Gender Roles in the Jute Value Chain in Bangladesh: a Case Study on the Bangladesh Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) Project

Gender Roles in the Jute Value Chain in Bangladesh: A Case Study on the Bangladesh Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) project

Deborah Rubin,1 Emily Myers2, Salma Akhter3, Berber Kramer2, Alan de Brauw2, and Mike Murphy2

November 26th, 2018 (Revised)

1 Cultural Practice, LLC 2 International Food Policy Research Institute 3 University of Dhaka

Contents Acknowledgements 4 Acronyms 5 Executive Summary 6 Background 7 Methodology 8 Context: Gender, Agriculture, Jute, and the Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) Project 10 Gender Relations in Bangladesh 10 Gender Relations in Agriculture 11 The Jute Value Chain in Bangladesh 12 The Bangladesh Agricultural Value Chain (AVC) Project 14 Findings: Activities at each nodes of the Jute Value Chain 16 Input Suppliers 16 Producers 17 Cultivation 17 Fertilizers 19 Post-Harvest and Homestead Processing 20 Jute Traders and Transporters 21 Trader Profile 25 Trader Profile 25 Manufacture of Jute Products 25 Findings: Participant Engagement with the Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) Project 26 Agricultural Training 26 Observations and Recommendations from Agriculture Officers 27 Findings: Empowerment and Respect 28 Empowerment and the pro-WEAI 28 Women’s Views on Respectable Women 28 Women’s Views on Respectable Men 29 Men’s View on Respectable Women 29 Men’s View on Respectable Men 30 Findings: Empowerment and Decision-making 30 Men’s Views on Empowered Women 30 Women’s Views on Empowered Women 32

Men’s Views on Empowered Men 32 Women’s Views on Empowered Men 33 Areas of Men’s and Women’s Decision-Making 33 Findings: Group Membership 34 Findings: Mobility 35 Findings: Education 36 Implication of Findings for USAID and the AVC project 36 Integrating women into a market systems approach 36 Supporting Group Membership. 38 Empowering Gender Transformation 38 Benefits of participation in the jute value chain 40 Benefits of technology 40 Benefits of mixed-methods approaches 40 Appendix 1: NGOs/Organizations working in the interview locations 42 Appendix 2: Focus Group Discussion Guide: Men or Women 43 Appendix 3: Key Informant Interview Guide: Men and Women (individually) 46 Appendix 4: Key Informant Interview Guide: Supplier 51 Appendix 5: Key Informant Interview Guide: Traders 53 Appendix 6: References 55

Acknowledgements This work was undertaken as part of the Gender, Agriculture and Assets Project Phase 2 (GAAP2) led by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and funded by CGIAR Fund donors. Funding support for this study was provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The authors are grateful for the contributions of the researchers at the University of Dhaka, IFPRI Dhaka office, the USAID Agricultural Value Chains project, Cultural Practice, USAID, the farmers and agricultural extension officers who participated in this study, and the field team. Thanks to the Pro-WEAI principal Investigators Agnes Quisumbing, Ruth Meinzen-Dick, and Hazel Malapit for their support in implementing this study. The opinions expressed here belong to the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of GAAP2, IFPRI, CGIAR, or USAID. Acronyms A4NH Agriculture for Nutrition and Health

AVC Agricultural Value Chains {the project]

BADC Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation

BJRI Bangladesh Jute Research Institute

BMGF Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

DAI Development Alternatives Incorporated

DJP Diversified Jute Products

FGD Focus Group Discussion

FTF Feed the Future

GAAP Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project

IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute

KII Key Informant Interview

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

OPHI Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative pro-WEAI Project level Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index

USAID United States Agency for International Development

WEAI Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index

Executive Summary This report presents the results of a qualitative research study conducted in conjunction with the International Food Policy Research Institute’s (IFPRI) impact evaluation of the Bangladesh Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) project implemented by DAI.4 This report presents background information about the study, the qualitative methodology used, study findings, and implications for the both the AVC intervention and for the use and interpretation of project-level Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (pro-WEAI) findings.

The study describes gendered participation in the jute value chain in four districts across Bangladesh. To gather data, the study team used focus group discussions (FGDs) and in-depth key informant interviews (KIIs). These tools enabled researchers to elicit local understandings of empowerment, uncover the perceptions and experiences of women’s empowerment within the context of agricultural intervention projects, and provide context useful for understanding the operation of value chains.

In total, 16 FGDs – 8 with men only and 8 with women only – and 55 KIIs were conducted. Overall, the sample includes men and women with different empowerment statuses (based on baseline empowerment scores calculated by the quantitative survey) who participated in jute production, processing, and/or trading, or worked as an input supplier. The sample also includes spouses of individuals working in jute, jute suppliers, and jute traders. The results presented include local (emic) perspectives of empowerment, gendered patterns of work, decision-making, mobility, and education, and a discussion of how this influence barriers to and opportunities for men’s and women’s participation in the jute value chain.

The results discuss several components of women’s empowerment, including mobility, education, decision-making, group membership, and the importance of respect as a social value. Women and men who are respected are those who are well mannered, educated, and religious. However, perceptions of respect for men emphasize their financial status, while characterizations of respected women emphasize their roles as caretakers. The study finds that social norms restrict women’s mobility. Education is perceived as equal between boys and girls, though poorer households may support jute cultivation even if it causes children to miss school. Several community-based organizations exist in the study area, and some women in acknowledged the transformative power of group membership.

Empowerment was defined in the study as being able to make important decisions and to act on them. Local perceptions of empowerment, especially women’s empowerment were mixed. Women’s independent decision-making was not well regarded, especially by men. It was accepted when seen as part of a woman’s role as a caretaker, for example, if her husband was absent, disabled, or deceased. Both men and women expressed a more positive view of women who make decisions and act on them, seeing them through a lens of serving others. For example, a man from Narail said that women who make decisions and act on them are “good. They are contributing to society.”

Results indicate that women’s participation in the jute value chain is primarily limited to specific post- harvesting tasks, for the most part. Many of the tasks related to growing jute away from household plots and marketing jute are dominated by men. Even processing employment in Bangladesh appears to be

4 Originally named Development Alternatives, Inc. abbreviated with the acronym DAI, the company has been renamed as DAI Global, LLC.

5 dominated by men, even though women work in jute processing plants in relatively large numbers in both India and Nepal.

Considering the USAID AVC program, participants interviewed are quite receptive to agricultural trainings, but the trainings that occurred in the AVC before the change to a market systems orientation were not very gender sensitive. The market systems approach to provide, through the private sector, promotional discounts and information on high-quality fertilizers, addressed key constraints around fertilizer adoption (price sensitivity and information barriers) but were not gender sensitive either. Therefore, some thought is required about how to make the market systems approach, as it relates to training farmers in the use of inputs or on selling output, more gender sensitive.

Second, a major challenge in attempting to improve empowerment relates to what appear to be entrenched attitudes about empowerment, as well as barriers to movement among women. Women’s movements on their own is often restricted in rural areas, which makes it difficult to perform agricultural tasks if not accompanied, or to market or sell jute fibers. It is fairly clear that group membership is a way to overcome this barrier, as women are empowered in numbers. Further, the findings make clear that a way to improve women’s empowerment in general might be to ensure that they have additional control over income. So finding ways to work with women’s groups in a market systems orientation would appear to be a potential method of making the market systems approach more gender inclusive.

A third major result of the research relates to the concept of women’s empowerment. It became clear from interviews that the concept of women’s empowerment embodied in the WEAI quantitative questionnaires is not necessarily the same as the concepts as understood by the population studied here. Therefore, the WEAI results, no matter which version of the WEAI is used in measurement, may mis- measure the local concept of women’s empowerment. It is worth considering further research into ways to both keep the questionnaires general but finding ways of incorporating more local concepts of empowerment as well.

Background The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), a CGIAR5 research center, has received a second round of support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) to adapt and validate a measure of women’s empowerment that agricultural development projects can use to diagnose key areas of women’s (and men’s) disempowerment, design appropriate strategies to address deficiencies, and monitor project outcomes related to women’s empowerment. This empowerment measure will be based on the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI) developed by IFPRI, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI), but will be adapted for project use. The second project, called the Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project (GAAP2 (2015-2020)), will build on the experience of GAAP1 (2010-2014), which worked with a set of agricultural development projects to incorporate gender into their monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks to evaluate their impacts on women’s use of, control over, and ownership of productive assets. This work is undertaken as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH), which is led by IFPRI, and will be complementary to ongoing efforts to use and adapt the WEAI, supported by USAID.

Funded under the Feed the Future (FTF) Initiative, the Bangladesh Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) project is working to improve food and nutrition security through strengthened agricultural value chains in six classes of food crops (pulses, tomato, mango, ground nuts, potatoes, and a summer vegetable basket) and two classes of non-food crops (natural jute fibers and floriculture). The total project budget is about $34.2 million for all AVC interventions, focused in 20 southern districts in Barisal, Dhaka, and Khulna Divisions.

The impact evaluation associated with the AVC focuses on one food and one non-food value chain with comparable attributes and growing patterns: mung beans and jute. The quantitative component of the impact evaluation analyzed the effects of NGO-delivered trainings on cultivation and post-harvest processing versus private sector promotions of agricultural inputs on farmer knowledge, input adoption and production outcomes through a cluster randomized controlled trial. These interventions largely took place in March-April, 2016, just after baseline quantitative data collection took place. The qualitative study complements the impact evaluation and explores men’s and women’s participation at different nodes of the jute value chain. It further seeks to provide recommendations regarding ways AVC or future USAID market systems interventions could improve their program implementation, by uncovering gendered differences in how men and women may differently participate in or benefit from engagement with the jute value chain. The qualitative data presented here may help explain patterns evident in the quantitative data collected by the pro-WEAI survey. It may also be used to contrast how study participants (and therefore program beneficiaries) think about empowerment with definitions of empowerment and agency used to inform pro-WEAI survey development. Methodology Four research assistants with experience in qualitative interview methods were trained on the qualitative research protocol between November 2 and 12, 2017, including piloting the interview questions in Manikgonj, a district in the Dhaka division. Manikgonj was selected for piloting because of it

5 CGIAR was formerly known as the Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research.

7 is a jute producing district and it was close to the training venue. Qualitative research was then conducted in January and February, 2018 with community members in the four districts that AVC had selected for the impact evaluation of the jute value chain activities: Faridpur, Madaripur, Jhenaidah, and Narail. Table 1 shows the geographic information specific to each village where data collection occurred.

Table 1: Study sites No. Division District Upzilla Union Village

1 Faridpur Faridpur FaridpurSadar Majchar Bakchar 2 Faridpur Faridpur Nagarkanda Talma Kathiya 3 Faridpur Madaripur Rajoir Khalia MacharanjRong 4 Faridpur Madaripur Sibhivchar Sheroil Sadeka Bad 5 Khulna Jhenaidah Horinakundou Kapashatia Kesmot 6 Khulna Jhenaidah Shoilokupaailakupa Monohorpur Mohishadangga 7 Khulna Narail NarailSadar Mulia Echorbaha 8 Khulna Narail NarailSadar Mulia Shaliarvita

Quantitative data from the impact evaluation’s baseline survey were used to identify potential participants, and to understand which of them had been initially classified as empowered or disempowered, to ensure diversity of the informant pool.6 Study participants include those who have been involved in the NGO-delivered training programs versus the private sector promotions (both facilitated through the AVC project), their spouses, and additional community members or government officials in the project areas. Jute producers were defined as individuals who cultivated jute in the previous producing season or intended to cultivate jute in the coming season. All participants were smallholder farmers with fewer than 5 acres of land.7 Jute input suppliers included in the study must have sold inputs for jute production in the past year, and jute traders must have traded jute in the last producing season. All inclusion criteria were self-reported by participants.

Five semi-structured interview guides were used for data collection:

● Focus group guide: To elicit local understanding of empowerment and experience of labor scarcity or sufficiency. ● Key informant guide: To understand perceptions and experiences of empowerment in the community, particularly linked to agricultural labor in the family and for wages, using in-depth interviews to address key themes. ● Input dealer (supplier) interview guide: To provide context related to value chain operations from the perspective of those supplying agricultural inputs. ● Trader interview guide: To provide context related to value chain operations from the perspective of those purchasing and selling post-harvest products.

6 These classifications were not shared with participants. Identifiable information was not shared beyond the core research team to protect participants’ anonymity. 7 This maximum corresponds directly to the maximum landholdings used for the baseline AVC quantitative sample (5 acres = 500 decimals), though the median landholding is considerably smaller (0.67 acres = 67 decimals).

● Agricultural officer guide: To obtain information about the development projects and the communities in which interventions take place and gain expert insights about the factors affecting the way the project does (or does not) have impact on women’s empowerment.

The GAAP2 protocol was adapted for the AVC study, though revisions were minor. The original protocol also included the following activities: review of project documents, a community profile, a seasonality calendar, and KIIs with project staff. AVC project documents are available elsewhere, and while the information included in this report draws on such documents, this report does not synthesize all project documents. The experiences of a wide number of agricultural value chain projects in Bangladesh are well established in the literature, insomuch that information gained through a community profile and/or seasonality calendar would be duplicative. The study presented in this report chose to interview more suppliers and traders over project staff to gain greater nuance about the jute value chain.

In total, 16 focus groups were conducted, 8 of which were with women and 8 with men. The women’s focus groups covered a total of 59 women across the 8 groups, while the men’s groups covered a total of 58 men. A total of 55 additional individual interviews were conducted: 32 KIIs (16 men and 16 women), 12 supplier interviews (all of whom were men), and 10 trader interviews (9 men and 1 woman). In addition, interviews were conducted with several agricultural officers.

Table 2 shows the distribution of men and women across each type of interview by district. Data were collected as planned, with a few exceptions. Although it was anticipated that interviews would be conducted with 3 traders or suppliers total in each union, that number of informants in those categories were not available when the data collection team was in the field, either because they were away from the village or otherwise occupied. As a result, in Faridpur District, only 2 suppliers/traders were interviewed in Nagarkanda Upazilla, Tamal Union. In Narail District, only 2 were interviewed in the unions of Sibchar and Rajoir. No traders or suppliers were interviewed in Shaliarvita Union in Jhenaidah District. Interviews with one agriculture/jute officer in each district were also planned. In data collection, 3 officers were interviewed in Faridpur District and 2 in Jhenaidah District. None were interviewed in Madaripur or Narail Districts. In one case, the officer was traveling for business; in another case the previous agricultural officer had been transferred and the new agriculture officer was not yet familiar with his post or the project, so he was not interviewed.

