Tools in the making: the co-construction of gender, crops, and crop breeding in African agriculture

References

• Acevedo, M., Pixley, K., Zinyengere, N., Meng, S., Tufan, H., Cichy, K., Bizikova, L., Isaacs, K., Ghezzi-Kopel, K., & Porciello, J. (2020). A scoping review of adoption of climate-resilient crops by small-scale producers in low- and middle-income countries. Nature Plants, 6(10), 1231–1241. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-020-00783-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 205–224). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Almekinders, C. J. M., Beumer, K., Hauser, M., Misiko, M., Gatto, M., Nkurumwa, A. O., & Erenstein, O. (2019). Understanding the relations between farmers’ seed demand and research methods: The challenge to do better. Outlook on Agriculture, 48(1), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0030727019827028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora-Jonsson, S. (2014). Forty years of gender research and environmental policy: Where do we stand? Women's studies international forum, 47, 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2014.02.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora-Jonsson, S., & Leder, S. (2021). Gender mainstreaming in agricultural and forestry institutions. In C. Sachs, L. Jensen, P. Castellanos, & K. Sexsmith (Eds.), Routledge handbook of gender and agriculture (pp. 15–31). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, J., & Polar, V. (2019). The implications of gender for modern approaches to crop improvement and plant breeding. In C. Sachs (Ed.), Gender, agriculture and agrarian transformation (pp. 11–34). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, J., Lubbock, A., & Stuart, H. (2013, November 6–7). Assessment of the status of gender mainstreaming in CGIAR research programs. In 10th Meeting (FC10), Nairobi, Kenya.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, J., Polar, V., & Thiele, G. (2018). Critical decisions for ensuring plant or animal breeding is gender-responsive. CGIAR Gender and Breeding Initiative.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, J. A., & Polar, V. (2021a). User guide to the G + product profile query tool (G + PP) (user guide 2021-2). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas & International Potato Center. Retrieved from: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/113167
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, J. A., & Polar, V. (2021b). User guide to the standard operating procedure for G + tools (G + SOP) (user guide 2021-3). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas & International Potato Center. Retrieved from: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/113166
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831. https://doi.org/10.1086/345321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg, A.-J., & Lie, M. (1995). Feminism and constructivism: Do artifacts have gender? Science, Technology, & Human Values, 20(3), 332–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399502000304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berik, G. (2017). Efficiency arguments for gender equality: An introduction. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 38(4), 542–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2017.1377063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (2012). Creating gender-responsive agricultural development programs. An orientation document. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Borlaug, N. E., & Dowswell, C. R. (2005). Feeding a world of ten billion people: A 21st century challenge. In R. Tuberosa, R. L. Phillips, & M. Gale (Eds.), Proceedings of the international congress in the wake of the double helix: From the Green Revolution to the Gene Revolution (pp. 3–23). Avenue Media.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, G. (2016). The girl effect: A neoliberal instrumentalization of gender equality. Consilience: The Journal of Sustainable Development, 15(1), 146–180. https://doi.org/10.7916/consilience.v0i15.3936
   Google Scholar
• Braun, H.-J., Rajaram, S., & van Ginkel, M. (1996). CIMMYT's approach to breeding for wide adaptation. Euphytica, 92(1–2), 175–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00022843
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex”. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Byerlee, D., & Lynam, J. K. (2020). The development of the international center model for agricultural research: A prehistory of the CGIAR. World Development, 135, 105080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M., Millo, Y., & Muniesa, F. (2007). Market devices. Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Cernea, M. M., & Kassam, A. H. (Eds.). (2006). Researching the culture in agriculture: Social research for international agricultural development. CABI.
