Resource-poor people face multiple risks and disturbances across social, economic, health, political, and environmental spheres. Included among these are conflict, public health threats, corruption, climate change, and natural resource degradation. The concept of resilience provides a useful framework for considering potential solutions to these intersecting challenges. This is particularly the case in situations where structural problems and inequalities—such as chronic poverty and gender gaps—underlie persistent and recurring shocks. Growing evidence shows that men and women have different exposure to shocks and stressors, and different preferences and capacities in terms of their responses. This stems from gendered social, cultural, and institutional contexts that shape such factors as their livelihood activities, roles, and bargaining power. Importantly, these factors are intrinsically linked with women’s empowerment levels, including their ability to access resources and make strategic life choices to improve their overall wellbeing. Because shocks and stressors occur in local contexts with different power structures, institutions, and sociocultural norms, it is difficult to generalize the different ways men and women are affected and choose to respond. Men’s and women’s experiences and reactions largely depend on the types of overlapping shocks and stressors they are exposed to. This brief highlights some of the key gendered dimensions of resilience, drawing on evidence from the literature, including systematic reviews and global indicators, where available, as well as case-study examples that highlight important linkages. The evidence summarized is intended to guide the development and implementation of gender-sensitive resilience interventions focusing on key programming areas of interest to Feed the Future’s Center for Resilience.
