GUPAP-Report-December-2024-1 (2)
Acknowledgements
GUPAP extends profound gratitude to those who contributed to data collection under conditions of
siege, where the concept of the Triple Nexus, as seen through a food sovereignty lens to support
urban family farming, has never been more important. This involved GUPAP’s field team, led by
Projects and Community Participation Coordinator Alaa Abu Jayab, and gender specialist Faten
Nabahin, working on the ground alongside members of the Coordinating Committee of UWAF. This
has also involved the solidarity work of experts and friends engaged from our local, regional, and
international network.
GUPAP also extends our gratitude to Dr. Ahmad Abu Shaban, GUPAP’s Technical Advisory Committee
Member and Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine at Al-Azhar University, and to
Dr. Georgina McAllister, an agroecologist specialising in conflict-affected food systems recovery and a
partner on the Gaza Foodways project, who analysed the data and co-authored this report. The
authors themselves are grateful to Dr. Vanessa Farr (University of Cape Town), a specialist on women
and peace with a decades-long experience with women in Gaza, and to Dr. Joe Nasr, an urban food
systems specialist (Metropolitan University of Toronto) for reviewing this report.
GUPAP proudly acknowledges the vital role of its valued partners in strengthening its institutional
resilience during crises. Collaborative efforts with organizations like the Zayed Sustainability Prize
(ZSP, UAE), French Consulate-Jerusalem, CCFD-France, MADRE-USA, AIDOS-Italy, ROSA-Germany, the
Global Network for the Right to Food and Nutrition (Germany), Global Garden for Peace- Australia,
Sustain-Australia, LUSH Spring Prize-UK, alongside networks such as the PNGO, UN-OCHA FSS
Clusters, Habitat International Coalition (HIC-Geneva/Cairo), Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples
Mechanism (CSIPM) of the UN-CFS, Arab Forum for Rural Advisory Services (FAO/IFAD), have enriched
GUPAP’s community interventions in crisis and paved the way for shared learning.
Cover Image: UWAF members collecting dates for mutual aid and processing in Deir Al Balah,
September 2024. Photo: Sara Shamaly
Citing this report: Shaban, A. & McAllister, G. (2024) Resilience, Reciprocity and Recovery in Gaza:
Drawing Lessons from Women-led Agribusinesses Amidst Conflict and Crisis. GUPAP, December 2024.
2
Report Contents
1. Report Background 3
– Methodology 3
– Objectives of the Report 4
2. Glossary of Terms 5
3. Executive Summary 7
4. Introduction 9
5. Pre-War Study 11
– Overview of data 11
– Importance of women-led agripreneurs for socio-economic resilience 12
– Agricultural practices for sustainability 12
– Land access and secure tenure 13
– Representation and participation 14
6. Policy Review & Implications for women 15
– Documents Reviewed 16
– Gaps identified 16
– Policy Landscape & Support for Women 17
– Summary 18
7. Impacts of the War on the Food System 19
– Impact of the war on women-led food & farming enterprises 19
– Rapid Needs Assessment 20
– Family Farming Survey 20
– Challenges to agricultural production 21
– Perceptions of policies and support mechanisms 21
– Resourcefulness, adaptation and care under siege 22
8. Divergent Post-War Food & Farming Strategies 24
– Distinct visions for Gaza’s Food System 24
– Future Prospects for a Just Recovery 25
9. Recommendations for Supporting Women Entrepreneurs 27
– Immediate Response Prior to a Ceasefire 27
– Capacity Support for an Agroecological Transition 27
– Innovative Solutions 28
– Material and Financial Support for Food Systems Recovery 28
– Policy Recommendations for Supporting Women-Led Agribusinesses 29
10. Conclusion 30
3
1 Report Background
This report, prepared and released in December 2024, is part of ‘Gaza Foodways’ (2021-2026) an action
research project with the Palestinian Hydrology Group, the Gaza Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture
Platform (GUPAP), the University College of Applied Sciences in Gaza, and the Centre for Agroecology,
Water & Resilience at Coventry University (UK). It is funded by IDRC in Canada.1
Gaza Foodways [towards resilient women-led urban agroecological food systems] is a transdisciplinary
research collaboration intended to contribute toward a ‘just transition’ to diversified low-carbon urban
food and farming systems with a gender transformative focus. Together with the Urban Women’s
Agripreneur Forum (UWAF), which was established by GUPAP in 2019, our emphasis has been on
supporting new, and strengthening existing, networks of micro and small-scale producers and
processors that restore eroded knowledge, recover lost resources and rebuild bonds between people
and the landscape upon which they depend.
Between November 2021 and October 2023, strands of this work have included the establishment of
City Food System Actor-networks in Gaza City and Khan Younis to bring together producers, officials,
academics and civil society networks to build collaborative relationships for new ways of thinking and
acting together to stimulate food system change. It also involved developing forms of popular and
formal education around urban agroecology, including farmer-to-farming learning and organising, and
a professional diploma in Urban Agroecology and Food Sovereignty hosted by UCAS, which was due
to commence with 30 selected students on October 14th 2023. And four ‘challenge prizes’ had been
awarded for transdisciplinary research that brought together women researchers co-developing social
and technical innovations with UWAF members, to explore what innovations would look like when
they are co-designed by women in response to the needs of women producers.
Since 07/10/23, the systematic destruction of infrastructure and Israel’s policy of starvation has
severely disrupted food supply and exacerbated food insecurity across the Gaza Strip. However, urban
and peri-urban farming, including rooftop gardens, community gardens, and small-scale farming
initiatives, as well as wild harvesting has continued, providing at least some local and culturally
appropriate foods. Gaza Foodways is now in the process of reorienting our contributions to their long
task of recovery and healing. Direct cash payments are supporting UWAF members to continue their
work to produce and organise. The diploma is being resurrected in response to an expressed desire by
students to continue learning and to transform and rebuild their future. And plans to reconstruct
Gaza’s only baladi seed bank in Al Qarara are underway, while people are working to multiply and get
these seeds into the hands of more growers.
1 https://agroecology.world/gaza-foodways/
UWAF members in Khan Younis. GUPAP, 2021
4
Herder in Rafah sheltering her flock, April 2024. FAO Yousef Alroz
1.2 Methodology
This report draws on several strands of the Gaza Foodways research. Prior to the current assault on
Gaza, over May-June 2022, a survey was carried out with 168 women agripreneurs, many of whom are
part of the now 300-strong Urban Women Agripreneurs Forum (UWAF) which represents nearly 10%
of the overall women-led agribusinesses across the Gaza Strip. These women, between the ages of 21-
60 years old, have been active across all five governorates, and deeply involved in various aspects of
the food system, from farming and herding, to processing and marketing. This was followed up by a
series of focus group discussions and interviews to clarify, validate, and deepen the data. A subsequent
review of related policies and regulations was then undertaken to consider barriers and opportunities
for women-led, regenerative food and farming systems. Since 07/10/23, UWAF members have
continued to meet, self-organise and collect data, supported by GUPAP’s staff on the ground, with
monthly meetings with 20 representatives, and WhatsApp groups with over 100 UWAF members
enabling discussions and surveys. In August 2024 a rapid needs assessment was undertaken across its
300-stong membership, and in November 2024 an online survey was conducted with 245 small-scale
family farmers, men and women. This data, and the womens’ stories of resilience and reciprocity, bring
a new dimension to how the action research under Gaza Foodways was originally envisaged.
1.3 Objectives of the Report
This report aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of the impact of the war on women-led
agribusinesses in Gaza, highlighting the resilience and agility of women and their enterprises.
Specifically, the report will:
1. Assess the Impact of the War: Examine the extent of short- and long-term damage to womenled agribusinesses, infrastructure, and livelihoods.
2. Highlight the Role of Urban Agriculture: Illustrate how urban agriculture has contributed to
community resilience during the crisis through specific examples and case studies.
3. Recommend Support Initiatives: Propose strategies for recovery and rebuilding, emphasising
agroecological principles and farming practices suitable for highly-contaminated soils,
capacity-building, and material support to ensure the sustainability and growth of women-led
agribusinesses.
Understanding the challenges and leveraging the strengths of these women entrepreneurs is essential
for developing policies and initiatives that foster a reparative, resilient, sustainable and sovereign food
system in Gaza.
