Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

A systematic review of the impact of post-harvest aquatic food processing technology on gender equality and social justice

Nature Food volume 5, pages 731–741 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Post-harvest practices and technologies are key to reducing global aquatic harvest loss. The lives of post-harvest fisheries workers, over half of them women, are deeply affected by these technologies, but their equity and equality outcomes are poorly understood. This systematic review synthesizes evidence of post-harvest aquatic food processing technology outcomes, showing that persistent inequalities in social structure and norms disadvantage women across a range of technologies, both traditional and improved, especially regarding control over resources. We found that improved technologies bring enhanced productivity and possibly income for workers, yet contracts are often precarious due to pre-existing social inequities. While power and control of resources is more unequal in factory settings, it is not necessarily equal in traditional contexts either, despite offering greater flexibility. More rigorous comparative research, including voices of diverse actors, is key to understanding the impacts of different technologies on gender equality and social justice and inform policymaking.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Impact of gender and intersectional inequalities on health, livelihood and equity outcomes of fish processing technologies.
Fig. 2: PRISMA diagram reporting the review results.
Fig. 3: Geographic spread of the 42 included studies.
Fig. 4: Publication dates of included studies by year, grouped by processing type.
Fig. 5: Gender dimensions and social justice outcomes assessed in the included literature, by processing technology.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request. The DOIs of the studies included in the systematic review are presented in Supplementary Table 1.

References

  1. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Duke University & WorldFish Illuminating Hidden Harvests (FAO, 2023); https://doi.org/10.4060/cc4576en

  2. WorldFish Annual Report 2021 (WorldFish, 2022); https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12348/5284

  3. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA) (FAO, 2020); https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en

  4. Agarwal, M., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, S., Singh, R. & KM, J. Food Loss and Waste in India: The Knowns and the Unknowns (World Resources Institute, 2021); https://www.wri.org/research/food-loss-and-waste-india-knowns-and-unknowns

  5. Stathers, T. et al. A scoping review of interventions for crop postharvest loss reduction in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Nat. Sustain. 3, 821–835 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gopal, N., Hapke, H. M., Kusakabe, K., Rajaratnam, S. & Williams, M. J. Expanding the horizons for women in fisheries and aquaculture. Gend. Technol. Dev. 24, 1–9 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Food Security and Nutrition: Building a Global Narrative towards 2030. A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security (Committee on World Food Security, 2020); https://www.fao.org/3/ca9731en/ca9731en.pdf

  8. Bennet, E. Gender, fisheries and development. Mar. Policy 29, 451–459 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gustavsson, M. Women’s changing productive practices, gender relations and identities in fishing through a critical feminisation perspective. J. Rural Stud. 78, 36–46 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bryceson, D. F. & McCall, M. K. Lightening the load on rural women: how appropriate is the technology directed towards Africa? Gend. Technol. Dev. 1, 23–45 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Basu, P. & Scholten, B. A. Technological and social dimensions of the Green Revolution: connecting pasts and futures. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 10, 109–116 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gopal, N., Edwin, L. & Meenakumari, B. Transformation in gender roles with changes in traditional fisheries in Kerala, India. Asian Fish. Sci. 27, 67–78 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rola‐Rubzen, M. F., Paris, T., Hawkins, J. & Sapkota, B. Improving gender participation in agricultural technology adoption in Asia: from rhetoric to practical action. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 42, 113–125 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bennett, N. J. Mainstreaming equity and justice in the ocean. Front. Mar. Sci. 9, 873572 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hicks, C. C. et al. Rights and representation support justice across aquatic food systems. Nat. Food 3, 851–861 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Issifu, I., Dahmouni, I., Deffor, E. W. & Sumaila, U. R. Diversity, equity, and inclusion in the Blue Economy: why they matter and how do we achieve them? Front. Polit. Sci. 4, 106748 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. The State of Food and Agriculture 2013 (FAO, 2013); https://www.fao.org/4/i3300e/i3300e00.htm

  18. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA) (FAO, 2022); https://www.fao.org/3/ca9731en/ca9731en.pdf

  19. Kabeer, N. Mainstreaming Gender Equality in Poverty Eradication and the Millennium Development Goals: Handbook for Policy Makers (Commonwealth Secretariat, 2003).

  20. Gopal, N., Williams, M. J., Porter, M. & Kusakabe, K. Gender in aquaculture and fisheries. The long journey to equality. Asian Fish. Sci. 29S, 1–246 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Training Module—How to Integrate Gender Issues in Climate-Smart Agriculture Projects (FAO, 2017); https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en?details=45d93533-c024-%2f

  22. Komlatsky, V. I., Podoinitsyna, T. A., Verkhoturov, V. V. & Kozub, Y. A. Automation technologies for fish processing and production of fish products. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1399, 044050 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Turan, H. & Erkoyuncu, İ. in Progress in Food Preservation (eds Bhat, R. et al.) 297–313 (Wiley, 2012).

  24. Tokur, B. & Korkmaz, K. in Innovative Technologies in Seafood Processing (ed. Ozogul, Y.) 303–322 (CRC Press, 2019).

  25. Kamarulzaman, A., Hasanuzzaman, M. & Rahim, N. A. Global advancement of solar drying technologies and its future prospects: a review. Sol. Energy 221, 559–582 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Harwood, S. & Eaves, S. Conceptualising technology, its development and future: the six genres of technology. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 160, 120174 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Dosi, G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Res. Policy 11, 147–162 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mamat, H. & Bhandari, B. R. Special issue on innovative food products and processing. Appl. Sci. 13, 8542 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kabeer, N. Reversed Realities: Gender Hierarchies in Development Thought (Verso, 1994).

  30. Kruijssen, F., McDougall, C. L. & van Asseldonk, I. J. M. Gender and aquaculture value chains: a review of key issues and implications for research. Aquaculture 493, 328–337 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Njuki, J. et al. A Review of Evidence on Gender Equality, Women’s Empowerment, and Food Systems (International Food Policy Research Institute, 2021); https://ebrary.ifpri.org/digital/collection/p15738coll2/id/134469

  32. Moser, C. Gender planning in the third world: meeting practical and strategic gender needs. World Dev. 17, 1799–1825 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Giddens, A. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (Polity, 1986).

  34. Rao, N. et al. A qualitative comparative analysis of women’s agency and adaptive capacity in climate change hotspots in Asia and Africa. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 964–971 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  35. McDougall, C. et al. Women’s Empowerment in Fisheries and Aquaculture Index (WEFI): Guidance Notes (WorldFish, 2022); https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12348/5107

  36. What Does It Mean to Leave No One Behind? A UNDP Discussion Paper and Framework for Implementation (United Nations Development Programme, 2018); https://www.undp.org/publications/what-does-it-mean-leave-no-one-behind

  37. Doneys, P. et al. Gender, technology and development: reflections on the past, and provocations for the future. Gend. Technol. Dev. 26, 285–294 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Nagoli, J., Binauli, L. & Chijere, A. Inclusive ecosystems? Women’s participation in the aquatic ecosystem of Lake Malawi. Environments 6, 3 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ngaruiya, F. W., Ogendi, G. M. & Mokua, M. A. Occupational health risks and hazards among the fisherfolk in Kampi Samaki, Lake Baringo, Kenya. Environ. Health Insights https://doi.org/10.1177/11786302198814 (2019).

  40. Environmental Management and Economic Development Organization (EMEDO). Women’s Role, Struggles and Strategies across the Fisheries Value Chain the Case of Lake Victoria-Tanzania (Socio Economics and Extension Services Division, National Institute for Freshwater Fisheries Research, 2017); www.icsf.net

  41. Zelasney, J., Ford, A., Westlund, L., Ward, A. & Peñarubia, O. R. Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries—Showcasing Applied Practices in Value Chains, Post-harvest Operations and Trade. Case Study 3: The FAO-Thiaroye Processing Technique: Facilitating Social Organization, Empowering Women and Creating Market Access Opportunities in West Africa (FAO, 2020); https://doi.org/10.4060/ca8402en

  42. Picked Apart the Hidden Struggles of Migrant Worker Women in the Maryland Crab Industry (American University Washington College of Law International Human Rights Law Clinic and Centro de los Derechos del Migrante, 2010).

  43. Rafnsdottir, G. L. & Gudmundsdottir, M. L. New technology and its impact on well-being. Work 22, 31–39 (2004).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Aasmoe, L. et al. Skin symptoms in the seafood-processing industry in north Norway. Contact Dermatitis 52, 102–107 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Aasmoe, L., Bang, B., Egeness, C. & Løchen, M. L. Musculoskeletal symptoms among seafood production workers in North Norway. Occup. Med. 58, 64–70 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Jeebhay, M. F. et al. Occupational allergy and asthma among salt water fish processing workers. Am. J. Ind. Med. 51, 899–910 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Tomita, S. et al. Introduction prevalence and risk factors of low back pain among Thai and Myanmar migrant seafood processing factory workers in Samut Sakorn Province, Thailand. Ind. Health 48, 283–291 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Shobhana Warrier, M. V. Women at work: migrant women in fish processing industry. Econ. Polit. Wkly 36, 3554–3562 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Howse, D. et al. Gender and snow crab occupational asthma in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Environ. Res. 101, 163–174 (2006).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Howse, D., Jeebhay, M. F. & Neis, B. The changing political economy of occupational health and safety in fisheries: lessons from Eastern Canada and South Africa. J. Agrar. Change 12, 344–363 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Yingst, A. & Skaptadóttir, U. D. Gendered labor in the Icelandic fish processing industry. Marit. Stud. 17, 125–132 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Barclay, K. M., Satapornvanit, A. N., Syddall, V. M. & Williams, M. J. Tuna is women’s business too: applying a gender lens to four cases in the Western and Central Pacific. Fish Fish. 23, 584–600 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Choudhury, A., McDougall, C., Rajaratnam, S. & Mi Young Park, C. Women’s Empowerment in Aquaculture: Two Case Studies from Bangladesh (FAO, 2017).

  54. Ike-Obasi, J. & Ogubunka, S. O. The roles of women in fish processing activities in some local government areas of Rivers State, Nigeria. Agric. Ext. J. 3, 73–77 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Sangaramoorthy, T. Liminal living: everyday injury, disability, and instability among migrant Mexican women in Maryland’s seafood industry. Med. Anthropol. Q. 33, 557–578 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Gender Analysis of Post-harvest Fisheries in Cambodia (United Nations Industrial Development Organization, 2021).

  57. Kaminski, A. M. et al. Fish losses for whom? A gendered assessment of post-harvest losses in the Barotse Floodplain fishery, Zambia. Sustainability 12, 10091 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Santos, A. N. Fisheries as a way of life: gendered livelihoods, identities and perspectives of artisanal fisheries in eastern Brazil. Mar. Policy 62, 279–288 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Ramirez, P. J. B., Narvaez, T. A. & Santos-Ramirez, E. J. Gender-inclusive value chains: the case of seaweed farming in Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines. Gend. Technol. Dev. 24, 110–130 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Torell, E., Manyungwa-Pasani, C., Bilecki, D., Gumulira, I. & Yiwombe, G. Assessing and advancing gender equity in Lake Malawi’s small-scale fisheries sector. Sustainability 13, 13001 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Nwabeze, G. O. et al. Gender and Fisheries of Lake Kainji, Nigeria: A Review (Fisheries Society of Nigeria, 2012); http://hdl.handle.net/1834/38238