Table 2: Data Planned vs. Collected

Note: Blue rows indicate planned interviews. Any changes in the final sample are indicated by the numbers and locations presented in the white rows. Faridpur Division Khulna Division

Faridpur District Madaripur District Narail District Jhenaidah District

Interview Union 1 Union 2 Union 1 Union 2 Union 1 Union 2 Union 1 Union 2 type Sadar Nagarkanda Horinakundo Shoilokupa Sibchar Rajoir Echorbaha Shaliarvita

FGDs 1 Men 1 Men 1 Men 1 Men 1 Men 1 Men 1 Men 1 Men 1 Women 1 Women 1 Women 1 Women 1 Women 1 Women 1 Women 1 Women KIIs 2 Men 2 Men 2 Men 2 Men 2 Men 2 Men 2 Men 2 Men (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) 2 Women 2 Women 2 Women 2 Women 2 Women 2 Women 2 Women 2 Women (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) (Emp/Dis) KII Traders 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 3 1 1 1 0 1 3 0 KII 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 1 or 2 Suppliers 1 1 2 2 2 1 3 0 KII Agr 1 1 1 1 official 3 0 0 2

Context: Gender, Agriculture, Jute, and the Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) Project Together, the following subsections offer a broad understanding of the intersections between gender, agriculture, jute, and the AVC project. Gender Relations in Bangladesh Bangladesh has not achieved gender parity in the workforce. As of 2013, 57.4% of women participate in the workforce, while 84.1% of men report doing so. Such statistics indicate that, in practice, Bangladeshi women are not participating equally in society relative to men. Further, as of 2014 Bangladesh does not yet have laws preventing gender discrimination in hiring practices, which may help explain why fewer women report participating in the work force (UN Women 2015).

Social norms also reinforce gender inequality. Though Bangladesh ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1984, Bangladesh still maintains marriage laws that grant men authority over women – in alignment with conservative interpretations of Islamic law (UN Treaty Collection 2018; UN Women 2015). One study in Bangladesh found that, of their total sample, 32.2% of women were married before the age of 14, another 30.6% of women were married between 14 and 16 years of age, and 19.2% of women between 16 and 18 years of age (Kamal 2012). In other words, 82% of women were minors when they married. Child marriage correlates with many adverse outcomes, including heightened maternal morbidity, less education, and increased intimate partner violence (ICRW 2007). Because women and girls experience child marriage at a higher rate than men and boys, they bear the brunt of such adverse outcomes (UNICEF 2014). Purdah, or the social practice of dividing men and women, also restricts women’s mobility – and thereby their ability to

10 attend school, work, and engage with their communities (Salway, Jesmin, and Rahman 2005). Such practices constrain women’s and girls’ ability to educate themselves, provide for themselves and their families, and strengthen social networks apart from their and their husband’s family.

Bangladesh, has, however, over the past few decades, made strides toward gender equality. Family planning policies implemented in the 1970s, like increasing access to contraception via door-to-door delivery, cut the average fertility rate from 6 children in 1971 to 2.3 children by 2013 (Kabeer et al. 2013). Women’s control over their bodies, including birth spacing, is widely recognized as a component of women’s empowerment. Additionally, the Female Secondary School Stipend Programme, a cash transfer program that grants money to school-aged girls to defray the cost of attendance, has increased girls’ enrollment and graduation rates (Bhatnagar et al. 2003). Evidence suggests that women working in formal employment, particularly in the garment industry, have higher education levels relative to women without formal work, suggesting education enhances girls’ work opportunities later in life (Kabeer et al. 2013; Heath and Mobarak 2015). Further evidence from Bangladesh suggests formal employment positively correlates with women’s empowerment indicators (Kabeer et al. 2013). Investments in girls’ education thereby may have an indirect impact on women’s empowerment. Gender Relations in Agriculture Agriculture remains an important source of employment for men and women in Bangladesh. However, a common perception of women’s work in agriculture is that they are limited to agricultural activities occurring within their homestead boundaries, because of cultural restrictions on women’s mobility (Rahman 2000). Although their contribution is yet to be adequately recognized, statistics reveal that women do play an important role in many dimensions of agricultural work. Women’s participation in agriculture increased from 28% to 65% between the mid-1990s to 2010, while men’s participation fell from 50% to 40% (Kabeer et al. 2013). Among women who work in agriculture, a higher proportion are from poorer households, including households headed by women, likely because they face higher food insecurity (Quisumbing et al. 2013).

Women’s land access is low, largely due to religious law, which limits their ability to independently generate income (Parveen 2008; Quisumbing et al. 2013). Since many rural development projects are land-dependent, some criticize agricultural development projects for failing to more comprehensively reach women. Qualitative research indicates women do not feel confident in managing land tenants, selling land, or traveling long distances to agricultural fields. If women use land for agricultural production, they most commonly cultivate vegetables on household garden plots (Parveen 2008), often with the help of their children and for household consumption (Ali 2005).

However, women may raise poultry and goats to generate cash for their households (Quisumbing et al. 2013). Women’s poultry production may immediately improve household welfare because it provides additional cash flow, which may enhance women’s social status within their homes (Ali 2005).

Cultural norms restrict women’s access to agricultural markets. Because private and public life is segmented in Bangladeshi society, women are often excluded from participating in market transactions (Mair and Marti 2007). For example, a 2008 mixed-methods study found that 97% of women in their sample reported having access to livestock rearing activities. These women explained that though their livestock rearing activities enhanced the nutritional and economic status of their households, they did not have direct access to markets to sell their livestock products themselves (Parveen 2008).

The Government of Bangladesh has taken several steps to eliminate gender disparities in agriculture. For example, the 1999 National Agriculture Policy of Bangladesh committed to provide women with trainings related to a variety of agricultural products, create extension schemes specifically for women, and conduct research to understand women’s constraints to agricultural participation (Ministry of Agriculture 1999). More recently, the 2009 Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan recognizes poor women and their households as a priority for monitoring and programming (Asian Development Bank 2010). The 2007 National Livestock Development Policy emphasizes the importance of enhancing women’s access to micro-credit and other l financing schemes to market their animal products (Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock 2007). The integration of gender-sensitive policies across sectors demonstrates Bangladesh’s longstanding commitment to achieve gender parity in agriculture. The Jute Value Chain in Bangladesh Jute remains a significant crop for Bangladesh, providing a means of generating cash income for farmers. It is a multi-functional crop. Although perhaps best known for the fiber extracted from its stalk, dried and made into a wide range of products such as rope, mats, baskets, and handicrafts, the leaves can also be eaten as a fresh or cooked vegetable, crushed into juice, or cooked into soups. The leaves also have medicinal value as they contain many micronutrients (Islam 2013).

For many years, jute was the nation’s top export and foreign exchange earner. However, a growing demand for polyester fibers and plastic bags, available at lower costs than jute, has caused jute markets to shrink. Producers and manufacturers are nonetheless optimistic that the new interest in natural fibers and support of diversified jute products (JDP) will reenergize jute sales. Production levels are rising even though the farmgate price of jute has fluctuated over the past ten years (Islam and Ali 2017; Ali et al. 2015). Since 2016, the Government of Bangladesh has been promoting jute cultivation and has made the use of jute fiber bags mandatory in the packaging of many agricultural products.8

There are two main types of jute grown in Bangladesh produced and processed for fiber, known as white (Corchorus capsularis) and tossa (Corchous olitorius). White jute produces better quality fibers when prepared properly. Other factors that influence fiber quality include the seed, the soil, and the quality of the water and length of time of the retting (soaking) process that occurs prior to the jute fiber extraction.

Key actors in the jute value chain are input suppliers, growers, household processors, traders, jute mill operators, manufacturers of diversified products, and ultimately consumers (Figure 1). Although not directly part of the chain, several NGOs and donor-funded projects contribute to the operation of the chain by building farmers’ and marketing associations, supplying inputs, and providing trainings and other platforms for building capacity of the various value chain actors. They are indicated in the figure below by the elongated yellow diamond shape.

Jute is grown from seed; most farmers grow certified seed varieties purchased from input suppliers. Approximately 80% of the certified seed is Indian. Some farmers have access to improved seed through their participation in donor-funded projects including the AVC project, and another project, Switch Asia, led by CARE Bangladesh. The Switch Asia project has formed farmer groups, provides training in improved cultivation practices, and builds linkages to input suppliers (including fertilizer), credit

8 https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/bangladesh-makes-jute-bags-mandatory-for-packaging- 11-more-commodities-117012400910_1.html

12 providers, and millers. Farmers in these groups are given free access to breeder seeds of high yielding varieties developed by the Bangladesh Jute Research Institute. Other farmers and input suppliers access seeds from the BADC, the agency conducting field trials and seed multiplication, and local seed companies (Bhuyian 2016).9

The largest proportion of jute is cultivated by smallholder farmers, and there are clear differences in men’s and women’s activities along the jute supply chain. While there are individual cases of men and women performing any given jute cultivation and processing task, as described by project participants below, during the growing season, men dominate land preparation, cultivation and harvesting, while women play a central role in the jute fiber production process, especially during post-harvesting.

Producers carry out tasks of land preparation, planting, weeding, and harvesting with the assistance of family and/or hired labor. This work is primarily done by men, though women play an important role in some production stages. In the AVC midline quantitative survey, less than 10 percent of respondents reported any female household labor use during most production stages, but much higher rates for post-harvest activities such as drying (67%), stripping and washing (49%), bailing (29%), and sorting and grading jute (20%). Hired labor may be local, from a farmer’s own community, or from areas farther away with labor surpluses.

Once harvested, the jute stalks are soaked to allow for fiber removal. Men prepare the stalks for retting (soaking). This process is ideally done in fields, rivers, or ponds with slow-moving but clear waters. Retting can take weeks to permit the water to soften, dissolve, and wash away the sticky material holding fibers together within the stalk. Once the retting is complete, the fibers are removed and dried in the sun, sorted, graded, and baled, prior to shipping to jute mills or other manufacturers.

Both men and women extract jute fibers. Men extract the fibers while standing in the water where stalks have been soaking. Women work on stalks that have been carried to their compounds, or along the banks of the water bodies. Women are rarely involved in directly marketing either the jute fibers or products made from fibers.

At the mills, jute fibers are processed into a yarn, for further processing into JDP including not only the well-known rope and twine, bags, mats, baskets, and handicrafts but also materials such as fabric for curtains, upholstery, and carpets, and geo-textiles to control soil erosion. Research is also underway to study the possibility of creating biochar for fuel from jute sticks.

9 http://www.switch-asia.eu/news/bringing-high-quality-jute-seeds-to-bangladeshi-farmers/

Figure 1: The Jute Value Chain

The Bangladesh Agricultural Value Chain (AVC) Project The Bangladesh USAID Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) project, implemented by DAI, is working to improve food security and nutrition by strengthening productivity and sales in nine agricultural value chains (six food and three non-food) in the southern districts in USAID’s Zone of Influence. The project first aimed to work with NGO subcontractors to create farmer groups in target areas and deliver, through these groups, agricultural training and linkage activities, connecting groups with other actors in the jute value chain.

Since 2016, the AVC project has followed a market systems approach, working with private sector firms to co-develop commercial strategies to more effectively engage and incentivize value chain actors, including smallholder farmers, input suppliers, output buyers, and service providers. A market systems approach to developing agricultural value chains seeks to improve relationships between actors throughout the value chain so that the end consumers of inputs are better understood by input manufacturers, and so that traders and output aggregators both know their producers and how to market their output. From the perspective of input markets, AVC used several types of promotional tools in attempting to upgrade input supply networks. To build relationships between specific input manufacturers and end users, the project has used several strategies, such as mass marketing techniques, improved branding, and promotional discounts. The theory behind the market systems approach suggests that by working with a lead firm, then other firms in the same sector will follow with improved practices (Osorio-Cortes and Lundy 2018).

As part of AVC’s cross-cutting objectives, gender integration is or was primarily reflected as a component of farmer trainings initially provided through subcontractors across all its value chains.10 As AVC shifted to a market systems approach, the role of gender had to be considered within the context of the market systems approach. Unfortunately, the literature on the nascent market systems approach to developing input markets is notably weak on gender; the comprehensive review by Osorio-Cortes and Lundy (2018) only uses the word “gender” 5 times, and only mentions women in the context of crops largely grown by women.

Perhaps not surprisingly given this context, the relaunch of the AVC’s gender strategy in value chains with crops grown primarily by male farmers took some time after the market systems approach was adopted. It largely has two pillars, which were in place when the qualitative work occurred. The first pillar involves working with stakeholders in five of the ten value chains (including jute) to understand better how to integrate gender into future interventions. The resulting strategy emphasized working with women and enhancing roles that they already held; the problem with this approach is that it does not help expand women’s empowerment within a value chain. The second pillar was to engage in supporting women-owned businesses to help reduce gender-based constraints and encourage them to submit concept notes for support through grant-making processes. As will be observed, many nodes of the jute value chain are heavily dominated by men; almost all input dealers identified in the target districts were men. The qualitative work therefore sought to understand the opportunities and constraints presented by labor force participation and access to labor for women and men. In the jute value chain context—common to the market systems approach—gender issues were largely ignored.

Other literature, however, provides concepts and methods for analyzing men’s and women’s engagement along the value chain and the identification of gender-based constraints that can limit women’s participation, performance, and benefits from An inclusive market system engages participation. It seeks solutions for a more inclusive and benefits groups that are often approach to market systems by finding new ways to engage excluded from, or even exploited by, both men and women in value chain nodes where they have traditional market systems. been underrepresented (e.g., Rubin, Manfre, and Nichols Source: Markel, Hesss, and Loftin Barrett 2009; KIT, Agri-ProFocus and IIRR 2012; Markel and 2015: 3. Jones 2015: Markel, Hesss, and Loftin 2015). Suggestions for integrating gender into a market systems approach include:

● Identifying partners with potential to create systemic change; ● Exploring partnerships beyond the usual suspects; ● Choosing partners that are sensitive to slow adopters; ● Finding businesses with knowledge of cultural norms and a willingness to address social barriers Markel, Hesss, and Loftin 2015:6).

Much of this report will focus on the two randomized interventions evaluated in the quantitative impact study: private sector promotions of high-quality inputs, including promotional discounts to increase

10 The gender content of the training was quite basic. The training manual used by the AVC project contained two pages of materials on gender integration for the course, similar to other topics covered. However, it incorrectly conveyed the meaning of gender, confusing it with sex, and generally offered little analysis or practical recommendations for addressing sex-segregation in the operation of the jute value chain.

15 market share, and the farmer level trainings occurring in the previous iteration of the AVC, which continued long enough to be used in the impact evaluation. The trainings aimed to build farmers’ (who are mostly men) capacity on the use of improved seed varieties and cultivation practices, as well as provide basic training on gender and nutrition issues. The private sector promotions focused on knowledge and awareness raising around best practices in fertilizer application, targeting a specific fertilizer with significant potential to improve jute yields. In general, engaging women directly in AVC’s interventions has been challenging in Bangladesh because of women’s limited field role in agriculture, mobility constraints, and perceived excessive time burden. Instead, the expected impact of both training and private sector promotions accrues indirectly to women in the producer households.11 The trained farmers are expected to adopt the improved technologies and fertilizers, which result in increased agricultural output and income. They are also expected to use their improved nutrition knowledge and gender awareness from the NGO-delivered trainings to make better food choices and support their wives in household decision making. Although this was not an objective of the private sector promotional activities implemented in the context of the AVC impact evaluation, insights on women’s empowerment in the context of NGO trainings could be applicable to outreach activities conducted by the private sector, particularly to trainings around their products.

Findings: Activities at each nodes of the Jute Value Chain12 This section includes an overview of the input sector, cultivation, processing, and marketing, and describes the gendered labor patterns across these segments of the jute value chain as well as participants perceptions of these activities. Table 3, at the end of this section, summarizes the gendered divisions of labor, including the percent of labor by gender noted in the midline data where available.13 Input Suppliers Inputs are supplied to farmers in different ways. Input retailers (suppliers) buy fertilizer from the government and from private input companies, pesticides from several companies, and seeds from wholesalers or dealers, and sell these inputs to farmers. Suppliers may sell on credit, though only after considering the customer’s credit history. In the midline quantitative sample, 36% of farmers report having used a loan or other form of credit to purchase inputs in the past year, most often to purchase fertilizer or irrigation equipment and services.

