Beyond “women and youth”: Applying intersectionality in agricultural research for development

Intersectionality as an applied analytic concept

The concept of intersectionality originates in black feminist thought ¹ and was first defined as “the interaction between gender, race, and other categories of difference in individual lives, social practices, institutional arrangements, and cultural ideologies and the outcomes of these interactions in terms of power” (Crenshaw, 1989). Applied to social research, intersectionality has been used to understand how different axes of experience and identity interact to produce different effects that cannot be explained by analyzing single categories (Clement et al., 2019).

Beyond the analysis of individual-level and intrahousehold relationships, intersectionality can be used to analyze structures of power at multiple scales (global, national, and local) and institutions (communities, markets, and management regimes) (Mohanty, 2003). Identifying and comparing these dynamic processes facilitate investigation of power structures and relational experiences beyond a simple description of intersecting inequalities (Choo and Ferree, 2010). However, the complexity that arises when the subject of analysis expands to include multiple dimensions of social life and categories of analysis has created significant methodological challenges for integrating intersectional analysis in agricultural research for development (McCall, 2008). This is unfortunate, considering applied intersectional analysis could offer ways of understanding how social dimensions of identity are connected to systems of power and social institutions that shape farmers’ agricultural practices. These new insights could hypothetically contribute toward more targeted development actions within local agrarian settings.

Toward this end, our article explores the utility of applying intersectionality to agricultural research using three application examples from the Tanzanian dairy sector. We demonstrate how intersectionality can be applied to identify marginalized social groups and intersecting inequalities, understand how gendered norms “intersect” with different social groups and practices, processes, and power relations, and illustrate how self-perception and institutional norms intersect to mediate engagement with agriculture.

Site background

Our study is situated in Mbeya region, Tanzania (see Figure 1). Mbeya is in the southern highlands where the cash crops plantains, cotton, Irish potatoes, coffee, cocoa, tea, and tobacco are commonly grown (Mkenda-Mugittu, 2003). The Nyakusa are the dominant ethnic community and are historically patrilineal (Bryceson et al., 2013). Cattle have long been highly valued by the Nyakusa and still play an important role in relation to bridewealth (Odgaard, 1997). In the late 1970s, exotic breeds of dairy cattle were introduced in Mbeya through a joint dairy production project funded through the governments of Tanzania and Switzerland (Mkenda-Mugittu, 2003). Since then, the formal marketization of milk has accelerated in cattle-keeping households, with most households keeping between one and three crossbred cows that produce 8–16 liters of milk per day. Milk marketing in the region is characterized by both formal sales to dairy cooperatives and informal sales to intermediary vendors, who generally collect milk directly from farmers and sell to local shops or to traders who transport the milk to urban areas outside Mbeya.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Map of the study site location in Mbeya, Tanzania.

Application 1: Intersectionality and gendered social difference in dairy intensification

Elders in the community highlighted that prior to the introduction of exotic dairy cattle breeds in the 1970s, men were the primary dairy laborers but that men’s out-migration to urban areas in Mbeya City and Dar es Salaam has required women to take on these roles. Because smallholder dairy intensification relies heavily on inexpensive and unpaid labor, wives are often responsible for the daily tasks associated with dairy intensification, which includes cleaning the cow shed, transporting harvested feeds, watering the cows, milking, cleaning milking tools, and taking milk to collection centers. Both single men and older women (married and single/widower) tend to rely on the use of hired male casual labor to assist them with the tasks of milking, feeding, watering, and manure management.

Men were generally regarded as being the “cattle owners” within families and responsible for paying for the care of the cow, including veterinary bills and purchasing special feeds/concentrates, as well as picking up money from the dairy cooperative or intermediary vendor. If men were retired and staying at home, they contributed through cutting grasses for feeds and by delivering milk to the collection center.

Traditionally, decisions around the slaughter, purchase, or sale of a cow are handled by men. FGD participants explained that wives were most actively involved in decision-making when the husband is working in areas away from the home. In FGDs with both men and women, farmers articulated that women’s decisions dealt more with the day-to-day implementation of plans previously discussed as a couple as opposed to women’s implementation of “their own ideas” for on-farm changes. Furthermore, in households that deliver milk to dairy cooperatives, wives were expected to report the related income to their husbands, who would then direct them on how to spend the money and how much (if any) could be used at the wives’ personal discretion. Unmarried women tended to have the most autonomy in terms of decision-making in dairying, with the ability to own cows and access the direct material and monetary benefits from production. Widows were also noted as having greater autonomy than married women, although they were expected to consult their eldest son or male relative when making large dairy decisions, such as cattle sales or slaughter.

