The Pennsylvania State University

The Graduate School

GENDER AND LEADERSHIP OF AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES:

THE CASE OF CAMBODIA

A Thesis in

Rural Sociology

by

Sovanneary Huot

© 2020 Sovanneary Huot

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Science

May 2020

The thesis of Sovanneary Huot was reviewed and approved* by the following:

Leif Jensen Distinguished Professor of Rural Sociology and Demography Thesis Advisor

Ann R. Tickamyer Professor Emerita of Rural Sociology, Sociology, Demography, and Gender, Women’s, and Sexuality Studies

Ricky M. Bates Professor of Horticulture

David R. Ader Research Assistant Professor, The University of Tennessee

Kathryn Brasier Professor of Rural Sociology Director of Graduate Studies in Rural Sociology

iii ABSTRACT

Gender inequality in the agriculture sector remains a global concern. There is increasing evidence that having women in leadership roles is critical to foster gender equity. Cambodia is marked by a lack of women representatives in leadership and decision-making positions at every level, a problem that is clearly seen in agriculture. There are only a few reports on women and leadership in Cambodia. In particular, there is a need to better understand financial and time constraints for women in acquiring leadership positions. In this study, I examine the representation of women in leadership positions, document the extent and nature of women’s decision-making power, and describe the barriers they face in acquiring and continuing in leadership roles. Qualitative data were gathered through focus group discussions and key informant interviews within two agricultural cooperatives in Siem Reap and Battambang province in Cambodia. This thesis finds that women in these two cooperatives do have leadership opportunities and seem to enjoy equal power as male leaders. However, women face challenges in acquiring and participating in leadership roles. Obstacles include domestic work burden, which limits time for activities outside the farmstead, low education, which inhibits capacity and confidence in being able to serve as leaders, and lack of proper compensation tied to leadership positions. The study concludes that if government agencies, policymakers, donors, NGOs, and others want women to play a greater leadership role, they need to reduce the interrelated constraints of time poverty, lack of capacity, and insufficient compensation.

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures ...... vi

List of Tables ...... vii

List of Boxes ...... viii

List of Abbreviations ...... ix

Acknowledgments...... xi

Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 1

The case of Cambodia ...... 3

Chapter 2 Literature Review ...... 8

Concept of leadership ...... 9 Theoretical framework ...... 11 Gender Transformative Approach (GTA) ...... 11 Women’s empowerment theory ...... 17 Gender leadership in Cambodia ...... 22 Barriers to women in acquiring leadership roles ...... 22 Constraining social and cultural norms ...... 23 Gender discrimination in education ...... 25 Family duties and leadership work burdens ...... 30 Economic barriers ...... 31 Research question ...... 33

Chapter 3 Methods ...... 34

Goal ...... 34 Women in Agriculture Network (WAgN) Cambodia ...... 35 Research setting ...... 36 The setting of Khom Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung Agricultural Cooperative (KKSRAC) ...... 37 The setting of Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative (TSAC) ...... 39 Research approach ...... 40 Research sampling ...... 42 Participant recruitment ...... 43 Data gathering strategy ...... 44 Focus group discussion ...... 44 Key informant interview ...... 45

v Data analysis strategy ...... 46 Transcription ...... 46 Coding ...... 47 Ethical issues ...... 48

Chapter 4 The Overview of the Two Cooperatives ...... 49

Khom Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung Agricultural Cooperative (KKSRAC) ...... 51 Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative (TSAC) ...... 57

Chapter 5 Interpretation and Analysis of Findings ...... 65

Leadership opportunity ...... 65 Representation and organization of women in leadership positions ...... 67 Barriers to women in acquiring leadership roles ...... 70 Domestic work burden ...... 70 Lack of capacity and low education ...... 72 Working without salary ...... 75 Motivation and confidence ...... 80 Women in decision-making ...... 82 Men’s perspective toward female leadership ...... 87 Mechanisms to increase the involvement of women already in leadership positions ..... 88 Capacity building ...... 90 Benefits in joining agricultural cooperatives ...... 93 Bargaining power ...... 94 Learning new agricultural techniques ...... 94 Improving food security and nutrition ...... 97 Making income, reducing poverty ...... 99 Easy accessing to credit services ...... 102

Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusion ...... 106

Restatement of the problem ...... 106 Restatement of the methods ...... 107 Summary of findings ...... 108 Implication for policies and academics ...... 114 Limitation and suggestions for future research ...... 114

References ...... 116

Appendix : List of Questionnaires for Focus Group Discussion ...... 126

vi LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Gender transformative approach (GTA) ...... 17

Figure 2: Women’s empowerment theory...... 21

Figure 3: Map of Cambodia and study setting...... 37

Figure 4: The two Famer Cooperatives, KKSRAC and TSAC ...... 40

Figure 5: The structure of KKSRAC ...... 52

Figure 6: The structure of TSAC ...... 59

vii LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Enrollment rate at the primary level by sex ...... 28

Table 2: Net enrollment rate by school levels ...... 28

Table 3: Students at higher education ...... 29

Table 4: Literacy rate 15 years and above ...... 30

Table 5: Research study participants ...... 42

viii LIST OF BOXES

Box 1: A Human-Interest Story ...... 77

ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AAS Aquatic Agricultural Systems ADB Asian Development Bank ADDA Agricultural Development Denmark Asia AIN Aquaculture for Income and Nutrition AR4D Agriculture Research for Development BFP Boosting Food Production BoD Board of Director BTB Battambang province CCHR Cambodian Center for Human Rights CGIAR The Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research CIFSRF The Canadian International Food Security Research Fund CPS Center for Population Study CWD The Commission on Women and Development FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations FGD Focus Group Discussion GADC Gender and Development for Cambodia GTAs Gender Transformative Approaches IDRC Canada’s International Development Research Centre IBSSVVCC The Innovations to Build and Scale Safe Vegetable Value Chains in Cambodia IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute ILO International Labour Organization IPM Integrated Pest Management JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency KII Key Informant Interview KKSRAC Khom Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung Agricultural Cooperative LEAF Lowering Emissions in Asia’s Forests MDG Millennium Development Goal MoP Ministry of Planning MoWA Ministry of Women’s Affairs

x MoEYS Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport NIS National Institute of Statistic PDA The Provincial Department of Agriculture READA Rural Economic & Agriculture Development Agency RUA Royal University of Agriculture RUPP Royal University of Phnom Penh SC Supervisory Committee SIIL Sustainable Intensification Innovation Lab SI Sustainable Intensification SR Siem Reap province SRAUAC Siem Reap Angkor Union Agricultural Cooperative TSAC Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative UNICEF United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNDP United Nations Development Programme UN-REDD The United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation USAID The United States Agency for International Development WAgN-Cam Women in Agriculture Network project in Cambodia WB World Bank WEIA The Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index WOCAN Women Organizing for Change in Agriculture and Natural Resource Management ZOI Zone of Influence

xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my extremely grateful to my advisor, Dr. Leif Jensen,

Distinguished Professor of Rural Sociology and Demography, for your incredible support, guidance, and motivation throughout my time at Penn State. I would also like to express my most profound appreciation to my committee members, Dr. Ann R. Tickamyer, Dr. Ricky M. Bates, and Dr. David R. Ader, for your support, valued advice, and encouragement throughout this whole process.

I acknowledge the support of The Pennsylvania State University and partners implementing the Women in Agriculture Network: Cambodia (WAgN-Cambodia) project. This project received support from the USAID-funded Sustainable Intensification Innovation Lab

(SIIL) at Kansas State University.

I would like to thank Saren Ry, Channaty Neang, and Davuth Nin in Cambodia for your help in arranging the participants for the interview. I would also like to express my sincerest thanks to the committee leaders and members of The Khom Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung

Agricultural Cooperative (KKSRAC) in Siem Preap Province and The Tasey Samaki Agricultural

Cooperative (TSAC) in Battambang province, Cambodia, who participated in this study. This research would not have been possible without their support and generosity.

I am greatly indebted to my husband, Vibol Morm, for accompanying me on this journey to State College, Pennsylvania, and for sharing with me the struggles of life as an international graduate student. Finally, many thanks to my parents, my mother-in-law, sisters, brothers, sisters- in-law, and brothers-in-law for their understanding and letting us pursue our goal.

1

Chapter 1

Introduction

According to a report by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations

(FAO), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and World Bank (WB), globally, there are almost 795 million people facing hunger (FAO, IFAD, & WFP, 2015). Among them, 780 million are people in developing countries. Economic growth is a key to address this chronic poverty. It increases employment opportunities leading to generate more household income. During the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) monitoring period, the least developed and developing countries had their economic growth increased by 3.4 percent, on average (FAO et al., 2015). However, the benefits of economic growth are diverse across geographic regions. For example, the poorest of the poor have low education and limited access to resources, especially financial. Thus, they have fewer opportunities to benefit from economic growth. Around 75 percent of the world poor live in rural areas (FAO et al., 2015).

There is ample recognition by the international development community that agricultural development is a promising mechanism to deal with food shortage, reducing poverty and enhancing the economic growth in developing countries (Bunch & Mehra, 2008; Doss et al.,

2011; FAO et al., 2015). Investment in agriculture is three times more effective in reducing extreme hunger than other sectors (FAO et al., 2015). However, the agriculture sector in many of those countries is underperforming (Doss et al., 2011). Women are considered to be significant food producers, household income earners, and knowledge sharers (Bunch & Mehra, 2008; Doss,

Meinzen-Dick, Quisumbing, & Theis, 2018; FAO et al., 2015). As Bunch & Mehra (2008, p. 2) claim that “[a] key failing of past efforts to reduce hunger and increase rural incomes has been the lack of attention paid to women as farmers, producers and entrepreneurs in their communities.” In

2 developing countries, on average, 43 percent of the agricultural labor force consists of women.

Among them, 79 percent have their primary source of livelihood within agriculture (FAO,

2011b). The limitations and constraints of women in access to land tenure, financial services, and other productive resources contribute to this underperformance of agriculture. This unequal access impedes women from fully participating in the growth of agriculture and the rural economy in developing countries (Bunch & Mehra, 2008; Doss et al., 2011; Quisumbing et al.,

2014). Therefore, FAO (2011b) and FAO (2011a) demonstrate that closing the gender gap in agricultural resources and inputs would help to increase the productivity of women farmers from

20 to 30 percent. Correspondently, agricultural production in developing countries would increase by 2.5 to 4 percent, leading to a decrease in world malnutrition by 12-17 percent or by 100 to 150 million people.

To close the gender gap in agriculture, Ragasa, Kinwa-Muzinga, & Ulimwengu (2012) suggest that there is a need for more women in leadership positions. These options could include increasing the number of women members in community governance, local development organizations, or agricultural cooperatives. Once women have the chance to take up leadership positions, they can ensure women are valued and recognized as equal as male counterparts. They can elevate women’s voices and ensure that they are heard, and they can participate in decision- making on agriculture, food security, and nutrition. Thus, women would be able to access information, resources, and support related to agriculture when needed (Ragasa et al., 2012).

Closing the gender gap allows women to own and have control over productive assets and to have decision-making power over the production. As a result, they can improve their productivity, increase efficiency, and enhance self-esteem (Quisumbing et al., 2014).

3 The case of Cambodia

Cambodia is located in Southeast Asia, bordering between Thailand,

Vietnam, and Laos. Cambodia has an area of 181,035 square kilometers, with a total population of 15,288,489, and women represent 51.5 percent of the country’s population (NIS, 2019).

Between 1975-1979 Cambodia was under the Khmer Rouge regime. This genocidal regime claimed millions of Khmer lives. In addition, cultural, social, and economic activities, including infrastructure, were banned and destroyed (Clayton, 1998). The Cambodian people and the government have tried hard to reinstall the country after the Khmer Rouge regime was overthrown. Over the past twenty years, Cambodia has achieved remarkable economic growth with an annual growth rate of above seven percent. The poverty rate remarkably dropped from about 50 percent in 2007 to only 13.5 percent in 2014 (ADB, 2019). With this economic development, Cambodia was reclassified in 2016 as a lower-middle-income country by the World Bank. Unfortunately, Cambodia remains one of the poorest countries in Asia and the second poorest country in ASEAN. In Cambodia, the majority (77 percent) of the population lives in rural areas (NIS, 2016). Women play a critical role in both the country’s economy (FAO, 2010) and ensuring food security (ADB, 2015; JICA, 2007). Nevertheless, their efforts and contribution remain unseen (FAO, 2010). Similar to other developing countries,

Cambodian women face some gaps compared to men, for example, accessing land tenure, extension services, agricultural tools and techniques, and financial services (ADB, 2015; JICA,

2007).

Cambodia is characterized by hierarchies and patriarchal social and political structures.

This structure positions men as breadwinners, who are expected to take primary care for the families’ well-being and responsibility for the economic security of the family members. Women are expected to manage domestic work and are considered to be under the protection of husbands

4 (Booth, 2014; WOCAN, UN-REDD, & USAID, 2013). Cultural and traditional norms portray women as caretakers and housekeepers, which ties women to domestic responsibilities that limit their agency, mobility, and opportunities (Booth, 2014; WOCAN et al., 2013). Women are overburdened with domestic work and reproductive activities (ADB, 2013; USAID, 2016).

Although men share some unpaid family work, 60.4 percent of unpaid family work is done by women (JICA, 2007). According to the ADB, the gender unpaid work gap was 3.5 hours per day in 2004 for a married couple aged between 18 to 64 years (ADB, 2013). Women have additional responsibility for making income. Ensuring economic security for their families is the primary concern for women. Thus, women have triple roles as farmers, caretakers, and cash earners (MoP,

1999; MoWA, 2014a; Tanwir & Safdar, 2013). These multiple roles and workloads, hold back

Cambodian women from attending any distant activities (WOCAN et al., 2013). Any activity that takes away time for essential income-generating work would discourage women’s participation

(CCHR, 2013; MoWA, 2014b). Family duties and work burden pose barriers for women attending higher education, participating in economic activities, and engaging in leadership positions (Chhoeun, Sok, & Byrne, 2008; MoWA, 2014b).

According to the Ministry of Education Youth and Sport (MoEYS, 2014), 73.6 percent of women are literate compared to 86.4 percent of men in Cambodia. Cambodia is marked by rural- urban differences in the living standards of farmers and that of women. Female students from low-income families and ethnic minorities, especially in rural areas, are even more disadvantaged

(MoWA, 2014c). Women in urban areas have better access to resources, including education, finance, and agricultural technology. Generally, urban females have higher school enrolment and a greater proportion pursuing higher degrees. Consequently, the literacy rate of farmers is lower than the average of the overall literacy rate. Approximately, 72 percent of agricultural household heads can read and write a simple message (MAFF, 2015). The gap is quite high between male and female agricultural household heads. Only 42 percent of the female of agricultural household

5 heads are literate compared to 80 percent of their male counterparts (Doss et al., 2011). This educational gap between men and women directly affects the development of women in leadership positions. Attaining a low level of education leads to women having less confidence and with less experience as well as fewer tools to take on leadership roles. Therefore, the representation of women in leadership and decision-making positions remains low at every level, especially at the grass-roots level (ADB, 2012; MAFF, 2006).

Some efforts have been made by the government, development partners, and local organizations to promote gender equality and equity. Those efforts have made some progress and yielded some results. However, women are still underrepresented in leadership and decision- making positions at every level, especially at the grass-roots level (ADB, 2012; Keothyda &

Malika, 2016; MAFF, 2006). In the government, women occupy very few leadership positions.

The culture of discrimination against women still exists in the current institutional system of the

Royal Government of Cambodia, although there is a commitment to eliminate gender inequality.

The traditional preference for the masculine model of politics has limited women's engagement in leadership roles and the political sphere (Hill & Ly, 2004; Keothyda & Malika, 2016).

There are a few reports on women and leadership in Cambodia. For instance, the report by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs (MoWA, 2014d) on ‘Women in public decision-making and

Politics’; by USAID (2016) on ‘Cambodia Gender Assessment’; by Chhoeun, Sok, and Byrne

(2008) on ‘Strengthening Female Leadership in Rural Cambodia’; by Keothyda and Malika

(2016) on ‘Progress of Women in Politics in Cambodia’; by (Lund, 2013) on Women’s

Leadership’; and Ly (2015) on ‘Leadership Pathways for Local Women: Case Studies of Three

Communes in Cambodia.’ Among these reports, there are only two empirical research studies, Ly and Lund. Ly interviewed around 25 local authorities and key informants in three different communes from Kampong Cham, Kratie, and Steung Treng provinces. The findings indicate that women’s personal or individual characteristics (education, motivation, confidence, and attitude)

6 and external factors (intervention from government and NGOs) contribute to their pathways in participating in leadership positions. Interestingly, interviews uncovered other barriers arise, including financial and time constraints. However, on this point the author could not go into greater depth. An implication is that there is a scientific need for research focusing on financial and time constraints as barriers faced by women in acquiring leadership positions. I seek to fill this gap through this study of the barriers that women face in acquiring and retaining leadership roles within two farmer cooperatives in Cambodia.

I chose to study these two cooperatives because they fall under a USAID-funded project known as the Women and Agriculture Network Cambodia project (WAgN-Cambodia). This project is designed to empower women and improve the economic and nutritional well-being of women and their families. With funding channeled through the Sustainable Intensification

Innovation Lab (SIIL) at Kansas State University, the objective of WAgN-Cambodia is to identify and foster enabling conditions and social networks for women to fully participate in the local, regional, and international value chains for horticultural and other foods produced via sustainable intensification (SI) practices.

This thesis is divided into six chapters. In Chapter 1: Introduction, I describe the context of world hunger, the crucial roles of women in addressing this issue, the gender gap in the agriculture sector, and the need for more women’s leaders to address this gap. Here I also briefly describe the context of social and cultural norms, domestic responsibilities, educational situation, and economic status of women in Cambodia. In Chapter 2: Literature Review, I review the key ideas and literature that support this thesis. I will start by explaining the concept of leadership, followed by the theoretical framework, and the treatment of gendered leadership in Cambodia.

Finally, I will present the research questions. Chapter 3: Methods, explains the research goals of the WAgN-Cambodia project generally and of this study in particular. Then I will explain the setting and the approach of research, followed by respondent sampling, participant recruitment,

7 data gathering, as well as data analysis strategies, and ethical issues. Chapter 4: The Overview of the two Cooperatives, provides an overview of the two cooperatives, the Khom Khnat Samaki

Roung Roeung Agricultural Cooperative and the Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative. In

Chapter 5: Interpretation and Analysis of Findings, I first will present findings on the leadership opportunities, the representation and organization of women in leadership positions, followed by barriers to women in acquiring leadership roles. Then I will present findings regarding motivation and confidence, women in decision-making, and men’s perspectives toward female leadership. In the same chapter, I draw on these results to describe the mechanisms to increase the involvement of women already in leadership positions, promote capacity building, and finally, the benefits of joining agricultural cooperatives. In the final chapter, Chapter 6: Discussion and conclusion, I will restate the problem, the theoretical approach, and restate the methods. I will summarize and discuss the findings and elaborate on their implication for policies in Cambodia. I also discuss caveats and offer suggestions for future research.

8 Chapter 2

Literature Review

Almost 795 million people are hungry every day (FAO et al., 2015). There is rising evidence of the vital contribution of gender equality on poverty reduction and food security improvement, because women are considered to be significant food producers, household income earners, and knowledge sharers (Bunch & Mehra, 2008; Doss et al., 2018; FAO et al., 2015).

Notwithstanding, gender inequality in the agriculture sector remains a significant concern among local governments and development partners, including the World Bank, FAO, USAID, as well as other bi-literal and multi-lateral donors. The limitation and the constraint of women in access to land tenure, financial service, and other productive resources contribute to the underperforming of agriculture. This unequal access hinders women from fully participating in the growth of agriculture and the rural economy in developing countries (Bunch & Mehra, 2008; Doss et al.,

2011; Quisumbing et al., 2014). The CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems

(2012) argues that, “… past efforts to integrate gender into agricultural research and development practice have failed to address gender inequalities that limit women’s access to agricultural inputs, markets, sources, and advice” (p. 3). Wakefield (2017) suggests that having women in leadership roles is believed to promote social equality and equity because women are less hierarchical, more cooperative, and collaborative. Moreover, they are more likely than men to advocate for policy changes for promoting the interests of women, children, and families.

Similarly, in Cambodia, women play a critical role in both the country’s economy (FAO,

2010) and ensuring food security (ADB, 2013, 2015). Nevertheless, their effort and contribution remain largely unseen (FAO, 2010). Therefore, this study aims to assess the representation of women in leadership positions in two farmer cooperatives in Cambodia to gain an understanding of women’s representation in leadership positions, the extent, and nature of their decision-

9 making, and the barriers they face in acquiring leadership roles. And the purpose of this chapter is to review key ideas and literature that support this thesis. Thus, first, I am going to explain the concept of leadership, followed by the theoretical framework, then gender leadership in

Cambodia. Finally, I will present the research questions.

Concept of leadership

What is leadership? As a popular concept that it is, there are many different definitions for leadership (Burns, 1978; M. Fairholm, 2002; Northouse, 2010, 2018; Praszkier, 2018;

Winston & Patterson, 2006). Bennis & Nanus (1985) found 350 leadership definitions from thousands of studies. Pye (2005) suggests that there are over 35,000 different leadership definitions in the academic literature. They vary by discipline (political science, economics, psychology, and so on), experiences, contexts, and situations. In addition, some scholars define leadership differently depending on whether it is a trait, ability, skill, behavior, relationship, or as a process of influence. For instance, G. Fairholm (1991) defines leadership from a skills perspective. He states that “[leadership is] the integrating capacity to use these skills as well as others-in complex social interactions” (p. 4).

Some scholars view leadership as an influencing process to bring about change in order to achieve a common goal. For example, Fairholm (2002) sees leadership as “the art of influencing people to accomplish organizational goals” (p. 34). Praszkier (2018) borrowed from

Bellows (1959) to define leadership as “the process of arranging a situation so that various members of a group, including the leader, can achieve common goals with maximum economy and a minimum of time and work.” Similarly, Northouse (2018) studied various existing definitions of leadership and then concluded that “[l]eadership is a process whereby an individual influence a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 7).

10 Others define leadership as an act or behavior of leaders. Burns (1978) sees it as “leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations – the wants and needs, the aspiration and expectations – of both leaders and followers. And the genius of leadership lies in the manner in which leaders see and act on their own and their followers’ values and motivations” (p. 19). Bourns, in his chapter in “The Quest for General Theory of

Leadership” by Goethals & Sorenson (2006), expresses that leadership is about the morally right way that leaders should lead followers to achieve common goals. It is beyond the jobs that leaders actually do. He then concludes that “leadership as an influence process, both visible and invisible, in a society inherited, constructed, and perceived as the interaction of person in human (and inhuman) conditions of inequality ― an interaction measured by ethical and moral values and by the degree of realization of intended, comprehensive, and durable change” (p. 239).

Finally, some scholars view leadership in terms of the power relation between leaders and followers. For instance, Batliwala (2011) says leadership is mainly about power. “[I]t is about holding power, exercising power, and changing the distribution and relations of power, in multiple forms and settings” (p. 33). Various researchers and scholars have identified different leadership styles. The two most common leadership styles are transactional leadership (Burns,

1978; Downton, 1973; Praszkier, 2018) and transformational leadership (Burns, 1978; Downton,

1973; Praszkier, 2018). Under a transactional leadership style, leaders share information with followers but do not take into consideration the needs of their followers. Leaders monitor their subordinates’ behavior and their relationship with them. Leaders use a system of rewards and punishments with followers (Burns, 1978; Downton, 1973; Praszkier, 2018). Under a transformational leadership style, leaders work with followers to identify a vision through inspiration and motivation. Leaders build up trust and respect among subordinates and support the individual needs of followers (Burns, 1978; Downton, 1973; Praszkier, 2018).

11 The above suggests that leadership is a power relation between leaders and followers. It involves an influence process that leaders use to induce followers to willingly and enthusiastically work to achieve common goals. To foreshadow, in this thesis, I draw on this perspective to examine the power relations evidence among the leadership committees of two farmer cooperatives in Cambodia. I will also seek to provide an understanding of the extent to which women at these two cooperatives have been empowered. To place women’s empowerment in a theoretical context, I next describe two theoretical frameworks: the Gender Transformative

Approach (GTA) and Women’s Empowerment Theory.

