbsp;Hugh Sharma Waddington,&nbsp;Edoardo Masset","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Value chain interventions have become widespread throughout the international development sector over the last 20 years, and there is a need to evaluate their effectiveness in improving women's welfare across multiple dimensions. Agricultural value chains are influenced by socio-cultural norms and gender dynamics that have an impact on the distribution of resources, benefits, and access to opportunities. While women play a critical role in agriculture, they are generally confined to the least-valued parts of the value chain with the lowest economic returns, depending on the local, social and institutional contexts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The review assesses the effectiveness of approaches, strategies and interventions focused on women's engagement in agricultural value chains that lead to women's economic empowerment in low- and middle-income countries. It explores the contextual barriers and facilitators that determine women's participation in value chains and ultimately impact their effectiveness.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Search Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched completed and on-going studies from Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection (Social Sciences Citation Index [SSCI], Science Citation Index Expanded [SCI-EXPANDED], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Science [CPCI-S], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Social Science &amp; Humanities [CPCI-SSH], and Emerging Sources Citation Index [ESCI]), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, EconLit, Business Source Premier, APA PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane, Database of Systematic Reviews, CAB Abstracts and Sociological Abstracts. We also searched relevant websites such as Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR); the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); AgriProFocus; the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF); Donor Committee for Enterprise Development; the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO); the International Labour Organisation (ILO); the Netherlands Development Organisation; USAID; the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation; the International Food Policy Research Institute; World Agroforestry; the International Livestock Research Institute; the Foreign, Commonwealth &amp; Development Office; the British Library for Development Studies (BLDS); AGRIS; the IMMANA grant database; the 3ie impact evaluation database; Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA); The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL); the World Bank IEG evaluations; the USAID Development Data Library; Experience Clearinghouse; the proceedings of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Health Academy conference; the proceedings of the Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE) Conference; the proceedings of the North East Universities Development Consortium (NEUDC) Conference; and the World Bank Economic Review. The database search was conducted in March 2022, and the website search was completed in August 2022.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\n \n <p>The review includes value chain interventions evaluating the economic empowerment outcomes. The review includes effectiveness studies (experimental and non-experimental studies with a comparison group) and process evaluations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\n \n <p>Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, critically appraised the studies, and synthesised findings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We found that value chain interventions are successful in improving the economic conditions of their intended beneficiaries. The interventions were found to improve women's economic outcomes such as income, assets holdings, productivity, and savings, but these effects were small in size and limited by low confidence in methodological quality. The meta-analysis suggests that this occurs more via the acquisition of skills and improved inputs, rather than through improvement in access to profitable markets. The qualitative evidence on interventions points to the persistence of cultural barriers and other constraints. Those interventions implemented in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia are consistently more successful for all outcomes considered, although there are few studies conducted in other areas of the world.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The review concludes that value chain interventions empower women, but perhaps to a lesser extent than expected. Economic empowerment does not immediately translate into empowerment within families and communities. Interventions should either moderate their expectations of empowerment goals, or they should be implemented in a way that ensures higher rates of participation among women and the acquisition of greater decision-making power.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11317815/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1428","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Value chain interventions have become widespread throughout the international development sector over the last 20 years, and there is a need to evaluate their effectiveness in improving women's welfare across multiple dimensions. Agricultural value chains are influenced by socio-cultural norms and gender dynamics that have an impact on the distribution of resources, benefits, and access to opportunities. While women play a critical role in agriculture, they are generally confined to the least-valued parts of the value chain with the lowest economic returns, depending on the local, social and institutional contexts.

Objectives

The review assesses the effectiveness of approaches, strategies and interventions focused on women's engagement in agricultural value chains that lead to women's economic empowerment in low- and middle-income countries. It explores the contextual barriers and facilitators that determine women's participation in value chains and ultimately impact their effectiveness.

Search Methods

We searched completed and on-going studies from Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection (Social Sciences Citation Index [SSCI], Science Citation Index Expanded [SCI-EXPANDED], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Science [CPCI-S], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Social Science & Humanities [CPCI-SSH], and Emerging Sources Citation Index [ESCI]), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, EconLit, Business Source Premier, APA PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane, Database of Systematic Reviews, CAB Abstracts and Sociological Abstracts. We also searched relevant websites such as Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR); the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); AgriProFocus; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF); Donor Committee for Enterprise Development; the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO); the International Labour Organisation (ILO); the Netherlands Development Organisation; USAID; the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation; the International Food Policy Research Institute; World Agroforestry; the International Livestock Research Institute; the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office; the British Library for Development Studies (BLDS); AGRIS; the IMMANA grant database; the 3ie impact evaluation database; Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA); The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL); the World Bank IEG evaluations; the USAID Development Data Library; Experience Clearinghouse; the proceedings of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Health Academy conference; the proceedings of the Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE) Conference; the proceedings of the North East Universities Development Consortium (NEUDC) Conference; and the World Bank Economic Review. The database search was conducted in March 2022, and the website search was completed in August 2022.

