
































Microsoft Word - 283-Final.docx


   Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 4, Issue 2, 2023 
  agdevresearch.org 

 

1. Jessica R. Spence, Ph.D. Student, Virginia Tech, 214 Litton-Reaves Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061, jessicaraespence@vt.edu, 

 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3789-3477 
2. Tobin Redwine, Instructional Assistant Professor, Texas A&M University, 2116 John Kimbrough Blvd, College Station, TX 

77845, tredwine@tamu.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9975-8169 
3. Tracy Rutherford, Professor and Department Head, Virginia Tech, 214 Litton-Reaves Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061, 

trutherford@vt.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3875-4791 
4. Kim Dooley, Professor, Texas A&M University, 2116 John Kimbrough Blvd, College Station, TX 77845, k-dooley@tamu.edu, 

 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5654-5988 
 

74 

 

Unanticipated Unity and Independence: A Photovoice of 
Ugandan Gender-Based Agriculture Issues 

J. R. Spence1, T. Redwine2, T. Rutherford3, K. Dooley4 

 
 

Article History 
Received: November 19, 2022 
Accepted: May 5, 2023 
Published: June 5, 2023 
 
 
Keywords 
Uganda; agricultural development; 
feminist theory; photovoice  

Abstract 
Globally, women are major contributors to agricultural productivity 
efforts, yet they face challenges in being as productive as their male 
counterparts. In Uganda, the male-dominant realities of agriculture are 
as strong as the country’s dependence upon it. In this country, women 
are responsible for the majority of agricultural production, despite facing 
a plethora of gender-based barriers. Therefore, this photovoice study 
aimed to discover gender-based agriculture issues from the perspective 
of female Ugandan agriculture producers to make applicable 
recommendations for improvements in research, practice, and extension. 
Through this study, we found major themes of both technical challenges 
in agriculture as well as abstract social constructs that hindered the 
productivity of women farmers. Despite these issues, Ugandan women 
agriculture producers display unity in self-identification and pride as 
women farmers. Therefore, we recommend efforts be made to improve 
education for, research on, and extension efforts targeted toward 
women farmers as well as training for women and men in these 
communities to end gender-based violence that is currently used as a tool 
for control over women in developing, agriculturally-based countries. 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  75 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
Productive and sustainable global agriculture is critical for a healthy, worldwide human 
population (Jones & Ejeta, 2016). When we rely upon agricultural producers to feed the global 
population, it is vital to note that of the 570 million farms across the globe, 83% lie within Sub-
Saharan Africa (Lowder et al., 2016; Ricciardi et al., 2018). Across Africa, particularly within 
smallholder farming-based societies, women are often tasked with more agricultural labor than 
men (Ugwu, 2019). In addition to this workload disparity, women in developing countries take 
on major responsibilities as primary housekeepers, homemakers, and childcare providers when 
compared to their male counterparts (Satyavathi et al., 2010). Specifically, in Sub-Saharan 
Africa, Uganda’s gender-based disparities within women’s agricultural production are higher 
than that of other countries in the region, such as Niger, Ethiopia, and Nigeria (Doss et al., 2018; 
Palacios-Lopez et al., 2017). 
 
The problem is women farmers in Uganda are hindered by societally imposed, gender-based 
issues such as farm work imbalance, disparities in home and childcare, as well as a lack of 
resources (Doss et al., 2018; Palacios-Lopez et al., 2017; Satyavathi et al., 2010; Ugwu, 2019). To 
better understand these individuals, research must explore barriers to production amongst its 
most productive individuals: women farmers.  
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
Feminist theory views interactions between men and women through a power hierarchy lens 
and brings to light inequalities due to gender (Keedle et al., 2019; Lindsley et al., 2019). A major 
goal within feminist research is to better understand, and thusly remove, inequalities in gender 
that contribute to societal structures (Hirudayaraj & Shields, 2019), and it fundamentally “seeks 
to unmask gendered patterns in human relationships, whether in public organizations or in the 
family to promote more equitable and emancipatory actions among all members in society” 
(Morton & Lindquist, 1997, p. 349). Scholars in feminist theory argue both women and men are 
biological beings, but the institutional subordination of women is a social construct and not 
determined through biology (Reddock, 2000). Biological aspects are fixed and cannot be 
changed, but “what is social is subject to change and should be the focus of attention for 
feminist theorists” (Reddock, 2000, p. 37). 
 
