63. The organiser of this session was Mr. B. Davis, Economist, FAO Agriculture and Economic Development Analysis Division and the discussant was Mr. F. Vogel, Deputy Administrator, National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA.64.

 

64. Three papers were presented:

(i)“Visibility of the Role of Rural Women through an Analysis of Gender-disaggregated Census Data” (M. Randriamamonjiy);

(ii)“Rural Women and Western Development” (Lin Zhibin);

(iii)“Rural Women and Agricultural Development in China” (Zhang Shiping).

 

65. The first two papers used Chinese Census data to comment on the role of women in rural China. One paper utilized complementary outside information to focus on regional differences. The third paper provided evidence on the substantial participation of rural women in both agricultural and non-agricultural activities.

 

66. The following conclusions were made in the presentation of the first two papers. Both authors found significant differences between men and women in terms of education levels and labour activities. First, a large education gap existed between men and women. A much higher share of women, compared to men, were illiterate or with a primary level of education, while a greater share of men had higher levels of education. Second, a much larger share of men were involved in non-agricultural activities. These conclusions led to the characterization of the “feminization” of agriculture- women are increasingly responsible for agricultural activities, a trend likely to be further accentuated with the continued growth of non-agricultural activities in rural areas, which are dominated by men. The importance of additional study of this phenomenon was stressed, focusing on additional gender variables that could be collected either as part of a census or through alternative survey instruments.

 

67. During the discussion, a number of somewhat disparate comments were made, not all directly related to the census data. The importance of considering gender issues in the collection of census data was stressed. It was noted, for example, that the recent Agricultural Census in the US ignored gender, partly due to its use of agricultural enterprises as the unit of collection, and therefore PRC should be congratulated for including some basic questions on gender and socio-economic factors. It was pointed out that the inclusion of gender issues in a census was not correlated with societal views on gender roles, but rather a choice made in the design of the instruments, suggesting that unless gender is written in specifically to a project, it just gets left as a general principle. The importance of including gender issues early on in the design process, as well as taking stock of existing data to provide more accurate gender disaggregated analysis for policy making and planning purposes, were stressed. It was also pointed out that there is a need to identify the major gender-related indicators that should be addressed by countries in conducting censuses of agriculture.