Theoretical framework

Gender Transformative Approach (GTA)

The Gender Transformative Approach (GTA) has been increasingly recognized as an important fundamental approach to understanding gender inequality, to addressing the social norms, attitudes, behaviors, and social systems that underlie gender disparities, and to promote change the current system of power imbalances so as to reduce social inequalities, ensure equitable benefits between men and women (Beuchelt & Badstue, 2013; CGIAR Research

Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems, 2012; Cole, Kantor, Sarapura, & Rajaratnam, 2014;

Cornwall & Rivas, 2015; FHI 360, 2012; Hillenbrand, Karim, Wu, & Mohanraj, 2015; IFAD,

2019; Kantor, Morgan, & Choudhury, 2015; Poulsen, 2018; Rottach, Schuler, & Hardee, 2009;

Wong, Vos, Pyburn, & Newton, 2019). As Rottach et al. (2009, p.8) emphasize, “[g]ender- transformative approaches actively strive to examine, question, and change rigid gender norms and imbalance of power … [and] encourage critical awareness among men and women of gender

12 roles and norms; promote the position of women; challenge the distribution of resources and allocation of duties between men and women; and/or address the power relationships between women and others in the community.” Studying the underlying causes of gender disparity as well as changing social norms and existing power dynamics are the cores value of GTA. Indeed, it is its focus on root causes that distinguishes GTA from other gender development approaches that lack this explicit concern (Kantor et al., 2015; Poulsen, 2018).

Some organizations and agencies admitted the limitation of the current approaches to their gender development projects and programs and found GTAs as the most promising approaches. For example, at the launching of FHI 360’s Gender Integration Framework, FHI 3601 acknowledges the importance of GTAs. It holds that “gender transformative approaches actively attempt to examine, question and to change harmful gender norms and the imbalance of power between women and men as a means of reaching development and gender equality objectives”

(FHI 360, 2012, p.10). FHI 360 describes some existing projects that focused only on the quantity of women’s involvement in the projects, with no consideration of the underlying structures and norms that perpetuate gender inequality. One example pointed out by FHI 360 was an education project concerned with gender disparities in access to education in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. They noted that the project only made the community aware of the importance of education for girls; it did not examine the root causes that hinder girls from attending school.

The GTAs were initially implemented in the health sector. It has been commonly used to promote change in the attitudes and behaviors of people related to general health issues, reproductive health, and nutrition (CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems,

2012). The GTA seeks to create an enabling environment for women making their own decisions affecting their own health. According to (Rottach et al., 2009), the implementation of the GTA in

1FHI 360 is a nonprofit organization working to improve the health and well-being of people in the United States and throughout the world. It is committed to advancing gender equality through its various development projects.

13 the health sector has been quite successful. Although the adoption of the GTA in the agricultural sector is more recent, it has already been widely implemented (CGIAR Research Program on

Aquatic Agricultural Systems, 2012). For instance, the Consultative Group for International

Agricultural Research (CGIAR) committees integrates GTA into some of its research programs and implementation projects (CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems, 2012).

The CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems (AAS) adopted GTAs to help achieve the goal of enhancing development outcomes of resource-poor women and men and their families in a sustainable manner at five program hubs located in Solomon Islands, Philippines,

Cambodia, Bangladesh and Zambia (Cole et al., 2014).

Kantor et al. (2015) conducted the research study to identify the potential principles of agriculture research, which they named ‘the guiding principles of agriculture research for development (AR4D)’. The researches were conducted with two USAID-funded projects (Cereal

Systems Initiative for South Asia in Bangladesh (CSISA-BD) and Aquaculture for Income and

Nutrition (AIN) in Southwest Bangladesh. The research findings recommend integrating GTAs in agriculture research by introducing five key elements2 (Kantor et al., 2015). These five key elements of research have received full support from Poulsen (2018). She integrated these five key elements in her discussion paper on ‘Implementing Gender Transformative Approaches

(GTAs) in Agricultural Initiatives.’

The Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (CIFSRF) is a CAD $124.5 million research for development program implemented by Canada’s International Development

Research Centre (IDRC) and Global Affairs Canada since 2009. CIFSRF aims to improve the

2 The five key elements of GTAs include: 1). Development of a deep understanding of people in their context and the way social inequalities intersect to affect choices and outcomes; 2). Engagement with both women and men as both have a role and stake in gender-transformative change; 3). Engagement with different actors and institutions across scales in recognition of the way that social inequality is created and maintained through their attitudes and practices; Commitment to address unequal power relations; and 5). Commitment to foster iterative cycles of critical reflection and action as a means to challenge oppressive norms, behaviors, and structures (p. 308-9).

14 food security and nutrition of its target program’s populations. Seeing the potential of GTAs in improving food security, nutrition, and gender equality, CIFSRF recommends the AFS program of IDRC should design collaborative research and intentional learning agenda to conceptualize, articulate, and implement a gender transformative strategy. And that some CIFSRF projects should move toward GTAs (Danielsen, Wong, Mclachlin, & Sarapura, 2018).

The European Commission is designing a €5 million project named “Taking gender transformative approaches to scale for impact on SDG2 – food security, nutrition, and agriculture.” Embedding Gender Transformative Approaches (GTAs) in policy, programs, and working modalities of the United Nations Rome‐Based Agencies (RBAs) are the goals of this project. The European Commission commissioned the CGIAR Collaborative Platform for Gender

Research to draw the significant experiences and materials of GTAs and to lead the discussion paper at the Inception Workshop in May 2019. The Inception Workshop was to provide an understanding of GTAs and highlight implications for the implementation of GTAs by the RBAs

(Wong et al., 2019).

Similarly, to achieve the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, IFAD acknowledges the need to address the root causes, not just symptoms of economic, social, political, and environmental inequality. Therefore, IFAD has revised and strengthened its gender action plan

(GAP) by focusing on mainstreaming GTAs in Action Plan 2019-25. IFAD set 25% of the projects to be the GTA projects by 2025 (IFAD, 2019).

Kantor et al. (2015) strongly emphasized the need to examine the underlying causes of gender inequality of some development projects rather than just reducing gaps between men and women. They stressed that “[b]y not addressing the underlying causes of poverty and gender inequality, for example, projects may produce superficial changes in the participation of women

… in an economic activity that returns to normal after the project. Alternatively, the project may produce unintended and potentially harmful outcomes because the interests and incentives of the

15 poor or women were not understood and addressed” (p. 297). Kantor et al. (2015) also point out the recent study on the projects under the CGIAR research programs in Southwest Bangladesh, which emphasized the need for accommodating GTA into their existing guiding principles of agriculture research for Development (AR4D). The research found that social barriers limit the full potential achievement of some groups, which may lead to undesirable outcomes.

GTA defines the issues underlying gender inequality and then develops potential solutions to foster positive change. This approach enables practitioners to be sensitive to particular barriers and problems and thereby propose suitable and practical solutions. Given the significant potential of GTA, this study employs it to examine the root causes of gender inequality in leadership positions at KKSRAC and TSAC by exploring barriers women face in acquiring leadership positions. This study also will use this approach to deepen the understanding of power relations among the leadership committee of these two cooperatives.

The working paper of Hillenbrand et al. (2015) on measuring gender-transformative change discussed the interaction of powers that create unequal outcomes and the transforming of those unequal power relations. This raises the question of what is power? According to a study undertaken by the Asia Pacific Bureau of Adult Education’s (1993) cited in VeneKlasen & Mille

(2007, p. 41), power can be defined as “the degree of control over the material, human, intellectual and financial resources exercised by different sections of society. The control of these resources becomes a source of individual and social power. Power is dynamic and relational, rather than absolute ― it is exercised in the social, economic, and political relations between individuals and groups. It is also unequally distributed ― some individuals and groups having greater control over the sources of power and others having little or no control. The extent of the power of an individual or group is correlated to how many different kinds of resources they can access and control.” In short, power refers to “the ability to make choices” (Kabeer, 2001, p.18).

There are three positive power relations, namely power to, power within, and power with

16 (Charlier & Caubergs, 2007; Hillenbrand et al., 2015; Mosedale, 2003; VeneKlasen & Mille,

2007).

Power to refers to the abilities and capabilities including knowledge, skills, and education of individuals to make a difference and to shape his or her life and future (Charlier & Caubergs,

2007; Hillenbrand et al., 2015; VeneKlasen & Mille, 2007), which can be achieved by individual alone (Mosedale, 2003). Power to can refer to techniques or procedures, critical analysis skills, or the ability to turn knowledge into action (Charlier & Caubergs, 2007). Hillenbrand et al. (2015) indicated that, in the agriculture sector, knowledge and skills generally refer to specific knowledge and skills such as management, accounting, and bookkeeping. However, for gender transformative measurement, this might extend to other life skills, including communication, negotiation, and literacy. For instance, the findings of mid-term evaluations of Several CARE

Agricultural Programs revealed that women in those programs cited literacy as an essential component of empowerment. For my paper, I will also examine education and capacity of leadership members. I will explore who have a higher level of education.

Power within refers to internal or spiritual power, psychological strength of individuals including self-knowledge, self-efficacy, self-esteem, self-motivation, self-worth, and self- confidence that enable individuals to make choices and shapes their futures (Charlier & Caubergs,

2007; Hillenbrand et al., 2015; Mosedale, 2003). As Parpart, Rai, & Staudt (2002) claim that

“[power within] is rooted in self-understanding that can inspire women (and some men) to recognize and challenge gender inequality in the home and the community” (p.11). For this paper,

I will use power within to examine self-motivation and self-confidence of leadership members of

TSAC and KKSRAC.

Power with focuses on the collective powers or the ability to work together for their common objectives and goals (Charlier & Caubergs, 2007; Kabeer, 1999) and the ability to change power structure (Mosedale, 2003; O’Neil, Domingo, & Valters, 2014). According to

17 Cornwall (2014), power with is beyond focusing on the achievement of solidarity and collecting action. It looks at the connection and action with other social networks for further achievement.

For power with, I will study the representation of women in leadership positions in these two cooperatives.

 Education & capacity of leadership committee  Knowledge & skills for working for cooperative  Barriers to women in Power to acquiring leadership positions Examine

Examine root causes of gender inequality in Power within leadership Power with

 Representation of women in leadership positions  Self-confidence  Men perspective toward women leadership.  Self-motivation  Mechanisms to increase involvement of women already in leadership positions.

Figure 1: Gender transformative approach (GTA)

Women’s empowerment theory

Women’s empowerment is crucial for increasing the number of women leaders and encouraging the level of participation of women leaders. Before discussing women’s empowerment, some consideration of empowerment, per se, is necessary. Empowerment as a concept was adopted after the Conference in Beijing in 1995 with the consideration as the potential ways in attaining personal and social powers (Charlier & Caubergs, 2007). Eyben,

Kabeer, & Cornwall (2008, p.5) define empowerment as “fundamentally about power―about the power to redefine our possibilities and options and to act on them, the power within that enables people to have the courage to do things they never thought themselves to be capable of and the

18 power that comes from working alongside others to claim what is rightfully theirs.” UNDESA

(2013) argues that empowerment makes people powerful that leads to increase accountability and contributes to building self-confidence, self-esteem, and a sense of self and agency.

Recognizing the importance of the empowerment approach, some development communities have naturally considered applying it to empower women and girls, who face significant inequality. Notably, women’s empowerment was invoked in the 1980s and 1990s by feminists as a way to integrate women’s rights into the international development agenda

(Cornwall, 2014; Cornwall & Rivas, 2015; O’Neil et al., 2014). Women’s empowerment is a process of changing the pathways that individuals and groups follow in acquiring power and increasing the choices people can make on matters that affect their lives (O’Neil et al., 2014).

Kabeer (1999) defines women’s empowerment as “the expansion in people’s ability to make strategic life choices in a context where this ability was previously denied to them” (p. 437).

Since 2000 women’s empowerment has come to be seen as a promising goal towards the sustainable global development (Huis, Hansen, Otten, & Lensink, 2017), and has been integrated into the policy agendas of some international development agencies (CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems, 2012). For instance, the United States Agency for International

Development (USAID) in collaboration with International Food Policy Research Institute

(IFPRI), and Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative developed the Women’s

Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEIA) to measure the empowerment and the involvement of women in the agricultural sector (CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems,

2012).

In addition, since the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation believes that women’s empowerment is “a process of ongoing change through which women and girls expand their aspirations, strengthen their voice, and exercise more choice” (Bill and Melinda Gates

19 Foundation, 2017, p.4), they have incorporated the empowerment of women and girls into its programmatic approach with the vision of achieving greater gender equality. The expansion of aspirations and choices leads to opening up opportunities that are believed to have positive effects on the lives of women and their families. Whether it is whom to marry or other critical life choices, the goal is women’s freedom to decide. Women’s empowerment is also viewed as a means to improve the access of women to resources. Enhancing status, decision-making power, and agency would yield improvements in well-being and other achievements (FHI 360, 2012;

Yount, VanderEnde, Dodell, & Cheong, 2016).

Regarding women’s empowerment, Kabeer (1999) states that in expanding and exercising choice, there is a need to encompass three dimensions: resources, agency, and achievement. Therefore, to measure women’s empowerment, it is crucial to measure these three dimensions: resources, agency, and achievement. The measurement of these three dimensions is the pathways to empower women in framing their desired lives, individually or collectively.

Several studies use these three dimensions to measure women’s empowerment. This raises the question of why are these three dimensions critical for women empowerment?

Resources that help women to enhance the capability to exercise choice include not only resources from various economic activities but also human and social resources (Charlier &

Caubergs, 2007; Kabeer, 1999; Yount et al., 2016). Accessing resources enables women to gain bargaining power (Huis et al., 2017) and offer women the security to plan and to act (Cornwall,

2016). Having equal access to education, employment, economic market, health care, and other essential services are the fundamental of women’s empowerment (Kabeer, 2001; O’Neil et al.,

2014).

In my research, I employ this resource domain to examine the support that female leadership members of the cooperatives received from families and communities to take on leadership positions. I examine the training that leadership members, especially female leadership

20 members, received. I also explore supports that cooperatives received from other projects and institutions, including the Provincial Department of Agriculture (PDA), Royal University of

Agriculture (RUA), Agricultural Development Denmark Asia (ADDA), and other NGOs.

Agency refers to the ability and capacity to identify goals and the process of decision- making to transform goals into action (Buvinić, 2017; Kabeer, 1999). According to Kabeer

(1999), indicators to measure agency include women’s mobility in the public domain, their participation in public activity, and decision-making power. Of these, Kabeer stressed decision- making for the agency domain of her paper on “Resources, Agency, Achievement: Reflections on the Measurement of Women’s Empower” (Kabeer, 1999). For this study, I focus on the decision- making power of women leadership members at the cooperatives.

Achievement is the outcome of choices, the outcomes of people’s efforts (Huis et al.,

2017; Kabeer, 1999, 2001; Sraboni & Quisumbing, 2018). It is about people’s capacity to make choices. Achievement is about the consequences of the exercising agency (Buvinić, 2017;

Kabeer, 1999). Kabeer (1999) and Kabeer (2001) measure the achievements of women’s empowerment based on the consequence of choices. Within the Achievement domain, this study looks at the benefits that cooperative farmer members and leadership committee members received in joining the cooperatives. This study will especially look at those benefits that help to contribute to women’s empowerment.

21

 Leadership  Organization of Opportunities Leadership positions (support from  Women in decision- family & Agency making community) Resources  Trainings leadership  Benefits for cooperatives committee for leadership committee Achievement received  Benefits of cooperatives  Cooperative for farmer members received supports from PDA, RUA,

Figure 2: Women’s empowerment theory.

Applying these two theoretical frameworks will enable a more comprehensive understanding of gender and leadership in these two farmer cooperatives. First, GTA will help to examine the root causes of gender inequality in these two farmer cooperatives and explore the power relations among leadership members. For instance, whether the education and capacity of female leadership members are the root causes of women acquiring leadership positions? To what extent is the motivation of the leadership committee, especially female members, in joining leadership roles? Second, women’s empowerment theory will inform the empowerment of women leadership members in these two farmer cooperatives. For example, to what extent is the support from families and communities for women in acquiring leadership roles with the cooperatives? To what extent are women involved in decision-making as leaders? Understanding the root causes, power relations, as well as women’s empowerment process in these two farmer cooperatives, will allow me to identify barriers women face in acquiring leadership positions. I will also be able to give recommendations on how to help women in order to play great leadership roles.

22 Gendered leadership in Cambodia

In Cambodia, women represent 51 percent of the country’s population (NIS, 2016).

Unfortunately, they are underrepresented in leadership positions (Keothyda & Malika, 2016). In the government, women share very few leadership positions. For instance, they comprise 14.8 percent of the Senate, 20.3 percent of the National Assembly (NA), 22.0 percent of NA

Committee Chairs, 10.1 percent of Provincial & Municipal officials, 12.6 percent of District and

Khan 12.6 officials, 17.8 percent of the Commune Councils, and 5.8 percent of Commune Chiefs

(Ashman, Wilkie, Mer, & Sreng, 2014). Moreover, the representation of women in leadership and decision-making positions is weak at every level, especially at the grass-roots level (ADB, 2012;

MAFF, 2006). The culture of discrimination against women still exists in the current institutional system of the Royal Government of Cambodia, although there is a commitment to eliminate gender inequality. The traditional preference for the masculine model of politics has limited women's engagement in leadership roles and the political sphere (Hill & Ly, 2004; Keothyda &

Malika, 2016).

Barriers to women in acquiring leadership roles

Even though the progress has been made in promoting gender equality by the Royal

Government of Cambodia, challenges and potential obstacles for women acquiring leadership roles remain. Barriers include constraining social and cultural norms, gender discrimination in education, family duties and leadership work burdens, and economic barriers.

23 Constraining social and cultural norms

Cambodia has a strong social, traditional, and cultural patriarchy system. This system allocates power and authority to men as breadwinners. The male head of households is expected to take primary care for the families’ wellbeing and responsibility for the economic security for the family members. Wives are considered to be under the protection of husbands. Women are expected to manage domestic work (Booth, 2014; WOCAN et al., 2013) but not supposed to do any activity far from home. As the Cambodian proverb says, “Women do not go deep or travel far.” The proverb limits and oppresses women by not allowing going away from family and being involved in any activity outside the house (Gourley, 2009). This proverb discourages and discriminates women from gaining access to, exploring, and interacting with the outside world.

In addition, the codes of conduct for women in Khmer called “Chhbab Srey” or “Rules of the Women” seriously focuses on the responsibilities of women in fulfilling such tasks as child- rearing, housekeeping, and serving their husbands. The codes also strictly focus on women’s behavior and practices. Women are expected to be modest in speech and appearance all the time, and they should be respectful and honor their husbands and parents (Booth, 2014). These codes of conduct oppress women and make them see themselves as inferior to men. Cultural and traditional norms portray women as caretakers and housekeepers that constrain women to domestic responsibilities that limit their opportunities, mobility, and agency. Cultural norms also limit women's opportunities to attend school and pursue higher education.

Besides the codes of conduct, there was a common practice, especially for people in rural areas, of forbidding daughters from attending school because they feared that once literate, their daughters might be able to write love letters to their boyfriends3 (Chan & Chheang, 2008). The

3 As a personal aside, this belief had been practiced within my extended family, as well. My grandmother did not allow her two older daughters to go to school, because my grandmother thought that if my aunties were able to write, they might have started a connection with men by sending back and forth love letters.

24 Cambodian traditional culture did not allow girls to have relationships with boys before marriage.

Moreover, marriages were traditionally arranged. Parents made the decisions for daughters with whom they should get married. Daughters had no right to make an objection. Parents always applied the Cambodian custom as stated that “A cake cannot be bigger than the cake pan” to take control of their daughters (Hill & Ly, 2004). This custom was not only applied for the choosing partner, but it was applied for other situations by telling that girls or women possess low status in society.

Another proverb that challenged women’s exposure to the outside world is “Men are gold, women are clothes.” The meaning of this proverb is that: “[gold] if it is dropped in the mud, it can be washed completely clean, and is still gold. However, women are like white cotton cloth: once it is soiled in the mud, it can be washed but never made clean again” (Hill & Ly, 2004, p.109). This proverb instructs women to put off any attempt to do anything that they are not allowed to do. It constructs the fear among women that if they do anything wrong, women’s reputation will be viewed in very bad ways forever, much as a white cloth soiled cannot be made clean again.

According to a study conducted by Gender and Development for Cambodia (GADC) in cooperation with the Center for Population Study (CPS) of the Royal University of Phnom Penh

(RUPP) in 2011, titled “Demand for Gender Related Studies at Tertiary Education,” one female key informant claimed that social and cultural norms cause gender inequality. She expressed that

“[s]ocial and cultural influence in Khmer society on the role of women, makes women see their roles as lower than men” (CPS & GADC, 2011, p.12). To be sure, sociocultural norms have placed women in lower status than men and constrained opportunities and education.

25 Gender discrimination in education

Education is incredibly important as it paves the way for the development of individual, society, as well as the nation. Lake4, the Executive Director of UNICEF, provided the statement of the importance of education at the World Education Forum 20155 in Incheon that [education is the key to a better life for every child and the foundation of every strong society...” (UNESCO,

2016). Education has the power to change a life. It is a powerful means to lift families out of poverty. Education provides individuals with the necessary skills to find work, which is the key to lift themselves and families out of poverty (UNESCO, 2019). FAO (2011a) claimed that “Human capital is a major factor in determining the opportunities available to individuals in society and is closely linked to the productive capacity of households and their economic and social well-being”

(p. 28). In that World Education Forum 2015, Clark6 from UNDP also stated that “[i]n our world, knowledge is power, and education empowers. It is an indispensable part of the development equation. It has intrinsic value extending far beyond the economic―to empower people to determine their own destiny. That is why the opportunity to be educated is central to advancing human development” (UNESCO, 2016). A country's development is determined importantly by the education systems provided to its citizens. Therefore, it is critical to invest in education, as it contributes to the enhancement of human capital, leading to improving the welfare of individuals, families, communities, and societies.

In Cambodia, the education system originally was within the religious realm. Formal schooling was provided at pagodas and was historically restricted to male students only (Dy,

2004; Tan, 2007). Only sons were allowed to go to school since they were expected to take future roles as household heads and community leaders. On the other hand, female schooling was

4 Anthony Lake, Executive Director, UNICEF 5 The World Education Forum 2015 in Incheon, Republic of Korea, from May 19-22, 2015 6 Helen Clark, UNDP Administrator

26 regarded as unimportant. Daughters were not allowed to attend any formal schooling. Instead, they were required to have informal education at home by their mothers and older female relatives to be ready to be good housewives (Gorman & Kheng, 1999; Gourley, 2009; MoP,

1999)

Under the Prince Norodom Sihanouk era between the 1950s and 60s, the King was committed to building a prosperous nation-state through educational development. However, the education system did not reach rural Cambodia. It was allocated only in some large cities. Thus, rural Cambodian children and adults did not get any benefit from the King’s education system.

By the late 1960s, more than one million children enrolled in primary education. The number of female students enrolled in primary levels increased from 9 to 39 percent from 1950 to 1965. The illiteracy rate was estimated at 55 percent in 1966. Although the basic education system was not universalized nationwide, the Sihanouk regime has been credited with leading the most important advancement of the education system in the past few hundred years of history. Indeed, Cambodia had one of the highest literacy rates and the most progressive educational system in Southeast

Asia during the 1960s (Dy, 2004).

In 1975, when Khmer Rouge came to power, the Pol Pot regime evacuated residents from the capital city, Phnom Penh, and all other towns, cities, and urban centers, and then sent them to rural areas, where they were forced to work in agricultural cooperatives under brutal supervision.

This genocide regime of Pol Pot from 1975 – 1979 claimed millions of Khmer lives. The successful education system under King Sihanouk was closed at all levels (Clayton, 1998).

Education at all schools and Universities ceased, almost 90 percent of school buildings were destroyed, and all documents were burned. Professors, teachers, students, and other educated people were all killed. Cambodian culture, tradition, customs, and moral ethics have been banned and destroyed (Clayton, 1998).

27 After the Khmer Rouge regime was overthrown in 1979 by the People’s Republic of

Kampuchea (PRK), the educational institutions were reinstalled. Educational infrastructure and human resources were restructuring and rehabilitating between 1979 and 1981. The surviving teachers and literate people were encouraged to teach without any quality requirements. Some classes were in buildings, some were open-air, and some classrooms were under the trees (Dy,

2004) The constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia of 1993 (Article 68) and the Law on

Education of 2007 (Article 31) recognize that basic compulsory of education for every citizen is nine years (RGC, 2007).

