RISK AND VULNERABILITY TO FOOD INSECURITY AMONG WOMEN IN SAVELUGU-NANTON DISTRICT OF NORTHER REGION, GHANA

Headnote

Abstract

Dealing with household food insecurity has become a serious challenge for policymakers in developing countries, including Ghana. À number ofrisk and vulnerability factors account for food insecurity among peasant women in Ghana and elsewhere. This study explored food insecurity vulnerability among low-income women in rural communities in Northern Region, Ghana, through semi-structured interviews with 28 participants. Despite the localized focus, the findings-covering income disparities, asset access, land tenure inequities, and burdensome domestic roles-contribute to broader discussions on gendered socioeconomic vulnerabilities in sub-Saharan Africa. The study highlights critical implications for research, policy, and practice addressing global gender inequality in food insecurity contexts. Keywords: Food insecurity; women, risk and vulnerability; household assets & income, Ghana

Introduction

Although Food insecurity is a global problem, it is more pronounced in some areas of the world and among certain groups in society. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization's (ЕАО, 2019) report, over 3 million Ghanaians are food insecure, and 10% of them come from the Northern Region. Research has identified factors that account for shortfalls in food production and food insecurity in sub-Saharan Africa. These factors include rapid population growth, environmental degradation, climate change, and pollution, which adversely affects food security and livelihoods of rural households, with women and children greatly affected (Bugri, 2008; De Janvry & Sadoulet 2009; Какой, 1999). For example, the high rate of population growth progressively reduces the acreage of cultivable lands and length of fallow intervals without "compensating inputs" which consequently reduce fertility or "soil mining" (Adams & Mortimore, 1997, p. 150), and the socio-economic entanglements mean food scarcity in the peasant communities, declining yield per hectare and costly food import strategies. In addition, food security threats in the region emerge from a multiplicity of factors (i.e. political, socio-economic, ecological and climatological) which generally place food systems under stress and women and children become vulnerable (Whitehead, 2002).

Food insecurity risks and vulnerability among rural women have widely been researched in sub-Saharan Africa, including among households in rural Ghana (Babatunde et al., 2008; Gladwin et al., 2001; Hesselberg & Yaro, 2006; Lovendal & Knowles, 2007; Whitehead, 2002; Yaro, 2004). However, much still needs to be done by focusing the lens on a special category of women such as poor elderly women, widows and second wives who are noted to be more vulnerable to the persistent cycle of food shortages in sub-Saharan Africa (Hesselberg & Yaro, 2006; Whitehead, 2002). In addition, government and other agencies have focused their anti-poverty programs on only the economic aspect (e.g., consumption and income) of women's risks to food insecurity, but have failed to consider the gendered social risk and vulnerability aspect (e.g., social discrimination based on gender, gender inequality in intra-houschold decision-making, customary practices that proscribe women's ownership and control over productive assets). Within the identified category of women, research has shown that lack of skills, lack of access to productive resources (assets) and limited social capital heighten vulnerability to food insecurity (Kumornu et al., 2013; World Bank, 2016). Therefore, a gap in knowledge regarding vulnerability to food insecurity among peasant women exists in Ghana that needs to be filled to provide guidance to policy makers and practitioners.

Statement of the Problem

While extensive research exists on food insecurity among rural women in sub-Saharan Africa (Babatunde et al., 2008; Whitehead, 2002), significant gaps remain in understanding the experiences of particularly vulnerable subgroups such as widows, elderly women, and second wives in polygamous households in Northern Ghana. Previous studies have predominantly focused on economic vulnerabilities (Kumornu et al., 2013) while overlooking the intersection of gendered social risks with food insecurity (Amuzu et al., 2010). This study addresses these gaps by specifically examining how gendered power relations, cultural norms, and household dynamics create and perpetuate food insecurity among these marginalized groups of women in Savelugu-Nanton District. By exploring these intersections, this research provides critical insights for developing more targeted and effective interventions that address both economic and social dimensions of food insecurity.

Despite Ghana's implementation of multiple food security and gender equality interventions, such as the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP) program and the Food and Agriculture Sector Development Policy (FASDEP II), these initiatives have shown limited effectiveness in addressing women's food insecurity in Northern Ghana (Abubakari et al., 2021). These policies often adopt gender-neutral approaches that fail to account for the distinct vulnerabilities of different categories of women. As Atengble et al. (2020) argue, interventions like LEAP inadvertently reinforce gender inequalities by increasing women's unpaid care work burden while providing insufficient resources to address structural barriers. Furthermore, Nyantakyi-Frimpong and Bezner Kerr (2017) demonstrate that agricultural policies in Ghana frequently overlook the customary barriers that prevent women from accessing and controlling productive resources, focusing instead on technical solutions that fail to transform unequal gender relations. This study examines these policy gaps by exploring how interventions could better address the specific vulnerabilities of marginalized women in Savelugu-Nanton District.

