Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GENDER, WATER AND LIVELIHOOD: A CASE STUDY ONKOVALAM VILLAGE
PRESENTED BYZARIN SUBAH
DEEPE NEUPANERABEYA SULTANA LEYA
J. SIVARANJANIS.D.N.M.SENADEERA
1
“Fishing on the sea is only the men’s JOB”
2
Outline of the Presentation
Introduction
Literature Review
Objectives
Research Question
Methodology
Analysis
Conclusion
3
Locality Name : Kovalam ( க ோவளம் )Block Name : ThiruporurDistrict : Kanchipuram
State : Tamil NaduLanguage : Tamil And English
Elevation / Altitude: 36 meters. Above Seal level
4
Introduction
5
Review of related literature
In many regions of coastal Southeast Asia, fishing livelihoods are frequently marked by both processes of capital intensification, and increasing levels of environmental degradation (BFAR 2004; Eder 2008; Fougerès 2005;Gaynor 2005; Salayo et al. 2008).
Asia is an important region in terms of fish trade supplying nearly 60% of global fish production. The region’s coastal fisheries play a critical role in ensuring food security and providing livelihoods, particularly for poorer sections of the community,(Ilona,2006).
Fishing communities are often perceived as highly specialized and dependent on a single source of food and income: water (either fresh or marine), (Brugere et al, 2008).
Review of related literature
• Local fishermen are often compelled to go out fishing despite pending typhoon orstorm surge to sustain the daily needs of their family. To reduce people’svulnerability and enhance capacities to face coastal hazards the study fostersCommunity-Based Disaster Risk Reduction with special emphasis to sustainablelivelihoods, (Gaillard, 2009).
Primary Objective of Study
• To explore the intersection between gender and water within diverse livelihood practices.
7
Research Questions
1. What are the different occupation perused by the women and men in the village?
2. What are the livelihood strategies adopted by different men and women in the village?
3. How the availability and accessibility of water is having gendered influence on the livelihood?
8
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
.
H
F
N
P
SInfluence
PoliciesInstitutions
Process
Livelihood strategies
Livelihood outcomes
KeyH- Human; N- Natural; F- Financial; P- Physical; S- Social
Livelihood assets
9
Source: Adopted and modified from DFID 2002
Research Methodology- Understanding of Conceptual Framework
Livelihood Assets Livelihood StrategiesAssets Indicators
Human Assets Skills, Education, Experience
Physical Assets Building, Car, TV, Boat
Financial Assets Cash, Jewelry
Social Assets Social connections
Natural Assets Land, Forests
10
Multiple occupation (fishing and non-fishing)Alternative sitesJoint family – Multiple earning member from different occupation
Research Methods and Tools
.
11
MIXED METHOD
QUANTITATIVE METHOD QUALITATIVE METHOD
QuestionnaireTime Use
SurveyIn Depth Interview
Focus Group Discussion
Key Personnel Interview
Methodology
Questionnaire survey 20
FGD 1
Social mapping 3
KPI 2
In- depth interview 3
Research Methods- Sampling Techniques
Business
Fishing
Sea water Back water
Natural based activities Non Nature Based Activities
Tourism
12
Analysis of Occupation Structure in Kovalam Village
Fishing
Fishing Related Activities
Small Business
Services
Labor
Others
13
Occupation diversity
Institutional factors affecting livelihoods: A case of Fishing Livelihoods (FGD with Fishermen)
Government norms for gill
nets
Traditional roles of women
in fishing
Market changes –improper cost
benefits
Fisherman cooperative
Government loans for boats
Urban market demand
Fishing livelihood
Government provision of technology
15
16
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
Fishing fishing related activities Small Business Services Houshold Activities
Pe
rce
nta
ge o
f In
volv
em
en
t
Occupation
Sexwise Occupation Difference
Male Female
17
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
Fishing fishing related activities Small Business Services Houshold Activities
Pe
rce
nta
ge o
f In
volv
em
en
t
Occupation
Education wise Occupation
Illeterate and Primary Higher Secondary & Secondary Graduate & above
18
19
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
Fishing fishing related activities Small Business Services Houshold Activities
Perc
enta
ge o
f In
volv
emen
t
Occupation
Agewise Occupation Difference
15 - 30 years 31 - 60 years 61 years and above
.
