This paper examines the effects on women of three types of agricultural policy interventions. It analyzes the successes and failures of women-only projects, projects in which women were treated as a special component, and projects that integrated men's and women's work. In particular, the study focuses on the economic and social advancement of women through improvements in agricultural processes. It also considers the long-term sustainability of the projects and their effect on other community members and the environment.

The Study

"...rural agricultural projects aimed at benefitting women are generally unsustainable unless they are integrated into mainstream development plans."

The study combines a literature review with a review of agricultural projects in developing countries worldwide over the past 15 years. The review includes projects im- plemented by the United Nations Development Fund for Women, the World Bank, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the United States Agency for International Development, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the Inter-American Commission of Women/Organization of American States, the Canadian International Development Agency, and other donors.

Findings
The study finds that women have significant potential to improve their economic status through agricultural activities. Biases on virtually all fronts have rendered their production levels lower than those of men, and that projects aimed at rectifying gender imbalances can significantly raise women's farm productivity. Women often face inequities such as having access to only the poorest quality land, having little or no access to credit or technological resources, and having to cut short their farm time in order to tend to husbands' fields, prepare meals, or care for children.

The study finds that the first two types of agricultural projects—women-only and women-component—while they have served the important purpose in focusing attention on women's needs, are now considered by donor agencies to be generally ineffective and unsustain-able. Over the long run, women-targeted projects have suffered from lack of consideration of women's needs and constraints, such as domestic responsibilities or labor requirements as dictated by custom. These projects have often stressed women's domestic roles (focusing on health, nutrition, and education rather than income generation), giving inadequate attention to women's potential for agricultural productivity. They have been plagued by under-funding and inexperienced or inadequate staff, as in many cases where male extension workers were not permitted to teach the women farmers due to custom. Finally, the women-focused projects tended to fail because they were isolated from the needs and activities of other community members; in some cases this engendered opposition from the males, and in others, the separation simply disrupted the balance of labor and resources too much for the women to continue.

One example of a failed women-focused project was the introduction of solar stoves in Southern Africa. Aimed at eliminating the need for women to spend so much time gathering firewood, the program required that women reschedule all their activities in order to cook during peak sun hours. Traditionally they cooked in the early morning or late afternoon in order to avoid the mid-day heat, and the time requirements of the solar stoves relative to other uses of time simply had not been considered by the project's designers.

In another example, an AID/NASA project installed a solar pump to save women the task of lifting water. It turned out, however, that male cattle herders were the main beneficiaries, as they needed many buckets for watering their cattle. Women would have benefitted far more by the installation of water pipes, as their most time consuming and difficult task was carrying the water from the well to their homes.

The study found that the third type of project, gender-sensitive integrated or mainstreamed projects, are the most effective and sustainable, and have the highest potential to raise women's socioeconomic status along with men's. Designed to deal with women in relation to men, the community, and society, these projects view women not as isolated beneficiaries, but as active participants in the development process. They tend to integrate well into mainstream structures, and they are more likely to enhance women's socioeconomic status than women-only and women-component projects.

Based on the findings in the projects studied, the paper recommends the following guidelines for planning effective agricultural projects.

1. Projects intended to assist women cannot deal with women in isolation; males and children and their socio-cultural environment must also be considered.
2. Project goals and outcomes must be well defined in order to measure success in addressing gender issues. For example, is success marked by mere participation in a credit program? Or is it better measured by crop yield increases? Both qualitative and quantitative measures should be included.
3. New projects must be based on thorough analysis of the farm and sociocultural environments, including resource ownership and distribution, gender-based responsibilities, and the potential allocation of project benefits. Women's feedback and participation must be included.
4. Projects should not require participants to perform too numerous, complex, or unfamiliar tasks. For instance, many projects have failed because they place too great a demand on women's time and labor, or they require extensive training that women cannot afford to attend.
5. Project designers cannot take women's participation in agricultural activities for granted. Their participation will depend on whether or not such activities fit into their traditional set of activities, and on their opportunity costs. Women in Niger, for example, were initially unable to participate in farmer training courses because the class schedule conflicted with their meal preparation activities. When grain mills were introduced and reduced meal preparation time, they were then able to attend the training sessions.
6. Projects must be flexible and able to adapt to new information about gender constraints. For example, the pool of eligible female participants can be affected through changes in procedures such as not targeting the programs to male household heads, or through the development of programs to train women to instruct other women.
7. Institutional mechanisms must be in place to ensure proper implementation.

Policy Implications
If women farmers have access to the same level of inputs as male farmers, their productivity gains will be very significant. Yet rural agricultural projects aimed at benefitting women are generally unsustainable unless they are integrated into mainstream development plans. The success and sustainability of agricultural projects will depend on their fostering economic growth among both genders simultaneously.