Most suppliers and customers (farmers) are men. Also, suppliers prefer to hire men as employees. As one supplier remarked, “I only hire men for my business because women are not eligible to pull the heavy bags and our tasks are masculine." A group of input suppliers in Jhenaidah also reported hiring only men because almost all their customers were men. Only one supplier said he sometimes has a few female customers, and they are those who have no men to shop on their behalf. He added, “Women are feeling shy if in my shop [there are] any men customers. When that happens, they are stand beside the shop. When men have left the shop, then they start their shopping.”

11 However, it is not as indirectly as providing training to input retailers, who then would have to effectively “pass on” that training to the men who purchase inputs, who then would use those lessons for benefits to accrue indirectly to women as above. 12 Words that are in brackets […] reflect editing to make the quotes read more easily in English. 13 The qualitative work broke up tasks in more detail than the quantitative data.

Another supplier from Narail offered a similar explanation for only hiring men; saying that men “are more suited” to tasks requiring interaction with the customers, such as measuring out portions of bulk goods. He continued and explained that “my wife helps me. For example, I told my wife that ‘you receive the money and I am measuring and providing the goods.’ Also, she already understands about this business. Sometimes I go outside and she manages the business at that time.” Though he is not hiring women to complete measuring tasks, he uses women’s labor for his supply business in some capacity (i.e., management), but such women’s work is often referred to as ‘help’, not ‘labor.’

Besides selling fertilizer, pesticide, and seed products, suppliers may also advise about product use. Some suppliers mentioned trainings from USAID, Syngenta, Semco, and other pesticide producing companies; USAID likely implies the AVC (as USAID does not directly train input dealers). Suppliers attended training about fertilizers, pesticides, and farming medicine. Suppliers intended to use these trainings to pass product-specific knowledge on to farmers. In some areas, however, suppliers do not sell any poisonous pesticides or herbicides because they believe that after selling them, both men and women may acquire them and ultimately use them to commit suicide. In 2000, WHO Class 1 toxicity highly hazardous pesticides were banned by the government in response to high levels of self- poisonings. Recent analyses found that suicides have declined, and that the ban has not negatively affected agricultural production (Chowdhury 2018).

A FGD of men in Jhenaidah had no knowledge of any women working as input suppliers or owning input supply shops. When asked why women did not work as input suppliers, they stated that they would be challenged by the need, as a person selling inputs, to go into farmers’ fields and share their knowledge with them. They noted that women could do so if a man went with her, but not alone because of the “psychology” of Bangladeshi society, in which women are expected to move around very carefully due to threats of harassment and social norms about the importance of maintaining women’s character.

The input suppliers reported sometimes giving credit to good customers, and most stated that they could give credit to customers, whether men or women. However, as few customers were women, it does not appear that many women purchase inputs independently or get credit when doing so. Producers Cultivation Jute cultivation involves several tasks, including land preparation, seed sowing, transplanting, applying fertilizer/manure, weeding/thinning, irrigation, plant protection, and harvesting. Most tasks are performed by men for fields owned by their households or by hired labor. For instance, a man stated “I do all types of work from the beginning of jute cultivation. Such as preparing field, sowing the seeds, weeding the field, giving fertilizers and pesticides, cutting the jute…”

As for women’s participation in cultivation, a FGD of men said that women participate in weeding. Married women do help their husbands in jute cultivation, especially in weeding, but as shown in Table 3, it is less common. These patterns differ somewhat by area: as one FGD of women remarked in Narail, when it comes to agricultural work overall “no discrimination between men and women in our village. Husbands respect the wives in this area.” Another woman in the same FGD shared a similar sentiment: “Men work in the phase of cultivation, peeling the fiber, bundling fiber and transportation to market. Other work is done by the women, with the help of men.” A different women’s FGD in the same area reported a similar division of tasks for men and women but was less confident that the community

17 approved of women’s participation in jute cultivation. They said, the community does “not interfere on this matter because all [women] do not join the tasks. Usually [those] who are economically weaker do these tasks. But sometimes some community members do not support it or see [it] from bad perspective.”

In Jhenaidah, however, participants in a FGD of women all agreed that women do not work in the field at all. According to this focus group, women may, however, dry jute and/or keep small home gardens within their family compounds. This finding is reflected in the midline survey data, where fewer than 1 percent of surveyed households in Jhenaidah report using female household labor before or during harvest, relative to 44 percent of households in Narail. Both districts do report high levels of female participation in post-harvest activities (suggesting that respondents in Jhenaidah may be distinguishing between work in the fields, and work done at the homestead), though again the rate is much higher for Narail (91%) than Jhenaidah (74%).

Overall, there is a clear stigma associated with women working in the fields. Respondents stated that it reflected badly on their husbands and was accepted only when a woman had no husband, either because she is a widow, or because her spouse is absent or unable to work. Another issue raised by several respondents was the perception that work in the fields under a hot sun made women’s skin dark, and that was a sign of poverty and low status. One woman from Faridpur explained, community members do not support women completing ‘masculine’ jute work or perceive it as negative. As this woman said, working in jute cultivation “makes your wife black …by working in the field.”

Many of the FGDs reveal that women do not get any share of income generated from their jute work, but the money earned is nonetheless spent for household needs. As a woman from Madaripur in a FGD stated, “I work in our field to help my husband, so that the labor cost is reduced and our household can earn more as labor cost is high and it is difficult to find adequate labor as the harvesting time is short.” Some informants reported that women may take on some of these tasks if men are traveling or the women are poor and have no other sources of income.

Both men and women in FGDs explained that jute is not always a profitable venture; rather, they report that incurring losses is a common feature due to decreasing price, stagnant markets, and a lack of subsidies for jute cultivators. A jute farmer lamented that his wife supported him for months, but the revenue earned from jute does not even cover expenses of jute cultivation, harvesting, and marketing. He also said women in his household gained nothing from the jute work. Another farmer said, “My wife who helps me for the whole season and ruins her Sharee to help me in extracting and dying jute fibers, I cannot even buy a new Sharee for her.” Another farmer said, “Leave the thought of profit, we can’t even buy a big fish for our family members for even once with the money we earn from jute.” Another man commented, “My wife had forbidden me to invest in jute anymore as in last year we faced a huge loss as I didn’t listen to her and invested in jute; this year I shall go for other crops.” Others, however, report preferring jute to rice cultivation. A key informant in Faridpur states, “I choose to cultivate jute for jute stick and some money by selling jute, as jute cultivation is more profitable than cultivating paddy in that particular season.” Farm prices have fluctuated over the past years, but farmers who can purchase improved seeds or are associated with projects providing improved seeds and employing better cultivation and retting practices are able to do well.

Fertilizer Fertilizer is widely recognized as a necessity for successful jute cultivation; FGD participants from all four divisions stated that fertilizer was needed. A man from Mardaripur stated, when “I collect good fertilizer, I can do better growth in jute productions.” There is a wide range in the types of fertilizer used. Participants listed potash, animal dung (mainly cattle), TSP, DADC, DAB, MAPS, and Urea as types of fertilizer they use in jute cultivation. Participants named several sources for obtaining fertilizer, including government sellers, local marketplaces, and individual dealers. For example, a supplier from Faridpur stated that he purchases fertilizer from the government for resale to farmers. A man farming jute, also from Faridpur, uses local markets. As he said, “I can easily manage all things from nearby markets.” As for dealers, some participants may access several different sellers, depending on the specific fertilizer they seek to purchase. As a supplier from Jhenaidah said, “I am involved with two/ three dealers [at the] bazaar (Nagarkanda, Horanakunda) … Dealers told me about this fertilizer. They told that if I used this fertilizer into my field I will get good result from it [sic].” Fertilizer suppliers are typically men.

There are diverse perspectives across the sample on who – men or women – work with fertilizer in jute cultivation. In Mardaripur, men are most responsible for spreading fertilizer in jute cultivation. Though lacking in data around gendered fertilizer use in Faridpur, data from Narail and Jhenaidah are ambiguous. In Narail, a FGD of men stated that men and women work together in spreading fertilizer on their plots. Two women, also from Narail, confirmed they work with fertilizer in KIIs, codifying the results from the FGD. Yet other women from Narail indicate that knowledge around fertilizer is for men; as one woman said, “I don’t know the name of any kind of fertilizer. My husband understands this.” Another woman echoed this sentiment, saying women would have to ask men to understand which fertilizer to use and how to use it. In Jhenaidah, a FGD of men said both men and women work with fertilizer, much like the FGD of men in Narail. However, a woman from Jhenaidah said in a KII that men typically work with fertilizer. The seemingly contradictory responses among participants from Narail and Jhenaidah suggest that gendered divisions of labor may vary within those divisions, or that social norms governing such divisions of labor are less rigid.

Challenges in accessing and using fertilizer were revealed in the data, though they are not universal. First, fertilizer is hard to source for some participants. As a supplier in Jhenaidah said “No, I didn’t face any challenges to collect this fertilizer… Yes, this fertilizer still available in this market.” However, participants in both Jhenaidah and Faridpur stated that fertilizer available for purchase is scarce. Second, participants may find the fertilizer ineffective. Though few participants expressed this idea, one man who cultivates jute in Faridpur, for example stated that it “is matter of sorrow that the fertilizers are not as effective as it was in the past.”

NAAFCO fertilizers may be inaccessible to target producers given the current market context. Comments from the participants about the price of NAAFCO being cost-prohibitive would preclude any gains in agricultural outputs target producers would otherwise achieve. The cost may also play into when NAAFCO ought to be available for purchase. In other words, jute cultivators may not seek to purchase NAAFCO in advance of jute season – and thereby wait for jute season to use it – because they have more immediate, pressing costs.

Post-Harvest and Homestead Processing Post-harvest and processing activities carried out by producer households include activities that occur after the cutting of the jute stalks, include soaking/retting the stalks to loosen fibers, extracting the jute fibers, washing, drying, sorting, and binding them in bundles, and cleaning, drying, and storing seeds. Retting, which is a critical phase of the jute fiber extraction process, is more commonly done by men.

There appears to be some variation across regions in the gendered patterns of this type of labor, as summarized by a FGD of men in Faridpur: “There are also some women who are working with men in the field in another village but not in our area. No one of the society tell anything in this matter. In our area the women can help us only by dissociating the fiber and dying up the jute in the total process but in other areas women are doing all types work such dissociating and watering etc. And all the other work is done by the men.”

One Narail man reported that he was involved in “preparing fermentation14 , keeping concern about fermentation timely, dissociating the fibers, drying out the fibers, taking the jute in the market, etc.” Others, however, report greater separation of men’s and women’s work. A FGD of men in Faridpur described men’s and women’s work as follows: “…cutting the jute, irrigation of the field—all this work is done by the men. They pick up the jute after cutting and bring it home. Usually only men are involved in selling the jute in the market.” This group did not report that men extract jute fiber. They reported women as having a wide range of tasks in post-harvest stating, “They can do many things. Women normally bring the jute to the water source, pull them out then from the water... hey even cut the jute from the field as well as weed them. Many women do that.” A different FGD of men reported a more limited role for women, stating, “women usually work to dissociate the fiber. The women can help us only by dissociating the fiber and dying up the jute in the total process. And all the rest of the work is done by the men. We collect the dissociated jute and keep them into the water again. After washing and drying we sell them in the market.”

A woman from Narail said, “Women can’t harvest and soak jute from the field which is full of water. Usually this phase is done by men.” When retting is complete, men carry the jute stalks, transporting them to river banks, roadside, or homesteads for the fiber extraction process. While men occasionally report doing the work of jute extraction, this is more commonly a job associated with women. They sometimes do it as the men do, standing in the retting water, but much more commonly extract the fibers from stalks that are carried to their homes on the banks of the ponds and rivers where the cut stalks have been soaking.

Women then start peeling the fibers in groups, often between household chores. An agriculture officer said that women are better in peeling as they waste very little and do this with utmost care. Men work faster, sometime while the stalks are still in the water bodies but are said to be less nimble than women.

Washing the fibers is done in the nearby ponds or water bodies after extraction. Very few women do washing – only those who support family-based cultivation or who work as hired labor for neighboring houses. Women generally do not participate in washing because it is not socially acceptable for them to wear wet clothes in public. Women in one of the Jhenaidah FGDs said they only pull the jute fibers and do not do the washing.

14 Fermentation is also part of the retting process in jute processing.

However, other women and men reported that women do wash the extracted fibers. A woman said, “I can do better jute washing, drying, and selecting” and a FGD of men said, “This year I saw some women did jute washing.” Both quotes come from participants living in Narail, suggesting that there may be geographical variation in the acceptability of women completing jute washing. Unfortunately, it is not clear if the women referenced in these two quotes were hired for washing purposes. However, here the midline survey data shows a higher rate of household women’s participation in washing in Narail (76%) than in Madaripur (65%) or Faridpur (54%), and a much higher rate than in Jhenaidah (16%).

Drying is done in homestead areas and along the roadside. Women usually conduct drying, in a group or near their homesteads by themselves or to help their husbands. As one man said when talking about hiring labor for jute processing, “I must hire women for pulling jute fiber. Drying and other activities also done by women.” Finally, sorting is mostly done by men.

The FGDs revealed that women extract jute for an average of 2 months over the course of a season. The seasonal calendar shows that the women work at most four months of the Bengali calendar, which starts from Ashar and ends in Ashwin (approximately June to September). The data reveal that most women start to work on jute around 7 or 8 AM after finishing their household chores, and come back home for lunch between 2 to 3 PM. Other household members, particularly mothers-in-law or neighbors, look after their children while the women work.

The data, however, indicated that some may value men’s and women’s jute work differently. For example, in an in-depth interview, one man stated that the “female can’t do as much as the male can do. As a result, they get [lower] prices than the male.” But if men and women typically perform different jute tasks, the output quantities are not comparable. Such comments may indicate that women’s work is valued less, an assertion supported by the midline survey data. Comparing wages for stripping and washing of jute- the activity with the highest level of labor participation by hired females-the median daily wage for men was 400 taka per day, while that for women was only 150 taka per day. Jute Traders and Transporters Farmers are not generally directly involved in jute trading as a separate business, beyond selling their own production. Jute traders buy jute fibers from farmers and sell them to factories elsewhere. Traders may also sell to exporters and other national-level stakeholders. They suggested implementing policies to ensure sufficiently high jute prices and to subsidize seeds and fertilizer.

Transportation for jute activities such as carrying seeds, raw jute sticks after cutting, jute fibers to hoe and market are completed by men. As one jute trader said, there is “no task for women. To measure and to [lift] up in the car these tasks is for men. They [women] can work in mill, which is suitable for them. But here [the] labor[er] should do heavy work. They have to bear the bundle of 20-50 KG jute. Women will not [be] able to carry that.”

Men usually transport jute fibers by hiring rickshaw vans for small amounts of fibers or trucks for larger loads. Men also accompany hired transport to the market. Women may hire them too, but only men drive vehicles. Some women may go to the markets themselves in a rickshaw or van to sell small amounts of fiber if they do not have men in their households.

