Scholarly article on topic 'The Balance of Power in Household Decision-Making: Encouraging News on Gender in Southern Sulawesi'

The Balance of Power in Household Decision-Making: Encouraging News on Gender in Southern Sulawesi Academic research paper on "History and archaeology"

Share paper
Academic journal
World Development
OECD Field of science
{Asia / Indonesia / food / money / "life chance" / violence}

Abstract of research paper on History and archaeology, author of scientific article — Carol J. Pierce Colfer, Ramadhani Achdiawan, James M. Roshetko, Elok Mulyoutami, E. Linda Yuliani, et al.

Summary Analyses of intra-household decision-making in Sulawesi are linked to gender issues shown to affect involvement in landscape management. These include agriculture, food, money, life chances, and attitudes toward domestic violence. The picture portrayed is encouraging, showing the social sophistication of a group often marginalized: This group shows considerable female involvement in decision-making and strongly democratic elements. We identify three issues that need greater attention—for equitable landscape management to result: women’s spheres of decision-making must be ascertained and taken into account, men’s involvement in care needs to expand, and women’s agency requires enhancement and external support.

Academic research paper on topic "The Balance of Power in Household Decision-Making: Encouraging News on Gender in Southern Sulawesi"

World Development Vol. 76, pp. 147-164, 2015 0305-750X/© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://


The Balance of Power in Household Decision-Making: Encouraging News on Gender in Southern Sulawesi



a Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia b Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA c World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), Indonesia d Radboud University of Nijmegen, Netherlands e Balang, South Sulawesi, Indonesia f World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), Bogor, Indonesia

Summary. — Analyses of intra-household decision-making in Sulawesi are linked to gender issues shown to affect involvement in landscape management. These include agriculture, food, money, life chances, and attitudes toward domestic violence. The picture portrayed is encouraging, showing the social sophistication of a group often marginalized: This group shows considerable female involvement in decision-making and strongly democratic elements. We identify three issues that need greater attention—for equitable landscape management to result: women's spheres of decision-making must be ascertained and taken into account, men's involvement in care needs to expand, and women's agency requires enhancement and external support.

© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( by/4.0/).

Key words — Asia, Indonesia, food, money, life chance, violence



Women continue to be disadvantaged by.. .exclusion from decision-making at household, community and national levels.

[Catacutan, McGaw, and Llanza (2014)]


Why are women still missing from landscape governance processes? Who is making the micro-level decisions that affect people's daily lives, ultimately feeding into meso-scale decisions? These were key questions that prompted our study.

These questions emerged as key in the AgFor project,1 designed to enhance collaborative management of landscapes in Sulawesi. AgFor researchers have found, not unusually, that involving women and (to some extent) men in landscape governance 2 has proven difficult. Evidence from Sulawesi and other parts of Indonesia suggests women's comparatively active decision-making roles. Why then were these women— like women elsewhere—so invisible at larger scales and in more formal settings?

Some of the patterns we observed suggested impediments to women's involvement, varying by site, but linked to norms and obligations at home:

• Women's lesser educational levels and knowledge of national languages, resulting in less self-confidence and discomfort speaking up among men.

• Lack of childcare to travel or attend meetings.

• Cultural domestic prescriptions for women, conflicting with timing of formal meetings.

• Women's generalized time constraints.

• Local men's reluctance to expose women to alien gender norms and/or outsiders' negative stereotypes.

• Taboos/discomfort with women's travel (and recognized dangers therein).

• Subtle and overt exclusion (more pronounced for women than men) by high prestige visitors.

Although all of these, important to varying degrees globally, can interfere with women's involvement in formal landscape governance, all are amenable to change (whether endogenous or externally stimulated). Such change can build on men's cooperation, governmental flexibility and attitude change, changing economic conditions, and/or discussion of ways to overcome these constraints.

We realized that decision-making within the household was a key factor.3 There is a lack of logic in asking these women, typically burdened with both agricultural and domestic responsibilities, to become more involved in agroforestry or governance, without corresponding changes in men's workload (e.g., contributing to vital household tasks that women currently perform, e.g., Lewis & Giullari, 2006). Just how strong a voice did these women have within their own households

* This article and the research on which it is based were supported by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), by the gender program of the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research Centers' (CGIAR) Collaborative Research Support Program, Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (CRP6/FTA), and by the ICRAF-led Project, Agroforestry and Forestry in Sulawesi: Linking Knowledge to Action (AgFor; Contribution Arrangement No. 7056890, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), Government of Canada (2011-2016). We acknowledge with gratitude the financial support of CIFOR's Gender Program, specifically that of Esther Mwangi, and the constructive critiques of earlier drafts by Alice Beban-France, Tania Li and Penny Van Esterik, as well as two anonymous reviewers—though we alone bear responsibility for any remaining errors as well as two anonymous reviewers. Final revision accepted: June 6, 2015.

and in their family fields? And how involved were men in household decisions?

To answer these questions, we first asked a sample of villagers about the decisions they made in the management of fields and crops. But we added to these, decisions from what is typically termed the reproductive (or domestic) sphere— the sphere most closely associated with women.4

Groups vary greatly in the degree to which they under-value women, but within the development community writ large, women have been the more consistently ignored gender. Once truly invisible, in recent years their value has been measured with economics in mind: by their formal productivity, their wage earning capacity, their contribution to GDP, their educational level (all lower than men's, on average); or they have been identified as passive victims, their capabilities, contributions, and hopes for the future ignored.5 Here we build on the view of rural men and women as actors, constrained by a variety of contextual realities, but actors nonetheless, with capabilities, interests, and hopes of their own.

We recognize too that for human beings to subsist and flourish, both productive and reproductive tasks must be accomplished. A number of scholars have argued that the analytic differentiation between production and reproduction itself has been a factor in women's invisibility. Van Esterik and Greiner (1981) and Folbre (2006) provide useful examples of the fuzzy boundaries between these categories. More recently Razavi (2011) edited a special issue of Development and Change on the related subject of care.

(a) A need for re-framing

Barker (2014), a student of "men and development", has concluded that,

".. .men and boys doing gender justice and achieving richer and fuller (including healthier and less violent) lives - and women and girls achieving their full potential in political, social and work spheres -requires nothing less than a radical redistribution of care work."

[(p. 85; also called for by Razavi, 2002).]

We too call for a global re-framing, such that these ubiquitous and crucial, home-based tasks are recognized and appreciated comparably6—requiring a move away from the production-reproduction dichotomy, most likely. This requires looking at lives (and research) holistically. It also requires building on whatever domestic activities men are currently doing. Inviting, even demanding, women's increasing involvement in agricultural production and governance spawns this question: What happens to women's current roles? Van Esterik (1999) called for a "vocabulary of care"; Folbre (2006) for measuring "the care economy". Lewis and Giullari (2006) note the interdependence among human capabilities and their dependence in turn on the care we have received and are able to provide. They go on to argue that,

"Women's agency is situated in relationships of care, and therefore that concern for others needs to be taken seriously as an expression of autonomy.. .[T]he key issue is.. .how to promote conditions that foster responsibility for sharing care between men and women and that enhance women's agency freedom by making men more accountable for their responsibility to care for others.. ..It is only when all persons are conceived from the start as autonomous and interdependent—that is as persons who need, give and receive care.. .that gender equality in respect of agency freedom can be embraced." (p. 184).

There is wider agreement on the global stage that people everywhere deserve equal rights to self-determination and self-actualization—which may variously require moving beyond the domestic sphere or becoming more involved in it.

Although mechanisms like legislation can serve as spurs to changing gender norms and behavior (Doss, 2013, provides positive, gender-relevant examples), ultimately these issues will require discussion, evidence, and thought.. .and eventually a change in values. Culturally appropriate solutions will require women and men to think together about ways forward (see Bujra, 2002, for a discussion of such successful change in Africa; or Welsh, 2011, in Nicaragua).

(b) Care, agency, bargaining, and ethnography

Our study provides an example of some needed evidence on gendered decision-making—one piece of the puzzle. Here, we outline some of the works that have influenced our thinking, focusing on care and agency, followed by brief mention of bargaining and ethnographic holism.

(i) On dualities, hegemonies, and the " vocabulary of care"

Dualistic distinctions like production-reproduction may not

be helpful and indeed may limit our efforts to achieve the gender equity we see as integral to human and landscape health. Our (collective) previous focus on women or men—yet another duality—has been misguided; we have imagined instead their shared humanity, equivalence or complementarity, and the relations between them. The unusually gender-equitable traditional systems of ethnic groups like the Tolaki (discussed below) can perhaps provide partial models for those who hope to involve women and men effectively in governance and at broader scales.

Van Esterik (1999), noting the global concern for food security, has argued for more attention to the rights to be fed, to food, and to feed others. Such a concern has both landscape implications and leads directly to women's lives, to a coalescing of what we've thought of as production and reproduction.

The field of "men in development" has emphasized the notion of "hegemonic masculinity"—the idea that "real men" [everywhere] must demonstrate their achievement of manhood by being successful breadwinners, powerful, strong, and in control of their families (see collections by Bannon & Correia, 2006; Cornwall, Edstrom, & Greig, 2011b; Inhorn, Tjornhoj-Thomsen, Goldberg, & Mosegaard, 2009). In many areas, such an ideal is demonstrable.

However, for parts of Southeast Asia, this notion does not fit in its "ideal" form7; and it is particularly inappropriate for upland groups like the Tolaki (see Atkinson, 1989; Atkinson & Errington, 1990; Errington, 1989; Li, 1998, on Sulawesi; or Andaya, 2006, for Southeast Asia generally). These groups more closely resemble the gendered egalitarian hegemony discussed in Ortner (1989-90).

Atkinson (1989), for instance, in discussing the Wana, a Central Sulawesi group similar to the Tolaki, says,

"[Wana] Men's and women's procreative and household roles are closely matched in cultural terms; nurturance is cast as a parental, not a uniquely female, act; and both women and men are food producers. Women and men are conceived to be fundamentally the same... Notions of gender are constructed as a continuum rather than as a set of dichotomies..." (p. 282). 8

The systems of the groups discussed here fit comfortably with such a "vocabulary of care" (cf. Garrity et al., 2002, on the land care movement).

(ii) On female agency

Kabeer (1999) stimulated our focus on decision-making; she defines agency as

".. .the ability to define one's goals and act upon them. Agency is about more than observable action; it also encompasses the meaning,

motivation and purpose which individuals bring to their activity, their sense of agency, or 'the power within'." (p. 438).

In trying to define and measure empowerment, for instance, Kabeer says "One way of thinking about power is in terms of the ability to make choices: to be disempowered, therefore, implies to be denied choice" (p. 436). She sees such choice as including three elements: a pre-condition pertaining to resources, agency as a process, and achievements or outcomes deriving from that process.

