Practical experiences within the UN system have shown that gender mainstreaming usually fails
because of the following reasons:
• Lack of consultation with all divisions that failed to ensure ownership of gender plans
within the organization.
• Lack of training to ensure effective monitoring and evaluation of progress in gender
mainstreaming
• Lack of gender analysis skills among technical staff, as well as the lack of understanding among many managers of the key concepts and principles of results-based programming and the purpose of indicators in that context - which obstructs effective mainstreaming
• Lack of Gender and Development Plan of Action.
• Lack of clear strategies for promoting gender equality - empowering and mainstreaming.
Furthermore, experience has shown that most policy-makers and implementers believe that gender mainstreaming is a very complex exercise. This should not be necessarily so if there are checklists to guide the person. For most part, practical gender mainstreaming is about running through a checklist of questions to ensure one has not overlooked anything. It is about asking the right questions so that one can see where limited resources should best be diverted. Gender mainstreaming is a necessary process for achieving gender equality in the most effective and efficient manner.
3.6 Dealing with Challenges to Gender Mainstreaming
Gender-sensitive organizational practice cannot be guaranteed by institutional policy commitments alone. Macdonald et al (1997: p.23) comments that "there will inevitably be psychological resistance to change in fundamental attitudes. Resistance is natural and is to be expected" Frequently, gender equity becomes increasingly less visible in the process of specifying project/programme objectives, anticipated results, implementation strategies and evaluation. Broad commitments to improving women's position are often reduced to an under-resourced women's component emphasizing the number of women in project/programme activities. Longwe (in Macdonald et al, 1997, p.76) calls this process "policy evaporation".
According to Longwe, these are the signs of policy evaporation:
• Verbal defense: denying that the problem exists; blaming the victim; pretending the policy has no power for change.
• Diversionary action: giving lip service to the problem, but doing nothing; commissioning unnecessary research; shelving the research which already exists.
• Ineffectual organizational change: setting up a separate women's division outside key decision-making structures; giving the post to a person with no power or influence to
change things; tokenism.
• Mystification: claiming that gender issues are too complicated and difficult to address and that a more sophisticated change strategy is needed.
• Cultural resistance: claiming that gender mainstreaming is a foreign, feminist, counter
productive concept.
She attributes gender policy evaporation to a number of factors:
• On an individual level, resistance can arise from:
o lack of understanding about the intent of mainstreaming initiatives o potential loss of power or privilege
o bad experiences in the past
o lack of reward or recognition for effort and output o lack of certainty about future outcomes
o poor self-concept or lack of confidence in one's own capacity.
• At the institutional level, the Development Assistance Committee (1998, p. 53-55) and Hadjipateras (1997) believe that gender policy evaporation is exacerbated when:
1. There is lack of consensus about policy directions.
• Economic and social analyses are given more priority than social and cultural factors.
• Pre-determined project goals and inputs, short project timeframes and a focus on quantitative project outputs conflict with project level empowerment needs.
• Donors, implementing partners and beneficiaries are not working together towards the same goals and outcomes. This is most likely to happen when gender equity objectives are not clearly stated in all official documents such as partner selection criteria, contracts, and terms of reference.
2. Gender-sensitive indicators are not clearly defined or monitored.
• No system for recording intended outcomes and actual impact is in place.
• Equity is defined only as equal numbers of men and women.
• There is no support for the development of qualitative indicators. The organization is not accountable for broader qualitative outcomes.
3. There are few gender advocates at the organizational or beneficiary level.
• Organizations are often reluctant to address issues not raised by partners - particularly if the organization values responsiveness and local leadership. However, this undervalues both the organization's commitment to gender equity and the partner's potential for
capacity building.
• Organizational culture is not supportive of individual staff who wishes to take action.
4. There is confusion about roles, responsibility and procedures
Management demand for gender analysis, information and updates are not consistent, or management signals that these activities are not priorities.
Operational processes for gender mainstreaming (guidelines, checklists, etc.) are separate, processes attached, rather than integrated into other program/project documents.
Lack of organizational memory about what works and why there is a lack of continuity.
This can also occur when consultants are used to provide advice around policy development, undertake project gender analysis, devise gender strategies, etc.
Inadequate resources are allocated to gender mainstreaming.
Insufficient human and financial resources are allocated or they are used ineffectively.
There are multiple demands on staff time and skill. The complexity of work is compounded by an increasing number of themes and concerns which need to be taken
into account.
Women are under-represented at the beneficiary and organizational level.
If staff are primarily women, there are likely to be limits to the extent the organization reaches poor women or is willing to address gender based power issues. Although men can work effectively with women, gender balance within an organization usually influences rules and culture in such a way that practice becomes more gender-sensitive.
Training is inadequate or ineffective.
No follow-up or guided supervision is provided to help staff consolidate their learning and apply tools.
High staff turnover makes it difficult to provide training on a systematic basis.
Ready-made tools alone are not enough to address complex issues surrounding gender equality. The organization must also be willing to examine the local; regional and national context for development and organizational approaches and biases.
Macdonald et al (1997, p.23) emphasize that in confronting individual and organizational resistance to gender mainstreaming, "dialogue and negotiation rather than confrontation"
must be used.
People generally need to know how gender mainstreaming will affect them and their work.
How self -interest is affected and who else will support them in this effort.
Change agents should use terms and language that people understand and link gender concepts with commonly accepted values and approaches. For example, a participatory action-learning approach can defuse dependency on experts and deepen personal understanding.
Acknowledging and exploring people's doubts and concerns may open up avenues for further communication.
Finally, change agents need to have realistic expectations about what is possible within a given timeframe and context.
Anticipating and planning resistance, setbacks and delays increases the probability of eventual success.
3.7 The ABC of gender mainstreaming - general approach
Although the specific questions and approach to gender mainstreaming will differ with the subject under discussion and the mandate of the institution, several starting points can be identified. The first steps in the mainstreaming strategy are the assessment of how and why gender differences and inequalities are relevant to the subject under discussion, identifying where there are opportunities to narrow these inequalities and deciding on the approach to be
taken.
It is important to:
• Ask questions about the responsibilities, activities, interests and priorities of women and men, and how their experience of problems may differ in the context of the institution.
• Obtain data or information to allow the experiences and situation of both men and women to be analyzed. For example, the number of men and women who occupy senior positions within the Commission.
• Seek the inputs and views of women as well as men about decisions that will affect the way they live. The Open Space (December 2002) is an excellent example.
• Ensure that activities where women are numerically dominant receive attention.
• Avoid assuming that all women and men share the same needs and perspectives.
• Analyze the problem or issues and proposed policy options for implications from a gender perspective and seek to identify means of formulating directions that support an equitable distribution of benefits and opportunities.
• Secure enough resources for the gender mainstreaming exercise. To introduce and implement any political strategy, it is necessary to have adequate personnel and financial
resources.
Gender mainstreaming, by definition, involves integrating a gender perspective and gender analysis in all stages of designing, implementing and evaluating projects, policies, budgets and programmes. In this document, we provide practical guidelines and advice for translating this theory of gender mainstreaming into practice.
An example of key elements of gender mainstreaming in national budgets.
Some Key Elements of Gender Budgeting Gender-sensitive budgets:
• Are not about separate budgets for men and women
• Focus on mainstreaming gender issues into all national policies, plans and programmes as opposed to focusing on women as a unique category of "special interest" group
• Are about addressing poverty to ensure that government resources are used to meet the needs of the poorest women and men, boys and girls.
• Are about taking government's commitments to gender equality in treaties, conventions and declarations and translating them into budgetary commitments.
A gender sensitive budget asks a simple question:
• Whether women's and men's needs, interests and priorities are included?