Jute trading is perceived as a man’s domain by both men and women, in part because of the capital required to start a jute business. Two men who work as traders in Majchar, Faridpur explained that jute

21 trading requires a lot of start-up capital and great mobility. They said that women do not have the money to enter jute trading, nor is it socially acceptable for women to travel as needed within the jute value chain. Women may go to the market, but only in the absence of male household members who could otherwise go, and only to sell small amounts of fibers. Even then, they only travel to the market when accompanied by other women and/or their children. Once at the market, men mostly sell via installment and/or credit-based payments, and women sell via cash because they have small sales, according to a jute trader in Faridpur. One woman from Jhenaidah said “I have no interest in selling jute products. It is shameful for my husband. I like to avoid doing anything that is shameful for my husband.”

The jute price depends on market demand and supply. Jute mill owners may determine prices, but the price also depends on one’s negotiating ability and jute quality. Traders often face losses if they fail to identify the quality of their fibers. It is believed that Faridpur jute is of the finest quality, so jute traders in other areas earn less for the same amount of jute. The midline data supports this belief- farmers in Faridpur are more likely to report receiving a price of 45 taka or more for a kilogram of jute (30%) than in Madaripur (18%), Jhenaidah (8%) or Narail (3%), though the mean price is only marginally higher, suggesting this reputation only benefits farmers in Faridpur able to produce higher quality jute.

Women may also sell jute sticks which they get in exchange for providing labor, or in addition to wages. For instance, in a FGD with men from Narail, one man said women “also collect jute sticks and sell this. They use this money in the family activities and provide to the husband.” Women in a FGD from Faridpur said the price of the jute sticks is so low that it is not even worth it to pay for the carrying cost. Some women sell jute sticks near where they extract the fibers, from their homes, or at nearby markets. Jute sticks are used as cooking fuel or as a low-cost building material. In Jhenaidah, however, one trader reported that women do not come to the market to sell at all, explaining that it is viewed negatively by the community member, “There will be …a negative sense on it. The women …always live in veil. For this they couldn’t come to the market.”

Some traders combine or complement their jute businesses with other agricultural products because jute is sold seasonally. Such items include paddy, lentils, and chaffy15 to complement revenue from jute. The seasonality of jute also leads traders to hire temporary labor to manage increased workloads. As a trader in Talma, Faridpur, explained:

Due to large investment and uncertainty of market, jute traders do not solely depend on jute trading, they try to get involved in other agricultural products as they already get reputation and connection in the market and master the skill of trading. Normally, I sell jute, paddy, lentil and chaffy in my business in different monsoon. Now, jute and paddy season, I sell it. In monsoon, I sell also two items. I buy those items from the farmers and sell it to the customers.

A major challenge of jute trading is the capital required, which brings prestige and honor for the traders. As such, elite, local families or community leaders dominate jute trading and traders tend to have high school education. Some businessmen have early experiences with jute, and may inherit their business, while others start experimentally and others through a partnership.

Jute traders may purchase their commercial goods with cash, but must sell on credit, leaving them in a vulnerable financial position until credit is repaid. Government mills may also make late payments to

15 Chaffy is a dried husk that may be used for fuel.

22 jute traders. Although entering jute trading requires large cash investments, banks do not offer jute traders specific loans for their businesses. As mentioned above, some development projects have started to provide credit services to jute farmers and to companies along the jute value chain.

Incurring a business loss was reported as a common issue as international market demand, competition with polythene, and falling jute prices affect profitability. Local market demand has fluctuated, and factory owners who sell jute internally or internationally withhold payments or pay via installment.

Overall, jute trading business is a trust-based business; both buyers and sellers give the option of late payments in deals. Over time, traders’ interactions with customers and other business peoples grant them the experience needed to foster a successful trading business. As a trader from Narail, said “Honesty and trust are the key principles of jute trading business,” both of which are established as traders and customers build rapport over time.

Table 3: Gendered Division of Jute Activities Task Jute activities Involvement of Men/Women by Task Qualitative Proportions In Findings Midline Data Men Women Men Women Cultivation Land preparation, Plowing ✓ 84.3% 6.4% Purchasing seeds ✓ Purchasing fertilizer ✓ Cultivation ✓ Transplanting, Sowing seeds ✓ 92.5% 2.7% Applying fertilizer/manure ✓ 90.1% 11.2% Weeding ✓ ✓ Thinning ✓ Irrigation and drainage ✓ Harvesting ✓ 82.1% 3.9% Processing Carrying jute to home or ponds for ✓ rarely processing Soaking jute plants in water ✓ rarely 80.9% 48.6% Extracting jute fibers ✓ ✓ Peeling jute/Bailing ✓ ✓ 60.3% 29.0% Marketing Taking jute fibers to market by self for sale ✓ rarely 63.1% 3.8% Selling jute fibers in large scale at market ✓ place Selling small scale jute fibers in the ✓ ✓ neighborhood Sell jute sticks ✓ Trading jute16 ✓ 36.1% 19.6% Source: Qualitative Interview Data; Akter 2009.

16 The study includes one woman who works in jute trading, but men dominate the jute trade. As such, we classified jute trading as work performed by men.

Table 3 illustrates the similarities and differences between perceived and measured differences in the gendered division of labor in jute cultivation, processing, and marketing (where possible). The qualitative data reveal that men are perceived to participate in all jute-related activities. Women are perceived to only participate in a handful, and the most lucrative activity – selling jute at large scale markets – is notably absent. The midline quantitative data largely supports the qualitative findings. For instance, the qualitative data found that men are responsible for land preparation, and the quantitative data found that 84.3% of men and only 6.4% of women participate in land preparation. This comparison shows that land preparation is perceived as a task for men and is predominately completed by men. Such trends are also found between the qualitative and quantitative data around transplanting, sowing seeds; applying fertilizer/manure; harvesting; and taking jute fibers to market by self for sale.

Not all perceptions revealed in the qualitative work are reflected in the quantitative work, however. For instance, the qualitative data reveals soaking jute in water as a predominately male activity, but the quantitative data shows 80.9% of men complete this activity in comparison to 48.6% of women. The 48.6% of women who state they participate in soaking jute contrasts with the qualitative assessment that women rarely soak jute. The comparisons between peeling jute/bailing and trading jute reveal similar ambiguities. While the definitive reason such ambiguities exist remains unknown, there are a few possible explanations. For instance, the non-random sampling of the qualitative study may not represent the quantitative sample, giving contrasting results about gendered divisions of labor. Social desirability bias may have affected participant responses in both the quantitative and qualitative studies,17 resulting in apparent discrepancies observed here. Trader Profile A trader who is a man in Faridpur has worked in the jute trading business for around 12 years. From childhood he saw that jute traders are very respected and well known in the area. That was the motivating factor to become a jute trader. After completing his education, he entered jute trading. He had no prior experience in jute, so he formed a partnership with an experienced jute trader. In his first year of business, he experienced a loss of more than a million taka (BDT). Many of his friends and family discouraged him from continuing to trade jute, but he was determined. His sister lent him money to stay in jute trading. Now he is one of the most established jute traders in the local market. According to him, a clear understanding of the various qualities of jute and financial solvency are both necessary to survive in jute trading. Trader Profile Few women are jute traders, and interviewed male traders said that jute trading is for men, and that women do not to enter such a business. Nevertheless, one woman got involved in this business because her husband, a jute trader, suddenly died. With three children, no property, and little education, she decided to continue her husband’s business. She faced initial disdain from others for entering the jute trade, but slowly her relatives involved with jute guided her. She considers jute trading to be difficult for women, as it requires time, dedication, mental strength, mobility, and courage to face social challenges and negative comments. She believes women’s lack of experience and mental strength is a problem for

17 Focus group participants may have been more prone to this bias because they were prompted to discuss social norms with their fellow community members.

24 women seeking to enter the jute trade. She also believes that women’s responsibility for household chores and limited mobility constrain women’s participation. Manufacture of Jute Products Farmers do not have direct access to manufacturers; individual farmers would not have the quantity of product needed to meet manufacturers demand regularly, and also lack the information, cash, credit, skill, and network.

Jute mills soften and refine the fiber produced at the homestead level and sold by market traders. The process involves a series of steps to reach the finished yarn, including initial selection and sorting into graded batches, carding, preparing, spinning, winding, weaving and finishing. The finished product is a high-quality yarn useful for producing a range of diversified jute products, including not only textiles but also goods into which jute mills recently expanded such as shoes, handkerchiefs, clothes, bedsheets, hats, furniture, cooking and dining utensils, sofas, and paper (Islam 2018).

Although jute mills in neighboring Nepal and India employ many women, jute mills in Bangladesh do not. Estimates of women’s employment range from under 5% to 18% of employees, and good sex- disaggregated data is lacking. Nonetheless, the International Jute Study Group found the jute manufacturing labor force was male at a ratio of 30:1, and female employees in the jute sector, especially in private sector mills, was much lower than in other sectors. Women were also limited to lower paid jobs in the mills, and they do not receive the same allowances or access to trainings as men (IJSG 2011; Moazzem 2011). Newspaper stories of strikes at jute mills, as in early 2018 in Khulna, report that female workers are more likely than men to be employed as part-time or seasonal labor.

The qualitative study did not directly ask about barriers to participation in the labor force. However, the literature suggests barriers include concerns about safety traveling long distances to work, lack of affordable transportation, and lack of child care (ADB 2016). All these factors were implied during interviews discussing women’s involvement in sale of jute products. Recommendations of the International Jute Study Group in its Gender Action Plan for the industry include, among others, improving the gender ratio of employees in the sector, improving wages for all workers and making them more equitable between men and women, providing equitable access to trainings and allowances (e.g., for housing), improving working conditions, and improving the gender monitoring and evaluation.

One positive exception has been the involvement of women in smaller levels of manufacturing, such as the fabrication of handcrafts associated with Fair Trade organizations and other enterprises. Women form nearly 30% of small and medium-sized entrepreneurs with businesses in JDP, while women form 90% of the employees making the products in these firms (Bhuiyan 2016).

Findings: Participant Engagement with the Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) Project Agricultural Training Familiarity with AVC project activities varied across geographic areas. Women in Narail talked about their awareness of and familiarity with AVC and their participation in training. A man from Narail also remembered the AVC training positively; “they talked about medicine… Yes, I like to join the training as it was beneficial for the farmer,” he said. Women in Jhenaidah had the lowest familiarity of all regions.

Women in Faridpur and Madaripur had mixed responses, and in some cases may have been referring to AVC trainings but could not remember the name. A FGD of men in Faridpur, e.g., said, “We do not know exactly the name of the organization. Some foreigners also came. The project was about how to cultivate the jute properly, how much time to provide fertilizer, how much irrigation is needed, when to cut the jute, how to sell properly, etc.” Overall, women had a mixed range of familiarity with AVC and related inputs. Thus, women and men suggested more activities and training for enhanced benefit.

Some input suppliers could provide more detail about trainings they attended. One man in Jhenaidah recalled several different pesticide trainings that he found very helpful and thought had been provided by Syngenta, saying, “They gave us training on how to use insect killer, which fertilizers are good for crops, where farmers gets good quality of seeds, how farmers can identify good quality of seeds, how they can preserve the seeds, etc.” Another supplier in Faridpur recalled receiving training from both USAID (although he did not specify the AVC project) and Syngenta, reporting, “The training was on everything like fertilizer and pesticides.” More generally, the data revealed other agricultural development projects operating in the same area. For instance, “Training and Research on Jute Plantation,” “JRO,” and “Syngenta,” which were remembered as providing trainings on various agricultural topics. These findings suggest that jute producers may navigate several different agricultural development strategies at once, making follow-up about specific projects difficult.

Despite the mixed range of familiarity with AVC training, male and female participants were both interested in receiving more agricultural training. Some participants mentioned having previous training. The people who attended any training session mentioned it was helpful and they would participate in more training sessions to further their knowledge if given the option. For instance, a FGD of women described how, after a USAID sponsored training, their community had improved in that they “learnt about the strategy of identifying better seed, testing the fertilizer by water glass” and that “we are able to cultivate in developed way.” In summary participants view trainings positively, regardless of who sponsors the training. This type of training would not necessarily need to be provided by NGOs; i.e. the model from which USAID has moved away, but could also be provided by, for instance, an input company, provided to attempt to increase its market share and proximity to end users of their products, while also improving smallholder farmer knowledge, access to inputs and potentially productivity. These concepts are more consistent with the market systems approach.

Concerning NAAFCO fertilizers, suppliers interviewed had mixed awareness and experiences. Two suppliers – both from Jhenaidah – had never heard of it. In Faridpur, one supplier remarked that they are familiar with NAAFCO fertilizer, “but my experience has not been positive. The quality of this fertilizer is not good composed.” A man from Jhenaidah had a contrasting opinion and shared that “It’s good for soil …It’s very good for jute cultivation and it’s also working in betel leaf field. I collected this fertilizer from the dealers. I used this fertilizer in my own lands to produce the crops.” A supplier in Narail spoke about the mixed reception of NAAFCO fertilizers among their communities. As one man said, “In our area people don’t use this fertilizer very much. As they don’t like this fertilizer…Personally, I like this fertilizer. In my field I also used this and its output was very good.” A second supplier from Narail offered commentary that may contextualize community dislike of the NAAFCO fertilizer. He explained that “I sold NAAFCO NPKS fertilizer for one time… This fertilizer is good, but all over the price of this fertilizer is very high.” Data from the midline household survey does suggest that the average purchase price for a kilogram of NPKS fertilizer is somewhat higher than for Urea (the most commonly used fertilizer among respondents). At the same time, it is comparable to other fertilizers that producers

26 reported using, suggesting that the perception of NPKS fertilizer being expensive is not necessarily quantitatively grounded.

Figure 2: Mean Unit Price of Commonly Reported Fertilizers in Midline Quantitative Sample

Source: Quantitative Data from Midline Household Survey; IFPRI 2017.

Some participants, all from Jhenaidah, had heard of NAAFCO in the context of a lottery program in which winners could purchase the fertilizer at a discounted rate. In one FGD, a few men described their experience with winning NAAFCO fertilizer, though the winners did not purchase any fertilizer because they felt the discounted price of 600Tk (a 20% discount) was still too expensive. In some of the KIIs, a participant revealed they were a lottery winner, but they did not purchase the fertilizer because it was not the season in which they needed to use it for jute cultivation. One noted that he did not see that the NAAFCO fertilizer was any better than other types. In Mardaripur, a few other participants – men – described a lottery in which individuals could purchase NAAFCO. One man said he could purchase NAAFCO at a discounted rate of 110 Tk after winning the lottery. He only used NAAFCO one time but did state why he did not use it again. There was no indication in the data analyzed here that similar lotteries were staged in Faridpur or Narail. Nevertheless, these findings indicate that NAAFCO fertilizers would be more acceptable to the target population if it was perceived to have a more acceptable price. This finding is reflected in the midline household survey data, which shows much larger take-up of NPKS within the treatment sample among those who received the highest discount rate.

Figure 3: Reported usage of NPKS among households assigned to discount treatment, by discount rate received (95% confidence interval)

Source: Quantitative Data from Midline Household Survey; IFPRI 2017. Observations and Recommendations from Agriculture Officers Overall, the five agriculture officers interviewed perceive farmers’ interest in jute cultivation to be declining due to low profit margins. However, poverty is a motivator for women to continue to work in jute cultivation and processing (peeling, drying, and preserving jute sticks). Local agriculture officers host jute cultivation trainings for farmers seeking to enhance their harvests. Agriculture officers aim to invite some women and provide greater awareness for gendered issues in agriculture. As one officer shared, “I have participated in a few training programs on gender and empowerment where I learned about engaging more women in agriculture. To implement the lesson, we do encourage the women to participate more in agriculture." Additionally, such officers believe that encouraging women to cultivate vegetables on household plots may benefit women.