Feminist theory’s application within studies of women in developing nations has been 
previously used in similar contexts (Bryceson, 2020). Feminist theory lends itself to the present 
study because the socially constructed gender biases in Ugandan society are evident in the 
literature (Doss et al., 2018; Palacios-Lopez et al., 2017; Satyavathi et al., 2010; Ugwu, 2019). 
However, it is vital to note Southern feminist theorists denounce traditional Western feminism 
as it tends to reproduce imperatives within colonization when theorizing the struggles of 
women in postcolonial contexts (Oyewumi, 1997; Spurlin, 2010). Approaching this study with a 
framework of Southern feminist theory is crucial to this population, as Uganda is a once-
colonized country, and its people still face issues resulting from colonialism. Women in Uganda, 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  76 
 

specifically those who rely on agriculture as an economic and social means for survival, face 
daily challenges because of institutional gender-based disparities.  
 

Purpose 
 
The purpose of this study was to utilize photovoice, a method aligned with feminist theory and 
one that empowers its participants, to explain the reality of women farmers in Northern 
Uganda via participatory methods to make participant-informed recommendations for change 
and improvement upon the gender-based issues they experience (Gervais & Rivard, 2013; 
Wang & Burris, 1997). The research question guiding this study was:  
 
RQ1: What struggles and problems within agriculture do Ugandan women farmers experience?  
RQ2: Can specific improvements be made based on these problems? 
 

Methods 
 
This study utilized a form of participatory action research known as photovoice (Wang & Burris, 
1997). Subjects observed themselves, their environment, and their issues, produced self-taken 
photographs that documented their lives, and were observed naturalistically through the 
photos they produced and focus group discussion (Wang & Burris, 1997). 
 
This photovoice was conducted in Northern Uganda in July of 2019, where community and 
opinion leaders helped identify potential participants in community gatherings at the Dokolo 
and Apac villages in the region. As recommended by Wang and Burris (1997), participants were 
embedded and involved in their community.  
 
One member of the research team led the in-country photovoice procedures, and the methods 
will document the guidance from that individual. Once recommended individuals volunteered, I 
obtained consent and then introduced the groups to the camera’s potential risks, power, and 
ethics (Wang, 1999), photograph viewing functions, and camera protection and handling (Wang 
& Burris, 1997). I then gave instruction and practice time with the cameras and distributed 
them, with SD cards and batteries already inserted, to the participants. Participants were 
prompted to take photos of their lives as women agricultural producers but were not given any 
further guidance on subjects or examples to not impede their interpretation and photography 
process.  
 
The translator and I returned at the planned meeting time to the groups after 10 days. Upon 
our return, all 10 women (five in each meeting), and some of their young children, met us and 
the concluding meeting began. In this meeting I recorded audio on two devices whilst taking 
notes. Then participants’ images were uploaded from SD cards onto my password-protected 
laptop for us to view each participants’ photographs and identify elements within the photos 
during discussion. While viewing all of their photos, participants selected 1-2 photos that gave 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  77 
 

context to what was in each photo, told the story of each photo, and identified issues, theories, 
and themes through the images and their experiences (Wang, 1999).  
 
While recording both focus groups, I matched each speaker with the photos they took and 
removed all identifying information to maintain confidentiality (Jurkowski & Paul-Ward, 2007). 
Next, I systematically coded (Jurkowski, 2008) the transcribed interviews using the Constant 
Comparative Method (CCM) as per Glaser and Strauss (1967). The analysis occurred in three 
stages: comparing incidents, a unit that represents a meaningful concept that is relevant to the 
research and applicable to each category; integrating categories and their properties; and 
delimiting the theory by analyzing with a critical feminist lens (Grove, 1988; Glaser & Strauss, 
1967). 
 