Selection Criteria

The review includes value chain interventions evaluating the economic empowerment outcomes. The review includes effectiveness studies (experimental and non-experimental studies with a comparison group) and process evaluations.

Data Collection and Analysis

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, critically appraised the studies, and synthesised findings.

Results

We found that value chain interventions are successful in improving the economic conditions of their intended beneficiaries. The interventions were found to improve women's economic outcomes such as income, assets holdings, productivity, and savings, but these effects were small in size and limited by low confidence in methodological quality. The meta-analysis suggests that this occurs more via the acquisition of skills and improved inputs, rather than through improvement in access to profitable markets. The qualitative evidence on interventions points to the persistence of cultural barriers and other constraints. Those interventions implemented in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia are consistently more successful for all outcomes considered, although there are few studies conducted in other areas of the world.

Conclusions

The review concludes that value chain interventions empower women, but perhaps to a lesser extent than expected. Economic empowerment does not immediately translate into empowerment within families and communities. Interventions should either moderate their expectations of empowerment goals, or they should be implemented in a way that ensures higher rates of participation among women and the acquisition of greater decision-making power.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
提高妇女经济能力的价值链干预措施:混合方法的系统综述和荟萃分析:系统综述。
背景:在过去的 20 年中,价值链干预措施已在国际发展领域得到广泛应用,因此有必要评估这些措施在多方面改善妇女福利的有效性。农业价值链受到社会文化规范和性别动态的影响,对资源、利益和机会的分配产生了影响。虽然妇女在农业中发挥着关键作用,但根据当地、社会和制度环境的不同,她们通常被限制在价值链中价值最低、经济回报率最低的部分:本综述评估了以妇女参与农业价值链为重点的方法、战略和干预措施的有效性,这些方法、战略和干预措施可增强中低收入国家妇女的经济权能。它探讨了决定妇女参与价值链并最终影响其有效性的背景障碍和促进因素:我们检索了 Scopus、Web of Science Core Collection(社会科学引文索引[SSCI]、科学引文索引扩展版[SCI-EXPANDED]、会议录引文索引-科学[CPCI-S]、会议录引文索引-社会科学与人文科学[CPCI-SSH])中已完成和正在进行的研究、和新兴资源引文索引 [ESCI])、国际社会科学书目、EconLit、Business Source Premier、APA PsycInfo、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、Cochrane、Database of Systematic Reviews、CAB Abstracts 和 Sociological Abstracts。我们还搜索了相关网站,如国际农业研究中心联合会 (CGIAR)、国际农业发展基金 (IFAD)、AgriProFocus、比尔及梅林达-盖茨基金会 (BMGF)、企业发展捐助委员会、联合国粮食及农业组织 (FAO)、国际劳工组织 (ILO)、荷兰发展组织、美国国际开发署 (USAID)、瑞士发展与合作署、国际粮食政策研究所 (International Food Policy Research Institute)、世界农林业 (World Agroforestry)、国际家畜研究所 (International Livestock Research Institute)、外交、联邦与发展办公室 (Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office);英国发展研究图书馆 (BLDS);AGRIS;IMMANA 赠款数据库;3ie 影响评估数据库;创新扶贫行动 (IPA);阿卜杜勒-拉蒂夫-贾米尔扶贫行动实验室 (J-PAL);世界银行 IEG 评估;美国国际开发署发展数据图书馆;经验交流中心;农业、营养与健康学院会议记录;非洲经济研究中心 (CSAE) 会议记录;东北大学发展联盟 (NEUDC) 会议记录;以及世界银行经济评论。数据库搜索于 2022 年 3 月进行,网站搜索于 2022 年 8 月完成:审查包括评估经济赋权成果的价值链干预措施。数据收集与分析:两位综述作者独立评估研究的纳入情况、提取数据、严格评估研究并综合研究结果:我们发现,价值链干预措施成功地改善了预期受益者的经济状况。干预措施可改善妇女的经济成果,如收入、资产持有量、生产率和储蓄,但这些效果的规模较小,且受到方法质量可信度低的限制。荟萃分析表明,这更多地是通过获得技能和改进投入实现的,而不是通过改善进入有利可图市场的机会实现的。有关干预措施的定性证据表明,文化障碍和其他制约因素依然存在。在撒哈拉以南非洲和南亚实施的干预措施在所考虑的所有结果方面一直较为成功,但在世界其他地区开展的研究很少:审查得出的结论是,价值链干预措施增强了妇女的权能,但程度可能低于预期。经济赋权并不能立即转化为家庭和社区的赋权。干预措施要么应降低对赋权目标的预期,要么应以确保提高妇女参与率和获得更大决策权的方式实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
PROTOCOL: Effectiveness of social accountability interventions in low- and middle-income countries: An evidence and gap map PROTOCOL: Risk and protective factors for child sexual abuse and interventions against child sexual abuse: An umbrella review PROTOCOL: Is the CEO/employee pay ratio related to firm performance in publicly traded companies? New search guidance for Campbell systematic reviews PROTOCOL: The association between adverse childhood experiences and employment outcomes: Protocol for a systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1