**1. Introduction**

Many scientists agree that climate change is the most pervasive and urgent global threat of our time, contributing to complex environmental, socioeconomic, and governance issues that impact developed and developing countries. However,

a much smaller community of scholars and practitioners has documented the linkages between climate change and gender inequality showing differentiated impacts on men and women because of gender division of labour and differences in use, control and ownership of assets and natural resources. (Tovar-Restrepo 2017, p. 412)

This is the situation in the Caribbean, where limited information exists on gender in fisheries and their nexus with climate change. Diverse gendered impacts of climate change burden women in Caribbean fisheries, both directly and indirectly (Morrow 2017). Excluding gender from applied research to conceptualize, examine, and address climate change impacts on fisheries means that an inadequate understanding and inappropriate solutions could intensify maladaptation (Sturgeon 2017). As argued by feminist authors in the collection assembled by Frangoudes et al. (2019), there is an urgent need to transform gender relations in fisheries, including climate aspects.

Attention must be paid to both women (Solano et al. 2021) and men (Salguero-Velázquez et al. 2022) to understand gender relations. In the Caribbean fisheries harvest sector, few women fish, and a small but unknown number own or co-own fishing vessels. Most work in postharvest, with a few in ancillary services. The Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism (CRFM) is the authoritative regional fisheries body and source of statistics. It estimates that about 470,000 persons have fisheries sector livelihoods in its 17 CRFM member states, with a third of these (mostly men) in harvest (CRFM 2021). This leaves about 320,000 persons employed in fish processing, marketing, distribution, and ancillary services (e.g., ice production, gear supply, boat repair, research, development, and management). CRFM does not provide gender disaggregated data for any country, and lists collection and analysis of gender-disaggregated data as its first priority (CRFM 2020a).

There are few women in the Caribbean fisheries harvest sector, but extreme weather events increase hazards at sea and reduce the number of fishing days for the harvest sector dominated by men. This in turn limits the fish landings to be sold by the women who dominate postharvest. Fishery households tend to be poorer and female-headed, further increasing the burden on women (IDB 2020). As women work harder and longer to secure supplementary income for their households, less time is available for training and education, and for participation in fisherfolk organization leadership. Limited access to assets needed to cope with and adapt to climate impacts may translate into women fisherfolk having less power to engage and influence climate-related decisions in fisheries governance and wider society. Women's voices at all levels of governance and all forums for decision making are likely to lead to empowerment, with more equitable and sustainable development (IDB 2020; Kabeer 1999; Morrow 2017).

Women have been recognized as key actors in climate change adaptation and mitigation, given their diverse roles in fisheries as scientists, managers, civil society trailblazers, and resource users. Women are change agents who catalyze the transformation necessary to achieve climate-smart resilience in the supply of Caribbean seafood (CRFM 2020a). Yet, women's ability to adapt to climate change is often limited by entrenched societal gender norms, roles, and inequalities that "result in women being the most disadvantaged by the impacts of climate change and least well placed socially, legally and economically to respond to them" (Morrow 2017, p. 402). These challenges motivate women's empowerment and gender mainstreaming (FAO 2017; IDB 2020). Women must engage in climate change discourses, given the disproportionate impact on the vulnerable in society (Morrow 2017). Documenting the climate challenges faced by women in fisheries and how they deal with them in livelihoods and organizational leadership can inform gender mainstreaming (GIFT 2018).

In this chapter, we examine challenges in women's livelihoods and leadership in Caribbean small-scale fisheries and suggest gender mainstreaming at the

fisheries–climate nexus. The next section sets out the methods followed by results and discussion of women's adaptive capacity in two specific cases. We conclude with a perspective on the way forward.

#### **2. Materials and Methods**

We use three analytical frameworks to understand fisheries' social–ecological systems: adaptive capacity, livelihoods analysis, and institutional analysis (GIFT 2018). This chapter first sets the context for adaptive capacity, followed by summary analysis of two cases of women in Caribbean small-scale fisheries that illustrate some challenges and adaptations.

A review of the literature provides a practical perspective on the scope for women's adaptive capacity to climate in Caribbean small-scale fisheries. The review employs a heuristic version of the framework from McClanahan and Cinner (2012) that uses five dimensions of adaptive capacity: assets, flexibility, learning, social organization, and agency. The framework has been applied to fisheries in Africa (Cinner et al. 2015), the Pacific (Cohen et al. 2016), and the Caribbean (Turner et al. 2020). Due to the paucity of Caribbean fisheries' gender data and information, we focus on broadly thematic capacities and enablers encompassing the dimensions rather than addressing them individually. The two case studies facilitate deeper exploration using more specific analytical frameworks.

Livelihood analyses have long been used in gender studies of fisheries, and a sustainable livelihoods approach (Allison and Ellis 2001) is applied to the sargassum case (Figure 1). Climate is a particularly strong factor in the vulnerability context, but it pervades the entire framework. Slow climate change trends (e.g., sea level rise), more rapid climate variability or chronic seasonality (e.g., extreme weather events), and outright environmental surprises or shocks (e.g., sargassum seaweed influxes) all impact social, ecological, and economic conditions in the fisheries sector. Next are the livelihood capital assets (physical, financial, human, social, and natural). The third as interactions consists of institutional structures (e.g., agencies) and processes (e.g., policies). These exhibit complex interactions with climate, gender, and livelihood variables to determine feasible livelihood strategies (e.g., multi-occupationality) and outcomes (e.g., reliable income). Each provides feedback to all prior components.

Institutional analysis (Ostrom 2011) is applied in the second case. Similar to livelihoods, the first component is context. This includes ecological (e.g., marine resources), socio-economic (e.g., livelihoods), and institutional (e.g., decision making) factors. The second component is an arena comprising patterns of interactions among institutional actors (e.g., fisherfolk and fisheries authorities). Outcomes provide feedback to evolving institutional arrangements (Figure 2).

**Figure 1.** Simplified fisheries livelihoods analysis of sargassum seaweed influx impacts. Source: Figure by authors. **Figure 1.** Simplified fisheries livelihoods analysis of sargassum seaweed influx impacts. Source: Figure by authors. making) factors. The second component is an arena comprising patterns of interactions among institutional actors (e.g., fisherfolk and fisheries authorities). Outcomes provide feedback to evolving institutional arrangements (Figure 2).

Institutional analysis (Ostrom 2011) is applied in the second case. Similar to

**Figure 2.** Simplified institutional analysis applied to fisherfolk organization leadership. Source: Figure by authors. **Figure 2.** Simplified institutional analysis applied to fisherfolk organization leadership. Source: Figure by authors.

4 **Figure 2.** Simplified institutional analysis applied to fisherfolk organization leadership. Source: Figure by authors. The figures show case-based features of the components as examples. The livelihoods case focuses on how women dealt with sargassum seaweed influxes as climate surprises. The institutional case focuses on women leaders in fisherfolk organizations that must influence policy for climate adaptation in fisheries. Both 4 The figures show case-based features of the components as examples. The livelihoods case focuses on how women dealt with sargassum seaweed influxes as climate surprises. The institutional case focuses on women leaders in fisherfolk organizations that must influence policy for climate adaptation in fisheries. Both The figures show case-based features of the components as examples. The livelihoods case focuses on how women dealt with sargassum seaweed influxes as climate surprises. The institutional case focuses on women leaders in fisherfolk organizations that must influence policy for climate adaptation in fisheries. Both cases were constructed from several fisheries projects comprising 37 informal interviews, 6 focus groups, and 11 workshops and field observations involving approximately 100 women and the authors. For secondary data, the cases draw upon the unpublished outputs of these projects. The cases illustrate the utility of investigating how women in fisheries cope with climate change and variability. They do not claim to be representative, but they aid understanding. Lessons learned from

the cases on how women in fisheries cope with and adapt to these climate challenges can inform gender mainstreaming.