I achieved trustworthiness and credibility throughout the inquiry by participating in reflexive 
journaling (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). In the data collection process, credibility was achieved 
through prolonged engagement with participants in multiple meetings, field notes, audio-
recording and verbatim transcription of the focus groups, the triangulation of data via photos 
taken and supporting focus group description and discussion, and member-checking during 
focus groups with a translator (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). I employed member-checking to ensure 
the translator communicated effectively and maintained transferability by providing thick, rich 
descriptions of my findings, including direct quotes to accompany the themes. A notable 
limitation of this study is the lack of verbatim translation in some parts of the focus group 
sessions. I performed member-checking and especially did so when this issue occurred. 
Nonetheless, it is important to note that there is data from discussion lost in translation. To 
ensure confidentiality, each individual’s name referenced represents a participant through a 
pseudonym.  
 
Positionality Statement  
I identify as a white, American, middle-class, able-bodied, heterosexual female who is from a 
developed nation. I view the world through these intersectional lenses, many of which are from 
a place of privilege. These potential influences on the research were notable, as there were 
many intersectional differences between me and the participants within this study. My identity, 
influences, and personal biases as result of my positionality limit my ability to fully understand 
the participants’ and their lives, identities, and culture.   
 

Findings 
 
The realities women farmers in Northern Uganda face were represented, through this study, by 
the emergent themes and subthemes of agronomic knowledge and competencies and abstract 
social constructs. Within the major theme of agronomic knowledge and competencies, 
emergent subthemes were: varied agriculture practices, physical skills and fatigue, and 
technical challenges. The theme of abstract social constructs was described by the emergent 
subthemes: gender inequities and patriarchal society, women assuming majority responsibility, 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  78 
 

physical and financial abuse, independence, need for help, visualization and self-actualization, 
and lastly, pride in self-identification. 
 
Agronomic Knowledge and Competencies 
Through the supporting incidents, generated from the participant’s explanations of their 
photos, agronomic knowledge and competencies is an evident theme. Participants detailed 
their challenges with agricultural production, both as a labor-intensive livelihood and technical 
issues but also gave evidence to their existing knowledge and prowess within the agricultural 
production. This theme is explained by the supporting themes: varied agriculture practices, 
physical skills and fatigue, and technical challenges.  
 
Varied Agriculture Practices 
With 20 incidents supporting this theme, the participants explained how they use tangible and 
varied agriculture practices to support both themselves and their families. Participants took 
photos of their crops, including soybeans, ground nuts, sunflowers, simsim, and sunflowers. 
They displayed their practical agriculture knowledge clearly, taking photos of themselves 
weeding, planting, harvesting, and using the ox plow as a method—with the Dokolo group 
collectively stating they “relate to one another through use of ox plow for plowing.” Jaime said 
she “wanted to show the ox plow method of farming,” which is a vital technique for her success 
as she “cannot plant without an ox plow” as shown in Figure 1. 
 
Figure 1 
 
Participant Photo 1: Women pose in a garden with their ox plow.  

 
 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  79 
 

Physical Skills and Fatigue 
Every element of agriculture implementation, even processes aided by animals, cause 
exhausting physical fatigue. The participants engage in varied, rigorous agriculture practices. 
These are necessary for production and ultimate financial and nutritional gain; however, they 
come at a physical cost to each individual. Women use ox plows to plow fields, navigating the 
tough earth to ready it for planting. If ox plows are not available, they must turn the soil by 
hand, as Gail photographed herself performing this task and stated she “wanted to show how 
she farms using a hand ho,” shown in Figure 2. The Apac group consensed that “after 
completing so many tasks, you feel tired.” Jan commented on the work to come in the next 
season by stating, “next year I will need to work harder.” The Dokolo group said they felt “there 
is no reward for hard work.” 
 
