institute of development policy and management
TRANSCRIPT
UNIVERSITY OFANTWERP
INSTITUTE OF DEVELOPMENT POLICY AND MANAGEMENT
Dissertation
ASSESSING GENDER MAINSTREAMING IN
COMMUNAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN
CAMEROON
DOUAGNI EDWIGE MARTIALE
Master of Development Evaluation and Management
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Nathalie HOLVOET
Academic Year 2015 - 2016
ii
Acknowledgement
First and foremost I give all glory and thanks to the Almighty for a sound mind and body
throughout this academic year. I am forever grateful for this opportunity and experience to
build on my career and to complete this master program.
My heartfelt gratitude to my family, my mother, Mama Zangue Esther, to Mama Lucienne,
Mama Bettine and my sisters for the immerse and immeasurable moral and financial support
throughout this year. Thank you for your love and trust for investing in me.
A special thanks to my supervisor, Prof Nathalie Holvoet for your insightful and magical
words of guidance that twists my mind to produce the best. You inspire me with your world
of knowledge and expertise. Thank you for the prompt and critical feedbacks that helped me
to restructure my approach and to complete this study.
To the entire IOB family, this is a wonderful opportunity to discover Belgium and be part of
the incredible class of 2014/2015. A big thank you to all my lecturers and staff: To Annaert
Greet ‘tombs up’ for your warm welcome and availability. To my classmates and friends
especially Grace Bruintjies and Lamin Toure for your friendship; all the memorable times
and support throughout the year.
Words cannot express it all. You have all been very special to me. I will forever be grateful.
Thanks.
iii
Table of Content
Acknowledgement .............................................................................................................................. ii
Table of Content ................................................................................................................................ iii
List of Tables, Figures, Graphs and Pictures........................................................................................ v
List of Acronymes ............................................................................................................................... vi
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... viii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Evolution of Development Planning in Cameroon ........................................................................ 1
1.2 Relevance of Gender Mainstreaming in Development Programmes ........................................... 3
1.3 Reasons for Assessing Gender Responsiveness of Development Programmes ........................... 5
1.4 Problem Statement and Research Questions ............................................................................... 6
1.5 Research Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 7
1.6 Organization of the Paper ............................................................................................................. 7
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE, THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS ................ 9
2.1 Key Concepts and Theories ........................................................................................................... 9
2.1.1 Local governance and local development ............................................................................. 9
2.1.2 Participatory development .................................................................................................. 11
2.1.3 Gender equality and gender mainstreaming ....................................................................... 13
2.3 Gender Equality Models and Gender Mainstreaming Dimensions ............................................ 14
2.3.1 Models of gender equality ................................................................................................... 15
2.3.2 Dimensions in gender mainstreaming ................................................................................. 18
2.4 Tools to Assess Gender Sensitivity of Policies and Programmes ................................................ 20
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 22
3.1 Why a Comparative Case Study? ................................................................................................ 22
3.2 Case Selection ............................................................................................................................. 23
3.3 Data Collection and Method of Analysis ..................................................................................... 25
3.5 Limitations of the Study .............................................................................................................. 27
CHAPTER FOUR: LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IN CAMEROON ....... 28
4.1 The Local Government in Cameroon .......................................................................................... 28
4.2 The National Programme for Participatory Development (PNDP) in Cameroon ....................... 30
4.2.1 Communal Development Planning ...................................................................................... 32
CHAPTER FIVE: GENDER ASSESSMENT OF COMMUNAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS: CONTENT AND
PROCESS ................................................................................................................................................ 34
5.1 Presentation of Assessment (quick scan) Scores ........................................................................ 34
5.2 In-depth Gender Assessment of the Communal Development Planning Cycle ......................... 37
iv
5.2.1 Preparation phase ................................................................................................................ 38
5.2.2 Community diagnosis ........................................................................................................... 40
5.2.3 Planning/programming ........................................................................................................ 42
5.2.4 Budgeting and implementation strategies .......................................................................... 43
5.2.5 Monitoring and evaluation .................................................................................................. 44
5.2.6 Participatory process ........................................................................................................... 46
5.3 General Discussion on the Gender Responsiveness of CDPs ...................................................... 47
5.3.1 Discourse .............................................................................................................................. 47
5.3.2 Institutional or Structural changes....................................................................................... 47
5.3.3 Use of gender analytical and operational tools ................................................................... 48
5.3.4 Availability and use of sex-disaggregated data .................................................................... 48
5.3.5 Broader scope of actors ....................................................................................................... 49
5.4 Exploring the Link between Cultural Norms and Gender Responsiveness of CDPs.................... 49
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................... 53
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 53
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 54
References ........................................................................................................................................ 56
Annexes ............................................................................................................................................. 61
v
List of Tables, Figures, Graphs and Pictures
List of Tables
Table 1: Regional difference in gender inequalities
Table 2: Gender sensitivity scores of communal development plans: content assessment
Table 3: Gender sensitivity scores of communal development plans: process assessment
List of figures
Figure 1: Dimension of participation
Figure 2 Models of gender equality
Figure 3: gender mainstreaming multiple-track strategies
Figure 4: Findings related to the relationship
List of graphs
Graph 1: Summary of assessment scores
Graph 2: Gender responsiveness of preparatory phase
Graph 3: Gender responsiveness of community diagnosis phase
Graph 4: Gender responsiveness of planning phase
Graph 5: Gender responsiveness of budgeting and implementation strategies
Graph 6: Assessment results of monitoring and evaluation phase
List of pictures
Picture 1: Training sessions with local facilitators
vi
List of Acronymes
AFD Agence Française de Développement
BTI Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index
BAC Baccalaureate (secondary school diploma)
CDP Communal Development Plans
CEDAW Convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against
women
CEFAM Centre de Formation d’Administration Municipale
CIG Common initiative groups
CLGF Commonwealth Local Government Forum
COPIL Comité de pilotage (Steering committee)
CSO Civil society organisation
DSDSR Sector Strategy for the Development of Rural Areas
EIGE Europe Institute for Gender Equality
FEICOM Fonds d’Equipement et d’Intervention Communal
GAD Gender and development
GESP Growth and employment strategy paper
GEM Gender empowerment measure
GDI Gender-related development index
GRB Gender responsive budgeting
GTZ German Agency for Technical Cooperation
HIV Human immune virus
HDR Human development report
IDA International Development Assistance
IMF International Monetary Fund
KFW Germany’s Development Bank
LG Local government
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MDG Millennium Development Goal
MINEPAT Ministry of economy, planning and regional development
MINADT Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralisation
vii
MINPROF Ministry of women’s empowerment and the family
NEMP National Environmental Management Plan
NAPA National adaptation programme of action
NIS National Institute for Statistics
NGO Non-governmental organisations
OECD Organisation for economic corporation and development
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
PNDP Programme Nationale de Développement Participatif
PGN Practical gender needs
RBF Result based framework
RRA Rapid rural appraisal
SGN Strategic gender needs
SIGI Social Institution and Gender Index
UCCC United Cities and Councils of Cameroon
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Funds
VDC Village development committee
WDR World development report
WID Women in Development
viii
Executive Summary
Decentralised planning through the use of participatory approaches and methods have the
potential of promoting equitable and sustainable development, but can be more effective with
more commitment to integrating gender issues. A comprehensive understanding of the
underlying factors and local power relations need be taken into consideration and the
necessary policy environment to ensure the expected deliverables.
Many developing countries have embraced the practice of local planning and participatory
approaches without or with little attention to measuring or evaluating the real impact/change
it contributes/makes to the lives of individual local inhabitants. The assumptions of its
potential to engage and harness the participation of all social groups have obscured the actual
result and tendency in reinforcing existing inequalities and power relations in local settings.
Despite the growing importance attached to decentralised development and participatory
development, more women than men still suffer from poverty, poor health, low education,
unemployment and participation in decision making positions.
This study assesses the extent of gender mainstreaming in local development planning
processes and plans, and explores the link to cultural norms. The assessment attempts an
exploration of the influence of cultural dynamics on gender mainstreaming in rural
development and poverty eradication processes by comparing the process and plans from
three different cultural contexts. The findings of this study are intended to support gender
mainstreaming not just as a modern fashion in policy improvement but as a strategy that
should recognise gender-based inequalities as a socially embedded and structural problem
that needs transformation.
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
The chapter introduces the fundamental basis/rationale and focus of this paper. It lays the
groundwork regarding the rationale of this paper, highlighting the research questions and
objectives.
1.1 Evolution of Development Planning in Cameroon
Since the early years of the 1960s, following years of colonial exploitation, the quest in many
African countries has been to improve the quality of life of individuals and the institutional
capacities to mobilise and manage resources, produce and justly distribute benefits that are
consistent with people’s aspirations (Korten, 1990). As newly independent states, early
development policy options were mainly geared at catching-up with the rest of the world.
Development planning was adopted as an approach to effect deep-seated changes in the
economy and society. This entailed the practice of anticipation and selection of best policies
for implementation over a period of time for the development of a national economy (Killick,
1983). Planning was deemed important for effective management of resources and to address
the “inability of price mechanisms to ensure growth, efficiency and equity” (Shakya, 2007:9).
It was also considered necessary to deal with the pervasive problems of poverty, disease and
ignorance that were widely prevalent in many African countries in the early years of
independence.
For over four decades of development planning and implementation, different countries have
adopted different models and approaches to development, with unique trajectories influenced
by socio economic, political and institutional capacities. In Cameroon the trajectory has been
quite progressive though not without some setbacks. The country has been through the three
broad phases/approaches of development planning: the central planning phase (five-year
plans), liberalisation / indicative planning phase and the visioning phase described by
Mutahaba and Kweyamba (2010) and Shakya (2007). At independence, Cameroon adopted
the five years development plan approach to growth and social development, within highly
centralised government policies. The need for sufficient amounts of productive investment to
raise national income directed government’s interest towards a policy approach which
entailed mobilising resources for productive investment. As a result, national plans were
more focused on infrastructural programmes and economic growth. At the same time, like
most African countries faced with internal weaknesses and institutional limitations, increased
2
dependency on donors for implementation of these plans, compromised its efficiency,
effectiveness and ownership (Osabuohien et al, 2012).
With the 1985s economic crisis, a major turning point was experienced. The Cameroon
government engaged in some important stabilisation and structural adjustment programmes
leading to the discontinuation of the long-term initiatives. As Tanga and Fonchingong (2009)
observe, “the introduction of economic reforms and structural adjustment programmes meant
that the government could not fulfil its responsibility of providing social amenities” (Tanga
and Fonchingong, 2009:84). They argue that government’s disengagement and liberalisation
of the development arena contributed to the involvement of the private sector represented by
civil society organisations. More than 150 non-governmental organisations were created
during this period. This crisis led the government into structural adjustment programmes, and
shifting the responsibility of (local) development to non-governmental organisations. Like
Nigeria, however, Cameroon’s development for over two decades was slowed down by the
lack of strong institutions to mediate potential moral hazard and adverse selection in resource
allocation (Osabuohien et al, 2012) and to support the relationship between government and
private sector. Coupled with the inefficiency of the free market mechanism in allocating
resources and investment in accordance with local needs, the absence of a common and
coherent vision, and effective national economic policies, the conditions of vulnerable people
(55% of women and girls) were made worst (MINEPAT, 2009).
In the third phase, in an effort to overcome/redress weaknesses and challenges of Structural
Adjustment Policies (SAP) and its long lasting effect on human development, many African
countries, including Cameroon have been engaged in national strategy processes for growth
and poverty eradication. The government’s re-engagement to comprehensive long term vision
planning has been scaled- up with the production of the Growth and Employment Strategy
Paper (GESP), the Cameroon Vision 2035, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) and
other sectoral programmes. Among which are: the National plan for the fight against
corruption, the National Programme on Good Governance, the National Environmental
Management Plan (NEMP) and the Sector Strategy for the Development of Rural Areas
(DSDSR). In this phase, people centred programmes have received considerable attention
with the government acting as guide and facilitator in cooperation with other actors. Through
the DSDSR, the government has established procedures to enhance decentralized planning
processes at local government councils (communes/municipality). Since 2004, the local
3
government has been at the centre of the decentralisation process and the National
Participatory Development Programme (PNDP) to engage local populations in the
formulation and implementation of development plans for their communities. This
programme like most local governance and development planning initiatives stresses on
identifying the real needs of local populations, mobilising local participation, and reaching
the poorest of the poor. Most importantly the decentralised planning process has been
adopted not only for integrating and mobilising local potential and knowledge, but for
empowering the less privileged (Parfitt, 2004). Converging with the growing need to promote
gender equality in development, local development and participatory planning approaches are
recognised by some advocates (Cornwall, 2003; Percy, 1999; Bock, 2015) as possible avenue
for men and women to equally express and channel their needs and interest into the
mainstream of development policies and programmes. But understanding what opportunities
local planning approaches alongside participatory planning provides and how effective it is to
ensure gender sensitive plans and development requires more than just a predisposed
hypothesis. This calls for the need for an investigation of the local planning process and how
it potentially addresses the needs of different groups of women to ensure the achievement of
sustainable development and empowerment of local people (especially poor and
underprivileged local women).