Findings: Empowerment and Respect For the study presented here, because of unfamiliarity with the word “empowerment,” initial questioning on this topic referred to ideas around respect to make sense in the Bangladeshi context. For example, when asking participants about empowered people in their community, the field team asked about who is “valued” or “respected” in their community. This question was followed up by additional ones (see Annex 3) asking about the ability of women and men to make decisions and to act on them, behavior that is associated with the definition of empowerment. This allowed the respondents to talk about their views on empowerment without prejudicing their responses by a reaction to the word itself.

The responses across the districts and upazilas have many areas of agreement, but also areas of tension, particularly between what might be understood as the cultural ideal of woman of a woman who listens to her husband and manages the house, without traveling alone outside of it. It is also shaped by the reality of life in Bangladesh today that includes a need to provide for one’s family. In some cases, men or young women must travel to take work in Dhaka or abroad, and women remaining in their home villages must engage in agricultural tasks or marketing in the absence of other family members. Some respondents believed that the community accepted these women who were taking on new responsibilities, while others believed that such women brought shame to their families. Empowerment and the pro-WEAI The definition of empowerment used to draft the pro-WEAI survey instrument emphasized one’s ability to make strategic life choices and enact those choices to better one’s life. This definition contrasts with the opinions expressed about what constitutes an empowered woman or empowered man among the study population. Notably, the gendered difference described in the discussion below between the belief that men should hold positions of authority (and therefore the ability to make decisions) and women should not transgress beyond their socially sanctioned domestic roles is in stark contrast to the idea that empowerment is the ability of a person to make choices for themselves and to act on them. Questions about decisionmaking were also asked in the KIIs and the FGDs (as discussed in greater detail below), as well as questions about respected people in the community. Paring these questions in the qualitative work helped illuminate the differences in how the pro-WEAI frames and measures indicators empowerment and how the study population conceives of empowerment. Women’s Views on Respectable Women Women were asked about the qualities of women that they admired and respected. Such women are well-behaved, educated, and polite. As a woman from Narail said, “[e]ducated women are respected in this community. Those provide us intellects and suggestions”. They are pious and maintain hijab. As a woman from Faridpur stated “women who are open minded and well behaved are respected in society. Women who are religious minded are also respected.” She should be helpful, whether helping others in her community or the poor. A FGD of women in Madripur linked respect to being liked in the community. They said, “The women who are religious, don’t engage any kind of hassle, etc., and we like them” and “The women who are good quality and character — we like them.” Another woman in Madaripur said that a respected woman is one who is “understanding and can good advice.” She also manages her household, completing various household tasks and dedicates herself to the betterment of her family overall.

Additionally, several participants stressed working any job and hard work as an important quality for a woman. For example, several different women from Narail shared that women who work a lot and are industrious are respected. One woman in the study articulated a more transactional approach regarding women’s hard work. She said that “They think if they do not value us then we will not work as a laborer in their field,” meaning that their community only respects women because women will reciprocate labor for such respect.

Respect did not encompass mobility. A respected woman should not be too mobile, and not leave her home. For instance, one woman described a market and remarked “We [women] can’t go there, as that is about three kilometers away from our home. If we go there then who will do my household work?” This participant links her domestic responsibilities – the responsibilities women believe they must fulfill

29 to be respected in their communities – to her inability to travel far from her home. Overall, women’s perceptions of a respected woman imply women should serve their households above all else. Women’s Views on Respectable Men Women perceive respectable men to have some similar qualities as their perceptions of respected women. For instance, men should also be honest, educated, and pious. In one FGD, a woman remarked that “we respect those men who are honest.” However, additional characterizations of empowered men emphasize their roles outside the home and financial prowess. Women perceive men to be community leaders, active in politics, or elderly men who manage conflict resolutions – or as one woman in Madaripur said of men, “People listen to those who are oldest and wisest.” A woman from Faridpur echoed this sentiment. She said men who are respected “are educated and have power, especially as a chairman member.”

When discussing a jute producers’ group, a woman from Faridpur explained, “There are two leaders in the group and both of them are men. The women have better idea about household works and the men have more knowledge about agricultural aspects like seed, irrigation, fertilizer, etc. That is the main reason for selecting men as leaders in the group.” Additionally, respected men should be high performing and hold a high-status job. As a FGD of women remarked, respected men “are educated, we do the `high’ job.’ A man who works more in comparison to other men is more respected. For instance, a woman said that “men who can work more are respected in this community.” Most explicitly, a woman from Faridpur remarked that respected men are those “who have a lot of money are respected in society.” Men’s View on Respectable Women Men hold similar beliefs about respectable women as women do. They also believe that women should uphold social norms, behave well, and be educated. Some men also commented on being pious as an important dimension of respect. Additionally, men also believe empowered women complete their domestic tasks well and emphasized women’s service to others in their families and communities. A man from a FGD in Narail said that respected women are those who “do domestic tasks properly.” As one man in a FGD said, “Rights are not applicable for women, women should cook food, look after the children and husband.” A man from Jhenaidah said that women who are “attentive to household chore are valued and respected.” A man from another FGD said that respected women are those “who do social work; like, if any women work with us to renovate the road.” Both comments underline men’s belief that women serve as caregivers, to women’s families and communities. Unlike women, men believe women should own property and have money. While it is possible women also believe women should own property and have money, they did not explicitly voice this opinion in the data available. Men’s View on Respectable Men Men viewed respectable men similarly to how women did. Men perceive men worthy of respect to be honest, educated, and of upstanding character. For example, in an in-depth interview one man shared that “those men who are industrious and who can talk smartly.” A FGD of men from Narail stated that respected men are “people who are industrious, brilliant, and conscious. And who work with us together.” Men also perceive financial security as a component of respect. They believe a man should be employed, own land, have successful farms, and be financially stable. They also saw men with status within the community, as political and social leaders who are team players. As a man from Faridpur said,

30 men who are respected in the community are “those who are experts.” Interestingly, men believed that like women, respected men should be helpful and assist those in need.

Findings: Empowerment and Decision-making The second component of the questions asked on empowerment track more closely to the idea of an empowered person being one who can make strategic life decisions for themselves and to then act on them. In answering these questions, men and women had divergent opinions about women. Many men expressed dissatisfaction with the idea that women could make decisions independently and emphasized the importance either of making joint decisions, or for some, of having men make the decisions for the women. These results are consistent with findings from the Abbreviated WEAI (A- WEAI) baseline survey, which found women to be disempowered in decision-making in ownership of assets, access to and decisions on credit, and in control over the use of income. Women had more input into decision-making in agricultural production in jute-growing households than in these other areas of women’s empowerment (de Brauw et al. 2017a: 40), but with “men much more involved in decisions over the household’s primary cash crop” (de Brauw et al. 2017b: 49).

Figure 4: Self-reported participation rates in selected agricultural activities, by gender

Source: Quantitative Data from Midline Household Survey; IFPRI 2017.

The quantitative data from the Pro-WEAI also reflected a difference in perceptions of decision-making, particularly around activities with high rates of female participation such as small livestock and poultry farming, where male respondents were much more likely than females to report themselves as having been involved in decision-making: a gap of more than 23 percentage-points.

Table 4: Comparative Reporting on Involvement in Decision-Making, Pro-WEAI respondents

Participating in: Jute Production Other Crop Poultry / Small Production Livestock

Reporte Reporte Reporte Reporte Reporte Reporte Member d by d by d by d by d by d by participating: Male Female Male Female Male Female

Male HH Member 99.5% 98.1% 100.0% 99.3% 56.6% 23.8%

Female HH 54.9% 61.3% 51.0% 57.2% 94.9% 97.0% Member

Observations 421 421 416 416 332 332

Source: de Brauw et al. 2017b: 49 Men’s Views on Empowered Women Men had a predominantly negative view of an empowered woman, defined in this question as a woman who makes strategic life decisions and can enact them. One man in a KII stated, “We do not have any women in our village who makes her own decision and act accordingly. If we do find someone like this, we will warn her.” In a KII from Jhenaidah, a man remarked that women who make their own decisions are “not positive, not only in my perspective but also in the eyes of other members of the family… they may prosper economically but demoralized in the surroundings.” As another man said, “[t]his is not good. They [women] have fewer ideas than men. They need to discuss with family as they live in a joint family.” This comment demonstrates that some men may believe that women are less capable than men based solely on gender and offers further evidence that some men dislike women making independent decisions. This man’s comments also convey that women are expected to consider themselves in relation to their families, though he had no similar expectations of men. Another man in a KII said that if a wife made a decision independently of her husband, “[m]en will not accept such decisions — by no means.” His comment offers further evidence that some men do not believe women should make decisions independently.

Comments about women’s decision-making also indicate that women should consider others first, akin to perceptions that empowered women help their families and communities. In an interview, a man shared that women making decisions independently are often seen negatively. As he said, “[i]f any women do not consult with others, then society will not get any benefit from their activities. If other people don’t get benefit by her work, we don’t accept this.” His and other similar comments insinuate that a woman not working to serve her community is unheard-of and unexpected. Such quotes further demonstrate how women are expected to consider themselves in relation to the desires of others.

At the same time, some men expressed a more positive view of women who make decisions and act on them, though viewed such women through the lens of serving others. For example, a man from Narail said that women who make decisions and act on them are “good. They are contributing [to] society.” A FGD of men offered the view that “[i]f any women [who makes their own decisions] become self-reliant

32 by her work we see them positively.” While not explicitly highlighting service to others to guide women’s decision-making, their thoughts imply that women should not be burdensome to others.

Men, however, did have some diversity of opinion around women’s decision making. As an older man in a FGD said, the “modern world needs both men and women to work side by side and take joint decisions in household matters.” One man, from Faridpur, simply said “this is good,” in reference to women making their own decisions. Most women in this study perceived it as positive.18

Tables 5 and 6 present a content analysis of how women and men participants responded to the proposed questions.

Table 5: Describe a woman who makes important decisions in her life independently and acts accordingly Men (N = 16) Women (N = 16) Positive 12.5% (2) 25% (4) Negative 87.5% (14) 62.5% (10) Confused 0% (0) 12.5% (2) Source: KIIs. Analysis by Akter. Women’s Views on Empowered Women Women had mixed views on women who make their own decisions and act accordingly, and a woman’s household’s migration status may shape their views. A woman from Narail said that women who make their own decisions “do not become happy.” Another woman echoed this sentiment, and flatly stated “I don’t like that type of women.” She continued, however, and said that “those women whose husband is away they can work such way,” meaning that women may make their own decisions if her husband is not available to make them himself or in consultation with her. Likewise, a woman from Jhenaidah said of women who make their own decisions “I don’t support them if they have a male to discuss with. If she has no men that would be all right.” Together, these comments show that women expect themselves to defer to men in their household on decision-making, and that they may only make decisions in the absence of men.

Conversely, an interview with a different woman stated that “yes, men are eager to marry such industrious women,” indicating that she believes men view women who make their own decisions as hardworking – a desirable quality for marriage. A FGD of women had a more balanced view of women who make their own decisions and act on them. They said if “women become success then others appreciate them, but if they become [a] failure then community people see them negatively.” In their view, community acceptance of women’s independent decision-making is situationally dependent on the ‘success’ and likely how that success benefits the community.

Some women recognized women’s economic empowerment as a way to subvert such thinking. As one woman from a FGD said, “As women of these families earn money and the man live by his wife’s income so in this case husbands need to tolerate his wife’s voice.” In other words, augmenting a woman’s financial contributions to her household also augments her influence over household decisions. This idea contrasts with a comment from a man in a FGD; he said that women “should not go for income

18 However, some women did not understand questions about independent decision-making during the FGDs and KIIs.

33 earning. Men should earn money, thus should take all decision in household and outside.” Here, this participant links influence over household decision-making to one’s financial contributions just as the woman did above, though he believes women should be denied the work, and therefore be denied influence over decisions.

Not all decision-making is as it appears. One trader explained that “[w]omen sell jute secretly. Suppose, in their stock has 800 kg (20 mon) jute, women hide 80 kg (2 mon) jute from there. They sell this jute to our shop secretly. And they tell us not to disclose this to their husband.” While the trader did not say why women sell secretly or what they do with their secret revenue, it is evidence that some women do make independent decisions, enact them, and take measures to protect their independence. Men’s Views on Empowered Men Men had a more positive view of men who make their own decisions overall, as shown in the table above, but comments from study participants show diverse opinions around this theme. One man said such men “are considered good.” Conversely, another man in a FGD stated that “We don’t see them positively. We call them stubborn [sic].” Women’s Views on Empowered Men Comments from women participants show a similar range of opinions about men who make their own decisions. In an in-depth interview, one woman asserted that men are viewed positively when they make their own decisions; another woman said that men “should consult with wife before taking any big decision….No one sees them positively.”

Table 6: Describe a man who makes important decisions in his life independently and acts accordingly

Men (N = 16) Women (N = 16) Positive 75% (12) 62.5% (10) Negative 25% (4) 31.25% (5) Confused 0% (0) 06.25% (1) Source: KIIs. Analysis by Akter. Areas of Men’s and Women’s Decision-Making Table 7 shows which decisions about income generating activities men and/or women may make independently, and which are made jointly. As shown below, women may make decisions about (1) livestock, (2) poultry, (3) handicrafts, (4) tailoring, (5) family businesses, or (6) domestic work independently, but men may also make these decisions independently (except for poultry), or women make them in conjunction with men. Men only make a few decisions completely independently: (1) harvesting of other crops via hired labor; (2) processing of jute from family lands; (3) processing of other crops from family lands; (4) processing of jute via hired labor; (5) processing of other crops via hired labor. All other decisions may be made by men exclusively or jointly.

Table 7: Decision making about income generating activities Income Generating Activity Men Women Joint

1 Cultivation of jute in family lands ✓ ✓ 2 Cultivation of other crops in family lands ✓ ✓ 3 Cultivation of jute as hired labor ✓ ✓ 4 Cultivation of other crops hired labor ✓ ✓ 5 Harvesting of jute in family lands ✓ ✓ 6 Harvesting of other crops in family lands ✓ ✓ 7 Harvesting of jute as hired labor ✓ ✓ 8 Harvesting of other crops via hired labor ✓ ✓ 9 Processing of jute from family lands ✓ ✓ 10 Processing of other crops from family lands ✓ ✓ 11 Processing of jute via hired labor ✓ ✓ 12 Processing of other crops via hired labor ✓ 13 Selling of jute from family lands ✓ ✓ 14 Selling of other crops from family lands ✓ ✓ 15 Trading jute ✓ 16 Trading other crops ✓ 17 Livestock ✓ ✓ ✓ 18 Poultry ✓ ✓ 19 Handicrafts ✓ ✓ ✓ 20 Tailoring ✓ ✓ ✓ 21 Shop keeping ✓ ✓ 22 Non- Agricultural Labor ✓ ✓ 23 Family business ✓ ✓ ✓ 24 Housekeeping, Domestic help ✓ ✓ ✓ Source: Qualitative interviews; analysis by Akter.