Literature Review

Gender, Poverty and Food Insecurity in Ghana

Feminist scholars argue that households and individuals" experience of poverty including food insecurity is gendered, as women, more than men, bear the disproportionate cost and consequences, particularly in rural areas (see Bradshaw et al., 2017; Chant, 2008). Poverty in Ghana "is gendered in its predisposing factors, in its processes and in its impact" (Awumbila & Ardayfio-Schandorf, 2008, p. 173). Awumbila (2006) argues that the ways in which women become poor or vulnerable in Ghana is determined by their position in society, and this is embedded in "gendered power inequalities" perpetuated by unjust social policies and societal norms (Bradshaw et al., 2017, p. 4). In addition, Amuzu et al. (2010) break down the risk faced by rural women in Ghana into two, i.e. "gendered economic risk" and "gendered social risk" (Amuzu et al, 2010, pp. 5-6). The former arises from income and consumption shocks and stressors, and the latter arises from gender inequality and social prejudice, inequity of power and resource distribution. Amuzu et al. (2010) further point out that, social protection policies in Ghana focus more on the "gendered economic risk" and pays little attention to the "gendered social risk" which marginalize women at the macro, meso, and micro levels. Some scholars have also argued that cash transfer programs such as the Livelihood Empowerment against Poverty (LEAP) in Ghana reinforce gender inequality in domestic care work (Molyneux, 2006). Chant (2008) has described such programmes as feminization of poverty, while Bradshaw and Viquez (2008) viewed them as the feminization of obligation. The biggest challenge of these kinds of programs is the high burden of frequent meetings, and so-called participation required by the programs, which makes it harder for women to get time for income activities (Adato et al., 2000).

In addition, rural women have little or no basic education, and limited access and control over productive assets (Agarwal 1997). These women also have different social networks as compared to men, which means that they have little economic capital, weaker bargaining power within their households, and are at increased risk to shocks (Ashong & Smith, 2001). Similarly, the World Bank's (2009) report revealed that rural women in Ghana have limited access to micro-credit schemes and farm inputs such as fertilizer, which makes it difficult for them to intensify their livelihood activities to enable them to resist or cope with shocks, including food insecurity. In managing households risk of hunger and starvation, rural women in Ghana are caught up in the debt cycle of borrowing from friends and family members to cater for their households' food needs, and these further increase their risk to shocks (Ashong & Smith, 2001). In subSaharan Africa, the poverty and vulnerability situation of peasant women varies across countries. However, their predicaments are commonly shared and deeply immersed in three key factors which include "weak governance; traditional restrictions on women's property rights; and violent civil conflict" (McFerson, 2010, р. 50). These factors are found to be commonly present in sub-Saharan African countries, and their interaction negatively affects the position or status and well-being of women (Collier, 2007).

Broadly speaking, food security is the access to adequate, safe and nutritious food for healthy and productive life by all people at all times, the opposite results in food insecurity (Hendrick, 2002; Hesselberg & Yaro, 2006). Food security is dependent on the sufficiency, efficiency and sustainability of food production, storage and access, stable purchasing power for food production inputs and food. The interaction of political, socio-economic, ecological and climatological factors coupled with availability of markets, access to credits, pricing policies, and availability of sustainable technology affect food supply (Bonti-Ankomah, 2001). Other factors that are noted to correlate with food shortage in sub-Saharan Africa include poor food storage and preservation practices, food loss during harvest and higher food prices during the lean season (Hendrick, 2002). The current study contributes to the literature by exploring food insecurity risk and vulnerability among peasant women in a rural context in Northern Ghana.

Women's Bargaining Power in Relation to Food Insecurity Risk and Vulnerability

A wide range of factors defines a person's bargaining power (Agarwal, 1997; Jones, 1986). Some of the factors are more quantifiable (for example economic assets), and others are less quantifiable (e.g., institutions, social norms). Some resources determine a person's bargaining power, which in themselves can be bargained for. Taking arable land for instance, one could argue that rural women who own lands will have a greater bargaining power than those who are landless due to their stronger fall-back position in relations to allocation of household subsistence. However, gaining a share of arable land in itself may require bargaining, which will require a different set of factors (Agarwal, 1997; Jones, 1986). Similarly, the outcomes of bargaining could be affected by social norms, which may also be subjects of bargaining. In establishing the bargaining power of women, say for a household farmland, the social and legal legitimacy of the share must be established first, since the outcomes of intra-houschold bargaining are preconditioned by the extrahousehold bargaining outcomes with the state and the community (Chant, 2010; Jones, 1986). In this case, women who are excluded in decision-making concerning cash expenditure or agricultural production within the household would have a weaker bargaining power as compared to those who are involved in the household decision making. However, the final outcomes in decisions made, and whose interests prevail, actually reveal the relative bargaining power within the homes (Agarwal, 1997).

In bargaining for subsistence within the family (for examples subsistence needs such as healthcare and food), two key factors become paramount: endowments and exchange entitlement mapping (Sen, 1981). Endowment refers to what a person owns (i.e. labour, assets and power), whereas the entitlements mapping refers to one using his or her endowments to command exchange of goods and services for consumption. In a typical rural setting, the arable land and ability to labour become the most important endowments, and the possibilities of using these two for trade and production, including seeking for employment, determines the exchange entitlements. Moreover, the list could be extended to include other entitlements that are not derived from market exchange or from private ownership. This list may include support from nongovernmental organizations and the state, traditional social support systems, and traditional rights in communal resources. These factors are further strengthened by social norms depicting social perceptions about who deserves what, and social division of labour and resources. The point here is that a person would command greater bargaining power over subsistence within the household if she/he has the higher ability to survive outside the household. Inequality emanating from gender relations within households would place some members in a weaker bargaining position relative to others (see Agarwal, 1997; Sen, 1981).

Further to the above, social perceptions about a person s abilities, contributions or needs can influence her/his bargaining power. Because of gender or race, a person's contribution could be undervalued. The work that men do is regarded as "skilled" and that of women as "unskilled" as a function of gender, even if both of their work requires same amounts of skill (Awumbila, 2006). Moreover, in Sub-Saharan Africa, policymakers, bureaucrats implementing development programs, and family members more often undervalue the contributions of women to household well-being, and such perceptions affect allocation and bargaining power within households (Bradshaw et al., 2017). This perception also affects women's bargaining power outside the households, extending to the labour market. Most rural women are often excluded from the labour market, because of gender or race, which is known to define their abilities, and leads to discrimination in hiring and payment (Agarwal, 1997).

