Recognising widespread uncertainty about how to address gender within the forestry world (researchers, as well as natural resource, development and conservation practitioners), this paper strives to provide targeted guidance. We divide gender methods into three main approaches, based on the availability of resources. In the first section, we provide a brief discussion of theory and method. Then, after discussing some all-purpose methods, we classify methods loosely into the 'quick and (more or less) dirty' studies, 'academic' studies and collaborative studies. We argue that although there is legitimate space for all three approach, the last is most likely to result in meaningful and long-term improvements in forest and human well-being.