1.2 Relevance of Gender Mainstreaming in Development Programmes
Gender mainstreaming is a “process of assessing the implications for women and men of any
planned action, including legislation, policies or programmes, in all areas and at all levels”
(UN ECOSOC, 1997:28). It is a strategy for ensuring that women and men’s concerns and
experiences become part of the mainstream in the design, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation of policies and programmes. Its relevance in policy making processes has long
been recognised since the United Nation Decade for Women (1976-1985) as a key strategy
capable of bringing about the necessary change in policy processes and structures and
ensuring equal participation and benefit to all social groups.
Primarily, gender mainstreaming serves as a strategic tool to achieving gender equality. As
highlighted in the World Development Report (2012), achieving gender equality in
development is relevant both as a basic human right “to live the life of one’s own choosing”
and as an instrument that “contributes to economic efficiency and the achievement of other
development goals” (WDR, 2012: 3). Like, non-discrimination, access to sexual and
4
reproductive health and right, gender equality is a fundamental human rights principle.
Realising women’s human rights is challenging violations and structural constraints to equal
rights and choice for women and promoting policies and programmes that respond to human
rights principles (UN Women, 2014). This concern for gender equality in development
debates has generated scholarly evidence to support “inequality-reducing policies as a valid
and effective tool to directly and indirectly promote development” (Bandiara and Natraj,
2013).
Moreover, gender mainstreaming is relevant for efficiency in the achievement of other
development goals. Equality between men and women is fundamental and vital to achieving
social and economic growth. The Human Development Report (2014) and the OECD Social
Institution and Gender Index (SIGI) visibly indicates this correlation between gender
inequality and the achievement of other development goals such as maternal mortality,
adolescent fertility, female seats in parliament, labour force participation among others.
Several studies at micro and macro levels (World Development Report, 2012; Klasen, 1999)
clearly reveal empirical evidence that achieving gender equality is highly recommended for
poverty reduction and economic growth. Among these, Klasen’s (1999) study has shown that
“gender inequality in education and access to resources may prevent a reduction of child
mortality, of fertility, and an expansion of education of the next generation” (Klasen, 1999:1).
Thus, increasing gender equality in education, health, decision making and access to land and
economic opportunities, directly impacts and enhances productivity, improve development
outcomes, and make institutions more representative (WDR, 2012).
In addition, the practice of gender mainstreaming ensures a thorough understanding of issues
and provides opportunities to initiate change in attitudes and beliefs that create disparities
between men and women. The absence of such insightful and in-depth analysis of gender
issues/norms not only results in failure of the gender equality agenda but also hinders the
opportunity to make development policies successful (Bock, 2015). Similarly, as highlighted
by Roggeband and Verloo (2006) gender mainstreaming counteract the belief of policy
makers that regular policy making is gender neutral and emphatically “use the normal
mandate of policy makers to promote more equitable relation between women and men”
(Roggeband and Verloo, 2006:618). It questions the disproportionate degree to which women
and men’s productive, reproductive and community roles impact on their productivity and
5
living conditions. It ensures the integration of women and men’s interests, needs and
constraints and their equitable participation and benefit from development interventions.
In essence, gender mainstreaming provides the unique opportunity to address inequalities and
realise inclusive and transformative development that respond to the needs of all social
groups.
1.3 Reasons for Assessing Gender Responsiveness of Development Programmes
Evaluating gender responsiveness is essential for sustainable development. It is an
opportunity for systematic and consistent measurement of existing gender gaps with the
potential to ensure productive policies and programmes for development (EIGE, 2013).
Policies and programmes rely on data about processes and strategies to yield positive results.
Assessing gender mainstreaming strategies towards achieving structural gender equality and
empowerment enable development practitioners to identify opportunities to narrow these
inequalities and promote best practices that improve policy processes. It aims at creating
avenues for overcoming gender blindness and biases in traditional planning and policy
procedures. It offers the possibility to identify and address institutional structures, priorities,
values and processes that may constrain the ability of programme managers to make all
aspects of a programme more gender-responsive.
Still, evaluating gender responsiveness gives an opportunity for learning. Learning to
improve and renew mainstreaming strategies given the slow but changing gender relations. It
is recognised that conducting a persuasive evaluation of gender responsiveness has been
challenging not only in developing adequate analytical approaches but also because the
complex process of social change does not follow a uniform path and offers few guaranteed
outcomes (Molyneux and Razavi, 2005). As such, the focus on measuring achievements
made towards gender equality helps to identify what works, what does not work and what can
be done to develop new strategies for gender mainstreaming. In a similar view, it helps keep
track of women’s progress in well-being and the impact of interventions on women and men.
This makes it a learning process for both practitioners and decision makers.
Following the call at Beijing plus ten, accountability concerns have become central. As
highlighted in the UN Women (2014) guidance note, the lack of comparable data and
accountability for allocation and expenditures for gender equality and the empowerment of
women have delayed progress. As such increasing demands for accountability is requested
6
from international institutions and development agencies for the analytical, institutional, or
financial supports toward gender justice. In this regard, member states, government agencies
and civil society organisations are expected to track and report progress to the commitment
made to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of women (Moser and Moser, 2005).
These assessments are intended to improve the relevance and performance of gender
mainstreaming, as well as hold governments responsible for the commitments and resources
for gender equality.
1.4 Problem Statement and Research Questions
Dissatisfied with the state of development in Cameroon, the government since 2004,
embraced a concept of decentralized local planning (through the PNDP Programme) with the
hope to address the real needs of local people, reduce poverty and ensure a focus on
participatory and sustainable development of local communities. A decade later, it is
uncertain whether this programme has effectively addressed gender issues and empowered
women in local communities. Limited positive returns have been recorded for women. Most
rural communities still live in extreme poverty with women making up more than 70% of
rural poor (BTI, 2014; IMF, 2014). As revealed in the recent Human Development Report
(2014), high levels of inequalities in health, education and living standard still exit, causing a
32.8% fall in the human development index (HDI) for 2013 from 0.504 to 0.339. In addition,
the gender development index (GDI) shows clear differences in human development of
female (0.468) and males (0.537), with the expected years of schooling for females at 9.5 as
oppose to 11.2 for males. For every 100,000 live births, 690.0 women die from pregnancy
related causes, and only 63.6% of women participate in the labor force as compared to 76.7%
for men (HDR, 2014). Moreover, as an ongoing programme, several assessments conducted
on the PNDP have largely neglected the gender perspectives in the planning processes of the
CDP.
Drawing on these gaps, this paper questions the effectiveness of the local government in
integrating women’s issues and needs in the mainstream of the Communal Development
Plans (CDP) and hope to contribute to the ongoing debate on the importance of local
planning and participatory approaches as prospective avenues for promoting gender equality.
To explore these concerns, the paper set out to research the following key questions:
7
To what extent are Communal/Municipal Development Plans (CDP) responsive to
gender perspectives?
Can the level of responsiveness of CDP be related to the existing gender/cultural
norms of these communities?
What possible factors influence the effective incorporation of gender perspective in
local planning processes?
To answer these questions, a gender scan and checklist are used to measure the
responsiveness of three CDP to gender perspectives. The CDP are selected in such a way that
represents three different cultural settings. The outcomes of the assessment are then
compared to the existing cultural norms. This is to explore the link between levels of
implementation gender mainstreaming and the existing cultural norms.
1.5 Research Objectives
The main aim of this research is to contribute in enhancing gender perspectives in local
development planning process for an equitable and sustainable development in Cameroon.
Specific objectives
- Review from a gender perspective 3 Communal Development Plans to assess the
extent to which gender mainstreaming principles are included.
- Explore the link between socio-cultural norms and the gender responsiveness of CDPs
- Examine strengths and challenges associated with gender mainstreaming in local
planning processes
- Propose recommendations for the inclusion of gender aspect in CDPs for sustainable
local development in Cameroon
1.6 Organization of the Paper
The paper is divided into six sections. The first chapter introduces the background of
development planning and highlights the major trends and phases. It situates the scope of the
paper, giving a brief overview of the importance of gender perspectives and assessments, the
problems under investigation, and the objectives of the study. Chapter two provides the
conceptual environment within which the research problem is built, examining major
concepts and raising arguments in the literature that provides the basis of this study. This is
followed by the methodology section (chapter three) which highlights the
8
procedures/techniques used for data collection and analysis to justify the validity of the
arguments and findings of the study. Chapter four covers the context of the case study. It
presents the local governance process and development in Cameroon, with a summary of the
local development programme (PNDP).
Chapter five shows the analysis and findings related to the gender responsiveness of local
development plans from three regions, with discussions on the influencing factors (positive
and negative) and a comparison of the link between gender responsiveness and existing social
norms. The last chapter concludes with recommendations for policy makers and development
agents for an effective and gender inclusive programming for local development.
9
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE, THEORETICAL AND
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS
This chapter explores literature regarding the theoretical and conceptual notions used in this
study. The literature reviewed highlights different interpretations of these concepts and their
underlying assumptions and approaches in addressing development issues such as gender
inequality. It examines the what, why and how these concepts contribute to equitable and
sustainable development as well as how they may limit/ challenge its achievement.
2.1 Key Concepts and Theories
2.1.1 Local governance and local development
Governance has been defined by Olivier De Sardan as “any organized method of delivering
public or collective services and goods according to specific logic and standards” (Sardan,
2011:22). This means that governance involves processes of negotiation and renegotiation
that can either involve state or non-state actors, and operating at central or local levels within
clear regulations to deliver services. Local governance is referred to as “a rule-governed
process through which residents of a defined area participate in governance in locally
important matters” (Olowu, et al in Ngalim, 2014: 90). It is a system of government that
permits the involvement of different relations in terms of ethnicity with different forms of
legitimacy such as traditional forms in the provision of public services in local communities.
It involves engaging local inhabitants as key actors in the decision on the priorities, strategies,
resources and structures for managing local development processes that affects their lives
(Ngalim, 2014). Sardan (2011) in this context identifies eight (8) modes of local governance:
notably chiefly, associational, municipal, project based, bureaucratic, sponsored based,
religious and merchant, each of which provides distinctive dynamics in organizing and
promoting development. This makes local governance processes an important mechanism for
local developmental-service delivery and sustainable local development.
At the centre of this governance system are the local government units. These are locally
elected governments representatives, granted the power to govern a defined constituency. As
defined by the law on the organization of councils in Cameroon (1974), the local government
is a decentralized public authority having the status of a corporate body under public law.
They enjoy administrative and financial autonomy in the management of local interests
10
(Cheka, 2007). With recent shifts from state centered to citizen-led development processes,
especially in developing countries, the authority, power, legitimacy and responsibility for
local development is increasingly devolved to these locally elected governments. Devolving
power to these local units is aimed at enhancing local development and contribution to the
fight against poverty (Cheka, 2007). This is because contrary to centralized top-down
government planning, these units are intended to bring services closer to the citizens, ensure
accountability, and adopt participatory and inclusive approaches that better target and
mainstream the needs of the people into national policies. Though some also argue that
decentralized approaches might increase inequalities rather than decrease them, local
governments also serve as a link between the people and national government. They are
required to take the leadership role of involving citizens and stakeholder groups in local
development processes, by building social capital and maintaining a sense of collective action
for local sustainability (Binns and Nel, 2002). Interesting also is the fact that they facilitate
local people’s participation and appropriation of new policies and technology, and mobilize
local knowledge and labour to minimise implementation cost (Michener, 1998). Thus, local
governments are a mechanism to improve efficiency in service delivery, improve governance
through better participation of local actors, improve equity for the poor, and improve local
development via the elaboration of better framework and coordination of private and state
actors (Ahmad et al, 2005).
In theory, we may conclude that local governance for development is thought to ensure that
local needs and preferences are better met, with adequate social inclusion (targeting the needs
of the poor and disadvantage), and effective participation of local communities and groups
(Cornwall, 2003). It is a model that promises a more equitable, inclusive and effective
approach in capturing the needs of disadvantaged groups (including women). With
participatory approaches as the leading principle and tools, decentralized planning processes
are thought to provide the possibility of better learning, decision making and targeting the
needs of people including women (Leeuwis, 2000). In spite of these well recognised
advantages, some authors (e.g. Ahmed et al, 2005; Ngalim, 2014) have argued that the
capacity for local government to perform is often challenged by inadequate resources,
corruption, ethnic diversity, ineffective decentralization processes and lack of management
capacity in the effective execution of their responsibilities. This notwithstanding, the practice
of local development planning has continued to gain popularity in the development discourse.
