Gender matters - Climate Change Adaptation and Development: Transforming Paradigms and Practices - page 91

thus giving patrons the power to deny others their influence (Hydén 2008).
When these patrons are men - and in the LVB they generally are - it tends to
makes women unable to negotiate the terms of the exchange. Subsequently,
women become reliant on their husbands/sons/brothers/brothers-in-law to
negotiate in their place for the assistance they need to uphold the gendered
responsibilities that the gender regime has assigned to them. But in a livelihood
context where the males are generally reluctant to plan for the future or engage
in diversification of incomes or intensification of agricultural production, it
may be difficult for women to persuade their men to negotiate on their behalf.
Similarly, it may be difficult for women to convince their men of the need to
buy new agricultural equipment or a bike to facilitate transport of goods to
the market, when the economy of affection can give patrons instant rewards
through the strengthening of social ties to those who share their personal wealth
rather than investing in long-term economic ventures.
Moreover, as the trend of greater need for cash among rural farming
families continues to rise and women's labour burdens become heavier,
demands on the economy of affection grow to such an extent that the need
outstrips the means - and that may erode the entire system, forcing people
to seek other strategies to ensure livelihood security and wellbeing (Miles
2007; Hydén 2013). When people's capacity to pool resources horizontally
and share among themselves diminishes, assistance must be sought elsewhere.
Increasingly such assistance is sought from vertical exchanges supported by the
state, albeit through informal networks, thus advancing another trend in SSA
where pooling, or cooperative exchange, serves to deepen political clientelism.
The consequence is concentration of both power and wealth in the hands of
a few male political leaders (Hoon 2002; Hydén 2013). For women in the
LVB, significantly underrepresented in national and local political leadership
positions, these recent developments may undermine individual agency and
even restrict their choices of and access to the adaptive capacities - loans,
farming education, drought resistant seeds or new land areas - necessary for
coping with and adapting to increased climate risks in the future. Instead, access
to these critical adaptive capacities may be reserved for those, predominately
men, who already have personal relationships with the political patrons in
power or have established social networks that may influence access to such
political leaders.
The narrowing of the economy of affection is thus likely to have negative
consequences for men and women alike. But this will apply more to some
than others, as lack of adaptive capacities will leave them with limited options
for engaging in any types of activities beyond instrumental action, i.e. coping
with impacts rather than preventing them from taking place (Gabrielsson and
Ramasar 2012). From an adaptation perspective, this means that most responses
to the increased risks of climate uncertainty become based primarily on reactive
and autonomous coping mechanisms, like resource diversion and reduced
food intake, instead of autonomous and planned adaptation strategies which