A gender-sensitive budget appreciates the different needs, privileges, rights and obligations that women and men, girls and boys have in society. It recognizes the different contributions of women and men, girls and boys in production of goods, services and human labor in mobilizing and distributing resources. A gender-sensitive budget is a tool of analysis in which the government budget is disaggregated and the effectives of expenditure and revenue policies on different groups of citizens, and especially poor women and girls, are analyzed.
Source: Rusimbi, Budlender, et al., 2000
4. Gender mainstreaming in ECA's output
The ECA's mandate is to support the economic and social development of its 53 member States, foster regional integration, and promote international cooperation for Africa's development. It reports to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). The work of the Commission is organized around six major themes carried out by six substantive divisions: Development Policy and management; Economic and social policy; Gender and Development; Information for Development; Sustainable Development; and Trade and Regional Integration.
ECA's offices in the five sub regions contribute a sub regional perspective to the work programme and support outreach. The Office of Policy and Programme Coordination provide oversight and ensures synergies within divisions. Human Resource Management and Finance, and conference services - provide administrative support. The Office of the Executive Secretary provide overall strategic directions and leads implementation of the Commission's partnership.
This structure provides many opportunities for gender mainstreaming into the six thematic areas outlined above, all of which are crucial to promoting economic and social (including gender
development) in member states.
4.1 Gender mainstreaming policy analysis and development (1)
Policy analysis and advocacy is one of the major activities of the ECA. This activity provides an excellent opportunity for gender mainstreaming within the Commission. Gender mainstreaming in policy analysis and development draws attention to the impact of policy on people and explores how this impact could vary for women and men, given gender differences and inequalities. A gender perspective contributes to a more informed view of policy options and impacts. It could also help decision-makers to assess the potential to narrow gender gaps.
The mainstreaming strategy seeks to ensure that gender considerations are routinely included in the assessment of policy issues, options, and impacts, along with other considerations such as socio-economic dimensions. It also routinely seeks gender equality as one of the policy outcomes, along with growth, efficiency, poverty reduction, and sustainability. This requires the inclusion of gender perspectives at several points in the policy process.
The following steps should be taken in engendering policy analysis and policy making:
• Integrate gender perspectives into formulation of policy issue/question to be addressed.
o Define the issue in a way that it can provide scope to examine gender issues. If the issue is defined too narrowly, the potential for considering gender issues may be reduced.
• Take gender perspectives into account when defining information needs to assess policy
options.
o Use data which is disaggregated by sex in order to analyze trends and issues
o Determine how the information on both women's and men's situations will be incorporated in the decision-making process
o Ask different kinds of questions and look for information that helps to reformulate or refocus the policy discussion.
• The assessment of the implications of different options by gender is a third important point.
o Bear in mind the fact that various options can have different costs and benefits for women and men and different consequences for gender relations and gender equality, o Identify the consequences for gender equality as a matter of routine so that they are
evident in the decision-making process.
• Selecting participants who will be consulted and how on matters such as the formulation of issues, the definition of information needs, and assessment of options.
o Seek meaningful input from both men and women
• The formulation of recommendations for policy choices should reflect the information and analyses on gender equality issues resulting from the previous steps.
These steps are illustrated in the box below taken from UN documents:
INCORPORATING GENDER PERSPECTIVES IN POLICY ANALYSIS
The formulation of a national water strategy can be taken as an example. At one level, the strategy is about water resources - how water is collected, used, protected, monitored, and contaminated, and how to ensure future supply. At another level it is about the users - their specific uses, their rights and access to and control over water resources and their involvement in decision-making. A gender perspective raises
questions about:
• Whether or not women's and men's uses (for both domestic and economic use) and priorities for water are different. It is important that there is analysis of sex -disaggregated data on uses, access to water, priorities, etc. (which may require steps to ensure that such data is regularly collected and analyzed). It is also critical to ensure a consultation process that seeks the inputs of women as well as men in identifying uses and priorities;
• Whether or not various policy options will affect women and men differently - for example, how would different approaches to water pricing affect poor women in comparison with poor men? What options would have the most equitable distribution of costs and access? (UNDP, 2000)
In an area involving choices in fiscal policy, a gender perspective would lead to questions about the gender equality implications of aspects of fiscal policy such as:
• Choices of revenue-raising methods - Methods such as use fees and consumption taxes can have different implications for men and women.
• Structure of taxation - Various policy choices relating to individual orfamily income tax structures, income brackets, payroll taxes, and balance between income, consumption and production taxes can all have gender dimensions.
• Budget allocations for social infrastructure and programmes - Choices about investments in health care (preventativefcurative? Urban/rural? Training of professionals? Salaries?), education (primary or secondary system? Investment in curriculum reform to eliminate gender stereotypes? Investment in teacher training?) And social insurance (who is covered? What benefits are offered?) Can have different benefits and costs for women, girls, boys and men.
Source: IDRC "Gender and Biodiversity Research Guidelines" 2002
4.2 Gender Mainstreaming Research in ECA
Research is another major activity carried out by most professionals within the Commission. In order to mainstream gender into research, gender issues should be incorporated into planning the overall research agenda as well as in formulating specific projects:
• The research agenda is important because choices made at this stage shape the
opportunities available at the implementation stage• Ask the question: does the overall research agenda respond to issues concerning and/or
raised by both women and men?• What questions are worth investigating? Is there attention to priorities of both women and
men, the work that they do, and their needs and interests?• Do men and women benefit equally from research investment?
• Such questions may raise new issues about the focus and impacts of broad choices about
research priorities.
To mainstream gender perspectives in the area of research, questions such as those suggested
below should be asked at the key stages in the planning process (EDRC, 2000). More specific
questions about approach and methodologies will of course depend on the discipline and thesubject under consideration (2).
• Defining the research area: Consider the purpose and scope of the project; see whether these can be formulated to reflect the perspectives and priorities of both men and women on the issue under investigation.
o How is the research area relevant to men and women (what are the differences and
similarities)?
o Have both men and women been involved in the definition and design?
• Assessing the methodology: Choose methodologies that will ensure that gender differences and inequalities are documented and explored.
o Are gender differences reflected in the conceptual frameworks, objectives, methodology, expected outputs an anticipated impact of the research?
o How can attention to the different situations of men and women be incorporated into these aspects of the research design?
o How will the design and implementation of the research address factors that often produce unequal opportunities for women and men?
• Selecting researchers: Choose researchers who can incorporate gender perspectives into their research.
o Do they have the relevant expertise to understand the gender dimensions of their research?
o Are they familiar with the relevant literature and can they ensure that appropriate methodology is used?
o Can they integrate gender perspectives throughout their research?
• Disseminating and applying research results: Ensure that research findings on gender issues are disseminated and brought into policy discussions.
o Will gender-specific findings and recommendations on narrowing gender gaps, including at policy level, be identified?
o What steps will be taken to ensure that these findings and recommendations are disseminated and included in policy discussions?
• Evaluating the research
o Will gender issues be incorporated into the evaluation criteria for assessment of methodologies, strategies, impacts, outputs, etc.?
Example of gender mainstreaming from the IDRC is presented in the box below:
MAINSTREAMING GENDER INTO RESEARCH AGENDA AND CHOICES
The following is an illustration by the International Development Research Center (IDRC) of an approach to setting a research agenda that incorporates gender perspective. It is a research agenda for the assessment of social policy reforms and how the incorporation of a gender perspective shapes choices in the types of research supported and the purposes it will
serve.
• Assess various approaches to policy reform, such as decentralization, privatization, targeting or fees for services, including their potentially differential and inequitable impact on women and men;
• Identify alternative approaches and policy recommendations to ensure that social policy reforms across sectors (e.g., in health, education, social security, employment,
housing, etc.) provide equal opportunities and benefits to women and men;
housing, etc.) provide equal opportunities and benefits to women and men;