11
2.1.2 Participatory development
Frustrated with the ‘top-down’ bureaucracy and professionalism of centrally mandated
development; decentralised local planning approaches gave way for participation to dominate
development thinking in the 1970s (Cohen and Uphoff, 1980). The concept was formed on
the premise that successful development is “not [found in] the bureaucracy and its centrally
mandated development projects and programmes, but rather [in] the community itself: its
needs, its capacities, and ultimately its own control over both its resources and its destiny”
(Korten in Samuel, 2002: 2). This concept has been open to different interpretations. But
according to Cohen and Uphoff’s (1977) definition, “participation includes people’s
involvement in decision-making processes, in implementing programmes, their sharing in
the benefits of development programmes and their involvement in efforts to evaluate such
programmes” (Cohen and Uphoff in Parfitt, 2004: 538). This definition highlights two major
components: its contribution to achieving development goals, and the empowerment of local
people to pursue their own development.
This viewpoint has been extensively developed in the literature by leading scholars like
Robert Chambers to cause a theoretical shift in development. Chambers notes the potential of
participatory or people centred development to “enable local people to share, enhance and
analyse their knowledge of the life and conditions, and to plan, act, monitor and analyse”
(Chambers, 1994:1253). He argues that participation is crucial for poor people to gain control
over decisions that affects their lives, and to ensure success of projects and more likely
transformation in development.
The concept has equally been influenced by Amartya Sen’s broad based capability approach
(1999), which emphasises the empowerment of the poor to collectively act for their own
interest. It relies on the willingness and ability of the people to freely participate and exercise
voice and choice for the incorporation of local knowledge and values in development
programmes. The emphasis is on people’s own experiences that enable them to articulate and
analyse their own situation, with more focus on individual agency than structural analysis
(Cornwall, 2003). Moreover, its methodologies and approaches are known to be more
appropriate to incorporating local people’s knowledge into the programme planning process
to transform power relations in local communities (Mosse, 2001) and to involve different
stakeholders in “a process of planning, decision-making and/or social learning” (Leeuwis
12
2000: 931). Different social groups get involved in mapping or modelling, scoring and
ranking priority needs as a strategy to bridge the gap among rich and poor, men and women,
and create legitimacy for planning action.
In addition to its empowerment component, “Participation is expected to lead to better
designed projects, better targeted benefits, more cost effective and timely delivery of project
inputs, and more equitably distributed project benefits with less corruption and other rent-
seeking activity” (Mansuri and Rao, 2004:11). Thus, development is enhanced when the final
beneficiaries are involved in the design, implementation and evaluation of programmes and
policies that affects them.
However, critiques of participation express doubts on the empowerment claims. Some argue
that participation simply provides methods that appear to include the poor and vulnerable
meanwhile they tend to legitimise the voice and interest of those in power (Parfitt, 2004;
Cornwall, 2003). In Mansuri and Rao’s (2004) view, rather than serving as a vehicle for
radical social transformation, participation is mostly used to promote pragmatic policy
interest. Others argue that its theoretical assumptions are inconsistent and can easily lead to
unproductive development interventions which undermine the specific constraints faced by
women and other less powerful groups to effectively participate in the process (Leeuwis,
2000). Barriers that have greatly affected the quality of participation leave the approach
questionable in effectively transforming power relations and ensuring equitable participation
and benefit for all.
In this complexity, the measurement of participation has become problematic. Different
frameworks including Deshler and Sock (1985), White (1996) and Cohen and Uphoff (1980)
have been proposed to define and measure the degree of people’s participation. Deshler and
Sock’s (1985) framework underlines the relative power relations between the outsider and
beneficiaries in defining participation and measures the extent of control from pseudo to
genuine participation. White (1996) in his typology highlights the conflicting interests of
stakeholders and measures participation on the scale of nominal, instrument, representative to
transformative, where the empowerment of beneficiaries becomes a shared interest among
stakeholders. Yet, Cohen and Uphoff (1980) put forward a more practical framework for
analysing participation in three dimensions. The framework highlights participation at the
13
different levels of planning, provide for actor analysis as well as mechanisms for describing
the nature/condition of their participation (Michener, 1998).
Figure 1: Dimension of participation
Source: Cohen and Uphoff (1980) reproduced in Michener (1998)
This framework provides a handy tool for determining the actual participation of the different
social groups and an understanding of power relations among them to ensure empowerment.
The framework questions whether participation is consistent from decision making to
evaluation, involves the appropriate target group, and whether participation is voluntary or
coerced, continuous or intermittent, effective or not. This tool is therefore well suited in
promoting as well as assessing women’s participation in local development planning.
2.1.3 Gender equality and gender mainstreaming
Like gender mainstreaming, gender equality is complex and multi-dimensional with
insufficient agreement on what it constitutes and what it should achieve (EIGE, 2013). While
gender equality is viewed as “the overarching and long-term development goal”, gender
mainstreaming “is a set of context-specific, strategic approaches as well as technical and
institutional processes adopted to achieve that goal” (UN Women, 2014:7). Moreover,
gender equality relates to “accepting and valuing equally the differences between men and
women and the diverse roles they play in society” (Council of Europe in Walby, 2005:327).
14
With the inception of the mainstreaming strategy for equality, varying debates, contestation
and conceptual interpretations (Walby, 2005; Woodward, 2001; Squires, 2005) have been
raised about its potential to effectively transform mainstream policies, programmes and
processes. Unlike the early strategies of equal treatment and positive action, gender
mainstreaming integrates a gender equality component into policies and programmes with the
aim of transforming discriminatory social institutions. Some have termed it “a new”, “better”
and “revolutionary” strategy, with the potential to change institutionalized practices that are
deep-rooted in systems and structures, to impact on gender equality (Verloo, 2001). The
United Nations Economic and Social Council defines gender mainstreaming as both a process
and a strategy for ensuring that women and men’s concerns and experiences become part of
the mainstream of the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies and
programmes. This definition combines the two broad aspects of institutionalization of
women’s concerns in organizational culture, goal and procedures, and empowerment for the
improvement of women’s participation (Moser, 2005).
Others suggest it is a theoretical concept and a model of policy making that is variously
understood to entail “mainstreaming equal opportunities, equal treatment, women’s
perspectives, gender, gendered perspectives or, more recently diversity” (Squires, 2005:368)
into development processes. Its main aim is to target change in policy making processes that
are transformative of laws, customs and institutional procedures so there is no more
discrimination against women on grounds of sex (Porter and Sweetman, 2005). Its focus goes
“beyond the classic opposition between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome,”
(Squires, 2005: 370) with the aim to transform the policy process and eliminate gender bias in
development.
Though gender mainstreaming has gained popularity and political opportunities within
international development organisations as a modern and potential strategy to transform
policy processes (Walby, 2005), the vision of transformation (altering or deconstructing
existing systems and structures) has not only been difficult to accurately assess but also lacks
clear strategies on how to achieve it.
2.3 Gender Equality Models and Gender Mainstreaming Dimensions
Bearing in mind the importance of gender equality and the mainstreaming strategy (discussed
in 1.2), this section aims to provide more insight into the literature on the theoretical and
15
analytical frames for understanding how gender mainstreaming has been interpreted and
measured.
2.3.1 Models of gender equality
In the search for an effective route to gender equality, various analytical models have been
derived by feminist writers like Rees (1998), Squires 1999b (2005), Booth and Bennett
(2002) in line with the three broad approaches to gender equality: the equal treatment,
positive action and gender mainstreaming approach. Each of these models provides distinct
theoretical and analytical frames for understanding gender mainstreaming.
The first model (equal treatment approach) puts the emphasis on women as equal partners to
men by establishing equal rights for women and men in legislation. It argues that men and
women should be formally equal, with equal rights to education, employment, political
participation and protection by the law. The approach analytically focuses on women as a
marginalized group with special or additional interests (Porter and Sweetman, 2005), in need
of special attention. However, it is criticized to be politically conservative, not intended to
change the ‘rules of the game’ but the ‘players of the game’ (Rao and Kelleher, 2005:59).
That is, it includes women in previously male domains with less emphasis on changing the
existing unfair social roles and values.
The second model (positive action approach) stresses specific policy actions to address the
disadvantages women face by focusing on women specific projects. Recognising that equal
rights are not enjoyed by all to the same extent, this approach is at the root of separate
projects for women and quota systems in political and organisational management positions
to attain equality in outcome (Verloo, 2001). Like the equal treatment approach, women
specific projects focused on improving women’s capacity to better perform their traditional
gender roles, leaving the mainstream of development processes to men. In this regard, they
both adopt the welfare; anti-poverty and efficiency approaches to women in development
(WID) identified by Moser (1989) and an integrationist kind of mainstreaming (Jahan, 1996)
The third model (gender mainstreaming approach) alternatively focuses on deconstructing
systems and structures that infringe on people’s rights and cause existing disadvantages (see
figure 1). This approach involves identifying how existing systems and structures cause
16
indirect discrimination and challenging them as appropriate (Squires, 2005). It is a more
radical and distinct approach that “seek to institutionalise equality [through] gender sensitive
practices and norms in the structures, processes and environment of public policy” (Daly,
2005:435) with the aim of transforming the existing development agenda. It emphasizes on
gender analysis of programmes and policies as a first step not only for identifying new
priorities but also for understanding the political causes of women’s marginalization. In this
way, gender mainstreaming infuses gender analysis into all development programmes
(women specific or not) to address issues of strategic importance to women not included in
the development agenda (Porter and Sweetman, 2005).
Figure 2 Models of gender equality
Source: Rees (2005)
Each building progressively from earlier approaches, these models have usually been used as
mutually exclusive or stand-alone strategies in development interventions. Among them, the
gender mainstreaming approach has been the most widely promoted for its transformative
potential to impact on gender equality more effectively than the other strategies.
However, the growing recognition that these approaches can coexist within and across
sectors, programme or at policy levels (Walby, 2005; Booth and Bennett, 2002; Daly, 2005;
Verloo, 2001) makes it even more complex. Drawing from the lessons learned on gender
17
mainstreaming, the 3 models are more likely to manifest in the practice of mainstreaming.
The arguments suggest that they represent three complementary rather than competing
approaches, interconnected with each other as components of a ‘three-legged stool’ (Walby,
2005; Squires, 2005). Increasingly, more studies and evidence on the potentials of a multiple
track strategy that combines both gender-targeted and gender-integrated approaches within a
programme show more success in the achievement of gender equality and the empowerment
of women (UN Women, 2014).
Figure 3: gender mainstreaming multiple-track strategies
Source: UN Women, 2014
Contrary to Rees’ (2005) and Squires’ (2005) early view of the transformative model as the
way forward, the multiple track strategy supports a comprehensive approach and gives
priority to no model as the most appropriate for analysing gender mainstreaming. Its
emphasis is placed on understanding and adopting targeted measures towards poor minorities
within mainstream gender responsive programmes as simultaneously imperative strategies for
attaining gradual, sustained societal change at national and local government levels (UN
Women, 2014). The European Employment Strategy as highlighted by Walby (2005)
provides evidence to support that multiple track strategies yield better results toward gender
equality and women’s empowerment. Following Daly’s (2005) advise, gender mainstreaming
cannot and should not be treated in isolation from other approaches because it is predated on
18
the history and set of gender equality measures of each country. Rather, it should be “viewed
as a broad strategy that entails the incorporation of the other two strategies as and when
appropriate” (Squires, 2005:372) and where all three models are relevant and no one single
approach to gender equality is deemed sufficient in practice. At this point and for the purpose
of this study, gender mainstreaming will be addressed as a multiple track strategy of change
and transformation in systems and structures, organisational culture and policy making
processes that includes but is not limited to targeted measures towards women.
2.3.2 Dimensions in gender mainstreaming
In the practice of gender mainstreaming combining institutional and operational dimensions
is the most effective way to mainstreaming gender at all levels: national, organisational and
programme levels. However, some studies have shown that at national and organisational
levels, the emphasis has been on institutional/organisational gender mainstreaming activities
(Rao and Kelleher, 2005; Moser and Moser, 2005) at the expense of the operational elements
which address changes in programmes to support structural gender equality and
empowerment of women (Porter and Sweetman, 2005). The former involves changes in the
internal culture, system, structure and procedure of development organisations and national
machineries as preconditions for interventions at operational levels. Though there are huge
variations in the implementation and outcomes of internal organisational activities across and
within countries and organisations, some common trends highlighted by Daly (2005), include
formal commitments such as changes in policy and legislations, creation of gender units and
ministerial departments as well as gender action plans; the use of gender analysis tools; and
combined use of gender equality approaches.
Mainstreaming gender in programmes provides the opportunity for operational development
work. At programme levels, gender is mainstreamed into development operations such as
design, implementation and evaluation. As outlined by Leduc and Ahmad (2009), and the UN
Women (2014) guidance note, mainstreaming in programmes follow a cycle which involves:
gender analysis of the context or thematic issue for evidence base planning;
Selecting priority actions, target groups, programme results and indicators that
promote gender equality;
Budget planning and implementation modalities that are responsive to gender
equality objectives;
19
Gender sensitive monitoring and evaluation system with innovative and adaptable
approaches, coherent theory of change, and evidence for decisions related to gender
equality.
