Search results

Women’s empowerment remains a key development challenge in Kenya. The purpose of this study is to attempt to understand the status of women’s empowerment and the key contributors to their disempowerment in Kenya’s aquaculture sector.

A cross-sectional survey was conducted on 534 male and female fish farmers from 300 households drawn from six counties in Kenya (Kakamega, Kisumu, Kisii, Kiambu, Meru and Nyeri). The Abbreviated Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (A-WEAI) was adapted to Abbreviated Women’s Empowerment in Fisheries and Aquaculture Index (A-WEFI) to suit the aquaculture and fisheries sub-sector. The adapted A-WEFI was then used to estimate and the status of women’s and men’s using five domains of empowerment (5DE) and a gender parity index (GPI). Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Cramer’s V and sensitivity analysis as test statistics.

About 86% of the men and 80% of the women were classified as empowered. The mean score of the 5DE was 0.93 and 0.95 for women and men, respectively. In addition, 82% of the households achieved gender parity, suggesting that for such households, empowerment of men was no greater than that of women. Overall, the results suggest no major differences between the empowerment of women and men. Findings suggest areas of improvement in empowerment: when observed separately, women report lack of agency in production, resource, time-use and allocation and leadership.

This paper adapts the A-WEAI to the fisheries and aquaculture context, in bid to bridge the gap in standard women’s empowerment measurement methods in this area. Also, there are limited empirical studies on the multifaceted empowerment of women in aquaculture in Kenya. The findings are meant to serve as a point of reference for policymakers, as they develop gender-responsive intervention programmes, and in implementing gender mainstreaming in Kenya.

This paper aims to investigate the extent to which three subgroups – people with mental health conditions, people belonging to sexual minority and gender groups and Indigenous peoples – have been “left behind” by countries implementing the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

A general review of electronic bibliographical databases to provide an overview of smoking prevalence among the three groups and interventions designed specifically to reduce their smoking rates.

Although explanations and specific rates differ, two trends are consistent across all three groups. First, information reported in the past two decades suggests that smoking prevalence is disproportionately high among people with mental health conditions, and in the rainbow and indigenous communities. Second, most cessation programmes are targeted at majority politically dominant groups, missing opportunities to reduce smoking rates in these minority communities.

There is a general dearth of data preventing detailed analysis. Better data collection efforts are required. Trials to identify effective smoking reduction interventions for marginalised groups are needed.

It is socially unjust that these groups are being systematically ignored by tobacco control initiatives. A failure to equitably reduce tobacco harms among all groups across society has contributed to the perceived concentration of smoking in some subgroups. The increasing stigmatisation of people who smoke then adds a marginality, compounding the negative effects associated with belonging to a marginalised group. Ongoing marginalisation of these groups is an important determinant of smoking.

Cross-case analysis of neglected subgroups with disproportionately high smoking rates suggests social marginalisation is a shared and important determinant of smoking prevalence.