Comprehensive education reform commenced in 2000 to meet the compulsory years of education of the Cambodian constitution. The reform includes improving and upgrading the educational systems and ensuring equal opportunities between boys and girls. The Ministry of

Education, Youth and Sport (MoEYS) has effectively and efficiently cooperated with line ministries, donors, and development partners (MoEYS, 2014) in implementing this reform.

Through the effort of the government and with assistance from development partners, the education system has made significant progress. The net enrollment rates at the primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary school levels have improved significantly. At the primary level, the enrollment rate increased by 10 percent between the school year 2001-02 and 2012-13, from

87 percent to 97 percent, respectively. Interestingly, the enrollment rate of girl students during these twelve years remarkably increased by 12.8 percent, from 84.2 percent in 2001-02 to 97 percent in the 2012-13 school year. While the enrollment rate of boy students slightly increased only by 6.9 percent, from 90 percent in 2001-02 to 96.7 percent in the 2012-13 school year

(MoEYS, 2014).

28

Table 1: Enrollment rate at the primary level by sex. 2001- 02 2012-13 Total 87.0% 97.0% Girl 84.2% 97.0% Boy 90.0% 96.9%

Source: MoEYS (2014): Education for All 2015 National Review Report

At the lower secondary school level, the net enrollment rate (NER) almost doubled from

16.6 percent in the school year 2000-01 to 32.6 percent in the school year 2009-10. At the upper secondary school level, the net enrollment rate more than doubled (11.7 percent) between the school year 2000-01 and 2009-10 from 7.7 percent to 19.4 percent, in that order (MoEYS, 2014).

Generally, female students from low-income families and ethnic minorities, especially in rural areas, are having more disadvantages (MoWA, 2014c). Table 2 shows that girls in urban areas at the lower secondary school education have more chances of pursuing better and higher education than those from rural areas. The net enrollment rate for female students in the school year 2000-01 in urban areas was 13.7 percent, which is higher than the enrollment rate for female students in rural areas, that was only 11 percent. This disparity still exists after a decade. The net enrollment rate for female students in the school year 2009-10 in urban areas was 50.5 percent, while the enrollment rate for female students in rural areas was only 31.5 percent.

Table 2: Net enrollment rate by school levels. School Level Region 2000-2001 2009-2010 Total Female Total Female Lower Nationwide 16.6% 13.7% 32.6% 34.6% secondary Urban 29.5% 13.7% 49.1% 50.5% Rural 14.1% 11.0% 29.4% 31.5% Upper Nationwide 7.7% 5.4% 19.4% 19.4% secondary

Sources: MoEYS 2005 and MoEYS 2010

29

At higher education levels, although, the government, MoEYS, line Ministries, and other development partners have given remarkable effort, female students still face disadvantages compared to male students. In the 2000-01 school year, less than one quarter (21.4%) of higher education students were female, which compared to 78.6 percent for males. Even though the number of female students attending higher education is on the rise, in recent years, they are still facing this disparity. In the 2012-13 school year, the number of male students is well above female students, respectively 60.1 and 39.9 percent, in relative terms.

Table 3: Students at higher education.

2000 - 2001 2012 - 2013

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

Total 31,940 100.0% 216,053 100.0%

Female 6,851 21.4% 86,235 39.9%

Male 25,089 78.6% 129,818 60.1%

Sources: (MoEYS, 2005) and (MoEYS, 2010)

The education system has seen an increase in female student enrollment at all levels.

Nonetheless, the history of social structure and culture norms, which fully respects the patriarchal and hierarchal system has mostly affected the education of the adult female population across the country. Therefore, Cambodian women are at a greater risk of illiteracy compared to men. The literacy rate for men was 79.48 percent in 1998, followed by 85.08 percent in 2008, and 86.40 percent in 2013, while the literacy rate of women was 59.99, 70.86, and 73.60, respectively in

1998, 2008, and 2013 (MoEYS, 2014).

30

Table 4: Literacy rate of 15 years and above. 1998 2008 2013 Total 67.34 77.59 79.7 Male 79.48 85.08 86.40 Female 59.99 70.86 73.60

Source: MoEYS (2014): Education for All 2015 National Review Report

According to the study by CPS & GADC (2011), parents are still biased toward males’ schooling. They give more weight to sons than daughters to pursue higher education despite some effort from the government, civil society, and international and local NGOs to promote education for women. Parents often keep their sons for quite a more extended period at school than daughters. The consideration of parents to invest more for their sons than daughters represents another high hurdle for women in building their capacities toward leadership positions.

Family duties and leadership work burdens

Traditionally, women in Cambodia have been considered inferior to men (ADB, 2013;

USAID, 2016). This belief and practice still prevail (USAID, 2016). Women are overburdened with unpaid housework, including caring for children, doing household chores, and reproductive responsibilities (ADB, 2013; JICA, 2007). Although men share some unpaid family work, around

60.4 percent of women undertake unpaid domestic work (JICA, 2007). The gender gap of unpaid work was 3.5 hours per day in 2004 for a married couple aged between 18 to 64 years (ADB,

2013, 2015). In Cambodia, 22 percent of households are female-headed households (ADB, 2014).

Most of them have every burden place only on their own shoulders, without having anyone to share. For some married couples, the husband carries primary responsibility for economic support. However, for some low-income families, women have to share the economic burden

31 with their husbands. They need to do some work for pay, in addition to domestic work, in order to contribute to the family income. Although some women manage to work outside the home for paid work, they still have primary responsibility for unpaid domestic chores (MoP, 1999).

When women have additional responsibility for making income, they often then have triple roles as farmers, caretakers, and cash earners (MoP, 1999; MoWA, 2014a; Tanwir &

Safdar, 2013). As such, family duties and work burdens are key barriers for women in leadership positions, as they need to fulfill their leadership roles, household duties and to engage in economic activities (Chhoeun et al., 2008)These multiple roles and workloads, hold back

Cambodian women from attending any distant activities (WOCAN et al., 2013) Family duties and work burden post barriers for women attending higher education and evolving economic activities.

Economic barriers

The hierarchical structure of Cambodian society has placed women in a lower status than men (Gorman & Kheng, 1999; MoWA, 2014a, 2014b), leading women to continue to be economically and politically marginalized (WOCAN et al., 2013). Household well-being is crucially important as well as a huge responsibility for women. Providing economic security to their families is the primary concern for women. Any activity that takes much time would discourage women from participating because they cannot do other work for their income

(CCHR, 2013; MoWA, 2014b). Poverty is the main factor that narrows opportunities for women engaging in any leadership roles at all levels.

32 A joint regional initiative between WOCAN7, UN-REDD, and USAID funded Lowering

Emissions in Asia’s Forests (LEAF) project, examined the particular challenges and barriers that hinder women’s participation in REDD+ in Cambodia (WOCAN et al., 2013). One of the reasons the study revealed is a lack of income generation alternatives. In other words, women do not have any motivation to join the activities that take significant time from their livelihood activities without appropriate compensation. They need to make income for their immediate wellbeing. The study stated that:

Due to poverty, some communities could not actively join the project, as they need to fulfill their livelihood needs. Furthermore, the CFMC committee is currently working voluntarily without any salary or payment, although they have received financial incentives via attending workshops and training. Without income … some committee members could not actively participate in community activities, as they need to work to support their family... (Gurung et al., 2013, p.16).

Another study by Chhoeun et al., (2008), on the effort to build the capacity of women to participate in leadership at Banteay Srei, a local Cambodia NGO, revealed that salary is one of the main factors that impede women participating in any leadership position. Taking up a leadership role may require greater time. Since women need to take care of the economic security for their families, they cannot dedicate that much time to their volunteer work. They need to generate income for their families. The study indicated that the salary of the commune council is relatively low, which is a reason that discourages women from standing for election to commune council. They are often concerned that if they are elected, they might not have enough time to work in their agricultural or alternative activities, which is their primary income for supporting their families (Chhoeun et al., 2008). Generating income to support the family is the first priority for women. They need to spend time to make money.

7 See page viii for list of abbreviations

33 Research Questions

• What are the barriers facing women to participate as leaders?

• To what extent are women involved in decision-making as leaders?

• What can be done to increase the number of women leaders, and the level of

participation of women once they become leader

34 Chapter 3

Methods

In this chapter I describe the goal of the research and place it in the context of the larger

Women in Agriculture Network (WAgN) Cambodia project, of which it is a part. Then I present the research setting, focusing on each of the cooperatives (KKSRAC and TSAC) under study. I then detail the research approach, sampling strategy, participant recruitment, data gathering methods (focus groups and key informant interviews), and data analysis strategy (transcription, coding). Finally, I will cover the ethical issues of the research.

Goal

The goal of this research study is to study two sustainable intensification (SI)-oriented farmer cooperatives to gain an understanding of women's representation in leadership positions, the extent and nature of their decision-making, and the barriers to acquiring leadership roles. This research is part of the Women and Agriculture Network (WAgN) Cambodia project.

These two cooperatives were selected so as to compare those that were established with different purposes in mind and in different geographic areas. KKSRAC was first set up as savings groups. The original purpose of the savings groups was to enhance and empower women. The idea of women’s empowerment is embedded amongst all members, even though KKSRAC is registered as an agricultural cooperative. On the other hand, the main goal of TSAC is to promote the benefits of farming and improve the living standard of farmers in the community. It does not have any specific intention for women’s empowerment. Moreover, Khnart commune, where

KKSRAC is located, is in a rural area (NCDD, 2009), while Ta Meun commune, where TSAC is located, is classified as a wholly urban (NIS, 2008).

35 Women in Agriculture Network (WAgN) Cambodia

The WAgN Cambodia project was designed by Penn State and partners to empower women and improve the nutrition status of women and children in Cambodia. WAgN encourages women to participate in the value chains for horticultural crops produced via SI practices. The project incorporates researchers from Penn State, the University of Tennessee, and

Cambodian partners who have experience in research and training together. The team has longstanding expertise in gender and agriculture, especially in developing countries, and promoting SI in the context of Cambodia. An overarching goal of the research team is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the nexus of gender and SI. With that understanding, the project team hopes to develop, inform, and deploy synergistic programs to enhance women’s status and improve the socio-economic and nutritional status of women and their families. In keeping with the goals of Sustainable Intensification (SI), the project seeks to identify, develop, and strengthen existing and potential SI technologies, practices, and policies that promote the production of nutritious and marketable food while protecting agro-ecological resources8.

The WAgN Cambodia project pursues three major objectives. First, to identify and promote adoption of gender-sensitive SI technologies and practices in horticulture value chains.

The expected results include improving ecological resilience, nutritional status, as well as income for poor households. Second, to identify the nature of and barriers to the participation of women in the local, regional, and international value chains for horticultural and other foods produced according to SI principles, with an eye toward their full participation. Finally, to build capacity in local agricultural institutions, NGOs, and international universities and research institutes, to scale up and out innovations in gender- and ecologically-sensitive SI.

8 Women in Agriculture Network (WAgN) Cambodia project document.

36 Promoting gender equality and family nutrition, the project seeks to understand the root causes of the barriers that impede women in participating in the value chains for SI. Via SI, the project generates new opportunities for women, as well as improves their family nutrition. The project acknowledges the importance of markets and seeks to advance efforts to move Cambodian agriculture towards a market-driven system. The project focuses on Cambodia’s USAID- designated Zone of Influence (ZOI), including Siem Reap, Kampong Thom, Pursat, and

Battambang Provinces. This ZOI has a 45 percent poverty rate and high concentrations of stunting and malnutrition. At the same time, it has the highest soil fertility and water resources available in the country.

Research setting

This study takes place in two provinces, Battambang and Siem Reap, where the WAgN-

Cambodia project has been focusing. This research is anchored around a comparative case study of two cooperatives. One cooperative is the Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative (TSAC) located in Battambang (BTB) province. The second is the Khom Khat Samaki Rong Roeung

Agricultural Cooperative (KKSRAC) located at Siem Reap (SR) province.

37

Figure 3: Map of Cambodia and study setting.

The setting of Khom Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung Agricultural Cooperative (KKSRAC)

KKSRAC is located in Khnart commune, Pouk district, Siem Reap province. Siem Reap province is located in northwestern Cambodia. It shares a border with Kampong Thom province to the southeast, Preah Vihear to the east, Oddar Meanchey province to the north, Banteay

Meanchey to the west, and Battambang to the southwest. It is the 10th largest province in land size

(10,299 km2) in Cambodia and ranks as the 6th largest (896,309) in population (NIS, 2008). This province connects with Tonle Sap, a major lake around which is found fertile soil for agriculture.

Thus, the main economic activity is agriculture. However, tourism thrives in the central part of the province which is home to the world-famous temple of Angkor Wat, a UNESCO World

Heritage site and the most popular tourist attraction in Cambodia. The thriving tourism industry has created many new buildings in the town. The increase in the tourism sector provides job opportunities at hotels, restaurants, and souvenir stores. According to the Ministry of Tourism

38 Cambodia, the construction sector in Siem Reap employed greater numbers of male and female workers. This development provides job opportunities for poor villagers from communities nearby the town.

Puok is a district of Siem Reap province. It is situated 16 km northwest of the town, along the national road 6. The central part of the district has a market where farmers can sell their agricultural products, including rice, vegetables, livestock, handicrafts, fresh fishes, crabs, and other edible plants. Farmers can also buy some agricultural inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and seeds), groceries, and construction tools. Khnat commune, where KKSRAC is located, is one of the 16 communes of Pouk district. It is comprised of 12 villages. The living standard of people in this commune is relatively poor. According to ID Poor9 information system in Cambodia of the Ministry of Planning (2017), the living standard of people in Khnat commune is poorer than the provincial poverty rate. The poverty rate of households in this commune is 19 percent, while the provincial poverty rate is only 17.7 percent. However, it is slightly lower than that of the Pouk district (20.1 percent). Out of 12 villages, only five have members in KKSRAC

(Prey Thlok, Ampil Peam, Boeng Khnar, Kouk Trach, and Trameng). The individual living standard of people in each village in these five villages is more or less similar to the poverty rate of the commune.

9 According to Ministry of Planning (2012) “Identification of Poor Households in Cambodia”. The Identification of Poor Households (IDPoor) Programme was established in 2006 within the Ministry of Planning to officially establish national procedures for identification of poor households and to realise their implementation throughout Cambodia.

39 The setting of Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative (TSAC)

TSAC is based in Tamoeun commune, Thmar Koul district, Battambang (BTB) province.

Battambang province is also located in northwestern Cambodia. It shares a border with Siem

Reap province to the northeast and an international border with Thailand to the northwest.

Battambang is the fifth largest province of Cambodia in land area (11,702 km2). With a population of 1,024,663, Battambang is ranked as the third-largest province in the nation. Since

Battambang connects with the Tonle Sap as well, the soil is very fertile, which is suitable for rice fields and cash crops. Therefore, the main economic activity for this province is agriculture. In addition, this province is well known for a range of natural resources and historical sites.

Thmar Koul district is located along with national road number 5. It is 28 km from

Battambang town. There is a small town in the central district. In this small town, there are banks, microfinance institutions, supermarkets, rice mill factories, and other businesses. Farmers also can buy agricultural machinery/tools/inputs, and also sell their agricultural products at this district town. Ta Moeun is one of the ten communes in Thmar Koul district. Tamoeun commune is located precisely at the district town center. The poverty rate of this commune is 16.3 percent of the total of 3,228 households, which is significantly lower than that of the Thma Koul district

(27.4 percent) and Battambang Province (26.5 percent). Tamoeun is comprised of ten villages.

However, only four villages participate in TSAC (Tasey, Ang Cheung, Chrouy Mtes, and

Krasang). These villages are located along national road 5 and only 1-3 km from the district town.

Therefore, the living standard of people in these four villages is better, with poverty rates, respectively, of 7.5, 27.8, 23.0, and 16.4 percent.

40

Figure 4: The two farmer cooperatives, KKSRAC and TSAC

Research approach

This research focuses on the two farmer-cooperatives, KKSRAC, and TSAC. The best epistemology for this study is neo-positivist. This approach focuses on collecting data on participant’s beliefs, perspectives, opinions, and attitudes in their own terms, rather than having interviewers express their own views and perspectives on a research topic (Roulston, 2010;

Roulston, Demarrais, & Lewis, 2003). This neo-positive approach aligns with the objective of this research paper in gaining an understanding of women’s representation in leadership positions of two SI-oriented farmer cooperatives, gaining an understanding of their extent and nature of the decision-making, and studying the potential barriers that hinder them from acquiring leadership roles. The qualitative research methodology is used in this study. Qualitative research – which includes open-ended interview structures – allows the researcher to gather rich data and

41 information on research problems (Miner & Jayaratne, 2014; Ormston, Spencer, Barnard, &

Snape, 2013). In this regard, it allows me to explore and gain an in-depth understanding of the contextual issues related to gender within these two farmer cooperatives. Furthermore, the qualitative approach is not a predefined data collection method and thereby encourages participants to respond to the research questions in their own words and voices (Miner &

Jayaratne, 2014).

For the research methods, this research study used a mixture of Focus Group Discussion

(FGD) and Key Informant Interviews (KII). This study employed FGD because I wanted to explore some questions by encouraging participants to talk to one another instead of asking questions of each person in turn. Kitzinger & Barbour (1999) state that “[f]ocus groups are ideal for exploring people’s experiences, opinions, wishes, and concern” (p. 26). Moreover, FGD allowed me to observe different perspectives of participants and how opinions are constructed. In addition, I did interview some key informants, including the leaders of farmer cooperatives, female leadership members of cooperatives, as well as commune leaders. With these key informant interviews, I was able to explore some concepts, perspectives, and experiences from individuals in different contexts from different sources with regard to gender and leadership.

Lynn Michel as cited in Kitzinger & Barbour (1999), also expressed the importance of combining

FGD with the individual. She states, “[a]ll data are context-bound, and the same individuals are likely to answer questions differently, depending on whether we access them individually, through a research-convened group, or through a naturally-occurring group” (p. 9). Combining focus groups with key informant/individual interviews, Kitzinger & Barbour (1999) claim that it can be fruitful. Moran-Ellis et al. (2006) claim that mixed methods is a triangulation model. This

Model increases the confidence in the implied measurement outcomes of the research.

42 Research sampling

Participants for the FGDs were randomly selected from the cooperatives' membership lists that were stratified by gender. This selection method allowed for the formation of female- and male-only focus groups whose perceptions would represent those of all cooperative members.

Ten farmers were invited to each FGD. Interestingly, participation rates were very high. For these four FGDs, a total of 38 farmers participated.

Key informants were recruited purposively. The goal of this purposive selection was to learn from different individuals in different contexts and sources (Marshall, 1996; Tongco, 2007;

Tynan & Drayton, 1988) about the barriers of women in gaining access to decision-making and leadership roles in their communities. In this regard, seven key informants were recruited for interviews, including two cooperative leaders, two female leadership members (one from each cooperative), two commune councils (one from each province), and one former ex-female leadership member in BTB.

Table 5: Research study participants. Type Description Province Number of participants/ interviewees FGD 1 Female FGD at KKSRAC-SR Siem Reap 9 FGD 2 Male FGD at KKSRAC-SR Siem Reap 9 FGD 3 Female FGD at TSAC-BTB Battambang 10 FGD 4 Male FGD at TSAC-BTB Battambang 10 KII-1 Male Cooperative Leader in KKSRAC-SR Siem Reap 1 KII-2 Female Leadership Member in KKSRAC-SR Siem Reap 1 KII-3 Male Cooperative Leader in TSAC-BTB Battambang 1 KII-4 Female Leadership Member in TSAC-BTB Battambang 1 KII-5 Commune council (male) at Khnat Commune, SR province Siem Reap 1 KII-6 Commune council (male) at Tasey Commune, BTB province Battambang 1 KII-7 Ex-female leadership member at TSAC-BTB Battambang 1

43 Participant recruitment

The recruitment of participants was assisted by two gatekeepers. One was a Women in

Agriculture Network (WAgN) project staff member who works with the cooperative in Siem

Reap, the other was a staff member working for the project titled Build and Scale Safe Vegetable

Value Chains in Cambodia (IBSSVVCC) who works with the Cooperative in Battambang. These two gatekeepers worked with me to help identify participants for FGDs and KII. I first arrived at

Siem Reap in the first week of May 2018. I had meetings with the gatekeeper in Siem Reap to recruit participants at KKSRAC for FGDs and KII. For the FGD, we randomly selected participants from the cooperative’s membership lists that were stratified by gender. This random selection method with stratification by gender allowed for the formation of female- and male-only focus groups. The perceptions of these male and female groups were assumed to represent those of all cooperative members.

The same participant recruitment process was followed for TSAC in Battambang. When I first arrived at Battambang, I had meetings with the gatekeeper and we used the same recruitment process as in Siem Reap. These two gatekeepers also helped to arrange for the location for the interview and discussion. At the recruitment phase, gatekeepers explained the purpose, procedure, place, and date of FGDs and KII. To achieve informed consent, gatekeepers clearly described the purpose of the study and the interview and informed potential participants that they had the right not to participate. During the recruiting process, several names were not available during the date of discussion. In that case, I advised gatekeepers to invite the next person on the list instead.

44 Data gathering strategy

Focus group discussion

Four semi-structured focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with two farmer cooperatives (one FGD of male members, and one FGD of female members, in each cooperative).

Each FGD was conducted in the morning, from one to one and a half hours. The participants for each FGD were between eight to ten farmers. In all, there were 38 farmer participants in these four FGDs. Since the subjects all spoke the Khmer language and Khmer is also my first language, the FGDs were conducted in Khmer. Right before the discussion began, I explained the purpose of this FGD. I also asked for verbal consent using dialogue detailed in the consent form and requested to record the conversation. I additionally informed them that they could leave the group discussion at any time and for any reason.

After consenting all participants, I began the FGDs, relying on audio recording and personal written notes. The discussion allowed me to explore the experiences of both men and women farmers and growers in-depth. The discussion examined gender differences, gender roles, and gender issues in cooperative leadership. The discussion was face-to-face and guided with discussion questions corresponding to five key areas addressed by the study’s research questions

(Appendix). The discussion began with a question about the establishment of the cooperative:

How was this cooperative set up? How did people get involved? The second main question was on the organization of the leadership: How many different leadership positions are there? How many females and males are in these leadership positions? When women speak up at meetings, do they have as much input as men? Are they listened to? Are there any specific roles for males and females in the cooperative? The third main question was on leadership opportunities: Were/are there any barriers for women to taking leadership roles in the cooperative? If fewer women take

45 leadership roles, should anything be done to encourage more women to be leaders? What could be done? The fourth main question was on decision-making: Who makes the most decisions about how the cooperative operates? If decisions are made mostly by men, why is this? If both female and male members share in decision-making, are there any kinds of decisions mostly made by female members and decisions mostly made by male members? The fifth main question was on training: Have you ever received any training that is organized by the cooperative for its members? If so, what training have you received? Is there any specific training that you wish to have? Finally, the discussion ended with a question that allowed participants to bring up the issues that we did not discuss. Participation rates were very high.

I listened to all recordings after the first round of data collection to make sure I got all the information. While listening, I found some missing information from FGDs. There were some follow-up questions that I did not think to. Therefore, I made an appointment with those FGDs’ participants again. But this time, I interviewed a mixed group of males and females from each cooperative. By having this mixed-group discussion, I was able to more deeply observe women's contributions and their power compared with their male co-workers.

Key informant interviews

Seven key informants were interviewed, including two cooperative leaders, two female leadership members (one from each cooperative), and two commune councils (one from each province). As with the FGDs, before each interview I explained the purpose of the study and asked for verbal consent to be interviewed and to record the conversation. I was able to explore some concepts, perspectives, and experiences from individuals in different contexts from different sources with regard to gender and leadership. For example, I managed to explore gender practice and empowerment, especially in decision-making, separately and individually from male

46 and female leadership members. I was able to explore with female leadership members the reasons for having fewer females in the leadership committee. Follow-up questions allowed me to go more in-depth on that particular issue. I could seek additional information on the opportunities given to female leadership members. Moreover, I could see women’s perception of becoming a leader.

Then, I was able to verify this gender practice with local authorities. Accessing information from different key informants is a fruitful technique, as Kitzinger & Barbour (1999) claimed, in combination with the FGD technique. Also, Moran-Ellis et al. (2006) called this combination approach as the triangulation model that increases the confidence in the implied measurement outcomes of the research. I interviewed two commune council leaders, one from the communes where KSRRAC is located, and another is from the commune where TSAC located.