This sequence provides a systematic approach and a wide range of indicators to analysing
gender sensitivity in development programme planning. These indicators have formed the
bases of several checklists and methodologies designed and adopted by development
organisations and practitioners to assess gender mainstreaming (for example, WHO, 2011;
USAID, 2014; World Bank, 2001; Holvoet, 2010; Holvoet and Inberg, 2013).
Faced with the complexity of meaning, strategies, indicators and methodologies in gender
mainstreaming, assessing gender mainstreaming has become very challenging (Rees, 2005;
Walby, 2005). However, five main dimensions for appraising mainstreaming have been
identified in the literature (Daly, 2005). These include the shift in discourse/approach (from
women to gender); institutional or structural changes; use of gender tools and techniques in
policy processes; production and use of disaggregated data; and broadening of actors in
policy making. These dimensions focus on the following indicators:
The first dimension of mainstreaming (policy discourse/approach) examines the underlying
theory/paradigm of development in the interest of women. This relates to whether the
plans/programmes adopt the women in development (WID) approaches (welfare
programmes) that target women or the gender and development (GAD) approach that
addresses relations of power between men and women. In this sense, policy/programmes
approaches are gender responsive when they analyse gender relations, recognise the
subordination of women and address women’s strategic gender need.
Related to the discourse, the second dimension of gender mainstreaming assesses the changes
in institutional/structural activities of organisations. Institutional activities address the internal
dynamics such as policies, structures, systems and procedures (Porter and Sweetman, 2005).
This dimension assesses the changes in policy processes, structures such as the establishment
of specialised technical units, gender units, gender training, that serve as vehicles for
incorporating gender perspective in regular development practices in all sectors. It also looks
at reforms in the policies and procedures to enable women participate as fully as men, and
take positions of leadership.
20
The third dimension assesses the use of gender sensitive tools: analytical and operational
tools. Gender analytical and operational tools are important for diagnosing how and why
women are affected unequally to men. This dimension assesses the use of gender analytical
(Harvard analytical framework; the Moser framework; or the women’s empowerment
framework) and other operational and governance tools such as gender budgeting, gender
monitoring and evaluation framework or gender impact assessment methods.
As a product of the third measure, the fourth dimension looks at the effective use of these
analytical tools and techniques to generate gender disaggregated data for evidence base
planning. This dimension measures the availability and use of sex -disaggregated data to
provide insight into the proportion of women and men affected by the identified development
problems. Evidence suggests that gender sensitive data and context analysis is necessary for a
coherent approach to mainstreaming gender in sector programmes (UN Women, 2014).
Lastly, broadening the spectrum of actors involve is a valuable indicator of collaboration,
partnership and ownership. This dimension examines the range of actors involve in the
planning process. Consulting with actors from a wide range of sectors or discipline and
expertise from line ministries or departments, women and women groups not associated with
gender is a major strength of the mainstreaming approach (Daly, 2005). This aspect looks at
the effectiveness of consultation processes with vulnerable groups and the conditions of their
participation.
These dimensions provide an essential analytical framework for measuring the gender
responsiveness of organisation/policy/programme. This study will explore the institutional or
structural elements, use of gender tools and techniques, gender disaggregated data and the
actors within the planning cycle to assess the gender responsiveness of CDP.
2.4 Tools to Assess Gender Sensitivity of Policies and Programmes
In the absence of a harmonised or standard framework for assessing gender mainstreaming,
different tools have been developed by The World Bank (2001) to assess gender in PRSPs,
Holvoet (2010) and Holvoet and Inberg (2013) to assess PRSPs and National Adaptation
Programmes of Action (NAPA) respectively. By use of a quick gender scan and checklist
which aligns with the different phases of PRSPs and NAPAs, these studies highlight gender
21
perspectives in the programme diagnosis, selection of priority projects, implementation and
budgeting as well as the monitoring and evaluation phases. These tools provide a coherent
and systematic approach and a scoring system that allow for flexible and in-depth analysis of
the plan/programme documents. Their flexibility also allows for modification and
harmonisation of other frameworks in the assessment process.
For the purpose of this study, the gender scan and checklist (see in annex) designed to assess
the process and the content of the CDPs draws on elements from Holvoet (2010) and the
World Bank (2001) (with some modifications), taking into consideration five main planning
phases that regroups the seven stages prescribed for the elaboration of communal
development plans in the regional and local planning guide (MINEPAT, 2010). The
assessment tools include questions highlighting the different dimensions of gender
mainstreaming as mentioned above (section 2.3).
22
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.1 Why a Comparative Case Study?
According to Social Institution and Gender Index (SIGI) 2014 edition, Cameroon has high
levels of gender inequality in its social institutions (social norms, practices and laws). These
inequalities form the basis for gender gaps in development areas such as education, political
participation, and employment, creating barriers for women to participate and benefit equally
from development.
Discriminatory social institutions are however not experienced in the same degree in all ten
regions of Cameroon. Statistics on early marriage, inheritance rights, domestic violence,
female genital mutilation, boy child preference, land rights and political participation, show
huge within-country differences. As reported by UNFPA (2012) the prevalence of child
marriage is highest in the north (73%), far north (72%), Adamawa (59%) as compared to the
South (43%) and West regions (24%) among others. In the southwest and far northern
regions, female genital mutilation (FGM) is reportedly practiced on 100% of Muslim and
63.6% of Christian girls. FGM prevalence rates in the extreme north and the southwest
regions of the country are 5.4% and 2.4%, respectively, 0.5% in West and 0.2% in Adamawa
(Cameroon’s 57th
session report to CEDAW, 2014; UNICEF, 2005). Literacy rates are
estimated below 60% in rural areas. While primary school enrolment rate stands at 79%
nationwide, there are huge geographic and gender disparities (World Bank, 2003). The
National Institutes of statistics (2011) reports low literacy rates in the northern regions (51%
in Adamawa, 25% in the North Province and 26% in the Far North Province), while
UNESCO 2013 information paper shows literacy rates for Cameroonian adults above 15years
at 80.9% for male and 68.2% for females. In terms of political representation at local levels,
statistics show 1.5% and 3.9% representation of women as councillors and mayors
respectively with only the Northern regions (Far north, North and Adamawa) having no
single female as mayor between 2007-2012 (CLGF, 2013).
23
Table 1: Regional difference in gender inequalities
Far North North Adamawa South West Southwest
Prevalence of child
marriage 72% (73%) 59% 43% 24% -
Prevalence of
FGM
5.4% 5.4% 0.2% Not practiced
0.5% 2.4%
Literacy rates of
women
26.1% 35.4% 51.4% 94% 82%
Number of Female
mayors
0 1 0 2 3 4
Source: UNESCO (2013); NIS (2011); UNICEF (2005); CLGF (2013)
These and other gender inequality indicators clearly show disparities across regions, which to
some extent are attributed to social and cultural factors. They limit women’s participation in
decision making at household and community levels and can be challenging/stumbling blocks
for mainstreaming gender perspectives in development practices.
Since inequalities in social norms create gaps between men and women in terms of rights and
opportunities, and translate into gender gaps in labour markets, education, levels of poverty
and political participation, a comparative study is intended to explore the link between social
norms and gender responsiveness of local development planning. That is exploring whether
gender mainstreaming practices are to some extent related to the existing cultural norms. Are
communities with less gender inequality norms more gender responsive in development
planning? This study examines the relationship by analysing the gender responsiveness of
three CDPs.
3.2 Case Selection
The researcher examined 3 CDP selected from 3 cluster/groups formed on the basis of
available plans and regional differences in levels of inequality in social norms/institutions as
presented in 3.1 above. The first cluster constitutes the two northern regions of Cameroon (far
north, north), formed on the basis of their similarity in religion and culture. This cluster
represents the community with more inequality and strict social norms for women and men.
The second cluster is represented by the West region with less inequality in opportunities and
capabilities with less strict social norms for women and men. The South region represents
the third cluster with the least inequality in social norms. High levels of inequality and
discriminatory norms in the northern regions are compared with regions of lower inequality
24
in social norms. Within each region/cluster, a random selection of one plan is made of the
available Community Development plans (CDP) from the cluster. As the sample is very
small, the results of this study are purely exploratory and cannot be safely extrapolated to the
entire regions.
The variation in historical, religious, economic and political factors will not be examined in
this study. The comparative study only focuses on the existing social situation/condition and
its relation to the formulation of gender responsive plans.
Brief description of regions/clusters
To begin with, it is important to note that generally, men benefit/enjoy higher social status
than women in the patriarchal system that reigns in Cameroon. As a predominately
patriarchal society, “there is an inherent imbalance in men and women’s socio- cultural and
linguistic power and the type of discourses they produce or are exposed to” (Dashaco and
Anchimbe, 2014:146). Men enjoy more rights with regards to marriage, divorce, education
and land tenure according to/as reinforce by law and local systems of social organisation and
more access to government bureaucracy and courts. The long established public-private
division of roles between men and women have experienced some changes overtime in some
communities more than in others. The differences in these communities are examined in
terms of the intensity (overt or covert) of practices, rights and obligations, access to and
control over resources as well as decision making power of women and men in the public and
private domain.
i) The Northern regions
The 3 northern regions of Cameroon are primarily Muslim communities. Made up of the
Adamoua, North, and Extreme North, these regions are culturally dominated by the Fulani
ethnic group that makes up 10% of the total population. With a strong interconnection
between culture and the Islamic religion, these communities are very close-up for women.
Among the Fulani, women’s role and responsibilities are limited to child bearing and home
care. Women’s mobility and socialisation is strictly controlled by men (father, brother and
husband); women are not allowed to talk in the mist of men or greet men by handshake;
education for girls is mostly limited to primary levels; early marriage is highly preferred;
decisions are solely made by men; land inheritance is patrilineal and marriage is
25
endogenous1. Though some women engage in income generating activities and other
professions like teaching, these practices and division are still very strong in northern
communities and limit the possibilities for women and girls development.
ii) The Western region
The West region makes up part of southern French speaking Cameroon. It is also part of
western highlanders commonly called ‘grassfield peoples’ including many smaller groups in
the northwest region. The west region is predominantly made up of the Bamileke and
Bamoun. They are variously described as patrilineal or dual descent kinship. Traditional
systems of governance still exist (chief) and women marginally participate in village politics
(Atanga, 2010). It is a very traditional society with some gender discriminatory cultural
practices such as polygamy, limited inheritance rights for women and girls, and wife
inheritance also commonly practiced as a way to guarantee widows access to land. Household
chores are solely attributed to women and girls, while major decisions are only taken by men.
However, western highlanders are the most entrepreneurial urban emigrant population,
prominent in commerce and higher education. Their expansion has contributed to some
cultural changes such as the participation of women and girls in education and economic
activities within the local communities and urban areas in the country. Men and women enjoy
joint associational life with women holding decision making positions in family, local and
community groups. Some women also own and control landed property.
iii) The Southern region
Like the centre and East, the South region makes up the southern tropical forest people,
which include the Beti, Bulu, Fang, and Pygmie. These communities also have a patrilineal
system but are less restrictive and strict. In these communities (especially the Beti and
Beulu), women’s rights and obligations are less restrictive. Though wife battery and early
marriage are commonly practiced, women and girls are more assertive, enjoy equal rights to
education, inheritance, freedom of movement, and association with men.
3.3 Data Collection and Method of Analysis
Since this research is a desk study, data used is mainly secondary. The study explored
existing literature on the different thematic issues to establish the conceptual and analytical
1 Marrying someone from within the village, tribe or religion.
26
approaches of the research. The researcher compiled 13 Communal Development Plans from
which 3 were randomly selected for the study.
Using a desk study approach, the researcher made use of an exploratory research method.
This involved the review and adaptation of a checklist and a gender scan as well as a
comparative analysis to explore the link with cultural factors. These assessment tools (gender
scan and checklist) were elaborated to assess the gender sensitivity of the content and process
of the communal development planning. These tools were informed by those developed by
Holvoet and Inberg (2013) and the World Bank (2001).
The assessment exercise consisted of two steps. The first involved a quick scan for reference
made to gender or women’s issues in the different planning phases. The quick scan matrix
with the simple scoring system provided quantitative information necessary to rate or classify
the plans as gender neutral or gender/women sensitive. The scoring system assessed content
and processes based on scoring scale of 0 to 3.
Content
0 = Not possible to determine on the basis of information
1 = Gender/women issues are completely absent
2 = Some reference to women/gender issues
3 = Detailed discussion of gender issues
Process
0 = Not possible to determine on the basis of information
1 = Absence of women and /or gender expertise
2 = Limited presence of women and or gender expertise
3 = Effective presence of women and/or gender expertise
Source: adopted from Holvoet and Inberg (2013)
The second step is a more qualitative assessment to provide deeper understanding. Using a
checklist of questions, an in-depth assessment of each phase of the plan was done.