20
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
4AM -
5AM
5AM -
6AM
6AM -
7AM
7AM -
8AM
8AM -
9AM
9AM -
10AM
10AM -
11AM
11AM -
12PM
12PM -
1PM
1PM -
2PM
2PM -
3PM
3PM -
4PM
4PM -
5PM
5PM -
6PM
6PM -
7PM
7PM -
8PM
8PM -
9PM
9PM -10PM
10PM -11PM
11PM -12AM
12AM -
1AM
1AM -
2AM
2AM -
3AM
3AM -
4AM
Freq
uenc
y/No
.of h
ouse
hold
s
Time
SNA Activities among Men and Women
Male SNA activity Female SNA acitivity
Livelihood Strategies
21
All activities (for female respondents)
.
Economic Non-Economic
SNA NON - SNA
1. Selling grocery items2. Catching fishes3. Collecting fishes4. Processing fishes5. Selling fishes (both raw and
cooked fishes)6. Selling dry fishes7. Collecting raw materials for
making fishing blades8. Making fishing blades9. Tailoring
1. Packing food for children
2. Cooking meals
3. Making tea and snacks
4. Cleaning clothes and
utensils
5. Fetching water for home
6. Preparing children for
school
7. Dropping children to
tuition
1. Sleeping
2. Waking up
3. Having breakfast
4. Having lunch
5. Taking rest
6. Watching TV
7. Spending time with friends
8. Having dinner
22
All activities (for male respondents)
.
Economic Non-Economic
SNA NON - SNA
1. Room boy in hotel2. Catching fishes3. Collecting fishes4. Segregating fishes5. Repairing fishing nets6. Going and coming back from work7. Making strategy for fishing8. Making fishing blades9. Working on construction sites10. Working as cable operator11. Collecting fuel woods
1. Attends classes in college2. Grocery shopping3. Drops children to school
1. Sleeping2. Waking up3. Going to mosque4. Having breakfast5. Having lunch6. Taking rest7. Watching TV8. Spending time with friends9. Having dinner10. Playing games
23
24
25
26
WATERGENDER LIVELIHOOD
Fetching water
No time
Livelihood Burdens
WATER AND LIVELIHOOD
• Women from fish market said thatfetching water hamper theirbusinesses and cause losses.
• Can water increases their dailyexpenditure.
• Absence of proper drainage networksystem cause severe health problemsand water born diseases.
• In flood and monsoon period, candelivery person can’t come tohouseholds.
GENDER AND LIVELIHOOD
• Being college graduate girls are confined with in household chores.
• When compared to men, women have many secondary non economic activities.
• Fishing on sea is termed as only men's job.
• During off seasons, borrowing money for daily consumption add burden on women livelihood.
28
29Men - back water site
Women - back water site
Men locate TajHotel at the
begining
Women tend to focus on temple, dargas and wells
30
Fishermen – Near seashore
Fisherman are so much into the sea
shore line, highway and major social
services
They mention their schools at the beginning
of drawing
Fishermen identify areas resources
beyond the village interior
31
H
F
N
P
S Livelihood assets
Policy and Institutions
Traditional gender roles
Family typeYouth
aspirationAlternative employment
availability
Livelihood strategies
Access to water
Livelihood Outcomes
Expenditure Time Physical (fetching water)
Outcome Framework
Limitation Of Study
• Shortage of time.
• Respondent busy with their daily works/chores.
• Language barrier.
• Difficulty in identifying key persons.
32
References
• BFAR (Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources) (2004). In Turbulent Seas: The Status of Philippine Marine Fisheries CoastalResource Management Project, Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Department of Agriculture, Cebu City.
• Eder, J. F. (2008). Migrants to the Coasts: Livelihood, Resource Management, and Global Change in the Philippines. CengageLearning, Wadsworth.
• Fougerès, D. (2005). Aquarian Capitalism and Transition in Indonesia. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of California Berkeley.
• Gaynor, J. (2005). The Decline of Small-Scale Fishing and the Reorganization of Livelihood Practices Among Sama People in Eastern Indonesia. Michigan Discussions in Anthropology 15(1): 90–149.
• Salayo, N., Garces, L., Pido, M., Viswanathan, K., Pomeroy, R., Ahmed, M., Siason, I., Sengh, K., and Masaei, A. (2008). Managing Excess Capacity in Small-Scale Fisheries: Perspectives from Stakeholders in Three Southeast Asian Countries. Marine Policy 32: 692–700.
Thank You!!
34