With these two local authorities, I could inquire about the living standards of farmers in those communes. I also could seek to verify some other information, including the knowledge, perception, and practice of people on gender equality, the decision-making power in the family, and the participation of women and men in the community meeting and activities.

Data analysis strategy

Transcription

I used a voice recorder for all the field interviews, including the four FGDs and seven

KIIs. For analyzing, I listened to the recordings and then transcribed the conversations and interviews into text, simultaneously translating from Khmer into English. All names and personal information were not transcribed to maintain the confidentiality of participants (Emerson, Fretz,

47 & Shaw, 2011). People in some provinces in northwestern Cambodia (Siem Reap, Banteay

Meanchey, and Battambang) speak with accents different from people in central Cambodia.

While I was able to discern all that was said and make sure all voices were heard and registered, the differences in accents slowed down the transcription and translation process.

Among data collection methods, more time was needed for transcription of the FGDs in part because they were simply longer. Each FGD generates more than 20 pages. As planned, there are four FGDs. Since I did one follow up FGD for each cooperative, there were a total of six

FGDs, which generated more than a hundred pages of transcribed text. KIIs each generated only around five pages or less of text.

Coding

Coding was conducted in two steps – open coding and focus coding – as suggested by

Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw (2011). For the Open Coding, I read the transcript text line-by-line to identify and categorize all ideas, themes, and issues. For identifying and categorizing ideas and theme, I used mixed coding approaches, including descriptive coding, emotional coding, and value coding. For the descriptive coding, I summarized data in short phrases. Emotional coding is for the intrapersonal and interpersonal participant experiences and actions. This coding approach allows for exploration of the participants’ perspectives and life conditions. Finally, value coding is used for the values, attitudes, and beliefs of participants. From open coding, I prepared memos by categorized ideas and issues. The second coding step is ‘focus coding.’ After making a decision on themes, I looked for interesting and salient patterns, ideas, and themes in the data.

According to Miles et al. (2014), there are four pattern codes, such as categories or themes, causes/explanations, relationships among people, and theatrical constructs. These four themes

48 nicely fit for this research. Then I further elaborated analytically interesting themes that speak to the broader topic of the thesis.

Ethical issues

Recruiting participants for FGD through gatekeepers might generate a chance for bias

(Kitzinger & Barbour, 1999). The gatekeepers may screen only the potential supporters and may try to exclude potential critics. In the case of this cooperative, this bias might be less than in other institutions that involve more politics. To minimize this bias, I randomly selected participants from the cooperatives' membership lists that were stratified by gender. Then gatekeepers invited those sampled in this way. During the recruiting process, a few particular names were not available during the date of the discussion. In this case, I advised gatekeepers to invite the next person on the list instead.

Applying the purposive sampling technique to recruit participants for the key informant interview might be not free from bias (Tongco, 2007). As Tongco expresses that “[u]nlike random sampling, non-probability methods such as purposive sampling are not free from bias” (p.

154). There is another concern for the interpretation of results for this purposive sampling technique. Tongco claims that it might be limited to the population under study. To enhance the validity of the research findings, Tongco also suggests that, “the study may be repeated for confirmation in a different population …” (p.154). To that end, I interviewed key informants who differed by gender, context, and institution.

49 Chapter 4

Overview of the Two Cooperatives

In this chapter, I explain cooperatives and give an overview of two cooperatives, Khom

Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung Agricultural Cooperative (KKSRAC) and Tasey Samaki

Agricultural Cooperative (TSAC) in northwest Cambodia.

Cooperatives have been considered as a critical mechanism for community development

(Zeuli & Radel, 2005). The Guidelines for establishing agricultural cooperatives (GEAC, 2010) defines cooperatives as:

A cooperative is an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their mutual economic, social and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned and democratically controlled enterprise. An agricultural cooperative is a cooperative that produces, processes or markets agricultural products and supplies agricultural inputs and services to its members (p.3).

Similarly, the International Cooperative Alliance (ICA) defines cooperatives as “people- centered enterprises owned, controlled and run by and for their members to realize their common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations” (ICA-Asia and Pacific, 2015, p.1).

Cooperatives have been formed to improve bargaining power, reduce purchasing power, obtain market access or broaden market opportunities, and improve products or services. Overall, forming cooperatives helps cooperative members by reducing investment cost, and increasing income (GEAC, 2010, p.3). Cooperatives represent one livelihood strategy for improving the living standard of rural people and communities (Majee & Hoyt, 2011; Mhembwe & Dube,

2017). Cooperatives are the means to bring individual farmers together and pool out their resources, and then mutually work for their collective goals (Mhembwe & Dube, 2017).

Cooperatives play a significant role in improving community livelihoods by creating self- employment opportunities, mobilizing community resources, and inducing investment. As such,

50 they would lead to enhancing food security and empowering socioeconomics (FAO, 1998;

GEAC, 2010; Mhembwe & Dube, 2017). Some scholars identify seven principals to guide cooperatives, including: (1) democratic member control; (2) voluntary and open membership; (3) autonomy and independence; (4) educational training and information; (5) cooperation among cooperatives; (6) concern for community; and (7) economic participation of members

(Apostolakis & Dijk, 2018; FAO, 1998; GEAC, 2010; ICA-Asia and Pacific, 2015; ILO, 2014;

Majee & Hoyt, 2011; Mhembwe & Dube, 2017)

GEAC (2010) classifies agricultural cooperatives by three levels. The first level is the primary agricultural cooperatives. Primary agricultural cooperatives are formed by individual members for the common goals of the mutual cooperative for the livelihood and community development. The second level is secondary agricultural cooperatives. It is a joint primary cooperative of two or more cooperatives. The goal of the secondary agricultural cooperative is to provide related services to its members. Finally, the third level, or tertiary agricultural cooperative is a joining of two or more secondary cooperatives to advocate with the government or other powerful institutions or agencies for the interests of the members.

It is common for agricultural cooperatives, especially primary agricultural cooperatives, to run their operations and services base on internal resources, including human, financial, and social resources. Trying to engage in successful activities as a cooperative and expand the benefits to members can be a challenge when relying on the internal resources of members. This can be a challenge for members of these cooperatives as they often face situations of limited human and financial capital (Zeuli & Radel, 2005). In other words, the primary agricultural cooperatives, particularly those at the grass-root level, generally, are made up with members who are limited in their education, experience, and financial resources. This extends to the leadership of cooperatives as well, who may also have limited experience in leadership roles. Moreover, the committee members may not be able to dedicate significant time to organizing cooperative

51 activities because of their own livelihood engagements. Another challenge that agricultural cooperatives generally face is financial capital issues, since most primary agricultural cooperatives are funded by members, who often come from poor rural communities, and cannot provide large amounts of capital (Zeuli & Radel, 2005). In other words, most of the cooperative members have limited financial resources themselves. In summary, human capital as education and experience, and financial capital are two major limiting factors to expanding and growing successful cooperatives activities. In the following section, I will talk about the overview of the two agricultural cooperatives that were selected for this study.

Khom Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung Agricultural Cooperative (KKSRAC)

KKSRAC was set up by Agricultural Development Denmark Asia (ADDA) in 2014 and officially registered in 2015. The cooperative was formed from a joining of savings groups, which were under ADDA supervision, with the original purpose to enhance and empower women

(KKSRAC, 2014). There were several main goals for setting up KKSRAC, including (i) improving collective agricultural production and the ways of producing; (ii) enhancing agricultural production, agro-industry, agri-business, and other related services; (iii) ensuring high quality and quantity of production to be competitive in the market. Ultimately, KKSRAC sought to improve the benefits of agriculture for local farmers and enhance equality, equity, and dignity. In the KKSRAC, there are three managerial bodies, including the Assembly, the Board of

Directors (BoD), and the Supervisory Committee (SC). The General Assembly is the highest body. The BoD and the SC elected by the General Assembly with a five-year membership term.

The election was facilitated and witnessed by Agricultural Development Denmark Asia (ADDA),

Rural Economic & Agriculture Development Agency (READA), the Provincial Department of

52 Agriculture (PDA), District Governor, commune councils, and the District Office of Agriculture

(DOA).

At the outset, the cooperative had total capital of 24,980,800 KHR (6,245 USD). The source of this capital was from selling the KKSRAC’s shares. The Annual Assembly of

KKSRAC agreed to the amount of 50,000 KHR (12.5USD) for each shareholder and 5,000 KHR

(1.25 USD) for the membership fee.

General Assembly

Board of Directors (BoD) Supervisory Committee (SC)

1. Director (Mr) 1. Chaire (Ms) 2. Vice Director (Ms) 2. Vice Chair (Ms) 3. Finance (Ms) 3. Member (Mr) 4. Bookkeeping (Mr) 5. Member (Ms)

Figure 5: The structure of KKSRAC.

The General Assembly is the highest body of the organization structure. It oversees and makes decisions about any activity related to administration, finance, management, implementation, as well as the progress of KKSRAC. There are three different types of General

Assembly, including the first General Assembly, Annual General Assembly, and the Extra-

Ordinary General Assembly. There are a number of commitments under the General Assembly’s responsibilities, such as approving or amendment regulation and rules of the law of KKSRAC;

53 organizing the election to recruit Chair, Vice-Chair or members of BoD and SC; endorsing the roles and responsibilities of Chair, Vice-Chair or members of BoD and SC; providing approval on activity, budget, and other investment plans and reports; organizing the election to dismiss Chair,

Vice-Chair or members of the BoD and the SC; and making-decision on merging, dividing or eliminating KKSRAC. All agricultural cooperative members are invited to the General Assembly or Special Assembly. All the decision-making needs to be agreed on by two-thirds of all participants. The commune council, district governor, Director of the Provincial Department of

Agriculture, and other related stakeholders are also invited to the General Assembly.

The Board of Directors (BoDs) is the executive agency of the cooperative. The primary responsibility of the BoD is to manage the business affairs, including organizing the Annual

Assembly, developing business plans, managing daily income and expense, as well as preparing the implementation and financial reports. It has a five-year membership term. The first election was held at the end of 2014. At that first election, there were eight candidates on the ballot for the

BoD, but only two of them were females. Those two female candidates were elected as Vice-

Chair and a member of the BoD. On the other hand, three out of six male candidates were elected as Chair, Finance Officer, and Bookkeeping Officer. After serving about four years, one member of the BoD resigned before the mandatory term-end, and accordingly, a special election was held during the cooperative's annual meeting in February 2018. After the first election, only two members of BoD were women. However, after the special election, the representation of women on the BoD increase to three women members out of five members. One woman in the role as

Vice-Chair of BoD, another woman as a Finance Officer, and the 3rd woman is a member.

The Supervisory Committee (SC) is also the executive agency of the agricultural cooperative. The membership term for SC is also five years. The SC members were elected at the same time with the BoD. In the first election, there were four candidates registered for the SC.

Half of them (two people) were females. Then only three candidates were elected. Two-thirds

54 (67%) were men, who were elected as Chair and Vice-Chair. One-third (33%) was a woman who was elected as a member. However, after the special election, the number of women in SC increased from one-third (33%) to two-thirds (67%). Importantly, women also gained power by becoming both the Chair and Vice-Chair of SC. The SC is mandated as the internal auditor to monitor the implementation of the rules, regulations, articles of the memorandum, and other activities endorsed by the General Assembly. The SC is also responsible for monitoring all activities of members and a Chair of BoD, for ensuring the consistency with rules and regulations, the article of a memorandum, and the Assembly’s decision-making. Moreover, SC is in charge of monitoring inventories, financial reports, and other reports related to KKSRAC’s businesses. In addition, the SC has the responsibility to receive complains from members and related stakeholders, and then to provide the suggestion for the solutions.

In the beginning, there were 71 members of KKSRAC, of which 57 were female. The membership increased to 119 members by the end of 2017, of which 94 were female. As such, the prevalence of women has remained steady at about 80 percent. In short, historically and today, about 80 percent of cooperative members are female. As mention above, the cooperative was formed from savings groups. Therefore, savings groups members automatically became members of the cooperative. Although they have the right not to buy shares, all of them have purchased the shares. They can buy the share/s from the cooperative from one to the maximum number of shares, which were set with the agreement at the Assembly. Other farmers who were not already members of the savings groups were (and remain) free to buy in as cooperative shareholders.

They have the same right as others to have a voice in selecting a member of BoD and SC.

KKSRAC has set its business activities and investment in short and long terms. There are three main activities in KKSRAC, including agricultural production, agri-business, and credit.

Those activities, including agricultural production (livestock, rice and vegetable production), agro-business (buy and sell agricultural inputs, and animal feeds), and credit. To date, KKSRAC

55 is able to run only some activities, such as rice seed/vegetable production/selling, fertilizer selling, and credit service. Farmer members that could not afford to purchase rice seed and fertilizer from the market can buy from the cooperative on credit (debt).

Saving and credit services are the core activities at KKSRAC. It is set up for providing the opportunity for members to access finance in the community with a low-interest rate and without any collateral. Farmer members can access financial sources when they need it for their agricultural production, as well as in emergency situations when they can quickly access credit to pay for transportation and medical costs. All farmer members can directly borrow from the cooperative. The cooperative uses the funds from selling shares to members. Vegetable production and selling are another core activity of KKSRAC. Vegetable production and selling were running quite well in the beginning of the cooperative. However, this activity has gradually declined. The main reason is that there is no consistency in producing vegetables among members, leading to a difficulty in marketing the vegetables. Customers request consistent quantity and quality. In the beginning of KKSRAC, farmers agreed to grow two varieties of vegetables. KKSRAC prepared this plan with farmer members because the cooperative wanted to have a fixed plan (varieties and quantity), which helps to gain contracts with customers. Overtime some farmer members have broken the contract agreement with KKSRAC by not planting the agreed upon variety. Subsequently, KKSRAC could not make any fixed contracts with customers.

Although, the cooperative does not have an actual plan for vegetable production with farmer members, the members still produce vegetables. Consequently, the cooperative sells vegetables at the retail market and does not sell contracted-customers. The reason that many farmers broke the contract, and stop growing vegetables is because they have an urgent need for income to support the daily life of their families. They stopped growing vegetables to find paid employment that they can get daily paid instead of having to wait for the vegetables. Those farmer members stopped growing vegetables for selling but they still grow some vegetables for consumption.

56 KKSRAC is located in a rural area, so the living standard of people is much poorer than the overall provincial living standard. The poverty rate of households in this commune is 19 percent, while the provincial poverty rate is only 17.7 percent. The living standard for households in each of these five villages is more or less similar to the poverty rate of the commune. Each farmer member has between 150m2 to 300m2 of land for vegetable production.

The education level of farmers is also remarkably low. For the cooperative members, around 75 percent of farmers are illiterate, 15 percent have studied up to grade 8, and around 10 percent studying between grade 9 and grade 12. The education level of leadership members is between grades 4 to 11. The two male leaders have studied between grades 8 and 11, while the six female leadership members between grades 4 and 8. In summary, the leadership of this coop has limited education and is trying to organize a poor rural community on a variety of activities to improve agriculture.

One benefit of becoming members of the cooperative, farmers have the chance to receive support from some external projects and agencies. For example, Women in Agricultural Network in Cambodia project (WAgN-Cambodia) provides support to farmer members of KKSRAC. The support includes providing Conservation Agriculture (CA) techniques as well as some agricultural inputs and tools such as seedling, trellis, fertilizer, drip irrigation, water tank, and shade cloth. There is a criterion for farmers to join the WAgN project. That is, farmers should have farmland at least 150m2. Farmers at KKSRAC mostly grow leguminous plants, including string bean, cucumber, wax gourd, sponge gourd, and eggplant. The reasons for growing these vegetables are that they are easy to grow and easy to sell, as there is market demand. Few farmers have expanded their land for producing vegetables using conservation agriculture (CA) techniques.

KKSRAC also received one cold room from The Innovations to Build and Scale Safe

Vegetable Value Chains in Cambodia (IBSSVVCC) to store vegetables. This cold room

57 functions, but there is some issue with consistency. When farmers take vegetables from the cold room and keep outside for a while, the freshness of vegetables is affected. Thus, some buyers have concerns about the quality. Accordingly, some markets do not want to buy vegetables from

KKSRAC. As the leader of KKSRAC said that:

When there are more vegetables, we cannot sell them all, so we keep in this cold room. When there are more vegetables, we cannot sell only to retailers, so we need to sell to wholesalers. Normally, we sell to two markets, one in Siem Reap for the retailer and wholesalers, and another market is in Pouk to wholesalers. Vegetables look very fresh in a short time after taking out from a cold room, but after wholesalers in Pouk market put them outside for a while, vegetables change color. So, wholesalers in Pouk district are reluctant to buy vegetables from us. They said that vegetables from the cold room are not good. But we don’t have a problem with wholesalers in Siem Reap market, as they have a cold box to store vegetables.

Although KKSRAC was set up quite a period of time, it still struggling with financial and human capital resources. Therefore, leadership members are seeking courses related to leadership and management, as well as financial resources for the implementation and enlargement of cooperative business activities.

Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative (TSAC).

In 2007, the group of eleven farmers had been formed as a group for an Integrated Pest

Management Program (IPM) program in Tasey commune. They eventually transitioned into small savings groups of 36 members. By 2017, the membership of the group expanded to 65 households and the Provincial Department of Agriculture (PDA) suggested the group register as a cooperative. With some support from the Boosting Food Production (BFP), Innovations to Build and Scale Safe Vegetable Value Chains in Cambodia (IBSSVVCC)10, and with the facilitation

10 The USAID project funded by the Horticulture Innovation Lab

58 from PDA, the cooperative was set up in September 2017. At the outset, the cooperative has a total capital of 8.2 million KHR (2,050 USD). The purpose of setting up this cooperation is to boost and improve agricultural productivity, as well as strengthen the production capacity

(quantity and quality) of agriculture, agro-business, and agro-industry. More importantly, it is to promote the benefits and improve the living standard of farmers in the community (TSAC, 2017).

There are three managerial bodies in TSAC, including the General Assembly, the Board of Directors (BoD), and the Supervisory Committee (SC). The General Assembly is the highest body. The BoD and SC are elected by the Assembly with a five-year membership term. At the initial stage, BFP provided six meetings and training workshops to all 65 cooperative members.

Those training workshops including Good Agricultural Product (GAP) and roles and responsibilities of each committee member. After the training workshops, all participants identified seven capable members to be nominated as the candidates for BoDs. Those seven candidates were to be elected for the five BoD members. All participants also identified six outstanding members to nominate as candidates for SC. Among these six candidates to be elected for three SC members. The election was moderated and facilitated by Boosting Food Production

(BFP), The Innovations to Build and Scale Safe Vegetable Value Chains in Cambodia

(IBSSVVCC), and the Office of Community, Department of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishery, witnessed by the district governor, district police, and commune councils.

59

General Assembly

Board of Directors (BoD) Supervisory Committee (SC)

1. Director (Mr) 1. Chaire (Mr) 2. Vice Director (Mr) 2. Vice Chair (Ms) 3. Finance (Mr) 3. Member (Mr) 4. Secretary (Mr) 5. Member (Mr)

Figure 6: The structure of TSAC.

General Assembly is the highest body of the organization structure. It oversees and makes the decision about any activity related to administration, finance, management, implementation, as well as the progress of TSAC. There are three General Assembly, including the first General Assembly, Annual General Assembly, and the Extraordinary General Assembly.

There are several responsibilities for the General Assembly. First, to approve or amendment regulation and rules of the law of TSAC. Second, to organize the election to recruit or dismiss

Chair, Vice-Chair, or members of BoD and SC. Third, to endorse the roles and responsibilities of

Chair, Vice-Chair, or members of BoD and SC. Fourth, to approve and monitor activity, budget, and other investment plans and reports. Fifth, to make the decision on merging, dividing, or eliminating TSAC. All farmer cooperative members are invited to the General Assembly. All the decision-making needs to be agreed on by two-third of all participants.

60 The Board of Directors (BoD) is the Executive Agency of the TSAC. It has a five-year membership term — the election held in September 2017. There were eight candidates; among them, there was one female candidate, registered for the BoDs. In other words, there was only

12.5 percent of women registered for the BoD candidacy. After the election, there were five candidates, including one female candidate, who had been elected for the members of BoD. The role of each member was assigned by the result of the election with the flexibility of switching when receiving the expressed preferences from the elected individual. For example, one female candidate for BoD membership was elected as the Finance Officer. After working as the Finance

Officer for a while, she had the pressure of overloaded work. She spent around 40 percent of her day time to work for TSAC. She then requested to be switched to Secretary, which she thought would be less of a time burden. Unfortunately, this new position also required her to dedicate a significant amount of time. She decided to resign after a few months. The Office of Community of PDA facilitated the appointing and switching of the roles. The responsibilities of BoD are to organize the Annual Assembly, develop business plans, run business activities, manage daily income and expense, as well as to prepare the implementation and financial reports.

The Supervisory Committee (SC) is also the Executive Agency of cooperative. The primary responsibility of SC is to conduct internal monitoring to make sure the implementation of the cooperation accordant to rules, regulations, and the articles of the memorandum of TSAC.

The terms of SC membership is also five years. The SC members were elected at the same time with the same procedure as BoD. There were six candidates registered for SC. Among them, there was only one (17%) female candidate. The election elected three SC members − one female and two males. The female member was elected as Vice-Chair of SC. The SC members were appointed based on the results of the election. However, the tasks they were assigned appeared to be gender-based. For instance, a female leadership member was elected as SC deputy Chair.

However, she was assigned to wash and pack vegetables, while male leadership members were

61 assigned to collect vegetables from farmers because it required strong physical labor. Generally, at TSAC, male leader members are assigned to work that requires strong physical labor.

At the time that TSAC officially registered, there were 65 farmer members (42% female).

The total members of the cooperative remain the same by the time of interviewing in May 2018.

Each member is required to buy at least one share but not exceed 30 percent of the total share value of TSAC. They are also required to pay the membership fee. TSAC members might propose any work-plan or activity to BoD and SC. Members could also request the BoD and the

SC to organize specific Assembly if they receive support from one-third of the total cooperative members. Members have the right to use any cooperative services, equipment, and tools. They also can buy and sell agricultural products and inputs from and to the cooperative. Additionally, they are eligible to receive the profits from the cooperative according to their share value. Lastly, they can resign from membership by submitting a written letter to BoD at least three months in advance.

TSAC has set its business activities and investment in the short and long term. There are four main activity plans in TSAC, such as agriculture production, agri-businesses, agro-industry, and agriculture production services. There are three sub-activities under agriculture production, including vegetable, crop, and seed production. There are four activities under agri-businesses, including agricultural market, agricultural inputs supply, food supply chain, and fuel supply. The agro-industry has two small activities: agricultural processing and organic fertilizer processing.

The last main activity is agriculture production services, focusing on credit service, saving, money transfer, and also on land preparation as well as transportation services.

To date, TSAC has only started saving and credit services, vegetable production, and selling seed and fertilizer. Saving and credit services are the core activities at TSAC. Each member has bought at least one share. Members of cooperative have the option to access financial services. The financial resources provide the ability for farmers to borrow money when they need

62 a low-interest rate and without any collateral. Farmer members can access financial resources when they need it for agricultural production or other household expenses such as in times of emergency.

For vegetable production, farmers at TSAC mostly grow brassica vegetables, along with a few others. Brassica is a genus of plants in the mustard family, for example, collard greens, kale, and cabbage. Other common crops are long bean, cucumber, and bitter gourd. Growing brassica vegetables is time-consuming. Farmers’ common practice requires extensive land preparation and a variety of other activities (e.g. tilling, preparing beds, weeding etc.). TSAC tries to use less chemical fertilizers than common practice, by making organic compost. They try to apply compost instead of chemical fertilizers. They believe this helps their vegetable production.

Vegetable selling continues successfully. The cooperative uses social media for its market strategy. The leader of TSAC set up a Facebook account and posts vegetable production on that medium. Some vegetable shops and stores in the capital city and at the provincial town, plus some individual customer access to TSAC via their Facebook to order vegetables. TSAC also used a Facebook chat platform to communicate among the leadership committee. They communicate the vegetable varieties and the quantity that cooperative members sell to the cooperative on this chat platform. They also place the vegetable order from the customers via

Facebook Messenger. By using this app, all leadership committee members are able to run their business smoothly and efficiently.

TSAC is located in a small district town. It is in a suburban setting. Therefore, the poverty rate of people living in this commune is low at only 16.3 percent. This commune poverty rate is significantly lower than the Battambang provincial poverty rate at 26.5 percent. Since

TSAC is located in a small district town, the living standard of people there is higher than other communes, so the opportunity of accessing education is also higher. Therefore, farmer members

63 of the cooperative and leadership committee have a higher level of education compared to

KKSRAC in Siem Reap province.