Categorised into “content” and “process”, the former focused on assessing reference made
and nature/magnitude of attention paid to gender perspectives at each phase of the plan, while
the latter (‘process’) examined the involvement/participation of different stakeholders
especially women and gender experts in the elaboration of Communal Development Plans.
27
The gender scan was designed to reflect the major phases in the elaboration of a quality plan,
and indicators by which each phase is measured.
On the basis of the information/result obtained the researcher explores the link to the cultural
setting/norms of the communities under study. Mindful of other possible influences such as
economic, institutional capacities, political will and external agent, this section of the analysis
aims to stimulate debate and further research on the influence of socio cultural factors on
gender mainstreaming efforts.
3.5 Limitations of the Study
The researcher was faced with language barriers. All documents consulted from the case
study area were mainly in French. This required personal translation and careful
understanding which was time consuming for the researcher.
The scope of the study is limited to a desk review concerned with appraising the planning
process and plans based on information from existing literature and documents of the
programme. As such, in the absence of primary data, the researcher was challenged to the use
of limited secondary data. Not much has been written on local development planning as well
as gender and participatory development in Cameroon.
Moreover, due to difficulties in accessing secondary data, the researcher was able to compile
only 13 out of 324 CDPs, limiting the possibility of other plans being assessed.
28
CHAPTER FOUR: LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING IN CAMEROON
This chapter provides a brief description of the governance and development system of
Cameroon as well as the programme under study. The chapter concludes with highlights of
some influencing factors and challenges faced by the local government in mainstreaming
gender.
4.1 The Local Government in Cameroon
According to Law No 74-23 of 5 December 1974 on organising councils in Cameroon, a
‘rural council shall be a council whose territorial jurisdiction covers a built up area, with or
without a town plan and rural areas whereas an urban council is a council whose territorial
jurisdiction is confined to a built-up area having a town plan.’ These local government
institutions –including rural and urban councils /communes- are products of the devolution of
power, tasks and resources in the ongoing decentralisation process. Following the 2004 law
on decentralisation, local government units are the third level of government after the central
and regional levels. They are initiated with the aim to “foster local development with the
active involvement of the population” (Cheka, 2007:181). Corresponding to the sub
divisional units of administration, there are 376 local governments (LGs), constituting of 320
councils, 14 city councils and 42 district councils. These councils, also referred to as
communes, are headed by elected mayors, and supported by a team of councillors, the
number of which depends on the population size of the council (CLGF, 2013).
Functions of Local Governments Units (Communes)
According to Section 55(2) of the 1996 Constitution these local government units have
administrative and financial autonomy and are freely administered by elected councils
(CLGF, 2013). The local governance system has been identified as a means of improving
service delivery, accountability of officials, regional tensions, inclusion, and environmental
management in Cameroon (World Bank, 2012). Officially local governments (councils) units
have the responsibility for service delivery including town planning, utilities (water supply
and electricity), health, social services, primary education, market facilities, and registration
of birth, marriages and death among others. But in practice councils do not have delivery
capacity for services such as education, health, water supply and electricity (CLGF, 2013).
29
LG responsibility for service delivery is devolved without corresponding authority,
infrastructure and resources to fulfil these responsibilities. Moreover, LG are empowered to
collect taxes and charges such as direct council taxes, cattle tax and licences to raise local
revenues. Given the power to promote development, financial and technical assistance from
national and local government associations such as United Cities and Councils of Cameroon
(UCCC), Fonds d’Equipement et d’Intervention Communal (FEICOM), and Centre de
Formation d’Administration Municipale (CEFAM), are provided according to population size
for LGs to be more active in enhancing local development. All grants, revenues and council
activities and performance are supervised and monitored by the Ministry of Territorial
Administration and Decentralisation (MINATD).
Community involvement in local governance
Theoretically decentralised planning is viewed as an opportunity to achieve more
participation of citizens in local decision making and development processes. In Cameroon,
community involvement in local decision making processes is very limited and informal.
First, there is no legal provision for community involvement in local development. Though
council meetings are open to the public and it is permitted for citizens to make suggestions
for policy change or improvement to local authorities (CLGF, 2013; Cheka, 2013), the final
decision making rights remains with the mayor and his councillors by a simple majority. For
accountability, the law (art 40) provides that proceedings of all council sessions be
communicated to the public within eight days.
In the context of the decentralisation process, local participation involves very few civil
society organisations/actors (Cheka, 2013). Generally, the state of women representation in
local politics has been relatively low. In 2009 approximately 1.5% of councillors were
women (149 out of almost 10000) including 14 Mayors (3.9%). Though, with the 2013
municipal elections the percentage of female mayors slightly increased to 8%, women’s
participation is still relatively insignificant (24 out of 360 mayors).
Insufficient legislature and capacity building/training have been provided to support women’s
effective participation. Kumichii (2010) attributes this to a lack of the political will, societal
barriers and norms, limited political skill of women, inadequate resources and weak national
systems that can promote accountability for gender equality and women’s representation
among others. However, efforts are being made by the UNDP and World Bank through the
30
PNDP programme to promote local participation in the elaboration of council development
plans.
4.2 The National Programme for Participatory Development (PNDP) in Cameroon
The PNDP offers an opportunity to empowering local communities as an important element
in the decentralisation process. For the past years the transfer of responsibilities and financial
autonomy to municipal councils has made slow progress. Cameroon government
decentralisation efforts have been constrained by insufficient financial means, weak capacity
of local actors, the absence of a common vision for local development, and the lack of
appropriate planning and budgeting tools. Communal elected officials have not been
sufficiently empowered to manage local development and have had limited accountability
toward their constituents (World Bank, 2003). Similarly, the allocation of resources to the
local level has been inefficient due to lengthy and non-transparent administrative procedures
and poor tracking systems, leading to delays in implementation of investments at local level.
Since 2004, the government of Cameroon in collaboration with national and external partners
have taken measures to address these issues. The National Programme for Participatory
Development as a community support programme commonly known in the French acronym
PNDP (Programme National de Développement Participatif) was designed to support
decentralisation and local development through the active involvement of local populations.
This is an ongoing programme elaborated within the frame of Cameroon’s decentralisation
efforts to promote sustainable livelihoods based on the organization and capacity
reinforcement of beneficiaries to participate in the identification of priority needs, planning
and implementation of concrete actions for the social and economic development of their
communities. PNDP overall objective is to increase rural communities' involvement in
identifying their needs and solutions to improve basic social service delivery and promote
growth. The PNDP is a 12 years programme structured in three phases of four year each.
The programme consists of four major components:
Component 1: Provision of financial support to develop rural communities;
Component 2: Support to decentralization;
Component 3: Strengthening of public and private actors; and
Component 4: Support to coordination, management and evaluation of programme activities.
31
With financial and technical support from the International Development Assistance (IDA),
French Heavily Indebted Poor Country Funds, Agence Française de Développement (AFD),
Germany’s development bank (KFW) and the German Agency for Technical Cooperation
(GTZ), PNDP support to actors and institutions involves among others:
Capacity strengthening of local authorities in the management of public resources:
training in communal planning, functioning rules of communal and community
subproject approval committees, and familiarization with national and simplified
procedures;
Contribution to setting in place adequate legal frameworks to improve local
development planning, implementation and management which brings about
consistency in local development planning;
Direct transfer of resources to communes to finance prioritised project and
programmes through the institutionalisation of developments plans as investment and
budget planning tools;
Support to communities in the elaboration of Communal development plans; and
Strengthen civil-society actors’ active involvement in decentralisation and local
development processes.
According to the World Bank (2003), PNDP co-finances socio-economic micro-projects
proposed by communities/commune based on a participatory assessment of their priority
needs. Communes are required to prepare local development plans/commune development
plans with clear indication that it went through a participatory process; highlights priority
action plan; have made clear management arrangements; communes have a contribution to
make; a bank account; and a recognised legal status.
The programme is organised at four different levels: village or community, commune level,
provincial/regional level, and central level. The local people are mobilised at village levels to
develop a plan which is then used to guide the development of the communal plans. In its
first (2004-2009) and second (2010-2013) phase, PNDP has contributed to decentralized local
development through its support in the elaboration of 324 development plans at village and
communal levels, financing of capacity building activities, and setting up of a mechanism to
channel resources to implement priority activities in the development plans. In partnership
with AFD for instance, the PNDP has financed and realised more than 1500 micro projects,
construction of 274 classrooms, construction and rehabilitation of 467 water points among
32
others costing 13 billion FCFA during the first phase and 38 billion FCFA for the second
phase (Le Echos du PNDP, 2013). For reasons of accessibility and comprehensiveness, the
Communal Development Plans will serve as the objects of analysis in this paper.
4.2.1 Communal Development Planning
The elaboration of communal development plans in Cameroon has been institutionalized as
an instrument for investment and budget planning. Under the leadership of MINEPAT and
the PNDP, 324 Communal Development Plans (CDP) have been developed with
comprehensive and integrated micro projects that targets rural socio-economic development
priorities (Les Echos du PNDP, 2013: 18). Communal development planning is enhanced by
some legal and institutional frameworks as well as actors and its elaboration guided by the
regional and local development planning guide developed by MINEPAT. The guide ensures
harmonization in the approach and implication of stakeholders to ensure a mastery of
planning procedures and the elaboration of quality plans.
Communal Development Plans are drawn for the duration of five years. In principle the
process is intended to involve actors/stakeholders from line ministries, civil society
organizations, community groups, and local traditional leaders. Each plan is expected to
provide/contain information on seven phases of the planning cycle as indicated in the
methodology guide. These phases include:
1. Preparation
2. Community diagnosis and analysis
3. Planning
4. Resource mobilisation
5. Programming of priority projects
6. Implementation
7. Monitoring and evaluation
The guide equally provides the standard for a common and quality planning process to
overcome duplication and resource wastage in programming. By advocating for a
participatory approach, it is hoped that CDP will increase sustainability in rural development
that promotes gender equality by creating room for women’s and men’s participation in local
decision making and development. According to the first semester report for 2013, the most
33
solicited sectors in micro projects include water (1009 projects), education (332 projects),
electrification (70 projects), transport (49 projects), and health (30 projects) (Les Echos du
PNDP, 2013). However, most of these CDP have not yet been finalised and actualised
(ongoing process).
34
CHAPTER FIVE: GENDER ASSESSMENT OF COMMUNAL DEVELOPMENT
PLANS: CONTENT AND PROCESS
Has communal development plans adequately involved women and gender experts and do
they reflect the needs of vulnerable groups or women? This chapter addresses this question in
two steps. First it presents the scores of the quick scan conducted on 3 CDPs, followed by an
in-depth assessment of each planning phase, guided by the checklist mentioned in chapter
three. The in-depth assessment offers a comprehensive analysis and discussion of the findings
at each phase with regards to the major planning tasks and the five dimensions of gender
mainstreaming. The chapter concludes with highlights/discussion on the relationship between
gender responsive planning and cultural norms in these communities.
5.1 Presentation of Assessment (quick scan) Scores
The scores presented below were obtained for the five core phases of the planning process
(preparatory, diagnosis, priority actions planning, budgeting/implementation, monitoring and
evaluation) and six sectoral areas (health, education, water and sanitation, employment,
energy and transport) of the plans using the quick scan metric (included in annex). The
sectors selected and assessed represent basic public service sector facilities necessary for
promoting community/individual capability to engage and attain minimum standards of
living. These sectors are necessary to build human capital that accelerates growth and
national development.
The first table presents scores on the gender sensitivity of the content while the second show
scores on the process. The quick-scan process involved identifying references made to gender
/ women’ issues in the content of the documents, and scoring them on a scale of 0 to 3.
Table 2: Gender sensitivity scores of communal development plans: content assessment
Phases Communal plan
Bafoussam
Communal plan
Ma’an
Communal plan
Lagdo
Preparation
Community awareness
Stakeholders identification
Expert/steering committee
Agenda/mandate
1
1
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
1
1
35
Community Diagnosis
Strength/potentials by sector
-Education
-Health
-Water and sanitation
-Employment (econ activity)
-Energy
-Transport (road network)
Weakness/constraints by sector
-Education
-Health
-Water and sanitation
-Employment (econ activity)
-Energy
-Transport (road network)
Opportunities
-Education
-Employment (econ activity)
-natural resource
-tourism
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
0
0
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
Planning/programming
Goal & objectives
Priority sectors/projects
Action plan
Expected results
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Budgeting/implementation
MTEF
Budget and resource allocation
Implementation strategies
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
2
2
Monitoring & evaluation
M&E system
M&E tools
Targets and indicators
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
Total score 0 = Not possible to determine on the basis of information, 1 = women/Gender issues are completely absent, 2 = Some reference to
women/gender, 3 = Detailed discussion of gender issues
Source: generated from own analysis
36
The above table shows the score of each core element of the plans. None of the plans made
detailed discussion of gender issues. We notice that the attention given to women’s issues in
the content of CDP is also very low. By simply making some reference to women/gender
issues a plan could earn a total score of 64 points. Surprisingly none of the plans earned half
of these points. The CDP of Bafoussam III shows the least concern for women/gender issues
throughout the process; mention is made only to women and men differences in economic
opportunities. The Ma’an CDP made a total of 10 points and Lagdo 22 points for making
some reference to women issues.
We also notice variation across phases and sectors. In the CDP of Ma’an some reference
made during the preparatory and diagnosis disappears at planning, budgeting and evaluation
phase. The Lagdo community made more reference to women issues in education, health,
water and sanitation, and less when dealing with transport and energy sectors. The attention
to women reduces as the process of analysis intensifies from the identification of communal
strength to the analysis of constraints and opportunities for actions.
Table 3: Gender sensitivity scores of communal development plans: process assessment
Phases Communal plan
Bafoussam
Communal plan
Ma’an
Communal plan
Lagdo
Preparation 1 2 0
Community diagnosis 1 1 1
Planning/programming 1 0 2
Budgeting/implementation 1 1 1
Monitoring and
evaluation
0 0 0
0 = Not possible to determine on the basis of information, 1 = Absence of women and /or gender expertise, 2 = Limited presence of women
and or gender expertise, 3 = Effective presence of women and/or gender expertise
Source: generated from data analysis
Table 3 shows the participation of women and gender experts throughout the process. The
result is slightly similar to the content assessment. Women and or gender expertise are not
consistently involved at all levels of the planning in all three plans. Their participation and
engagement is very minimal in Ma’an and Lagdo and generally absent in Bafoussam.
37
Graph 1: Summary of assessment scores
Source: Based on own analysis
In order to establish the disparity in responsiveness to women/gender issues among the three
communities under study, the sum of scores of 2 (some reference to women/gender issues)
was calculated for each of the core elements and sectors of each plan. Since none of
communities made a detailed discussion of gender issues (i.e. are gender responsive), their
comparison is based on their responsiveness to women’s issues, which is reflected by the
score of 2 (some reference to women/gender issues). This indicates that these communities
have an interest in gender issues but its approach has been largely limited to a brief
mentioning of women’s issues. In this context, making reference to some issues affecting
women is maybe assumed to mean addressing gender issues. From this perspective, the CDP
of Lagdo scored highest, followed by Ma’an and lastly Bafoussam III. That is, Lagdo is
assumed to be more responsive to women as compared to Ma’an and Bafoussam III.
5.2 In-depth Gender Assessment of the Communal Development Planning Cycle
The general observation drawing from the quick scan is that the approach adopted in
elaborating these plans was largely traditional/ conventional, with little or no attention to
gender perspectives. In all three CDP of (Lagdo, Ma’an and Bafoussam III) gender
mainstreaming takes the form of separate projects for women. With women targeted actions
these plans focus mainly on women’s practical needs and not on gender relations. Gender
relations of power in decision making and resource allocation are only mentioned in a passing
without commitment to address them. Moreover, data collection tools and frameworks (e.g.
0
5
10
15
leve
l of
resp
on
sive
ne
ss
Planning Phases
Bafoussam
Ma’an
Lagdo
38
log frame, Result-Base Framework, budgeting plan and M&E plans) are used in a generic
format, with little or no adaptation to gender dimensions. This resulted in a total disregard to
gender issues in input provided by participants/stakeholders.
5.2.1 Preparation phase
The preparation phase sets the basis on which the programming directives and procedures are
determined. At this stage of planning, the assessment targeted the strategies of information
sharing and sensitization, stakeholder identification, set up of the committee and the agenda/
mandate of planning units.
The first aspect examines the strategies used for awareness raising and mobilisation of
community participation. The review found that information and sensitization processes were
largely insensitive/vague or blind to the constraints faced in accessing information by
different groups. In Baffoussam and Lagdo, the use of bill boards and posters undermined the
educational capacity of women to access information. Awareness was therefore limited to
those who could read. Women and women’s groups were not informed in their usual
environment (like market squares, meeting days etc) to stimulate their participation.
Secondly, in terms of targeted actors/stakeholders the assessment questioned the involvement
of the primary and secondary actors. That is, the local actors such as local women’s groups
and organisations, youth groups, and local leaders (primary actors) as well as government
agents or administrative official (secondary actors) who can influence or contribute to the
effective realisation of plans. In all three cases, the observation is that there is more
participation of actors from within than outside the government/state agency. The list of
stakeholders identified mostly includes mayors, councillors, deputies, Divisional officers,
local elites, traditional authorities, specialised CSOs, and the PNDP regional staff. No
consultations with local women’s groups and organisations, or gender experts were
conducted or mentioned. Likewise, the criteria for selecting local facilitators are very biased.
In Lagdo for instance, local facilitators were expected to have completed secondary
education, have public speaking skills, knowledge of information technology, be available
etc.- « Avoir un bon niveau intellectuel (au moins le BAC) ; Etre disponible ; Etre
ressortissant de la commune ; Avoir une connaissance de l’outil informatique ; Etre apte à
parler en public ; Avoir une maîtrise de l’espace communal » ( Ladgo CDP :8). These are
communities with low levels of education and training especially for women. Such criteria set
39
a limit for women’s participation at an early stage because fewer women than men could
meet the requirements. The sample pictures below supports this assertion.
Picture 1: Training sessions with local facilitators
Source: CDP Lagdo, 2006 and CDP Bafoussam, 2011
Related to this is the setting up of the steering committee. That is, the establishment of
planning committees or technical support units and the mission/responsibility assigned to
them. For effective coordination, the local support mechanism consisted of a facilitating
NGO, the planning committee and the local facilitators. The assessment revealed that the
member identification and the agenda/mandate were not defined in a consultative manner.
The mayor and councillors took the responsibility for identifying committee members most
of whom are bureaucrats and technocrats. Less reference to representatives from women
groups, women’s NGOs, gender experts and community leaders is made. Not only were the
planning committee members hand-picked by the mayor but they are mainly composed of
men and few women with little or no expertise on gender. Similarly, no special women or
gender experts unit was setup to provide the technical support needed for gender
mainstreaming. The composition of the steering committees and village committees involved
very few women. For instance 3 out of 10 members on average were women in the village
development committees (VDC) in Ma’an while Bafoussam III had 4 women out of 17
members. Members of the steering committee are selected based on their availability and
experience/expertise in planning « Le critère des choix des membres du COPIL était
principalement la disponibilité et l’expérience en matière de planification ou organisation
d’activités de développement » - (Lagdo CDP : 7-8).
40
Graph 2: Gender responsiveness of preparatory phase
Source: Based on own analysis
The graph demonstrates the insufficient and ineffective involvement of women’s groups in
this initial stage of decision making. There is minimal involvement of women in the steering
committee in the planning of CDP in Ma’an and Bafoussam, which to some extent may
explain the absence of women and gender issue in the other components and phases.
5.2.2 Community diagnosis
The diagnosis phase is assessed on the basis of information collected and analysed on
community strengths, constraints and opportunities for women and men. Here the assessment
questioned the gender disaggregation of baseline information collected on the state of
development and the analysis of causes and consequences of development constraints for
women and men. It focused on six sectors (education, health, water, employment, energy and
transport) necessary for measuring community capability to engage and attain minimum
standards of living.
Diagnosing and analysing the context is the first and most critical step to understanding
community development issues/gaps. It examines the problems, causes and consequences,
which generate the logical flow of priority actions to address these issues. At this stage the
use of gender analysis tools is crucial for generating sex-disaggregated data and provides an
opportunity for gender responsive planning and programming. As a key measure for
mainstreaming, collecting sex disaggregated data is important for determining the extent of
inequality and provides a baseline for setting targets that can be used for evaluation (Holvoet,
0
1
2
3
4le
vel o
f re
spo
nsi
ven
ess
Core Elements
Preparatory phase
Bafoussam
Ma'an
Lagdo
41
2010). Yet, these elements were largely ignored in the analysis/diagnosis phase. The
Bafoussam, Ma’an and Lagdo plans highlighted the use of tools such as the log frame,
problem and objective tree, vein diagrams, semi structured interviews, adapted matrix and
PRA methods for data collection. However, data collected and analysed on community
strengths, constraints and opportunities made minimal or no reference to gender dimensions
and were hardly disaggregated by gender. The absence of sex-disaggregated data makes it
difficult to determine whether or not, how and why women and men are affected differently
and what can be done to address the inequalities (UN Women, 2014).
Besides, no reference is made to secondary gender statistics from national or international
databases such as GDI, GEM, and Gender Country Assessment in any of the thematic
sectors. In this way, there is a missed opportunity of using existing findings on socio-cultural
inequalities and to align local efforts to national and global commitments toward gender
equality. Moreover, the identified problems and proposed solutions for women focused on
their practical needs, rather than their strategic needs. Little or no attention is paid to the
unequal relations of women and men in terms of roles, rights, needs, access to and control
over resources. However, a call to improve women’s social status and decision making power
as a strategy to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is made in the
Bafoussam plan though without any supporting actions.
Graph 3: Gender responsiveness of community diagnosis phase
Source: Based on own analysis
0
1
2
3
leve
l o
f re
spo
nsi
ven
ess
Core Sectors
Diagnosis phase
Bafoussam
Ma'an
Lagdo
42
Furthermore, the assessment questioned differences in sectors. It is observed from the above
graph that mention is made of women’s issues more in ‘soft’ than ‘hardcore’ sectors’ analysis
of communities. Women’s issues are mostly mentioned in sectors such as water, health and
education, and ignored in transport, energy and natural resources. The Bafoussam III plan for
instance analysed 27 sector ministries and only mentions women’s low social status,
vulnerability to harmful cultural practices, poverty and subordinate position in decision
making under the umbrella of the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and the Family
(MINPROF). These issues disappear in the analysis of other sectors and planning phases. In
Ma’an, women’s constraints are only highlighted in water, health and employment sectors.
For instance, the consequences of the lack of electricity and poor transport networks on
women’s economic activities, health and education were totally ignored. Whereas in Lagdo,
the plan briefly included data on women’s economic activities, disaggregated data on
educational enrolment of boys and girls, and women’s participation in HIV testing and
sensitization campaigns. Moreover, the constraints faced by women in each sector were not
examined in detail or addressed as an issue of unequal power relations between men and
women. This easily translates into an absence of gender concerns in the planning, budgeting
and evaluation of priority projects.
5.2.3 Planning/programming
As a follow up, the prioritised actions need to be precise and reflect the problems analysed in
the diagnosis phase. At this point, the communes use the result based framework (RBF) and
or log frame as a major programme planning tool to define actions and expected results. This
tool provides an opportunity for incorporating gender equality results into programme result
frameworks and to align them with national development strategies (UN Women, 2014).
However, the assessment showed that the logic in the theory of change connecting the vision,
goal, objectives of priority projects/ activities and expected results in each action plan were
insensitive to gender perspectives. The vision, goal and project objectives statements are
generally not specific enough. Though some selected priority actions made reference to
addressing women issues, the objectives were not specific, measurable, achievable and
realistic to produce the desired changes. In the Ma’an CDP for instance objectives such as
‘ameliorate women’s living condition’, and ‘promote socio-professional reinsertion of
women’ had activities such as ‘building of training centres’. How this will effectively and
efficiently benefit women is not clearly described.
43
Graph 4: Gender responsiveness of planning phase
Source: Based on own analysis
Besides, most of the constraints faced by women were either not prioritised and/ or priority
projects did not address women’s socio-cultural challenges. An example of this is the issue of
discrimination faced by women in the forestry industry in the Ma’an which was identified in
diagnosis but disappeared in the list of priority actions. This missing link can be attributed to
the gaps created at the preparatory and diagnosis stage. The absence of gender expertise and
gender analysis of the problems identified increases the possibility of women/gender equality
goals being neglected. The general assumption is that community needs and prioritised
actions will automatically involve and benefit women and men equally. Thus resulting to a
total disregard for gender targeted and gender integrated planning.
5.2.4 Budgeting and implementation strategies
An orientation toward result based management provides opportunities for gender responsive
budgeting, which is an effective measure against policy evaporation (Holvoet, 2010). Gender
budgeting looks at how the budgets are allocated to address the needs of women: translating
the gender commitments into budgetary commitments. It “ensure[s] that government budgets
include necessary financial resources to implement goals and policy commitments to gender
equality objectives” (UN Women, 2014:28)
0
1
2
3
Leve
l o
f R
esp
on
sive
ne
ss
Core Elements
Planning phase
Bafoussam
Ma'an
Lagdo
44
Graph 5: Gender responsiveness of budgeting and implementation strategies
Source: Based on own analysis
The assessment examined the correspondence of actions and budget, and realised (see graph
above) that the allocation of resources to women/gender sensitive actions were ignored in two
of the plans. Moreover, budget lines assigned to actions towards public works, water supply
and energy, education and health were among the highly budgeted though some huge
differences are observed. Some priority activities/projects for women were not budgeted. In
Lagdo, the budget allocated for activities targeted at women represent 1% of the total budget.
