Search

Background: Value chain interventions have become widespread throughout the international development sector over the last 20 years, and there is a need to evaluate their effectiveness in improving women's welfare across multiple dimensions. Agricultural value chains are influenced by socio‐cultural norms and gender dynamics that have an impact on the distribution of resources, benefits, and access to opportunities. While women play a critical role in agriculture, they are generally confined to the least‐valued parts of the value chain with the lowest economic returns, depending on the local, social and institutional contexts. Objectives: The review assesses the effectiveness of approaches, strategies and interventions focused on women's engagement in agricultural value chains that lead to women's economic empowerment in low‐ and middle‐income countries. It explores the contextual barriers and facilitators that determine women's participation in value chains and ultimately impact their effectiveness. Search Methods: We searched completed and on‐going studies from Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection (Social Sciences Citation Index [SSCI], Science Citation Index Expanded [SCI‐EXPANDED], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Science [CPCI‐S], Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Social Science & Humanities [CPCI‐SSH], and Emerging Sources Citation Index [ESCI]), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, EconLit, Business Source Premier, APA PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane, Database of Systematic Reviews, CAB Abstracts and Sociological Abstracts. We also searched relevant websites such as Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR); the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); AgriProFocus; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF); Donor Committee for Enterprise Development; the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO); the International Labour Organisation (ILO); the Netherlands Development Organisation; USAID; the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation; the International Food Policy Research Institute; World Agroforestry; the International Livestock Research Institute; the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office; the British Library for Development Studies (BLDS); AGRIS; the IMMANA grant database; the 3ie impact evaluation database; Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA); The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J‐PAL); the World Bank IEG evaluations; the USAID Development Data Library; Experience Clearinghouse; the proceedings of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Health Academy conference; the proceedings of the Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE) Conference; the proceedings of the North East Universities Development Consortium (NEUDC) Conference; and the World Bank Economic Review. The database search was conducted in March 2022, and the website search was completed in August 2022. Selection Criteria: The review includes value chain interventions evaluating the economic empowerment outcomes. The review includes effectiveness studies (experimental and non‐experimental studies with a comparison group) and process evaluations. Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, critically appraised the studies, and synthesised findings. Results: We found that value chain interventions are successful in improving the economic conditions of their intended beneficiaries. The interventions were found to improve women's economic outcomes such as income, assets holdings, productivity, and savings, but these effects were small in size and limited by low confidence in methodological quality. The meta‐analysis suggests that this occurs more via the acquisition of skills and improved inputs, rather than through improvement in access to profitable markets. The qualitative evidence on interventions points to the persistence of cultural barriers and other constraints. Those interventions implemented in Sub‐Saharan Africa and South Asia are consistently more successful for all outcomes considered, although there are few studies conducted in other areas of the world. Conclusions: The review concludes that value chain interventions empower women, but perhaps to a lesser extent than expected. Economic empowerment does not immediately translate into empowerment within families and communities. Interventions should either moderate their expectations of empowerment goals, or they should be implemented in a way that ensures higher rates of participation among women and the acquisition of greater decision‐making power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The term 'care‐experienced' refers to anyone who is currently in care or has been in care at any stage in their life. A complex interplay of factors leads to care‐experienced children and young people (CECYP) experiencing poorer oral health and access to dental care than their peers. A rapid review of the co‐production of health and social care research with vulnerable children and young people (CYP) was carried out to inform the development of a co‐produced research project exploring the oral health behaviours and access to dental services of CECYP. Here, 'co‐production' refers to the involvement of CYP in the planning or conduct of research with explicit roles in which they generate ideas, evidence and research outputs. Aim: To learn how to meaningfully involve vulnerable CYP in the co‐production of health and social science research. Objectives: To identify: Different approaches to facilitating the engagement of vulnerable CYP in co‐production of health and social science research; different activities carried out in such approaches, challenges to engaging vulnerable CYP in co‐production of health and social science research and ways to overcome them and areas of best practice in relation to research co‐production with vulnerable CYP. Search Strategy: A rapid review of peer‐reviewed articles was conducted in six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, SocINDEX, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science) and grey literature to identify studies that engaged vulnerable CYP in co‐approaches to health and social research. Main Results: Of 1394 documents identified in the search, 40 were included and analysed. A number of different approaches to co‐production were used in the studies. The CYP was involved in a range of activities, chiefly the development of data collection tools, data collection and dissemination. Individual challenges for CYP and researchers, practical and institutional factors and ethical considerations impacted the success of co‐production. Discussion and Conclusion: Co‐production of health and social science with vulnerable CYP presents challenges to researchers and CYP calling for all to demonstrate reflexivity and awareness of biases, strengths and limitations. Used appropriately and well, co‐production offers benefits to researchers and CYP and can contribute to research that reflects the needs of vulnerable CYP. Adherence to the key principles of inclusion, safeguarding, respect and well‐being facilitates this approach. Patient and Public Contribution: Members of our patient and public involvement and stakeholder groups contributed to the interpretation of the review findings. This manuscript was written together with a young care leaver, Skye Boswell, who is one of the authors. She contributed to the preparation of the manuscript, reviewing the findings and their interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]