The education level of farmers aged 50 years old or above is grade 3, while the education of people aged under 50 years old is between grades 8 and 9. Generally, male farmers have higher education than female farmers. For the leadership members, the education level is between grades

8 and 12. The female and male leadership members have a similar educational background. Three male leadership members are qualified as agriculture trainers on Integrated Pest Management

(IPM), After Harvest Management, General Agricultural Technique, and Mixed Measurement

Maintaining Techniques.

Being members of the cooperative, farmers have the chance to receive support from some external projects and agencies. Boosting Food Production (BFP) is one of those projects. BFP provides direct support to farmer members of the cooperative. The criteria of farmers to receive support from BFP include: farmers who already have an agricultural skill, possess the land from

2,000m2 and larger, have enough water resources, and are committed persons. Farmers that qualify to participate are quite privileged. At the first stage, BFP provided the money of 1.95 million KHR (487 USD) for irrigation system (tube, drip irrigation), and three bags of chemical fertilizers to each individual household, with the total 27 households. BFP plans to provide to the other 13 households in the second stage. BFP contributed a small amount of money to build a cooperative office.

In addition, Innovations to Build and Scale Safe Vegetable Value Chains (IBSSVVC), which is the project of the Royal University of Agriculture (RUA), provided support to six farmers by offering 600m2 of shade net to build a net house for vegetable production. Farmers contributed the rest of the net house construction cost, around $300. This net house is supposed to provide climate and pest control. Besides supporting six farmers, IBSSVVC helped TSAC to build a cold room for vegetable storage, similar to the other cooperative. Since this cold room was

64 built, TSAC has not fully used it. This is because the quantity of vegetables that farmer members produce is manageable. In other words, vegetables that are harvested are mostly sold on the same day. There is not much leftover that requires the use of the cold room, particularly since the cost of electricity to run the cold room is expensive.

The TSAC set up and runs its business based on internal resources, without receiving any support from outsiders. The financial capital of this cooperative is just from members. The external supports mention above are for some individual farmers. Therefore, there is a shortage of financial resources for the implementation and enlargement of cooperative business activities.

Additionally, TSAC is still struggling with human capital resources. The knowledge and experiences on leadership and business of the committee members are still limited. Therefore, leadership members are seeking courses related to leadership and management, plus any course that helps to build their motivation and confidence.

65 Chapter 5

Interpretation and Analysis of Findings

In this chapter, I present my research findings. I organize the interpretation and analysis into the following sections: i) Leadership opportunity ii). Representation and organization of women in leadership positions; iii) Barriers to women of acquiring leadership roles; iv)

Motivation and confidence; v) Women in decision-making; vi) Men’s perspective toward female leadership; vii) Mechanisms to increase the involvement of women already in leadership positions; ix) Capacity building; and vii) Benefits in joining the agricultural cooperative.

Leadership opportunity

Living in a patriarchal society, opportunities for women to become leaders are relatively low compared to men. There are some intervention programs run by the government, local organizations, and international organizations to promote gender equality and equity.

Notwithstanding, the representation of women in leadership and decision-making positions remain limited at all levels, including national, sub-national, and community. In exploring the underlying causes of this gender disparity, this research will look at the opportunities that families and communities offer to women in joining leadership positions with KKSRAC and TSAC.

According to the focus group discussion, all farmer members in both cooperatives, regardless of gender, reported having an equal chance and opportunity to be a candidate for the cooperative leadership committee election. Women are encouraged and given opportunities by cooperative committees to participate in leadership positions. For example, one female on the leadership committee in KKSRAC reported that she did not want to join the leadership

66 committee, because she thought she did not have the capacity and that she was busy with domestic work. At the focus group discussion, she said that:

Before we joined the cooperative, I could not hold a pen (could not write). When I joined a meeting with the cooperative, one person on the election preparation committee requested me to join (to register as a candidate for the leadership committee), I said, ‘Oh I know nothing.’ I was trying to reject the idea; I didn’t want any people to vote for me. But that person said, ‘We cannot expect to know everything right away. When you join, you will learn from others what to do, and later on, you will know how to do the work.’

This quote demonstrates the encouragement that women get even when they are not sure if they want to join.

Women have also received support from their husbands and families in joining the leadership committees. Indeed, no one indicated they had ever experienced any pressure to the contrary from their families. For example, the leader of KKSRAC shared at the group discussion that, “… there is no pressure. Those female leadership members, when I met their husbands, they were happy for their wives to join leadership members.” Interestingly, women are not only encouraged and provided opportunities to take leadership positions, but they are also encouraged to seize leadership opportunities that do arise. This was voiced by female leadership members at the focus group discussion with KKSRAC, who explained that they are encouraged to take positions as leaders. However, because they have low education and capacity, they do not feel they have the ability to take those positions. One female leadership member said, “[i]f we have the capacity, they will let us take [position as a leader].” A second female leadership member said, “[i]f I know well, I can be a leader… If I can do the work, I want [to become a leader].”

Another said, “[i]f we have the capacity, we can take [position as a leader] the same [as men], but we have low [literacy] capacity.”

Lacking capacity and having low education is a concern for female leadership members at KKSRAC only. There was no such concern at TSAC. Male leadership members at TSAC

67 expressed confidence that women leadership members have the capacity to take leadership positions if they are willing to do so. A male TSAC leader said that “[a]bsolutely, because we have already set things up, so they can follow our existing procedure.” Another male leadership member expressed that “[w]e have the procedure so that they can follow, when they knew how we do, they can do. When there is the first step, they can follow from that.” Female leadership members at TSAC also confirmed that they have the necessary capacity. However, since they are busy and since this work has no salary, they need to work on their gardens to make money to support their families. One respondent stated that:

If we want [to be a leader], we can because we can manage all our family’s work. So, we can manage the cooperative’s work too but because there is no salary … Since there is no salary, and there is more work to do at home, we cannot just leave this work [vegetable production and domestic work] and then go to work for the cooperative… If there is a salary, maybe more women would be interested.

Overall, although gender inequality is still an issue in Cambodia, based on this research, women are encouraged and given opportunities to join leadership roles with the cooperatives. To have a deeper understanding of women and leadership, this study will look at the representation of women in leadership positions at these two cooperatives in the following section.

Representation and organization of women in leadership positions

Cooperatives represent one livelihood strategy for improving the living standard of rural people and communities (Mhembwe & Dube, 2017). Women have been represented in many forms and types of cooperatives, including mixed-gender cooperatives and women-only cooperatives. In some countries, women are restricted by their cultures that only allow them to join women-only cooperatives (Prakash, 2003). This is not the case in Cambodia, where women

68 are free to join mixed-gender cooperatives. Even in cases where women have the freedom to join any type of cooperative, the representation of women in decision-making and leadership positions remains low within the cooperatives and, indeed, in many other types of rural organizations

(Tanwir & Safdar, 2013). Thus, there is a global concern about the representation of women in leadership positions within cooperatives (Prakash, 2003). Therefore, this section will explore the representation and mobilization of women in the leadership committees of the two cooperatives under study, TSAC and KKSRAC.

This study found that the representation of women in leadership positions is significantly different between KKSRAC and TSAC. There are five women leadership members out of a total of eight in KKSRAC, so fully 62.5 percent are women. On the other hand, there is less representation of women in the leadership committee in TSAC. There is only one woman out of eight leadership members or only 12.5 percent. There are a number of possible factors that could be contributing to this difference. For one , it may take time for women to move into leadership roles. TSAC was set up less than one year prior to the interview date in May 2018. KKSRAC was set up in early 2015, so it had already run for four years. After these four years, there was a special election due to a resignation. KKSRAC increased its representation of women on the leadership committee as result of this special election. After the first election, only 40 percent of the BoD were women. After the special election, the representation of women on the BoD increased to 60 percent. Regarding the supervisory committee (SC), women also made significant progress, increasing from one-third (33%) to two-thirds (67%) between the first and second elections. Importantly, women also gained power by becoming both the Chair and Vice-Chair of

SC. This shows that the lifetime of the cooperative is one of the factors that affects the representation of women in the leadership committees.

These two cooperatives have a different mechanism of assigning members to leadership positions. At the first election, KKSRAC assigned tasks to leadership members based on their

69 positions, but the assignments were gendered. That is, female leadership members were assigned tasks that require less physical strength. For example, there were three activities: saving, vegetable production, and selling fertilizers and rice seed. Female members were assigned to vegetable production, which is less physically demanding. On the other hand, only male members were assigned to be in charge of fertilizer and rice seed selling, which requires physical strength.

However, in the second election, KKSRAC assigned tasks to the leadership committee members based on the results of the election. As a result, a male leader was tasked with saving activities, and another male member was placed in charge of bookkeeping. Meanwhile, two female members were made responsible for fertilizer and rice seed activities. The increasing capacity of female members to successfully fulfill their roles and duties, as proven by their capability over the previous year helps explain this change.

Slightly different from KKSRAC, TSAC assigned positions of leadership members based on both the result of the election and the capacity of leadership members. As a start-up, of the cooperative, it required more time for the preparation and organization. Therefore, most of the committee members needed to spend intensive time for their assigned work. The mobilization was mostly based on the expressed preferences of each individual who was elected. For example, one female candidate for BoD membership was elected as the Finance Officer. Since she needed to spend much more time on this position, she did not have time to work on her vegetable production, which is the only means to make money to support her family. Therefore, she requested to be switched to the Secretary. Nonetheless, this new position still kept her busy, she decided to resign from the leadership committee, after working for about few months.

In the case of the SC, the roles of members were assigned based on the results of the election. However, the assignment of their tasks and responsibilities appeared to be gender-based.

For instance, a female leadership member was elected as SC deputy chair. However, she was assigned to wash and pack vegetables, while male leadership members were assigned to collect

70 vegetables from farmers because it required strong physical labor. Generally, at TSAC, male leaders’ members are assigned to work that requires strong physical labor.

As can be seen from the study, the representation of women in leadership positions varies between TSAC and KKSRAC, as well as within the individual cooperative itself. Between the two cooperatives, KKSRAC has more women than men occupying leadership positions. On the other hand, TSAC has only one woman participating in leadership positions. Within KKSRAC, in the beginning, there were fewer women in leadership roles. However, after working for almost four years, women have been empowered. Certainly, there are a number of other factors that contribute to the prevalence of women in leadership roles. In the next section, the study will discuss the barriers to women in acquiring leadership positions.

Barriers to women in acquiring leadership roles

As mentioned above, there are more female leadership members at KKSRAC, but there is less female leadership members at TSAC. At KKSRAC, there are five female leadership members out of total members of eight. On the other hand, at TSAC, in the beginning, there were only two female leadership members out of total members of eight. Unfortunately, while serving for a while, one female leadership member resigned. The underrepresentation of women in leadership positions naturally leads to questions about why. What are the barriers that impede women in acquiring leadership positions?

Domestic work burden

Cultural Social norms contribute to a strong gendered division of domestic labor. Women have greater responsibility for domestic work. Therefore, my findings suggest that although

71 women are encouraged and given the opportunity to participate in the leadership positions, there were not many of them willing to join. The reason given is that they are busy with domestic work and vegetable production. For instance, one male leadership member at TSAC said, “[a]t the registration of candidates, women did not want to join [leadership committee].” Another male leadership member continued, “[a]t that time [candidate registration] there were four women, but two other women strongly rejected this proposed for the candidate.” Women themselves at TSAC also expressed that women do not want to register as a candidate for the election because they are very busy at home. As one female leadership member said that “[n]ot want, because there are so many works at home.” All the female participants spoke the same time together that “[w]omen are very busy.”

Since there were not many women willing to participate in the leadership positions, there are only fewer women involved in leadership committees. The same reason given is that because women are busy with household chores, taking care of children and other relatives (siblings and older people). In addition, women are tending to home gardens. They share the responsibility with husbands in making an income to support the family, which was previously the only husbands’ responsibility. As one female leadership member at TSAC emphasized that “I didn’t want to join because I am busy. My daughters are studying, and my husband is teaching. And me,

I’m doing household chores and also growing vegetables.” She added that “[a]s you can see, there are so many things to be done here. If I work for the cooperative, who will do these works (she pointed to households and gardening work). Here, there is only me who does all these tasks.”

Another male leadership member at TSAC mentioned that “[women] have the capacity, but some of them have unhealthy elderly people to look after at home, so they cannot join us…if more allowance [provided], they could join.” One female participant used to work as Finance Officer for TSAC, then switched to Secretary and finally resigned. She has a high motivation to help her community. She wants to devote as much as a possible time for the cooperative. However, since

72 she has to work on her vegetable garden and to do all household chores, plus she needs to take her unhealthy mother, she decided to resigned from the leadership committee member. She said that

“[t]he reason I stopped [from leadership member], sometimes my parents got sick. Even cooking food for my family, my mother cannot do it. Just only me who responsible for the whole family.”

It appears that Cambodian culture takes part in hindering women from taking leadership positions in the cooperatives. The reason given is that cultural norms position men as breadwinners, who are expected to take primary care for the families’ well-being, and position women as caretakers, who are expected to manage domestic work. This cultural norm is still widely practiced throughout the country, especially in rural areas. Although there is some improvement regarding gender practices, it seems the roles of women being caretakers for domestic work remain unchanged.

Lack of capacity and low education

Low education and capacity are found to be the other barriers for women acquiring leadership positions in cooperatives or other local organizations. Generally, education, the standard of living, and gender practice in urban are better than in rural areas. Moreover, the education level of male farmers is better than female farmers. Since TSAC is in urban and

KKSRAC is in rural settings, the education and standard of living at TSAC are better than in

KKSRAC. Thus, farmer members and leadership committee members in TSAC have a higher level of education than farmer members and leadership committee members in KKSRAC.

Therefore, it seems that TSAC does not have any problem with the capacity of the female leadership members. However, low capacity was a great concern for female leadership members in KKSRAC.

73 Some female leadership members of KKSRAC did not know how to use pens before joining the cooperative. Their writing capacity was limited, although the simple letters or text because their education is low. In rural areas, most children had very little chance to access to education compared to urban areas. However, the drop-off rate at rural areas is higher because of poverty or any other family issues. For example, the leader of KKSRAC expressed that “I studied in grade 8. Then I dropped out at half-year because of a family issue.” Compared to boys in the same rural context, daughters had very little chance, or some of them did not have the opportunity to attend any form of education at all. Daughters, especially the older daughters, had an obligation to help parents in taking care of their young siblings. One female leadership member at KKSRAC said that “[p]reviously, parents allowed daughters studies only up to two to three years then stop.”

Another female member added that “[p]arents asked us to take care of our siblings.” A female member at TSAC also reported dropping school because she needed to help her parents in growing vegetables for making an income to support the family. She said that “[m]y parents are old. My older sisters and brothers got married and moved to their new houses. There was nobody to help my parents, so I decided to stop school.” She added that “[a]t that time, my father was still raising ducks, and most of them died, so we lost a lot of money. It was hard for me to concentrate on study. Then I decided to stop and fully start vegetable production.”

Furthermore, those women almost had never had any activity involved in writing since they left schools. A female leadership committee quoted, “… I forget all … I stopped using a pen since I was 13 years old.” Working for the cooperative required them to learn how to write, especially report writing and note-taking, which they have never done before. They also had to learn to organize the work, to do bookkeeping and recording, to prepare reports, and to speak in the public. Regarding the capacity of female leadership members, the leader of KKSRAC stated,

“[a]t the start of the cooperative, female leadership members had very low literacy and capacity…

74 For male leadership members, like Mr. A, Mr. B and me, we have capacity since starting, so we do not have any problem. When we have any work to do, we can do.”

Female leadership members expressed the improvement they have made since joining the cooperative. One female leadership member said that “[a]t the start, we did not have any capacity, but since we attended this training that training our limited capacity improved, previously our knowledge was very little.” Women themselves also claimed that they were nervous at first a few times when they spoke in public. Another female leadership member stated that “… right after I was elected [as BoD], I was requested to give a speech, I was very panic, but now I can write some. I studied in grade 3. It is quite a long time since then. That was why I forgot all. But now I can write … [I am brave].” Although the capacity of female leadership members is low, it is better than some farmer members. As the leader of KKSRAC said that “… we have a better education…” One female leadership member said, “[o]ld generation who studied at primary school is not many. Most of them are illiterate. They just attended non-formal education later on”

Another female leadership member added that “[s]ome of them can read but cannot write, and some can write but cannot read …”

TSAC did not appear to have difficulty finding candidates with acceptable educational levels and competence for the leadership committees. However, there is a problem that those women do not want to join with leadership committees. They claimed that they are busy with domestic and gardening work. One male participant at the group discussion said that “[f]or education, some women have higher education level, but they do not want to join.” Another person added that “[t]here is no issue of education level [for women]. They have enough capacity, but they do not want to join the leadership committee.” The leader of the cooperative also let us know that “[s]ome women have higher education than men.” Another male leadership member stated that “[t]hey are busy at home and here, so they do not want to join.” There is another support from male leadership members that “[t]hey have the capacity, but they do not want to

75 do.” In sum, although low education is one of the barriers facing women in stepping into leadership positions in the more rural KKSRAC, this was not the case for TSAC, which is found in a more urban locale.

Working without salary

In Cambodia, social and cultural patriarchy places power and authority on men as breadwinners in the families. They are expected to take primary care for the families’ wellbeing and responsibility for the economic security of the family members. Women are expected to manage domestic work (Booth, 2014; WOCAN et al., 2013). As society becomes more and more sophisticated, this practice has gradually changed. Women start to share their responsibilities in the economic security of the families, which adds another burden on women. Women have additional responsibility for making income. Thus, women have triple roles as farmers, caretakers, and cash earners (MoP, 1999; MoWA, 2014c; Tanwir & Safdar, 2013).

“Voluntary and open membership” is one of the seven cooperative principles, according to Zeuli & Radel (2005), ILO (2014), and Mhembwe & Dube (2017). These two cooperatives,

KKSRAC and TSAC, apply this principle for their cooperatives. Therefore, all committee members have to voluntarily dedicate their time to the cooperatives. They do not get any allowance besides the $36 per year for KKSRAC, and 10 percent of the annual profits for TSAC which is divided into eight ways. Thus, there is a very paltry return (Mhembwe & Dube, 2017).

As the leader at TSAC said, they might get as much as a person selling one day of his or her labor. He said that,

Actually, the reason that I found for all cooperatives that fail and finally close is because they were a losing proposition. All leadership members got nothing … They do not gain any benefit. They just do the work for this or that person or group, or to solve this or that problem, and they get nothing in return. And they

76 know that any incentive than can expect at the end of the year will be very, very little. It doesn’t even equal what someone could expect to earn in only one or two days. So gradually, they feel discouraged.

As noted, the women members at TSAC I studied claimed that they are busy, and since work for the cooperative has no salary, they need instead to work on their garden for making money to support their families. A female leadership member at TSAC stated that “[there is only one female leadership member] because we are busy with our vegetable production and household chores.” A male leadership member at TSAC said that “[b]ecause the allowance is not sufficient, so they need to grow their vegetables at home.” This statement comports with the office of the Cambodian Commissioner for Human Rights and Ministry of Women’s Affairs which claims that any time consuming activity discourages women’s participation because it takes away time for essential income-generating work (CCHR, 2013; MoWA, 2014b). Working without a salary seems to be the most crucial fact that holds back women in joining leadership committees in cooperatives.

Male leadership members also have spent quite a lot of time working for cooperatives without proper compensation. However, they can better afford it since they do not have as much responsibility for domestic work as do women. For example, male leadership members at TSAC indicated they spend considerable time with the cooperative, despite also running their own businesses. Indeed, after the FGD a male TSAC leader pulled me aside and expressed reluctance to take a leadership position in the cooperative for this very reason but did so because he cared and felt no one else would step up. So, he sacrificed his time, motivated by the desire to help farmers in his community. He feared for the well-being of local farmers should the cooperative fail.

77 Therefore, male and female farmer members and leadership committees suggested for some proportion of allowance to support women in joining leadership committees. Supporting this suggestion, the Leader of TSAC stated that:

If we have some portion of allowance, for example, for one day people get from 25,000 KHR (6.25 USD) to 30,000 KHR (7.50 USD), but if we can give them only 10,000 KHR (2.50 USD), they would participate, although it is not a full incentive. … For leadership members, once they accept to join, although allowance is not full, they will still join. But sometimes, there is no benefit for them at all … In the future, if we can have an allowance, they would join.

Working for cooperatives without salary places a barrier for women participating in leadership positions because the family socio-economic conditions are their priority. Overall, as we can see, three main barriers that impede women from joining the leadership positions, including having low education and capacity, the burden of domestic work, and working for the cooperative without a salary. These barriers might have influenced the motivation and confidence of female leadership members. Thus, in the next section, I will examine the level of motivation and confidence that female leadership members at KKSRAC and TSAC have.

Box 1: A Human-interest Story

Vanny (a pseudonym) is a third child in one farmer family of seven members. She is

22 years old. Her parents are old. Her father is 66, and her mother is 65. Her older sister and

brother got married and moved to their new houses. Her family moved to the current village

(Tasey village) in 2007. Before that, they lived in Chruy Sdau village. Over there, her family

did small livestock production for family income. Unfortunately, they faced significant issues,

as most of 2,000 ducks became diseased and died. After this devastating loss, her family

became bankrupt. Then her parents sold the old house and moved to their current home. In

this current place, besides the house, they only have a small surrounding plot not big enough

to grow rice for family consumption.

78

Box 1: A Human-interest Story

After settling, her parents started duck raising again, but they faced the same problem, so they changed from raising ducks to growing vegetables in 2008. At that time,

Vanny studied in grade 8. Although she was studying, she helped her parents to do some heavy work every day before and after she came back from school. She said that “[b]efore dropping out of school, I got up at 4 am, I fetched water for the vegetables till 6 am and then would go to school. After coming back from school, in the afternoon, I fetched water for the vegetables again. I spent a lot of time watering vegetables!” Since her father is too old to work and her mother does not have a good condition, their vegetable production provided low yield. Therefore, Vanny decided to drop out of school in grade 10 to engage in vegetable production fully. Since she is the older daughter in the family, she is responsible for family expenditure. She states that “[m]y parents are old. My older sister and brother got married and moved to their new houses. There was nobody to help my parents, so I decided to stop school.” She added that “[a]t that time, my father was still raising ducks, and most of them died, so we lost a lot of money. It was hard for me to concentrate on my study. Then I decided to stop and fully start vegetable production.”

Vanny takes care of vegetable production by herself, without any assistance from her sister and brother. She said her sister is too weak to help, but her physical health is stronger than her sister’s. She said that “[be]cause my sister is not as strong as me, she does not do laborious work. So, I want her to study, working there is much easier, and she is smarter than

I am.” Besides family expenditure, she has also needed to support her sister and brother for their education. At the time of the interview, her sister completed grade 12 and wished to continue to university—her brother studies in grade 11. Vanny is committed sending her brother to university after completing grade 12.

79

Box 1: A Human-interest Story (continue)

She will continue to support him, but her sister will find some work to support herself. Vanny does not have any preference between her sister and brother with regard to helping them go to university. She supports her brother because a male is much easier to find the accommodation. For her sister, Vanny used to support her education at high school. Now her sister can make some income, so she would be able to support her own study. Vanny dropped out of school because she wanted to support her sister and brother to continue to a higher degree. She thought that if she did not drop out of school when she did, they would all wind up dropping out. Thus, she decided to quit school alone to support her sister and brother's education. On top of all this, Vanny is also saddled with a debt of around $4,000 that was left over from her father. That is a lot for her.

While growing vegetables, she joined the saving group. Then she was encouraged to register as a BoD member at TSAC. Vanny was elected as the Finance Officer for TSAC, but she was aware that this work might require much time, so she requested to switch to the

Secretary. While working for a few months, the work required more time than she could afford, so she requested to resign. She is the only person responsible for the brassica planting on a very large plot of 3200m2. The time that she spent on her leadership role was not financially compensated. As the head of the household, she needs to make money to support her family, including her sister and brother's education. She also needs to take care of her unhealthy parents. Thus, she could not afford to maintain her participation with the leadership team. Without compensation, Vanny cannot participate on the leadership team, although she shows high motivation for helping her community, she has a heavy responsibility to make money to support her family.