Sectors (such as water and health) where women face specific constraints had no specific
budget allocated to address these constraints. These plans provide no information on the
actors involved in the budgeting process and how priority project costing is done. No GRB
implementation strategies and analytical tools are used. Therefore, it is difficult to determine
how gender sensitive the result will be given that such details by gender are not provided.
However, a gender blind diagnosis and planning will possibly result into a gender blind
budgeting and implementation.
5.2.5 Monitoring and evaluation
A good monitoring and evaluation system plays a vital role in providing evidence base data
for informed and strategic decision making. It is an important tool for learning what works
and does not work, for achieving better results and for accountability. As a growing
requirement, incorporating gender perspectives in M&E systems is strategic for achieving
gender equality.
0
1
2
3
MTEF Budget/resourceallocation
Implementationstrategies
Leve
l o
f R
esp
on
sive
ne
ss
Core Elements
Budgeting phase
Bafoussam
Ma'an
Lagdo
45
Here, the assessment focused on measuring the gender responsiveness of the M&E system,
tools and indicators. Overall, this phase had the lowest score. In all three cases there is
inadequate information on M&E systems and tools (especially Lagdo and Ma’an). Without a
comprehensive system which details what to evaluate, why, how and for whom, data
collection, analysis and use of results, learning and accountability will equally be ineffective.
Thus the impact of these plans on gender equality and local development will remain
unknown.
Moreover, the stated targets and indicators for measuring priority actions in the 6 sectors
examined were neither disaggregated by gender nor specific nor measurable. The Lagdo plan
includes a few targets and indicators regarding women/gender equality objectives in the
sector of health, water and education which are very vague and neutral. That is, they did not
reflect the change an action will bring. An example of indicators for improving socio-
professional reinsertion of women and girls is « Nombre de centres de promotion de la
femme construits dans la commune de Lagdo »: the number of training centres constructed.
Graph 6: Assessment results for the monitoring and evaluation phase
Source: Based on own analysis
As shown by the above graph, monitoring and evaluation is treated with the least seriousness
in all three plans. This is indicative of the inadequate knowledge and capacity of local
planners/stakeholders in M&E and explains their insensitivity to gender in the M&E
framework. None of the plans satisfactorily and comprehensively met the gender
mainstreaming standard.
0
1
2
3
M&E system M&E tools Targets andindicators
Leve
l o
f R
esp
on
sive
ne
ss
Core Elements
Mon/Eva phase
Bafoussam
Ma'an
Lagdo
46
5.2.6 Participatory process
Local development planning processes are expected to be highly participatory. Involving all
key stakeholders and beneficiaries in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation
of actions taken for their development. It is recognised that the participation of women and
women’s organisation is essential for effective and better outcomes, ownership and the
attainment of their rights as equal partners and actors in decision making processes that
affects their lives (UN Women, 2014). For this reason, the regional and local planning guide
recommends the use of participatory tools and methods taking into consideration gender
dimensions and vulnerable groups. By this the participation of women, women’s groups and
organisations, gender experts and NGOs becomes primordial.
Contrarily to these notions, the stakeholders identified at the preparatory stage were mainly
local and state bureaucrats and technocrats. None of the plans made reference to specific
consultations with members of women’s groups or gender experts. Judging from the results
and the list of participants and stakeholders, there are doubts as to the participatory nature of
the planning and measures taken to ensure women’s effective contribution. Analysing
participation on the basis of Cohen and Uphoff (1980) framework, the overall low score
suggests that the quality of women’s participation and contribution was equally low. In
Lagdo, for instance, some women were present in committees, group sessions and
workshops, while in Bafoussam separate socio-professional groups of women and men were
consulted in the diagnosis at village levels. However, their influence on decision making and
implementation (‘inputs’ to planning) as well as the benefits and evaluation (‘outputs’ of
planning) remains very weak. Though women’s participation in decision making was limited,
they to some extent were involve in the implementation kind of participation where they
provided information and coordination services. As highlighted by Cohen and Uphoff (1980),
the absence of a group in initial decision making is likely to affect their participation in
implementation, benefits and evaluation of projects. This limitation can be related to social
power structures and the use of participatory methods such as public information sessions,
workshops and plenary discussions which are mostly not suitable for less vocal people
(women) to express themselves (Cornwall, 2003). Moreover, the call for local participation is
an initiative from authorities and is carried out through more formal organisations that
represent the community. This form of participation subsumes women under the ‘community’
and most likely fails to address unequal power relations and the interest of marginalised
groups.
47
5.3 General Discussion on the Gender Responsiveness of CDPs
This section discusses the dimensions of gender mainstreaming in CDPs drawing on the in-
depth assessment of the planning cycle. With evidence from the above analysis that the
concept of gender mainstreaming has not been successfully and consistently put to practice,
some highlights of the possible influencing factors will also be discussed.
5.3.1 Discourse
The WID approach is the most dominant in all three plans. With this approach gender
mainstreaming takes the form of separate projects for women without changing the process
and the agenda. In the absence of gender analysis of power relations, these plans identified
women’s challenges and adopted programmes that aim at improving their welfare and
efficiency in providing water and other services that are related to traditional roles. By
limiting the focus to women targeted projects, it is evident that the shift from women to
gender has not yet been attained in these communities.
According to Rao and Kelleher (2005) the non-institutionalisation of gender equality policy
in State and development agencies are at the root of the difficulty in promoting women’s
empowerment and gender equality. At no instance in the presentation section of the
Bafoussam, Ma’an and Lagdo municipality is a gender equality policy explicitly
cited/mentioned. The absence of a gender policy in local government units and in the
planning guide limits commitments to gender in the work and internal practices of local
governments. The local planning guide which provides the framework for elaborating CDPs
only makes a cursory claim (in one sentence) to gender. Apparently, there is also no pressure
from the funding partners.
5.3.2 Institutional or Structural changes
With regards to institutional or structural processes, existing gender neutral policies and
procedures were maintained in the setting up of planning committees and selection of local
facilitators. These structures included fewer women especially in decision making positions
to maintain the masculine culture of politics (Bock, 2005). Organisational procedures and
practices reflected and reinforced inequalities especially with the absence of technical support
units on gender. This supports Potter and Sweetman (2005) assertion that more often than
not, organisational structures, practices and values tend to reflect cultural norms from
48
surrounding society. In Bafoussam, the unequal representation of women (26% women and
74% men) as staff reinforces the power of men who are less likely to be interested in gender
equality or willing to give up their privileges in decision making (Rao and Kelleher, 2005).
Thus, insensitiveness to gender can therefore be related to the underlying structure and
culture of the municipalities themselves.
Moreover, institutional changes necessitate adequate resources. In all three municipalities, the
need for human, financial and material resources is expressed. These are common challenges
faced by local government units which tend to exacerbate the disregard for gender expertise,
training and infrastructure in the execution of their duties (Ngalim, 2014; Ahmed et al, 2005;
Cheka, 2013).
5.3.3 Use of gender analytical and operational tools
The use of gender analytical and operation tools in the diagnosis, planning, budgeting and
M&E phases received no attention in all three CDPs. Not using any of the existing gender
analytical frameworks and tools is a contributing factor to the gender neutral/blindness of
these plans. This gap can be attributed to the availability of gender insensitive tools provided
in the planning guide, the lack of gender expertise and resources to design and effectively use
gender tools. The regional planning guide strongly recommends the use of the Rapid Rural
Appraisal (RRA) techniques for its potential methods and tools to capture local knowledge
and triangulate information (MINPAT, 2010). However, the guide provides a list of generic
data collection, analysis, planning, and M&E tools which places no emphasis on gender
dimensions. Moreover, these tools were adopted by the local planners without any
modifications. The facilitating NGOs and local planners have insufficient expertise,
authority, autonomy and resources to incorporate gender in the application of these tools.
Thus, plans tend to meet up with administrative requirements rather than responding to/or
accounting for local experiences and realities of disadvantaged groups.
5.3.4 Availability and use of sex-disaggregated data
The CDP of Lagdo for instance, provided gender disaggregated data in some sectors and
components, but little or no existing national or international gender statistics databases are
consulted. This can be attributed to the techniques and tools used for data collection and
analysis, the limited capacity to generate such data, and the pressure on local councils to meet
up with requirements or conditions of PNDP and its funding partners. The planning
49
timeframe was very short. Each of these plans was elaborated within a period of five months.
The rush has been for PNDP to reach its target of 360 CDP by 2012. For which between 2004
and 2012, 324 CDP were elaborated. This pressure can affect the type and quality of
information collected and analysed in the commune. Likewise, in the context of Cameroon
where statistics /secondary data are rarely made public and are mostly not disaggregated, the
local planners not only need time to assemble but may face difficulties accessing existing
data.
5.3.5 Broader scope of actors
The range of actors highlighted throughout the planning was not enlarged to and
encompassing different interest groups. The identified stakeholders were mostly
technocrats/administrative officials and contracted expertise. The absence of women’s groups
and organisations at all level of planning reduced the possibility of incorporating gender
dimensions in the plans. As highlighted by Percy (1999), women’s absence from policy
making processes that affects their lives not only marginalises integration of women’s interest
and needs, but creates or reinforces inequality. This challenge can be attributed to limited
resources to mobilise and the limited bargaining power of women’s groups. Participation was
demanded from above and therefore they determined the extent and form of local
participation. In Lagdo, out of 321 common initiative groups (CIGs) 70% are women’s
groups (Lagdo CDP) but their power to ensure women’s interest are heeded to in local
planning is weak. They lacked the capacity and power to make their voice count. This also
results from weak legal frameworks and collaboration among civil society organisations.
Also, while most local actors/women were not informed, the planning/participatory strategies
did not target the interest of various groups. The use of group discussions that bring the
different groups on a common platform strengthened the unequal power relations between the
vulnerable groups and the local power holders. Thus, women’s participation functions more
as an instrument to legitimise the decisions in CDPs rather than to empower the less
privilege.
5.4 Exploring the Link between Cultural Norms and Gender Responsiveness of CDPs
This section of the paper is intended to explore whether or not the existing gender norms
affects the approach and implementation of gender mainstreaming in CDPs. The rationale for
this inquiry is based on the argument that gender roles and expectations varies across
50
communities, changes over time and influences behaviour of men and women. They are
cultural norms related to women and men’s behaviour that are accepted and internalised by
the community as a way of life. Considering that culture is an embodiment of “shared beliefs,
values, customs, practices and normative rules of social behaviour of a particular nation or
people including ways of dressing, producing and also cooking food” (Atanga, 2010:113),
gender roles therefore are deeply rooted institutionalised ways of life. Any attempts towards a
transformation/change of these roles and expectations are usually faced with resistance and
require gradual and consistent action. In this light, gender mainstreaming represents a new
paradigm that demands radical changes in gender relations. Since a change in gender
relations requires changes in gender norms, it is obvious that gender mainstreaming
principles may encounter resistance from the existing power holders. As a result, this may
affect its implementation in public policy processes and development planning.
As earlier mentioned all three CDPs are gender insensitive irrespective of the existing
cultural norms but included some separate project/ actions for women. Similar findings have
been found in the assessment of rural development policy and plans in the European Union
(Bock, 2005). The absence of gender mainstreaming in community plans has been related to
the de-politicisation and unwillingness to address the more strategic needs of women in local
communities. As argued by Bock (2005), depoliticising local gender issues greatly accounts
for the downplaying and ineffective mainstreaming of gender issues in rural development
plans. The gender insensitivity of these CDPs however does not undermine the possibility
that cultural norms may also pose resistance given that women’s participation and
underrepresentation in local decision making bodies reflects the unequal traditional gender
norms and relations.
Interestingly also, the analysis shows an inverse relationship: communities with inflexible
gender norms (Lagdo) made more reference to women’s issues than communities with more
flexible gender norms (Ma’an). The Lagdo community, which has the least gender equality
norms, scored the highest points (24) for making some reference to women’s issues.
Meanwhile Ma’an, a semi-metropolitan community with more flexible/equal gender norms,
is less responsive to women’s issues with a score of 12 points. The Bafoussam III community
is the least responsive to women’s issues. Though it is a community with better opportunities
for women and girls, the Bafoussam III CDP earned a score of 6 points. Given the more
favourable cultural environment enjoyed by women of Ma’an and Bafoussam as compared to
51
Lagdo, we would expect that these women will be equally engaged, informed and ensure
their interest in the CDP.
