The Impact of Gender Relations on Rural Livelihoods: The Case of Two Communities, East Shoa Zone Oromia Regional State

Abstract

Many literatures indicate that, women in general and rural women in particular, are at a disadvantaged position due to a multitude of problems working against them. Furthermore their case is not made explicit with the age-old assumption that they could benefit through their male counterparts. However, the reality shows something contrary to the assumption held by many people. Cognizant of this fact, this particular study has attempted to unravel the situation of rural women, with special emphasis to the female headed household by examining how their gender relation is operating in making a living. Pursuit of a livelihood is dependent on so many factors among which livelihood contexts (trends and shocks), access to and control over resources, and mediating factors of which gender relations is the chief concern are some of them. Hence, this study is typically concerned with exploring the effects of gender relations on making a living in the rural contexts. In realizing this study both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies were employed, and the Sustainable Livelihood Framework is used as a model. A sample size of 116 heads of households (both female and male) were selected and interviewed from two communities through systematic sampling technique. Besides, to complement and triangulate the survey results, other research instruments like focus group discussions, key informant interviews and personal observations were undertaken. Hence, results from the study showed that there is still unbalanced power relation between the two sexes that can be manifested in so many ways, and implying that livelihoods’ of rural women in general is highly constrained. For instance, in the study it is found that among the total FHHs interviewed 51.4% of them are illiterate, where as it only 18.5% of the MHHs XIV that were placed in this category, and additionally, the percentages of FHHs who attained higher levels of education dropped significantly. It is also obtained that, among one of the crucial assets in pursuit of livelihoods, average land holding for FHHs is 1.17 hectare and that of MHHs was 1.19 hectare. At-test of independent samples on land holding has shown that there is a significant difference of land holding between the two sexes. Similarly in terms of oxen ownership the study result depicted that, the mean ownership of oxen is 1.74 for the FHHs and 2.54 for the MHHs, which shows a significant difference of ownership with a t-test. When the mediating factors comprising institutional arrangements were observed, here too, the FHHs comprise only 9.3 % where as the MHHs account for 90.7 %. The main reason for this small number of FHHs benefiting from agricultural Extension services is attributed to the failure of the concerned bodies to prioritize the FHHs. In the study it is also drewed that, about 58.6 % of the total respondents have either experienced or witnessed the exercise of harmful traditional practices (HTPs). Similarly, it is reported by the respondents that these HTPs exercised in their localities have health risk (43.8%), demoralizing effect and reduce women to dependence status (30.2%), and constraining them not to have ownership and inheritance rights (26%). Therefore, it can be concluded that, FHHs were still at a disadvantage position and hence some practical solutions which focus mainly on their empowerment need to be implemented.