  62. Omeje, J. E., Anthonia Ifeyinwa, A., Samuel Preye, J. & Queen Mercy, M. Economics of smoked farmed catfish in Kainji Lake Basin, Nigeria. J. Agric. Ext. 26, 1–14 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Larson, S., Stoeckl, N., Rimmer, M. A. & Paul, N. A. Understanding feedback relationships between resources, functionings and well-being: a case study of seaweed farming and artisanal processing in Indonesia. Ambio 51, 914–925 (2022).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Salim, S. S. & Geetha, R. Empowerment of fisherwomen in Kerala-an assessment. Ind. J. Fish. 60, 73–80 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Davies, R. M. & Davis, O. A. Traditional and improved fish processing technologies in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Eur. J. Sci. Res. 26, 539–548 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Cole, S. M. et al. Postharvest fish losses and unequal gender relations: drivers of the social-ecological trap in the Barotse Floodplain fishery, Zambia. Ecol. Soc. 23, 1–18 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Hasniati, Yunus, R. & Hamsinah The empowerment of coastal women through capacity improvement of seaweed farmer groups. Adv. Econ. Bus. Manag. Res. 43, 97–100 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Chiwaula, L. S., Chirwa, G. C., Binauli, L. S., Banda, J. & Nagoli, J. Gender differences in willingness to pay for capital-intensive agricultural technologies: the case of fish solar tent dryers in Malawi. Agric. Food Econ. 6, 1 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Forkuor, D., Peprah, V. & Alhassan, A. M. Assessment of the processing and sale of marine fish and its effects on the livelihood of women in Mfantseman Municipality, Ghana. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 20, 1329–1346 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Solano, N., Lopez-Ercilla, I., Fernandez-Rivera Melo, F. J. & Torre, J. Unveiling women’s roles and inclusion in Mexican small-scale fisheries (SSF). Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 617965 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Galappaththi, M., Collins, A. M., Armitage, D. & Nayak, P. K. Linking social wellbeing and intersectionality to understand gender relations in dried fish value chains. Marit. Stud. 20, 355–370 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Frink, L. The identity division of labor in Native Alaska. Am. Anthropol. 111, 21–29 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Abeledo, L. M. Labour segmentation in the Spanish fish-canning industry: a historical perspective, 1880–1960. Contin. Change 21, 475–501 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Hamid, M. A. & Alauddin, M. Coming out of their homesteads? Employment for rural women in shrimp aquaculture in coastal Bangladesh. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 25, 314–337 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Griffith, D. C. Nonmarket labor processes in an advanced capitalist economy. Am. Anthropol. 89, 838–852 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Friberg, J. H. & Midtbøen, A. H. Ethnicity as skill: immigrant employment hierarchies in Norwegian low-wage labour markets. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 44, 1463–1478 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Akinpelu, O. M., Ayeloja, A. A., George, F. O. A., Adebisi, G. L. & Jimoh, W. A. Gender analysis of processing activities among commercial catfish processors within Ibadan metropolis, Oyo state south-western Nigeria. J. Aquac. Res. Dev. 4, 1–5 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  78. Delaney, A. Transition in nori cultivation: evolution of household contribution and gendered division of labor. Cah. Biol. Mar. 52, 527–533 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  79. Mazumi, Y. Migration outside large cities: a comparison of the hiring of migrants for the food processing industry in the United States and Japan. Comp. Migr. Stud. 9, 46 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Johnson, N. L., Kovarik, C., Meinzen-Dick, R., Njuki, J. & Quisumbing, A. Gender, assets, and agricultural development: lessons from eight projects. World Dev. 83, 296–311 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Thorpe, A. et al. ‘Fishing na everybody business’: women’s work and gender relations in Sierra Leone’s fisheries. Fem. Econ. 20, 53–77 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Williams, M. J. & Syddall, V. Women, fisheries technology and development: toward new research approaches. Gend. Technol. Dev. 26, 357–384 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Neis, B., Gerrard, S. & Power, N. G. Women and children first: the gendered and generational socioecology of smaller-scale fisheries in Newfoundland and Labrador and Northern Norway. Ecol. Soc. 18, 64 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Szaboova, L., Gustavsson, M. & Turner, R. Recognizing women’s wellbeing and contribution to social resilience in fisheries. Soc. Nat. Resour. 35, 59–74 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Lynch, M. & Turner, S. Rocking the boat: intersectional resistance to marine conservation policies in Wakatobi National Park, Indonesia. Gend. Place Cult. 29, 1376–1398 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Lokuge, G. & Hilhorst, D. Outside the net: intersectionality and inequality in the fisheries of Trincomalee, Sri Lanka. Asian J. Women Stud. 23, 473–497 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Warner, L. R. A best practices guide to intersectional approaches in psychological research. Sex Roles 59, 454–463 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Tavenner, K., Crane, T. A., Bullock, R. & Galiè, A. Intersectionality in gender and agriculture: toward an applied research design. Gend. Technol. Dev. 26, 385–403 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Mikulewicz, M., Caretta, M. A., Sultana, F. & Crawford, N. J. W. Intersectionality & climate justice: a call for synergy in climate change scholarship. Environ. Polit. 32, 1275–1286 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Knott, C. The rhythm of making cheaps: a case study of rhythmanalysis and qualitative labour shortages in Canadian fisheries. Appl. Mob. 6, 202–219 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  91. Snider, A., Adraki, P. K., Lolig, V. & McNamara, P. E. Assessing gendered impacts of post-harvest technologies in Northern Ghana: gender equity and food security. Gend. Technol. Dev. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718524.2023.2273153 (2023).

  92. Wajcman, J. Feminist theories of technology. Camb. J. Econ. 34, 143–152 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Higgins, J. P. T. et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.3 (Wiley, 2022).

  94. Page, M. J. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 18, e1003583 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z. & Elmagarmid, A. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 5, 210 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Wells, G. B. et al. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 2000).

  97. Yosef, S., Jones, A. D., Chakraborty, B. & Gillespie, S. Agriculture and nutrition in Bangladesh: mapping evidence to pathways. Food Nutr. Bull. 36, 387–404 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Thomas, J. & Harden, A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 8, 45 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Noblit, G. W. & Hare, R. D. Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies (Sage Publications, 1988).

  100. De Brauw, A. et al. Food System Innovations for Healthier Diets in Low and Middle-Income Countries (International Food Policy Research Institute, 2019).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This Review received partial funding from the Economic and Social Research Council grant ES/R010404/1 to the project Coastal Transformations and Fisher Wellbeing. We thank our country-level partners S. Velvizhi, M. M. Haque, F. H. Shikha, J. Walakira, A. Atter and K. Addo in India, Bangladesh, Uganda and Ghana for the ground-level insights they have shared with us over the past year and for inputs from E. Allison and S. Haraksingh-Thilsted from WorldFish, which together have motivated this Review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Global Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

    Nitya Rao, Heather Gray, Johanna Forster, Nisha Marwaha & Abraham Wanyama

  2. Nutrition and Hydration, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

    Lee Hooper

  3. Norwich Institute for Sustainable Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

    Natasha Grist & Matthew Heaton

  4. Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, UK

    Julie Bremner

  5. Collaborative Centre for Sustainable Use of the Seas, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

    Julie Bremner

  6. Food System Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL, Frick, Switzerland

    Ghezal Sabir

  7. Professional Assistance for Development Action, Bhopal, India

    Sudarshan Thakur

  8. Food & Nutrition National Bioscience Research Infrastructure, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich, UK

    Liangzi Zhang

Authors
  1. Nitya Rao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lee Hooper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heather Gray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Natasha Grist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Johanna Forster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Julie Bremner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ghezal Sabir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Matthew Heaton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Nisha Marwaha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Sudarshan Thakur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Abraham Wanyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Liangzi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

This systematic review emerged from discussions between N.R., L.H., J.F., J.B. and N.G. N.R., N.G. and J.F. led the conceptualization and L.H. led the development of the research protocol and study design. Search, screening and extraction was carried out by H.G., G.S., N.M., S.T., M.H., A.W., N.G., J.B. and L.Z., under the guidance of L.H. N.R., L.H., G.S., S.T., N.M., A.W., M.H. and N.G. were responsible for writing sections of the paper based on the preliminary analysis. N.R., N.G., J.F. and J.B. reviewed and edited the paper. M.H., N.M., N.G. and L.H. created the maps, diagrams, figures and tables. H.G. supported referencing. All authors reviewed the final version of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nitya Rao.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Food thanks Jessica Decker Sparks, Nikita Gopal and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Table 1 (characteristics of included studies), Supplementary Table 2 (risk-of-bias assessment) and Supplementary Table 3 (study locations) and discussion of methodology and search strategies.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rao, N., Hooper, L., Gray, H. et al. A systematic review of the impact of post-harvest aquatic food processing technology on gender equality and social justice. Nat Food 5, 731–741 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-024-01034-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-024-01034-6

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene