How we harvest, select and prioritize resources
The CGIAR GENDER resource hub features publications, methods, tools, news and more from across CGIAR and beyond.
Publications provided via GARDIAN
Publications and data featured on the resource hub are harvested via GARDIAN (the Global Agricultural Research Data Innovation Acceleration Network), part of the CGIAR Big Data Platform. To feature the most relevant materials, our custom selection criteria include harvesting all publications published in CGIAR repositories after 2006 with a “gender” tag and subsequent exclusion of any material that does not include one of the following keywords in its title: gender, gendered, woman, women, girl, girls, equality, equity, empowerment, inclusion, inclusive, intersectionality, masculinity, masculinities, participatory, participation, feminization.
To browse thousands of additional gender-related publications, from CGIAR and beyond, visit GARDIAN.
Methods, tools and manuals
Methods, tools and manuals featured on the CGIAR GENDER resource hub are intended to be of relevance to gender in food systems and to be targeted toward researchers, practitioners and policymakers—especially those in the Global South.
Priority is given to methods, tools and manuals that have been presented in peer-reviewed literature, which is expected to represent the most rigorous evaluation of available methods and tools, as well as to resources that have undergone rigorous review in the GENDER Platform’s Methods module. However, to allow room for emerging resources, non-peer reviewed methods, tools and training materials will also be considered, for example if supported by long-standing or wide-ranging application or, on the other hand, if of particularly urgent need.
The training courses featured on the GENDER resource hub are curated and reviewed by the Alliances Module. Priority is given to training courses offered by highly reputable institutions.
Our evidence explainers are intended as short, accessible summaries of gender research fit for fast consumption by policymakers, practitioners and other decision-makers.
Evidence considered may originate from across a continuum, ranging from evidence as defined by methodological criteria based on a traditional scientific paradigm (e.g., a randomized, controlled trial) to descriptive criteria documented through process-oriented reports (e.g., best practices). We prioritize evidence that is of particular relevance to the role of gender in the transformation of food systems, that addresses policy concerns and that is applicable to real-world contexts.
In addition, priority is given to evidence from systematic reviews, literature reviews, scoping reviews or meta-analyses as well as from critically appraised topics and articles, which are expected to represent the most rigorous evaluation of available evidence. However, to capture recent, emerging evidence, evidence based on grey literature as well as evidence based on participatory research, best practices and case studies may also be considered.
What are we missing?
Please contact us at email@example.com with with feedback or suggestions of other resources we should consider including.