   Google Scholar
• CGIAR System Council (2018, November 15–16). CGIAR system 3-year business plan (2019–2021) companion document. Initiative on “Crops to End Hunger”: Strategy and options for CGIAR support to plant breeding. In 7th CGIAR System Council Meeting, Seattle, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Chamala, S. (1990). Social and environmental impacts of modernization of agriculture in developing countries. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 10(1–2), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/0195-9255(90)90021-Q
   Google Scholar
• Chambers, R., Pacey, A., & Thrupp, L. A. (Eds.). (1989). Farmer first: Farmer innovation and agricultural research. Practical Action Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Chant, S., & Sweetman, C. (2012). Fixing women or fixing the world? ‘Smart economics’, efficiency approaches, and gender equality in development. Gender & Development, 20(3), 517–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552074.2012.731812
   Google Scholar
• Cockburn, C., & Ormrod, S. (1993). Gender and technology in the making. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall, A. (2018). Beyond “empowerment lite”: Women’s empowerment, neoliberal development and global justice. Cardenos Pagy, 52, e185202.
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall, A., & Rivas, A.-M. (2015). From ‘gender equality and ‘women’s empowerment’ to global justice: Reclaiming a transformative agenda for gender and development. Third World Quarterly, 36(2), 396–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1013341
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornwall, A., Standing, H., & Lynch, A. (2008). Reclaiming feminism: Gender and neoliberalism. IDS Bulletin, 39(3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-5436.2008.tb00505.x
   Google Scholar
• Crossland, M., Paez Valencia, A. M., Pagella, T., Mausch, K., Harris, D., Dilley, L., & Winowiecki, L. (2021). Women’s changing opportunities and aspirations amid male outmigration: Insights from Makueni County, Kenya. The European Journal of Development Research, 33(4), 910–932. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-021-00362-8
   Google Scholar
• Donald, C. M. (1968). The breeding of crop ideotypes. Euphytica, 17(3), 385–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00056241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubin, H. J., & Brennan, J. P. (2009). Fighting a “Shifty Enemy”: The international collaboration to contain wheat rusts. In D. J. Spielman & R. Pandya-Lorch (Eds.), Millions fed: Proven successes in agricultural development (pp. 19–24). International Food Policy Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Esquivel, V. (2017). Efficiency and gender equality in growth theory: Simply add-ons? Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 38(4), 547–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2017.1377061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewell, H. (2021). Breeding for impact: Perspectives on gender-responsive cassava breeding in Nigeria. Gender, Technology and Development, 25(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2021.1939962
   Google Scholar
• Farhall, K., & Rickards, L. (2021). The “gender agenda” in agriculture for development and its (lack of) alignment with feminist scholarship. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5(20), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2021.573424
   Google Scholar
• Farnworth, C. R., & Jiggins, J. (2003). Participatory plant breeding and gender analysis (PPB Monograph No. 4). International Center for Tropical Agriculture.
   Google Scholar
• Fejerskov, A. M. (2017). The influence of established ideas in emerging development organisations: Gender equality and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. The Journal of Development Studies, 53(4), 584–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2016.1199859
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, K. (2016). Why new crop technology is not scale-neutral—A critique of the expectations for a crop-based African Green Revolution. Research Policy, 45(6), 1185–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, M., & Carr, E. R. (2015). The influence of gendered roles and responsibilities on the adoption of technologies that mitigate drought risk: The case of drought-tolerant maize seed in eastern Uganda. Global Environmental Change, 35, 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2011). Women in agriculture: Closing the gender gap for development. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Fresco, L. O. (2015). The new Green Revolution: Bridging the gap between science and society. Current Science, 109(3), 430–438.
   Google Scholar
• Friz, A., & Gehl, R. W. (2016). Pinning the feminine user: Gender scripts in Pinterest’s sign-up interface. Media, Culture & Society, 38(5), 686–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443715620925
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuglie, K. (2016). The growing role of the private sector in agricultural research and development world-wide. Global Food Security, 10, 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.07.005
   Google Scholar
• Gates, M. F. (2019). The moment of lift: How empowering women changes the world. Flatiron Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gauch, H. G. Jr., & Zobel, R. W. (1997). Identifying mega-environments and targeting genotypes. Crop Science, 37(2), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1997.0011183X003700020002x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gengenbach, H., Schurman, R. A., Bassett, T. J., Munro, W. A., & Moseley, W. G. (2018). Limits of the New Green Revolution for Africa: Reconceptualising gendered agricultural value chains. The Geographical Journal, 184(2), 208–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill, R., & Grint, K. (1995). Introduction: The gender-technology relation: Contemporary theory and research. In K. Grint & R. Gill (Eds.), The gender-technology relation: Contemporary theory and research (pp. 1–28). Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Goebel, A. (2003). Women and sustainability: What kind of theory do we need? Canadian Women Studies, 23(1), 77–84.