During the research process, it emerged that a substantial minority of married male participants were in polygamous relationships. Elders explained that in the years preceding Tanzania’s independence from British colonial administration in 1961, it was common for men to have more wives as they and their children provided a larger “free” labor reserve that increased farm productivity. However, over the last 50 years, the increasing adoption of Christianity and restrictive economic and land realities for many families has led to a decline in “official” polygamy. However, interviewees estimated 25–30% of households were in “official” polygamous relationships that had been sanctioned in formal traditional/religious ceremonies. According to participants, between 70% and 75% of men were “unofficially” polygamous, and the term “wife” was used more loosely to refer to the blurred relationships of sexual partner or girlfriend in the absence of demarcating rituals or public ceremonies.

The intra-gender differences between married women in monogamous and polygamous households revealed varying norms around labor dynamics, decision-making, and resource allocation. In particular, the positioning of wives in polygamous households greatly influenced the level of power and autonomy women exercised in dairy production. Overall, FGD participants agreed that first wives tend to have more power and autonomy in making dairy production decisions and that first wives tend to have more cows and dairy resources, because they’ve had more time to build up assets. Moreover, children from the first wife are prioritized in terms of inheriting land, cows, and resources.

The first wife is neglected, so they have more autonomy to sell milk. Because the husband stays with the new, younger wife. So, the older wife has more power to make her own decisions. (Middle-aged man, Faraja cooperative society FGD, Rungwei)

The first wives have more decision-making power than second wives in cases where the second wife is getting more attention from the husband. The first wife will become angry and will do everything on her own – when the husband asks her why she sold a cow, the wife won’t even tell him! (Young woman, member of youth dairy interest group, KII, Busokielo)

When men have more than one wife, they divide the cattle between their “first” and “second” families. While cows and associated resources should ostensibly be evenly distributed between wives and their households, FGD participants noted that in reality, the first wife is often prioritized in terms of land and cattle. However, the second wife often has greater access to the attentions of the husband, with potentially more capital flowing to the new household. Overall, polygamous families and dairy production were construed primarily through conflictual relationships, with competition between co-wives happening beyond the household level and affecting livestock development interventions.

Some of the polygynous families’ dairy activities are hindered because the father cannot divide himself 50/50, even when taking care of both families – the first family would have to struggle. Co-wives need to compete over resources. (Middle-aged woman, intermediary vendor, KII, Busokielo)

This example application illustrates how marital status and position heavily influence women’s access to and ownership over cows and labor dynamics associated with production in Mbeya. These dynamics highlight how opportunities and constraints are based not only on whether women are married or single but also on the order of wifedom in the household.

Application 2: Intersectionality and gendered practices and processes in mtindi production

In addition to raw milk production, value-added activities are also being promoted in Mbeya. The most common value-added dairy product is mtindi, a fermented yogurt drink. Mtindi can be made through spontaneous fermentation of raw milk or by “back-slopping” whereby previously fermented mtindi is added to boiled warm water/milk, covered, and left to ferment for 12 hours (Mlimbila et al., 2014). Making mtindi is a highly gendered activity that has changed drastically in just a few generations. Before the introduction of exotic dairy cattle breeds, participants noted that “men were in charge of everything” regarding cattle production and caretaking.

In past times, when men were done with the milking, they would make mtindi or give raw milk to their wives. Women were not allowed to do these things. (Elder woman, Wamabu cooperative society FGD, Busokielo)

Study participants noted that traditionally men had their own small house, usually inside of a polygamous household compound, where they would make mtindi for their own consumption and to share with their families. As traditional polygamy declined over the last 60 years, multiple-house “compounds” were condensed into single households, in which one kitchen was demarcated as a “woman’s space” and became taboo for men to enter.

It’s the woman’s responsibility – husbands can’t go to the kitchen and make it. For single men, they must make mtindi on their own. But if a woman is at home, there’s no way a man could make mtindi. (Young woman, nondairy women’s youth group, FGD, Busokielo)

Some farmers claimed that when mtindi started being produced through “back-slopping” which requires boiling water/milk, the requirement to have firewood meant that the associated labor practices with mtindi fell under women’s responsibilities. Currently, mtindi continues to be used for household consumption and is also sold to neighbors or local shops (in the same fashion as raw milk). Participants stressed that women were able to exert total control over the money earned from mtindi production because of the assumption that any proceeds would be marginal (considering the low levels of dairy productivity) and would be used to purchase small items for the household like salt or sugar.

For mtindi, I don’t have to ask my husband – whether I sell or eat it, I don’t need to consult him, because I am the kitchen master! (Middle-aged woman, Ukukwe cooperative society, FGD, Rungwei)

Furthermore, there was a perceived consensus among elder men that mtindi production is a “fundamentally feminine activity” and that they would not be interested in pursuing it regardless of its commercial viability, as illustrated in the following excerpt from an all-male FGD.

Interviewer: Are farmers interested in commercial mtindi production?

**all men laugh**

Despite elder men’s position, the prospect for commercialization of mtindi production appears to be changing these gender dynamics again, as young men are entering the mtindi business as commercial producers. The unreliability of the formal raw milk market was the most-oft quoted incentive for starting mtindi enterprise. Furthermore, young men actively contested the gender norms that reportedly inhibited older men from engaging in mtindi production. Overall, young men do not feel like they are losing their masculinity by engaging in mtindi production, but only if it is done commercially. In this way, the process of commercialization is both disrupting traditional norms that delimit men’s ability to engage in mtindi production and reinforcing traditional norms around household headship that legitimize men as the beneficiaries of commercial production.

The young people don’t have the perspective that it’s a woman’s job – we don’t care! It’s not a matter of who will do it – it’s a matter of who will pay. Even men will go to the kitchen and prepare mtindi if there’s a market! (Young man, nonaffiliated dairy farmer, FGD, Rungwei)

Women can’t handle all that money from commercial production. Men are better suited to, because men are the head of the family and must allocate to everyone. (Elder man, Ukukwe cooperative society FGD, Rungwei)

To summarize, intersectional analysis of mtindi production underlines the dynamism of cultural norms that emerge from the perspective of intersecting age and gender categories. The masculine meanings ascribed to commercialization, household headship, and dairy production more broadly work to deflect young men’s concerns over compromising their masculinity in mtindi production.

Application 3: Intersectionality, institutions, and self-perception

Cooperative leadership and membership in Mbeya are dominated by elder men. While some cooperatives have elder women serving as treasurers or secretaries, young people are largely absent as members because they feel their voices will not be heard. The inability to exert authority over elder men in any way has made it difficult for women and young people to emerge as leaders within these organizations. A mixed-gender youth FGD in Rungwei expressed that these exclusionary dynamics contributed to young people’s apathy toward group participation.

No one is a member of a farmer’s co-operative! The young people aren’t considered in leadership. The co-ops don’t promote youth participation – so we don’t know what’s going on…the co-op will take a cut of my milk money to pay their expenses – it’s better for me to sell on my own. (Young man, nonaffiliated dairy farmer, FGD, Rungwei)

Co-operatives are all about having classes. High class people will look down on you, people from the middle class don’t respect poor people. They’ll say, ‘why are they here? They can’t even afford memberships!’ They won’t respect or accept them or listen to anything they have to say. (Young woman, nondairy women’s youth group FGD, Busokielo)

While young people are side-lined by lack of ownership opportunities and cultural constraints in dairying, the ways in which these constraints were articulated varied by intersecting gender and generational factors. Older men and women claimed that young men weren’t interested in dairying, though young men had customarily overseen grazing cattle in extensive systems prior to the era of required formal schooling (pre-independence). In discussions with older farmers and young men, young women were usually absent from the discussion around “youth dairy involvement.” Instead, they were framed as dairy “helpers” who contributed mainly during holidays, helping parents bring milk to collection centers or fetching water. While some girls learn how to milk, water, and feed the cattle, girls are most associated with feeding concentrates and cleaning the milking utensils, tasks that men referred to as “things anyone can do.” The local perception voiced by older people and young men was that young women will be “catered for” with dowry and that if a young woman were to own livestock of her own, once she enters a marriage that livestock would not move with her.

Localized gender norms on socially appropriate feminine behavior influenced perceptions of why young women were absent from dairying production. For example, young men perceived young women as not wanting to engage in dairy for fear of appearing “masculine”:

Married women are capable of cutting grasses, but not young women. They feel like it’s a hard and masculine job, so they don’t want to engage – they want to appear small and soft and appealing. They will injure themselves going to the bushes and get scratches and have scars. They will get big calf muscles which will make them more masculine, so they won’t be as attractive compared to other women not involved in that work. A masculine female is more arrogant and authoritative! You will be in a family where people won’t be able to identify who’s the man and who’s the woman. (Young man, nondairy men’s youth group FGD, Busokielo)

Young women’s mobility constraints, stemming from values of women’s place being in the household, and more specifically from cultural norms against women riding on motorcycles, also influenced the perception of women’s participation in dairy intensification.

Women can’t travel long distances just to look for grasses for the cow, so they’re only able to source what’s nearby, at the back of the house, so the amount of grasses she’ll collect will be very small compared to young men on motorcycles that can go farther away and collect larger amounts of grass. (Young man, nondairy men’s youth group FGD, Busokielo)

However, young women themselves referred to the same constraints that young men face—capital, land, and time resources dedicated to cattle care.

To have a cow, you need a big cow shed – the size is regulated by the government. I don’t have capital for a cowshed or a cow, so I need to engage in other business to save. (Young woman, nondairy women’s youth group FGD, Busokielo)

It’s all about the capital to start keeping the cow – you can’t compare the price of pigs and chickens to one calf. So, you need to invest a lot to get just one cow. (Young woman, nondairy women’s youth group FGD, Busokielo)

In trying to explain this gap in perception, young women articulated their marginalization as a result of a lack of education and restrictive gender norms on the ability for young women to participate and be seen as village leaders or as equal partners in decision-making at home.

Young married women aren’t benefitting at all! Women aren’t able to make decisions or be village leaders – women are not given equal chances in the household or in the community! You see, everything in the household is owned by men. According to Nyakusa culture, they have to obey whatever a man is saying. I think we need education in the interior parts like Busokielo – men aren’t aware that what they’re doing is wrong. Women need to be given a space and opportunities to grow. (Young woman, member of youth dairy interest group, KII, Busokielo)

To summarize, intersectional analysis of cooperative participation illustrates how organizational dynamics reflect institutional norms associated with both gender and age. The cultural norms that marginalize young people and women from meaningful participation in cooperatives shape self-perceptions about the impact of structural barriers to dairying. However, the narratives of exclusion voiced by elder men and women, as well as young men, were contested by young women interested in dairying.

Intersectionality helps identify “hidden” social groups

Intersectionality applied to agricultural systems illuminates “hidden groups” and can be used to better understand the factors that shape vulnerability. A broad focus on “women and youth” threatens to intensify inequality by only seeing/assisting the dominant (visible) group (e.g. married women or young men). Our study highlighted the intersectional differences that mediate engagement with intensified dairy production in Mbeya. In polygamous arrangements, power differences between first and second wives tend to give first wives more power and autonomy in decision-making over production and marketing decisions compared to second wives. These dynamics provide opportunities and constraints based on marital status and the status of women in the household. Our study illustrates that rather than a one-size-fits-all approach in addressing “gender,” interventions need to be sensitive to women’s heterogeneity and pay attention to the differences in their socioeconomic conditions and social positions.

Furthermore, this research echoes recent studies (Elias et al., 2018; Ripoll et al., 2017) that have cautioned against attempts to introduce “youth mainstreaming” in international agricultural research. A focus on reducing “youth” to a homogenous target group that can be “mainstreamed” into development programming would miss out on capturing the gender power relations that intersect with generational difference.

Intersectionality helps identify how livelihood practices and development processes intersect with gendered social groups and power relations

Mtindi production is linked to dynamic historical gendered processes that have shaped contemporary masculinity and femininity. While changes in household structure and religious influences have contributed to the feminization of mtindi production in Mbeya over the last 50 years, more recent processes of intensification, beginning in the 1970s through the introduction of exotic breeds of cow (Mkenda-Mugittu, 2003), have masculinized milk production—but not mtindi production among older people. However, gender norms continue to intersect with generational change in ways that appear to be masculinizing mtindi production once again, especially due to its emerging commercial orientation. This theme illustrates the variability in interests and agency across age and gender and how they are dynamic across time. At the same time, this theme also assists in illustrating which social norms are more resistant to change over time than others. For example, while the social norm that only women can produce mtindi has changed, the norm of male control over income remains pervasive. Identification of such changes can help development interventions be more effective and design social safeguards to offset potentially detrimental effects (Tavenner et al., 2019).

Intersectionality reveals how self-perceptions intersect with institutional and structural constraints

By investigating the institutional power structures and structural constraints in dairying, we were able to glean new insights into farmer’s engagement with dairy cooperatives and production processes. Applying intersectionality to cooperative membership dynamics illustrated the social-embeddedness of organizations and the changing, contested nature of gender relations. The elicitation of self-perceptions in interviews provided a nuanced understanding of farmer’s lived experiences within the complex spaces which shape their choices. Applying intersectionality in this way situates local relations of power that can help expose the processes that both create and transform inequalities over time. Because these dynamics greatly influence participation in agricultural innovation processes (Iradukunda et al., 2019), further probing of these patterns is necessary to inform the design of equitable and inclusive agricultural interventions both in and beyond Tanzanian dairy development.