Gender
mainstreaming: Reflections on implementation of the strategy
Carolyn
Hannan
Director,
UN Division for the Advancement of Women
Presented
at the seminar
Integrating
gender equality into development co-operation
by
Sida and the European Commission
organized
by
European
Commission
and
the
Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)
Brussels,
27-28 November 2003
I thank the European Commission (EC) and the
Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) for providing me
with the opportunity to participate in this seminar. I would like begin by
congratulating EC and Sida for the very constructive evaluations of promoting
gender equality through gender mainstreaming within their organizations, and
particularly for the positive follow-up processes which they have initiated.
Although there is a shift in emphasis in evaluations today to learning
processes rather than measurement of accountability, many evalations still come
to an abrupt end when they are presented, and tend to grace bookshelves more
than promote processes of change. There has been an important learning process
in both the EC and Sida evaluations, which has continued long after the
evaluations were finalized. There is a concerted effort by both organizations
to draw out and apply the important learnings on gender mainstreaming. As a
result, there are already positive indications of change underway. Through this
seminar, the evaluations have potential to contribute to better understanding
of gender mainstreaming and to improved implementation and the positive impact
of the evaluations can spread beyond the two organizations directly involved.
What I will offer in
this presentation are reflections on the discussions held during the seminar,
as well as insights from my own experience in both bilateral and multilateral
contexts. I will not provide many conclusive answers to questions raised but
hope to highlight major gaps and challenges and some potential ways forward. Many
of the issues raised in this seminar are not new; they have been raised time
and again over the past two decades. This should clearly imply that it is time,
particularly in the context of the forthcoming review and appraisal of ten
years of implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action, to seriously
rethink some of the approaches in place. I will begin with some general
reflections and then speak briefly on specific aspects of efforts made in
development cooperation contexts to implement gender mainstreaming.
Global mandates and
commitments
It is important to
start with the global mandates for gender mainstreaming. The necessity for
gender equality policies to be "in line with" the international goals
on gender equality was raised in discussions over the past two days. It is not,
however, enough to be in line with the global goals and recommendations. It is
critical to effectively use these global goals and recommendations for action
in development cooperation, as an integral part of the policy frameworks
developed in agencies and in policy dialogue with partners.
The Member States of
the United Nations - the partner
countries of development cooperation agencies - committed in the United Nations
Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing,1995) to gender mainstreaming in all
areas of development. Since then, the mandates for gender mainstreaming have
been significantly reinforced. Specific mandates have been developed for
different sector areas and issues, including even in difficult areas, such as budgets
and peace and security. There is considerable support for gender mainstreaming
among Member States, even though there is still uncertainty on how to implement
the strategy. In New York there is a strong constituency of supporters of
gender mainstreaming, with an informal group of around 25 Member States (the
Friends of Gender Mainstreaming) working to promote more effective
implementation in the intergovernmental processes, and in the work of the
permanent missions to the United Nations and the entities of the United
Nations.
Several
times during the seminar it was stated that lack of support for gender
mainstreaming by partner institutions is a problem. There was reference to
resistance of different types. It is true that individual bureaucrats, particularly
at middle-levels of management, may not know about these specific global
commitments or may not be interested in implementing them. It would be
dangerous, however, to slip into a pattern of presuming that there will
automatically be resistance. The global goals and recommendations can be used
very constructively by development cooperation agencies. The starting point has
to be that the Governments should be accountable and willing to work with
partners to secure implementation of commitments made globally. The global
goals and recommendations must be consistently referred to in policy dialogue
and women's groups and networks should be brought into this dialogue. There are
often strong local movements of women's groups and networks making concerted
efforts to hold their Governments accountable to these same commitments. Partnerships with, and/or support to these
groups, in this context can be very effective.
Use should also be made of the Millennium
Declaration and the Millennium Declaration Goals (MDGs). The Millennium
Declaration recognized that gender equality is a key indicator of, and
precondition for, sustainable development. The MDGs clearly set out critical
development goals, targets and indicators, including one goal on gender
equality.It is not enough, however, to work with one specific goal on gender
equality; there are critical gender perspectives in relation to all other MDGs.
The targets and indicators already developed for gender equality need further
refinement and expansion. Work is underway to strengthen the focus on gender
equality in the implementation of the Millennium Declaration and the MDGs, both
to support gender mainstreaming and the achievement of all the MDGs. Much can
be gained from the strong emphasis in the work on the MDGs on implementation,
targets and indicators to strengthen the focus on implementation, targets and
indicators in promoting gender equality.
It should be a requirement that professional
staff in development cooperation agencies are aware of the global goals and
recommendations on gender equality and that they have capacity to use them in
dialogue with partner countries. To ensure that this is possible, information
on the global goals and recommendations should be integrated into training
programmes in development agencies.
The importance of the rights-based approach
was emphasized many times during the seminar. The important conclusion was made
that the rights-based approach is not a substitute for gender mainstreaming.
The rights perspective and the empowerment approach must be integral to gender
mainstreaming. It is also critical to keep in mind that the use of the
rights-based approach does not automatically ensure attention to women's human
rights. There has to be an explicit focus on women's human rights.
It is thus also important to improve the
focus on legally-binding commitments that governments have made through
international conventions, in particular the Convention on All Forms of
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). It is worth noting that 175 of 191 Member
States of the United Nations have ratified CEDAW. Bilateral development
cooperation agencies can take as a starting point that probably all or most of
their partner countries have ratified the convention and thereby committed to
actively eliminating all forms of discrimination against women, in both public
and private contexts. It is important
in preparing for policy dialogue to know what reservations, if any, the partner
countries have to the convention; what their reporting record is; and what the
CEDAW Committee has commented on and what changes they have recommended in the
Concluding Comments prepared after the dialogue with the countries. The CEDAW
convention, alongside the Platform for Action, should be an important basis for
gender equality policy frameworks in development cooperation agencies. CEDAW
could be used more strategically in dialogue with partner countries, and NGOs
could be effectively involved in these discussions. Ways and means of using
CEDAW in development cooperation policies and programmes should be integrated
into training programmes in development cooperation agencies.
Gender mainstreaming:
concepts and approaches to implementation
The discussions in this seminar, as well as
in other contexts, have focused attention on the complexity of gender
mainstreaming. Without falling into the trap of over-simplifying, it is
important not to over-problematize gender mainstreaming. While it is necessary
to explicitly highlight gaps and challenges, this should not create myths about
gender mainstreaming being too difficult to implement or foster the perception
that only experts can use the strategy effectively. The comment of one of the
transport specialists at this seminar: "Don't give up on us (non gender
specialists). We can take gender perspectives on board in our own work."
is particularly pertinent in this respect. Many discussions of gender
mainstreaming have, to far too great an extent, focused on the complexity of
the strategy rather than on concrete steps needed to implement it. Gender
specialists need to be aware of the risk of inadvertently hindering the
implementation of gender mainstreaming by portraying it as too complex.
It is also important
to distinguish between general problems relating to development cooperation
which affect all areas of work, and problems and challenges which are specific
to the promotion of gender equality. General challenges and constraints in
development cooperation, for example in attaining local ownership of processes,
can be attributed to the gender equality and used as an excuse for doing nothing. There are
certainly some specific sensitivities around the promotion of gender equality
because it directly with power relations and stereotypes. Discussions here also
highlighted the close links between the personal and the professional in
working with gender equality which can also create constraints. However in
organizations where promotion of gender mainstreaming is popularly perceived to
be extremely difficult and minimal efforts made to implement it, the question
should be legitimately be raised: Is the promotion of gender equality so
intrinsically more difficult than poverty eradication, promotion of human
rights, and achievement of effective participatory governance? It is important
to expose the underlying values and attitudes underlying perceptions of gender
mainstreaming, particularly if they lead to inaction on gender equality within
an organization.
Related to this is the
issue of conceptual clarity. There has been considerable discussion during the
seminar of conceptual confusion and difficulties with concepts. While there
certainly can be difficulties with, for example, the distinction between the
concepts of equality and equity, there has also been an unfortunate over-problematizing
of concepts which has not been constructive for implementation of gender
mainstreaming. The concepts of gender and mainstreaming should not present
enormous problems. A great disservice is done to the promotion of gender
equality when the perception is created that gender mainstreaming is so
enormously difficult conceptually as to render it impossible to implement.
If the concept of "gender " appears
to be difficult, it is possible to use "women and men" to clarify
that the concept refers to women and men and the relations between them. If
"mainstreaming" appears difficult to grasp, it is possible to talk
about integrating or incorporating gender perspectives, if this is more
understandable. What is critical is to take time to find out what causes the
difficulty in understanding and develop other ways to explain the concept.
Flexibility and pragmatism are important. Experience has shown that development
specialists do have the capacity to take on new and complex concepts. In fact,
they often like to be challenged in this way. Unfortunately the promotion of
gender equality has not excited and inspired development professionals as much
as could be desired.
There is, in addition,
a need for clarity relating to goals and strategies. The strategy of gender
mainstreaming is not adequately understood by many professional staff in
development cooperation agencies. There may be many reasons for this. It can be
because staff have never received an adequate explanation, apart from being
given a copy of the gender equality policy, and are truly at a loss to know how
gender mainstreaming would be relevant to their work or how it could be
implemented. It could also be that the presentation of mainstreaming to
professional staff through training programmes has been inappropriate - for
example teaching theoretical analysis methodologies without adequate attention
to ways of using them in daily work, or by failing to focus clearly on the
areas of work professional staff are involved in. It, however, also needs to be
kept in mind that some professional staff may simply not want to understand
what it means. In this context, clear establishment of professional
responsibility and accountability for gender mainstreaming is critical.
It is interesting to recall that when gender
mainstreaming was first introduced as a concept in the early 1990s, there were
many complaints about how difficult it was to understand and implement. Over
the years the concept of mainstreaming has, however, been adopted in other
contexts, for example in relation to disability, children, human rights, and
poverty, with very little difficulty. Despite this, one can still hear that the
concept of mainstreaming gender perspectives is too difficult. It is thus
important to raise the question: Why can development professionals work with
the concept of mainstreaming in relation to other areas but not in relation to
gender equality? What is the underlying factor that needs to be addressed - the
concept itself or the political will within the organization, as manifested by
management signals and the attitudes of individual professional staff?
It has become
increasingly "fashionable" in some circles, even among gender
specialists, to criticize gender mainstreaming. It is interesting to note that
this criticism comes most often from organizations where little success has
been achieved in its implementation. That there are huge failings in relation
to implementation of the gender
mainstreaming strategy is very clear, but it is short-sighted and
unconstructive to blame the strategy itself or these failings. There should be
a greater focus identifying the factors which have made implementation
difficult. It is also important for gender specialists to take a more
self-critical look at their own roles and to develop new ways and means of
supporting gender mainstreaming.
A historical perspective
When gender
mainstreaming is criticized and it is suggested that gender mainstreaming
should be abandoned, the question should be raised: What is the alternative? In
this context it is useful to have a clear historical perspective. In the 1960s
and 1970s the strategy utilized was women-specific activities. Lessons learned
showed that this approach as the sole strategy led to the marginalization of
women and their concerns. It did not deal with the structural causes of
inequality. In the 1980s and early 1990s most organizations introduced the
integration approach in an attempt to overcome the problems identified and to
influence the mainstream of development. While attention was given to women's
priorities and needs, it was usually after all important decisions on goals,
strategies, activities and resources had been made. As a result, most attention
to women was in the form of components or add-ons which had little impact on mainstream
development.
In the mid 1990s the mainstreaming strategy
gained ground. It was established precisely to deal with some of the
constraints identified in earlier strategies. Gender mainstreaming aims to
incorporate attention to women as well as men, their contributions, priorities
and needs, from initial stages of
policy and programme development to influence goals, strategies, activities and
resource allocations. Gender mainstreaming should involve changes to the way
development cooperation is done - contributing both to the achievement of
gender equality, as well as facilitating the achievement of all other
development goals. This is what is referred to as the transformative process in
gender mainstreaming - it can require re-focusing, re-prioritizing and
reorganizing development cooperation efforts to ensure that all stakeholders,
women as well as men, can influence, participate in and benefit from
development interventions.
All that being said,
it is clear that implementation of gender mainstreaming is not simple. It does
require explicit attention to gender perspectives and it requires development
of knowledge, awareness, commitment and capacity among professional staff. It
involves a process of change which will not be achieved in a short time -
changes in processes and procedures, as well as changes in what is done on the
ground and the impacts of these changes. Effective means of measuring both the
process and the impacts need to be developed, including targets and indicators.
It should also be made clear that Member
States of the United Nations commited to a dual approach in promoting gender
equality: gender mainstreaming complemented by targeted activities for women
and gender equality. There is no contradiction between the strategies; both
continue to be needed. What is important is to understand the differences
between the strategies so that there is clarity on what is gender mainstreaming
and what is not.
The review and appraisal of implementation of
the Beijing Platform for Action, scheduled for 2005, provides an excellent
opportunity for a critical rethinking of
approaches for implementation of the gender mainstreaming strategy. The
question needs to be asked: Are we doing the right things or expending a lot of
energy doing the wrong things well? It is clear that sector specialists are not
always getting the kind of support they need to fully integrate gender
perspectives into their work. Since there are very few gender specialists
within organizations who can support gender mainstreaming, what they do is
critical. Many specialists are working in isolation with little concrete
support, and few strategic alliances and resources. Much of the work on gender
equality within development cooperation organizations is separate and marginalized.
There has also been an over-emphasis on technical aspects (the perception that
provision of training and guidelines would make the critical difference) and a
neglect of political aspects (political will, clear management signals of
support, and adequate resources). Many existing processes, mechanisms and
instruments, which could support gender mainstreaming, such as the Poverty
Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and the MDGs, are not being effectively
utilized.
Areas where change is most
needed
In the remainder of the presentation I would
like to focus on some of the areas where change would be most needed.
§
Gender equality policies
Most development organizations today do have
a gender equality policy. To be effective, such policies require regular updating,
to respond adequately to development challenges and to changes in development
cooperation. Even when strong gender equality policies are in place, they do
not necessarily have the desired impact, often because they are kept on the
margins of the policy environment within organizations. A major failing is the
lack of linkage between promotion of gender equality and other prioritized
development goals - the issues that are at the centre of attention - within
organizations. Neglect of these linkages leads to failure to utilize the
constructive synergies that could emerge. A second reason for lack of impact is
that gender equality policies are often developed or revised by gender
specialists with little consultation throughout the organization. A policy
which is developed or revised collaboratively, in a process requiring inputs
from all parts of the organizations - field-level as well as headquarters, has
much greater potential for developing awareness, commitment and capacity and a
real sense of ownership throughout the organization, and thus there is also
greater potential for effective implementation.
For a gender equality policy to have the
desired impact there needs to be a strategy and/or action plan which elaborates
the needs to be done at different levels to ensure that the policy is
implemented effectively. This should outline what actions need to be taken; who
is responsible; and how they will be held accountable. It should also include
explicit attention to the competence development required for implementation of
the policy within the organization - that is, attention to the areas of
competence required and the ways by
which this should be developed within the organization. This should have
implications for the overall training programme within the organization, as
gender perspectives need to be incorporated into all training on substantive
issues as well as procedures and processes. Responsibility for developing the
competence on gender equality, and other changes in processes and procedures
required, in order to meet the organizational commitments made in the adoption
of a gender equality policy should not be left to a few under-resourced gender
specialists. The sections of the organization responsible for planning,
budgeting, monitoring and evaluation and competence development of staff should
have clearly outlined roles and responsibilities.
There have been very constructive discussions
at this seminar on the importance of identifying and building on the synergies
between promotion of gender equality and achievement of other development
goals, such as poverty eradication, promotion of human rights, promotion of
environmental sustainability, and establishment of effective paticipatory
governance. Discussions revealed that
there is some "competition" among development goals in many
organizations. There can be a clear hierarchy of goals, with some receiving
more attention/priority, resources, and stronger management support than
others. Poverty eradication remains the most important development goal for
most organizations. Staff know that they will be held accountable in their work
programmes for poverty eradication. It is therefore important to ensure that
gender perspectives are fully integrated into poverty eradication efforts. It
is well established, including through the Millennium Declaration, that poverty
eradication is facilitated by gender equality; and experience has also shown
that in many contexts promotion of gender equality is facilitated by
gender-sensitive poverty eradication strategies. Gender specialists must
develop more effective ways and means to establish and use the linkages between
gender equality and poverty eradication, and other development goals, to move
the gender equality agenda forward.
It is also well established that, as well as
being a development goal in its own right, gender equality is critical for
achieving all other develoment goals. Inequality between women and men and
continued discrimination and subordination of women creates enormous hinders to
development which need to be addressed in every sector. It is important to
challenge the perception of gender equality as just one more cross-cutting
issue added unto the responsibilities of professional staff with no guidance or
prioritization. Gender equality should not simply be seen as a cross-cutting
issue but as a development goal with implications for all other goals. As an
analysis variable, gender is overarching and impacts on all other variables,
such as class, race, ethnic group and age. Women are not a special interest
group or a vulnerable group; they comprise at least 50% of the population, and
through their roles and responsibilities in many different areas, make critical
contributions to development which need to be recognized and built on.
§
The country strategy process
A critical entry-point for advancing the
promotion of gender equality is the
country strategy process. It is important that gender analysis is
integrated into country-level analyses, in order to influence sector policies
and the establishment of clear gender equality goals at sector level, as well
as action plans for gender-sensitive implementation. Country strategies
determine which sectors will be prioritized; which aspects within specific
sectors will be focused on; what links will be established between sectors; and
what the concrete approach will be. Analysis at all levels of strategy
development has to be context-specific. It must build on local knowledge -
locally established goals, strategies and targets - through consultation
processes which include women's groups and networks. There is a strong body of
field-level experience, including good practice examples - not always well
documented - which should feed into policy development and country strategies.
Work at the field level, while critical, will, however, by itself not bring
about the systemic change required.
Gender-sensitive country strategies and sectoral strategies within
development organizations are critical for ensuring full organizational
commitment. Without this commitment explicitly outlined in the country and
sectoral strategies, promoting gender equality at field level will be left to
the initiatives of committed individuals and thus will lack potential for more
long-term impacts and sustainability.
Experience to date shows that gender analysis
is not implemented adequately into most country strategies, and in turn into
sectoral strategies. There are few examples where gender equality has been
given priority focus in development of country strategies. Strong institutionalization
of gender perspectives into country strategy processes requires systematic
incorporation of gender perspectives into dialogue and analyses and
establishment of monitoring processes, including targets and indicators. The
challenge is to go beyond the obligatory and politically correct one or two
paragraphs on women/gender to a sound gender analysis which influences choices
made through country strategy processes. Considerable analysis has already been
carried out, particularly by local women's groups and networks. The challenge
is to make this knowledge available and integral to country strategy processes.
Many organizations have commissioned separate gender analyses with the purpose
of influencing the mainstream process. However, much of this work has remained
separate and has not influenced critical mainstream decisions and resource
allocations. The results have appeared as an annex to country strategies or as
separate documents with little impact.
Sida presented a positive example of an
innovative approach which awakened interest and support during the seminar,
that is, the prioritizing of one gender equality issue - land rights - within a
country strategy. This critical issue for women would be addressed in all
sectors within the framework of the country strategy process. A word of caution
was, however, raised by participants - that the issue of land rights for women
should be an integral part of the whole of the country strategy, to be
addressed by all sectors and not kept as a separate component for women, if
this innovation is to be effective.
Two issues raised marginally in the meeting
are very important in the context of the country strategy process - data and
budgets. It is important to ensure that policy commitments made by governments
are matched by data collection to facilitate monitoring of implementation of
these commitments. There are, however, huge data gaps to be addressed. Firstly,
the issue of lack of sex-disaggregation of statistics, and secondly, the fact
that there is no data collected systematically on many key issues for gender
equality. The MDG context could be used constructively to focus more attention
on these data needs. On the other hand, it is also clear that there is
sometimes more data available than is presumed. The reason such data is not
brought forward and utilized is that there is little demand. A good example of
this is the health sector where most data is disaggregated on collection at
grassroots level, but becomes aggregated as it passes up through the system
because of lack of demand for disaggregation. Development cooperation agencies,
as users of statistics, could play a more constructive role by making clear
demands for disaggregation by sex and age as well as for collection of critical
information on gender equality. Agencies can also support the role of producers
- such as National Statistical Offices, statistical departments in line
ministries - in different ways.
Similarly, it is important to match
government policy commitments on gender equality with resource allocations. To
date initiatives to mainstream gender perspectives into budget processes, while
undertaken in many countries, have been ad hoc and relatively marginal
processes, often initiated by NGOs and civil society groups as stand-alone
initiatives. If assessment of budget allocations relative to policy goals on
gender equality could be made an integral part of country strategies, this
could be a powerful tool for change,
particularly if the Ministry of Finance were actively involved.
§
Policy dialogue and sector approaches
The seminar had a strong focus on dialogue as
a critical instrument for bringing women's voices into decision-making
processes. It is important that dialogue builds on the knowledge and capacity
already existing at local levels. Incorporation of local analyses, goals and
targets will promote real ownership and partnerships. There has not been
sufficient focus on gender equality issues in dialogue. The ability of
development cooperation agencies to follow through on issues raised in dialogue
with partner institutions was emphasized in the seminar. It is not constructive
if development agencies raise gender equality strongly in policy dialogue and
are then not willing or able to live up to the expectations generated. Sida
offered a potential good practice example on policy dialogue. A framework has
been developed to guide Sida professionals in incorporating gender perspectives
into dialogue in the context of country strategies. The framework provides
guidance, sector by sector, on the gender equality problems/issues, the goal in
terms of raising these issues in policy dialogue, the key questions to be
raised - by which actors and with which partners, and the manner by which the
issues should be raised constructively. Such a framework is an important
innovation.
In discussions on sector approaches during
the seminar, very thoughtful inputs were raised by the transport specialists,
highlighting the need for a holistic, cross-sectoral and multi-disciplinary
approach. Appropriate responses to challenges in the infrastructure sector
today do not lie in any one sector. Greater cross-sectoral collaboration is
required within organizations. For example, transport is not simply about
building roads but involves provision of transport services, with implications
for, for example, labour market issues and health and security issues. The
interlinkages between sectors, and the gender perspectives in relation to
these, need to be addressed at all levels - the country strategy level, the
sector strategy level and the level of intervention. Achievment of gender
mainstreaming in sectors requires stronger alliances between sector specialists
who know the sector well but do not have in-depth knowledge of gender
perspectives, and gender specialists who may not know the sector issues in
depth but should be able to raise the appropriate questions to be addressed.
The constraints involved in sector-wide approaches and budget support were
noted as specific challenges to be addressed.
Institutional arrangements
Finally I would like to make some very brief
comments on institutional arrangements for gender mainstreaming within
organizations, focusing on the role of gender specialists, the role of
management, stratgies for competence development, the critical role of gender
analysis, and the need for relevant tools.
§
Gender specialists
Most organizations have gender specialists in
both headquarters and the field. Experience has shown that it is critical that
these specialists have clear mandates, particularly emphasizing their catalytic
role; strategic location providing adequate access to information and
decision-making processes; adequate levels of resources; and most importantly,
clear lines of reporting and full explicit support from senior and middle-level
management within organizations. Unless clear signals of commitment and support
come from senior management in particular, the efforts of gender specialists
will not have optimum impact. It is particularly important that the
responsibilities and accountability of all other categories of staff in
organizations are clarified so that responsibility for gender mainsteaming does
not fall entirely on gender specialists.
Gender specialists themselves need to rethink
their strategies and approaches and focus on more effective means of developing
competence for gender mainstreaming within organizations. Greater attention
needs to be given to communication skills for gender specialists to ensure that
gender mainstreaming can be advocated, supported and monitored in
understandable, non-threatening and constructive ways.
§
Management roles
Leadership by management in organizations is
critical to the effective promotion of gender mainstreaming. Managers at all
levels must have adequate levels of awareness, commitment and capacity for the
promotion of gender equality and must be aware of their important role in
promoting, supporting and monitoring progress and demanding accountability from
all staff. Senior managers can give invaluable support through messages of
commitment and support in different ways. Experience has shown that staff in
organizations do respond positively to the vision and priorities elaborated by
senior management. Commitment and support of middle-level management is also
critical. In some organizations, the positive signals of senior management have
limited impact because of middle-level managers who block progress because of
disinterest or resistance to the principles of gender equality. Ways and means
of developing greater substantive understanding of gender equality and the
gender mainstreaming strategy among managers, and of holding them accountable
for progress, must be developed. These can include, for example, more effective
briefings for senior management on gender mainstreaming and their roles in
promoting, supporting and monitoring progress, as well as inclusion of
responsibility for gender mainstreaming in the work programmes of middle-level
managers, and accountablility for the promotion of gender equality in work
contracts and performance assessments.
§
Competence development
Professional competence for promotion of
gender equality and utilization of the gender mainstreaming strategy should be
required of all professional staff in organizations. This includes awareness,
knowledge and commitment as well as capacity, that is, to know why promotion of gender equality is an
important development goal and what to do to address the goal in their
own work. Staff in many organizations
have received training which addresses the question of why they should be
working on gender equality but have not received sufficient support in knowing
how to go about it. This has created considerable frustration, which is
counterproductive for the effective implementation of gender mainstreaming.
Although there has been a significant focus on competence development over the
past decade, particularly through training programmes, in many organizations,
it is clear that the "hearts and minds" of staff have not been
sufficiently captured. One reason for the limited success in this area is
probably a tendency to treat competence development as primarily a technical
process. Attitudinal change is required which requires a focus on the rationale
for the promotion of gender equality.
New approaches are needed which provide
incentives and motivation for professional staff to further develop their
knowledge, commitment and skills. Experience has shown that training on gender
equality not only has to be tailored to specific sector areas and issues, but
must also be tailored to the different types of work done by various groups of
professionals. Once professionals are made aware of what the gender
perspectives are in relation to the sector they work with, such as health,
economics, agriculture, etc, they need to also understand how to work with
these issues when doing research and analysis, collecting and utilizing
statistics, conducting policy dialogue, developing and implementing projects,
monitoring and evaluating, providing training programmes, etc. Each professional
needs to be assisted to understand the ways in which gender equality is
relevant for the work in their "in-trays", and how they might go
about addressing these issues. Innovative programmes today focus on the
specific tasks that participants are currently working on, in order to make the
training as useful as possible. Many programmes also work towards the
development of a set of concrete, measureable individual actions that the
participants can agree to undertake on the completion of the programme, as a means
to ensure that the programme will have some immediate effect on the work of
participants.
The competence development efforts made in
many organizations have less than optimal success because little attention has
been given to follow-up. Participants should leave programmes with a clear
understanding of what they are required to do. Managers must also be made aware
of the commitments made by participants and encouraged to follow-up on a
regular basis. Some organizations have
established "help-desks" (which can be electronic) to support
participants who have follow-up questions after completing their training
programmes. Training divisions should develop new means to follow-up training
programmes to both assess effectiveness of the programmes as well as ensure
that professional staff get the additional support they need.
Training divisions in organizations should
work together with gender specialists to put in place a more diverse,
action-oriented and client-friendly competence development programme on gender
mainstreaming. A range of on-going learning processes need to be initiated,
including on-the-job training and dynamic interactive debate fora where topical
issues can be discussed, to meet the needs of all professional groups within
organizations. Executive briefings for senior- and middle-level management,
rather than traditional training programmes, have been used effectively in some
organizations. "Brown-bag lunches" have also been useful in some
contexts. It is, however, important to know what the value and contributions of
different types of activities can be. A series of brown bag lunches on diverse
topics, for example, can certainly be effective in raising awareness and
interest, but will not provide the "hands-on" guidance needed to help
professionals know what they need to do differently on a day-to-day basis.
§
Gender analysis
In connection with the discussion of
competence development efforts, I would like to raise the issue of gender
analysis. Over the past 10-15 years different models for gender analysis have
been developed. In development cooperation contexts these models have sometimes
been unquestioningly adopted and presented in training programmes. The outcome
of these efforts has been mixed, depending to a certain extent on how theoretical
and complicated these analysis methods are and the manner in which they are
linked to the work of organizations. There have been cases where many different
models for gender analysis have been presented to participants, without any
clear linkages to the work of the participants. Presentation of analysis models
in a theoretical manner, with no direct links to the work of participants can
create frustration and resistance.
Developing gender analysis capacity does not
so much require teaching a particular analysis model but fostering capacity of
participants to ask the right questions in relation to their work and know
where to go to find the relevant information (particularly developing
understanding that there is a lot of analyses and information available at
local levels). If a particular gender analysis model is to be presented, the
emphasis must be on how it is relevant to the work of the participants and how
they themselves might use it in their daily work. It needs to be kept in mind
that training programmes do not aim to turn all professionals into gender
specialists. Professionals should be supported to know how to analyse their
work from a gender perspective, that is, to know what critical questions should
be raised, and how to work with these in their daily work.
Teaching gender analysis as a separate
analysis methodology often presumes that all gender analysis should be done in
the context of separate analyses. Gender mainstreaming rather requires that
gender perspectives are incorporated into existing analyses, such as sector
analyses, country strategy analyses, poverty analyses or analyses on HIV/AIDS,
disability, etc. Training programmes should support participants to fully
integrate gender perspectives into the existing analyses they use in their
day-to-day work.
§
Methodologies and tools
The separateness of many efforts to promote
gender equality - which work against the gender mainstreaming strategy - can be
seen in other areas. Organizations have, for example, developed specific methodologies
and tools for promoting gender equality. Many of these are (or could be) very
useful. However research has shown that
many very relevant tools - such as guidelines, manuals, handbooks - on a
multitude of sectors are not being used effectively. There are many reasons for
the underutilization of the existing methodologies and tools. In some
organizations there is little knowledge that they exist because inadequate
attention has been given to dissemination within organizations. Ironically, in
some cases methodologies and tools are used more in PR activities outside the
organization than internally as a means to develop capacity. To be effective
instruments for change, the tools developed must have a broad distribution
within the organization and must be used effectively in training programmes.
Help-desks, as discussed earlier, could also be established in the initial
stages of introduction in an organization, to support potential users and get
feedback to ensure development of more effective methodologies and tools in the future.
A second reason for non-utilization of
existing methodologies and tools is that many are overly complex and not
user-friendly. Busy bureaucrats need instruments which are clearly developed on
the basis of an understanding of what they do and can provide guidance in a
short, concise manner. Experience has
also shown that methodologies and tools which are developed in a collaborative
manner, together with those who will use them, have the best chance of being
used and making an impact operationally.
A major failing in relation to development of
methodologies and tools, is the lack of attention to incorporating gender
perspectives into existing processes and tools, such as existing sector
guidelines, manuals and handbooks. It is not always strategic to develop a
separate handbook on, for example, gender and agriculture, when the
organization has an existing handbook on agriculture with no attention to
gender perspectives. A priority for gender specialists in an organization should
be to identify the most critical planning instruments and ensure that gender
perspectives are fully incorporated into these, for example, guidelines on
country strategy development, handbooks on poverty eradication or evaluation
manuals. In addition, gender perspectives need to be an integral part of
efforts to work with partner countries to develop strategies, guidelines,
handbooks, etc, for example in the context of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers
or Country MDG Reports.