Going beyond the household level, Agarwal (1997) argues that, the community, the market, and the state play a greater role in determining the bargaining power of women. Gender interactions take place within the arenas of the community, the market and the state, which also determines bargaining approaches and outcomes (Ma & Piao, 2019). Considering the market level, relations are characterized by self-interest, and women's ability to bargain for their self-interest is mediated by gendered norms and practices. Thus, property ownership and control is important in strengthening women's bargaining power within the labour market. At the labour market, work conditions, such as,work duration, work intensity, and wages may be bargained over, but gender gaps in education, information and skills as well as the domestic responsibilities of women may place constraints on their bargaining power at the workplace (Broussard, 2019; Ma & Piao, 2019; Scoones, 2015).

While bargaining power theories explain many aspects of women's vulnerability, they have been critiqued for overemphasizing individual agency while underestimating structural constraints. Chant (2016) challenges the notion that enhancing women's bargaining position alone can overcome food insecurity, arguing that this approach may overlook how patriarchal institutions systematically undermine women's gains. Similarly, Kabeer (2015) cautions against narrowly focusing on houschold-level bargaining without addressing community and state-level constraints. These critiques are particularly relevant in the Northern Ghanaian context, where Songsore (2020) demonstrates how women's improved individual assets sometimes lead to countervailing responses from male household members who feel threatened by shifting power dynamics. This study contributes to this theoretical debate by examining how women's bargaining power interacts with broader structural constraints in shaping food security outcomes.

The present study builds on the extant literature by exploring women's vulnerability to food insecurity in an understudied geographic context, the Savelugu-Nanton District of Northern Region, Ghana.

Study Approach

This study used an interpretative approach. This qualitative approach studies ideas and meanings from individuals' interpretations of reality (Fischer & Forester, 1993; Hajer & Wagenaar, 2003; Yanow & Schwartz-Shea, 2006). The interpretative approach starts from constructivist ontology. Constructivism looks at the social construction of reality or the meaning that people give to their social reality (Rizzo et al., 1992). In this approach, individuals are seen as members of a community of meaning-making (Yanow & Schwartz-Shea, 2006). Therefore, researchers using the interpretative approach interact with their subjects in their own conditions and circumstances, in order to understand their socially constructed realities (Haverland & Yanow, 2012). Hence, the researchers spent time at the fieldwork interacting with the participants to obtain data on the social realities of their experiences of food insecurity and their explanations of the causes of this insecurity.

Participants

The study employed a non-random sampling technique that included purposive, accidental and convenient sampling methods. The 28 participants were selected using purposive and convenient samplings to allow for flexibility. This was necessary because we had to encounter them during their working periods. The women were harvesting early maturing groundnuts, and we relied on those who were available to speak to us. O'Leary (2017) argues that non-random selection gives researchers flexibility "when working with populations that are not easily identified or accessed" (O'Leary, 2017, p. 211).

We gained access to the peasant women through community volunteers whom we approached with the intention of the study. The volunteers led us to do the identification and selection of the participants. Widows, older women (60+ years), second wives, and first wives were purposively included. Participants were selected from three peasant communities; Sahani, Kpipaligu, and Kunkundanyili, in the east of the Savelugu-Nanton District. Table 1 provides a summary of the participants' characteristics. The youngest was 19 years while the oldest was 80 years. Eight participants were widows and 10 were divorced. Four participants were first wives and six were second wives. None of the participants had a background in formal education.

While the sample size of 28 participants is appropriate for an in-depth qualitative investigation (Guest et al., 2006), we acknowledge certain limitations in our sampling approach. The purposive selection of participants from three communities may not capture the full diversity of experiences among women in Savelugu-Nanton District. However, we sought to enhance credibility through several strategies. First, the deliberate inclusion of women across different vulnerability categories (widows, elderly women, and second wives) enabled us to capture diverse perspectives within these marginalized groups (Patton, 2015). Second, although we relied primarily on interviews, we strengthened data quality through member checking, where preliminary findings were discussed with selected participants to verify our interpretations (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Third, field notes documenting observations of participants' living conditions and community contexts provided additional contextual data that complemented interview narratives. Future research would benefit from methodological triangulation incorporating focus groups and extended ethnographic observation to further enhance rigor.

Data Collection

Data for the study were collected in 2018. The research used face-to-face semi-structured interviews to explore food insecurity risk and vulnerability experiences of participants. Semi-structured interviews allowed for exploration and for what O'Leary (2005) has described as the discovery of expected, unexpected, and interesting data. The interviews were held at locations convenient for participants, including under shady tress. The interviews asked questions to gather data on the following: intra-household bargaining power; control over assets; intra-household decision-making; perceptions about social norms and gender stereotypes on women's economic roles; domestic and family responsibilities; household labor contributions; access to micro-credit institutions; participation and influence in community decision-making; and access to food and nutrition. The interviews lasted for 40-45 minutes on average. Audio recording and manual note taking were employed to record the interview proceedings. All interviews were conducted in Dagbani, the local language of participants. A professional agency in Tamale transcribed and translated the interviews into English for our analysis.

Data Analysis

Analysing the data was done based on the categorization of the objectives into major themes and sub-themes with the use of content and thematic analyses. Content Analysis is the categorization of verbal or behavioral data, for purposes of classification, summarization, and tabulation (Creswell & Creswell, 2017). . Each author read the transcripts independently and coded the material to identify themes on risk and vulnerability to food insecurity, for example, "access and control over household income", "skewed land tenure system" etc. The codes identified were broad in order to avoid overly compartmentalizing the data. We then further analysed the coded data to discover subthemes on food insecurity risk and vulnerability. Finally, we discussed the themes and agreed on what to present as findings of the study. We agreed on four such themes that broadly capture the vulnerability situation of participants.

Findings

The findings are presented under four interrelated themes. These include access and control over household income; access and control over household assets; skewed and insecure land tenure systems; and unfair domestic and family burden on women. Each of these themes captures how vulnerability is gendered to the disadvantage of participants. For ethical reasons, all the names associated with participant quotes are pseudonyms.

Access and Control over Household Income

Participants described their low-income and vulnerability status, which would be due to the inability to access or control household income for their needs. Income is unfairly distributed within the households, a situation which results in the vulnerability of those who receive the little share. Participants stated that although they contribute to the household income, sometimes more than their husbands do, they do not have the capacity to determine the use of the income. The problem of lack of control over household income differed across participants. Widows, women aged 60 years and above, and those regarded as second wives described their circumstances as more pecarious. These categories of women suggested that they were entirely excluded from income distribution in the various households; meanwhile they always work harder to contribute to the on-farm activities which are their major source of livelihood. For instance, Nagumsi, a 40-year-old second wife stated that:

As for the income we generate from the farming, I don't even talk about it. They don't involve me in the distribution of the income meanwhile they involve the elder wife. They don't even tell me how much income we earn from the sale of the crops or the livestock. My husband and his brothers spent the money on their needs, I have to hustle to earn money to take care of my needs, unless sometimes, they just give me something small and say this is the money we get from the sale of the crops or livestock.

Income was distributed based on the household hierarchical structures (head, first wife, second wife, etc.) in these communities. Those who fell under the bottom of the hierarchy received little or no cash to boost their consumption of basic needs. This confirms the arguments of Albert et al. (2007) and Ojong (2011) in the literature, who argue that the status of a person in a household determines the amount of income he/she gets. Similarly, the findings resonate with the findings of Babatunde et al. (2008) who point out that, the risks and vulnerability incurred by women are because of their entitlement failures to resources that include household income and food benefits. It also supports the arguments of Otieku et al. (2017) who opined that the income status of a person determines her well-being and livelihood outcomes.

Access and Control over Household Assets

Similar to the point above, it emerged that second wives, widows and the aged could neither gain access to nor determine the use of the productive assets such as farmlands, livestock, poultry, and others possessed in their households. Some of the participants indicated that they did not have the capacity or power to use, sell or replace the household assets. This confirms the arguments put forward in the literature by Bradshaw et al. (2017) on gendered power inequalities leading to gendered poverty by Awumbila and Ardafio-Schandorf (2008), and risk of food insecurity at the household level. Pagnaa, a 35-year-old widow, shared her experiences on this:

We rear plenty sheep and goats in this household, but I do not have an idea about how they are managed. It is my husband's younger brothers who are responsible for managing them. I am only responsible for feeding the animals and sometimes my children feed them. But when they sell one sheep or goat, they don't give me anything, and I fear to ask them for my share, because I don't want them to sack me in the household. If I ask for my share, they would say I am challenging their authority, meanwhile, it was myself and my husband who started rearing the animals before he died, and my children are still young, they cannot fight for me.

Many of the participants complained that, in large part, male heads of households take decisions regarding use of household assets. This finding confirms the arguments of Bradshaw et al. (2017), Chant (2008), and Kabeer (2005) who all agree that in rural households, especially in developing countries, male heads take decisions in regards to when and how to use assets belonging to a household. Interestingly, some participants had internalized the longstanding generational gendered norms in the communities, holding the view that, it is a taboo for a wife to own a property whilst the husband is alive. Hence, they considered themselves as assets belonging to their husbands because the men have paid dowries on their heads. Therefore, some participants felt that they have no right to own any property while still married to their husbands.

Skewed and insecure Land Tenure Systems

In the rural areas, income inadequacy makes agriculture a necessity of rural livelihoods. However, participants had limited access to farmlands, which makes it difficult for them to intensify their crop cultivation, unlike the men who control vast portions of the lands. Sankpema, a 50-year-old widow shared her experience of the land tenure system in the area:

We have plenty of farmlands in our households, but, my plot is very small, it is just like one acre. My husband's younger brothers own vast piece of the farmlands because, the land belong to their clan, and I am not regarded as part of them. They say I am a woman; I am only married to them. Even when my husband was alive, I could not get more access to the land how much more now that he has died.

The experiences shared by Sanpkema as a peasant woman can be put into the context of the patriarchal land tenure system in Ghanaian communities based on marital status. According to Aduamoah-Addo (2016), the modes of acquiring land in our Ghanaian communities put constraints on rural women to access lands meant for agriculture. For instance, the major modes through which lands are acquired in Ghanaian communities are an inheritance, purchasing, leasing and many others. He points out that, all these modes of acquiring lands discriminate against women. Taking purchasing for an example, most people consider it as the best option of acquiring land, because it depends on an individual's ability to pay for it, but the lack of income coupled with customs and traditions embedded in gendered norms, constraints women's access to lands. When a woman wants to purchase land, the tradition demands the consent of her husband before she can purchase. The landowners only negotiate with their husbands excluding the women, and this requirement impedes the opportunities of certain categories of women such as the widows, divorcees and single mothers to access the farmlands. These categories of women do not have husbands as requirement to negotiate or purchase land, thus limiting their income making through agricultural activities. These practices render these women vulnerable to shocks such as food insecurity.

Unfair domestic and family burden on women

In addition to the foregoing, it emerged that participants were overburdened with both domestic and family activities for ensuring household survival, coupled with additional labour work in the farms, which further compromised their livelihood security. Participants revealed that they were not in a better position as compared to men to exploit non-farm income opportunities. Their time and energy were often spent on carrying out household activities which include cooking, fetching water and fuel wood, household upkeep, child care, care for the sick and aged, corn mill attendance, collection of wild vegetables, and family activities such as funerals, weddings, installation of chiefs, child naming ceremonies and traditional festivals. They indicated that time spent attending to all these activities limits their income opportunities. This is similar to the findings of Wineman (2017, p. 5) and Yadav and Lal (2018, p. 6) in rural Tanzania, and the case of India and South Asia. The more vulnerable ones are the younger wives who are disproportionately overburdened with the household upkeep as compared with the elder wives, and this is due to their low status in the households. The unfair burden on them affects their livelihood assets as it constraints their realization of anticipated livelihood outcomes. For instance, participants revealed that they waste too much time performing funerals, especially when it is their relatives, and that affects their income activities and opportunities negatively. According participants, after performing the funeral rites and chieftaincy installations, they would always mobilize themselves and go round to show gratitude to family members and friends, both far and near distances, for coming to mourn or celebrate with them. And these trips are very tricky and time-consuming, thus limiting their time to work for money; they have to suspend their income-earning activities, which sometimes stretches to a full month or more. According to Bugli, a 29-year-old second wife:

My father-in-law is very old now; he cannot even walk, bath or eat on his own. I am the one taking care of him. I bath him, wash his clothes, cook for him, and assist him to feed. Anytime he defecates, I have to collect the faeces and urine and make sure that I clean the room. Taking care of him is not easy for me at all, I cannot do anything; even going to market is a problem. My husband doesn't always take it kindly with me, anytime I attempt leaving the house to do something else that will keep me longer away from home. I suffer a lot doing these activities, but no one gives me a pesewa for that, and I cannot complain, because that is what God has created us the women to be doing.

Putting Bugli's narration in context, Hendricks' (2002) and DFID's (1998) arguments are sacrosanct. Hendricks (2002) have argued that caring for the aged and sick members of a household and compensating for their low productivity adds further burden to rural women. They take up an additional and disproportionate load for giving care to aged, orphans and sick members, which means they get limited time to pursue different livelihood strategy paths. These also limit mobility opportunities of the women to their immediate environment, thus, increasing income and food security risk. Also, the DFID (1998) points out that, peasant women spend long hours at work and are usually performing strenuous activities. The hard labour coupled with domestic drudgery take their toll on women's health and also limits their freedom to participate in activities which are more rewarding and dignifying to their status.

Despite the pivotal role peasant women play to ensure the survival of their households, much of their work is often downplayed and unrewarded, and the only option is to depend on their husbands for income security with minimal control over the assets. This results in impairment of the peasant women's economic freedom, thus, increasing risks and vulnerability to food insecurity because of gender inequality. Respondents also narrated that, they bore much financial and human costs involved in performing these activities, especially funerals and weddings. Nabia, a 35-year-old second wife shared her story:

The way funerals and weddings are performed here are very time consuming and very costly to us the women. During funerals and weddings, you have to contribute towards buying the food ingredients to cook for the guests. It is compulsory for us, even if you don't have money, you have to go to a friend or family member to borrow and contribute if not people will mock you. When they were performing my father-in-law's funeral, I sold all my groundnuts and made the contributions towards the purchase of food ingredients nothing was left for me to depend on in that year. And the money family members and friends contributed for me as their solidarity, I could not spend it because after the funeral, my younger brother consulted a soothsayer and he told us that some of the monies are bad gifts. If I spend it, I will die. So I donated the monies to a blind beggar as alms.

The situation of Nabia can be contextualized in the findings of Hendricks (2002). Hendricks (2002) observed that, in rural South Africa, the majority of the women were caught up in the debt cycle of borrowing and lending to fulfil the roles of the escalating numbers and never-ending funerals in the communities, which further deteriorate their little assets, rendering them more vulnerable to any little shock. Peasant women's attendance to funerals and wedding activities threatens their livelihood security safety nets, as they get little time to engage in income activities. These also confirm the arguments of Gammage (2010), Noh and Kim (2015), and Wodon and Blackden (2006) on time and income poverty of rural women in the literature.

Discussion

The findings of this study offer critical insights into how gendered power dynamics, socio-cultural norms, and systemic inequities exacerbate food insecurity among peasant women. While the study was conducted in three communities in the Northern Region of Ghana, its implications extend beyond this context. Similar socio-economic and cultural barriers exist in many sub-Saharan African countries, where women often face compounded challenges due to traditional land tenure systems, unequal income distribution, and overwhelming domestic responsibilities. For instance, the systemic barriers to women's access to productive resources highlighted here mirror findings from other African countries such as Tanzania and Kenya, where gendered access to land and assets significantly influences household food security (McFerson, 2010; Quisumbing et al., 1996). These shared patterns suggest that the experiences of women in Northern Ghana can inform broader interventions targeting gender inequality and food security in similar socio-economic settings globally. Moreover, these findings underscore the need for international organizations and national policymakers to adopt an intersectional approach when designing food security and poverty alleviation programs. Initiatives that fail to account for intra-household power dynamics or the disproportionate domestic burden on women risk reinforcing existing inequities. Addressing these challenges requires not only economic interventions but also societal-level efforts to transform gendered social norms.

The findings can be put in a broader context of the situation of rural women in sub-Saharan Africa in general. In subSaharan Africa, the economic vulnerability of poor women stems from the lack of explicit property rights for women to own productive assets (e.g., livestock or land), particularly in the rural areas where customs and laws constrain their capacity to access and manage lands. In Kenya for example, only about five percent of women are found to be registered landowners; however, they constitute 80% of the on-farm labor force (Quisumbing et al., 1996). The denial of poor African women's right to land property is clearly demonstrated in 'divorcing of marriage and death'. In cases of divorce or death of a male spouse in the African society, women are often denied access to the heritage lands of their deceased husbands, hence losing income earned from the cultivation of cash crops. The problem is further exacerbated when the children of the widow drop out of school to hustle for survival.

Despite the promotion of land registration and entitlements for the poor by international institutions such as the World Bank and the ADB to serve as collateral for securing credits to enable poor women to invest in income generation activities, women still lack access and control. Moreover, such initiatives are weak in addressing the customary restrictions, which bar women from ownership and control of land and contribute to gender inequality and aggravation of poverty among women, including food insecurity. Besides, although several countries in sub-Saharan Africa have promulgated anti-discrimination laws and conventions against women status of land property ownership, the lackadaisical attitude of law enforcement agencies towards enforcing the laws, coupled with the upholding of customary laws on marriage in the constitutions does very little to empower women. For instance, in Tanzania, two land acts were promulgated to invalidate traditional laws that socially exclude women from owning property, but did not see the light of day, as the laws were not duly enforced due to the lukewarm attitude of patriarchal judiciary and ignorance of women to assert their legal rights. Similarly, in Kenya, the double standard of the Kenyan constitution, which bars gender discrimination against women's property ownership at the same time that it upholds customary laws on marriage has made it problematic for implementation (see McFerson, 2010).

The findings show that the peasant women shoulder the responsibility of providing household food benefits during lean periods, however, resource constraints increase their vulnerability, as a specific category of them are denied access to the household productive resources such as land and livestock. Besides, the inability of men to increase agricultural production and income put a heavier burden on the peasant women since they are expected to prevent the family from starvation, which further worsens their situation. This observation was similar to the studies conducted by Hesselberg and Yaro (2006:52) at Kassena-Nankani district in northern Ghana, where they found that the lower agricultural productivity by peasant men in the study villages of Chiana, Kajelo, and Korania adds an extra burden on household wives to provide food benefits for their families. The peasant women bore the cost of their children's healthcare and education. Most of them pay hospital bills, P.T.A levies, and cost of children's school items, which further drain their little income and consequently lower consumption and well-being. Further, the gender inequality in decision making on what quantity of food crops should be kept for consumption after harvest, and what should be sold for income, and how the income should be shared worsens these women's situation. A specific category of women such as second wives, widows and the elderly women were often socially excluded in taking these decisions, which disproportionately affect their consumption of public goods such as health, education, and nutrition. These findings can be related to the arguments of Philip and Rayhan (2004) and Kabeer (2005). They argue that when people are excluded from political and leadership positions their voices are not heard and this further exacerbates their risk and vulnerability to livelihood threats.

It seems that the women's own internalized beliefs do work to reinforce their vulnerability. The women had the perception that males are the breadwinners of the families and women are responsible for the household upkeep. These gendered myths about the social division of labor made the women reluctant to challenge the authority of male heads in the distribution and control over household assets, which disproportionately affect their well-being. They solely depend on their husbands for the supply of food despite all their efforts to assume the responsibility. In addition, the perception that no matter the strength of a woman, the man is still superior over her to work for income does not help women in this context. For example, one participant in the study held that "no matter who we are as women, the men are physically and financially better than us. So our capabilities are not the same". These beliefs relegate rural women to the background in every sphere of livelihood activities and increase their risk to income and food insecurity.

Limitations

This study has limitations inherent in its qualitative design. Although a sample of 28 participants is sufficient for thematic saturation in qualitative research, it limits the generalizability of the findings to broader populations. The study focused on a specific rural context in Northern Ghana, and its findings may not fully capture the diversity of experiences in other regions or countries. Additionally, the reliance on semi-structured interviews, while valuable for eliciting rich, detailed narratives, could be complemented in future research by methods such as focus group discussions or participant observations to provide additional depth and triangulation of data. Future research should explore these themes using larger, more diverse samples across different regions or countries to examine their applicability in varied socio-economic and cultural settings. Expanding the geographic scope and employing mixed methods can help build a more comprehensive understanding of the complex interactions between gender, poverty, and food insecurity.

Conclusion

This study contributes to the growing body of literature on women's vulnerability to food insecurity by exploring localized experiences in the Savelugu-Nanton District of Northern Ghana. It identifies key areas where systemic inequalities intersect to exacerbate risk and vulnerability, including gendered access to productive assets, skewed land tenure systems, and the inequitable burden of domestic responsibilities. The findings call for targeted policy interventions that address these challenges not only in Ghana but also in similar socio-economic and cultural contexts globally. These interventions should integrate gender-sensitive approaches, including reforms to land tenure systems, enhanced access to financial resources for women, and community education campaigns to challenge discriminatory gender norms. Such measures are essential to advancing global commitments to gender equality and food security under initiatives like the Sustainable Development Goals.

Policy Recommendations

This study highlights the need for targeted interventions that address both economic and social dimensions of women's food insecurity in Northern Ghana. Specifically, we recommend:

1. Reforming land tenure systems to explicitly protect women's land rights, particularly for widows and divorced women, through community-based land documentation processes as demonstrated effectively in Tanzania (Pedersen, 2018);

2. Establishing women-focused agricultural extension services that combine technical training with deliberate efforts to transform gender norms, similar to successful approaches in Malawi that increased women's agricultural productivity by 28% (Ragasa et al., 2019);

3. Creating targeted social protection programs for particularly vulnerable women (widows, elderly women, and second wives) that provide both immediate food assistance and long-term productive assets, modeled after Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Programme's gender-responsive components (Berhane et al., 2017);

4. Implementing community dialogue programs engaging traditional authorities, men, and women to challenge discriminatory practices regarding household resource distribution, building on successful approaches from Rwanda's gender transformation programs (Slegh et al., 2013).

These interventions must be implemented with careful attention to local contexts and with meaningful participation of diverse groups of women to ensure their effectiveness.

References

References

Abubakari, A., Husseini, R., & Ali, E. B. (2021). Social protection for rural poverty reduction: A comparative analysis of single mothers in Ghana and Tanzania. World Development Perspectives, 23, 100349.

Adams, W. M., & Mortimore, M. J. (1997). Agricultural intensification and flexibility in the Nigerian Sahel. Geographical Journal, 163(2), 150-160.

Adato, M., de la Briere, B., Mindek, D., & Quisumbing, A. (2000). The impact of PROGRESA on women's status and intrahousehold relations. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

Aduamoah-Addo, L. (2016). Culture, rural women and land rights in Ghana. Regional News (Tuesday, 4 October). Accessed on 20 October, 2018.

Agarwal, B. (1997). Bargaining and gender relations: within and beyond the household. Feminist Economics, 3(1), 151.

Albert, J. R. G., Elloso, L. V., & Ramos, A. P. (2007). Towards measuring household vulnerability to income poverty in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Development, 35(1), 23-53.

Amuzu, C., Jones, N., & Pereznieto, P. (2010). Gendered risks, poverty and vulnerability in Ghana: to what extent is the LEAP cash transfer programme making a difference? London: Overseas Development Institute.

Ashong, K, & Smith, D. R. (2001). Livelihoods of the poor in Ghana: a contextual review of Ghana-wide definitions and trends of poverty and the poor with those of the peri-urban Kumasi. Accessed on 20 October, 2018.

Atengble, K., Mwamba, R., & Adetunde, T. (2020). Gender analysis of social protection programs in Ghana. GSSP Working Paper 42. International Food Policy Research Institute.

Awumbila, M. (2006). Gender equality and poverty in Ghana: implications for poverty reduction strategies. Geo Journal, 67(2), 149-161.

Awumbila, M. & Ardayfio-Schandorf, E. (2008). Gendered poverty, migration and livelihood strategies of female porters in Accra, Ghana. Norwegian Journal of Geography, 62(3), 171-179.

Babatunde, R. O., Omotesho, O. A., Olorunsanya, E. O., & Owotokit, G. M. (2008). Determinants of vulnerability to food insecurity: a gender-based analysis of farming households in Nigeria. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 63(1), 116-125.

Berhane, G., Gilligan, D. O., Hoddinott, J., Kumar, N., & Taffesse, A. S. (2017). Can social protection work in Africa? The impact of Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Programme. The Economic Journal, 124(587), 256-276.

Blackden, C. M., & Wodon, Q. (2006). Gender, time use, and poverty in sub-Saharan Africa. The World Bank Working Paper # 73. Accessed 12 May, 2020.

Bonti-Ankomah, S. (2001). Addressing food insecurity in South Africa. Paper presented at the SARPN conference on land reform and poverty alleviation in Southern Africa, Pretoria.

Bradshaw, S., Chant, S., & Linneker, B. (2017). Gender and poverty: what we know, don't know, and need to know for 'Agenda 2030'. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(12), 1667-1688.

Bradshaw, S., & Viquez, A. Q. (2008). Women beneficiaries or women bearing the cost? A gendered analysis of the Red De Protection Social in Nicaragua. Development and Change, 34(5), 823-844.

Broussard, N. H. (2019). What explains gender differences in food insecurity? Food Policy, 83: 180-194.

Bugri, J. T. (2008). The dynamics of tenure security, agricultural productions, and environmental degradation in Africa: evidence from stakeholders in North-East Ghana. Land Use Policy, 25(2), 271-285.

Chant, S. (2008). The feminization of poverty and the feminization of anti-poverty programs: room for revision? The Journal of Development Studies, 44(2), 165-197.

Chant, S. (2016). Women, girls and world poverty: Empowerment, equality or essentialism? International Development Planning Review, 38(1), 1-24.

Collier, P. (2007). The bottom billion: why the poorest countries are falling and what can be done about it. Oxford University Press.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications.

De Janvry, A., & Sadoulet, E. (2009). Agricultural growth and poverty reduction: additional evidence. The World Bank Research Observer, 25: 1-20.

Food and Agricultural Organization. (2019). The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2019: safeguarding against economic slowdowns and downturns. Rome: FAO. Accessed on 5 June, 2021 at The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2019 - Safeguarding against economic slowdowns and downturns (unscn.org)

Gammage, S. (2010). Time pressed and time poor: unpaid household work in Guatemala. Feminist Economics, 16(3), 79-112.

Gladwin, C. H., Thomson, A. M., Peterson, J. S., & Anderson, A. S. (2001). Addressing food security in Africa via multiple livelihood strategies of women farmers. Food Policy, 26(2), 177-207.

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.

Hajer, A. M., & Wagenaar, H. (2003). Deliberative policy analysis: understanding governance in the network society. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Haverland, M., & Yanow, D. (2012). A hitchhiker's guide to the public administration research universe: surviving the conversations on methodologies and methods. Public Administration Review, 72: 401-408.

Hendricks, S. (2002). Unfair burden: women's risks and vulnerability to food insecurity. Agenda, 17(51), 51-57.

Hesselberg, J., & Yaro, J. A. (2006). An assessment of the extent and causes of food insecurity in Northern Ghana using a livelihood vulnerability framework. GeoJournal, 67(1), 41-55.

Jones, C. W. (1986). Intra-household bargaining in response to the introduction of new crops: a case study from North Cameroon. In J. L. Moock & B. N. Okigbo (Eds.), Understanding Africa's rural households and farming systems (pp. 105-123). NY: Routledge.

Kabeer, N. (2005). Gender equality and women's empowerment: a critical analysis of the third Millennium Development Goal. Gender & Development, 13(1), 13-24.

Kabeer, N. (2015). Gender, poverty, and inequality: A brief history of feminist contributions in the field of international development. Gender & Development, 23(2), 189-205.

Kumornu, J. K. M., Demi, S. M., & Amegashie, D. P. K. (2013). Analysis of food security status of farming households in the forest belt of the Central Region of Ghana. Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 13(1), 26-42.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.

Lovendal, C. R., & Knowles, M. (2007). Tomorrow's hunger: a framework for analyzing vulnerability to food insecurity. FAO. Accessed 10 March, 2021.

Ma, X., & Piao, X. (2019). The impact of intra-household bargaining power on happiness of women: evidence from Japan. Journal of Happiness Studies, 20(6), 1775-1806.

McFerson, H. M. (2010). Poverty among women in sub-Saharan Africa: a review of selected issues. Journal of International Women's Studies, 11(4), 50-72.

Molyneux, M. (2006). Mothers at the service of the new poverty agenda: Pregresa/Opportunidades, Mexico's conditional transfer programme. Social Policy & Administration, 40(4), 425-449.

Noh, H., & Kim, K. (2015). Revisiting the feminization of poverty in Korea: focus on time use and time poverty. Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development, 25(2), 96-110.

Nyantakyi-Frimpong, H., & Bezner Kerr, R. (2017). Land grabbing, social differentiation, intensified migration and food security in northern Ghana. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 44(2), 421-444.

Ojong, N. (2011). Livelihood strategies in African cities: the case of residents in Bamenda, Cameroon. African Review of Economics and Finance, 3: 8-25.

O'Leary, Z. (2017). The essential guide to doing your research project. Sage.

O'Leary, Z. (2005). Researching real-world problems: a guide to methods of inquiry. Sage.

Otieku, E., Ackah, C. G., & Forkuor, D. (2017). Motivations, income determinants and livelihood vulnerability of female teenage head porters in Kasoa, Ghana. International Journal of Social Economics, 44(12), 2396-2408.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Pedersen, R. H. (2018). Decoupled implementation of new-wave land reforms: Decentralisation and local governance of land in Tanzania. Journal of Development Studies, 54(4), 758-775.

Philip, D., & Rayhan, M. I. (2004). Vulnerability and poverty: what are the causes and how are they related? University of Bonn: ZEF Bonn Center for Development Research.

Quisumbing, A. R., Brown, L. R., Feldstein, H. S., Haddad, L., & Pena, C. (1996). IFPRI food policy statement. Women: the key to food security. Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 17: 1-2.

Ragasa, C., Aberman, N. L., & Alvarez Mingote, C. (2019). Does providing agricultural and nutrition information to both men and women improve household food security? Evidence from Malawi. Global Food Security, 20, 4559.

Rakodi, C. (1999). A capital assets framework for analyzing household livelihood strategies: implications for policy. Development Policy Review, 17(3), 315-342.

Rizzo, T. A., Corsaro, W. A., & Bates, J. E. (1992). Ethnographic methods and interpretive analysis: expanding the methodological options of psychologists. Developmental Review, 12(2), 101-123. Scoones, I. (2015). Sustainable livelihoods and rural development. UK: Fernwood Publishing.

Sen, A. K. (1981). Poverty and famines: an essay on entitlement and deprivation. Delhi: Oxford

University Press.

Slegh, H., Barker, G., Kimonyo, A., Ndolimana, P., & Bannerman, M. (2013). 'I can do women's work': Reflections on engaging men as allies in women's economic empowerment in Rwanda. Gender & Development, 21(1), 1530.

Songsore, C. (2020). Gender, intra-household dynamics, and household food security in the Northern Region of Ghana. Journal of African Studies and Development, 12(3), 93-108.

Whitehead, A. (2002). Tracking livelihood change: theoretical, methodological, and empirical perspectives from NorthEast Ghana. Journal of Southern African Studies, 28(3), 575-598.

Wineman, A. (2017). Women's welfare and livelihoods outside of marriage: evidence from rural Tanzania. Review of Economics of the Household, 17: 993-1024.

World Bank. (2016). Ghana: social protection assessment and public expenditure review. World Bank Africa Region. Accessed 12 May, 2020 at World Bank Document

Yadav, S., & Lal, R. (2018). Vulnerability of women to climate change in arid and semi-arid regions: the case of India and South Asia. Journal of Arid Environments, 149: 4-17.

Yanow, D., & Schwartz-Shea, P. (2006). Interpretation and method: empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.

Yaro, J. A. (2004). Theorizing food insecurity: building a livelihood vulnerability framework for researching food insecurity. Norwegian Journal of Geography, 58: 23-37.