80 Motivation and confidence

Spiritual or internal power is vital in inspiring women to challenge gender inequality in the family as well as in the community (Parpart et al., 2002). This internal power, including self- motivation and self-confidence encourages women to make choices and change in their lives

(Charlier & Caubergs, 2007; Hillenbrand et al., 2015; Mosedale, 2003). Therefore, in this study, I will examine the motivation and confidence of female leadership members at KKSRAC and

TSAC to see if they have been motivated and how?

KKSRAC was established in 2015 and has been in operation since then. Although female leadership members at KKSRAC had a low level of education when commencing work for the cooperative, they were trained to organize the work, to do bookkeeping, to prepare reports, and to speak in public. These tasks have built their skills, capacities, and confidence, and in the process, have empowered the female members of the cooperative. Previously, they were nervous the first few times they spoke in public. However, through frequent opportunities to provide training to groups of farmers, they noted that they gained more confidence in public speaking. All the female leadership members were given opportunities to provide training on Conservation Agriculture to farmers in another province, Kampong Thom, which helped them to build more confidence. In an interview with one key informant, a female leadership member, I asked her if “[the leader] has ever given you and other female leadership members chances to teach farmers or speak in the public with the community?” She responded:

Yes, to teach and share experiences to farmers in Kampong Thom province on conservation agriculture techniques … five of us have been there … We all did the presentation … At that time, I was panicking while holding the microphone … I feel more confident now because he often allows us to speak. Previously, because we rarely speak, then when I started talking, I was nervous because there were so many people in front of us. It made me forget how to answer the questions.

81 Confirming the improvement and empowerment of women leadership members, the leader of

KKSRAC stated:

At the start of the cooperative, female leadership members had very low literacy and capacity. But once they started, we trained and encouraged them to do the work. Now they can write and are braver in speaking. This is the knowledge that they received. For example, one female committee member could write very little, and she dared not speak, but now she can write better and is braver in sharing experiences with the community.

One female leadership member reported, “I got some knowledge…on bookkeeping of selling seed, fertilizers, and saving.” The leader of KKSRAC emphasized the empowerment received while evolving with cooperative work. He stated that:

If we do not join the cooperative, we will not know many people. I am the same, before joining the cooperative, I did not know who the district governor was, who the commune chief was, and others. After joining, we know them all. We learned how to communicate and gain more knowledge from networks and practices, although we attended a low grade of education.

Therefore, although KKSRAC leadership committees get minimal incentives with high workload demand, they still have a high commitment to helping to develop their community. Like the leader of the cooperative expressed that:

This work is community work, and our farmers need capital for starting their business. They have more debt. When they do agriculture, they need to buy fertilizers, and they need to sell their products. So, when PDA and ADDA disseminated information about setting up a cooperative, we see the benefits of our farmers, and if we do not help each other from this time, we will still use money from microfinance institutions. So those who get the benefits are bourgeoisies, including microfinance institute owners and fertilizer company owners. We see the need for farmers, and only the community can help farmers. Therefore, we agreed to set up this cooperative, and then we registered as candidates for the representatives of the cooperative. At that time, PAD informed us that if we work, we will work voluntarily. Because this is our work, we help ourselves. Then we voluntarily set up this cooperative. And when we received support from farmers by the election, it encourages us to work. We thought if we do not do this cooperative work, no one will do it, and it will not help to improve the standard of living of our farmers.

82 One female leadership member stated that:

We are from this village. If we request someone from other villages [to work for us], they will not accept it. I joined because I want people from these villages to have a better standard of living and have better knowledge and understanding. Moreover, setting up this cooperative, we can make some savings, so people can borrow money from the cooperative once they need it, especially when there is an urgent need like having a health problem at night. If we borrow from the bank, the bank is not open at night. Even in the daytime, we cannot get money from the bank as quick as needed. Also, [they can borrow money from the cooperative] when they need to support their children's education.

Another leadership member added that:

I joined the cooperative because I think that villagers can borrow money from the cooperative when they need it. And shareholders can get the interests of that. If we borrow from other micro institutions, the interest will go to others outside the village. And if you borrow money, you don’t need to have collateral and it is a fast process.

One other female leadership member said, “I want to help people in this village have a better standard of living. Previously we have more people under the poverty rate but now that decreased. Even me, I was under the poverty group, now I got rid of that poverty.” Going into it, they did not have any confidence to be BoD or SC members. Leadership members gained knowledge and experience in report preparation, community plan preparation, business analyzing, public speaking, and marketing facilitation when engaging with cooperative work.

Women in decision-making

Women and decision-making power have gained special attention among feminist scholars, academia, international organizations, and others. Women generally have less decision- making power than men. According to this study, however, men and women have remarkably

83 equal rights in both the community and household. In the community, women are encouraged to participate in community activities the same as men, including expressions of their interests and desires, and having a voice in decision-making. In the household, husbands and wives always discuss and make decisions jointly about big issues such as buying a motorbike. For the small issues or spending, wives do not need to discuss with husbands. I asked women in the TSAC focus group discussion, who makes decisions in the household? One participant responded,

“mostly me.” Then all women spoke together saying “mostly women.” Another participant added that “[f]or the most part, men do listen to women.” I probed about who makes big decisions. They altogether responded that “Both men and women make the decision.” While having a group discussion with the male group from TASC, a TSAC leader acknowledged a similar point of view that women are more likely to have more power in decision making than men. He said:

Some Cambodian women still have a traditional habitude by giving the rights to men to make decisions. But if women themselves act on that, everything will accelerate very fast, really, really fast. For example, this brother, we want him to set up one chicken house, and I set up one too. His wife is keen to do this work, so it is going very fast. But for my wife, it’s 50-50, she doesn’t really care; it depends on me, so the progress is quite slow. So, if women want and start, the level of success is very high. Success depends on women. That is why I want women to join …

Equal rights between men and women have been respected in both cooperatives, TSAC, and

KKSRAC. The cooperative leader at KKSRAC also said that:

[There is some change], because males and females have equal rights. Around here, husbands help their wives as they can with household chores and community work. Men have more understanding now about what women do, and they can do that work also. Previously, there was a more distinct labor division between males and females.

Having equal rights is something these two communities have been pursuing and practicing for more than 20 years. One female member at KKSRAC said that “[p]reviously, husbands never helped their wives, now they help. If a wife cooks rice, the husband helps to take

84 care of children.” The cooperative leader at KKSRAC added that “[i]n general, we always help each other in our community. We’ve never said this is your work; this is my work.” To verify this claim, I did interview the commune council in those two communes where these two cooperatives were located. The commune leader at Khnat commune (the commune where KKSRAC is located) provided a similar status of gender implementation in their communities. He stated that:

Previously, women had a lower status than men. But now men and women have equal rights. A longtime back, when I visited the villages, women were considered as having low status and fewer rights than men. They said women need to take care of only the kitchen. But now I do not hear that. This is maybe because there have been some village meetings on women's rights and also some gender mainstreaming programs on TV. In some families, wives go to work or run a business to make money to support the family. Their husbands look after children at home.

The commune leader added that “[n]ow they always discuss when they want to buy anything or to renovate the house. Years ago, you wouldn’t have seen that.” A group of TSAC female participants at FGD altogether said that “[unequal gender practice has been changed to equal practice] a long time ago.” All women participants added that “[t]hey always seek our ideas… Men always ask women what should be the decision?” Villagers in both cooperatives learned women’s rights and gender equality from the training provided by some local NGOs, from the gender mainstreaming programs provided by line ministries or via television channels, as well as from other means.

In both cooperatives, the main decisions are made at the General Assembly. For everyday work, each leadership member takes care of their own terms of reference. As issues arise within the scope of activities of which they are in charge, leadership members bring these issues first to the leadership team for discussion within the larger group. Male leadership members and female leadership members of both cooperatives participate and share in decision-making. Female leadership members at KKSRAC contribute ideas and input just as much as male members do.

85 However, since there is only one female leadership member at TSAC (at the beginning, there were two female leadership members but later on one of them resigned), her contribution of ideas and input are reported to be a bit less than her male counterparts. Nonetheless, the opinions and comments of the female leadership members from these two cooperatives are listened to and are accepted if they are viewed as the superior option. The final decisions are based on what is thought to be the best-reasoned and optimal option.

As reported, the leader of each cooperative initiates more plans and ideas than other leadership members. However, as reported and observed during group discussions (both gender- specific and mixed), female leadership members at KKSRAC actively contribute their ideas and offer input. One female leadership member at KKSRAC said that “[w]e all contribute [ideas].”

The second female leadership member added, “[f]or me, although right or wrong, I need to talk.”

The third female leadership member said, “[as] I told you, I always talk.” The fourth woman said,

“[w]e share, when we understand the issue, we contribute. If we do not understand, men contribute.” The third female leadership member added that “[w]hen we join the meeting if we have an idea we contribute. If men have an idea, they contribute.”

Most women at KKSRAC claimed that women have more ideas and contribute more to the meeting. Responding to my question comparing male and female committee members, and which as more ideas, the female participants said, “[m]en cannot compete with female leadership members.” Two other female participants added, “[f]or contributing idea, women are stronger.”

The other two participants reminded me that among the leaders, “[there are more women than men.” In addition to sharing and contributing ideas, accepting the idea is also essential. Although the leader of the cooperative is male, female leadership members expressed that the meeting accepts their idea if it is acceptable. One female leadership member said that “[i]f our idea is acceptable, they will take that idea.” Another female leadership member added that “[men accept

86 our idea] because our idea is not wrong.” Gender and gender roles do not factor into discussions of what is best. For example, KKSRAC plans to buy some shares from a local Union. The leader discussed with the leadership team whether KKSRAC would like to buy ten shares from that union. Female leadership members suggested, “[t]hat ten-shares is quite a lot of money because of one share equal to one million KMR ($250). We need money for our farmer members, and we do not have that much money.” Finally, the cooperative leader agreed with the team’s decision.

At TSAC meetings, female leadership members have also participated and contributed opinions or ideas. While conducting a focus group discussion with women at TSAC, I asked whether male leadership members ever seek the ideas from female leadership members. One female leadership member responded that “[he] always checked with all members, women and men alike…” Another female leadership member added that “he checked ideas from all members, he does not dare to make the decision by himself.” There is male dominance in terms of a number of leadership members. However, those male leadership members reported always respecting women’s rights. They always seek ideas from female leadership members. The ex-female leadership member added that the “[l]eader requests idea from everyone.” In addition, when female leadership members share their ideas and opinions, male leadership members always listen to them. Moreover, there is no such case that a leader or vice leader makes a decision by himself for the cooperative’s affairs. They always make decisions jointly. As one female member said “… he always lets us make a decision altogether” A female leadership member said that “at all meetings, we discuss and make decisions together” She added that “then we choose the best decision.” Another female member also added that “[f]inal decision will not be made unless all members agree.”

87 Men’s perspectives on female leadership

Men's perspectives on female leadership are vital in every workplace. It reflects how men help to contribute to women’s empowerment. It reflects what men think about women in leadership roles. Do women get support from their male co-workers? If they do, to what extent?

In this regard, I will look at the perspectives of male leadership members on female leadership members at these two cooperatives, KKSRAC and TSAC. Based on the results of the study, male leadership members at both cooperatives stated the importance of having women leaders as leadership members. The leader at KKSRAC explained that:

In the workplace, we need to have both males and females. Why do we need that? We want women to engage in all activities because the needs of women and men are not the same. As we said, women cannot do anything besides the kitchen. We want to change that perspective. We want women to become leaders. Although they cannot be village or commune leaders, they also can be community leaders. Like among the 119 farmer members of our cooperative, she is also one among other leaders. They can join all activities to gain knowledge. When they go back home, they can work as usual. If they cannot join this cooperative leadership team, they will be only at home and in the rice field.

Women themselves also expressed the importance of having women on the leadership committee because sometimes men do not make the right decision. One female participant from

TSAC said that “[s]ometimes the ideas or decision-making from the men are not really the right one.” She added that “[s]ometimes men have some gaps, so as women we can fill those gaps.”

Interestingly, although female leadership members at TSAC do not contribute their ideas and opinions as much as male members do, they possess some other value. Some work, women can do better than men do. For instance, they are better at negotiating vegetable prices with customers. As the leader at TSAC said:

It is hard when I set the vegetable price for customers. [Customers try to bring it down], but when I let my wife negotiate with customers, it is better [we can get a better price]. …

88 Sometimes customers call me and negotiate, I couldn’t say anything, but when I let my wife talk with the customer, she can keep a good price easily.

Some men believe that ‘women are a special taskforce.’ If they are willing to join and start activities with the cooperative, everything will accelerate very fast, and the level of success will be very high. From this study, we can say that male farmer members and male leadership members stress the importance of women’s participation. Thus, enhancing participation is essential.

Mechanisms to increase the involvement of women already in leadership positions

As we can see from this study, although women are encouraged and given opportunities to participate in leadership roles, there are not many women in leadership and decision-making positions. This is because they are facing some barriers, including the burden of domestic work, low education level, and working without salary. In this section, I will explore the existing mechanisms that have been used in KKSRAC and TSAC to increase the number and the involvement of women leaders. This exploration can answer the fourth main question, what can be done to increase the number of women leaders, and the degree and impact of women's participation once they become leaders?

In these two cooperatives, there are some existing mechanisms that both farmer cooperatives use to recruit women into leadership positions and retain them. One such mechanism includes male leaders spending more time than female leadership members on the cooperative’s work. For example, TSAC male leadership members contributed about ten to fifteen days per month (on average) to work for the cooperative. As the leader said:

For us, we spend quite a lot of work for the cooperative. For me, around half of the time. I spend quite a lot. There is so much work to do at the cooperative ... Sometimes I didn’t request our committee members to do the work because I feel

89 a lot for them already. Sometimes they work for the cooperative almost every day. So in some cases, I take care of that work alone … Some male leadership members work around 50%, some 40%, and some 30%. It depends on the individual. For buying vegetables, some individuals spend about 50%. All of us who are here work around 50%.

A female leadership member of TSAC is responsible for washing and packaging vegetables. She spends around three hours every two days, even on the weekend. As she claimed,

“[f]or me, I come to work every two days …in the afternoon … three hours.” Thus, male leadership members spend more time than female leadership members. Help from male counterparts is another mechanism to keep women in leadership positions. At KKSRAC, the leader helps female leadership members in preparing some reports. “I am a Chair of BoD, I help to prepare the report, but actually that is not my responsibility … My responsibility is just supervision. What is right what is wrong … Those who should prepare reports are the Finance

Officer and the Bookkeeping Officer.”

Creating and giving opportunities for women is also found to be an important mechanism to increase the involvement of women who are already in leadership positions. For example, female leadership members at KKSRAC have been given opportunities to provide training to farmers in Kampong Thom province and to engage in public speaking. By giving the women this opportunity, they can build their confidence in working as leadership committee members.

Women who have seized these opportunities have been able to build more self-confidence, which is much needed when working in leadership roles.

Assistance from family members could also help women participating in leadership roles.

For instance, in families, men claim that they do household work such as cooking rice and washing dishes when their wives are busy teaching at school or going shopping every morning (in

Cambodia, people go to the market to buy food every morning). One participant in the group discussion at TSAC said, “[f]or me when my wife goes to teach at school, I cook… I always

90 cook.” Another participant expressed that “[w]hen my wife goes to market, I stay home, I clean house, wash dishes, cook rice then work on farming.” All men participants in the group discussion stated that they have never had a division of labor between men and women. They said, “[w]e have never thought this is men’s work, that is women’s work.”

Capacity building

Capacity building plays an important role in women’s empowerment. Examining women’s empowerment, I will look at the capacity of leadership members, especially women leadership members of these two cooperatives. I will also look at the training that the farmer members and leadership committee members received. Additionally, I will look at the supplemental training that these two cooperatives need to build the capacity of leadership members to run business activities smoothly and successfully.

Members of both cooperatives have received training before and after joining the cooperatives. For KKSRAC, after being elected, all leadership members are provided some training on their roles and responsibilities, including management, planning, marketing, and bookkeeping. The trainings were not at all tailored to a participant’s gender. They are open to all members. Moreover, all members of the cooperative are provided a number of training sessions on agriculture techniques (mostly related to conservation agriculture), bookkeeping, minute taking, and report writing. The agriculture techniques are provided by the WAgN-Cambodia through its extension services.

Gender and domestic violence have also been integrated into those training agendas.

Activity planning, bookkeeping, and report writing were provided by ADDA. Gender was also provided by ADDA that focused on gender definition, gender roles, and gender equality. In

91 addition, a woman leadership member was invited for the training on Women Right & Women

Empower, which was provided by Banteay Srey NGO.

The KKSRAC leadership members acknowledge that since the gender training and gender mainstreaming provided by ADDA, by other national and international programs through television, outreach program at the community, the knowledge and behavior of villagers towards gender equality has been gradually changed since 2008. For example, males help females in doing household chores. Previously, the families sent only sons to school, but now both sons and daughters are given the same opportunities for attending schools. Moreover, in most households, husbands and wives have made decisions about major family purchases together. For small purchases, women can make decisions on their own. In Cambodia, generally, women manage all the income.

In training or meetings that are prepared for all cooperative members, generally, women’s participation is greater than men’s, but in accord with their share of the cooperative membership.

For example, for the annual meeting of KKRSAC in 2015, totally there were 71 members, among that 57 were female members. For TSAC, the 11 members of the cooperative received integrated pest management (IPM) training from the IPM project in 2007. Then when the Harvest Project started, most farmers received training on land preparation, drip irrigation, plastic cover, and crop rotation. Then before setting up a cooperative, all farmer members received training on compost

(dry and liquid) making, compost application, pest management, water management, safe vegetable production, and on techniques after harvesting from the Boosting Food Production

(BFP) project. At the training, farmers had a chance to do the experiment and watch field demonstrations.

Interestingly, there were more women than men who attended the trainings, although there are more men registered as cooperative members. Those women attended training in the name of their husbands because their husbands were busy with their work in the field or the town.

92 Some women that participated in training instead of their husbands shared knowledge, and encouraged men to use and apply new agricultural techniques that they just learned. One leadership member said, “…they told their husband. They are a special task force, as we knew.

Like me, if my wife does not give me an opportunity, I cannot join.” Another male leadership member also expressed that “[f]or my wife, I cannot work, I cannot join if she does not agree.”

Another male leadership member stated that:

[A]lthough women do not grow vegetables by themselves, they can push their husbands to apply what they have learned. They can explain to their husbands. For example, ‘I use to hear and see they apply like this like that.’ Women are the special effective mechanism working behind the scene. If women do not encourage men to do it, it is not going to work.

Finally, members in both cooperatives expressed that they are satisfied with the training they have received, including Conservation Agriculture (CA) techniques and Good Agricultural

Practices (GAP). They feel they have enough capacity to work on their vegetable farms.

However, they stress the need for new agricultural technologies and training on management and technical skills related to the broader roles and responsibilities needed for effective leadership of the cooperative. The cooperatives wish to have additional training on management and professional training related to their roles and responsibilities including finance, secretary, bookkeeping, report writing, administration, and so on. As the leader of TSAC said:

All our leadership members from the leader, vice leader, and members are weak in what they are in charge of. Like me, I do not involve much in buying vegetables. Only those brothers take care of. And vice leader, his responsibility is still low. If we can, we want to have training that tells us that this person who responsible for this position should have done such kinds of work. So, we want to know what each person should do in terms of their roles — how and what to strengthen capacity within each role. We are still weak in that.

Similarly, the management team from the KKSRAC expressed the need for more training on professional skills. They found themselves still having limited capacity for management, reporting, and bookkeeping. The leader said that “for our leadership members, [we want] training

93 that can build our capacity on management, recording/reporting.” Another female leadership member said that “[w]e want the training on reporting because we need to have a clear report, who borrow? When? How much he/she repay? When? How much remaining? How many people borrow each month? How many males and females? If we don’t have a comprehensive report, we might lose all the money.” Although they have learned those skills, their level of understanding is limited. As one female leadership member said, “[w]hen we attended training, we got little, 20 or

30% only. We want to have more so that we can do our work better”. Moreover, they stressed the need for training that helps to improve the self-esteem and self-motivation of leadership members.

Benefits in joining agricultural cooperatives

Achievement is one of the domain indicators to empower women (Kabeer, 1999).

Therefore, it is important to examine what benefits that members of these two cooperatives

(KKSRAC and TSAC) have received, especially women. According to the study, KKSRAC and

TSAC have provided significant benefits to both farmer members and leadership committees. The benefits for the leadership committee, including improving capacity, building networks, enhancing communication skills, building confidence, improving cultivation strategies, and improving market strategies. In addition to providing benefits to the leadership committee, cooperatives provide significant benefits to farmer members. The benefits that farmer members receive include increasing bargaining power, learning new agricultural techniques, improving cultivation strategies, having more chances to receive support, being easy to access credit services, improving food security, making more income, and reducing poverty.

94 Bargaining power

Bargaining power is one of the substantial benefits of forming a cooperative. It helps to strengthen the voice and power of farmers in negotiating the vegetable price (Mhembwe & Dube,

2017). Previously, when farmers did not join the cooperative, traders individually bought vegetables from the farmer. As such, traders could determine vegetable prices so that farmers sold vegetables at a very low price. Since farmers join the cooperative, they collectively sell vegetables. Therefore, traders cannot decrease the vegetable’s price as low as they used to buy from an individual farmer. For example, a female participant at the group discussion at TSAC expressed that “[b]efore when we grew and sold vegetables individually, vegetable’s price was very low, the price was determined by buyers. However, now since we join the cooperative, we grow together and sell together. We can negotiate the price. So, the price is higher.” Another participant stated that “[p]reviously, when the buyer went to someone's house, no one else would know the price … , but now since we work as a group, before selling, we check with other farmers, if the price is too low, we do not sell to that buyer. We sell to another buyer who gives a higher price.” Therefore, one benefit of joining a cooperative is that buyers cannot just drop the price as they wish. Joining cooperative, farmer members have a sense of collective power.

Learning new agricultural techniques

Learning new agricultural techniques is also important for farmer members of these two cooperatives. Joining the cooperatives, farmer members have received some agricultural trainings on Good Agriculture Practices (GAP) and Conservation Agriculture (CA) techniques. GAP places its primary concern on safety and healthy food production, with the orientation for economic, social, and environmental sustainability (FAO, 2016; Simons, 2012). Similarly, CA

95 focuses on better food safety and food security, which helps to improve financial, economic, social, and environmental benefits to farmers, communities, and societies (FAO, 2013). Thus, these two agricultural techniques have a common goal in providing a positive impact on environmental, social, and human capital.

These new agricultural techniques are reported in helping farmers to save labor and time.

Before new agriculture techniques have been introduced, farmers used traditional farming practices. They spent intensive labor and time for land preparation, as well as vegetable growing and maintaining. Farmers need to plow the soil and prepare seedbed every time of growing. As the leader of KKSRAC explained that:

Using traditional techniques spends more time at every growing time. In the beginning, we need to plow the soil, then prepare the seedbed, and then plant seedling. If we grow climbing vegetables, we need to build a trellis. After harvest, we need to clear everything. When we grow again, we need to till the soil, prepare the seedbed, and build trellis again. Also, on seedbed, we put nothing on it …

On the other hand, using CA techniques is reported to reducing soil compaction, reducing chemical fertilizer application, requiring less labor, and spending much lower cost. The leader of KKSRAC continued to explain that:

For CA, we do not need to plow, but we need to prepare the seedbed, then we put animal wastes and knead with soil. We set up an irrigation system and then put mulch on the top. After one cycle of production, we can grow second and third times. We do not need to do everything again. In doing that we save a lot of time … labor, money, and makes the soil becomes fertile. Income also increases … around 8011 percent … When we use CA, we can produce vegetables for the whole year.

These new agriculture techniques help to reduce the burdens of women farmers. For families without adult men or without getting help from adult men, women need to do land

11 There is only around 17 active farmer members who produce vegetables within the whole year round.

96 preparation by themselves, including tilling soil and preparing seedbed. That is the hardest job, which requires physical strength. As stated by one female farmer at KKSRAC that, “… Before joining the cooperative, we had to do tilling and prepare seedbed every growing time. It was very tiring. Actually, we are women. We have much work to do”. For maintaining vegetables, farmers needed to carry water from the water sources to the garden. Sometimes the water source was at a great distance. This watering took much time and made their bodies hurt, especially their shoulders. This vegetable watering even made it harder for women, since women have less physical strength, compared to men. Thus, they need to spend most of their time on vegetable watering, which puts much burden on them.