5
2 Solar dryer Hanady Sufian Khalil-Herbeid in Beit Hanoun. GUPAP, 2022
Glossary of Terms
Agroecology encompasses science, a set of practices and a social movement. It is also a way of
understanding and designing territorial food systems using social, ecological, and political principles to
regenerate nature and create a more just society. Organised around 10 elements,2
its practices (i) rely on
ecological processes as opposed to purchased inputs; (ii) are equitable, environmentally sensitive, locally
adapted and controlled; and (iii) adopt a systems approach embracing management of the interactions
among components rather than focusing only on specific technologies. It is rooted in indigenous and
traditional practices intricately connected to ancestral knowledge(s), combined with scientific knowledge
to address the polycrisis of chronic poverty and ill health, food insecurity, biodiversity loss and climate
change.
Baladi refers to traditional food and farming traditions across the Levant – from the use of open pollinated
seeds and breeds adapted to specific conditions, to ways of processing and cooking. Ba’ali refers
specifically to innovative rain-fed cultivation methods adapted over many generations.3
Climate-smart Agriculture (CSA) and ‘sustainable intensification’ is an industry-led Global Alliance of agribusiness and multinational corporations that embraces and promotes a mix of high-tech, biotech and
proprietorial external input-dependent approach, including herbicide-tolerant crops, insecticides and
fungicides, energy-intensive AI for data harvesting, genetically modified seeds and genetically engineered
livestock and fish, proprietary technologies and patents on seeds, as well as energy-intensive livestock
factory farming, large-scale industrial monocultures and biofuel plantations.4
Extractivism describes an economic and political model organised around profit, based on the
exploitation and commodification of nature and labour, and by removing large amounts of a nation’s
natural commons.
2 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/26395916.2020.1808705
3 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21683565.2018.1537324
4 https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/2015-11-outsmarting-nature-synthetic-biology.pdf
6
Food Systems. While food security encompasses components of availability, access and utilisation, a
‘systems’ approach provides an holistic analysis of how the current organisation of activities – including
land and natural resource-use, production, processing and packaging, distribution and retailing, and
patterns of consumption – impact food security. Understood as co-evolved social and ecological systems,
it considers how adaptive management can lead to better decisions in the face of uncertainty and
unpredictability.5
Foodways is a term that refers to the intersection of food culture, traditions and history while considering
the cultural, social, and economic practices relating to the production and consumption of food.
Food sovereignty is an expression of communities’ and Indigenous Peoples’ power to determine how
they grow, prepare, share and eat food and a reflection of their relationship to land and water. The more
that power is equitably shared among all people in a food system, the more likely people will have access
to adequate food; and the more that people’s relationship with land and water is based on care and
reciprocity, the easier it is for people to establish relationships with each other.6
Just Transition is a framework of principles, processes and practices that build economic and political
power in order to shift economies from exploitative and extractive paradigms towards sustainable
production. The term is used by the trade union movement to secure workers’ rights and livelihoods, and
by climate justice advocates to combat climate change and protect biodiversity.
Instrumentalism describes a conceptual approach that sees and adopts, for instance, narratives around
women’s rights and ‘empowerment’ primarily through the lens of contributions to economic outcomes
such as GDP growth. It is sometimes referred to as the “business case” for women’s rights.
Samoud or Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) is a values-based approach to economic development
with explicit social (and often environmental) objectives. It envisions facilitation of the economy through
various solidarity relations such as cooperatives, mutual associations, and the protection of commons.
Social reproduction refers to the activities and institutions that are required for making life, maintaining
life, and generationally replacing life. Social reproduction systems, or the creation of people, workers,
societies and maintenance of social bonds, as well as social reproduction institutions, such as public
education, health, care, water, transport, housing etc. They are gendered, carried out predominantly by
women and girls whose physical and emotional labour is finite and goes largely unseen and unpaid.
Urban agroecology aims to identify and define newly articulated relations between communities
engaging in land cultivation and soil stewardship that benefit nature on one hand, and urban consumers
dependent on increasingly globalised and highly commodified food systems over which they have little
control. Urban agroecology is about more than changing farming techniques in urban or peri-urban
settings, it is also about re-imagining and transforming policy, planning, science and economies to bring
about more just food systems.7
5
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=7d4663825600de6cb4a2331b0da701d92cdd812b
6 https://www.un.org/unispal/document/right-to-food-report-17jul24/
7 https://pure.coventry.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/13555286/RUAF_UAM_33_WEB_8_10.pdf
7
3 UWAF members collecting dates in Deir Al Balah, September 2024. Sara Shamaly
Executive Summary
The Gaza Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture Platform (GUPAP) presents this report to document the
profound challenges women-led agribusinesses face in Gaza amidst ongoing conflict and systemic
barriers, highlighting their critical role in fostering resilience and recovery. Women agripreneurs,
estimated at 3,000 before the current onslaught, form a cornerstone of Gaza’s food systems,
providing nutrient-dense and culturally important foods. However, repeated military offensives,
environmental degradation, and systemic barriers such as lack of recognition in policy frameworks
have severely impacted these enterprises. After the war, women will carry a disproportionate burden
of care for orphaned children and relatives with violently acquired injuries. Here we consider the
support structures required for family farming to be at the
forefront of a just recovery, with a particular focus on women.
Today, the unprecedented military offensive continues to
devastate Gaza’s food and farming infrastructure and its
agroecosystem. Destroyed farmlands littered with unexploded
ordnance and toxic contamination only compounds these
challenges. Women agripreneurs, many of whom are primary breadwinners, have been
disproportionately affected, struggling to access land, resources, and financial support. Despite this,
women have demonstrated remarkable adaptability, drawing on baladi skills and resources,
community solidarity, and social innovation to sustain and provide for their communities.
Urban and peri-urban family farming has emerged as a linchpin, offering crucial food production
capabilities even under constrained conditions, underscoring its importance in mitigating food
shortages and fostering long-term sustainability. Amongst others, organisations such as GUPAP and
the Urban Women’s Agripreneur Forum (UWAF) advocate agroecological practices and principles
among women-led and other food and farming enterprises that centre baladi foodways for the
advancement of food sovereignty. Where external resources for agriculture are particularly scarce and
vulnerable to geopolitical disruption, initiatives promoting food sovereignty are gaining traction to
(re)build agrobiodiversity for food and nutritional security.
In this report we share data and stories gathered from some of the 300 members of UWAF who
represent 10% of women with food enterprises in Gaza, captured before and during the current military
Women play and important role in Gaza’s
food system, as farmers, fishers,
shepherds and processors, while often
going unrecognised and unheard.
8
Bedouin Herders, Khan Younis. Ahmed Sourani, 2021
assault. These highlight the important role that women play in the food system, not least as farmers,
fishers, shepherds and processors, while often going unrecognised and unheard.
As such, we highlight examples of women-led social innovations that demonstrate the power of
solidarity in crisis and potential pathways for a just recovery. Community kitchens established by
women have provided essential meals for displaced families. Their Community-led Solidarity
Marketing Initiative has distributed over 18 tons of food to vulnerable households, fostering
community bonds. Efforts to recover and multiply baladi seeds have highlighted the importance of
local knowledge and seed sovereignty in rebuilding Gaza’s food systems. A farming advisory service is
being established by women for women to support increases in local food production. And a Solidarity
Café will soon provide a supportive, warm space with internet connection as a meeting point where
women can come together to learn, organise and support one another.
In the immediate term, it is essential to increase access to
emergency relief, including in-kind materials, and cash support,
not only to address urgent needs, but to lay the foundations of
a just and inclusive recovery. Looking forward, Gaza’s recovery
must prioritize locally adapted, climate-sensitive, and peoplecentred food systems. Agroecology represents a viable and just
alternative to extractive, input-intensive agricultural models,
fostering resilience while addressing structural inequities. By centring women in these strategies, Gaza
can rebuild a dignified, sovereign food system that ensures long-term sustainability and resilience.
The report concludes with policy recommendations, including formally recognising women as farmers
with secure tenure rights, and integrating urban agroecology into national policies and urban planning
strategies. Institutional, financial and material support will be critical in restoring livelihoods. And
training initiatives tailored to agroecological practices, financial management, and territorial markets
are essential to strengthening and raising the voices of women entrepreneurs.
