Date sent: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 01:22:57 +30000
From: "T. V. Sethuraman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Help!! on impact of green revolution on women
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi SANetters
Has any body came across any literature on impact of green revolution
/modern agriculture on women?
I would greatly appreaciate if any body could send relevant articles by
e-mail. (if articles are available on computer)
Thanking you in advance
REGI THOMAS
%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%^%
REGI THOMAS | Ph: 091-(22)-5782545, 5786530
Ph.D Scholar | Extns: 3330, or 3319
Humanities & Social Sciences Dept. | Fax: 091-22-5783480 Attn Regi HSS Dept.
Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay | Tlx: 011-72313-IITB IN ...do....
Powai, Bombay 400076.. INDIA | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________| or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Res: Hostel 1/ Room 22
Ph : 91-22-5781017
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 4 08:58:12 1995
Fri, 4 Aug 95 17:02:55 GMT+100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "Petra Mayerhofer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 17:02:25 GMT+100
Subject: Re: Population control and ecofeminism
I found the postings of Kylie Matthews and Ronnie
Hawkins on population control quite interesting. And astonishing
because they lack some points which have been a lot in the (German)
newspapers during the UN conference in Kairo last year.
Ronnie Hawkins criticised <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> And yes, while I haven't seen the Gaard and Gruen article, I am
> familiar with Mies and Shiva, Cuomo, and Ariel Kay Salleh. I didn't
> mean to say that I haven't seen ecofeminists addressing population
> issues, but that I haven't seen it done in such a way as to make
> clear how big a problem population is, for humans and for
> nonhumans. Unfortunately, most of what I've seen comes across
> to me as kind of a "yes, but"-- ...
>
> Yes, the factors listed by Kylie are frequently mentioned as
> contributory to the continuation of population growth in certain
> parts of the world.
> Also unfortunately, I've never heard an analysis that goes much
> farther than this.
> Cuomo raises the very interesting question, "Why do women
> bear many children, even in areas or communities where high
> population density impacts on individual lives very directly, through
> overcrowding, shortages of food and other necessities, poor
> health and hygiene, and the obvious destruction of local land and
> species?"
My question is: do these women have the power to avoid it?
Kylie Matthews had written ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I took the comment about controlling reproduction of third world
> women as sexist and unecessary. I thought the person who spoke
> about this did include the ecofem alternative that is empowering the
> women to make choices.
Very true. But IMHO Kylie's view is limited:
> Firstly, we must understand why these women have so many
> children. I am not fully informed but what I do recall from my study
> of Anthropology in 1990 is:
> Because 1.mortality of children is high they need to give birth to
> many to ensure survival of a few past puberty.
> 2. Children look after their parents in the parents old age.
> 3. Children contribute to the economic wellbeing of the family and
> are not a drain on family resources that western children generally
> are.
> 4. There is not adequate contraception for or education of women.
> Or men.
I am neither fully informed on the population issue. Still, from the
newspaper articles accompanying the UN conference last year in
September I gathered that the understanding on the population issue
has progressed beyond the facts enumerated by Kylie. As I
understood from these articles an important point is the discrimination
of women: in many (overpopulated) parts of the world they have no
choices. They do not go to school, they do not get any education, they
are completely subjected to their men, be it father, husband or
brother, they are married with 14 or even younger, bearing children
very early. The family does not "invest" in these girls, so they do not
care for their health, etc.
It has been shown that the population rise has been curbed in those
countries where girls get an education, so they marry later, so they
get children later, they can contribute better to the family income, they
can fight back and can make a choice for themselves. To these
countries belong not only the Western, industrialised ones, but also
some so-called underdeveloped ones.
The approaches against population growth pursued so far have
mostly not taken these points into account.
Kylie has cited the following ones:
> What we can do is:
> 1. Provide Education.
> 2. Provide access to free and safe contraceptives including
> vasectomy for men.
> 3. provide economic incentives for having small families - like social
> security.
> 4. Provide an alternative safety net for people to be looked after in
> their old age should they decide to have few children and these
> children do not survive.
Often these approaches have been combined with coercion or
mistreatment (as e.g. with the coerced sterilisations in India).
Nonetheless, these approaches were not successful.
Feminists (I have no idea of which provenance and direction)
instead have proposed to improve the status of women, to give them a
school and job education, yes, and to give the woman the choice of
abortions...
Feminists have lobbied the UN and connected institutions for years to
bring these points home and - as far as I understood the articles - they
succeeded at least in part last year as these viewpoints were also
integrated into the conclusions of the conference.
Insofar I cannot agree with Ronnie that there is no feminist approach
to the population issue. But I fear, that s/he will put it done as the
"yes, but ..." approach as it is not "direct" enough.
My impression is that many calling for population control do not CARE
for women (or people in the developing countries in general) at all, an
inhumane approach is acceptable to them as long as their purpose is
served. Furthermore, they SHARE the interest of those who keep
women subjected, therefore they cannot SEE the deeper reasons for
high or even rising birth rates, and - even more important - they are
NOT READY TO IMPROVE THE LOT OF WOMEN TO REACH THEIR
OBJECTIVE - population control.
Ronnie had some further points which concern the population issue in
the USA. As I am not American I am not familiar with the
overpopulation problem in Florida (apart from the fact, that more and
more pensioners flock to that state). Perhaps you can tell me more
about it. Apart from migration is the population rising in the USA, too?
In Germany we have had birth rates below the reproduction rate for
nearly two decades (things are similar in the other richer European
countries). Therefore we have not discussed overpopulation as "our"
problem in Germany (more the other way round). From a German
perspective there is lot of space left in the USA - but I suppose you do
not agree on this point.
Respectfully,
Petra
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 4 15:00:48 1995
id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 05 Aug 1995 09:06:27 +1200
; 5 Aug 95 09:03:24 +1200
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 1995 09:02:50 +1200
From: LORIETTE MORRIS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Economics of local food systems
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: Lincoln University
Date sent: Fri, 04 Aug 1995 08:30:37 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jennifer L. Wilkins)
Subject: Economics of local food systems
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am in the process of compiling data related to the connections between
dietary choice, social welfare and local food systems. I am seeking
references that focus on the economics of shifting to local food systems
versus globalized systems. Any references along this line would be most
appreciated. I will share whatever I receive with this listserve.
Thanks much!
Jennifer L. Wilkins, Ph.D., R.D.
Senior Extension Associate
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ishmael knows.