Fortunately, since they learned new agriculture techniques, which include drip irrigation, plastic cover, crop rotation, they spent less labor and less time for their vegetable production.

When farmers use CA or new agriculture techniques for leguminous vegetables, they do not need to spend more time on weeding or maintenance. They just turn on a water tap and let it flow. As one female farmer at KKSRAC stated that:

… receiving this support makes us easier. When we want to grow vegetables, we only need to build a trellis, then using drip to water vegetables. We only need to pump water into the water tank. Then we just turn on the water tap, when we water vegetables. So, we can do other work at home.

Therefore, these new agricultural technologies allow women to look after children at the same time as growing vegetables for household income.

The adoption of GAP and CA provides economic and financial benefits to farmers and communities. These new technologies help to reduce the need for chemical fertilizer application and increase resilience to pest and disease societies (FAO, 2013). Applying these new technologies, farmers do not need to spend whenever they grow new crops or a new cycle. Thus, adopting new agricultural techniques with efficiency tools is reported as spending less capital

97 investment. For example, the soil-digging machine is one of the efficiency tools that could complete the job very fast. As few male participants from TSAC said that, “[w]e have efficiency tools such as drip or sprinkling, and soil digging machine. Soil digging is faster than before.”

Supporting the low cost of new agricultural techniques, the leader of TSAC said that:

Previously we used Kouyun, and we spent more than now … I spent 400,000 KHR (100 USD) to hire people for digging soil, [the spending of this 400,000 KHR cannot cover for one hectare of land size]… Now with soil digging marching, we spend a very short time … For this digging machine we spend mostly only 3 to 4 liters of petrol, let us say around 20,000 KHR (5 USD). And if we hire some people to help, it cost around 30,000 KHR (7.50 USD) more, so total is around 50,000 KHR (12.50 USD) only. If we hire Kouyun, we need to spend a lot of money.

Therefore, CA and GAP techniques are reported helping farmers to save money. For instance, using CA techniques reduces the need for fertilizer application, and increases resilience to pest and disease (FAO, 2013).

Improving food security and nutrition

Joining cooperative could improve food security and nutrition for farmer members. For example, according to the study with these two cooperatives, it shows that previously, when farmers grew vegetables using traditional techniques, they could not even have enough vegetables for their family consumption. However, since they learned some modern agricultural techniques, they produce enough vegetables for consumption. In addition to growing vegetables, they raise chickens and fish as well. Therefore, they are consuming enough food with nutrients. As one farmer at KKSRAC stated that, “[b]efore joining the cooperative, we did not know new techniques for growing vegetables ... After joining, we learn to grow vegetables to support our families without buying from the outside…” Another farmer at KKSRAC stated, “…previously,

98 we did not have enough food to eat, but now more than enough.” Two farmers from TSAC also said the same thing, “[b]efore learning good agriculture techniques, my vegetable production had low yield… We almost could not have enough for our family consumption … After practicing good agricultural techniques, we got more yield.” Growing vegetables by using CA and GAP also provide farmers with safe food, keeping them away from chemical contamination. Consuming vegetables that are chemical-free helps to improve people’s health. One female participant at

KKSRAC said, “[a]t first, we did not have any knowledge, we bought from the market. It was not good, resulted in having diarrhea. But now, after we learned, we grow vegetables ourselves. We do not have any diseases anymore. We have good health.” Another participant added that [now we eat] more, we grow more varieties of vegetables and fruits.” Another woman also expressed that, “[now we eat] all three types of food, building (food that build the body), energy (food that gives strength and energy), and protection (food that protects the body against disease).” Using

CA and GAP techniques, farmers have enough food to eat with safe and nutritious food.

Therefore, their health is improved, especially children, who have enough food and nutrition for growing. One farmer expressed that, “Children are growing faster… because nowadays, children can have enough food to eat, including vegetables … helping them grow fast. Also, have good health, much clever, and may have good scores at school.”

When farmers at TSAC joined the previous project, they were requested to focus on only a high quantity of yield. Thus, they needed to use more chemicals and pesticides. They had never thought of their health impacts. Farmers needed to apply chemical fertilizers every two days. One farmer revealed that “[a]fter we learned, we knew, and now we do not feel safe when buying vegetables from others.” After they joined the cooperative, they learned about the GAP. They reduced their use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, using compost instead. All farmers have a compost-making container. They use the vegetables and kitchen wastes to make compost. In doing that, farmers could make compost and have a clean environment. Another male farmer

99 added that “[w]e produce, so we know. We grow vegetables, we use chemical substances, but we care about our customer’s health. We do not harvest vegetables immediately after spraying chemical substances. We can eat ourselves, and other people also can eat.” Interestingly, farmers start to think about the consumer’s health. Previously, they even did not think about their health at all. Joining the cooperative, they claimed they have safe food with enough nutrition because, besides vegetable production, they also raise some livestock that can support their family consumption.

Making income, reducing poverty

Adoption of Good Agriculture and Conservation Agriculture Practices provides economic and financial benefits to farmers and communities. New agricultural technologies allow farmers to grow vegetables all year round. They provide higher yields and greater stability with low investment costs. These two new technologies allow farmers to produce a better quality of vegetable production, leading farmers to get a better price. Therefore, farmers make more income from vegetable production, consequently reducing poverty.

Generally, rice-producing is the primary income source of farmers in Cambodia, especially in rural areas. However, according to this study, it is reported that income from vegetable production is the primary income source for most families in these two cooperatives.

They cannot rely on rice production. The income from vegetable production is for the most significant household expenditures, including food, children's education, health care, social and religious ceremonies, and wedding parties as well. For instance, a male leadership member said,

“[w]e can say that vegetables that we grow is for all expenses, including religious ceremonies, weddings so on. If we grow only rice, we cannot afford those expenses.” One male participant added, “[r]ice does not allow us to pay for those expenses.” Another male participant said that

100 “[f]or vegetable production, every harvest we got around 2 to 3 million KHR (500-750 USD).”

Another man continued that “[f]or rice, one hectare we can get only two million.” One participant added that “[t]he income from selling rice sometimes is not even enough for repaying rice production investment debt.” The leader of TSAC stated that “Growing vegetables at this time is fairly different from before because we can grow vegetables more times than before.”

At KKSRAC, among all members, 18 farmers who grow vegetables by using CA techniques, have made the primary income from this vegetable growing, because they can grow all year round. This vegetable production helps them to increase income around 70 to 80 percent.

As reported by farmers, they said that since they join cooperative, their standard of living has been improved. Few farmers reported that the “[benefits of vegetable production] in the household is reducing poverty. We can have enough food to eat … because we have the vegetables that we grow. We spent less money to buy [other additional food] from others.”

Before joining the cooperative, most families at KKSRAC were classified as the ID poor I and II.

The ID poor I refer to the poorest household, and the ID poor II is the second poorest household.

However, nowadays, almost half of them have moved out of this ID poor I and II categories. One participant stated that “[p]reviously we had 92 households under poverty, now there are only 50 households.” One female leadership member indicated that her family used to be under the poverty group. But now, since she joined the cooperative and applying the CA technique, her family has better living conditions. She said that “… I was under the poverty group. Now I get rid of that poverty … My living standard is improved.” Besides, some farmers reported that the contribution from selling vegetables, rice, livestock, and animals help them to build new brick houses.

The income from vegetable production is reported to play an important role in giving chances and supporting children's education. Previously, farmers made little income. They could not effort to spend money on their children. However, since they join cooperatives, they learned

101 and applied new agriculture techniques. They produced higher quantity and quality vegetables.

This better-quality coupled with collective selling; farmers could sell at a better price. Thus, farmers make a lot more income than before joining the cooperatives. Therefore, they have the ability to send children to school, although children's education expenditure is much higher than before. One female participant at KKSRAC talked about the pocket money that she has given to her children when they go to the school that “Previously, we did not have enough money to pay

[for our children education]. Our children were small, we paid little, only 500 KHR (0.125 USD) per day, but now we need to give them at least 5,000 KHR (1.25 USD) for each child [per day], and for 3 children, we spend a lot.” Thus, joining cooperatives provides incredible benefits for building and strengthening human capital.

Social ceremonies are claimed by Cambodian people as one of the significant expenditures for each household. Those social ceremonies, including house-warming, wedding parties, and religious ceremonies. Most people think that they must spend, although they do not have enough money or do not have any money. They need to borrow money to pay as a gift to those ceremonies. One participant stated that “[n]ow more weddings, house warmings, religious ceremonies.” Moreover, they need to spend more on each ceremony or party than before. Farmers can afford these expenses since they got money from vegetable production. Another participant added, “[a]nd we need to put as a gift around 50,000 KHR (12.50 USD) for a wedding.

Previously we could give around 25,000 KHR (6.25 USD) only.”

Although TSAC is too young to report the benefits of joining the cooperative, its leader expressed the benefits that farmers received in less than one year by joining. He stated that:

For this new project, there are benefits, but it seems invisible. For example, each family received a capital investment from the project. It is not much but can help to some extent. For two groups of our farmers, we received more than 50 million KHR (12,500 USD). Each farmer can use that money to buy pumping water, make a compost warehouse. Usually, we through the vegetable waste away, but now we keep in the compost hole [under the ground], plus

102 other waste from the kitchen. This is an indirect benefit because when we put wastes in the compost hole. They do not immediately turn into compost. And it makes the house clean. That is one good benefit. And then we can buy a pumping water machine and fertilizer-praying machine. We can say it is not still baby fruits12, but it a little bit growing.

Therefore, joining this cooperative helped farmers to make more income and reduce poverty.

Easy accessing to credit services

Access to finance is one of the concerns for gender equality. Having equal access to financial service is the fundamental of women’s empowerment (Kabeer, 2001; O’Neil et al.,

2014). To examine women’s empowerment in these two cooperatives, this study will look at the condition of women in accessing financial sources. The findings of this study reveal that saving is one of the main activities of cooperatives. The financial scheme is set up for providing the opportunity to farmer members to have access to finance in the community. Farmer members can access to financial sources when they need for their agricultural production or other household expenses. Members of cooperatives have two options in accessing the financial resource at the cooperatives with low-interest rates and without any collateral. The first option, all farmer members can directly borrow from the cooperative13. The second option, a small group of members can borrow money from the small saving group. This small saving group was set up by

7 to 8 members. Farmer members can also use this saving group system to save money. As reported, some farmer members put some income from selling vegetables in saving the group. In addition, farmers can use this system to borrow money when they need it. Some farmers borrow money from this saving group to buy shares with cooperatives. As reported by one female

12 Refers to little achievement 13 Cooperative uses the money that members bought shares, for lending to members

103 participant at KKSRAC that “[s]ome members used their extra money to buy shares. However, for those who did not have extra money, they withdrew some money from the saving group to buy shares with the cooperative.” These two options of financial resources provide the ability for farmers to borrow money when they need it. Especially when they have any urgent situation at night, such as family members getting sick. One participant stated that, “… when we need money during nighttime, we can borrow from the cooperative, and the interest rate is also low.” The interest rate from cooperative is cheaper, only 2 percent, but from the moneylender it is 3 percent per month. Although the interest rate from microfinance institutions is only 1.5 percent, loan requirements (e.g., collateral) are stringent.

Based on the result of the study, access to finance in these two cooperatives is equal between men and women. The decision to whom to lend money is made by the leadership committee and depends on the purpose of borrowing that money for, the share that particular person bought, and the ability to payback. It is not based on gender. As clarified by the leader of

KKSRAC:

Everybody has the same right to borrow. Base on cooperative regulation, they can borrow up to five times their share(s), and our committee evaluates their ability to repay … We do not differentiate between men and women, but we focus on the purpose of borrowing. What are they going to do with that money? Is it urgent? So, we try to work out that way.

Overall, the cooperatives provide benefits to the farmer members in general and the leadership committee in specific. The leadership committee reported having some benefits in joining the cooperative including improved capacity and communication skills, building networks and confidence, as well as enhancing cultivation and market strategies. Good Agriculture

Practices (GAP) and Conservation Agriculture (CA) techniques help farmers to have better food safety and food security, leading to improve financial, economic, social, and environmental benefits. With these new techniques, farmers reduce chemical fertilizer application, spend less

104 labor time, and have much lower investment cost. These new techniques help to reduce the burden of women farmers. Women can grow vegetables without getting help from adult men.

They can take care of children, prepare food, as well as growing vegetables at the same time.

Besides, using CA and GAP techniques, farmers have enough food to eat with safe and nutritious food, which helps to improve their health, and children have enough food and nutrition for growing. Moreover, these two cooperatives, KKSRAC and TSAC, offer equal opportunity to women in accessing the financial resource as men. Moreover, better quality and a larger quantity of vegetable production, using CA and GAP practices couple with the bargaining power by collective selling vegetables, help farmers get a better price for their vegetables. Therefore, farmers make more income from vegetable production, consequently reducing poverty.

To conclude chapter 5, women are encouraged and given opportunities to participate in leadership positions. However, not many of them are willing to join. Currently, there are five female leadership members at KKSRAC. Previously, in the first election, there were only three female leadership members. However, there is only one woman out of eight leadership members at TSAC. There are some barriers contribute to this anticipation. First, women are busy with domestic work. Second, some women have low education and limited capacity. Third, there is no salary to work for the cooperatives. For decision-making, males and females reported having equal rights, both in the community and within households. At the cooperatives, male and female leadership members participate and share in decision-making. The final decision is based on the best option. It is not based on gender or roles. These two cooperatives have some effective existing mechanisms to keep female leadership members in the leadership committee and to increase their involvement. For instance, the leader of KKSRAC helps female leadership members to prepare some reports. Building capacity and providing opportunities to female leadership members help to build their confidence and motivation in continuing their leadership

105 roles. Moreover, the perspective of male leadership members that the participation of female leadership members is important also helps to encourage female leadership members to stay.

Most interestingly, the cooperatives provide benefits to farmers members in general and leadership committee members in specific. The leadership committee reported benefits to joining that include improving capacity and communication skills, building network and confidence, as well as enhancing cultivation and market strategies. Farmer members also reported having some benefits such as new agricultural techniques that save investment capital, time, and labor. The cooperatives equally provide the locally available saving and credit services to all members.

Women especially have been offered equal opportunity to access the financial resources as men.

Collective selling helps farmers gain bargaining power. Also, good production yields and an emphasis on food safety promotes food security and nutrition. Farmers can make more income and alleviate poverty. Thus, the benefits received from joining the cooperative have many ways to empower women.

106

Chapter 6

Discussion and Conclusion

Restatement of the problem

Women significantly contribute to the development of the agriculture sector in most countries, especially in developing countries (Prakash, 2003). There is rising evidence of the vital contribution of gender equality on poverty reduction and food security improvement.

Notwithstanding, gender inequality in the agriculture sector remains a significant concern among local governments and development partners, including World Bank, FAO, USAID, as well as other bi-literal and multi-lateral donors. Wakefield (2017) suggests that having women in leadership roles is believed to promote social equality and equity because women are less hierarchical, more cooperative, and collaborative. Moreover, they are more likely than men to advocate for policy changes for promoting the interests of women, children, and families.

In Cambodia, women also play a critical role in both the country’s economy (FAO, 2010) and ensuring food security (ADB, 2015; JICA, 2007). Nevertheless, their effort and contribution remain unseen (FAO, 2010). Therefore, this study explored the role of women in two farmer cooperatives in Cambodia to gain an understanding of women’s representation in leadership positions, the extent and nature of their decision-making, and the barriers they face in acquiring leadership roles.

The two cooperatives studied were the Khom Khnat Samaki Rong Roeung Agricultural

Cooperative (KKSRAC) in Siem Preap Province and the Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative

(TSAC) in Battambang province. These two cooperatives were selected so as to compare the farmer cooperatives that were established with different purposes and in different geographic

107 areas. As mentioned earlier in Chapter 4, KKSRAC was the first setup as a saving group. The original purpose of the saving group was to enhance and empower women. The idea of women’s empowerment is embedded amongst all members, even though KKSRAC is registered as an agricultural cooperative. On the other hand, the main goal of TSAC is to promote the benefits and improve the living standard of farmers in the community. It does not have any specific intention for women’s empowerment. Moreover, Khnart commune, where KKSRAC is located, is in the rural area (NCDD, 2009), while Ta Meun commune, where TSAC is located, is classified as a wholly urban (NIS, 2008).

This research addresses three main questions: 1). What are the barriers facing women to participate as leaders? 2). To what extent are women involved in decision-making as leaders?

And 3). What can be done to increase the number of women leaders, and the level of participation of women once they become leaders? This study employs two theoretical frameworks to address these questions – the Gender Transformative Approach and Women’s Empowerment Theory.

Restatement of the methods

This research compared two farmer cooperatives KKSRAC and TSAC, using qualitative research methods. This research study was conducted in May and June 2018. Two methods of data collection were employed: Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and Key Informant Interview

(KII). Participants for the FGDs were randomly selected from the cooperatives' membership lists that were stratified by gender. Four semi-structured focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with two farmer cooperatives (one FGD of male members, and one FGD of female members, in each cooperative). There were a total of 38 farmers who participated. The discussion was guided by questions corresponding to five key areas addressed the study’s research questions.

For key informant interviews, participants were recruited purposively. The goal of this purposive

108 selection was to learn from different individuals in different contexts and walks of life. In this regard, seven key informants were recruited for interviews, including two cooperative leaders, two female leadership members (one from each cooperative), two commune councils (one from each province), and one former ex-female leadership member in BTB. A voice recorder was used for the four FGDs and seven KIIs. Then the recorded interview was transcribed, simultaneously translating from Khmer into English. Coding was conducted in two steps – open coding and focus coding. Open coding was used to identify and categorize all ideas, themes, and issues. Then I identified and explored the general patterns and themes that cut across a number of issues. For the focus coding, I looked for patterns, ideas, and themes that have particular interests. Then I further elaborated analytically interesting themes that speak to the broader research topic of the thesis.

Summary of the findings

Cambodian society remains largely hierarchal and patriarchal social structure. However, my results show that equal rights between men and women have been respected in both cooperatives. Women have a sense of receiving support from their families, communities, and cooperatives. They are encouraged and given opportunities to participate in leadership positions.

Moreover, female leadership members in both cooperatives KKSRAC and TSAC have a sense of women’s agency because they are treated equally vis-à-vis male leadership members. They are offered equal rights to attend any training and capacity building courses. They are given opportunities to participate in activities to build their capacity as leaders. For example, they have been offered the opportunity to share experiences with farmers in another province publicly.

Some of them were given opportunities to provide a speech at the National Assembly.

Interestingly, male and female leadership members participate, share and contribute opinions, and

109 make the final decisions together. Their ways of working reflect the power balance between male and female leadership members in the cooperatives.

These findings reflect the significant achievement that the Royal Government of

Cambodia, line ministries, development partners, NGOs, and other stakeholders have committed and paid particular attention to promote gender equality and equity for more than a decade. Through advocacy and political intervention, gender mainstreaming, and gender-specific programs, including trainings, meetings, and workshops from the national to the local levels, as well as, the dissemination via television, significant progress toward gender equality has been achieved. The communities have learned about women’s rights and gender equality. They have changed their behaviors toward respecting equal rights between men and women. As evidence, the USAID/Cambodia, in its report on

“Cambodia Gender Assessment,” reports that Cambodia has made some progress in addressing gender-related constraints and that USAID-funded projects have made important contributions to this achievement (USAID, 2016). The Asian Development

Bank (ADB), in its report on “Gender Equality in the Labor Market in Cambodia,” also acknowledges the improvement of gender equality in the labor market in Cambodia

(ADB, 2013).

Progress has been made in promoting gender equality in Cambodia. Yet the challenges and potential obstacles for women acquiring leadership and decision-making roles remain. In the beginning, TSAC had two female leadership members out of eight. However, after working for the cooperative for several months, one requested to resign, because working for the cooperatives required much more time than she could afford. Thus, currently, there is only one female leadership member. For KKSRAC, in the beginning, there were only three female leadership members out of eight leadership members. However, after working for almost four years, women

110 have been empowered. The female leadership members increased to five out of eight. Although there are more female than male leadership members at KKSRAC, they still report some barriers.

I employ the Gender Transformative Approach (GTA) to examine the root causes of these barriers by exploring the education, capacity, self-confidence, self-motivation, and representation of female leadership members. My findings show that male leadership members in both cooperatives have higher education levels than female leadership members. Higher education attainment is the reason that men take the top management positions as leaders in each cooperative. My results are consistent with the reports by

ADB (2012) and USAID (2016). The ADB report in 2012 on “Cambodia: Country

Gender Analysis” highlights the constraints to women’s participation in decision making and leadership positions as being their low levels of education, and the burden of caregiving and household work (p. 5). Additionally, USAID (2016) also points to women’s lack of experience, low levels of literacy, and limited capacity for public speaking as constraints to their participation in leadership positions.

A question is whether women are opting out or being kept out of leadership roles in view of these perceived shortcomings. This is complex. Quotes from women farmers and leaders interviewed as part of my study suggest that women are opting out of leadership roles by themselves. Because they think they have low education and capacity, they do not want to participate in leadership positions. However, a more critical interpretation might be that women are being pushed or kept away by systemic structural disadvantages. That is, structural disadvantages inherent to the hierarchal and patriarchal cultural and social system have kept some women away from accessing education and other women from pursuing higher education. With low education and capacities, they do not have the confidence to participate in leadership and decision-making position. Their low level of education and capacities limit their roles as leadership members.

111 Besides gender imbalances, the rural-urban division also creates disparity among women.

Rural-urban geographical division distinguishes living standards of farmers, especially women, between rural and urban areas. Women in urban areas have better access to resources, including education, finance, agricultural technology, information, and other resources than women in rural areas. Generally, women in urban areas have a higher percentage pursuing education than women in rural areas. And they have a greater proportion with higher educational degrees. Since TSAC is located in an urban area and KKSRAC is in a rural area, women members at TSAC have a somewhat higher level of education than women members at KKSRAC. Thus, women members at TSAC do not appear suffer quite the same lack of leadership capacity as those in KKSRAC, assuming that formal education is a valid indicator of that capacity.

Furthermore, my findings suggest that domestic work burden and working without appropriate compensation are also barriers that impede women in participating in leadership positions. As can be seen, women in these two cooperatives are busy with domestic work and with their vegetable production. Since farmers at TSAC have much larger land sizes for vegetable production than farmers at KKSRAC, female leadership members at TSAC spend more time on vegetable production than their counterparts at KKSRAC. In addition, they need to dedicate quite a lot of time without any compensation for the cooperatives. Family work burden, combined with lacking appropriate compensation for leadership work, are the root causes of the low motivation to participate as leaders among women at TSAC.

Male leadership members are also busy with their businesses. They also dedicate more time to the cooperatives and receive the same amount of incentive as female leadership members.

However, male leadership members still could afford to participate in leadership positions. They expressed that they do not have many responsibilities for domestic work as women do. Moreover, they have a higher motivation to help farmers in their communities.

112 Working without a salary seems to be the most crucial fact that holds back women in joining leadership committees in cooperatives because they have additional responsibility for making income. Zeuli and Radel (2005) acknowledge that people who are struggling for their basic needs would be more averse to the risk of joining any activity that does not contribute to their immediate needs. As they state that “… community members are struggling to meet their basic needs and do not have the time and energy to engage in activities that do not contribute to their immediate well-being. Cooperative generally require a significant dedication of time by the initial community organizers (especially if it is truly a grass-root, bottom-up effort)” (p. 51). Any activity that takes away time for essential income-generating work would discourage women’s participation (CCHR, 2013; MoWA, 2014b).

Achievement is important for women’s empowerment. My findings suggest that joining cooperatives, farmer members, and committee leadership members have received some benefits.

Farmer members reported having some benefits such as new agricultural techniques that help to save investment capital, time, and labor. The cooperatives provide locally available savings and credit services to all members, with equal opportunity. Women especially have been offered equal opportunity to access the financial resources as men. Generally, men have more chances than women, especially in developing countries (Doss et al., 2011; Quisumbing et al., 2014; WB,

FAO, & IFAD, 2009), in accessing financial resources. This unequal access to finance is claimed to have significant impacts on food production, food security, and nutrition, as well as the well- being of the family. However, these two cooperatives, KKSRAC and TSAC, offer equal opportunity to women in accessing the financial resource as men, which indicates some progress has been made for women empowerment in these grassroot organizations.

Collective selling helps farmers gain bargaining power, a clear benefit to being part of a cooperative. Also, enhancements in productivity and food safety serve to improve food security and nutrition among households and communities. In addition, farmers in cooperatives have

113 higher income, leading to reduced poverty. In addition to these advantages shared by all, leadership within cooperatives comes with additional benefits including improving capacity and communication skills, building networks, and confidence, as well as enhanced cultivation and market strategies. Although female leadership members reported having received some benefits, they still have less sense of achievement because they do not have a proper allowance for their work at the cooperatives. Insufficient compensation causes low motivation among female leadership members.

The study concludes that women in these two cooperatives have been given opportunities and equal rights as male leadership members. However, they are still facing some challenges in acquiring and participating in leadership positions. Those challenges include domestic work burden, low education and capacity, and no proper allowance in working for the cooperatives.

Compensation is one important issue that deserves more consideration for keeping women in leadership positions. Domestic work burden plus limited capacity and low education level also impede women from acquiring leadership positions. Therefore, Communities, NGOs, INGOs, government agencies, policymakers, donors, and others need to understand that if women are to play a greater leadership role, the interrelated problems of time poverty, lack of capacity, and insufficient compensation will need to be addressed.

Implication for policies and academic

In Cambodia, projects focusing on women’s empowerment that have been operating for more than a decade or two. However, the number of women leaders is still limited at all levels, including national, sub-national, as well as grassroots levels. It is hoped that the empirical evidence produced by this study will inform policy decisions and help agencies identify potential barriers (insufficient compensation, lack of capacity, and the burden of domestic work) that

114 impede women in acquiring leadership positions. The findings may influence public policy, governments, implementing agencies, and practitioners to draw more effective strategies that help to increase the opportunities for women in joining leadership roles, consequently, increasing the representation of women leaders. More broadly, it is hoped that this study to promote further social change with an eye toward raising the role and impact of women as leaders to be equal to that of men.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

There are only a few reports on women and leadership in Cambodia. In particular, there is a need to better understand financial and time constraints for women in acquiring leadership positions. In my study, I found inappropriate compensation, domestic work burden, as well as low education and capacity that are the main barriers for women in acquiring leadership positions.

Although I responded to the previous suggestion, there is a limitation in my scope of the study. I only studied two agricultural cooperatives, raising concerns about generalizability. However, there is a reason to believe these results are generalizable beyond these two cases within the local level. For example, a study by Chhoeun et al., (2008), on the effort to build the capacity of women to participate in leadership at ‘Banteay Srei’ a local Cambodia NGO, revealed that salary is one of the main factors that impede women participating in any leadership positions. The

REDD+ Cambodia also indicated that women do not have motivation to join any activity that takes significant time from their livelihood activities, without appropriate compensation. They have to make income for their immediate needs (WOCAN et al., 2013). Since women need to take care of the economic security for their families, they cannot dedicate that much time to their volunteer work, including engaging in leadership roles. Therefore, working without proper

115 compensation is also the factor that narrows opportunities for women engaging any leadership roles at all levels.

Although my findings are consistent with those of others, a fully scaled-up study that examines many more cooperatives and different kinds of organizations in Cambodia would certainly have more influence on public policy and an enhanced ability to increase the opportunities for women in acquiring leadership roles at all levels. A large-scale study of this issue also promises to provide those actors involved in women’s empowerment with much needed data about the full array of factors that hinder women from joining leadership roles.

Ultimately, the goal is to develop practical strategies and solutions to improve the involvement of women as leaders and decision makers.

116 References

ADB. (2012). Country Gender Analysis. The Philippines: Asian Development Bank.

ADB. (2013). Gender Equality in the Labor Market in Cambodia. The Philippines: Asian

Development Bank.

ADB. (2014). Cambodian Country Poverty Analysis 2014. The Philippines: Asian Development

Bank.

ADB. (2015). Promoting Women’s Economic Empowerment in Cambodia. Manila, Philippines:

Asian Development Bank.

ADB. (2019). Development Effectiveness Brief: Cambodia and Asian Development Bank-

Partnership for Inclusive Growth. Manila, Philippines: Asian Development Bank.

Apostolakis, G., & Dijk, G. Van. (2018). Copperative Organizations and Members’ Role: A New

Perspective (Working paper CIRIEC No. 2018/04).

Ashman, D., Wilkie, J., Mer, S., & Sreng, S. (2014). Women’s Leadership as a Route to Greater

Empowerment: Cambodian Case Study.

Batliwala, S. (2011). Feminist Leadership for Social Transformation: Clearing the Conceptual

Cloud.

Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. New York: Harper

& Row, Publishers, Inc.

Beuchelt, T. D., & Badstue, L. (2013). Gender, Nutrition and Climate-smart Food Production:

Opportunities and Trade-offs. Food Security, (5), 709–721.

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (2017). A Conceptual Model of Women and Girls’

Empowerment.

Booth, M. N. (2014). Education and Gender in Contemporary Cambodia. International Journal of

Humanities and Social Science, 4(10), 42–50.

117 Bunch, S., & Mehra, R. (2008). Women Help Solve Hunger. Why Is the World Still Waiting?

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership (First). New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.

Buvinić, M. (2017). Measuring Women’s Economic Empowerment: Overview. Retrieved March

29, 2019, from https://data2x.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/WomensEconEmpowerment

Measures_Overview.pdf

CCHR. (2013). Policy Brief : Women’s Political Representation in Cambodia.

CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. (2012). Building Coalitions,

Creating Change: An Agenda for Gender Transformative Research in Agricultural

Development Workshop Report, 3-5 October 2012, Penang, Malaysia.

Chan, R., & Chheang, V. (2008). Cultural Challenges to the Decentralization Process in

Cambodia. Ritsumeikan Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, 24.

Charlier, S., & Caubergs, L. (2007). The Women Empowerment Approach: A Methodological

Quide. Retrieved from https://www.joinforwater.ngo/sites/default/files/library_assets/

GEN_E5_women_empowerment.pdf?popup=true

Chhoeun, T., Sok, P., & Byrne, C. (2008). Citadel of Women: Strengthening Female Leadership

in Rural Cambodia. Gender and Development, 16(3), 535–547.

Clayton, T. (1998). Building the New Cambodia : Educational Destruction and Construction

Under the Khmer Rouge, 1975-1979. History of Education Quarterly, 38(1), 1–16.

Cole, S., Kantor, P., Sarapura, S., & Rajaratnam, S. (2014). Gender-Transformative Approaches

to Address Inequalities in Food, Nutrition and Economic Outcomes in Aquatic Agricultural

Systems (No. AAS-2014-42). Penang, Malysia.

Cornwall, A. (2014). Women’s Empowerment: What Works and Why? (WIDER Working Paper

2014/104).

Cornwall, A. (2016). Women’s Empowerment: What Works? Journal of International

Development, 28, 342–359.

118 Cornwall, A., & Rivas, A. M. (2015). From Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment to

Global Justice: Reclaiming a Transformative Agenda for Gender and Development. Third

World Quarterly, 36(2), 396–415.

CPS, & GADC. (2011). Feasibility Study on Demand for Gender Related Studies at Tertiary

Education. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Danielsen, K., Wong, F. F., Mclachlin, D., & Sarapura, S. (2018). Typologies of Change: Gender

Integration in Agriculture and Food Security Research. Amsterdam: Royal Tropical

Institute (KIT).

Doss, C., Meinzen-Dick, R., Quisumbing, A., & Theis, S. (2018). Women in Agriculture: Four

Myths. Global Food Security, 16, 69–74.

Doss, C., Raney, T., Anríquez, G., Croppenstedt, A., Gerosa, S., Lowde, S., … Matuscke, I.

(2011). The Role of Women in Agriculture (ESA Working Paper No. 11-02). Food and

Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

Downton, J. (1973). Rebel Leadership: Commitment and Charisma in the Revolutionary Process.

New York: The Free Press.

Dy, S. S. (2004). Strategies and Policies for Basic Education in Cambodia: Historical

Perspectives. International Education Journal, 5(1), 90–97.

Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing Ethnographic Fieldnote. Journal of

Chemical Information and Modeling (2nd ed., Vol. 53). Chicago and London: The

University of Chicago Press.

Eyben, R., Kabeer, N., & Cornwall, A. (2008). Conceptualising Empowerment and the

Implications for Pro Poor Growth.

Fairholm, G. (1991). Values Leadership: Toward a New Philosophy of Leadership. New York:

Praeger Publishers.

119 Fairholm, M. (2002). Defining Leadership: A Review of Past, Present, and Future Ideas

(Monograph Series No. MS02- 02). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/

publication/283048404

FAO. (1998). Agricultural Cooperative Development: A Manual for Trainers. Rome, Italy.

Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-x0475e.pdf

FAO. (2010). Gender Profile in Agricultural Households in Cambodia 2008.

FAO. (2011a). The State of Food and Agriculture 2010-11: Women in Agircutlure, Closing the

Gender Gap for Development. Soil Science (Vol. 79). Rome: Food and Agriculture

Organization of The United Nations (FAO).

FAO. (2011b). The Vital Role of Women in Agriculture and Rural Development. Thirty-seventh

Session, Rome, 25 June - 2 July 2011. Retrieved from www.fao.org

FAO. (2013). Policy Support Guidelines for the Promotion of Sustainable Production

Intensification and Ecosystem Services. Integrated Crop Management (Vol. 19). Rome,

Italy.

FAO. (2016). A Schem and Training Manual on Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) for Fruits

and Vegetables (Volume 1 The scheme - standard and implementation infrastructure).

Bangkok.

FAO, IFAD, & WFP. (2015). The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2015. Meeting the 2015

International Hunger Targets: Taking Stock of Uneven Progress. Rome, FAO.

FHI 360. (2012). Gender Intergration Framework: How to Integrate Gender in Every Aspect of

Our Work.

GEAC. (2010). Guidelines for Establishing Agricultural Co-operatives. Retrieved from

file:///V:/Downloads/1pdf.net_guidelines-for-establishing-agricultural-co-operatives.pdf

Goethals, G. R., & Sorenson, G. L. J. (2006). The Quest for A General Theory of Leadership.

Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing. Inc.

120 Gorman, S., & Kheng, P. D. (1999). Gender and Development in Cambodia : An Overview.

Working Paper 10. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Gourley, S. (2009). The Middle Way: Bridging the Gap Between Cambodian Culture and

Children’s Rights.

Hill, P. S., & Ly, H. T. (2004). Women Are Silver, Women Are Diamonds: Conflicting Images of

Women in the Cambodian Print Media. Reproductive Health Matters, 12(24), 104–115.

Hillenbrand, E., Karim, N., Wu, D., & Mohanraj, P. (2015). Measuring Gender Transformative

Change: A Review of Literature and Promising Practices.

Huis, M. A., Hansen, N., Otten, S., & Lensink, R. (2017). A Three-Dimensional Model of

Women’s Empowerment: Implications in the Field of Microfinance and Future Directions.

Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–14.

ICA-Asia and Pacific. (2015). Resource Guide for Advanced Training of Co-operatives on

Entrepreneurship Development of Women and Gender Equality. New Delhi, India:

Diamond Press.

IFAD. (2019). Mainstreaming Gender Transformative Approaches at IFAD - Action Plan 2019-

2025 (Investing in rural people No. EB 2019/126/INF.6). Rome, Italy.

ILO. (2014). Findings of the Assessment of Agricultural Cooperatives in West Bank: Challenges

and Opportunities. Beirut, Lebenon.

JICA. (2007). CAMBODIA: Country Gender Profile.

Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections on the Measurement of

Women’s Empowerment. Development and Change, 30, 435–464.

Kabeer, N. (2001). Reflections on The Measurement of Women’s Employment. In Discussing

Women’s Empowerment: Theory and Practice. Stockholm: Novum Grafiska AB.

121 Kantor, P., Morgan, M., & Choudhury, A. (2015). Amplifying Outcomes by Addressing

Inequality: The Role of Gender-transformative Approaches in Agricultural Research for

Development. Gender, Technology and Development, 19(3), 292–319.

Keothyda, K., & Malika, C. (2016). Progress of Women in Politics in Cambodia.

Kitzinger, J., & Barbour, R. S. (1999). Introduction: The Challenge and Promise of Focus

Groups. In R. S. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing Focus Group Research.

London: SAGE Publication.

KKSRAC. (2014). Khom Khnat Samaki Agricultural Cooperative. Siem Reap, Cambodia.

Lund, S. (2013). Women’s Leadership. Cambodia.

Ly, T. (2015). Leadership Pathways for Local Women: Case Studies of Three Communes in

Cambodia. The Victoria University of Wellington.

MAFF. (2006). Gender Mainstreaming Policy and Strategy in Agriculture.

MAFF. (2015). Gender Mainstreaming Policy and Strategic Framework in Agriculture 2016 -

2020.

Majee, W., & Hoyt, A. (2011). Cooperatives and Community Development: A perspective on the

Use of Cooperatives in Development. Journal of Community Practice, 19(1), 48–61.

Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for Qualitative Research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–526.

Mhembwe, S., & Dube, E. (2017). The Role of Cooperatives in Sustaining the Livelihoods of

Rural Communities: The Case of Rural Cooperatives in Shurugwi District, Zimbabwe.

Jamba: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 9(1), 1–9.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods

Sourcebook (3rd ed.). Los Angles: SAGE Publications.

Miner, K., & Jayaratne, T. (2014). Feminist Survey Research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.),

Feminist Research Practice: A primer. Boston: SAGE Publication.

MoEYS. (2005). Education Strategic Plan 2006-2010. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

122 MoEYS. (2010). Education Strategic Plan 2009-2013. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

MoEYS. (2014). Cambodia: Education for All 2015 National Review. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

MoP. (1999). Cambodia Human Development Report 1999: Village Economy and Development.

Moran-Ellis, J., Alexander, V. D., Cronin, A., Dickinson, M., Fielding, J., Sleney, J., & Thomas,

H. (2006). Triangulation and Integration: Processes, Claims and Implications. Qualitative

Research, 6(1), 45–59.

Mosedale, S. (2003). Towards A Framework for Assessing Empowerment (No. Working Paper

Series 3). Manchester: Impact Assessment Research Centre. Retrieved from

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.583.6299&rep=rep1&type=pdf

MoWA. (2014a). Policy Brief 2: Gender Relations and Attitudes (Cambodia Gender

Assessment). Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

MoWA. (2014b). Policy Brief 3: Women’s Economic Empowerment (Cambodia Gender

Assessment). Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

MoWA. (2014c). Policy Brief 4: Gender in Education and Vocational Training (Cambodia

Gender Assessment). Education. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

MoWA. (2014d). Policy Brief 8: Women in Public Decision-Making and Politics (Cambodia

Gender Assessment). Phnom Pen, Cambodia.

NCDD. (2009). Siem Reap Data Book 2009. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

NIS. (2008). General Population Census of Cambodia 2008: National Report on Final Census

Results. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

NIS. (2016). Cambodia Socio-Economic Survey 2015. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

NIS. (2019). General Population Census of the Kingdom of Cambodia 2019. Phnom Penh,

Cambodia.

Northouse, P. (2010). Leadership: Theory and Practice (5th ed.). California: SAGE Publication.

123 Northouse, P. (2018). Introduction to Leadership: Concepts and Practice (4th ed.). California:

SAGE Publication.

O’Neil, T., Domingo, P., & Valters, C. (2014). Progress on Women’s Empowerment: From

Technical Fixes to Political Action (Working Paper 06). London. https://doi.org/odi.org.uk

Ormston, R., Spencer, L., Barnard, M., & Snape, D. (2013). The Foundations of Qualitative

Research. In J. Ritchie & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice. Washington DC:

SAGE Publication.

Parpart, J. L., Rai, S. M., & Staudt, K. (2002). Theory and Praxis. In J. L. Parpart, S. M. Rai, &

K. Staudt (Eds.), Rethinking Empowerment: Gender and Development in a Global/Local

World. London and New York: Routledge.

Poulsen, L. (2018). Implementing Gender-Transformative Approaches (GTAs) in Agricultural

Initiatives (Discussion Paper).

Prakash, D. (2003). Rural Women, Food Security and Agricultural Cooperatives. America. New

Delhi, India. Retrieved from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/RURAL-

WOMEN%2C-FOOD-SECURITY-AND-AGRICULTURAL-Prakash/a98e873474f7

d92ff553cbe7fec8b4ae9d7274b0

Praszkier, S. (2018). Empowering Leadership of Tomorrow (First). New York: Sheridan Books.

Pye, A. (2005). Leadership and Organizing: Sensemaking in Action. Leadership, 1(1), 31–49.

Quisumbing, A. R., Raney, T. L., Meinzen- Dick, R., Croppenstedt, A., Behrman, J. A., &

Peterman, A. (2014). Gender in Agriculture: Closing the Knowledge Gap. Springer

Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London: The Food and Agriculture Organization of the

United Nations and Springer Sceience+ Business Media B.V.,.

Ragasa, C., Kinwa-Muzinga, A., & Ulimwengu, J. (2012). Gender Assessment of the Agricultural

Sector in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01201.

RGC. (2007). Education Law. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

124 Rottach, E., Schuler, S. R., & Hardee, K. (2009). Gender Perspectives Improve Reproductive

Health Outcomes: New Evidence.

Roulston, K. (2010). Considering Quality in Qualitative Interviewing. Qualitative Research,

10(2), 199–228.

Roulston, K., Demarrais, K., & Lewis, J. B. (2003). Learning to Interview in the Social Sciences.

Qualitative Inquiry, 9(4), 643–668.

Simons, J. (2012). Good Agricultural Practices: A Plain Language Guide from the New Entry

Sustainable Farming Project. Boston, The United States of America. Retrieved from

https://nesfp.org/sites/default/files/resources/plain_language_guide_to_gaps-small.pdf

Sraboni, E., & Quisumbing, A. (2018). Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture and Dietary

Quality Across the Life Course: Evidence from Bangladesh. Food Policy, 81, 21–36.

Tan, C. (2007). Education Reforms in Cambodia: Issues and Concerns. Educational Research for

Policy and Practice, 6(1), 15–24.

Tanwir, M., & Safdar, T. (2013). The Rural Woman’s Constraints to Participation in Rural

Organizations. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 14(3), 210–229.

Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive Sampling as a Tool for Informant Selection. Ethnobotany

Research and Applications, 5, 147.

TSAC. (2017). Tasey Samaki Agricultural Cooperative. Battambang, Cambodia.

Tynan, A. C., & Drayton, J. L. (1988). Conducting Focus Groups - A Guide for First-Time Users.

Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 6(1), 5–9.

UNDESA-DSPD. (2013). Online Survey on Promoting Empowerment of People in Achieving

Poverty Eradication, Social Integration and Full Employment Integration and Full

Employment and Decent Work For All.

UNESCO. (2016). Incheon Declaration and SDG4 - Education 2030 Framework for Action.

Paris, France: UNESCO.

125 UNESCO. (2019). Right to Education Handbook. Paris, France: UNESCO.

USAID. (2016). Cambodia Gender Assessment.

VeneKlasen, L., & Mille, V. (2007). Power and Empowerment. In A New Weave of Power,

People & Politics: The Action Guide for Advocacy and Citizen Participation. The United

States of America: Stylus.

Wakefield, S. (2017). Transformative and Feminist Leadership for Women’s Rights.

WB, FAO, & IFAD. (2009). Argriculture and Rural Development: Gender in Agriculture

Sourcebook. Agriculture and Rural Development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Winston, B., & Patterson, K. (2006). An Integrative Definition of Leadership. International

Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(2), 6–66.

WOCAN, UN-REDD, & USAID. (2013). Scoping Study of Good Practices for Strenghtening

Women’s Inclusion in Forest and Other Natural Resource Management Sectors.

Wong, F., Vos, A., Pyburn, R., & Newton, J. (2019). Implementing Gender Transformative

Approaches in Agriculture. In A Discussion Paper for the European Commission.

Yount, K. M., VanderEnde, K. E., Dodell, S., & Cheong, Y. F. (2016). Measurement of Women’s

Agency in Egypt: A National Validation Study. Social Indicators Research, 128, 1171–

1192.

Zeuli, K., & Radel, J. (2005). Cooperatives as A Community Development Strategy: Linking

Theory and Practice. Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, 35(1), 43–54.

126 Appendix

List of Questionnaires for Focus Group Discussion

* Before the interview begins, obtain verbal consent from participants.

1. How long have you been participating in this co-op?

2. How was this co-op set up? Tell me about its beginning. Who started it? When? Why?

3. In the beginning, what was your first impression of the cooperative? What did you think

about it? What did you find appealing?

4. Were there any barriers or challenges that you faced in joining this co-op? How about

barriers or challenges in participating as a member over time?

5. How many total members in this co-op? How many females? How many males?

6. Tell me about how the co-op is organized. How many different leadership positions are

there? How many females and males are in these leadership positions?

7. If you are not in a leadership role in the co-op now, would you like to be? Why or why

not?

8. Were/are there any barriers to taking leadership roles in the co-op?

9. Are there opportunities for female members to take leadership roles? Are these

opportunities that same as those for men?

10. If fewer women take leadership roles, should anything be done to encourage more

women to be leaders? Why or why not? What could be done?

11. Are there any specific roles for males and females in the co-op? In other words, what

roles do male members play, and what roles do female members play in the co-op

(examples: bookkeeping, selling the product, taking care of packinghouse, collecting

from community…)?

127 12. Tell me about how decisions are made in the co-op. Who makes the most decisions about

how the co-op operates (for example, the management of packinghouse, market…)? Is it

only those in leadership positions? Is it mostly male members (including males in

leadership positions)? Or mostly female members (including males in leadership

positions)?

13. If decisions are made mostly by men, why is this? Why do female members have less

participation in decision-making? Are there any restrictions or barriers?

14. If both female and male members share in decision-making, are there any kinds of

decisions mostly made by female members and decisions mostly made by male

members?

15. Are there decisions made about what to plant and grow? Who makes these decisions (for

example, individual farmers, the co-op, who in the co-op)? Why is this? Who chose this

arrangement?

16. What technologies are used by producers in this co-op?

17. Are there differences between planting and growing vegetable/horticulture crops with

traditional techniques and with SI? What are they? (Probe for knowledge of conservation

agriculture, drip irrigation, rotation crop, integrated crop…. )?

18. Are there any inputs that have been provided to members? What kinds of inputs? Who or

what institutions/agencies provide these inputs? Are these inputs free or do you have to

pay for them? How do you pay for them? Tell us about the payment methods.

19. What kinds of vegetables and fruits (horticulture crops) do you commonly grow?

20. How much land do you use for horticulture production?

21. Have you faced any difficulties in planting/growing these vegetables and fruits? (for

example, land access, labor, water, seeds, credit, technology, information, time, health,

safety, gender norms…).

128 22. Generally, where/how do you obtain/buy inputs (for example, equipment/tools, seeds,

….)

23. If you need credit for doing this farming, where and how do you obtain this?

24. Have you ever received any training that is organized by the co-op for its members? If so,

what training have you received? Is it mostly women or mostly men who attend, or a

mix? Are the trainings just for those in leadership positions? Is there any training that is

organized just for female members?

25. How do you find the market for your production? Where does the co-op market its

production?

26. Are there any particular products that have potential (marketable/more demand)?

27. Have you ever faced any difficulty in selling your products to the market?

28. Was/is there been leftover product that you cannot sell? If yes, what have you done with

that?

29. Have you ever faced prices that were too low to meet your costs? If yes, what you have

done about that?

30. What is the quality of the cooperative’s products compared to the same products from

other sources?

31. What is the price of the cooperative’s products compared to the same products from other

sources?

32. Which sectors have potential (production, packaging,….)?

33. What strategy of dividing up the benefits?

34. Is the process of dividing up the benefits transparent?

35. Has the process of dividing up the benefits ever been problematic? Describe.

36. Are there any benefits or positive impacts from joining this co-op? If yes, what are they?

37. Are there any downsides or tradeoffs from joining this co-op? If yes, what are they?

129 38. Was there ever a time when you thought about leaving the co-op? If so, why?

39. Does being a member of this co-op make you proud in any way? In what way?

40. Are there any changes or improvements you would like to see in the co-op? What are

they?

41. Has being a member of the co-op had any impact on your family? (Probe: changing in

gender roles and equality, decision-making power, economic, food security, and

nutrition).

42. Is there room for the co-op to add new members and still be manageable? Will co-op

grow further do you think?

43. Have you ever considered increasing the amount of land that you have under cultivation?

If you did, do you think you would be able to manage your production? Do you think the

co-op would have the capacity to manage a larger scale of production?

44. Is there anything you want to share about this co-op with other farmers?

45. Is there anything you thought I’d ask that I didn't?

46. Anything else you’d like to add?