These responses are reflected in the more aggregated categories which were included in the midline quantitative household survey. Crop production is almost exclusively decided upon by men alone or jointly, with almost no households reporting decision-making by women alone. Women are much more likely however to be the sole decision-makers around livestock, particularly for small livestock and poultry. There is some evidence of women-led decision-making in non-agricultural activities and off- farm employment (including agricultural labor). This is an area where the Pro-WEAI may benefit from having more disaggregated categories, as the qualitative data suggests differences based on the form these activities take (i.e., production of handicrafts versus shop-keeping).

Table 8: Decision-making by activity category, Pro-WEAI respondents Male Only Female Only Joint

Jute farming 41.26% 0.87% 57.87% Other crop farming 45.04% 0.44% 54.53% Large livestock 19.50% 5.95% 74.55% Small livestock 11.95% 28.62% 59.43% Poultry 1.93% 60.28% 37.79% Fishpond 42.13% 0.85% 57.02% Non-farm economic activities 53.30% 4.40% 42.31% Wage and salary employment 47.25% 6.04% 46.70% Source: Quantitative Data from Midline Household Survey; IFPRI 2017.

Both women and men discussed how they consult their spouse before making a decision about jute cultivation, processing, or marketing. A man in one FGD said that “[W]e take decisions together about jute cultivation. Together we consult that, `this land is in remote area, this land is nearest, it is better to harvest at first.’” Another man in this same FGD said that “We make decision after consulting with wife and others family members.” A woman from a KII said that “I take decisions after consulting with my husband.” Such comments illustrate a collaborative approach to managing jute work.

Other data suggest that men dominate decision-making in regard to jute. As one woman said of her husband, “[W]e take decisions after consulting together. But most of the cases my husband took decisions.” A FGD of women stated that men take most decisions. In a KII, a man said that “I take decisions. [My wife] is very young, now didn’t become an ideal housewife…She [doesn’t] try to realize agricultural issues.” He justifies making the decisions himself because he believes he is more knowledgeable and experienced in comparison to his wife.

Women did not characterize empowered women by the quantity of their work outputs within the community. These discrepancies between how women consider empowered men and empowered women demonstrates some may have implicit, gendered biases. Further, conceptions of empowered men hinge on their status outside their homes, while women may only be empowered within the home.

Findings: Group Membership The largest contributor to disempowerment in the midline Pro-WEAI data was group membership (de Brauw et al. 2017b:49). In focus group discussions and KIIs women mentioned multiple local and national NGOs are working in Faridpur, Narail and Jhenaidah. Such NGOs include BRAC, Grameen Bank, ASA, and Jagorani Chakra.19 Many such NGOs offer loans to women but provide little training about how to use the money to enhance income generation. However, some participants explained that community groups, overall, are not accepting of women. As a woman, in Faridpur shared, “There are some groups in our area. But these groups are only for men. There is no group for women. Women are not given proper respect in many aspects.” Another participant, however, described a different norm. Another woman in Faridpur explained that “Men do participate more in groups compared to women. Now, a few women are also participating in groups.”

19 A complete list of NGOs identified by participants appears in the appendix.

Participants cited several benefits of group membership. Many benefits had an economic focus, such as the microcredit or financial support offered through membership and access to cheaper fertilizer. Group membership also supports the flow of information; together, members may participate in various trainings about cultivation or new agricultural technologies and share ideas among themselves about seeds, pesticides, or production. Specific to jute, participants discussed how learning a new fertilizer technique through their group resulted in increased jute production. For example, a woman from Narail, said that she was “a member of farmers group by USAID. They discussed about techniques of identifying good jute, seeds, and fertilizer…it is good that they provide us good suggestion.” It is likely that the woman meant it was a farmer group set up by the AVC project. Others learned how to dry jute through their group and improved the quality of the fibers they produced. Groups also offered members a platform to share advice about negotiating prices for jute and information about the jute market. One of the Faridpur participants previously mentioned, acknowledges the transformative power of such benefits, though she is not a member of a group herself. She explained that “If we [women] could join any group related to agriculture then we would be able to get trainings resulting in better contribution to the family.”

Group membership does have downsides. Some study participants discussed how group activities may add stress to their existing workload, and some women reported they would not be able to attend group sessions because of their domestic chores. Other disadvantages stem from the interpersonal nature of group membership. Some participants lamented that not all their fellow group members are fiscally responsible, which may damage the group. Other times, group members do not have adequate time to prepare for preplanned group activities, reducing the quality of group activities and projects.

Findings: Mobility Women’s mobility within the jute value chain is limited in geographic range. Women travel to nearby fields for weeding, and post-harvest, peel jute fibers near their homes.

Participants had conflicting views on women’s mobility. In a FGD, one woman said that “Ten years [ago] we didn’t recognize Narail bazaar. We didn’t go by ourselves. But now we can go alone. Now we are free.” A trader was describing jute businesses and stated that “Such businessman needs to be a mobile person, women will not able to do this,” indicating that women are not mobile. A FGD of men said that women can travel where they need to go, “But they need to get permission from their husband,” suggesting that women must seek permission before going where they want or need to go. Men and women have a range of opinions about where women can go and if women need permission to travel before doing so.

Women who have no men in their households may have enhanced mobility in comparison to other women. A FGD of men said that women do not go out to buy seeds, “[b]ut those women who has not husband or other helping hand in family they go to market for buying seeds.” Further, as one supplier said, “[w]omen customers are rare, some women like whose husband has died only they come.” Together, these comments suggest that without a man – whether a husband, in-law, or son—in their household to travel on their behalf, women may travel by themselves.

Women’s mobility may also be constrained by the type of transportation available. For example, a trader said, “it is easier for men for transportation as men can come by sitting in the top of jute van, but

37 women can’t come in such way because it is bad to see.” However, a FGD of women said that women may use all types of transportation.

Findings: Education There is little discrimination in sending both boys and girls for education. Children go to nearby schools. But in cultivation and harvesting periods children support their parents and school absenteeism is high. While boys mostly help their fathers in the agricultural field in cutting jute and carrying food for them and some from poorest families also join neighbors for in-kind support. Girls usually help mothers by taking care of younger children and cooking and other household chores. These happen more for poorest households or when lack of availability of hired laborers.

There are important differences, however, in what parents want their sons and daughters to do with their education. A common sentiment was expressed by a woman in Madaripur who said, “I like to see my daughter get good education and get herself married to a good family. And [to] remain in peace in her husband’s house” while of her son she said,” I will be happy if my son gets any government job.” A man in the same area had similar views. He said of his daughter, that he wished her to receive a primary school and madrasa education and that after graduation, he would like to see his daughter married, while for his son, he envisioned that he would like to see his sons farming as adults. In the marketing of inputs and services for jute, the private sector could highlight the opportunity of using additional income from commercial jute production for children’s schooling.

Implications of Findings for USAID and the AVC project Women’s formal participation in the economy, including agriculture, has been rising over the past two decades (Kabeer et al. 2013) and is continuing to do so. The Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (2017) reports that women form 31% of the labor force from age 15 and above; for youth from 15-29, 54.8% of those employed in “skilled agricultural” work are women (2017: 26). These figures suggest there are opportunities for engaging women in the jute value chain. Interviews and FGDs reveal that supporting opportunities that strengthen women’s income earning and decision-making could be a successful approach. Integrating women into a market systems approach The market systems approach used in the AVC project targeted input suppliers as a primary entry point into the jute value chain. Because women have not historically participated in the chain as input sellers and as reported in the interviews women were not often the direct consumers of agricultural inputs, this approach proved ineffective in reaching women in the jute value chain.

Yet women are engaged in agriculture and as agricultural decision-makers as producers, processors, and marketing. A more inclusive market systems approach could increase the participation, performance, and benefits of value chain engagement for women in the following ways:

INPUT SUPPLIERS

● Choose partners that are open to working with women over the long-term. Markel, Hesss, and Loftin (2015), as noted earlier in the paper, found that intentionally forging partnerships with businesses that have the potential to create systemic change, are flexible, sensitive to slow

adopters, and/or have knowledge of cultural norms and a willingness to address social barriers are key actors in inclusive market systems.

In Bangladesh, CARE’s Strengthening Dairy Value Chain project,20 working with BRAC, specifically chose to work with companies that target “women as consumers; have inclusive and responsible business practices; [were] eager to invest in the industry; … willing to give buy-back assurance, be open to technology adoption.” The project reached 36,000 women dairy producers, who improved the quality and quantity of milk produced (as described by Markel, Hesss, and Loftin 2015:6).

In future programming, identify input supply partners willing to take more inclusive market system approaches by: o Increasing the number of women hired as employees, identifying potential recruits through links to vocational or agricultural technical programs and/or women agricultural extension agents. o Expand the number of female consumers by using innovative marketing methods to overcome gender-based constraints on mobility and concerns about interactions with unfamiliar men. This effort could include reaching women through membership in groups and/or associations, or by easing transport constraints by providing local delivery services. o Build on local women’s interest in trainings by offering instruction in applying and using fertilizers and other inputs to women producers through groups. o Model entrepreneurship opportunities by supporting women to become agents of the business to sell to other women within their villages. o Address concerns about fertilizer costs by offering sales in small packets or by providing a variety of purchase plans. o Consider targeting promotional discounts to families (including women) rather than targeting men alone, to promote more joint decision-making. In doing so, highlight family benefits from resulting income gains that can help provide for children’s schooling.

PRODUCERS

● Offer “integrated” or “bundled” services to producers to ease gender-based constraints of access to inputs, technology, and/or services.

In Bangladesh, the CARE Pathways program has had success in reaching women and strengthening empowerment with Farmer Field and Business Schools. This participatory, women-focused extension approach offers instruction about on-farm production techniques; proper nutrition; gender equality; marketing; and business management with gender dialogues with men/community leaders. The program has achieved adoption of improved agricultural techniques for over 65% of the 50,000 women in the Pathways program.21 This type of extension could be promoted by the private sector; it is not necessarily the purview of NGOs. However, the extension likely provided by the private sector would likely cover narrower topics than broad-based trainings offered by NGOs (de Brauw et al., 2017b).

20 The CARE Strengthening Dairy Value Chain project was one of the projects involved in IFPRI’s GAAP phase 1 work. 21 http://www.care.org/sites/default/files/documents/ffbs_innovation_brief.pdf

● Enlist extension agents to address gender-based social and mobility constraints by working with private suppliers of marketing information, bulking, and transport.

The DLEC LOOP activity, also in Bangladesh, works with village-based extension agents serving as aggregators to bulk produce (primarily vegetables) and secure transport to market, manage sales, and pay producers. Operations are managed using a mobile app to manage information on crop quantities, prices, and sales. Participants save time and money transporting their produce to the nearest market using Loop services. Participants report higher earnings when using the services.22

PROCESSORS

● Building on women’s reported preference to work in groups, future programming can introduce labor-saving technologies in jute processing to women through associations. ● Projects that can provide opportunities for women to engage in nodes of the value chain, such as in DJP manufacturing or as entrepreneurs, might have greater resonance with prevailing norms than efforts to bring women into field labor, while still offering a pathway toward women’s economic empowerment. Supporting Group Membership. ● Women’s groups can be the mechanism for projects and for businesses to offer technical instruction using farmer field schools and/or mentoring. Respondents who remembered attending training programs uniformly said they benefited from the experience and found the technical content to be helpful. ● Reported constraints on women’s mobility suggest that to the extent that trainings are held in the future, they could be held in their women’s own communities. Groups of women only might increase attendance by accommodating the concerns of many of women meeting with men outside the household. This concern, however, was less pronounced among the men and women in households of entrepreneurs (input suppliers and traders). ● Use groups to model gender-equitable behaviors and values to women and men. In Bangladesh, results from the Agriculture, Nutrition and Gender Linkages (ANGeL) project showed an increase in uptake of improved agricultural techniques among men and women who received joint instruction in their use.23 Empowering Gender Transformation ● The concept of empowerment, if defined as the ability to make and take decisions as an individual, was not seen as an appropriate or respected characteristic for women. Although some respondents, both men and women, saw this as acceptable for men when linked to economic and political affairs, joint decision making was more positively regarded for household affairs. In thinking about the market systems approach, future gender sensitization should consider how to incorporate household decision-making as a way to better include women. For instance, future NAAFCO lotteries could stipulate that a pair of spouses from a single household

22 http://www.digitalgreen.org/blogs/loop-mobile-app-makes-farm-to-market-linkages-easy/ 23 The ANGeL project being implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture in Bangladesh and aims to identify actions and investments in agriculture that can leverage agricultural development for improved nutrition, and to make recommendations about how to invigorate pathways to women’s empowerment, particularly within agriculture. The project explicitly recognizes the importance of gender along agriculture-nutrition impact pathways.

are eligible to enter, prompting greater inclusion of women in market participation. However, doing so requires an attitude change among implementers; including women in the targeting of promotional discounts was suggested in the planning phase of the impact evaluation, the AVC leadership was not receptive to including women in the targeting, or experimentation with such more inclusive targeting. ● Most respondents did not have a positive view of women who took decisions independently of their husbands or who worked outside the home. Such actions were associated with conditions of extreme poverty and/or distress, when women were widowed or had husbands unable to work or support the family. However, at the same time, many respondents expressed understanding for these women and some went further to express praise and/or respect. Future programming may consider exploring how women’s cooperatives may inspire social norm change and change community acceptance of women who make decisions independently. Women’s cooperatives, or women’s groups more generally, may also enhance women’s market participation because women may use their ‘strength in numbers’ to become major agents in local agricultural markets. The challenge, however, to implementing women’s groups is that they may initially be rejected by the community because they challenge social norms. ● Greater acknowledgement of women’s ability to work in business was reflected in comments by input suppliers and traders, either because these men entrepreneurs relied on their wives to “help” run their businesses or because they were aware of other women, in politics or in business, who were successful. ● Be sensitive to participants’ perspectives on what characterizes empowerment and that it may vary from definitions used to draft research instruments.

Specifically, empowered men are those who make participate in community decisions, while it is only appropriate for women to partake in joint decisions on domestic affairs. As such, when the current pro-WEAI instrument measure’s women’s decision-making, it is also measuring women who subvert social norms around decision-making. The significance of these differences is two- fold: researchers may need to adjust their definition of empowerment to be context specific, and to consider that future programming could challenge conservative gender norms. Future research should consider these discrepancies and how these discrepancies may inform potential analysis, particularly that of quantitative data. These differences also emphasize the importance of designing gender-sensitive programs, which consider how women and men may participate – and therefore benefit – differently. Further, some results point out how sub-groups of women (e.g., married or widowed) face different constraints. Future programming and project evaluations considering such nuances will be well placed to maximize development outcomes and offer rigorous evidence of how and why they work. ● Agricultural inputs, particularly when considered in isolation from the full context of the AVC project, may not be a viable strategy for facilitating gender transformation at this time. For instance, some women said they participated in spreading fertilizer, but restrictions on women’s mobility may prevent them from going to the markets to determine which fertilizer the household should use for jute production. In other words, women are excluded from weighing the positives and negatives to make decisions around fertilizer purchases, and perhaps agricultural inputs more generally. Further, one woman had remarked that she does not know about fertilizers – her husband does, and therefore he makes decisions about fertilizer in their household. Together, these comments suggest women may be excluded from participating in

decision-making because of asymmetrical information between men and women (i.e., women cannot learn about fertilizers from dealers in the marketplace, and therefore they must rely on their husbands to make decisions). A key assumption in the market systems approach is that private sector input suppliers can be instrumental in strengthening smallholder knowledge of best agricultural practices and thereby productivity, but women’s restricted mobility excludes them from obtaining such knowledge. The challenge, then, to facilitating gender transformation is that agricultural inputs are not an entry point for increasing women’s inclusion in their local agricultural markets, unless input sellers’ activities could be more inclusive for women, for instance by targeting women through groups. Benefits of participation in the jute value chain ● The primary benefit of jute for producers is cash income from jute sales. Both men and women acknowledged that jute cultivation provides them with an income that helps manage their cash flow, even if they were not always either aware or convinced that they were making a profit. ● Jute also provides jobs at other nodes of the chain for e.g., laborers involved in cultivation, extraction, and transport and wage workers in jute mills. Both men and women work in jute mills, and women are heavily involved in producing DJP through small shops and cooperatives. ● Although the literature has noted that many of those working in the jute supply chain are vulnerable to water-borne disease, exposure to a hazardous working environment, low wages, and seasonally dependent income, including women, (Akhter et al. 2016; Akter 2009; Switch- Asia n.d.), these concerns did not emerge as a strong theme in the interviews. Nor have efforts to introduce new technologies, such as ribbon retting, to reduce the soaking time, been particularly successful thus far. Benefits of technology ● Respondents clearly describe the drudgery of women’s work, both in the jute fiber extraction process as well as in domestic chores. At the same time, they describe the mobility and social constraints that limit most women’s engagement with the market. Agricultural technologies that can minimize labor burdens and mobile technologies that can enhance women’s ability to connect to suppliers and buyers could be another avenue for supporting women’s participation in and benefit from jute activities.

Benefits of mixed-methods approaches ● Another purpose of conducting the qualitative study was to validate the questions in the pro- WEAI survey tool. In the context of the qualitative study, this means trying to determine whether the survey was actually measuring what it intended to measure. There are implications to using the qualitative findings presented in future quantitative work. For instance, the language the participants use when discussing different activities may differ than that pre- selected for the quantitative survey. For instance, participants may be asked if they participate in “land preparation” in a future pro-WEAI survey. Typically, the work of “land preparation” involves multiple tasks, such as “clearing tree stumps,” “plowing land” and/or “spreading fertilizer. To answer meaningfully, the participants must interpret “land preparation” as including the same tasks intended in the survey. Further, a participant may complete one of these tasks, but unless they personally consider plowing or spreading fertilizer to be types of land preparation the pro-WEAI will not yield accurate measures. And, for example, if a man

42 plows, while a woman spreads fertilizer, they would both give an affirmative answer only if they know that “land preparation” involves both these activities.

The qualitative work presented here emphasizes local (emic) understandings of what the study populations knows about what they do. These perspectives can be integrated into future pro- WEAI surveys to ensure the resulting evaluation instrument is validated and takes accurate measures of what researchers intend to measure. Specific to the AVC work presented here, “bailing” and “grading jute” were identified as tasks measured in the quantitative midline survey but were not widely discussed in the qualitative work. This discrepancy may be because of differences in how the target population considers their agricultural tasks and how researchers do – differences that may influence the interpretation of results from future pro-WEAI work.

Appendix 1: NGOs/Organizations working in the interview locations The NGO names below were reported by respondents as working in their home districts. These are only a sample of actual NGOs working in those districts, as there are many more in operation that were not named, e.g., BRAC works throughout Bangladesh but was only named by a respondent in Narail.

District NGO Name

Faridpur ● Krishi Somprosaron ● Local informal group

Jhenaidah ● Temporary Seasonal Group ● ASA

Narail ● BRDB Samiti (Co-operatives) ● Grameen Bank ● GagoroniChkaraSamiti (Co-operatives) ● Water Development Board ● Pusti (Nutrition) ● Sahosh (Bravery) Jagoroni Group ● BRAC ● Ad-Din ● Astha ● USAID

Appendix 2: Focus Group Discussion Guide: Men or Women Background information

A1 Name of site/community/village

A2 Date (dd/mm/yyyy)

A3 Name of facilitator

A4 Name of note taker

A5 Other team member

Characteristics of the Respondents

Note to Interviewers: Fill out this information in advance from the quantitative survey list of selected participants and replacements. Confirm the information on-site with the respondents.

Code Name Sex Age Marital Project Other (survey status beneficia social ID) ry identity (M/S/W/D) Yes/No info

[add lines as needed]

* Ethnic, religious and/or caste group, as relevant (can be filled in by the note taker if known)

INTRODUCTION 1. What do men usually do in jute production, processing, and marketing? 2. In this community, are there ever situations where women do agricultural tasks that are typically only done by men? Follow up – what are these jobs and when would this happen? 3. What are the community views on these situations? 4. What do women do usually do in jute production, processing, and marketing? 5. In this community, are there ever situations where men do agricultural that are typically only done by women? Follow up – what are these jobs and when would this happen? 6. What are the community views on these situations? AVC INTERVENTION 1. Is anyone familiar with any jute projects in your community? [Note to interviews: Get a list of project names from the group. Follow up on the following questions for each project] a. Who provided the project? b. What was the project about? c. What conditions in the community have gotten better as a result of the project? d. What conditions in the community have gotten worse as a result of the project? 2. What have been your experiences getting t right inputs to use in jute cultivations? 3. Have you have had challenges in getting these inputs? 4. What have you tried to address those challenges?

5. Has jute production, processing, and marketing changed in your community over the last five years? Explain. EMPOWERMENT 1. What types of men are valued or respected in your village/community? 2. Why do you think that is? Explain. 3. How would you describe a man who makes important decisions and is able to act on them? (For example, about educating his children, his ability to move around freely in the community, or who gets involved in local government) 4. How does your community view these men? Explain. 5. What types of women are valued or respected in your village/community? 6. Why do you think that is? Explain. 7. How would you describe a woman who makes important decisions in her life and is able to act on them? (For example, about educating her children, her ability to move around freely in the community, or who gets involved in local government) 8. How does your community view these men? Explain. DECISION MAKING 1. Please describe how people make decisions in this community. 2. What kinds of decisions do husbands and wives usually make together? 3. What are the most common disagreements between men and women? 4. How do they resolve these disagreements? 5. Please describe how men and women in this community make decisions about jute production, processing, and marketing? 6. Are there any decisions about jute that men make by themselves? Explain. 7. Are there any decisions about jute that women make by themselves? Explain. 8. What are the most common disagreements between men and women about jute production, processing, and marketing? 9. How do they resolve the disagreements? 10. In this community, who in the household usually makes the decision about the income earned from jute? 11. Are there decisions about income from jute that men can make by themselves? Explain. 12. Are there decisions about income from jute that women can make by themselves? Explain. 13. Do household members usually know how much income other household members earn? 14. Does the amount of income earned by wives and husbands affect their relationships? Explain. 15. What are the most common disagreements between men and women have about income? 16. How do household members resolve these disagreements? 17. Are there households where women earn high incomes? What are these households like? 18. What is the opinion of the community about these women? 19. How has the way decisions are made changed in the last five years? MOBILITY 1. What types of places can women from your community go by themselves? 2. Are their places women cannot go by themselves? Explain.

3. Does it make a difference if she is married or single? Does it make a difference if she has children? Does it make a difference if her husband is away? 4. What would happen if women went to those places by themselves? 5. What would the community think if women went to those places by themselves? 6. What types of transportation do women use for jute production, processing, and marketing in your community? Explain. 7. What types of transportation do women use the most? Explain. 8. What types of transportation do men use the most? Explain. 9. Have the places women are able to go changed over the last five years? Explain.

Appendix 3: Key Informant Interview Guide: Men and Women (individually)

TIME

1. Tell me about a typical day. 2. Are there some tasks you would like to spend less time on? If no, why not? If yes, which tasks would you want to spend less time on? 3. What could help you spend less time on that those tasks? [Note to interviewer: If the respondent answers only with respect to their own efforts, follow up about other options that are broader, e.g., new technology or services] 4. Are there some tasks you would like to spend more time on? 5. What could help you spend more time on those tasks? [Note to interviewer: If the respondent answers only with respect to their own efforts, follow up about other options that are broader, e.g., new technology or services] 6. If you had an opportunity to learn about new agricultural practices or join a training course, would you want to participate in it? If no, explain your answer. 7. If yes, how would you change your schedule so that you could participate?

GROUP MEMBERSHIP

1. Do you know of any groups in this area? 2. Do you want to be in a group? If no, why? If yes, go to question 3. 3. Do you have time to participate in a group? If no, why? If yes, what group(s)? 4. For you, what are the advantages or benefits to being in a group? 5. Are there any disadvantages to being in a group (for you)?

Groups linked to the jute value chain

6. Tell me about any groups related to jute production, processing, and marketing in your community. 7. Are you a member of any of these groups? If no, why? (Note to interviewer: Be sure to clarify which node in the jute value chain the group is associated with, e.g., producers, processors, traders, exporters) 8. Have you joined a group that was organized through the AVC project? If no, why not? 9. What are the pre-conditions (“rules” in Bangla) for membership in this group? 10. Are any others in your family also group members? Explain. 11. What are some of the expectations for participation in the group by current members? 12. Does the group include both men and women? (yes/no) 13. If yes, do both men and women participate actively? Explain. 14. For you, what are the advantages or benefits to being in this group? 15. Are there any disadvantages to being in this group (for you)? 16. In your opinion, what are the benefits that women who are members receive from being in this group?

17. In your opinion, what are the benefits that men who are members receive from being in this group? 18. Are both men and women leaders (officers) in the jute group? 19. What are the qualifications (“rules” in Bangla) to be a leader in the jute group? 20. For whom it Is easier to be leaders – men or women? Explain.

PARTICIPATION IN THE JUTE VALUE CHAIN (results of training on employment, relates to empowerment)

1. How did you begin working with jute? 2. Tell me about your activities in jute production (e.g., cultivation, harvesting), processing (e.g., soaking, drying), and marketing (e.g., transport, sales, export). (Note to interviewer: Be sure to confirm activities in all nodes of the value chain) 3. What are the benefits of this work to you? (Note to interviewer: cash, in-kind, and social benefits) 4. Did you receive any training about these activities? 5. Tell us about whether you experienced any difficulties in attending the jute training. 6. Who provided the training? 7. What was the AVC agricultural training about? 8. What changes did you make to your jute-related practices based on the training? 9. What (if any) other benefits did you receive from the training? 10. Did any other household member attend a jute training? Who? If yes, did he or she tell you about what he or she learned? 11. [If interviewing a man who attended the AVC training, ask the following]: a. Tell us what you remember about the AVC training on women’s empowerment. b. Did you like having this topic presented as part of the agricultural training? Explain. c. Have you changed any practices at home after the women’s empowerment training? d. Tell us what you remember about the AVC training on nutrition. e. Did you like having this topic presented as part of the agricultural training? Explain. f. Have you changed any practices at home as after the nutrition training? 12. What inputs (other than labor) do you need to cultivate, process, or market jute? ([Note for interviewer: Follow up on any type of input not related to labor -- for cultivation: e.g., seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, etc.; for processing: fiber stripping, gloves, stakes, and twine; for marketing: twine for tying, bags for packing, etc.] 13. How do you obtain those inputs? [Note to interviewer: Follow up on all inputs mentioned] 14. Have you experienced challenges to obtain those inputs? Explain. 15. Have you received NPKS fertilizer from the AVC project or NAAFCO? (yes/no) If yes, what were your experiences with the process? 16. What services do you need cultivate, process, or market jute? ([Note for interviewer: services include extension and advisory services, equipment rental, credit, and/or market information or market linkages) 17. How do you access these services? 18. Have you experienced challenges in accessing these services? Explain. 19. Is there other work that you would prefer to do if you had the opportunity and the skills? Explain. 20. What jute products do you sell?

21. Do men and women sell different jute products? Explain. 22. Are women able to sell their products to anyone they like? Are men able to sell their products to anyone they like? Explain.

Hiring labor

23. Do you hire (for cash or in-kind ) laborers to work in jute cultivation, processing, and/or marketing? 24. Where do you find people to hire? 25. What do you look for when hiring someone? (Note to interviewers: This refers to personal qualities or attributes and skills) 26. Did you have trouble finding anyone to hire last season? Explain. 27. How do you manage this situation? Follow up: Did other members of your household meet these labor needs? Who? For which tasks? 28. Have you experienced changes in labor availability over the last five years? Explain. 29. Do you prefer to hire women for certain tasks? Explain. 30. How much do you pay for this work? (Note to interviewers: Follow up about how much they pay for each task) 31. Have you ever considered hiring men for the tasks women usually do? Explain. 32. Do you prefer to hire men for certain tasks? Explain. 33. How much do you pay for this work? (Note to interviewers: Follow up about how much they pay for each activity) 34. Have you ever considered hiring women for the tasks men usually do? Explain. 35. What kind of arrangement (written contract or oral agreement) do you make with hired labor? 36. Do you hire people with whom you have a long-term relationship or can you hire anyone you like? Explain. (Note to interviewer: Try to follow up about any existing patron-client relationships) 37. How do you determine how much to pay? 38. Do you ever purchase labor in advance? Explain.

Hired labor (e.g., daily laborers working in jute production, processing, and marketing)

1. Do you ever work as a day laborer in jute? 2. Why do you work as a day laborer in jute? 3. What kind of work of work do you do? 4. How do you find work in jute? 5. How far have you ever travelled to find work in jute? 6. Have you ever had trouble finding work? Explain. 7. How did you manage this situation? 8. Have you experienced changes in work availability over the last five years? Explain. 9. In the future, how far would you be willing to travel from your home community to find work in jute? 10. Can you work with anyone you like? 11. Do you have regular employers for whom you work? Explain. (Note to interviewers: Follow up on whether this involves patron-client relationships)

12. How do you earn your payment when working in jute (per day/other unit/seasonal)? (Note to interviewers: Follow up for each task) 13. Can you negotiate what they will pay you? 14. What are the advantages or benefits of working as a day laborer in jute? 15. What are the disadvantages of working as a day laborer in jute? 16. How do the wages in jute work compare to other agricultural labor?

DECISION-MAKING

20. Tell us how decisions about working in jute are made in your household? 21. Which decisions do you make yourself? 22. In your household, do women and men make any decisions about working on jute together? 23. What are the most common disagreements between men and women in the same household about jute? 24. How are these disagreements resolved? 25. Do you want to change your level of involvement with jute production, processing, or marketing? 26. If you want to change your level of involvement with jute production, processing, or marketing, how would you make that decision? Explain. 27. How do you make the decision to hire people to work in jute cultivation or processing? 28. How do you make the decision that you need to work as a day laborer in jute cultivation or processing? 29. In your household, do women and men make any decisions about household food purchasing together? 30. In your household, do women and men make any decisions about household food consumption together? 31. What are the most common disagreements between men and women in the same household about food? 32. How are these disagreements resolved? 33. How has decision-making changed in the last five years?

EMPOWERMENT

1. What types of women are valued or respected in your village/community? 2. Why do you think that is? Explain. 3. What types of men are valued or respected in your village/community? 4. Why do you think that is? Explain. 5. How would you describe a woman who makes important decisions in her life? (For example, about educating her children, her ability to move around freely in the community, or who gets involved in local government) 6. How would you describe a woman who can then act on those decisions? Follow up: What is this woman like? What is her life like? 7. Does the ability of a woman to make important decisions and act on them change over her life? 8. What would a man think if his wife acted this way during their marriage?

9. How would you describe a man who makes important decisions in his life? (For example, about educating his children, his ability to move around freely in the community, or who gets involved in local government) 10. How would you describe a man who can then act on those decisions? Follow up: What is this man like? What is his life like? 11. Does the ability of a man to make important decisions and act on them change over his life? 12. What would a woman think if her husband acted this way during their marriage? 13. In your opinion, does working in jute production, processing, or marketing facilitate a person’s ability to make important decisions in their lives and act on them? Explain. 14. In your opinion, is working in jute production, processing, or marketing of more help to either women or men? 15. Which activity is most helpful for women? (production, processing, or marketing)? Explain. 16. Which activity is most helpful for men? (production, processing, or marketing)? Explain. 17. What type of life would you like to see your daughters have as adults? 18. What type of life would you like to see your sons have as adults?

For women only: 1. What are some things you can do because you are a woman in jute production, processing, and marketing? 2. Are there certain women who cannot do those things? Explain. 3. What are some things you cannot do because you are a woman? 4. Are there certain women who can do those things? Explain. 5. Are there any things you would like to do, but cannot because you are a woman? Explain. 6. Are there any conditions where you do those things? What would happen if you did those things? For men only: 1. What are some things you can do because you are a man in jute production, processing, and marketing? 2. Are there certain men who cannot do those things? Explain. 3. What are some things you cannot do because you are a man? 4. Are there certain men who can do those things? Explain. 5. Are there any things you would like to do, but cannot because you are a man? Explain. 6. Are there any conditions where you do those things? What would happen if you did those things?

Appendix 4: Key Informant Interview Guide: Supplier

Background information A1 Name of site/community/market

A2 Date (Day/Month/Year)

A3 Name of interviewer

A4 Name of note taker

Characteristics of the respondent [Where possible, fill in from quantitative survey and confirm with respondent] B1 Name of respondent Household ID

B2 Sex B3 Age

B4 Name of respondent’s enterprise

B5 Type of enterprise (formal/informal, wholesale/intermediary/retail)

B6 Type of market (formal/informal)

INTRODUCTION – DESCRIPTION OF THE BUSINESS

1. How did you start your input supply business? 2. Who is the legal owner of the business? 3. Who manages the day to day operations of the business? 4. Who makes decisions about purchasing supplies and hiring employees? 5. What training or practice did you need to learn this work? 6. What investment did you need to begin to perform this work? 7. What items do you buy and sell for your business? 8. Why did you decide to buy and sell inputs for jute production and processing? 9. What are the characteristics of a person who operates or manages a successful input supply business? [Note to interviewers: Ensure that this question is about the management and not the ownership of the business] 10. Are there many women who are input sellers? Tell us about a woman that you know who has an input business, even it if is only small scale. 11. What challenges would a woman face in opening an input supply shop? Explain. 12. What challenges would men face in opening an input supply shop? Explain. 13. From whom do you buy inputs?

14. Do you have regular suppliers? If so, is there a contract with them? Explain. Follow up: Does it vary by the specific input? 15. Do you sell jute seed? Fertilizer? Other products used in jute production or processing? Follow up: Why did you decide to sell those inputs and not others? 16. Are you familiar with the Agricultural Value Chains (AVC) activity? Do you know if you have ever received any fertilizer from the AVC activity? If so, what was the experience like? 17. Are you familiar with NAAFCO NPKS fertilizer? Do you know if you have ever received this fertilizer? From what organization did you receive it? Tell me about your experience – e.g., how did you hear about it? Did the purchase go well? Was the product of good quality?

EMPLOYEES

1. Do you hire both men and women to work with you? Describe the types of jobs men and women do in your business. 2. How many employees do you have (how many men/how many women)? 3. Do you believe that men or women are better suited to particular jobs in your business? Explain. 4. Are there jobs in the input supply shop that are believed to be more difficult for women/men? Please give an example. 5. Are there jobs in the input supply shop that men or women are prohibited from doing? Please give an example. 6. Over the past five years, have you ever been unable to hire the labor you need for the shop? Explain. 7. What do you do when you are unable to find labor? Give me an example of when this happened to you and what you did. [Note to interviewer: Follow up to see if they asked for help from men and women in the household, and if so, which ones]

CUSTOMERS

1. Do you have both men and women as customers? Are there more men or women customers? Do women face any challenges in buying inputs? Explain. 2. Do you offer credit to your customers? Explain. 3. Who in the business makes decisions about offering credit? 4. What criteria do you use to make this decision? 5. Is it easier or harder for men or women to get access to credit? If so, how? 6. Are there differences in the products that men and women buy from you? If so, explain. 7. Do men and women buy at different times? If so, why do you think that is? 8. Do women customers face challenges purchasing from you? What kinds of problems (e.g. transport, knowledge, etc.)? 9. Do women have the knowledge they need to purchase the items they need?

CLOSING

1. Do you also grow and process jute yourself? Explain. Which inputs do you use on your crop?

Appendix 5: Key Informant Interview Guide: Traders Background information A1 Name of site/community/market

A2 Date (Day/Month/Year)

A3 Name of interviewer

A4 Name of note taker

Characteristics of the respondent [Where possible, fill in from quantitative survey and confirm with respondent] B1 Name of respondent Household ID

B2 Sex B3 Age

B4 Name of respondent’s enterprise

B5 Type of enterprise (formal/informal, wholesale/intermediary/retail)

B6 Type of market (formal/informal)

INTRODUCTION

1. How did you start your business? 2. What training or practice did you need to learn this work? 3. What investment did you need to begin to perform this work? 4. What items do you buy and sell for your business? 5. Why did you decide to buy and sell jute and jute-related products? 6. What are the characteristics of a person who is a successful buyer/trader? 7. What is the size of most of the traders in jute? Why might that be the case? 8. Do you process these products in any way before selling them? 9. Do you also grow and process jute yourself? Explain. Do you also sell the jute or jute products you produce?

DESCRIPTION OF BUYERS AND SELLERS 1. From whom do you buy jute products? (e.g., farmers, other traders, others) 2. How do you buy jute products? (Follow up: directly from the farmer at his/her field(s), in town, from another trader, wholesale or retail, etc.) 3. Do you have regular suppliers? If so, is there a contract with them? Explain. Follow up: Does it vary by commodity? 4. Do the producers experience any challenges getting their products to you?

5. Do you have both men and women as customers? Explain. 6. Do you hire both men and women to work with you? Describe the types of jobs men and women do in your business. 7. Do you offer credit, either to those from whom you buy or to whom you sell? Explain. 8. Where do you go to obtain credit for your trading business? 9. Is it easier or harder for men or women to get access to credit? If so, how? SEASONALITY AND PRICING

1. When do you buy jute fiber or other jute products? (E.g., right after harvest, daily, weekly, etc.) 2. Do men and women sell at different times? If so, why do you think that is? 3. How are prices determined? Are there higher prices for better quality? 4. Does anyone sell at a different time to get a higher price? Explain. 5. Does the product quality decline if the farmers don’t sell right away? 6. Do you believe that there are differences in the volume or quality of the product that you receive from men or women? 7. Is there bargaining? Fixed price? Follow up: Do you ever offer better prices to favored suppliers? Explain how that works. 8. How do you usually find out about the prices in the market? 9. Have you noticed any differences in negotiating prices between men and women suppliers? (Provide an example) GENDER-BASED CONSTRAINTS

1. Do both men and women supply jute materials to you? Explain. Follow up: Is it harder or easier for men or for women to bring the jute products to you? 2. Do women suppliers face challenges selling directly to you? What kinds of problems (e.g. transport, knowledge, etc.)? 3. Have you noticed any differences in buying from men or from women? 4. Are there many other women who are traders in jute and jute products? Explain. Is it easier or harder for women to do this work? What does it take to become a trader (resources, training, transport)? PAYMENT METHODS

5. How do you pay people for the produce (e.g. cash, mobile money, bank transfer, in kind, etc.)? 6. Is there a difference between how you pay men and women for their products? 7. How long does it take to pay them? 8. Do you provide advance payment (or a down payment) to your suppliers? Under what conditions? How is that deducted from the final amount? 9. How do you decide who you provide advance payments to? Do you offer it to both men and women? Do you offer the same conditions for the advance? 10. Are there differences in how men and women manage the advance payment?

Appendix 6: References A4NH (Agriculture for Nutrition and Health). 2017. Project in Bangladesh Aims to Strengthen Links Between Agriculture, Nutrition, and Gender. http://a4nh.cgiar.org/2017/05/02/project-in- bangladesh-aims-to-strengthen-links-between-agriculture-nutrition-and-gender/ Akhter, Salma. et. al., 2016, Jute Empowered Women Ensure Livelihoods (JEWEL) Baseline survey Report 2016, Study conducted by AARCED for Tradecraft. Akter, N. 2009. Role of Women Scientists and Workers in Bangladesh Jute Sector. Dhaka: Bangladesh Jute Research Institute. http://www.jute.org/Documents_Seminar_Workshop_Meeting/gender_workshop/07_DR.%20N Argis%20Akter%2C%20Role%20of%20Women%20in%20Bangladesh%20Jute%20Sector.pdf Ali, A. M. S. 2005. Homegardens in smallholder farming systems: examples from Bangladesh. Human Ecology, 33(2), 245-270. Asian Development Bank. 2010. Country Gender Assessment: Bangladesh. Manila, Philippines: Asian Development Bank. Bhatnagar, D., A. Dewan, M. Moreno and P. Kanungo. 2003. “Female Secondary School Assistance Project, Bangladesh.” The World Bank, Washington, DC. Bhuyian, M.H. 2016. A Case Study Value Chain Analysis of Diversified Products of Jute. Dhaka: BRAC University. Unpublished thesis. http://dspace.bracu.ac.bd/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10361/5409/Md.%20Mohaymanul%20Hasn at%20Bhuiyan.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Chowdhury, F.R., D. Gourab, V.Verma, D. Knipe, I. T. Isha, M. A. Faiz, D. Gunnell, and M. Eddleston. 2018. Bans of WHO Class I Pesticides in Bangladesh—suicide prevention without hampering agricultural output. International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 47, Issue 1: 175–184. https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/47/1/175/4085319 de Brauw, A., B. Kramer, H. Malapit, M. Murphy, and E. Yen. 2017a. Impact Evaluation Associated with the Bangladesh AVC Project Baseline Report. Washington, DC: IFPRI. de Brauw, A., B. Kramer, H. Malapit, E. Martinez, and M. Murphy, 2017b. Impact Evaluation Associated with the Bangladesh AVC Project: Midline Report. Washington, DC: IFPRI. Heath, R. and A. M. Mobarak. 2015. Manufacturing growth and the lives of Bangladeshi women. Journal of Development Economics 115:1-15. http://faculty.som.yale.edu/mushfiqmobarak/papers/garments.pdf International Center for Research on Women (ICRW). 2007. New insights on preventing child marriage: A global analysis of factors and programs. Washington, DC. International Jute Study Group(IJSG). 2011. A Framework Document for Preparing National Gender Action Plan (GAP) of the Jute Sector. Dhaka: IJSG. http://jute.org/IJSG%20Publications/Framework%20for%20GAP%20for%20Jute%20Sector.pdf

Islam, S. 2018. National Jute Day: Government initiatives aim to reclaim the golden era of jute. Dhaka Tribune. 6 March 2018. https://www.dhakatribune.com/business/2018/03/06/national-jute- day-govt-initiatives-aim-reclaim-golden-era-jute/# Kabeer, N., R. Assaad, A. Darkwah, S. Mahmud, H. Sholkamy, S. Tasneem and D. Tsikata. 2013. Paid work, women’s empowerment and inclusive growth: Transforming the structures of constraint. UN Women. http://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2013/1/paid-work- womens-empowerment-and-inclusive-growth#view Kamal, S. M. 2012. Decline in child marriage and changes in its effect on reproductive outcomes in Bangladesh. Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 30 (3), 317. KIT, Agri-ProFocus and IIRR. 2012. Challenging chains to change: Gender equity in agricultural value chain development. KIT Publishers, Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam. https://www.cordaid.org/en/wp- content/uploads/sites/3/2013/02/Challenging_chains_to_change.pdf Mair, J., and I. Marti. 2007. Entrepreneurship for social impact: encouraging market access in rural Bangladesh. Corporate governance: The international journal of business in society, 7(4), 493- 501. Ministry of Agriculture. 1999. National Agriculture Policy. Section 18.1.

Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock. 2007. National Livestock Development Policy. Section 4.7.

Markel, E., R. Hess, and H. Loftin. 2015. Making the Business Case: Women’s Economic Empowerment In Market Systems Development. Leveraging Economic Opportunities Brief No. 1. Washington, DC: ACDI/VOCA. http://avwebmaster.wpengine.com/wp- content/uploads/2016/05/Making_the_Business_Case_508_Compliant.pdf

Markel, E. and L. Jones. 2015. Women’s Economic Empowerment: Pushing the Frontiers of Inclusive Market Development. Leveraging Economic Opportunities Brief. Washington, DC: ACDI/VOCA. https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAC333.pdf Moazzem, K. G. 2011. Gender Disparity or Gender Parity: Is there any difference in an industry operated at low equilibrium level? Presentation prepared for the Interactive workshop on gender sensitization in the jute sector-Bangladesh. http://www.jute.org/Documents_Seminar_Workshop_Meeting/gender_workshop/04_Dr%20Kh ondaker%20Golam%20Moazzem.pdf Osario-Cortes, L., and M. Lundy. 2018. Behavior Change Scale-Up in Market Systems Development: A Literature Review. Paper prepared for the Policies, Institutions, and Markets CGIAR Research Program. Parveen, S. 2008. Access of rural women to productive resources in Bangladesh: a pillar for promoting their empowerment. International Journal of Rural Studies, 15(1). Quisumbing, Agnes R.; Roy, Shalini; Njuki, Jemimah; Tanvin, Kakuly; and Waithanji, Elizabeth. 2013. Can dairy value-chain projects change gender norms in rural Bangladesh? Impacts on assets, gender norms, and time use. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1311. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/127982

Rahman, S. 2000. Women's employment in Bangladesh agriculture: composition, determinants and scope. Journal of Rural Studies, 16(4), 497-507. Salway, S., Jesmin, S., & Rahman, S. (2005). Women's employment in urban Bangladesh: A challenge to gender identity?. Development and Change, 36(2), 317-349. Switch-Asia. 2015. Strengthening the value chain of jute diversified products in Bangladesh. Dhaka: Switch-Asia project. http://www.switch- asia.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/2015/Switch_Asia_Impact_Sheet_-_2015_- _Jute_Diversified_Products.pdf UNICEF. 2014. Ending Child Marriage: Progress and prospects. New York. https://www.unicef.org/media/files/Child_Marriage_Report_7_17_LR..pdf UN Treaty Collection. 2018. Convention on Human Rights: Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV- 8&chapter=4&lang=en UN Women. 2015. Progress of the World’s Women 2015 – 2016: Transforming Economies, Realizing Rights. http://www.unwomen.org/- /media/headquarters/attachments/sections/library/publications/2015/poww-2015-2016- en.pdf?la=en&vs=0