As Gaza recovers and rebuilds, strategies should centre sovereign food and farming systems with an
emphasis on healing people and nature. Given the historic levels of destruction and displacement, food
aid will remain a reality for many in Gaza. Notwithstanding, baladi food and cultivation remains pivotal
in providing diverse, nutrient-dense, culturally important and climate resilient foods capable of
restoring a healthy agroecosystem and resisting future aggressions. As such, it should be prioritised
and defended in recovery strategies. A radical re-imagining is required to centre womens’ knowledges,
skills and needs and to honour their solidarity and steadfastness as they recover Gaza’s foodways.
After the war, women will carry a
disproportionate burden of care for
orphaned children and relatives with
violently acquired injuries, and should be
at the forefront of a just recovery.
9
4 Gaza Fishing Port. McAllister, 2022
Introduction
Gaza’s rich history of food and farming is deeply intertwined with its cultural heritage. Over five
millennia, Gaza City and its surroundings have been repeatedly occupied, besieged, destroyed and
rebuilt. The traditional baladi food and farming system, managed and maintained by women and men
together, embodies the region’s cultural heritage and plays a vital role in a food secure and sovereign
future. Baladi seed is at the heart of food sovereignty as it can be saved year-on-year, is adapted to
local conditions, and requires few to no external inputs and less/no irrigation.
However, under Israel’s illegal 17-year blockade of Gaza, the search for autonomy in the form of food
security came at the expense of the very ecosystem that creates and sustains all life – with dire cost
to human and environmental health. To bolster autonomous food ‘security’ on limited land, intensive
production methods were prioritised by Gaza’s authorities, agronomists and NGOs, funded by
international institutions and INGOs. This quest for modernity demanded the importation of
agricultural inputs, mostly from Israel, a major manufacturer of inputs associated with capitalist
agrarian systems, due to the control it exerts over the borders and trade of the occupied Palestinian
territory (oPt) of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. In 2022 for instance, the Gaza Strip
imported 4.6 million litres of synthetic fertilisers, over a million litres of herbicides and pesticides, and
hundreds of thousands of tons of animal feed and input-dependent
hybrid seeds from Israel. In 2022, the oPt was Israel’s third largest
export market – a captive market worth US$4.6 billion to Israel.
In this scenario, production costs in Gaza increased as farmers
invested in imported inputs and technologies, making their produce
more expensive than highly subsidised industrial imports from Israel,
sold into Gaza at just below the cost of local production. Highyielding hybrid varieties, often monocropped in polytunnels by Gaza’s commercial producers, flooded
local markets, threatening baladi varieties. As embattled family farmers strived to defend baladi food
and farming systems in the face of increasing industrialisation, the intensive use of agrichemicals
around them depleted the soil life, and nitrate leaching contributed to groundwater pollution –
Climate change, and blockadeinduced economic hardship and its
associated market conditions have
long contributed to indebtedness
across the food and farming sector.
10
damaging the very life support systems that Gazans depended upon, and will need again for their
future survival.
Women-led urban agricultural enterprises, particularly those engaged in agroecological practices,
have demonstrated remarkable adaptability and resourcefulness amidst the blockade and recurrent
wars. Prior to 07/10/23 a quarter of Gaza’s population derived their livelihoods from small-scale family
farming, three quarters of whom were women.8 Many of these farmers have defended baladi food
and farming systems; for some, their knowledge and capacity to grow food has kept them from
starvation as the current assault has weaponised hunger.9 Yet climate change, and blockade-induced
economic hardship and its associated market conditions have contributed to indebtedness across the
sector, exposing farmers and their land to the forces of land speculation and elite accumulation.
Today, however, it is these baladi seeds, and the skills to cultivate them, that form an essential
component of a ‘commons’ currency – surviving the siege and bringing hope. We might ask ourselves,
are the ancient farming methods Gazans have resorted to simply coping strategies in times of
recurring crisis, or might they represent urgently needed new ways of thinking and acting to create a
dignified, resourceful and sovereign future under both occupation, and in a time of accelerating
climate crisis?
Collective maamoul making under war, May 2021
8
https://agritrop.cirad.fr/592999/1/Marzin%20Uwaidat%20Sourisseau%202019%20Study%20on%20SSA%20in%20Palestine%2
0with%20FAO%20WBGS%20final.pdf
9https://www.un.org/unispal/document/right-to-food-report17jul24/#:~:text=The%20Special%20Rapporteur%20first%20provides,starvation%20and%20genocide%20in%20Gaza.
11
5 Fragmented urban landscape in Gaza City Pre-War Study
5.1 Overview of Data on Women-Led Agribusinesses
Before the 2023-4 aggressions, women-led agribusinesses played a pivotal role in Gaza’s food system
and its vibrant parallel economies, sustaining livelihoods and contributing to nutritional well-being
despite significant challenges impacting the resilience of the food system in Gaza. These included the
17-year blockade, the recurring destruction of farmland and
infrastructure, a lack of compensation for losses, and shrinking of,
and restricted access to, fertile areas. These factors collectively
undermined, or made impossible, the stability and growth of local
food systems and women-led agribusinesses.
Contrary to the surprising ILO statement10 that women in Gaza
‘generally do not work’, according to the Palestinian Central
Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), of the 25% of the population that derived its livelihood from farming, up to
75% of these were women.11 According to our own study, 68% of respondents were primary
breadwinners, indicating that income from their agribusinesses was the main or sole source of income
for their families. These businesses were particularly important in urban settings, where over half of
the women operated, emphasising the importance of urban agriculture in a context like Gaza, where
space is limited and resources such as water and soil were already deteriorating. Urban production has
become increasingly significant as it optimises limited space and resources and takes place in close
proximity to urban markets and consumers – contributing to food system resilience.
While only five women in Gaza are recognised as fishers, it is thought that up to a half of the 23,520
people involved in the fishing sector – from sorting and processing fish, to mending nets – are women.
An important source of protein, and central to Gaza’s traditional foodways, fishing has seen a 65%
reduction over two decades due to restricted access to coastal fisheries. These access restricted areas
(ARAs) on sea and land also effect pastoralists grazing their sheep close to the boundary which holds
a large percentage of grazing land. It is also believed that half of Gaza’s 300 pastoralists are women,
added to whom a majority of shepherds in Gaza are women and children.
12 All have been exposed to
increased risk of targeting from Israel’s excessive or lethal use of force against civilians in the ARAs.
10 https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148296
11 https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/site/512/default.aspx?lang=en&ItemID=3679
12 https://features.gisha.org/closing-in/?fbclid=IwY2xjawGtkuZleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHSDUBduPX
aeUVUySaRBHQnBWralwTbOW8_dpNHxQIGQy15vj5V7gNoNFtg_aem_eYbBz5De28x78aIUQM4utA
Women-led agribusinesses played a
pivotal role in Gaza’s food system and
its vibrant parallel economies,
sustaining livelihoods and contributing
to nutritional well-being.
12
5.1.1 Importance of Women-Led Agribusinesses to socio-economic resilience
Before the war, it is thought that some 20% of the women producers in Gaza were engaged in the
capitalist market economy while others have contributed to the food system through myriad ways
embedded in traditional practices of reciprocity and care, from producing for household consumption
to sharing with neighbours, networks and community kitchens.
This highlights the critical role women have played in sustaining
community and its social fabric. While UWAF members constitute
the formal face of food production as ‘agripreneurs’ engaged in
the capitalist, or ‘formal’ market economy, other economies
within which they and others have participated, such as the
solidarity and care economies, often went overlooked.
One example, established in 2023, is the Community-led Solidarity Marketing initiative that distributed
18 tons of food produced by women-led SMEs to vulnerable families, further illustrating the resilience
of these agripreneurs in sustaining food security and supporting their communities during the crisis.
This initiative has strengthened the role of urban agriculture in addressing both economic and
humanitarian needs in Gaza, and is still functioning today.
However, there was a notable disparity in perceptions of food system resilience among different age
groups and types of agripreneurs – with half as many respondents below the age of 30 rating the food
system’s resilience as sufficient, compared with women agripreneurs between the ages of 30-60. This
raises interesting intersectional questions relating to women’s ages, educational attainment, social
class and status, and expectations, requiring further research. Nonetheless, the lack of preparedness
to shocks perceived by many members was largely attributed to the loss of land under Israeli-imposed
ARA, which formed the heart of Gaza’s family farming sector.