§
Conclusions
Gender equality perspectives are still not at
the centre of the development debate to an adequate extent. It is important to
identify and build on synergies between gender equality and other development
goals. The Millennium Declaration and the MDGs offer a unique opportunity in
this respect. The work that has been done to promote gender equality in many
organizations has been characterized by separateness, isolation and
marginalization. Lack of support for this work by management levels has
probably been a major causal factor.Gender perspectives are not an integral
part of the work of organizations at policy or programme levels. Training
efforts have not had significant impacts in some organizations. Resistance to
incorporating gender perspectives in different areas of work still exists,
although sometimes in subtle, less visible, forms. A more dynamic process of
competence development is required to create the awareness, commitment and
capacity required for gender mainstreaming.
Although there is a lot of discussion of the
importance of alliances, collaboration and local ownership, much more could be
done to make local knowledge and expertise on gender equality more central in
many development cooperation organizations. Local goals, analyses, priorities
and targets must be at the centre of the work on promoting gender equality,
with the country strategy process playing a key role in this respect. The
voices of women must be brought more clearly into this process. Lack of
interest among partner institutions should not be acceptable as an excuse for
doing nothing, particularly in the context of the existing strong global
mandates. Organizations need to focus first on the lack of interest and support
within their own organizations.
Ten years after the Fourth World Conference
on Women in 1995, implementation of gender mainstreaming takes place in a very
different context. Development cooperation involves a very full political
agenda, with competing priorities; overworked bureaucrats, and limited gender
specialist resources. It is important to critically rethink approaches for
gender mainstreaming in the current context. Some major opportunities exist for
supporting this. Firstly, implementation of the agreed conclusions on gender
mainstreaming from the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC,
1997/2) - which have provided the major global framework on gender
mainstreaming - will be reviewed in the Coordination Segment of the ECOSOC in
2004. Secondly, the Commission on the Status of Women is mandated in 2005, as
part of its multi-year programme of work - to review the implementation of the
Beijing Platform for Action (1995) and the outcome document of the 23rd
special session of the General Assembly (2000) - Beijing +5. This review will
include a focus on implementation of gender mainstreaming and the lessons
learned, good practices and gaps and challenges after ten years of
implementation.
The Commission on the Status of Women will
focus in 2004 on the "role of men and boys in achieving gender
equality". Participation of men in implementation of gender mainstreaming
- managers, professional staff and consultants within development cooperation
agencies as well as policy-makers,
administrators and stakeholders in partner countries - is critical, and this
may be an area for further emphasis in development cooperation agencies.
In closing, I again commend EC and Sida for
the positive contributions the two evaluation processes have made to
discussions of gender mainstreaming. It
is clear that efforts are being made to develop a learning process where
lessons learned will feed back into policies and implementation and monitoring
of actitivies. The learnings from this process will contribute to more
effective evaluations of gender mainstreaming in the future, but should - just
as importantly - also contribute to effective mainstreaming of gender
perspectives into all other evaluations in different sector areas. An important
spin-off of the follow-up activities to both these evaluations is also the
close collaboration and alliances fostered between policy makers, programme
staff and evaluators within (and between) the two organizations, which is a
precondition for gender mainstreaming
.
In particular the recommendation to continue
to make efforts to more effectively implement the gender mainstreaming
strategy, despite the constraints experienced to date, is very positive. The
concrete recommendations in the two evaluations on what more could be done to
enhance gender mainstreaming through, for example, country strategies and dialogue,
are very constructive. The evaluations rightly point out that, while it is too
early to assess adequately what has been achieved, it is important to establish
clearly now should be achieved and how this might be measured. The seminar
identified some critical questions which remain to be answered: What
constitutes good progress in gender mainstreaming in different areas? Who
decides what is an adequate level of progress? How can it be effectively
measured, both in terms of process and impact on the ground? What targets and
indicators are needed for different areas? Issues of attribution / contribution
remain - to what extent are the efforts - direct and indirect - made by
development cooperation agencies instrumental in promoting change on the ground
in partner countries.
The two evaluations will continue to make a
significant contribution to advancing gender mainstreaming in development
cooperation within the two organizations and more broadly. If we in the
Division for the Advancement of Women in the United Nations can contribute to
and support the process in any way we would be happy to do so.
Thank you.