Boudet, Petesch, Turk, and Thumala (2012) and Petesch (2012) have looked further into agency, linking it valuably with norms and empowerment in their cross-cultural research with both women and men.9 Strengthening involvement in landscape governance requires that both women and men have a significant voice in decision-making at various levels; and that this translate into agency.

(iii) Bargaining

Another group of scholars focuses on bargaining within households (e.g., Schultz, 2001). Doss (2013) provides a useful review of this literature, focusing on causality. Much of this literature examines bargaining only between husband and wife, whereas our data suggest multiple participants often sharing decision-making. The new collection by Quisumbing et al. (2014) examines various factors that can influence a person's bargaining position within households. Mabsout and Van Staveren (2010) make a convincing case for the centrality of cultural factors (norms, institutions) in Ethiopia, concluding that "women's individual level bargaining power may be overruled by the influence of culture, and more specifically of gendered institutions in society" (p. 784). Our own results suggest that bargaining may be more relevant in very gender-inequitable conditions than in the context discussed here, where much decision-making is shared.

(iv) Ethnographic insights

We place our findings within an ethnographic context (drawn both from literature and fieldwork) precisely to get a handle on these kinds of influences. We clarify the local con-text—for readers who value and use ethnographic detail— but also show how the topics highlighted here, with locally variable specifics, inform global governance issues. Two issues with important implications for development practice include the greater voice that these women from our research sites in Sulawesi claim (supported by complementary claims from local men); and the governance advantages evident among these representatives of Tolaki ethnicity, a marginalized group, sometimes described as "primitive". Their reported decision-making practices suggest governance sophistication and equity enviable in any society.

Before proceeding, we add global reference points: The World Development Report 2012 (World Bank, 2011) identified five outcomes characterizing women's agency: "(1) control over resources, (2) ability to move freely, (3) decision making over family formation, (4) freedom from risk of violence, and (5) ability to have a voice in society and influence policy." (p. 11).

Reports by our NGO collaborators, Balang, and Mulyoutami, Martini, Khususiyah, Isnurdiansyah, and Suyanto (2012), as well as field observations, suggest that these women of southern Sulawesi have, if not completely equal access to resources, certainly significant access.10 Women's dominant access to household funds is well established (see below). Our southern Sulawesi data suggest that, by and large, the women in our study sites have a significant voice in determining the first four of the outcomes specified above; and they

are even active in the fifth, local politics. The problem of significant inequity that we have observed arises in situations where scale increases (even if only to the landscape level) and outsiders (including county level officials) enter. As politics and policymaking become more distant and formalized, opportunities for ordinary rural women to participate tend to fall out.11

Lastly, we note the discrepancy between the various gender indices—Human Development Index (HDI), Gender Development Index (GDI), 12 and Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM)13—all low for our region (Mulyoutami et al., 2012), and our own results, which suggest the existence of a much more proactive, empowered role for women within these Sulawesi households.


The AgFor sites were selected using these criteria, of particular relevance for forest-human interaction: forest cover, income, major land use systems, major smallholder crops (commodities), environmental service issues, governance issues, and potential for project intervention (with topographical and elevation variation overall). A further seven criteria were applied for the governance sites.14 From these 35 governance sites, we selected five, two in South Sulawesi and three in Southeast Sulawesi (Table 1a and b) for the research reported here. We sought to reflect local cultural diversity and take advantage of our field teams' familiarity with those sites. We anticipated somewhat different decision-making patterns based on ethnicity; and we wanted to contribute to gender studies globally, by investigating these issues in a region that many researchers have described as comparatively gender equitable (e.g., Andaya, 2006; Atkinson & Errington, 1990; Sutlive, 1991).15 We anticipated the differentiation Errington (1990) noted between Indonesian regions with loosely structured, often bilateral kinship systems (like the Tolaki) and regions with more patrilineal tendencies, more rigid rules for marriage and inheritance, and ranked hierarchies (like the Bugis and Makassar).

These rural Muslim study communities include forests, tree crops and agriculture in their hilly inland landscapes (see Figure 1; Janudianto, Khususiyah, Isnurdiansyah, Suyanto, & Roshetko, 2012); Khususiyah, Janudianto, Isnurdiansyah, Suyanto & Roshetko, 2012); Martini and Tarigan et al., 2013). In all communities, there are complex mixes of tenure (local, governmental, and/or industry), with varying levels of acceptance by different parties. The various governmental forest classifications have differing implications for local use of the landscape, and also have the potential to affect gender relations. Women's voices have been muted or non-existent in governmental decision-making about forest uses and classification.

Women in both provinces are actively involved in marketing agricultural products and are dominant in marketing agro-forestry produce (Perdana & Roshetko, 2012)—as has been observed elsewhere in Indonesia. These authors asked people in a number of project sites about species preferences. There was little difference between men's and women's prioritization of plants; but women prioritized annual crops over agro-forestry and mixed garden crops, vis-à-vis men's rankings (Martini, Roshetko, & Paramita, 2013). In all sites, men are somewhat more involved in agriculture and agroforestry production than are women; women dominate in domestic work, but are also actively involved in agricultural production, processing and sale.

Table 1. Summary of site characteristics

Population in legal settlement

Male Female

Sex ratio Ethnicity

Subdistrict, district

Main income


Extent of forest (Ha)

Status of forest

Governance issues

(a) South Sulawesi* Bonto Tappalang


Tana Toa


(b) Southeast Sulawesi** Tawanga 324

Ladongi Jaya 1976 1957

Wonua Hua 391 383


Tolaki, Balinese, Javanese, Bugis

Tolaki and Bugis

Tompo Bulu, Bantaeng

Kajang, Bulukumba





Lambuya, Konawe

Onion, chili, tomato + coffee, clove, fruit

Coffee, clove AF, rice, maize

Cacao, wild honey,

NTFP, ferns, HG*** fruit

Food crops, timber, fruit; + now, cashew, cacao, wet rice, patchouli

Bugis: cacao AF, pepper, shrubs, cloves; Tolaki: paddy & dry rice, pepper, sago, cacao AF

Hilly, 800 m asl.

80,000 Village forest

Flat, 200 m asl.


Valley surrounded by hills,

350 m asl. Flat, 90 m asl.

Approx. 500 Ha

No data

Hilly, 500 m asl.

Approx. 100 Ha

Customary forest

but categorized by

the state as Limited Production Forest

Protected forest

Protected forest, but allocated for industrial plantation

Upstream protected forest, lower

production forest

overlapping claim with people's

orchard. Process to propose for HKm

Bonto Tappalang forest was included as Labbo Village Forest (Hutan Desa), thus management, programs and funds are monopolized by Labbo Kajang customary forest was delineated as limited production forest; now 'Regional Regulations' (Perda) and Customary Forest (Hutan Adat) under discussion

Protection forest,

'illegal but legal'

logging (permit exists

but logging done in

different place)

Plans for industrial

timber plantation

(Hutan Tanaman Industri).

Village head and police/military

were aware but unmindful of

logging. Locally perceived

decrease in water supply

and quality

Policy confusion

with both

an industrial timber plantation (Hutan Tanaman Industri) & Community Forestry (Hutan Kemasyarakatan (HKm)) programs under consideration. Village head and police/military were aware but unmindful of logging.


Data from Khususiyah et al. 2012, Balang (2012), Agfor Environment Team (2014). Data from Janudianto et al. 2012, Adnan (2012), Agfor Environment Team (2014). AF = agroforestry, HG = home garden, NTFP = non timber forest product.

Figure 1.

(a) South Sulawesi16

The main ethnic group/s17 in South Sulawesi are the Bugis and the Makassar, often discussed as one (Bugis-Makassar); the Kajang (the related ethnic group that inhabits Tana Toa) are also discussed below. In comparison to the people of Southeast Sulawesi, these people's social systems tend toward more hierarchy (including greater within-community variation in wealth), and are more overtly Islamic, with a more rigid traditional gender differentiation. The Bugis-Makassar have been rulers and aggressive about acquiring new lands (see Acciaioli, 1989, 1998, 2004, among others; or in Central Sulawesi, Li, 2002; Robinson, 1986); and they fit Scott's (2009) stereotype of Southeast Asian lowlanders, though the study communities are in the hills. They have an honor and shame complex reminiscent of the Mediteranean18 (known here as siri') and a tradition of maintaining the purity of aristocratic "white blood" (similar to European "blue blood").

(i) Bonto Tappalang

Bonto Tappalang is a dramatically beautiful mountain village (cf. Gibson, 2005; Sila, 2005; on the Bugis, Acciaioli, 2004; Amarell, 2002; Errington, 1989; Idrus, 2005). Besides an emphasis on vegetables, crops include corn, cacao and cloves. Some coffee and fruits are planted in an area eventually proclaimed "protection forest" (Hutan Lindung).19 Throughout Indonesia, local and governmental perceptions of ownership and management differ. The Ministry of Forestry has designated a "Village Forest" (Hutan Desa),20 part of which lies in this community. Community members hope that this

Adnan, &

formalization will grant them additional legal rights to their coffee orchards. Land ownership is largely in the hands of elites, with community members as workers; and there has been considerable confusion about exactly who owns which parcel, according to which management type (local, Protection or Village Forest).

(ii) Tana Toa

The Kajang of Tana Toa have long been known for their unusual customs (see Akib, 2008; Hamonic, 2009; Tyson, 2009). They speak Konjo (deriving from Proto-Makassar (Hamonic, 2009), and the "inner community", Rambang Sep-pang, prohibits the use of many features of modern life (e.g., cell phones, televisions, motorcycles). Their requirement to wear dark clothing sets them apart, as does their leader, the Ammatoa (inaugurated by two ritually important women), who has legal, spiritual and land management functions. 21 One formal governmental option for acknowledging and reinforcing this functioning local system is the development of perda (or Peraturan Daerah, Regional Regulations) to protect the forest and change its formal status from "limited production forest" to customary forest (Hutan Adat). Men's and women's roles are clearly demarcated, based on Kajang customary legal precepts, with women most well known for their weaving.

(b) Southeast Sulawesi

Tawanga, the first of three sites selected in Southeast Sulawesi, is a relatively homogeneous Tolaki community; the

Map of research sites in South and Southeast Sulawesi, set within provincial and national contexts (from Yuliani, Moeliono, Mulyana,

Manalu, 2012).

second, Ladongi Jaya, a melange of eight ethnic groups, with Tolaki numerical dominance; the third, Wonua Hua,22 has a clear majority of Tolaki, with Bugis, a significant minority. The Tolaki more closely represent the uplanders described by Scott (2009), their system the most forest-dependent. Their named aristocracy is far less central ideologically than among the Bugis-Makassar—yielding more homogeneous tendencies; they tend to value smooth interpersonal relations over "honor" or "shame"; and their gender differentiation is much milder. The introduction of other ethnic groups and government programs ("development") appears to insert greater economic and gender differentiation within communities—a process that has been seen elsewhere in Indonesia (Li, 2014, in Central Sulawesi; Elmhirst, 2011, in southern Sumatra), but which Colfer, Limberg, Resosudarmo, and Dennis (2008) found in East Kalimantan to diminish with time.

Sulawesi has recently been prioritized as the center of Indonesia's cocoa production by the Ministry of Agriculture. Cocoa has become a main source of livelihood for many Sulawesi communities (Perdana & Roshetko, 2012), including our study sites.

(i) Tawanga

Perhaps the oldest Tolaki community, Tawanga is in an idyllic mountainous region in the Konaweha watershed, difficult of access, threatened with possible dam construction (3,000 ha). Their remote community is thriving, by selling cocoa; women collect wild ferns for subsistence and sale in Rate Rate (district capital of Kolaka Timur) and Kendari (provincial capital).

(ii) Ladongi Jaya

This one-time transmigration site is an ethnic mix of people: from Java (including Sundanese), Sulawesi (Bugis, Tana Tor-aja), Bali, Madura, the island of Muna, along with Tolaki. Thirty years ago, a swidden system dominated, including fruit trees, timber, and food crops. A process of Bugis entrepreneurial land acquisition, as described by Li (2002, 2007) for Central Sulawesi, appears to have occurred, in which sophisticated in-migrants have bought up local lands.

(iii) Wonua Hua

The Tolaki practice swidden agriculture on their traditional lands, located on steep, well forested slopes. Janudianto et al. (2012) summarize local land uses: "...Lalobite [Bugis in-migrant hamlet] is dominated by forests, cacao agroforests, shrubs and clove gardens; while general land use in Wonua Hoa is characterized by paddy rice, sago and cacao agro-forests" (p. 23); pepper, fruits (durian, coconut, bananas), and oil palm are also important. Mulyoutami et al. (2012) found most people owning land (as did Janudianto et al., 2012), ranging from 0.3 to 1 ha (75% owned irrigated paddy). Although men were most consistently recorded as owning land (56% of plots), husband-wife ownership (28%) and wife-only ownership (13%) were also common. Local women saw mixed-gardens as the most important livelihood source for their community and for themselves. Men, interestingly, did not consider them very important for women.


Our field teams have been involved with local communities in an ongoing manner, working iteratively to address achievable, locally defined goals. 23 The survey analyzed below was undertaken ultimately to provide indicators of change over

time; here, however, we focus on what it tells us about people's own perceptions of their decision-making roles. We assume that involvement in household decision-making indicates (a) empowerment more generally and (b) likely influence on outcomes of interest to the respondent.

Stratified sampling randomly by village has been our goal. In Tana Toa, though, our teams selected four hamlets (of nine; two from the village's outer [Rambang Luara] and two from the inner [Rambang Seppang] areas). We then selected a total of 30 individuals from the village, in a stratified random manner, 15 of each sex (from different households). Where there was significant ethnic difference, we replicated this proportionally, excluding the headman and any other elite personages. We sought the perceptions of the "common man and woman". We complemented the participatory and survey work with an extensive review of relevant social science literature, in English and Indonesian.

Our null hypotheses included that women and men would have the same level of involvement in decision-making about the following 24:

• Field crop and orchard management.

• Home garden management and food consumption.

• Income generation and household money management.

• Decisions affecting life chances.

Our goal was not to be topically comprehensive (time and local expertise were constraints likely also to plague other potential users). Instead, we constructed questions designed to shed light on relations between men and women, and on the gendered balance of involvement in making these various decisions.25 We asked respondents to indicate their level of involvement on a scale from 0 to 10 (0 = not involved at all [Tidak ikut serta sama sekali]; 10 = respondent's own decision [Menentukan sendiri]). Because of the use of 0-10 for grades in schools (10 = the best), we feared an assumption that 10 was the "best answer". We explained that we sought answers that reflected the respondent's experience (e.g., a response of 0, not involved, or perhaps of 5, indicating shared decision-making, were all equally "good" answers). These answers do not reveal who made the final decision when decisions are shared; a lack of interest may also have resulted in no involvement. Although we assume that these responses reflect practice, we cannot be sure from these data alone.

We examined decision-making in four important areas: Food production and consumption, money management, life chances, and attitudes toward domestic violence. Our interest has been in reflecting aspects of local practice likely to affect landscape management, on which one might build.26 We have not tried to explain the derivation of those practices, which is surely influenced by culture, environment, and other broader global, national, and regional trends.


Our results fall into four categories, with what we imagined might have differing balances of production vs. reproduction for the women and men involved in our study. We sought measures that were seen by the teams to have implications for women's involvement in governance, for their agency. Some of these were common measures, like involvement in agricultural or household budgetary decision-making; others, like decisions about marriage and circumcision, we saw more as possible indicators of women's relative power and authority within the household—power that may be possible to parlay up to broader contexts. We consider a person's perception that

Figure 2. Men's and women's decision-making on upland field and orchards, southern Sulawesi 2013.

Figure 3. Women's and men's decision-making on home gardens and food choices, southern Sulawesi, 2013.

he/she is involved in decision-making to be indicative of agency.

(a) Decisions about agriculture and food

Figure 2 portrays decision-making related to the upland field (lahan) and the orchard (kebun)27; Figure 3, the home garden (halaman/pekarangan rumah) and family food consumption. Specifically we asked respondents to indicate their level of involvement in upland fields and orchards (Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan perencanaan pemanfaatan lahan? and .. .kebun?, Are you involved in determining the planning about how to use [your] upland field? or .. .orchard?).

These results are the most unsurprising. In all study villages, there is a statistically significant tendency for men to claim more involvement in decision-making about upland fields. For orchards, again, a significantly greater number of men claim to dominate (though in Wonua Hua in Southeast Sulawesi, this gender difference is not significant). For both kinds of fields, men and women are typically involved, though among the people of South Sulawesi (Bonto Tappalang and

Tana Toa) some women report no involvement at all. This is not surprising, given the stronger gender differentiation among these groups.

Another study in southern Sulawesi (Mulyoutami et al., 2012) similarly concluded that men have a stronger voice in these decisions. Her team also found though that "The market chain in .. .South and Southeast Sulawesi has already taken women into account. Women have equal positions in marketing and responsibility for cacao, clove and coffee marketing" (p. 71).

We then asked about home gardens ("Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan pengelolaan halaman/pekarangan rumah?" Are you involved in determining home garden management?). In home gardens, the tendency, again statistically significant in all sites, is for women to claim to dominate decision-making. Similarly and unsurprisingly, women claim to dominate in decisions about food consumption on all sites (statistically significant; see e.g., Van Esterik, 1999; or Karim, 1995, on the

^ 90 ^

ubiquity of this relationship). The question asked was "Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan menentukan makanan (jenis, jumlah) dalam keluarga?" (Are you involved in determining food (type, amount) in [your] family?) In both cases,

men's claims to low levels of involvement suggest they concur. There are some men who claim no voice at all in both these kinds of decisions in South Sulawesi. A study by Mulyoutami et al. (2012) in the same regions notes the congruence between the domestic elements of women's roles and the proximity of home gardens to such work, commonly noted elsewhere in Southeast Asia (Cairns, 2015) and around the world (Howard's collection, 2003).

Both of our null hypotheses were rejected. These results also suggest a stronger gender division of labor for "men's fields" in these South Sulawesi communities than for those in Southeast Sulawesi (similar to governance-related findings, Colfer et al., 2015). There is more similar gender differentiation across sites within "women's domains" (food and home gardens).

(b) Decisions about money

Figures 4 and 5, on earning and managing money were included in recognition of the notion that access to cash can be a source of power within families (Dolan, 2001, on Kenya;

Manfre & Rubin, 2012, globally). Winarto and Utami (2012) concur with this view, quoting a Javanese woman:

"So, once we can earn some money, although it's not much, we improve our self-confidence. Thus, we can fulfill all our needs, so that we don't need to be afraid of our husbands because we don't entirely depend on them anymore." (p. 282).

In some areas of Indonesia, however, the possibility exists that—contrary to widespread international expectations— particularly the management of money may comprise a downward pressure on women's esteem and an upward pressure on their responsibility (Errington, 1990; or Folbre, 2006, more generally). In parts of Indonesia, personal concern over money is disvalued,29 or at least inconsistent with men's stereotypical behavior (e.g., Brenner, 1995; Peletz, 1995). Hatley (1990) summarizes:

"The association of women with money brings more disparagement than esteem, as men complain of their wives' tightfistedness and rather contemptuously attribute to women a jiwa dagang, 'soul of a trader'." (p. 182).

Figure 4. Men's and women's decision-making on having their own income and migration, southern Sulawesi, 2013.

Figure 5. Women's and men's decision-making on financial management, and marriage and circumcision parties, southern Sulawesi, 2013.

(i) Decision-making about earning money

A common assumption in gender studies is that the ability to earn one's own income is likely to enhance a woman's options (e.g., Doss, 2013, on bargaining power). Globally, men commonly restrict women's "ability to move freely" (Fleming, Barker, McCleary-Sills, & Morton, 2013)—exacer-bating women's oft-noted invisibility. There is widespread agreement that Indonesian women in many areas are free to market produce (confirmed locally in the work of Janudianto et al. (2012), Mulyoutami et al. (2012)). Constraints to many Indonesian women's movements come from childcare responsibilities and fears about their safety, though also from a sense that women traveling alone is somehow undesirable, inappropriate (cf. Tsing, 1993; or Atkinson, 1989). We anticipated this might be more relevant for the women in our sites in South Sulawesi than in Southeast.

In our data set, on seeking a source of income for one's self (Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan memiliki sumber pen-dapatan sendiri? Are you involved in the decision to have a source of your own income?), men dominate slightly. Only in Bonto Tappalang and multi-ethnic Ladongi Jaya, though, is the difference significant. These data, and the literature (Atkinson & Errington, 1990), suggest that men and women consider income generation to be a right (and duty) of both. Women in both sites report freedom to seek such income.

Income generating opportunities are often distant and circular migration is common in Indonesia (e.g., Colfer, 1985b on Kalimantan; Elmhirst, 2011, on Sumatra). In Sulawesi, Bugis-Makassar men have a long tradition of out-migration (Acciaioli, 1989, 1998; Amarell, 2002), with sometimes adverse effects on receiving populations (Li, 2002; Robinson, 1986). Acciaioli (1989) describes the process of "making a place" in Central Sulawesi, which is replicated in Southeast Sulawesi (see also Mulyoutami, Roshetko, Martini, & Janudianto, 2015). Bugis women also sometimes migrate, some cleverly subverting cultural constraints (Idrus, 2008).

Respondents answered the question, "Were you involved in decisions to out-migrate?" (Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penen-tuan merantau?)—whether the respondent's own migration or another family member's—both have implications for family income, allocation of labor, and power/authority within the household. Men are more likely to migrate; women may migrate for marketing (Idrus 2008), agricultural labor for wages nearby, or to join a distant husband.

Significant gender differences were seen in Bonto Tappalang, Wonua Hua and Ladongi Jaya—all communities with significant representation from South Sulawesi. Some respondents of both sexes claimed no involvement in such decisions (Bonto Tappalang, Tana Toa), though men in both sites more frequently reported higher levels of involvement than did women (consistent with Mulyoutami's (2014) findings in a Bugis village near Tana Toa). 30 In the Southeast Sulawesi sites, some Wonua Hua women reported no such involvement. But most people of both sexes in our sample reported intermediate levels in Tana Toa, Wonua Hua and Ladongi Jaya. In Tawanga (Tolaki), both men and women respondents claimed high levels of involvement in these decisions—a pattern replicated for governance (Colfer et al., 2015).

(ii) Managing money

In many areas of Indonesia, women control significant family assets (e.g., Brenner, 1995, on Javanese; Blackwood, 1995, on Minangkabau; Colfer, 1991, for Central Javanese transmigrants in Sumatra, and for Minangkabau control of subsistence rice production). Errington (1989) describes Makassar women's responsibility to manage household

money; women are seen as "conservers", men, "dispersers" (p. 260). Laxmi (2010) concurs about Tolaki women's financial management, and emphasizes local disdain for men who excessively meddle in women's sphere: labeled with the pejorative, tombalaki (Bergink, 1987). Among the Bugis-Makassar, the equivalent concept is kampidokang, (Mulyana's observation).

The wording of our question was "Are/Were you involved in determining the management of family money?" (Apakah Anda terlibat dalam menentukan pengelolaan keuangan kelu-arga?). Most women confirm their key decision-making role in this sphere, confirmed by men's corresponding lack of involvement—the gender difference is statistically significant. Unusually, Bonto Tappalang respondents show the most commonality between the sexes, though the only instances of claims to no involvement are our male respondents from South Sulawesi: In Tana Toa, more than half the men in our sample so reported. Moeliono links this striking non-involvement with their cultural rejection of modernity (money being a prime example).

Our Balang collaborators found in 2012 that Bonto Tap-palang men and women have roughly equal rights of traditional ownership (land inherited by each and land obtained together) 31 and completely equal decisions about use (see Doss, 2013, on complex, varying relationships between ownership and intra-household bargaining power globally). In Tana Toa, the differentiation was clearer: either the man or the woman respondent reported full ownership rights and decision-making about use (except for lands obtained together). In both communities, these women had full ownership and decision-making rights over their bride wealth,

mahar. 32

Here we shift to topics least likely to be addressed in work on landscapes and natural resources: decisions about money used in marriage ceremonies (uang adat/panai') and circumcision (sunat; boys' and girls'). Atkinson's (1989) work with the nearby Wana (similar to the Tolaki) makes the relevance for governance clear: "[F]ar from merely reflecting "a real political order" that exists in other spheres, [Wana] rituals create an order and freeze it for a moment in a cosmic frame." (p. 8, our italics).

Millar (1989) discusses Bugis weddings' role in establishing/confirming a family's status. Bugis women plan and coordinate wedding ceremonies, which increase in cost, congruent with family status; we found no other work on decisions about circumcision costs.

Female circumcision has been identified globally as problematic for women's esteem and health. Marriage and circumcisions provide opportunities for commensality (eating together), an activity that binds people together everywhere (see Greenberg, 2003; Van Esterik, 1999, 2008, for cultural implications of commensality).

For wedding costs, we asked, "Were/Are you involved in deciding the amount of bride wealth for holding your own wedding feast?" (Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan putu-san jumlah uang adat (panai') untuk melaksanakan pesta pernikahan Anda sendiri?.). Gender differentiation on this question is minimal in all villages. Women in all sites except Ladongi Jaya—the most extreme case of cultural diversity and non-involvement overall—report themselves slightly more involved than men, but no one considers him/herself to be the main decider. For both men and women in our South Sulawesi sites, there are individuals of both sexes who consider themselves to have no say in such decisions. Mulyoutami and Moe-liono see the voices of parents and elders as the strongest33: a decision emerges in discussion, elders confirm it.

Figure 6. Men's and women's decision-making related to getting married and selecting a fiance/e in southern Sulawesi, 2013.

Figure 7. Women's and men's decision-making on education and contraception in southern Sulawesi, 2013.

Figure 8. Men's and women's levels of disapproval of wife beating and shouting or not supporting a wife in southern Sulawesi, 2013.

Turning to circumcision, the incidence of male and female circumcision is relevant. Only two respondents reported that boys were not (normally) circumcised (Balinese 34 living in Ladongi Jaya). Sixteen reported girls not normally being circumcised; none from South Sulawesi or Wonua Hua. Indonesian female circumcision is not the drastic form prevalent in eastern Africa (Boudet et al., 2012); instead, a baby girl's clitoris is lightly scraped—indeed, in Shell-Duncan's (2001) definition, Indonesian circumcision of girls does not qualify.

Like wedding costs, decisions about male circumcision costs are shared; Ladongi Jaya represents the only statistically significant gender difference. Our female respondents from South Sulawesi and Wonua Hua report slightly more involvement; Ladongi Jaya and Tawanga men claim slightly more.

For female circumcision, only Tawanga shows statistically significant gender differentiation. Responses about decision-making involvement are quite similar to those for male circumcision.

(c) Decisions affecting life chances

Here we examined people's involvement in decisions about selecting a proposed spouse (jodoh), marrying (Figure 6), continuing one's education, and using contraceptives (Figure 7). All of these have significant implications for women's lives (and indeed, men's). Fleming et al. (2013) analyze ways men globally may limit women's life chances: fathers determine their daughters' husbands, husbands determine their wives' contraceptive use, men may take a daughter or wife out of school, despite abundant evidence of education's advantages.

We asked first, "Were/Are you involved in determining the choice of your own fiance/e?" (Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan pemilihan jodoh Anda sendiri?). Men's reported voices are consistently louder than women's, but without statistical significance. As on many dimensions, Bonto Tap-palang women report the least involvement, with Tawanga women and men both reporting the highest levels. In all villages, the spread of responses suggests considerable variation among families. Millar (1989) reports that Bugis men's opinions were traditionally sought about marriage partners, and that by the 1980s women sometimes were as well. Idaman and Rusland (no date) and Tarimana (1989) provide indirect evidence of young people's voices in partner selection (popular topic of conversation, courting, a father's acquiescence when a daughter threatened suicide if she wasn't allowed to marry the man of her choice). The decision definitely involves both families.

On the decision to marry "Were/Are you involved in determining your own marriage?"; "Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan pernikahan Anda sendiri?"), again men's and women's responses show no statistically significant difference, with women in Tana Toa, Wonua Hua, and Tawanga reporting slightly more involvement. Men and women in ethnically diverse Ladongi Jaya report extremely low levels of involvement in this decision, strengthening our suspicion that ethnically complex contexts result in more rigid adherence to conservative/protective gender norms (wherein parents have a strong say).

On education, we asked "Were/Are you involved in the decision to continue your own education?" (Apakah Anda terlibat dalam penentuan melanjutkan pendidikan Anda sen-diri?). The men in the two study sites in southern Sulawesi report consistently slightly higher involvement in this decision, only statistically significant in Wonua Hua. Differenti-

ating the responses from migrants (Bugis) from the Tolaki, the gender difference is greater among the Tolaki, but both Tolaki men and women report stronger voices than do migrants. Janudianto et al. (2012) found insignificant differences in actual education between men and women in Wonua Hua, but an average of just over 9 years for the Tolaki inhabitants and only 6.75 years for the migrants. In Tana Toa, respondents of both sexes report a full range from no decision-making involvement to fully deciding on their own; Bonto Tappalang is similar, though no one there reports complete autonomy. In contrast, in our Southeast Sulawesi sites, neither men nor women reported having no say in this decision, and many in Tawanga and Wonua Hua report fairly high levels of involvement.

Contraceptive use has special significance, because it allows women under most circumstances to diversify their activities. 35 Having fewer children frees time for activities like involvement in governance; yet there remain groups within Sulawesi who see contraception as a western intrusion. The South Sulawesi sites show a statistically significant gender difference, with many women having strong voices in this decision. In the Southeast Sulawesi sites, the decision appears to be more shared (with no statistical difference between men's and women's responses). Again this finding differs from many in other areas of the world. Boudet et al. (2012), for instance, talk about the intense links in men's eyes between fathering children and feelings of manhood in Tanzania and Liberia (see also Bannon & Correia, 2006; Inhorn et al., 2009); Colfer has also noted such tendencies in Turkey, Iran, and Oman, where she has extensive experience.

(d) Acceptability and practice of domestic violence

Violence against women is a global problem (Duvvury, Callan, Carney, & Raghavendra, 2013; Fleming et al., 2013), as well as in Indonesia (Bennett, Andajani-Sutjahjo, & Idrus, 2011; National Commission on Violence Against Women, 2007; Nilan, Demartoto, Broom, & Germov, 2014). Duvvury et al. (2013) found that "intimate partner violence" (IPV) is negatively linked with education, skills and working experience:

"Women with less education were more likely to experience violence and men with lower levels of education are more likely to perpetrate violence against their partners (Ackerson, Kawachi, Barbeau, & Subramanian, 2008)." (p. 11).

The ubiquity and resulting fear of violence can serve as a serious constraint to women's autonomy and agency.

Seeking to determine the local acceptability of violence against women (see Figure 8), we asked for responses to the statement "Husbands may beat their wives" (Suami boleh memukul istrinya; 0 = he can as much as he wishes [boleh semaunya]; and 10 = he is not allowed to at all [tidak boleh sama sekali]). In Wonua Hua and Ladongi Jaya—the two ethnically diverse sites 36—the women in our sample considered such violence significantly more negatively than the men. On all sites most respondents strongly disapproved of wife-beating; Tana Toa stood out as more accepting than the other sites. These levels suggest far lower acceptability of violence against women than is found in many parts of the world (cf. Gang, Xiaopei, & Jolly, 2011, for China; Mabsout & Van Staveren, 2010, for Ethiopia; Welsh, 2011, for Nicaragua).

The Southeast Sulawesi teams asked "How often do husbands here beat their wives?" (Suami disini pukul istrinya

seberapa sering?; a topic considered too sensitive in South Sulawesi): The scale was 0 (often) to 10 (never). Only in Ladongi Jaya, which also reported the greatest incidence, were there significant differences between men's and women's responses: women reported more frequent beating than did men.

In many parts of Indonesia, behavior that would elsewhere be found acceptable may be categorized as force or violence. Colfer found, for instance, in Sumatra, that people "forced" (paksa) to accept family planning, were on deeper inquiry, talking about social pressure from elites. Bennett et al. (2011) found in Nusa Tenggara that local women included verbal abuse, economic violence, control of women's mobility and a husband's public infidelity in "domestic violence", besides more extreme behavior.

Given this broad Indonesian definition, we added a question on the acceptability of "shouting or not providing economically, etc., for a wife" (Suami boleh membentak atau tidak memberi nafkah pada istri, dll.; same scale as for wife-beating). Again, such behavior was strongly disapproved within our sample, though less so than wife-beating. Again only in Ladongi Jaya was there a significant gender difference, with men finding such behavior more acceptable than did women. Tana Toa and Tawanga represented a greater range of responses than the other villages.


We begin with a broad brush summary of our findings. We then highlight some good and possibly bad news in landscape governance. Finally, we conclude with suggestions for ways forward.

(a) Summary

Obvious conclusions include reinforcement of common generalizations about the involvement of Indonesian women in agriculture and agroforestry; their responsibilities and rights in household finance; comparatively great involvement in decision-making about issues from income generation to allocation of money for central rituals to decisions affecting life chances. These data suggest a situation of comparative autonomy, if we look on a global stage.

It is also clear that many decisions are shared among household members: particularly marriage issues and costs associated with circumcision and weddings.

There are also patterns that differ by ethnic group—"differ ences that make a difference" as researchers and practitioners strive to improve landscape governance in different regions and communities. These men and women in South Sulawesi, for instance, report having less influence about migration or decisions to continue their education, than do research participants in Southeast Sulawesi. We found, in our sample, greater gender differentiation in decisions about contraception, making money, and orchard management, in the South Sulawesi sites than in Southeast Sulawesi sites.

Such differences require different collaborative approaches. Working with men and women separately, for instance, may work better where gender differentiation and male power are greater. Focused attention to oppressive elements of male gender roles can be of value, as can strengthening women's self-confidence where they have had little public experience.

In southern Sulawesi, these different tendencies between ethnic groups provide important hints for landscape management

in the respective locales. Findings such as these, however, suggest that the process of involving women in landscape management—one goal of the AgFor project—should have been easier than it has been.

(b) The good news

Besides the utility of these findings for work in southern Sulawesi, two conclusions counter common assumptions about these (and other possibly similar) peoples. The first is the agency that these findings suggest characterizes these women. Rarely are women asked to indicate their own decision-making roles; and such results are rarely disseminated within the development community. How much more common is a strong voice for women in local contexts than has been appreciated?

Strong female voices in local decision-making mean that parallels can perhaps be drawn, to more meaningfully involve them in meso-level and landscape decision-making, even at the national level. Similar parallels can be drawn based on shared decision-making or decisions in which women truly dominate (like contraception in some areas; or home gardens in all our sites). People's pride in their own cultural systems can be reinforced and used skillfully to counter the external forces that can adversely affect women (from Colfer, 1985a or Robinson, 1986 to Li, 2014).

The second globally important issue is the evidence of a more democratic system characterizing the nationally marginalized Tolaki. Our respondents in this group considered themselves—both men and women—to be more meaningfully involved in decisions than do the others surveyed. Within "development-speak", there is a tendency to grant respect to economically sophisticated groups and disdain to (or at least disregard of) groups with less familiarity with and access to money. From a governance perspective, these (and other) data suggest that disdained groups can actually have systems that more effectively invite multiple views and diverse stakeholders into decision-making processes—as true democracy requires.

Such findings have two implications for development practice: First, we should look more closely at these marginalized systems, as they may provide societal models of use more generally. Second, the variety in human systems requires greater attention if "development" is to "do no harm". The South Sulawesi sites, with greater social stratification and stronger hierarchy, must be approached somewhat differently from those in Southeast Sulawesi. In some, women's voices ring loud and clear (Tawanga); in others, less so (Ladongi Jaya).

(c) And the bad

A third implication—arising from our research results and which therefore we have not yet been able more systematically to explore—could have far-reaching implications: the probability that communities of mixed ethnicity present more barriers to women's participation in decision-making and public life. A related likelihood is that the intrusion of governmental and other external actors can have the same adverse effects. In Indonesia, for instance, under Soeharto, there were powerful policy narratives that built on inequitable external gender stereotypes and reduced women's expected behavior and life options to housewifery. Doss, in summarizing literature on cooperative bargaining within households, cautions, ".. .that policies that change the external options of individuals [as many Indonesian policies do] will affect their bargaining power within the household and thus will affect outcomes" (p. 54).37

(d) Implications for action

We are cognizant of Cornwall, Edstrom, and Greig's (2011a) warnings of "the tendency in development discourse toward highly reified representations of women and girls as heroines and victims and men as perpetrators" (p. 15)—a tendency particularly inappropriate in these villages in southern Sulawesi. Besides encouraging attention to norms and "hetero-normativity",38 these authors call for more attention to "the play of power" in development interventions, and "the role of international development agencies in reproducing inequitable sex and gender orders" (p. 16).39 Such attention will require more ethnographic work and/or attention to the ethnographic literature, to ascertain local patterns, both of local people and of development actors.

There are also encouraging national trends at play: Representative bodies at all levels have been mandated to include 1/3 female participation (a goal not yet achieved); there is a vibrant feminist community in Indonesia that has exerted particular pressure with regard to domestic violence; and there is now a formal policy to "mainstream" gender. The international emphasis on gender in the Millenium Development Goals appears also to have had a positive effect in making gender more visible and acceptable in policy circles (e.g., a women's movement against corruption initiated through social media, the Presidential appointment of an all-female selection committee for the national anti-corruption committee, and 8 women of 34 ministers, the highest proportion in Indonesian history).

A reminder of the ubiquity of effects that local human contexts/people have on how larger scale policies are implemented is also important (Tsing, 2005).

Here, linking the findings of this study with the broader literature, we make three additional points: First, we need to increase attention to women's "productive roles", including attention to: the actual fields and spheres where they work and make decisions; the need for childcare at meetings and places of work; and the integration of productive and reproductive work in rural people's lives (e.g., the probable need for access to birth control).

Second, relatedly, we urge greater attention to the home as the site of activities that contribute to human well-being, whether production in home gardens or reproduction in feeding infants. As Van Esterik (1999) points out, "Home is [where] food rights, cultural rights and the rights of women intersect most clearly" (p. 230; or see Greenberg, 2003, and O'Connor, 2014, on cuisine and identity). A related concern is that when women involve themselves in larger scale activi-ties—as we believe they must in order to avoid losing the comparatively benign situation in which these women currently find themselves—men must take a more responsible role within the household (see Barker, 2014; Edstrom, Das, & Dolan, 2014; Lewis & Giullari, 2006; Razavi, 2002; and long ago, Van Esterik & Greiner, 1981). Chopra (2011) concludes

"The shift of perspective [in gender research] toward including men means that we must pair 'relational autonomy' [for women] with another key idea: 'men as supportive partners'.. ..[T]his coupling enables us to amplify both autonomy and supportive partnership as belonging simultaneously to the domains of the public-political and the familial, and encourages us to view both at once." (p. 139).

Finally, we see studies per se as comparatively impotent to influence gendered realities. The most useful, in fact perhaps the only viable, mechanism for changing people's attitudes— as greater involvement of men in work at home, and more attention by development experts to spheres outside conventional "production", imply—requires communication, interaction and discussion of alternatives, impediments, and possible benign change. It requires the "process" of agency identified by Kabeer.

Building on her experience in Central Sulawesi, Li (2002) concludes,

"On another scale of analysis, the social, economic and ecological trajectory of the world's great cocoa booms is quite well understood: the patterns of displacement and accumulation currently being experienced in Sulawesi, and the post-boom dislocation that is yet to come, have occurred elsewhere (see also Li, 2014). Surely this information could be shared, discussed, and incorporated into the projects of the farmers, village leaders, and regional planners who hope and expect cocoa to bring about a miracle of'development'." (p. 434) [our italics].

The processes of women's disempowerment that can attend cash crop booms and other changes involving the introduction of alien actors and institutions are equally well documented. We have ample evidence that working collaboratively with women and men farmers and forest dwellers can effectively incorporate their cultural perspectives, improve needed skills (analysis, planning, implementation, negotiation, networking, conflict management), and strengthen people's sense of their own agency (e.g., Colfer, 2005a, 2005b); Yuliani et al., 2014; and others on But efforts to collaborate in this fashion at broader scales have run into roadblocks (e.g., Colfer & Pfund, 2011; or Colfer et al., 2011); a central one being serious constraints—time, norms, fear, outsiders' assumptions— to women's involvement.

Achieving gender equity at broader landscape scales, even in remarkably egalitarian systems, will require varying degrees of change in gender norms, for local people, for researchers and for development specialists. We close emphasizing that our work provides a rare note of optimism in a usually dreary accounting of gender relations: women's situation isn't so bad in these communities in southern Sulawesi; although men retain a somewhat privileged position, hegemonic masculinity is scarcely visible there. We would like to be able to say the same thing at the landscape level. More broadly, perhaps we should be looking for the good examples to follow and build on, as much as (or rather than?) pointing out what's wretched in gender relations.

1. The AgFor Project is coordinated by the World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), which also leads the project's Livelihoods and Environment components; the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) leads the Governance component, of which this research is a part. AgFor's overall goal is "Improved equitable and sustainable agroforestry- and forestry-based livelihoods systems for women and men in rural commu-

nities." The governance component has an intermediate objective of "Increased equitable involvement of women and men in participatory governance of land use and natural resources at sub-district and district levels (Dahlia, Roshetko, & Finlayson, 2012). The governance team has used both adaptive collaborative management (ACM, acm) and appreciative inquiry (Yuliani, Adnan, Colfer, & Indriatmoko,

2014) approaches. The team works closely with local people to manage local landscapes for better human and ecological outcomes; yet the project has consistently failed to meet its own targets for women's involvement. It became clear that domestic and private issues were in conflict with women's potential involvement in landscape governance. The survey reported herein is part of a baseline of indicators, designed to be examined again at the end of the project.

2. In light of the global human and geographical diversity and dynamism, landscape management/governance are inherently fuzzy concepts (, Sunderland 2014; also argued by Gorg, 2007). However, within this Sulawesi context, we have sought to encourage and improve the integrated care of landscapes and ecosystems by local stakeholders through enhancing their capacity and building on their own interests. The anticipated result of such efforts is whole-landscape management schemes that encourage people to protect natural resources while benefiting from the environmental services provided by those resources.

3. This research began with issues directly relevant for governance, looking specifically at women's and men's involvement in local level governance and at their skills in this sphere (Colfer et al., 2013; 2015).

4. 'Reproduction' in this usage refers to the totality of action, thought, and collaboration that contributes to the reproduction of human life. Examples include the familiar pregnancy and childbirth, but also care of children, the sick, the elderly, bathing, cleaning, washing, cooking, feeding, etc. See Razavi (2011), for more formal treatment of these concepts.

5. Conceptual filters, extant diversity, lack of data, and analytical blinders can all interfere with human interpretations of any data; this is doubly true of gender, which all human beings see through their/our own gendered experience, the gender lenses available from one's own experience and culture.

6. Such a shift would also address the critique of (Hickel, 2014) who, while recognizing the disadvantages under which women and girls tend to operate globally, outlines his suspicions about the underlying, more corporate/neoliberal motivations for some of the efforts to bring more women and girls into the [cheap] labor force.

7. We recognize that the men with whom we worked in Sulawesi remain in a comparatively advantageous position vis-a-vis women; but in our experience, any ideology of male superiority (such as some ideas associated with Islam) is muted, ideals of male behavior do not emphasize overt control of women, men expect to share responsibility for their families' economic well being. See Li (1998) for a discussion of some of the subtleties of inequity in this region.

8. She acknowledges, in discussing Wana shamanship, that "some men, by pressing beyond the limits of ordinary experience, are somehow more so" (p. 282).

9. This work continues, in a new phase, within the Consultative Group of International Agricultural Resource Centers (under J. Ashby's leadership).

10. Still, see Li (1998), for a discussion of how rules that seem fair can ultimately work to men's advantage; or Atkinson (1989) for comparable political observations among the Wana, both in Central Sulawesi.

11. Despite these rural observations and findings, senior district level (kabupaten) Forestry officials in Bulukumba, South Sulawesi are all women. Those we met were well educated, articulate, and from the aristocratic Makassar class—a present-day parallel to Stoler's (1977) analysis of class and gender in Java.

12. The HDI is a simple or composite measurement based on three data sources: life expectancy, educational enrollments, and standard of living. The GDI uses the same data to measure development progress for women and men.

13. The GEM consists of three key components; political involvement, women as professionals, and women's contribution toward economic income.

14. These included significant forest cover; forest governance issues; high dependency/identity/value on forest resources and services; low to medium conflict among key stakeholders; functioning local or traditional forest/agroforest management system; potential for ecosystem services (e.g., microhydro, ecotourism, orchids, rattan, birds); willingness to participate in governance and learning processes.

15. Esther Mwangi has noted the importance of recognizing the biased ways in which gender has been studied in much of the world when making such comparisons; and the inaccessibility to researchers of women's views (largely through researchers' own biases). We find this argument compelling, particularly for parts of Africa and the Middle East where women's power has been present but particularly invisible to outsiders. We are not in any way suggesting that southern Sulawesi represents a kind of gender Utopia.

16. Additional detail is available in Colfer et al. (2013, (2015).

17. We are fully aware of both the fuzzy boundaries between any given sets of people labeled as ethnic groups (suku; e.g., Miles, 1976), and the dynamism that exists within any group so labeled, over time. We use these labels to reflect identifiable general patterns or tendencies that we expect to be relevant in working with these communities. There is no doubt that individuals vary, as do communities, as they interact with other groups and change over time.

18. Peristiany (1966), who also ties his analysis closely to gender, says, in his seminal work on this subject: "Honor is the apex of the pyramid of temporal social values and it conditions their hierarchical order. Cutting across all other social classifications it divides social beings into two fundamental categories, those endowed with honor and those deprived of it."

19. Such plantings and future ones have been rendered legal, as the people have received a permit under the GNRHL Program (Gerakan Nasional Rehabilitasi Hutan dan Lahan, National Movement to Rehabilitate Forests and Lands) allowing them to practice Agroforestry, including coffee, in this forest.

20. Akiefnawati et al. (2010) provide a clear description of this legislation (Minister of Forestry Decision No. P. 49/Menhut-II/2008, August 25) as well as its implementation in a Sumatran village.

21. Interestingly, the Ammatoa, like Gibson (2007), recognizes three spheres of law: Pasang (customary), Salang (Islamic), and formal governmental law. See also Blackwood (1995), for a thorough analysis of the gender implications of these three spheres among the Minangkabau (Sumatra).

22. Variations exist in spelling the name of this village.

23. The original intent of the project was to identify local goals and work toward those; but it soon became apparent that this would be impossible, given the illegality of some such goals. The alteration has been to work toward "facilitating collaboration between local people and government" to achieve goals that are both legal and beneficial to people and the forests. From the standpoint of sustainability, this is likely a second-best alternative.

24. In our statistical tests, we used the Mann-Whitney U test, to determine whether the median responses differed by gender. This test was selected because we were dealing with discrete scores (ranks from 0 to 10, indicating level of importance or preference). Mann-Whitney U assumes that two populations are independent; we avoided respondents from the same household. When the null hypothesis is rejected (i.e., the differences are statistically significant), the center value (or rank) of one population is greater/smaller than the other. We use two asterisks (**) in our figures when the p-value <0.01 and one asterisk (*) when it is <0.05.

25. The congruence between the issues examined here and the new indicators proposed by Harper, Nowacka, Alder, and Ferrant (2014) to track ".. .changes in social norms that signal the growing empowerment of women and girls" is encouraging.

26. We also have hoped that others might find this instrument useful in determining comparable information in other locales. We believe that the relevance of these particular results will diminish with geographical/cultural distance; but the kinds of questions asked, the issues raised, have much wider applicability.

27. Kebun is a word with many meanings. In southern Sulawesi, it typically refers to a family's tree crops (especially cacao in these sites), but it can also refer to fields of more intensively managed vegetables (chili, tomatoes, etc.), particularly those intended for sale. Considering the AgFor goal of diversifying local agroforestry systems and the complexity of the Southeast Sulawesi farming systems described by Janudianto et al. (2012), we were reminded of Li's (2007) observations about projects learning from farmers rather than farmers learning from projects.

28. Van Esterik (1999) usefully examines the issue of food security (or now, food sovereignty). She looks at three rights: the right to be fed, to food, and to feed—all particularly relevant for women's lives. Karim (1995), on Southeast Asia in general, says "Indeed in Malay and many other Indonesian communities, the person who distributes the food is as important as the person who brings it in" (p. 62).

29. This is not to say there is not locally legitimate, even valued, interest in making money (e.g., Acciaioli, 1998; 2004, on the Bugis). Roshetko questions this general cultural dismissal of money management, but Colfer finds it compelling. Her own evidence includes men's common willingness to pick up expensive tabs that they cannot afford, flat dismissals of suggestions to split costs, a discomfort among some ethnic groups with dealing with money at all (e.g., Colfer, 2008), the rarity of male sellers in many markets. Colfer too has heard the dismissal in people's voices when referring to the "soul of a trader". As with any cultural 'trait', there is likely to be location-specific variability; cultural observations are useful for alerting us to possibilities, rather than providing us with firm answers.

30. In Mulyoutami's dataset, of all responding households with a migrating family member, 55% felt that the husband had the deciding voice in migration decisions, 18% said the wife had a bigger say; and 5% said the decision was taken by the migrants' parents. Of the 23% making the decision themselves, the woman/daughter made the decision in 6% of cases; the man/son, in 16%.

31. Mulyoutami found that in the formal legal system, women were somewhat disadvantaged.

32. Luithu and Tugendhat (2013) consider bride price and dowry to be forms of violence against (indigenous) women, as they can be in some situations. However, this does not seem to be the case for the Tolaki (the group likely to be classified as "indigenous").

33. Alice Beban-France, a Cornell doctoral candidate, notes a similar pattern in Cambodia, where older women have the strongest voices in these decisions (pers. comm. July 2014).

34. Balinese are usually Hindu and are not known for practicing circumcision.

35. Colfer, Dudley, and Gardner (2008) use causal loop diagrams to clarify some relations that often exist between women's ability to control their fertility on the one hand, and health, education, work (subsistence and paid) and public and private status/autonomy, on the other.

36. Cf. the new national study by Mavridis (2015), showing lower levels of trust in Indonesia's ethnically diverse areas. His findings suggest likely greater inter-ethnic antagonism in the 'polarized' setting of Wonua Hua (with two main ethnic groups) vis-a-vis the 'fractionalized' setting of Ladongi Jaya, with many ethnicities.

37. These are not always negative, of course: Several cases Doss (2013) reviews show that ".. .the exogenous shift [spurred by more gender-equitable policies] in female bargaining power translates into positive outcomes for women and their children" (p. 60).

38. The gender diversity one encounters in southern Sulawesi makes this concern particularly relevant (see Graham-Davies, 2004, or Melamba et al., 2011, on locally accepted alternatives to hetero-normativity; or Dawson, 2008, and Elmhirst & Resurreccion, 2008, on pressures toward hetero-normativity exerted by the Soeharto regime).

39. Dawson (2008) explains that"Transmigration policy and documents reflect a conventional bureaucratic conceptualization of the nuclear family household as uniform, constant and discrete. This ideal is a hierarchical and asymmetrical arrangement in which the man is located at the apex as head (kepala keluarga or KK) with priority in entitlements to its material resources. As household head, he has the designated role of income earner and representative of the household in the public domain. On the other hand, the woman rarely emerges except to be assigned the subordinate position of household manager with responsibility for domestic work and child care" (p. 45).


Acciaioli, G. L. (1989). Searching for good fortune: The making of a Bugis shore community at Lake Lindu, Central Sulawesi. Canberra: Australian National University. Acciaioli, G. L. (1998). Bugis entrepreneurialism and resource use: Structure and practice. Antropologi Indonesia, 57, 81-91.

Acciaioli, G. L. (2004). From economic actor to moral agent: Knowledge, fate and hierarchy among the Bugis of Sulawesi. Indonesia, 78, 147-179.

Ackerson, L. K., Kawachi, I., Barbeau, E. M., & Subramanian, S. V. (2008). Effects of individual and proximate educational context on

intimate partner violence: A population-based study of women in India. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 507-514.

