Expanding Opportunities: A Framework for Gender and Socially-Inclusive Climate Resilient Agriculture

Limiting global warming to the 2°C target that countries have committed to in the 2015 Paris Agreement, and reaching the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, will require large-scale expansion of climate-resilient approaches in agriculture and food systems. In order to achieve the scale of change required, coordinated action is needed from global to local levels, from research to policy and investment, and across private, public, and civil society sectors. But at the same time, differential approaches are needed to address gender equality and women's concerns in climate-resilient agriculture. This article sets out a conceptual framework for scaling up climate resilient agriculture (CRA) approaches that are gender and socially inclusive by taking into account these constraints and inequalities across wider areas and different aspects of CRA. It builds on gender and climate-resilient agriculture research and project experience to argue that the additional integration of women's empowerment approaches and dimensions into this scaling framework provides the opportunity to promote gender equality while scaling up. It also identifies gaps and areas for further analysis and research. The intention is to identify potential pathways for developing a gender- and socially-inclusive set of options and strategies, in four key dimensions: climate resilient technologies and practices; climate information services that reach under-reached groups; inclusive finance mechanisms; and promoting leadership in decision-making.

1376Modern concepts in the handling and reporting of missing data

Focus and outcomes for participants Missing data are ubiquitous in observational studies, and the simple solution of restricting the analyses to the subset with complete records will often result in bias and loss of power. The seriousness of these issues for resulting inferences depends on both the mechanism causing the missing data and the form of the substantive question and associated model. The methodological literature on methods for the analysis of partially observed data has grown substantially over the last twenty years, and although there is increasing guidance on how to handle missing data, practice is changing slowly and misapprehensions abound, particularly in observational research. Importantly, the lack of transparency around methodological decisions regarding the analysis is threatening the validity and reproducibility of modern research. In this symposium leading researchers in missing data methodology will present practical guidance on how to select an appropriate method to handle missing data, describe how to report the results from such an analysis and describe how to conduct sensitivity analyses in the multiple imputation framework. Rationale for the symposium, including for its inclusion in the Congress One of the sub-themes of WCE 2021 is “Translation from research to policy and practice”. Although there is a growing body of literature surrounding missing data methodology, evidence from systematic reviews suggests that missing data is still often not handled appropriately. If practice is to change, it is important to educate applied researchers regarding the available methodology and provide practical guidance on how to determine the best method for handling missing data. An important part of this is providing guidance on the reporting of results from analyses with missing data. This is particularly pertinent given the current emphasis on reproducibility of research findings. In this symposium we bring some of the latest research from the Missing Data Topic Group of the STRengthening Analytical Thinking for Observational Studies (STRATOS) initiative whose aim is to provide accessible and accurate guidance in the design and analysis of observational studies in order to increasie the reliability and validity of observational research. Presentation program Names of presenters

From Field Research to Policy Change - Lessons from FAC and APRA

The Institute of Development Studies has led consortia of UK and African organisations in two large programmes of agricultural policy research: the original Future Agricultures Consortium programme, running from 2005 to 2014, and the successive Agricultural Policy Research in Africa programme, from 2016 to 2022. These programmes involved African field research teams, linked to African Universities, and conducting policy-relevant research into key issues relative to the future of agriculture in Africa and inclusive agricultural commercialisation (APRA). A component of both programmes was to use the evidence collected to influence the policy environment in favour of productive, sustainable, and inclusive agriculture. This paper explores what has been learnt in these two programmes about using field research evidence to improve agricultural policy.

The point is to change it: connecting research to policy and practice

The final chapter begins with epidemics in Africa and Asia, then considers challenges to health and illness research, and ways forward. Disconnections in theory, policy and practice are contrasted with the connections that need to be made in theory and practice if pandemics, climate change and other global threats to health are to be contained. Contradictory social science theories all need to be connected and combined, like medical science, into a larger coherent critical realist framework that goes beyond describing and measuring. The detailed example is about contested understandings of mental distress within neoliberal reform of community mental health services. Eight commitments for useful health research are followed by methods for Utopian research about future change.