Figure 2 
 
Participant Photo 2: A woman weeding in her garden by hoeing the soil. 

 
 
Technical Challenges 
Beyond physical challenges, these women face many technical challenges in their farming. From 
germination, transportation, weather, and pests to harvest, their barriers to their practical 
farming needs increase the level of difficulty to maintaining their livelihoods. The participants 
discussed problems with seed germination, the beginning of the planting process, and the 
beginning of their practical issues in farming. Using her camera as a tool for communication, 
Hallie said she “took a photo to show the challenge [she] had with first planting.” Many women 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  80 
 

of the group struggle with this issue, as Jan added she too has “been struggling with successful 
germination.” 
 
When the original planting does not germinate and therefore become a sellable or consumable 
product, they lose financial gain but still need to repurchase seed to attempt planting again. 
Hallie said she struggles because “buying seed is expensive when [she has] to rebuy from lack of 
germination.” A participant noted there are challenges during harvest, as well. Once products 
are harvested, they often need to be physically moved to market to be sold. Participants noted 
there are often issues during or finding transportation.  
 
According to participants, pests that destroy and predators that consume are both notable and 
constant threats to the success of harvest, family consumption, and financial gain. This issue 
was notable enough for Cait to take a “photo of maize affected by worms that is a challenge,” 
visible in Figure 3.  
 
Figure 3 
 
Participant Photo 3: Two women working in a garden with pest-damaged maize crop. 

 
 
Abstract Social Constructs 
As evident through the basis of feminist theory, the prevalent emergent theme of abstract 
social constructs appearing in the findings. Participants discussed and detailed their duties, 
assigned to them by society due to their gender and societal role as women. These roles reveal 
a disparity between men and women, responsibilities to family and income generation, issues 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  81 
 

with physical and financial abuse, independent work completed by women, and the resulting 
self-identity as women farmers.  
 
Gender Inequities and Patriarchal Society 
Because of their gender, participants identified disparities between their roles and 
responsibilities versus that of men in their lives. Women are not only responsible for the 
majority of cultivation, but also their home, childcare, and a host of other tasks. Additionally, 
their families look to them specifically as women for education, food, and income. Their 
physical and financial safety is not under their control either, as men often take control of the 
finances; this issue is perpetuated with threat of physical violence without compliance.  
 
Women Assuming Primary Responsibilities 
As is evident in the above themes, women participate heavily in the cultivation of their crops—
but their uneven gendered responsibilities do not end outside of their gardens. Childcare, food 
preparation, and keeping of the home are some of the additional responsibilities participants 
stated as shouldered by women in the family.  
 
“Women have many tasks,” the Apac group consensed, continuing to agree that “cooking, 
fetching water, firewood, everything at home, thrashing, and harvesting is the work of a 
woman.” Not only is their time taken up by the many activities assigned to them, but these 
duties fall on their shoulders because of their gender. The Apac group agreed, “women have 
many responsibilities at home.” Bailey supported this in saying she is “responsible for [her] 
child, garden and housework.” The theme is strengthened by the Dokolo group consensing that 
“women must cook, fetch water, raise kids—a lot of work as women.” Ruby said the prevailing 
societal norm is that “as a woman she should not just sit, she should be doing something.”  
 
Women feel they are the responsible individual for their families and specifically their children. 
The burden of productivity in the garden is furthered as their children look to them specifically 
for food, financial help, and education. Many women grow certain crops specifically to be their 
food at home to provide sustenance for their children, as shown by the groundnut crop in 
Figure 4. The Apac group agreed, “children ask the mother about education,” emphasizing this 
responsibility’s corresponding gender as the father is not the one asked. This theme continues 
to reveal gendered nutritional responsibilities as the group consensed, “children ask the mother 
for food.” 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  82 
 

Figure 4 
 
Participant Photo 4: A woman and her child processing groundnuts in the garden. 

 
 
Physical and Financial Abuse 
Participants said men feel entitled to the financial gain in selling crops, even if they did little to 
contribute to the tilling, planting, production, and harvest. The Apac group consensed, “men do 
little work and leave the rest of the work to the woman.” Pearl explained that men help in the 
garden in the morning but return home early and the rest of the work is left to the woman. The 
Apac group collectively agreed on the gender-bound disparity by saying, “if the woman sells her 
crop herself, the man will demand money from the sale.” Oftentimes, women do the work to 
produce the crop and after it is harvested, “the man takes the harvest to market,” said Bailey, 
to effectively sell her production. Once the crop is sold, profits may even not make it back to aid 
the family the women are responsible for the man may misuse money from the sale, confirmed 
by the Apac group. When asked if the women may try to keep their money, the Dokolo group 
agreed, “if a woman refuses to give money to the man it will bring domestic abuse.”  
 
Independence 
An emergent theme is the effect these gender-based discrepancies have on women. Firstly, 
they are more independent, resulting in a lack of help from their partners and others. This 
independence contributes to self-actualization and an evident pride in their identity as women 
farmers. Independence often has a positive connotation, but within this theme we see two 
sides. One side, they are empowered, as displayed in their photos and statements like Val 
saying she “wanted to show [herself] using an ox plow alone without help,” as shown in Figure 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  83 
 

5, and Gail stating, “[she does her] own work as a woman farmer without anyone helping her.” 
On the other side, the independence and lack of help has negative effects. Jaime said “[she’s] 
alone, with no money and can get defeated.” The group also agreed that “some women are 
depressed” due to the amount of work and responsibilities placed on them individually.  
 
Figure 5 
 
Participant Photo 5: A woman plows a garden independently with an ox plow. 

 
 
Need for Help 
Although one participant spoke of her positive experience with her husband, stating, “[her] 
husband helps with the crops and garden,” the overwhelming majority said they felt the 
opposite in regard to help. Pearl said, “men help with the garden and go home to rest,” 
although the women continue with their other responsibilities. Val said she is “not happy with 
the lack of help.”  
 
Visualization and Self-Actualization 
One of the strongest and most evident themes is supported by the focus group discussion and 
also the visual phenomenon that all ten participants chose to photograph themselves, as shown 
in Figures 1 through 6. None of the women were instructed to do so, but all of them took 
photos of themselves in their gardens, in their homes, and with their crops and animals. This 
unanticipated, unified, theme among the photos sparked a larger discussion among the groups. 
Table 1 displays how many photos from each participant were self-portraits.  



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  84 
 

 
Table 1 
 
Number of Photos and Self-Portraits Taken, and Selected by Participants 

Name 

Total 
Photos 
Taken 

Total Self- 
Portraits Taken Percent of Self-Portraits 

    
Ruby 173 45 26 
Hallie 131 57 44 
Pearl 107 41 38 
Cait 92 17 19 
Bailey 90 36 40 
Val 81 14 17 
Violet 71 50 70 
Jaime 44 30 68 
Gail 41 15 54 
Jan 28 11 27 

Note. When selecting photos for the focus group, all participants chose to discuss two photos, 
rather than one, and all participants chose a self-portrait style photograph.  
 
When asked why they made the decision to photograph themselves, the Dokolo group 
responded, agreeing they “wanted to show their struggles as women farmers by photographing 
themselves,” and they “took photos of themselves to show challenges as a woman farmer.” The 
group also said they “wanted to show their gardens by photographing themselves.” Jaime 
noted she “took photos of herself to show what she does, her work, and what she does by 
herself.” 
 
Betty reflected on the method of using photography as a tool for displaying her farming, 
stating, “seeing [her] work in the photo makes her appreciate the work she is doing.” 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  85 
 

Figure 6 
 
Participant Photo 6: A woman checking her sunflower crop in the garden. 

 
 
Pride in Self-Identification 
The final theme is formed from the evident pride the overwhelming majority displayed in their 
self-identification as farmers and more specifically as women-farmers. They used their photos 
to display themselves as farmers, as Pearl said her “photo shows [she] is a farmer.” When asked 
what their photo meant to them, multiple responded that they wanted me to know they were 
farmers, and more responded that they are women farmers. They were proud to display the 
actualization of their farming. Cait stated she “wanted to show [me] methods used in farming.” 
Cait also said she “wanted to show herself as a farmer preparing land,” and that she “wanted to 
show [me] that women can also do farming.” Ruby used photography to display the grandeur in 
which she produces her crop by stating the “photo shows she is a farmer who grows sunflowers 
on a big scale.” Ruby also made her camera a communication tool, stating that the “photo 
shows she is a woman farmer, concerned about her garden who wanted to check anything that 
might be wrong.”  
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
We found that Ugandan women agriculture producers face many challenges, including those of 
technical challenges and those caused by gender-issues. This confirmed issues identified in the 
literature such as primary responsibility in the household, of childcare, and of agricultural labor 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  86 
 

(Doss et al., 2015; Kasente et al., 2002; Palacios-Lopez et al., 2015; Kristjanson et al., 2017; 
Palacios-Lopez & Lopez, 2015). Ugandan women faced challenges due to a lack of resources, 
land, and education that contribute to the technical challenges in agriculture and physical 
fatigue, as evident in the emerging themes of this study (Doss, 2018; Jafry & Sulaiman, 2013; 
Mukasa & Salami, 2016; Sharaunga et al., 2015; Uduji et al., 2019). Thus, we concluded that 
gender-based challenges compound existing foundational and technical challenges faced in 
participants’ agricultural pursuits. Based on this finding, we recommended extension efforts be 
made specifically targeted at women in Northern Uganda.  
 
Through the results, we concluded women in this study view their role as agriculture producers 
holistically and with majority responsibility (Palacios-Lopez & Lopez, 2015). They viewed their 
role as producers and as providers for their children; they kept their families fed and produce 
income that contributes to their children’s education. Self-identity was evident through the 
emergent theme visualization and self-actualization, as participants wanted to show 
themselves as women-farmers. Pride is often a theme found in photovoice results due to the 
empowering nature of photovoice (Wang & Burris, 1997). Through the pride in self-
identification, evident in the participant’s photos and words, we concluded they take a deep 
sense of pride in what they do. Through adversity, they persevered. Therefore, this was a 
resilient and resourceful population that, due to the pride in their work and coupled with the 
responsibility they feel toward their children and families, would be receptive to aid in the form 
of education, resources, and extension. We recommended increased research on how these 
factors can be empowered to improve women’s lives and productivity for their own success. 
Specifically, we recommended gender-based extension efforts be made for this and similar 
populations.  
 
Women faced gender-based issues at home confirming issues noted in the literature (Doss et 
al., 2018; Nelson et al., 2012), such as assuming majority responsibility in the eyes of their 
children, paying for education, providing food, and a host of other tasks. They faced additional 
personal responsibilities as women that affect their abilities to perform in the garden. These 
tasks and responsibilities burden women with a gender-based inequity between them and their 
male counterparts as noted in Nelson et al. (2012). Once in the garden, men helped with 
production but often left the garden early and leave more work to the women. Women were 
motivated to produce in the garden because of the responsibilities at home to feed and use 
income to pay for their children’s schooling. This presented more gender-based challenges, as 
women often do not retain control over the income generated from agricultural production. 
Men associated with the production take control over the funds once harvest is sold for profit—
with the threat of physical violence preventing women from retaining these controls. 
Therefore, we recommended increased research on how to best engage men and women in 
eliminating gender-based control and threats. 
 
In conclusion, as we found efforts to understand and further prevent the gendered cultural 
structure that invokes violence as a tool for control as a vital need, we must continue to 
proliferate not only sustainability in agriculture but social justice. Women smallholder farmers 
must be empowered and unified by their independence and collective voices; for together, they 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  87 
 

are louder. It is essential that we be inspired by the multifaceted challenges these women 
overcome daily because they are the faces of agriculture and the backbone of their country.  
 

Acknowledgements 
 
We would like to thank Texas A&M University’s Center on Conflict and Development for 
funding the ten cameras used within this study. 
 
Author Contributions: Spence, J. R. – conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, writing-
original draft; Redwine, T. – supervision, writing-review and editing; Rutherford, T. – writing-
review and editing; Dooley, K. – writing-review and editing.  
 

References 
 
Bryceson, D. (Ed.). (2020). Women wielding the hoe: Lessons from rural Africa for feminist 

theory and development practice. Routledge. 
 
Doss, C. (2018). Women and agricultural productivity: Reframing the issues. Development Policy 

Review, 36(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12243  
 
Doss, C., Kovarik, C., Peterman, A., Quisumbing, A., & Van Den Bold, M. (2015). Gender 

inequalities in ownership and control of land in Africa: Myth and reality. Agricultural 
Economics, 46(3), 403–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12171  

 
Doss, C., Meinzen-Dick, R., Quisumbing, A., & Theis, S. (2018). Women in agriculture: Four 

myths. Global Food Security, 16, 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.10.001  
 
Gervais, M., & Rivard, L. (2013). “SMART” photovoice agricultural consultation: Increasing 

Rwandan women farmers' active participation in development. Development in Practice, 
23(4), 496–510. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23469663  

 
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Adeline.  
 
Grove, R. W. (1988). An analysis of the constant comparative method. International Journal of 

Qualitative Studies in Education, 1(3), 273–279. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839900030105a  

 
Hirudayaraj, M., & Shields, L. (2019). Feminist theory: A research agenda for HRD. Advances in 

Developing Human Resources, 21(3), 319–334. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422319851286 

 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  88 
 

Jafry, T., & Sulaiman, R. (2013). Gender inequality and agricultural extension. The Journal of 
Agricultural Education and Extension, 19(5), 433–436. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2013.824166  

 
Jones, A. D., & Ejeta, G. (2016). A new global agenda for nutrition and health: the importance of 

agriculture and food systems. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 94(3), 228. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.15.164509  

 
Jurkowski, J. M. (2008). Photovoice as participatory action research tool for engaging people 

with intellectual disabilities in research and program development. Intellectual and 
Developmental Disabilities, 46(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1352/0047-
6765(2008)46[1:PAPART]2.0.CO;2  

 
Jurkowski, J. M., & Paul-Ward, A. (2007). Photovoice with vulnerable populations: Addressing 

disparities in health promotion among people with intellectual disabilities. Health 
Promotion Practice, 8(4), 358–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839906292181  

 
Kasente, D., Lockwood, M., Vivian, J., & Whitehead, A. (2002). Gender and the expansion of 

non-traditional agricultural exports in Uganda. In R. Shahara (Ed.), Shifting burdens, 
gender and agrarian change under neoliberalism, (pp. 35-65). Kumarian Press. 

 
Keedle, H., Schmied, V., Burns, E., & Dahlen, H. G. (2019). A narrative analysis of women's 

experiences of planning a vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) in Australia using critical 
feminist theory. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 19(1), 142. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2297-4  

 
Kristjanson, P., Bryan, E., Bernier, Q., Twyman, J., Meinzen-Dick, R., Kieran, C., & Doss, C. (2017). 

Addressing gender in agricultural research for development in the face of a changing 
climate: where are we and where should we be going? International Journal of 
Agricultural Sustainability, 15(5), 482-500. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2017.1336411 

 
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage. 
 
Lindsley, J. G., Harris, J., Kruger, A. C., & Meyers, J. P. (2019). An exploratory study of African 

American adolescents’ talk about peer sexual harassment: More support for the utility 
of Feminist Theory. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 44(4), 251–270. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/01933922.2019.1669750  

 
Lowder, S. K., Skoet, J., & Raney, T. (2016). The number, size, and distribution of farms, 

smallholder farms, and family farms worldwide. World Development, 87, 16–29.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2018.05.002    

 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  89 
 

Morton, N. O. R., & Lindquist, S. A. (1997). Revealing the feminist in Mary Parker Follett. 
Administration & Society, 29(3), 348–371. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/009539979702900305  

 
Mukasa, A. N., & Salami, A. O. (2016). Gender equality in agriculture: What are really the 

benefits for sub-Saharan Africa? Africa Economic Brief, 7(3). 
https://afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Publications/AEB_Vol_7_Issue_3_
Gender_equality_in_agriculture.pdf  

 
Mugizi, F. M., & Matsumoto, T. (2021). From conflict to conflicts: War-induced displacement, 

land conflicts, and agricultural productivity in post-war Northern Uganda. Land Use 
Policy, 101, 105149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105149   

 
Nelson, S., Sisto, I., Crowley, E., & Villarreal, M. (2012). Women in Agriculture: Closing the 

Gender Gap for Development. Feeding a Thirsty World, 25. 
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anders-
Jaegerskog/publication/262916491_Feeding_a_Thirsty_World_Challenges_and_Opport
unities_for_a_Water_and_Food_Secure_Future/links/545cb6290cf295b5615cced0/Fee
ding-a-Thirsty-World-Challenges-and-Opportunities-for-a-Water-and-Food-Secure-
Future.pdf#page=25  

 
Palacios-Lopez, A., & Lopez, R. (2015). The gender gap in agricultural productivity: The role of 

market imperfections. Journal of Development Studies, 51(9), 1175–1192. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2015.1028539  

 
Palacios-Lopez, A., Christiaensen, L., & Killic, T. (2017). How much of the labour in African 

agriculture is provided by women? Food Policy, 67, 52–63. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.017  

 
Oyewumi, O. (1997). The invention of women, making an African sense of Western gender 

discourses. African Studies Review, 42(3), 21–33. 
 
Reddock, R. (2000). Why gender? Why development? Theoretical Perspectives on Gender and 

Development, 23–50. 
 
Ricciardi, V., Ramankutty, N., Mehrabi, Z., Jarvis, L., & Chookolingo, B. (2018). How much of the 

world's food do smallholders produce?. Global Food Security, 17, 64–72. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2018.05.002  

 
Satyavathi, C. T., Bharadwaj, C., & Brahmanand, P. S. (2010). Role of farm women in agriculture: 

Lessons learned. Gender, Technology and Development, 14(3), 441–449. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/097185241001400308  

 



Spence et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i2.283  90 
 

Sharaunga, S., Mudhara, M., & Bogale, A. (2015). The impact of women's empowerment in 
agriculture on household vulnerability to food insecurity in the KwaZulu-natal province. 
Forum for Development Studies, 42(2), 195–223. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/08039410.2014.997792 

 
Spurlin, W. J. (2010). Resisting heteronormativity/resisting recolonisation: Affective bonds 

between indigenous women in southern Africa and the difference (s) of postcolonial 
feminist history. Feminist Review, 95(1), 10–26. https://doi.org/10.1057/fr.2009.56  

 
Uduji, J. I., Okolo-Obasi, E. N., & Asongu, S. A. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and the 

role of rural women in sustainable agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa: 
Evidence from the Niger Delta in Nigeria. Sustainable Development, 27(4), 692–703. 
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1933  

 
Ugwu, P. (2019). Women in agriculture: Challenges facing women in African farming. Project 

report of African Women in Agriculture. 
 
Wang, C. C. (1999). Photovoice: A participatory action research strategy applied to women's 

health. Journal of Women's Health, 8(2), 185–192. 
https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.1999.8.185  

 
Wang, C., & Burris, M. A. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory 

needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior, 24(3), 369–387. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981970240030 

 
World Bank (2008), The growth report: Strategies for sustained growth and inclusive 

development. Commission on Growth and Development. 
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/6507/449860PUB0Box
3101OFFICIAL0USE0ONLY1.pdf.  

 
 
© 2023 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of 
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 
 