   Google Scholar
• Gregoratti, C., Roberts, A., & Tornhill, S. (2018). Corporations, gender equality and women’s empowerment: Feminism co-opted? In A. Nölke & C. May (Eds.), Handbook of the international political economy of the corporation (pp. 93–105). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Grosser, K., & McCarthy, L. (2019). Imagining new feminist futures: How feminist social movements contest the neoliberalization of feminism in an increasingly corporate-dominated world. Gender, Work & Organization, 26(8), 1100–1116. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12267
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haydon, S., Jung, T., & Russell, S. (2021). ‘You've been framed’: A critical review of academic discourse on philanthrocapitalism. International Journal of Management Reviews, 23(3), 353–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herdt, R. W. (2012). People, institutions, and technology: A personal view of the role of foundations in international agricultural research and development 1960–2010. Food Policy. 37(2), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.01.003
   Google Scholar
• Horowitz, R., & Mohun, A. (Eds.). (1998). His and hers. Gender, consumption and technology. University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jiggins, J. (1986). Gender-related impacts and the work of the international agricultural research centers. World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Kansanga, M., Andersen, P., Kpienbaareh, D., Mason-Renton, S., Atuoye, K., Sano, Y., Antabe, R., & Luginaah, I. (2019). Traditional agriculture in transition: Examining the impacts of agricultural modernization on smallholder farming in Ghana under the new Green Revolution. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 26(1), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2018.1491429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr, R. B. (2012). Lessons from the old Green Revolution for the new: Social, environmental and nutritional issues for agricultural change in Africa. Progress in Development Studies, 12(2-3), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/146499341101200308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kholová, J., Urban, M. O., Cock, J., Arcos, J., Arnaud, E., Aytekin, D., Azevedo, V., Barnes, A. P., Ceccarelli, S., Chavarriaga, P., Cobb, J. N., Connor, D., Cooper, M., Craufurd, P., Debouck, D., Fungo, R., Grando, S., Hammer, G. L., Jara, C. E., … Xu, Y. (2021). In pursuit of a better world: Crop improvement and the CGIAR. Journal of Experimental Botany, 72(14), 5158–5179. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erab226
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kilby, P. (2019). The Green Revolution: Narratives of politics, technology and gender. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kilby, P. (2021). Philanthropic foundations in international development. Rockefeller, Ford, and Gates. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkham, P. (Ed.). (1996). The gendered object. Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kunz, R., & Prügl, E. (2019). Introduction: Gender experts and gender expertise. European Journal of Politics and Gender, 2(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1332/251510819X15471289106077
   Google Scholar
• Leach, M. (2007). Earth mother myths and other ecofeminist fables: How a strategic notion rose and fell. Development and Change, 38(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00403.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyon, S., Mutersbaugh, T., & Worthen, H. (2019). Constructing the female coffee farmer: Do corporate smart-economic initiatives promote gender equity within agricultural value chains? Economic Anthropology, 6(1), 34–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/sea2.12129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marimo, P., Caron, C., Van den Bergh, I., Crichton, R., Weltzien, E., Ortiz, R., & Tumuhimbise, R. (2020). Gender and trait preferences for banana cultivation and use in Sub-Saharan Africa: A literature review. Economic Botany, 74(2), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-020-09496-y
   Google Scholar
• Mashonganyika, T. R. (2018). Developing product replacement strategies. Excellence in Breeding Platform Instruction Manual.
   Google Scholar
• McCalla, A. F. (2017). The relevance of the CGIAR in a modernizing world: Or has it been reformed ad infinitum into dysfunctionality? In P. Pingali & G. Feder (Eds.), Agriculture and rural development in a globalizing world (pp. 353–369). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McMichael, P. (2009). A food regime genealogy. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(1), 139–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150902820354
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moran, M. (2014). Private foundations and development partnerships: American philanthropy and global development agendas. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Moseley, W., Schnurr, M., & Bezner Kerr, R. (2015). Interrogating the technocratic (neoliberal) agenda for agricultural development and hunger alleviation in Africa. African Geographical Review, 34(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2014.1003308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mukhopadhyay, M., & Prügl, E. (2019). Performative technologies: Agricultural research for development and gender. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 21(5), 702–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616742.2018.1555004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orr, A., Cox, C. M., Ru, Y., & Ashby, J. (2018). Gender and social targeting in plant breeding. CGIAR Gender and Breeding Initiative.