Adnan, H. (2012). Laporan Baseline Study AgFor: Desa Tawang dan Kelurahan Sanggona. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research.

Agfor Environment Team, S. S. (2014). Profil Klaster 'Konawe' (Desa Wonua Hoa, Asaki, Rawua, Anggawo), Zona: Konaweha Tengah, Kabupatent Konawe, Propinsi Sulawesi Tenggara [Cluster Profile 'Konawe' (the Villages of Wonua Hoa, Asaki, Rawua, Anggawo), Zone: Central Konaweha, Konawe District, Southeast Sulawesi Province]. Bogor, Indonesia: World Agroforestry Center.

Akib, Y. (2008). Ammatoa: Komunitas berbaju hitam [Ammatoa: Black-shirted community]. Makassar, Indonesia: Pustaka Refleksi.

Akiefnawati, R., Villamor, G. B., Zulfikar, F., Budisetiawan, I., Muly-outami, E., Ayat, A., et al. (2010). Stewardship agreement to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD): Case study from Lubuk Beringin's Hutan Desa, Jambi Province, Sumatra, Indonesia. International Forestry Review, 12, 349-360.

Amarell, G. (2002). Bugis migration and modes of adaptation to local situations. Ethnology, 41(1), 51-67.

Andaya, B. W. (2006). The flaming womb: Repositioning women in early modern Southeast Asia. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Press.

Atkinson, J. M. (1989). The art and politics of Wana shamanship. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Atkinson, J. M., & Errington, S. (Eds.) (1990). Power and difference: Gender in island Southeast Asia. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Balang (2012). Laporan Keuangan Triwulan I: Program Agfor Governance, Sulawesi Selatan (Juni-Agustus) [Quarterly Financial Report 1: Program Agfor Governance, South Sulawesi (June-August). Bogor, Indonesia: Balang & CIFOR.

Bannon, I., & Correia, M. C. (Eds.) (2006). The other half of gender: Men's issues in development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Barker, G. (2014). A radical agenda for men's caregiving. IDS Bulletin, 45(1), 85-90.

Bennett, L. R., Andajani-Sutjahjo, S., & Idrus, N. I. (2011). Domestic violence in Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia: Married women's definitions and experiences of violence in the home. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 12(2), 146-163.

Bergink, D. (1987). The Tolaki female gender in procreation and production. In E. Locher-Scholten, & A. Niehof (Eds.), Indonesian women in focus: Past and present notions (pp. 152-165). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris Publications Holland.

Blackwood, E. (1995). Senior women, model mothers, and dutiful wives: Managing gender contradictions in a Minangkabau village. In A. Ong, & M. G. Peletz (Eds.), Bewitching women, pious men: Gender and body politics in Southeast Asia (pp. 124-158). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Boudet, A. M. M., Petesch, P., Turk, C., & Thumala, A. (2012). On norms and agency: Conversations about gender equality with women and men in 20 countries. Washington, DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development /The World Bank.

Brenner, S. A. (1995). Why women rule the roost: Rethinking Javanese ideologies of gender and self-control. In A. Ong, & M. G. Peletz (Eds.), Bewitching women, pious men: Gender and body politics in Southeast Asia (pp. 19-50). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Bujra, J. (2002). Targeting men for a change: AIDS discourse and activism in Africa. In F. Cleaver (Ed.), Masculinities matter! Men, gender and development (pp. 209-234). New York, NY: Zed Books.

Cairns, M. (Ed.). (2015). Shifting cultivation and environmental change: Indigenous people, agriculture and forest conservation. London: Earth-scan.

Catacutan, D., McGaw, E., & Llanza, M. (Eds.) (2014). In equal measure: A user guide to gender analysis in agroforestry. Manila, Philippines: ICRAF.

Chopra, R. (2011). Local lives, global dialogues: Shifting discourses of masculinity in India. In A. Cornwall, J. Edstrom, & A. Greig (Eds.), Men and development: Politicizing masculinities (pp. 139-152). London, UK: Zed Books.

Colfer, C. J. P. (1991). Toward sustainable agriculture in the humid tropics: Building on the Tropsoils experience in Indonesia (Vol. No. 91/02). Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.

Colfer, C. J. P. (2005a). The equitable forest: Diversity, community and resource management. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future/ CIFOR.

Colfer, C. J. P. (2005b). The complex forest: Communities, uncertainty, and adaptive collaborative management. Washington, DC: RFF/CIFOR.

Colfer, C. J. P. (2008). The longhouse of the tarsier: Changing landscapes, gender and well being in Borneo (Vol. 10). Phillips, ME: Borneo Research Council, in cooperation with CIFOR and UNESCO.

Colfer, C. J. P., Achdiawan, R., Adnan, H., Erni Yuliani, E. L., & Balang (2013). Gender and natural resource governance indicators: A need to assess and address 'sensitive and taboo' topics. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 22, 143-155.

Colfer, C. J. P., Andriamampandry, E., Asaha, S., Lyimo, E., Martini, E., Pfund, J.-L., et al. (2011). Participatory action research for catalyzing adaptive management: Analysis of a 'fits and starts' process. Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 5(1), 28-43.

Colfer, C. J. P., Achdiawan, R., Adnan, H., Moeliono, M., Mulyana, A., Mulyoutami, E., et al. (2015). Preparing the ground for better landscape governance: Gendered realities in Southern Sulawesi. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 24, 59-83.

Colfer, C. J. P., Dudley, R. G., & Gardner, R. (2008). Forest women, health and childbearing. In Colfer (Ed.), Human health and forests: A global overview of issues, practice and policy. London: Earthscan.

Colfer, C. J. P. (1985a). Female status and action in two Dayak communities. In M. J. Goodman (Ed.), Women in Asia and the Pacific: Toward an East-West dialogue. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, [republished in Colfer 2008].

Colfer, C. J. P., Limberg, G., Resosudarmo, I. A. P., & Dennis, R. (2008). From national to local scales: The Uma' Jalan in temporal context. In C. J. P. Colfer (Ed.), The longhouse of the tarsier. The Borneo Research Council/CIFOR/UNESCO: Philipps, Maine.

Colfer, C. J. P., & Pfund, J.-L. (Eds.) (2011). Collaborative governance of tropical landscapes. London, UK: Earthscan, CIFOR.

Colfer, C. J. P. (1985b). On circular migration: From the distaff side. In G. Standing (Ed.), Labour circulation and the labour process. London, UK: Croom Helm, [republished in Colfer 2008].

Cornwall, A., Edstrom, J., & Greig, A. (Eds.) (2011b). Men and development: Politicizing masculinities. London, UK: Zed Books.

Cornwall, A., Edstrom, J., & Greig, A. (2011a). Introduction: Politicizing masculinities in development. In A. Cornwall, J. Edstrom, & A. Greig (Eds.), Men and development: Politicizing masculinities (pp. 1-18). London, UK: Zed Books.

Dahlia, L., Roshetko, J. R., & Finlayson, R. (2012). Agfor Sulawesi. Newsletter, 1, 4.

Dawson, G. (2008). Keeping rice in the pot: Women and work in a transmigration settlement. In M. Ford, & L. Parker (Eds.), Women and work in Indonesia (pp. 40-60). NY: Routledge.

Dolan, C. S. (2001). The 'good wife': Struggles over resources in the Kenyan horticultural sector. Journal of Development Studies, 37(3), 39-70.

Doss, C. (2013). Intrahousehold bargaining and resource allocation in developing countries. The World Bank Research Observer, 28, 52-78.

Duvvury, N., Callan, A., Carney, P., & Raghavendra, S. (2013). Intimate partner violence: Economic costs and implications for growth and development. Women's Voice, Agency and Participation Research Series, 3, 91.

Edstrom, J., Das, A., & Dolan, C. (2014). Introduction: Undressing patriarchy and masculinities to re-politicise gender. IDS, 45(1), 1-10.

Elmhirst, R. (2011). Migrant pathways to resource access in Lampung's political forest: Gender, citizenship and creative conjugality. Geoforum, 42, 173-183.

Elmhirst, R., & Resurreccion, B. P. (2008). Gender, environment and natural resource management: New dimensions, new debates. In B. P. Resurreccion, & R. Elmhirst (Eds.), Gender and natural resource management: Livelihoods, mobility and interventions (pp. 3-20). London, UK: Earthscan.

Errington, S. (1989). Meaning and power in a Southeast Asian realm. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Errington, S. (1990). Recasting sex, gender and power: A theoretical and regional overview. In J. M. Atkinson, & S. Errington (Eds.), Power and difference: Gender in island Southeast Asia (pp. 1-58). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Fleming, P. J., Barker, G., McCleary-Sills, J., & Morton, M. (2013). Engaging men and boys in advancing women's agency: Where we stand and new directions. Women's Voice, Agency, & Participation Research Series, 1, 79.

Folbre, N. (2006). Measuring care: Gender, empowerment, and the care economy. Journal of Human Development, 7(2), 183-199.

Gang, F., Xiaopei, H., & Jolly, W. S. (2011). Masculinities and men's groups in China: A conversation between activists. In A. Cornwall, J. Edstrom, & A. Greig (Eds.), Men and development: Politicizing masculinities (pp. 185-195). London, UK: Zed Books.

Garrity, D. P., Amoroso, V. B., Koffa, S., Catacutan, D., Buenavista, G., Fay, P., et al. (2002). Landcare on the poverty-protection interface in an Asian watershed. Conservation Ecology, 6, 11.

Gibson, T. (2005). And the sun pursued the moon: Symbolic knowledge and traditional authority among the Makassar. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Gibson, T. (2007). Islamic narrative and authority in Southeast Asia. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Gorg, C. (2007). Landscape governance: The "politics of scale" and the "natural" conditions of places. Geoforum, 38, 954-966.

Graham-Davies, S. (2004). Hunters, wedding mothers, and androgynous priests: Conceptualising gender among Bugis in South Sulawesi, Indonesia (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Perth, Australia: University of Western Australia.

Greenberg, L. S. Z. (2003). Women in the garden and kitchen: The role of cuisine in the conservation of traditional house lot crops among Yucatec Mayan immigrants. In P. L. Howard (Ed.), Women and plants: Gender relations in biodiversity management and conservation. New York.

Hamonic, G. (2009). Nenek Moyang Orang Bugis [Bugis Elders]. Makassar, Indonesia: Refleksi.

Harper, C., Nowacka, K., Alder, H., & Ferrant, G. (2014). Measuring women's empowerment and social transformation in the post-2015 agenda. London: ODI/OECD Development Centre.

Hatley, B. (1990). Theatrical imagery and gender ideology in Java. In J. M. Atkinson, & S. Errington (Eds.), Power and difference: Gender in island Southeast Asia (pp. 177-207). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Hickel, J. (2014). The 'girl effect': liberalism, empowerment and the contradictions of development. Third World Quarterly, 35, 1355-1373.

Howard, P. L. (Ed.) (2003). Women and plants: Gender relations in biodiversity management and conservation. New York, NY: Zed Books.

Idaman, & Rusland. ([no date given]). Islam dan pergeseran pandangan hidup orang Tolaki: Analisis terhadap cerita rakyat Tolaki di Kabupaten Konawe [Islam and the sidelining of Tolaki world views: An analysis of stories of the Tolaki people in Konawe District].Unpublished manuscript, on line, ResearchGate.

Idrus, N. I. (2005). Siri', gender, and sexuality among the Bugis in South Sulawesi. Antropologi Indonesia, 29(1), 38-55.

Idrus, N. I. (2008). Makkunrai Passimokolo': Bugis migrant women workers in Malaysia. In M. Ford, & L. Parker (Eds.), Women and work in Indonesia (pp. 154-172). New York, NY: Routledge.

Inhorn, M. C., Tjornhoj-Thomsen, T., Goldberg, H., & Mosegaard, M. L. C. (Eds.) (2009). Reconceiving the second sex: Men, masculinity, and reproduction. New York, NY: Berghahn.

Janudianto, N. K., Khususiyah, N., Isnurdiansyah, Suyanto, & Roshetko, J. M. (2012). Livelihood Strategies and Land Use System Dynamics in Southeast Sulawesi. Agroforestry and forestry in Sulawesi series working paper,156, 53.

Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women's empowerment. Development and Change, 30(3), 435-464.

Karim, W. J. (1995). Bilateralism and gender in Southeast Asia. In W. J. Karim (Ed.), 'Male' and female' in developing Southeast Asia (pp. 35-74). Oxford/Washington, DC: Berg Publishers.

Khususiyah, N., Janudianto, N. K., Isnurdiansyah, Suyanto, & Roshetko, J. M. (2012). Livelihood strategies and land use system dynamics in South Sulawesi. Agroforestry and forestry in Sulawesi series working paper, 155, 47.

Laxmi (2010). Tombalaki: Studi kekerasan laki-laki pada suku Tolaki di Sulawesi Tenggara [Tombaki: A study of men's violence among the Tolaki of Southeast Sulawesi]. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Penerbit Ombak.

Lewis, J., & Giullari, S. (2006). The adult-worker-model family and gender equality: Principles to enable the valuing and sharing of care. In S. Razavi, & S. Hassim (Eds.), Gender and social policy in a global context: uncovering the gendered structure of'the social' (pp. 173-190). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Li, T. M. (1998). Working separately but eating together: Personhood, property, and power in conjugal relations. American Ethnologist, 25(4), 675-694.

Li, T. M. (2002). Local histories, global markets: Cocoa and class in upland Sulawesi. Development and Change, 33(3), 415-437.

Li, T. M. (2007). The will to improve - governmentality, development, and the practice of politics. Durham: Durham University Press.

Li, T. M. (2014). Land's end: Capitalist relations on an indigenous frontier. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Luithu, S., & Tugendhat, H. (2013). Violence against indigenous women and girls: A complex phenomenon. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact Foundation (AIPP) and Forest Peoples Programme (FPP).

Mabsout, R., & Van Staveren, I. (2010). Disentangling bargaining power from individual and household level to institutions: Evidence on women's position in Ethiopia. World Development, 38(5), 783-796.

Mavridis, D. (2015). Ethnic diversity and social capital in Indonesia. World Development, 67, 376-395.

Manfre, C. W., & Rubin, D. (2012). Integrating gender into CIFOR research: A guide for scientists and program administrators [draft 12 April 2012]. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research.

Martini, E., Roshetko, J., & Paramita, E. (2013). Jenis-jenis Pohon Prioritas di Sulawesi Selatan (Kabupaten Bantaeng dan Bulukumba) dan Sulawesi Tenggara (Kabupaten Konawe dan Kolaka) [Priority tree species in South Sulawesi (Bantaeng and Bulukumba districts) and southeast Sulawesi (Konawe and Kolaka districts)]. Lembar informasi, 3, 1-4.

Martini, E., Tarigan, J., Purnomosidhi, P., Prahmono, A., Surgana, M., Setiawan, A., et al. (2013). Agroforestry extension needs at the community level in AgFor project sites in South and Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Agroforestry and forestry in Sulawesi series working paper, 159, 43.

Melamba, B., Aswati, M., Bunggulawa, D. J., Suruambo, A., Asriani, S., Rusland, et al. (2011). Sejarah Tolaki di Konawe [The history of the Tolaki of Konawe]. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: TERAS.

Miles, D. (1976). Cutlass and crescent moon: A case study of social and political change in Outer Indonesia. Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney.

Millar, S. B. (1989). Bugis weddings: Rituals of social location in modern Indonesia (Vol. 29). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

National Commission on Violence Against Women. (2007). Crucial issues related to the implementation of the CEDAW Convention in Indonesia. Jakarta, Indonesia: National Commission on Violence Against Women.

Mulyoutami, E. P. (2014). Pengambilan Keputusan dan Jaringan Bermi-grasi: Kajian Komunitas Petani Coklat Migran Bugis di Sulawesi Tenggara [Decision-making and migration networks: An examination of a community ofmigrant cacao farmers in Southeast Sulawesi] (Masters thesis). Bogor, Indonesia: Institut Pertanian Bogor (Bogor Agricultural Institute).

Mulyoutami, E., Martini, E., Khususiyah, N., Isnurdiansyah, & Suyanto. (2012). Gender, livelihoods and land in South and Southeast Sulawesi. Agroforestry and forestry in Sulawesi series working paper, 158, 74.

Mulyoutami, E., Roshetko, J. M., Martini, E. & Janudianto, 2015 (in press). Gender roles and knowledge in plant species selection and domestication: Case study in South and Southeast Sulawesi. International Forestry Review Special Issue on Gender and Agroforestry.

Nilan, P., Demartoto, A., Broom, A., & Germov, J. (2014). Indonesian men's perceptions of violence against women. Violence against women, 1-20., Sage Publishing,

O'Connor, A. (2014). Heritage foodways: Reproducing identity. Anthropology News, 55(7-8), 11-12.

Ortner, S. B. (1989). Gender hegemonies. Cultural Critique, 14, 35-80.

Peletz, M. G. (1995). Neither reasonable nor responsible: Contrasting representations of masculinity in a Malay society. In A. Ong, & M. G. Peletz (Eds.), Bewitching women, pious men: Gender and body politics in Southeast Asia (pp. 76-123). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Perdana, A., & Roshetko, J. M. (2012). Rapid market appraisal of agricultural, plantation and forestry commodities in South and Southeast Sulawesi. Agroforestry and forestry in Sulawesi series working paper, 160, 17.

Peristiany, J. G. (Ed.) (1966). Honour and shame: The values of Mediterranean society. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Petesch, P. (2012). Unlocking pathways to women's empowerment and gender equality: The good, the bad, and the sticky. Ethics and Social Welfare, 6, 233-246.

Quisumbing, A. R., Meinzen-Dick, R., Raney, T., Croppenstedt, A., Behrman, J. A., & Peterman, A. (2014). Closing the knowledge gap on gender in agriculture. In A. R. Quisumbing, R. Meinzen-Dick, T. Raney, A. Croppenstedt, J. A. Behrman, & A. Peterman (Eds.), Gender in agriculture and food security: Closing the knowledge gap (pp. 1-19). Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

Razavi, S. (2011). Rethinking care in a development context: An introduction. Development and Change, 42(4), 873-903.

Razavi, S. (2002). Introduction. In S. Razavi (Ed.), Shifting burdens: Gender and agrarian change under neoliberalism (pp. 1-34). Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.

Robinson, K. M. (1986). Stepchildren of progress: The political economy of development in an Indonesian mining town. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Schultz, T. P. (2001). Women's roles in the agricultural household: Bargaining and human capital investments. In B. Gardner & G. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of agricultural economics 1 (pp. 383-456).

Scott, J. C. (2009). The art of not being governed: An anarchist history of upland Southeast Asia. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Shell-Duncan, B. (2001). The medicalization of female "circumcision'": Harm reduction or promotion of a dangerous practice?. Social Science & Medicine, 52, 1013-1028.

Sila, M. A. (2005). Gender and ethnicity in Sayyid community of Cikoang, South Sulawesi: Kafa'ah, a marriage system among Sayyid females. Antropologi Indonesia, 29(1), 51-68.

Stoler, A. (1977). Class structure and female autonomy in rural Java. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 3, 74-89.

Sutlive, V. H. (Ed.) (1991). Female and male in Borneo: Contributions and challenges to gender studies. Williamsburg, VA: Borneo Research Council, Inc..

Tarimana, A. (1989). Kebudayaan Tolaki [Tolaki culture]. Jakarta, Indonesia: Balai Pustaka.

Tsing, A. L. (1993). In the realm of the diamond queen. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Tsing, A. L. (2005). Friction: An ethnography of global connection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Tyson, A. D. (2009). Still striving for modesty: Land, spirits, and rubber production in Kajang, Indonesia. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 10(3), 200-215.

Van Esterik, P. (1999). Right to food; right to feed; right to be fed. The intersection of women's rights and the right to food. Agriculture and Human Values, 16(2), 225-232.

Van Esterik, P. (2008). Food culture in Southeast Asia. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Van Esterik, P., & Greiner, T. (1981). Breastfeeding and women's work: Constraints and opportunities. Studies in Family Planning, 12(4), 184-197.

Welsh, P. (2011). 'Swimming against the tide is easier as a shoal': Changing masculinities in Nicaragua—a community-based approach. In A. Cornwall, J. Edstrom, & A. Greig (Eds.), Men and development: Politicizing masculinities (pp. 205-218). London, UK: Zed Books.

Winarto, Y. T., & Utami, S. P. B. (2012). Women's empowerment in persisting and changing "family" norms in Java: Institution, ideology, practice. In Y. Hayami, J. Koizumi, C. Songsampan, & R. Tosakul (Eds.), The family in flux in Southeast Asia. Kyoto, Japan: Kyoto University & Silkworm Books.

World Bank (2011). World development report 2012: Gender equality and development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Yuliani, E. L., Moeliono, M., Mulyana, A., Adnan, H., & Manalu, P. (2012). Site selection report (Agfor Sulawesi). Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research.

Yuliani, E. L., Adnan, H., Colfer, C. J. P., & Indriatmoko, Y. (2014). Problem solving vs. appreciative inquiry approaches in community-based conservation. Forests, Trees, and Livelihoods, 24, 97-111.

Available online at