13
5.1.2 Agricultural Practices and Sustainability
According to the 2019 FAO report,14 agroecological farming practices to increase productive diversity
enhance dietary diversification, improve health, increase adaptive capacity for climate change
adaptation, and have positive impacts on household incomes and women’s empowerment. Some, but
by no means all, UWAF members integrated agroecological practices into their food production and
processing. For instance, our study found that 60% of women-led agribusinesses utilised baladi
13https://www.dalia.ps/sites/default/files/reports/status_of_farmers_in_border_areas_in_the_gaza_strip_from_a_food_sov_p
erspective_0.pdf
14 https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/ff385e60-0693-40fe-9a6b-79bbef05202c/content
Local networks facilitate knowledge
sharing, skills development, and
resource mobilisation, empowering
women to act collectively within and
across the food system.
13
practices which are vital for climate change adaptation and responsiveness to shocks, reflecting the
deep-rooted traditional knowledge(s). The women attributed their access to such a diverse
knowledge-base as being the result of either being passed down through generations, adopted
through farmer-to-farming learning, or higher education.
At the heart of Gaza’s foodways have been baladi seeds, crucial for maintaining the sustainability and
sovereignty of food systems. In fact, over 85% of women agripreneurs used local seeds, valued for
their adaptability and tolerance to Gaza’s specific climatic and soil conditions, and for the taste and
cultural significance of baladi foods. Importantly, unlike imported hybrid seeds that cannot be saved
and adapted year-on-year, baladi seeds are not dependent on external inputs such as synthetic
fertilisers, and, when planted in ba’ali or rainfed cultivation systems, require little to no irrigation.
5.1.3 Land access and secure tenure
Whether on family owned, rented or managed land, 37% of respondents were producing on rural (and
potentially inaccessible) land in ARAs that already presented a safety risk; 9% produced on peri-urban
land for production, and a majority of 54% were producing in urban spaces. Of the women engaged in
primary production, 37% rented land, and 63% claimed ownership, whether through formal deeds, or
as familial decision-makers. Of those 84 women producing on urban and peri-urban land, the majority
were family ‘owned’ (11 were managed only, and 19 were rented) suggesting that these are household
plots. Importantly, more data is required on perceptions of ‘ownership’ and its implications.
In addition to those women that do farm, according to a 2019 FAO
study, 17% of households produced in home gardens of a little over
200 sq. metres. 92% of these gardens were used for food production
– either for family consumption, sharing or bartering to ameliorate
the stresses of blockade.15 Nonetheless, the role of women has gone
largely unacknowledged in the census or other statistics, creating
gender disparities in access to productive resources and services.
15https://agritrop.cirad.fr/592999/1/Marzin%20Uwaidat%20Sourisseau%202019%20Study%20on%20SSA%20in%20Palestine%
20with%20FAO%20WBGS%20final.pdf
Land access and secure land tenure
for women to farm successfully and
safely, as individuals or as
cooperatives, will be a critical
consideration for a just recovery.
14
Before the 2023-4 aggressions, despite political, legal, economic and cultural obstacles to secure
tenure or ownership of land by women, 88% maintained that they had excellent to good control over
their own assets as business owners bringing income into their family. Furthermore, this gave them
freedom to move around to farm, market their produce and to organise.
In a future where the expansion of ARAs is anticipated, placing more fertility-rich soils further from
reach for family farmers, urban and peri-urban farming will become more important than ever before.
In this context, land access and secure land tenure for women to farm successfully and safely, as
individuals or as cooperatives, will be a critical consideration.
5.1.4 Representation and Participation
Women producers are most severely impacted by climate change and food pricing, and
disproportionately exposed to pesticide poisoning,
16 yet are rarely heard in policy spaces. Key areas
that comprise womens’ rights exist within the agricultural sector, which are deprioritised due to the
recurring humanitarian crises. The mutually reinforcing conditions of military occupation and
patriarchy deprive women of their general rights, as well as access to land and resources for social
reproduction. Burdens of care for a population depleted and violently injured by war, shortages of
food, fuel, energy and clean water have, over the decades, differentially compromised women’s
political, civil, social and economic participation, exacerbating their vulnerability to multiple shocks.
The study highlighted a gap between women’s perceived ability to influence decisions and their actual
participation in different fora that are claimed to influence decision-making processes. While 61% of
women said that they actively participated in a range of fora to which they were invited, only 24% felt
that their voices were heard in these fora. This discrepancy suggests the dominance of elite actors and
scientism, and a devaluing of different ways of knowing as represented particularly by baladi farmers.
It also points to a lack of authentic participatory processes that enable women and other family
farmers to actively contribute their expertise and experiences to food system debate and design.
Participation in local networks and professional groups was deemed important by 68% of the women
surveyed. These networks facilitate knowledge sharing, skill development, and resource mobilisation,
empowering women to act collectively within and across the food and farming sector. It is imperative
to address these gaps in both policy and participation in policy formulation.
16 https://www.fao.org/3/cc0356en/cc0356en.pdf
15
6 Policy Review & Implications
In the face of the overarching policy of de-development under occupation, no interventions can be
made more technically effective as if it were a navigable mechanical obstacle. Any assessment of
Gaza’s agricultural policies must recognize the impacts of occupation and containment, in addition to
internal governance challenges on local food systems. Policies aimed at resilience should be
contextualised as part of a broader strategy to counter de-development, which encompasses land
restrictions, military destruction, and the systematic depletion of resources critical to agricultural
viability. The reality is that Gaza’s agriculture has, for decades, operated under a series of constructed
vulnerabilities, where autonomy over essential inputs has been systematically undermined and
actively prevented.
Similarly, questions of policy cannot be addressed in isolation from the destruction of soils during
multiple and devastating military aggressions in Gaza, the unprecedented influx of military toxins that
are bioaccumulating in Gaza’s agroecosystem, the control over water across the oPt, and the
prevention of farmers, fishers and shepherds from accessing their lands and livelihoods. Nonetheless,
Palestine’s agriculture policies have consistently failed to invest in home-grown food systems, with
only 1% of the budget dedicated to agriculture. Similarly,
international support for agriculture constitutes less than 0.7% of
ODA. The abandonment of farmers who produce nutrient-dense
baladi food across the oPt has entrenched long-term dependencies
on food aid.
Gaza retains an agriculture policy designed for rural agriculture,
dating back to its adoption from Egypt in the 1950s, despite having
no land designated as ‘rural’ since 2017. Nonetheless, given this rural focus, there is a surprising lack of
pro-pastoral policies, or protection for pastoralists’ land or livelihoods. If Israel is permitted to further
expand the ARAs around the perimeter, any vestiges of Gaza’s rural areas will be further eroded. A
policy pertaining to urban agroecology and related support mechanisms is urgently needed to connect
up, and protect, the farming that now takes place on fragmented land dispersed within and between
Gaza’s once growing cities.
6.1 Document Review
Of interest to our review were strategic plans, policies and regulations that relate to protection of
farmland and agroecological food systems, including baladi seed and ways of cultivating and
producing, and those that are supportive of women producers and small business owners. It also
No intervention in pursuit of
‘resilience’ or ‘capacity’ building can be
made more technically effective as if it
were merely a navigable mechanical
obstacle.
16
draws on previous research undertaken on women’s access to and ownership of land across the oPt.17
As such the following documents were reviewed:
1. Collaborative Strategic Plan for the Advancement of the Agricultural Sector (2021-2026)18 this
‘comprehensive plan’ sets strategic goals to enhance resilience, sustainability, and food security
across the agricultural sector in Gaza.
2. Palestinian National Agricultural Sector Strategy: A Resilient and Sustainable Agriculture 2017-
202219 which aims to promote resilience and sustainable agricultural practices by supporting
local farmers, improving food security, and managing resources efficiently.
3. Cross-Sectoral National Gender Strategy (2017-2022)20 Developed by the Ministry of Women’s
Affairs, this strategy aims to promote gender equality in various sectors, including agriculture,
by ensuring women’s access to resources and decision-making roles.
4. National Policy Agenda: Putting Citizens First (2017-2022)21 this overarching policy document
includes references to agricultural development and gender equality as part of broader national
goals for resilience and sustainability.
Each of these documents was analysed for how well they address, or not, the specific needs of smallscale farmers, urban agroecology, and gender-sensitive agricultural support in Gaza. These were
benchmarked against international human rights standards and frameworks such as the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. The review highlighted significant policy gaps, especially around urban
agroecology, small-scale farmer support, and inclusion of women in agricultural policy frameworks.
6.2 Key Gaps Identified
● Lack of Urban Agroecology Integration: The strategic plan does not explicitly recognize the
existence of urban farming, or support urban agroecology – technical practices or social
processes – essential for local food production resilience in Gaza.
● Limited Support for Small-Scale Farmers: Policies favour larger commercial enterprises, leaving
small-scale and urban farmers, particularly women, with limited access to resources, and
financial and technical support.
● Inadequate Gender-Sensitive Policies: Current frameworks insufficiently address the unique
needs of women producers, impacting their access to land rights, financial support, and
market inclusion.
● Insufficient Inter-Ministerial Coordination: Weak collaboration between ministries results in
inefficiencies and missed opportunities to integrate urban agriculture within urban planning
and resilience initiatives.
● Data Gaps and Representation: The absence of accurate, inclusive data on small-scale and
urban farmers, especially women, hinders policy decisions and limits the visibility of these
stakeholders in national planning.
17 https://pwwsd.org/uploads/15949011091533037615.pdf
18 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JMzdhO3e1SV6ywtMWiNq5D18WANMiODi/edit#heading=h.gjdgxs
19 https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/prais-legacy/Palestine%2C%20State%20of/2018/annexes
/English%20Strategy%202017-2022.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
20 https://nwm.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/2022-10/——~1.PDF
21 https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/default/files/ressources/palestine_draft_final_npa.pdf
17
6.3 Policy Landscape and Support for Women-Led Agribusinesses
Current agricultural policies do not sufficiently recognize the urban and peri-urban agricultural realities
specific to Gaza’s context. They do not adequately support women farmers, limiting their access to
essential resources, such as veterinary services, inputs, and financial assistance. This gap is particularly
significant given that over 50% of agribusinesses in urban settings are managed by women, who are
often the primary or sole income earners for their families. Many of these women lack formal
recognition as landowners or farmers, which hinders their access to services, secure tenure, and
financial aid necessary for sustainable growth.
Policies should formally acknowledge and integrate urban agroecology within the national agricultural
strategy, specifically addressing urban farming challenges. Women-led agribusinesses, particularly in
densely populated and resource-scarce urban environments, require tailored financial incentives,
technical assistance, and infrastructural support. For instance, training in urban-specific farming
methods, such as rooftop and vertical farming, and access to microfinance for urban-specific
agricultural inputs are essential measures to be incorporated
to build resilience within this sector.
Gender-responsive policies are critical to addressing women
entrepreneurs’ unique challenges in accessing land,
resources, and markets. To enhance the status and
contribution of women within Gaza’s agricultural landscape, it is recommended that policies facilitate
formal recognition of women as farmers, secure tenure rights, and develop infrastructure that
supports urban agroecology initiatives. Capacity-building programs tailored to the needs of women
agripreneurs, such as training in financial management, marketing, and sustainable agroecological
practices, are also essential to foster their resilience and empowerment in the agricultural sector.
For women producers specifically, the review revealed significant gaps in mechanisms for small-scale
women farmers and women-led agribusinesses in Gaza. Their exclusion from essential support
programs, such as vaccination and access to fodder, relates to a fundamental failure by the relevant
authorities, particularly by the Ministry of Agriculture, to recognise the existence of women engaged
in food and farming, and so to train women extension officers who can cater for, and represent, the
needs of women committed to producing nutrient-dense baladi food and farming for home,
community and/or markets.
More broadly, without any regulation that either recognises or addresses the impacts of industrial
farming, or provides incentives for agroecological baladi farming systems, intensive production
methods have been prioritised by the authorities, agronomists and NGOs alike, demanding the
importation of agricultural inputs that became a major cause of soil depletion and groundwater
pollution. In this scenario, production costs in Gaza increased as farmers were encouraged to invest in
imported inputs and technologies, making their produce more expensive than highly subsidised
industrial imports from Israel, sold into Gaza at just below the cost of local production. High-yielding
hybrid varieties, often monocropped in polytunnels by Gaza’s commercial producers, flooded local
markets, competing unfavourably with baladi varieties. Family farmers were often heard saying that
they fed Gaza from their own pockets, despite their baladi produce being in high demand. Even as
embattled family farmers strived to defend baladi food and farming systems in the face of increasing
industrialisation, the intensive use of agrichemicals all around them depleted life below and above
ground, exposing them to increasingly resistant pests and diseases. After the military destruction over
the past year, it is impossible to determine the health of Gaza’s soils.
An urban agroecology policy is urgently
needed to connect up, and protect,
Gaza’s fragmented farmlands.
18
Without a coherent policy architecture that supports a long-term strategy towards a just transition to
an agroecological food system, added to the persistent exposure to trauma, toxic pollution from
industrial activities and munitions, poor diet due to a scarcity of nutrient-dense food, and industrially
grown and imported ultra-foods, Gaza’s already chronic disease burden will devastate future
generations. Added to which, combination of climate change, and blockade-induced economic
hardship and associated market conditions, added to regular military destruction, will continue to
drive indebtedness across the sector, exposing farmers and their land to the ongoing forces of further
land annexation that drive land speculation and elite
accumulation from within, further entrenching the separation
of Palestinians from their land.
6.4 In Summary
The study concluded with a call for developing policies and
creating opportunities that foster diverse and inclusive
decision-making processes. Such measures are essential to ensure the resilience and sustainability of
Gaza’s food system, particularly under the stress of ongoing and future shocks. The pre-war context
for women-led agribusiness in Gaza was characterised by significant contributions to the local
economy and food security, reliance on sustainable agricultural practices, and active participation in
social networks. However, these enterprises faced substantial challenges due to occupation and
associated political instability and resource limitations, as well as misrepresentation of women’s roles
and their under-representation in decision-making. Addressing these issues is crucial for building a
reparative, resilient and sovereign food system in Gaza.
There is a need to make visible women
engaged in food and farming who are
committed to producing nutrient-dense
baladi food and farming for home,
community and/or markets.
UWAF members planning their Solidarity Marketing distribution, July 2024. GUPAP.
19
7 Clearing farm damage. AP, 2024 Impacts of the War on the Food System
The ongoing assault on Gaza over the past year has weaponisation hunger, while profoundly impacting
Gaza’s food supply. The systematic targeting of fishing ports and farming areas including greenhouses,
collective infrastructures such as flour mills and olive presses and Gaza’s only heritage seed library,
and irrigation wells, wastewater and waste disposal, as well as repeated targeting of bakeries and
markets, is unprecedented. An estimated 70% of Gaza’s greenhouses have been partially or completely
destroyed,22 83% of all plant life and 70% of farmland and orchards have been destroyed.23 Soils will be
contaminated with heavy metals and compacted by military vehicles, and littered with bomb craters
and unexploded ordnance, which the UN estimates could take 14 years to clear.24
By March 2024
damage to agriculture was already estimated at $629 million.25
Combined with the destruction of natural areas, waste treatment
infrastructure, and debris removal, this amounts to over $1.5 billion –
before even considering the costs of environmental restoration and
reconstruction. By July, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to
Food, reported that approximately 93% of agriculture, forestry and
fishing sectors combined had been destroyed.26
7.1 Impact of the War on Women-Led Food & Farming Enterprises
Since the onset of the war, UWAF members have continued to organise and collect data, documenting
the destruction of their agribusiness infrastructure and lands, resulting in the loss of income for their
families. Additionally, they have faced difficulties in accessing and affording goods available in ad-hoc
markets, as well as securing inputs such as seed and fodder in the hope of feeding what remains of
their livestock or rebuilding their businesses in the midst of the ongoing bombardment and forced
displacement. The lack of due compensation for losses during past wars further exacerbates their
vulnerabilities, leaving them with limited means to recover.
Despite these challenges, local fresh food production, particularly in plant cultivation, has shown some
resilience, and requires closer attention during recovery and reconstruction phases. Urban agriculture,
focusing on vegetables like cucumbers, tomatoes, squash, eggplants, peppers, and sweet peppers,
remained operational in some areas in the summer months, albeit on a limited scale and always under
22 https://insecurityinsight.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Conflict-Induced-Hunger-in-Gaza-June-2024.pdf
23 https://content.forensic-architecture.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/FA_A-Spatial-Analysis-of-the-Israeli-militarysconduct-in-Gaza-since-October-2023.pdf
24 https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1149051
25https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/14e309cd34e04e40b90eb19afa7b5d15-0280012024/original/Gaza-Interim-DamageAssessment-032924-Final.pdf
26 https://www.un.org/unispal/document/right-to-food-report-17jul24/
UWAF members continue to
organise, collect data and produce a
range of fruits and vegetables for
neighbours, markets and community
kitchens.