   Google Scholar
• Orr, A., Polar, V., & Ashby, J. A. (2021). User guide to the G + customer profile tool (G + CP) (user guide 2021-1). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas & International Potato Center. Retrieved from: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/113168
   Google Scholar
• Oudshoorn, N., Rommes, E., & Stienstra, M. (2004). Configuring the user as everybody: Gender and design cultures in information and communication technologies. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 29(1), 30–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243903259190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel, R. (2013). The long Green Revolution. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 40(1), 1–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2012.719224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins, J. H. (1990). The Rockefeller Foundation and the green revolution, 1941–1956. Agriculture and Human Values, 7(3–4), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01557305
   Google Scholar
• Persley, G. J., & Anthony, V. M. (Eds.). (2017). The business of plant breeding: Market-led approaches to new variety design in Africa. CABI International.
   Google Scholar
• Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3), 399–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631284014003004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pingali, P., Spielman, D., & Zaidi, F. (2016). Changing donor trends in assistance to agricultural research and development in Africa South of the Sahara. In J. Lynam, N. M. Beintema, J. Roseboom, & O. Badiane (Eds.), Agricultural research in Africa: Investing in future harvest (pp. 139–170). International Food Policy Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Pingali, P. (2012). The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation: Catalyzing agricultural innovation. In J. F. Linn (Ed.), Scaling up in agriculture, rural development, and nutrition. International Food Policy Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Polar, V., & Ashby, J. A. (2021). Gender report and template forms for G + Tools (Report Template 2021-1). CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas & International Potato Center.
   Google Scholar
• Polar, V., Ashby, J. A., Thiele, G., & Tufan, H. (2021). When is choice empowering? Examining gender differences in varietal adoption through case studies from sub-Saharan Africa. Sustainability, 13(7), 3678. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073678
   Google Scholar
• Polar, V., Teeken, B., Mwende, J., Marimo, P., Tufan, H. A., Ashby, J. A., Cole, S., Mayanja, S., Okello, J. J., Kulakow, P., & Thiele, G. (2022). Building demand-led and gender-responsive breeding programs. In G. Thiele, M. Friedmann, H. Campos, H., V. Polar, & J. W. Bentley (Eds.), Root, tuber and banana food system innovations: Value creation for inclusive outcomes (pp. 483–509). Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Prügl, E. (2015). Neoliberalising feminism. New Political Economy, 20(4), 614–631. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2014.951614
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyburn, R., & Kruijssen, F. (2021). Gender dynamics in agricultural value chain development: Foundations and gaps. In C. Sachs, L. Jensen, P. Castellanos, & K. Sexsmith (Eds.), Routledge handbook of gender and agriculture (pp. 32–45). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ragot, M., Bonierbale, M., & Weltzien, E. (2018). From market demand to breeding decisions: A framework. CGIAR Gender and Breeding Initiative.
   Google Scholar
• Resurrección, B. P., & Elmhirst, R. (2020). Negotiating gender expertise in environment and development. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, A., & Soederberg, S. (2012). Gender equality as “smart economics”? A critique of the 2012 World Development Report. Third World Quarterly, 33(5), 949–968. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2012.677310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rommes, E. (2002). Gender scripts and the internet: The design of Amsterdam’s digital city. Twente University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rommes, E., Van Oost, E., & Oudshoorn, N. (1999). Gender in the design of a digital city of Amsterdam. Information, Communication and Society, 2(4), 476–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/136911899359510
   Google Scholar
• Smale, M., Assima, A., Kergna, A., Thériault, V., & Weltzien, E. (2018). Farm family effects of adopting improved and hybrid sorghum seed in the Sudan Savanna of West Africa. Food Policy, 74, 162–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.01.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobha, I. (2007). Green Revolution: Impact on gender. Journal of Human Ecology, 22(2), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/09709274.2007.11906008
   Google Scholar
• Sperling, L., Ashby, J. A., Smith, M. E., Weltzien, E., & McGuire, S. (2001). A framework for analyzing participatory plant breeding approaches and results. Euphytica, 122(3), 439–450. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017505323730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sumberg, J., Thompson, J., & Woodhouse, P. (2012). Contested agronomy: Agricultural research in a changing world. In J. Sumberg & J. Thompson (Eds.), Contested agronomy: Agricultural research in a changing world (pp. 1–21). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Teeken, B., Garner, E., Agbona, A., Balogun, I., Olaosebikan, O., Bello, A., Madu, T., Okoye, B., Egesi, C., Kulakow, P., & Tufan, H. A. (2021). Beyond “women's traits”: Exploring how gender, social difference, and household characteristics influence trait preferences. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2021.740926
   Google Scholar
• Thiele, G., Dufour, D., Vernier, P., Mwanga, R. O. M., Parker, M. L., Schulte Geldermann, E., Teeken, B., Wossen, T., Gotor, E., Kikulwe, E., Tufan, H., Sinelle, S., Kouakou, A. M., Friedmann, M., Polar, V., & Hershey, C. (2021). A review of varietal change in roots, tubers and bananas: Consumer preferences and other drivers of adoption and implications for breeding. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 56(3), 1076–1092. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.14684
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiele, G., Fliert, E., & Campilan, D. (2001). What happened to participatory research at the International Potato Center? Agriculture and Human Values, 18(4), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015230803456
   Google Scholar
• Thiele, G., Friedmann, M., Polar, V., & Campos, H. (2022). Overview. In G. Thiele, M. Friedmann, H. Campos, V. Polar, & J. W. Bentley (Eds.), Root, tuber and banana food system innovations: Value creation for inclusive outcomes (pp. 3–28). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Tufan, H.A., Grando, S., & Meola, C. (Eds.). (2018). State of the knowledge for gender in breeding: Case studies for practitioners. CGIAR Gender and Breeding Initiative.
   Google Scholar
• van der Burg, M. (2019). "Change in the making": 1970s and 1980s building stones to gender integration in CGIAR agricultural research. In C. Sachs (Ed.), Gender, agriculture and agrarian transformations: Changing relations in Africa, Latin America and Asia (pp. 35–56). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Van Oost, E. (2003). Materialised gender: How shavers configure the users’ femininity and masculinity. In N. Oudshoorn & T. Pinch (Eds.), How users matter: The co-construction of users and technologies (pp. 193–208). The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Voss, R. C., Donovan, J., Rutsaert, P., & Cairns, J. E. (2021). Gender inclusivity through maize breeding in Africa: A review of the issues and options for future engagement. Outlook on Agriculture, 50(4), 392–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270211058208
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagaw, K., Seyoum, A., Tadesse, T., Nega, A., Gebreyohannes, A., Bejiga, T., Siraw, S., Solomon, H., Nadew, D., & Bogale, M. (2021). Distinguishing of stable genotypes and mega environment for grain yield performance of sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] genotypes using spatial analysis. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 12(03), 417–431. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2021.123027
   Google Scholar
• Wajcman, J. (2004). Technofeminism. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weltzien, E., Rattunde, F., Christinck, A., Isaacs, K., & Ashby, J. (2019). Gender and farmer preferences for varietal traits. In I. Goldman (Ed.), Plant breeding reviews (pp. 243–278). John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, K. (2011). ‘Race’, gender and neoliberalism: Changing visual representations in development. Third World Quarterly, 32(2), 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2011.560471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, K. (2013). Agency as ‘smart economics’: Neoliberalism, gender and development. In S. Madhok, A. Phillips, & K Wilson (Eds.), Gender, agency, and coercion. Thinking gender in transnational times (pp. 84–101). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, K. (2015). Towards a radical re-appropriation: Gender, development and neoliberal feminism. Development and Change, 46(4), 803–832. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2012). World development report 2012: Gender equality and development. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar