Theorizing the Implications of Gender Order for Sustainable Forest Management

dc.contributor.authorVarghese, J.
dc.contributor.authorReed, M.G.
dc.titleTheorizing the Implications of Gender Order for Sustainable Forest Managementen
dcterms.accessRightsOpen access
dcterms.typeJournal Article
is.availability.fullTextFull text available
is.coverage.regionNorth America
is.evaluation.notesMeta-analysis of mainly Canadian empirical research related to gender issues in SFM. Theoretical but with some tangible suggestions for a more (gender) inclusive SFM. No specific reference to certification nor to FSC.
is.evaluation.quotes"In this conceptual article, we identify three models of engagementin SFM—expert-based, stakeholder-based, andcivic engagement—and consider the ways in which eachmodel includes issues and concerns of one social group historicallyexcluded from forestry management—women. Thisfocus does not presuppose that women are the only or mostimportant consideration for sustainable forest management.Nor does it suggest that all forestry issues are segregatedby gender. Nevertheless, empirical research conducted inCanada, India, Sweden, Kenya, Nepal, and Thailand hassuggested that the interests of women andmen in forestry are2 International Journal of Forestry Researchsignificantly different and that these differences are typicallynot reflected in forest policy, see [2]. We suggest that thegap between interests and outcomes may arise because theforestry sector is subject to a “gender order” that privilegesmen's contributions to forestry, constrains women's participationin forestry management, and ultimately reduces thecapacity of the forestry sector to achieve inclusive forestrymanagement as a key component of social sustainability."
is.evaluation.quotes"Despite the fact that most Canadian women do not useforest resources for subsistence purposes, they still holdinterests and perspectives in forest management that aredistinctive from men's and hence, their active involvementin giving advice about how forests should be managedcould influence decisions about sustainability. Furthermore,forestry communities are experiencing rapid economic,social, and ecological changes that affect both women andmen. At the community level, for example, climate changemay have significant effects including reduced health status of residents during extreme events, altered paid and unpaidwork patterns within communities, changes in livelihoodand household relations, and long term health concerns forindigenous residents who have traditionally relied on countryfoods of the boreal forest. Because there remain markeddifferences in the roles, activities and expectations of menand women living in forestry-based communities, womenand men will have different capacities to adapt to changingconditions."
is.evaluation.quotes"Thus, while there is ample reason to believe that womenbring different values, perspectives, expectations, and concernsto forestry issues, women have yet to advance theseconcerns directly. We suggest that this discrepancy can beexplained by understanding how a particular gender ordershapes ideas about what interests become represented inforest management forums."
is.evaluation.quotes"That forestry work is highly gendered has long been documented.“Canadian forestry continues to be dominated by amasculine gender order that separates men and women andfavours male workers in general. . . [whereby] potential contributionswomen might make to management and planning forthe sustainability of forestry and forestry communities are overlooked(page 78 [29])”."
is.evaluation.quotes"Simple practical strategies to address social constraintsto SFM recognize the competing time interests of women.For example, providing an honorarium, childcare/eldercare(or costs), considering the timing of meetings recognizestime constraints. In addition, ensuring a “criticalmass,” providing gender sensitivity training may address some ofthe constraints women face in actively engaging in theseprocesses. Capturing gender differences in statistics providesessential information to acknowledge and address possiblegender issues. But we recognize that these solutions focus onsimplistic ideas about representation and inclusiveness. Consequently,we also advocate for more difficult changes, suchas raising the profile of social sustainability alongside ecologicaland economic sustainability; addressing how systemicbiases within forestry communities and the forest industryconsider production, consumption, and appreciation offorest resources as gender-neutral; giving greater attentionto how power relations affect the definition and use of localcommunity knowledge, with particular attention to how thatknowledge is produced and how participation is constrained;greater attention to strategies for incorporating the resultingdiversity into SFM (e.g., gender differences across differentmodels, such as consensus, conflict resolution, and majoritywins)."
is.focus.systemElementMandE outcomes and impacts
is.focus.systemElementMandE performance monitoring
is.item.reviewStatusPeer reviewed
is.journalNameInternational Journal of Forestry Research