20
threat of repeated destruction. This resilience highlights the crucial role of urban farming in mitigating
food shortages during crises.
7.1.1 Rapid Assessment
A rapid assessment conducted during August 2024 through direct communication by UWAF’s
coordination team with its 300 members revealed that:
● 50% of women-led small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises have been partially or
totally damaged and need comprehensive rehabilitation and reconstruction support.
● 20% of these are still operating but require accelerated support in the form of inputs, and
advice on optimising increasingly scarce available resources to stabilise current operations.
● 30% of SMEs continue to produce, but at a reduced capacity due to a need for rehabilitation
support, including raw materials. This relates to the medium to long-term, focusing on
reconstruction and material recovery towards the recovery of full functionality.
● The economic performance analysis highlighted significant disparities in production between
the northern and southern regions of Gaza, primarily due to water availability. Transitioning to
micro-solar for irrigation in the southern region has improved production and led to benefits,
indicating a pathway towards more autonomous and decentralised energy generation.
This rapid assessment laid the groundwork for a follow-up survey conducted online so as to reach
producers that are displaced, or currently under siege in Gaza City and the North.
7.1.2 Family Farming Survey
Conducted in November 2024, this survey gathered responses from 245 family farmers and
agripreneurs across Gaza across all 5 governorates, representing a diverse cross-section of Gaza’s
agricultural community.27 Women comprised 83% of the sample, with the majority of respondents aged
between 26 and 45, reflecting the active involvement of a younger people. Of respondents, 40% were
engaged in food processing, 26% in crop production, 16% in livestock production or pastoralism, and
14% in mixed farming, with some engaged in other food related activities.
27 Survey respondents: North Gaza (20%), Gaza City (25%), Middle Gaza (15%), Khan Younis (22%), and Rafah (18%).
21
7.1.2.1 Challenges in Agricultural Production
This survey identified several recurring challenges faced by respondents in maintaining agricultural
production. The lack of water for irrigation was the most frequently reported issue, affecting 55% of
participants. This was followed by limited access to seeds and inputs, cited by 48%, and the ongoing
impacts of aggressions, which hindered 45% of respondents. Environmental challenges, including
drought and flooding, affected 35%, while 40% noted a lack of financial support or credit as a barrier.
On a severity scale, 70% of respondents rated these challenges as “Very severe,” underscoring the
urgent need for targeted interventions to support Gaza’s agricultural sector.
Furthermore, the ongoing situation has severely disrupted agricultural operations for most, with the
majority (62%) reporting damage to their critical infrastructure such as greenhouses, irrigation
systems, and storage facilities. Additionally, 48% were unable to access their land, and 40% experienced
direct losses of crops or livestock.
The economic impact of the conflict has been devastating. Over 76% of respondents reported income
losses exceeding 50%, with 30% indicating catastrophic losses of more than 75%. The ability to employ
workers or manage labour was similarly affected, with 65% of participants noting severe impacts on
their workforce. The financial burden was further exacerbated by increased costs for essential inputs
like seeds and fertilizers, affecting 55% of respondents, while disruptions in supply chains and market
access hindered the operations of 50% of respondents. These findings highlight the far-reaching
consequences of the conflict on Gaza’s agricultural sector and the livelihoods dependent on it.
7.1.2.2 Perceptions of Pre-existing Agricultural Policies & Support
The survey also examined respondents’ views on the effectiveness of agricultural policies. A significant
proportion (60%) indicated that pre-existing policies will hinder their ability to recover from the
destruction, while only 20% considered these policies to be even moderately effective. Key areas
identified for policy improvement included support for women agripreneurs, better access to
agricultural inputs and resources, and reforms in land use and access rights. Support for urban
agriculture was also highlighted by 25% of respondents as an area requiring attention.
Respondents identified several areas of support critical to improving resilience in the face of ongoing
siege and environmental challenges. Financial assistance or credit was the most commonly mentioned,
by 70%, followed closely by access to water and irrigation infrastructure (65%) and support for market
access (50%). Additionally, 45% of respondents emphasized the importance of training in sustainable
agricultural practices, such as agroecology and urban farming, to adapt to challenges effectively,
which was regarded as effective by 80% of respondents.
Despite the benefits of collective action, only 25% of respondents reported participating in
cooperatives or networks such as GUPAP or other local organizations. This highlights a gap in
community-level resilience at a territorial level that could otherwise provide effective farmer-led
strategies such as equipment and skills sharing, bulking and collective marketing.
From resource shortages and infrastructure damage to economic losses and inadequate policy
support, the survey findings underscore the urgent need for targeted interventions and support for
social innovation. At the same time, the resilience strategies identified by respondents, including the
adoption of regenerative agroecological practices and the need for financial and institutional support,
provide valuable insights for shaping future policies.
22
7.2 Resourcefulness, Reciprocity and Care under Siege
Amongst others in Gaza, organisations such as GUPAP and UWAF advocate for and implement
agroecological practices and principles among women-led and other food and farming enterprises
that centre baladi foodways towards the advancement of food sovereignty. Where external resources
for agriculture are particularly scarce and vulnerable to geopolitical disruption, initiatives promoting
food sovereignty are gaining traction. In Gaza, these have involved the promotion of resource
optimization through agroecology; technology sovereignty through small-scale energy generation for
water pumping and harvesting for irrigation; and local seed adaptation with an emphasis on baladi
seed to (re)build agrobiodiversity for food and nutritional security.
Women-led urban agricultural enterprises have shown remarkable resilience and adaptation, both
before and during the bombardment. Community resilience through collective efforts such as
collective care as seen through the establishment of community kitchens in shelters for displaced
people have exemplified the ethics of steadfastness and solidarity.
● Community Kitchens and Collective Care: In the
midst of the military offensive on Gaza, family- led
community kitchens have emerged as crucial
support systems. For example, a family-led
community kitchen in a shelter for internally
displaced people has provided vital nourishment –
in the form of essential meals and a sense of
community support and mutual aid during a time of
crisis. Women have often been at the forefront of
these mutual aid initiatives, as producers,
processors, and cooks.
● Building Shared Capacities through Knowledge Exchange:
Since learning opportunities, intended to strengthen women-led research, practice and policy
formulation and the advancement of women’s political participation in food system planning,
organising and resourcing (farmer-to-farmer learning exchanges, and a professional diploma
in Urban Agroecology & Food Sovereignty) were cut short on 07/10, UWAF members made a
decision to take this into their own hands. As many have graduate and post-graduate
qualifications in farming and food studies, they recently launched their own ‘family farming
advisory service’, utilising WhatsApp groups and hotlines to provide technical support to
women agripreneurs. This ensures that, given the lack of physical advisory services (for women
even before the war), that women could still access essential advice and support for
maintaining their small-scale agribusinesses. Many women are adopting agroecological
practices such as composting, greywater harvesting, and integrated pest management that
have enabled them to maintain productivity despite challenges like water scarcity and
disrupted supply.
● Community-Led Solidarity Marketing Initiative: Established by GUPAP and UWAF before 07/11,
this initiative had already collected and distributed 18 tons of fresh and processed baladi
products from 50 UWAF members to over 200 vulnerable families. This supported FNS,
strengthening community solidarity, and creating important connections between local
producers, processors and consumers.28 During Eid al Adha in July 2024, members again came
28 Community-led approaches to realise the Right to Food (GUPAP June 2024)
Eid al Adha. June 2024. GUPAP
23
together as an act of steadfastness, solidarity and care to produce the traditional sweets to
break the fast which were both shared and sold at markets. Through this innovative approach
seasonal crops and food products are sourced from women agripreneurs and distributed to
displaced families now in shelters, many of which are operated by women-led NGOs that cater
specifically to women, children, and the elderly. Since October 2024, a further 15 tons of fresh
olives for preserving, and fresh and processes dates have been distributed as part this
important mutual aid initiative, easing the harsh conditions “From women to women,”
reflecting the profound solidarity between women still farming and those that are displaced.
● Baladi Seed Recovery: Despite its destruction, Hanadi and Salama have inventoried seed
remaining from Al Qarara seed bank which was distributed amongst its 200 farmers for
multiplication at the beginning of 2023. They have since begun the task of multiplication on
rented land in Deir Al Balah, where they are displaced, and from where they have begun the
long task of recovery that centres local seed sovereignty and traditional agricultural
knowledge.29
● Solidarity Cafe: Another initiative developed by UWAF members has arisen from the need for
a safe, warm space where women can come together in solidarity to organise and learn
together – a place for coffee, conviviality and care. With electricity and internet in Deir Al Balah,
the Cafe also aims to provide a focal point for the family farming advisory services, a place
where women undertaking studies are also able to access reading, and a place to share
knowledge and seed.
29 Revival of Al Qarara seed bank (GUPAP, September 2024)
24
Hanady Abu-Herbeid harvesting and solar drying Za’atar. GUPAP 2021 8 Divergent Post-War Food & Farming Strategies
8.1 Distinct visions for Gaza’s Food System
In the coming months and years, Gaza is likely to be exposed to significant international pressure to
re-make Gaza’s food and farming system in its own industrialised image, heightening market
dependence, and increasing pollution and biodiversity loss. It is notable that, in spite of the systematic
targeting of food and farming and destruction of infrastructures (including water) for over a decade,
Gaza’s food system took considerably longer to collapse
than anticipated. A policy lesson is to increase
diversification rather than specialisation, and strengthen
localization and social organisation of food production
and distribution.
There are two visions emerging for the future of food and
farming in Gaza – both asserting a commitment to climate
resilience. While both are able to supply enough food, their centres of power are markedly different.
Many therefore highlight the incompatibility of these divergent visions. The first, climate-smart
agriculture, is capital-intensive, extractivist, specialised, high-tech/-input dependent and technocratic
with a commitment to shareholder profit; while the other, agroecology, is reparative, knowledgeintensive, diversified, place-based and people-centred with a commitment to equity and sovereignty.
One practical concern with the first vision is the viability of increasing dependence on imported and
proprietorial inputs. Another concern is the concentration of power and corporate control of the food
system. This vision represents the dangers of post-war reconstruction as war by other means where
input-intensive and people-less technologies would deepen dependence on multinational
corporations as a form of colonial modernity. This would exacerbate injustices in water, food and
labour regimes, further pollute Gaza’s agroecosystem, deepen power inequalities, and heighten
vulnerabilities associated with occupation and blockade.
Input substitution, rather than
acceleration, is a first step in reducing
costs of production and thus increases
farmers’ profitability and competitiveness
within territorial markets.
25
To achieve food sovereignty, there is a need to diversify through locally adapted polycultures, rather
than further specialise through input-intensive monocultures. An emphasis on resource optimization
is critical by, for instance, enhancing soil fertility through nutrient cycling of Gaza’s organic wastes
(which constitute over 50% of all landfill), and substituting synthetic fertilisers and pesticides with
natural and locally-available alternatives that would dramatically reduce the leaching of nitrates and
leachates into groundwater. And where farming is so embattled, and farmers’ indebtedness was
already so crippling, the viability of farming livelihoods is a central concern. Input substitution, rather
than acceleration, is a first step in reducing costs of production and thus increases farmers’ profitability
and competitiveness within territorial markets. Importantly, there is a need for social and political
transformation focused on improving ecological and human health and addressing issues of equity
and participation in food systems governance, empowering farmers, particularly women, to exert
agency over their production systems and ensure sustainable livelihoods. Rather than further
entrenching dependence on external proprietary technologies, the notion of innovation should
embrace principles of technology sovereignty based on accessibility that prioritises place-based
solutions rooted in diverse local knowledges – controlled by people that have agency over it – with
innovations co-designed with farmers according to specified needs.
With an understanding that decisions on food – how, where, and by whom it is produced, organised
and governed – are inherently political, we take a position that the recovery of Gaza’s agriculture,
fisheries, and livestock sectors must be rooted a sovereign and a just transition towards place-based,
climate-sensitive and people-centred food systems. Decisions about its post-war potential that lay out
a decolonial pathway towards food sovereignty will need to be made by decision-makers entering into
meaningful dialogues with all those with a stake in Gaza’s food
system – its farmers, fishers and shepherds, and its processors,
marketers and consumers.
8.2 Future Prospects for a Just Recovery
Without formal recognition of women as farmers with tenure rights
or as landowners women producers’ access to services and available finance will also be further
compromised. Three quarters of those working in food production are women, either as skilled yet
unpaid labour on family farms, as skilled labour on commercial farms, or as business owners. Given the
nature of Israel’s targeted attacks on men, there is likely to be a significant skewing of the adult
population towards women. Without formal recognition of their status, and possibly without evidence
of land ownership given the targeting of municipal registries and records, women will lack land access
and/or security of tenure.
The road to a just recovery and reconstruction is steep and littered with diversions and road blocks.
Worth noting is the IPES-Food report that identifies four drivers of the ‘land squeeze’30 which, while
taking in the global picture, resonate with Gaza’s experience as a microcosm of pressures resulting
from occupation, including the expansion of access restricted areas, and consolidation of control over
the food system by industrial capital through the imposition of neoliberal policies.
1. Land Grabbing: Deregulation, financialisation & rapid resource extraction
2. Green Grabbing: conservation, carbon offsets & ‘clean fuel’ expansion
3. Expansion & Encroachment: urbanisation, and mega-infrastructure developments
4. Food System Reconfiguration: Agri-food sector industrialization & profit consolidation
30 https://ipes-food.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/LandSqueeze.pdf
A narrow focus on recovering Gaza’s
formal economy risks rendering
women’s contributions to food and
nutritional security invisible.
26
Rethinking food systems as central to post-war recovery in Gaza presents an opportunity to consider
what a just recovery looks like – one that re-values baladi food and farming systems that are deeply
rooted land stewardship, defends the right to food for all, and promotes an adaptive, resourceful food
future that is resilient in the face of ongoing shocks.
In the likelihood of continued occupation and ongoing blockade, to intensify production with
industrially produced external inputs will only exacerbate pressures on Gaza’s agroecosystem such as
soil depletion, and water pollution and over-extraction, while leaving the Strip exposed to future
rounds of siege. Furthermore, an intensifying land squeeze, or an outright land grab, will intensify
widespread land concentration, fragmentation, and degradation, eroding meaningful access to and
control over land for small-scale food producers,
peasants, pastoralists, fishers and marginalised
groups.
Within their ‘day after’ planning, international
actors tend to focus on the recovery of Gaza’s
formal economy, which is not where the majority
of Gazans make their living, particularly women. This
narrow focus risks rendering women’s contributions to food and nutritional security invisible. This
focus also ignores important parallel economies such as the solidarity, sharing, circular and Sumud
economies within which women thrive and that, before and since 07/10/23, have been pivotal to Gaza’s
resistance, resilience and survival. This raises concerns that while women may be a majority of adults
alive after a ceasefire, and will carry a significant burden of care for ill and disabled family members,
their contributions as farmers during the assault on Gaza will be overlooked through the recovery and
reconstruction phases. Excluded from meaningful participation in decision-making on the future of
Gaza’s food system, women’s voices for change will remain especially marginalised, invisible and
misrepresented by domestic and international actors alike.
UWAF beekeeper Samar Al-Baa. GUPAP 2021
Excluded from meaningful participation in decisionmaking on the future of Gaza’s food system,
women’s voices for change will remain especially
marginalised, invisible and misrepresented by
domestic and international actors alike.
27
9 Recommendations for Supporting Women Agripreneurs
9.1 Immediate Response Prior to a Ceasefire
Resulting from discussions with UWAF members since the middle of 2024, the Agripreneur Support
Strategy outlines a three-phase approach to supporting women-led SMEs to address immediate needs
for recovering their production. This highlights the need for crisis response plans that provide clearing
of unexploded ordnance, soil repair, decontamination of water, infrastructure rehabilitation, strategic
input stocks, and financial support to enhance resilience against future shocks. The first phase,
selection, involves nominating SMEs based on their production capacity and location. The second
phase is verification, where online forms are used to verify the nominated agripreneurs. The final
phase, implementation, includes three modalities for delivering support: in-kind procurement of
essential materials, community-led solidarity marketing, and cash support for women with personal
bank accounts. In the medium to long-term, we highlight the
following recommendations towards a just recovery.
9.2 Capacity Support for an Agroecological Transition
To support capacity for an agroecological transition, there first
needs to be a collective vision for what this means and what is required. This would require building a
movement between farmers, fishers and pastoralists, producers, marketers, researchers, scholars,
and civil society organisations and consumers to identify knowledge gaps and agree on what the
parameters for support might be to co-create diversified and resilient closed-loop production systems
that support FNS while preserving and enhancing agrobiodiversity and local foodways. This could take
various forms, including:
1. Tailored Skill Development: targeted training programs to rebuild and re-value diverse
knowledge(s) focusing on agroecological practices, financial management, marketing
strategies, and leadership skills tailored to the needs of women entrepreneurs in Gaza.
2. Create networks for peer-to-Peer learning: Facilitate platforms for interconnected women-led
food and farming businesses to share knowledge, experiences, and best practices.
3. Establish mentorship programs where experienced entrepreneurs mentor newcomers,
fostering a supportive community and promoting continuous learning.
4. Professional diploma for NGOs, extension workers, food activists and researchers in urban
agroecology and food sovereignty tailored to Gaza’s specific context, but also drawing in
students from the West Bank and the region to create solidarity networks.
Extension provision by women for women
is needed to support agroecological
farming systems transition and design.
28
5. Extension provision by women for women through a concerted programme to train women
extensionists in agroecological farming systems, transition and design.
9.3 Innovative Solutions
To overcome the multiplicity of challenges ahead, different innovations are required. Conventional
views of innovation in agriculture often focus on the introduction and adoption of new technologies
through ‘interventions’ and ‘knowledge transfer’. In this way, the very understanding of ‘innovation’
should be revisited and expanded beyond the purely technical to include social innovations such as
cooperatives, commoning on vacant land, land access, markets and more collective infrastructure for
processing. Given that reconstruction will present extreme pressures on land – particularly affecting
women – greater emphasis should be placed on promoting:
1. Inclusive and participatory forms of innovation and its governance.
2. Social innovations that might include cooperatives catering for public procurement (to get
healthy food into, for example, hospitals, schools, orphanages).
3. Citizen science with baladi farmers trialling nature-based solutions to remediate soils
devastated by contamination and compaction.
4. Revisiting WASH regulations that depend on water-based sewage management with a
view to nutrient cycling systems.
5. Incentives for investment in local food, energy and water schemes.
6. Knowledge co-production and sharing among communities and networks.
7. Responsible co-innovation between researchers and farmers informed by specified needs.
8. Innovative co-financing for farmers to access land for collective ownership and production.
9.4 Material and Financial Support for Food Systems Recovery
1. Identify local and international organisations to establish relationships around a commitment
to an agroecological transition to build alliances for long-term support for a just recovery and
reconstruction that centres local knowledges, supports the establishment of seed libraries and
promotes the re-localisation of markets.
2. Access to Finance: Establish women-led and
organised microfinance schemes or grants specifically
for women-led agribusinesses to access affordable
credit and investment. Provide financial literacy
training, for those who require and request it, to
empower entrepreneurs in managing finances and
accessing funding opportunities.
3. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Assistance: Mobilise resources to provide all farmers with
essential materials for repairing soils, decontaminating water, and rehabilitating damaged
infrastructure such as greenhouses, irrigation systems, and storage facilities.
4. Farmer Managed Seed Systems: The basis of a sovereign food system begins with open
pollinated seed that has been selected, adapted and shared over generations that can be
produced with no industrial inputs and little water. Policies are needed to preserve and
distribute baladi seed through the establishment of seed libraries supported by agroecological
practices to multiply genetically diverse baladi varieties for pest and drought resistance and
nutrient-density.
Defence of farmland requires the
monitoring, recording and suspension of
any contested or undemocratic land
transfers, land-use changes or land grabs
without the full consent of women.
29
9.5 Policy Recommendations for Supporting Women-Led Agribusinesses
Current agricultural policies neither centre the urban and peri-urban realities of Gaza’s food and
farming systems, nor adequately recognize women farmers, fishers or pastoralists, limiting their
access to essential resources such as veterinary services and financial assistance.
1. Defence of farmland: The monitoring, recording and suspension of any contested or
undemocratic land transfers, land-use changes or land grabs without the full consent of
women and other local people should be at the forefront of local and international policy.
2. Investment in agriculture that envisages a post-aid dependent oPt would begin with domestic
and international recognition of the role of highly resilient and adaptive farming systems and
those innovators that continue to practise and adapt it. This would include increasing the
percentage of GDP and ODA to agriculture, and prioritising its allocation to baladi food and
ba’ali cultivation systems, including to pastoralists and fishers.
3. Gender-Responsive Policies that recognize and address the unique challenges faced by
women entrepreneurs. These include equal access to land, water resources, and markets, and
integrate gender perspectives into food systems strategies and governance.
4. Identification of urban land: for collective urban agroecology by networks and cooperatives
of women unable to farm out-of-reach and dangerous no-go areas, while reducing transport
costs and waste associated with getting produce to markets.
5. Introduce incentives for agroecological practices such as relaxing regulations, tax breaks or
subsidies, particularly for women-led agribusinesses employing baladi skills and protecting
baladi foodways.
6. Build integrated governance for land, environmental, and food systems to halt land grabs, recentre communities, and ensure a just and human rights-based transition. Bar speculative
capital from land markets, and get land back into the hands of farmers.
7. Lift and review regulations and standards regimes that represent uneven barriers to market
entry for small-scale producers. These should be lifted to enable a just recovery, and be
comprehensively reviewed thereafter to satisfy local requirements, and incorporate, for
instance, labour considerations and environmental impacts.
8. Resist the imposition of proprietorial technologies that would concentrate power over the
agri-food system in the hands of international capital, and instead prioritise the establishment
of locally adapted legal frameworks that recognise farmers’ rights and guarantee equitable
access to diverse seeds and livestock breeds.
9. Prioritising the re-establishment and re-localization of markets and support for communal
infrastructures such as sorting, packing and processing hubs, and transportation
infrastructures that provide greater processing and handling capacities for fresh products
from small-scale farmers who adopt agroecological and other innovative approaches and
improve their access to local food markets.
10. Introduce supply management and import quotas to guarantee stable prices and market
outlets for food local producers and processors.
11. Create municipal systems for organic waste collection and integration into soils for fertility
management. This could include support for location-specific community-led composting and
sales to farmers across the Gaza Strip.
30
10 Conclusion
Throughout, we have examined the profound impact of the systematic assault on Gaza’s entire food
system, with a focus on women-led agribusinesses, highlighting the resilience and challenges faced by
these agripreneurs amidst extreme adversity. The resilience displayed by women in Gaza is a
testament to their unwavering determination and resourcefulness in the face of adversity. Despite
enduring unimaginable setbacks, these entrepreneurs have leveraged local knowledge, community
solidarity, and innovative approaches to sustain operations and support their communities.
This report has highlighted the opportunities that Gaza’s reconstruction represents for global
capital. As such, it warns of the dangers of post-war reconstruction as a ‘continuation of war by other
means’ where input-intensive and people-less technologies would deepen dependence. Available
evidence warns that this would exacerbate injustices in water, food and labour regimes of extraction,
deepen the pollution of Gaza’s agroecosystem, and heighten structured vulnerabilities associated with
ongoing occupation and blockade. With an understanding that decisions on food – how, where, by
whom it is produced and governed – are inherently political, we take a position that the recovery of
Gaza’s agriculture, fisheries, and livestock sectors must be rooted in a sovereign and just transition
towards place-based, climate-sensitive and people-centred food systems.
Here we also drew on a policy review that revealed significant gaps. In the face of the occupation
strategy of containment, de-development and regular destruction, no interventions can be made more
technically effective as if they were a navigable mechanical obstacle. Any assessment of Gaza’s
agricultural policies must therefore recognize the impacts of occupation in addition to internal
governance challenges on local food systems. Many reports have been produced on ‘improving’
Palestinian coping and resilience mechanisms, presented as simple technical or capacity building
strategies. As such, we have sought to navigate this tension, calling for more effective strategies in
Gaza, while avoiding pathologising its producers.
By fostering an inclusive and supportive ecosystem that values the diverse contributions of women to
food and farming across different landscapes, Gaza can harness the resilience and innovation of its
entrepreneurs to build a more dignified, sovereign and prosperous future. The journey ahead will
require continued negotiation between government agencies, civil society organisations,
international donors, and local communities to ensure that women-led agribusinesses thrive amidst
adversity and contribute to Gaza’s food and nutritional security and its economic resilience.
Leave a Reply
يجب أنت تكون مسجل الدخول لتضيف تعليقاً.