Figure 4: Findings related to the relationship
Source: own illustration
This result can be interpreted from different angles. First it may imply that the presence of
women in the traditional governance system, economic empowerment and inheritance rights
are not necessary to bring women’s interest to the forefront of public policy processes. In
which case, the response to women’s needs is subsumed in addressing development needs.
Second it may indicate that though cultural/gender norms influence the behaviour of men and
women, there are also other factors/incentives for gender mainstreaming principles to be
implemented.
Another interpretation could be related to the approach adopted in these communities. Since
the communes are more focused on PGNs, this finding may simply indicate that the PGNs of
women in Ma’an and Bafoussam have been satisfactorily addressed but these communes lack
adequate policy and human capacity to address the SGNs. Meanwhile the Lagdo commune is
more sensitive to PGNs because less has been achieved in this dimension (as it is indicated in
section 3.3), or because addressing PGNs does not provoke resistance. This finding also
shows that understanding and dealing with the difference between women is important for
mainstreaming. Women are not a homogenous group. Gender mainstreaming is operational
as a dual-faceted approach that not only institutionalises procedures but target individual
Bafoussam III
Less gender equality norms
Lagdo
Least gender equality norms
Ma’an
More gender equality norms
Community Levels of gender
equality norms
Less responsive of women’s issues
Score: 12
Least responsive of women’s issues
Score: 6
More responsive of women’s issues
Score: 24
CDP Levels of responsiveness
52
women’s interest relative to other interest/identity (poverty, caste, age, ethnicity etc). Some
have argued that meeting the immediate survival needs of women is necessary to pursue
political actions to gender equality (Porter and Sweetman, 2005) However, specific women’s
projects alone tend to reinforce existing gender relations and though they may address some
rural gender issues and help some women, it does not address the structural causes of gender
inequality (Bock, 2005).
By exploring the relationship between gender norms and the level of responsiveness of a
community to gender, the researcher hoped to contribute to the debate on the role of socio-
cultural norms in the implementation of gender mainstreaming and achievement of gender
equality. The findings of this study do not allow us to draw major conclusions on this link.
However, it provides the bases for more research to be conducted in this direction. Such an
investigation requires more in depth field work on the cultural settings and the local
associations/groups involved in local development as well as the participatory planning
processes.
53
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusion
Decentralised planning alongside participatory processes are new paradigms for efficient
citizen participation in public decisions. They provide the opportunity for various local
groups to negotiate their interests/needs within local power structures. While local
municipalities of Cameroon through the CDP and its participatory mandate are intended to
incite citizen participation in public decision processes, the result of this assessment provides
evidence of possible challenges that may hinder effective representation of women’s
interests. The result highlights three major lessons.
First, decentralising planning to local government units and using participatory methods is
not a guarantee that the interest of various local groups (especially women) will be
incorporated in the development agenda. The planning process is a political arena that
involves negotiations between the vulnerable groups and local power holders.
Mainstreaming gender in this context requires readiness to reorganise the local policy process
and to involve all social groups in evaluating the local situation and resetting the agenda
(Bock, 2015:733). Although local participation seems to be taking place, the process is too
bureaucratic and does not involve the poor/vulnerable groups in decision making. Not
considering the kind of participation, who participates and the how participation occurs failed
to create opportunities to empower women or to bring gender issues to the fore. It is also
obvious from the results that women’s presence is not enough and effective for measuring
participation and gender mainstreaming. Their presence is only used to legitimise the
decision of those in power. Leaving the power relations between men and women untouched
implies that participation is a means rather than an end, and will cease once the planning task
is completed (Parfitt, 2004). Thus women are neither empowered nor are their interests
included in the development agenda.
Secondly, the effects of existing gender norms may play a minimal role in the approach and
willingness to adopt gender mainstreaming principles in local planning. Rather, more can be
attributed to the use of traditional planning processes that are gender neutral and based on the
assumption that the priority projects will involve and benefit women and men equally. They
involve women in planning process without changes in the rules and tools of planning to
54
identify women’s disadvantages in underlying systems and structures of power. As a result,
local planning reproduces and reinforces existing inequalities.
Lastly, several factors (socio-economic and political) account for effective implementation
of gender mainstreaming. Local participation is an important component of local
development planning and reflects a bottom-up approach to addressing the real needs of local
people. Yet, the power of central bureaucracies, absence of gender policies, the lack of skills
and experience on gender, resources and social divisions among women’s groups at local
levels are major obstacles to effectively mainstream women’s interest in local development
planning. Municipalities have insufficient resources and authority for effective local
planning.
Recommendations
To ensure the effectiveness of CDPs to represent the interest of vulnerable groups/ women
and contribute to sustainable local development, this section will highlight some major
recommendations targeted at the different stakeholders.
Decentralising planning to local authorities should be accompanied with adequate
resources (human, financial, and material) authority and autonomy
The regional and local planning guides should be reviewed and adjusted to include
gender analytical tools and techniques and emphasise gender in the planning cycle
The timeframe for developing CDPs should be revised to allow for adequate research
and consultation with local populations
There should be clearly stated gender policies and guidelines for their implementation
in local development policies.
Municipal and local planners should take the moral responsibility to support the
interest of the poor and less privilege groups, rather than merely satisfying
administrative requirements
Clearly stated policy commitments are essential for holding actors accountable to the
interest of less privilege groups. Municipalities should develop and implement a
gender equality policy in all their programmes and sectors.
Participatory tools and technique should incorporate gender analytical tools,
disaggregated data and experts from the preparatory to the M&E phase.
55
Planning processes should target various interest groups to determine their
development plan in a collective manner to ensure direct forms of participation.
The demand for participation should be induced by local women’s groups and NGOs.
56
References
Ahmad, J., Devarajan, S., Khemani, S. and Shah, S. (2005) “Decentralization and Service
Delivery, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3603, 1-27.
Atanga, L. (2010) Gender, Discourses and Power in the Cameroonian Parliament, Langaa
Research and Publishing, Cameroon.
Bandiara, O. and Natraj, A. (2013) “Does Gender Inequality Hinder Development and
Economic Growth? Evidence and policy implications”, World Bank Policy Research
Working Paper 6369:1-30.
Binns, T. and Nel, E. (2002) “Devolving Development: Integrated Development Planning
and Developmental Local Government in Post-apartheid South Africa”, Regional Studies,
36(8): 921-932.
Bock, B. (2015) “Gender mainstreaming and rural development policy; the trivialisation of
rural gender issues”, Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 22(5):
731-745.
Booth, C. and Bennett, C. (2002) “Gender Mainstreaming in the European Union: Towards a
new conception and practice of equal opportunities?”, European Journal of Women’s Studies,
9 (4): 430–46.
BTI (2014) Cameroon Country Report, Gütersloh, Bertelsmann Stiftung, http://www.bti-
project.de/uploads/tx_itao_download/BTI_2014_Cameroon.pdf (last consulted: 18 November
2015).
Cheka, C. (2007) “The State of the Process of Decentralization in Cameroon”, Africa
Development, 32(2):181-196.
Chambers, R. (1994) “Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA): Analysis of Experience”, World
Development, 22 (9): 1253-1268.
Cornwall, A. (2003) “Whose Voices? Whose Choices? Reflections on Gender and
Participatory Development”, World Development, 31(8):1325–1342.
CEDAW (2014) Cameroon’s 57th
session report, Written Statement submitted by The
Advocates for Human Rights, Cameroon.
Cohen, J.M. and Uphoff, N.T. (1977) Rural Development Participation: Concepts and
Measures for Project Design, Implementation and Evaluation, Cornell University, Center for
International Studies, Ithaca, New York.
CLGF, (2013) Country Profile: The local government system in Cameroon
http://www.clgf.org.uk/userfiles/1/file/countries/profiles2013/Cameroon_Local_Government
_Profile_2013_CLGF.pdf (last consulted: 6 November 2015).
57
Daly, M. (2005) “Gender Mainstreaming in Theory and Practice”, Social Politics:
International studies in Gender, State and Society, 12(3):433-450.
Dashaco and Anchimbe, A. (2014) “Gender and the Use of Tags in Cameroon English
Discourse”, in: Anchimbe, A. (ed) Structural and Sociolinguistic Perspectives on
Indigenisation: on Multibiligualism and Language Evolution, Springer, New York-London.
Deshler, D. and Sock, D. (1985) Community development participation: a concept review of
international literature, Paper prepared for the International League for Social Commitment
in adult education, Ljungskile, Sweden.
Europe Institute for Gender Equality (2013) Gender Equality Index –Report, EIGE, Italy.
Holvoet, N. (2010) “Gender Equality and New Aid Modalities: Is Love Really in the Air”,
European Journal of Development Research, 22(1): 97-117.
Holvoet, N and Inberg, L. (2013) “How Gender Sensitive are National Adaptation
Programmes of Action (NAPA) of Sub Saharan Africa Countries?: A Gender Scan of 31
NAPAs”, Working Paper 2, 1-24.
Human Development Report (2014) Sustaining Human Progress: Reducing Vulnerabilities
and Building Resilience, Country explanatory note- Cameroon, UNDP,
https://s3.amazonaws.com/hdr4media.org/explanatory/CMR.pdf (last consulted: 20
November 2015).
International Monetary Fund (2014) “Cameroon: Selected Issue” Country Report No. 14/213,
IMF, Washington, DC, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2014/cr14213.pdf (last
consulted: 18 November 2015).
Jahan, R. (1996) “The Elusive Agenda: Mainstreaming Women in Development”, The
Pakistan Development Review 35 (4): 825—834.
Killick, T. (1983) “Development Planning in Africa: Experiences, Weaknesses and
prescriptions”, Development Policy Review, 1 (1): 47-76.
Klasen, S. (1999) “Does Gender Inequality Reduce Growth and Development? Evidence
from Cross-Country Regressions”, Policy Research Report on Gender and Development, The
World Bank, development research group.
Kumichii, H. (2010) “Potentials and Constraints of Decentralisation processes in Cameroon”
in: VENRO, Local Power and Women’s Rights – Gender Perspectives on Decentralisation
Processes, Africa-EU partnership, Bonn.
Korten D. (1990) Getting to the 21st Century: Voluntary Action and the Global Agenda,
United State of America, Kumarian Press.
Leeuwis, C. (2000) “Reconceptualising Participation for Sustainable Rural Development
toward a Negotiation Approach”, Development and Change, 31:931-959.
58
Leduc, B and Ahmad, F. (2009) Guidelines for gender sensitive programming, ICIMOD –
international centre for integrated mountain development, Nepal.
Les échos du PNDP • N° 001 Juillet - Aout - Septembre 2013.
Mutahaba, G. and Kweyamba, A.B (2010) “Searching for an Optimal Approach to National
Development Planning in Africa: Assessing the contribution of public administration
systems”, African Association for Public Administration and Management.
MINEPAT, (2009) Cameroon Vision 2035, Republic of Cameroon, Cameroon.
Molyneux, M. and Razavi, S. (2005) “Beijing Plus Ten: An Ambivalent Record on Gender
Justice”, Development and Change, 36(6): 983-1010.
Michener, V.J. (1998) “The participatory approach: Contradiction and co-option in Burkina
Faso”, World Development, 26 (12): 2105–2118.
MINEPAT, (2010) (2eme edition) Guide Methodologique de Planification Regionale et
Locale au Cameroun, Republique du Cameroun.
Mosse, D. (2001) “‘“People’s Knowledge”, Participation and Patronage: Operations and
Representations in Rural Development”, in: Cooke, B. and Kothari, U. (eds) Participation:
The New Tyranny?, London, Zed Press, 16-35.
Moser, C. (2005) “Has gender mainstreaming failed?” International Feminist Journal of
Politics, 7(4): 576-590.
Moser, C. and Moser, A. (2005) “Gender Mainstreaming since Beijing: a review of success
and limitations in International institutions”, Gender and Development, 13(2): 11-22.
Moser, C. (1989) “Gender planning in the third world: meeting practical and strategic gender
needs”, World development, 7(11):1799-1825.
Mansur, G. and Rao, V. (2004) “Community based and driven development: a critical
review”, World Bank policy research working paper 3209, 1-77.
National Institute of Statistics NIS (2011) Deuxième Enquête Sur l’emploi et le secteur
informel au Cameroun (EESI 2), Republique du Cameroun.
Ngalim, A. (2014) “Local Government, Infrastructure Provision and Sustainable
Development in Fako Municipalities of Cameroon’s South West Region, 1866-2010”,
Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 16(5):87-101.
Osabuohien, E., Efobi, R. and Salami, A. (2012) “Planning to Fail or Failing to Plan:
Institutional Response to Nigeria’s Development Question”, African Development Bank
Working Paper Series 162: 1-27.
OECD-DAC (2014) 2014 edition of the Social Institutions and Gender Index, OECD,
http://www.oecd.org/dev/development-gender/Mini-Brochure_SIGI2014-EN.pdf (last
consulted: 25 November 2015).
59
Porter, F. and Sweetman, C. (2005) “Editorial”, Gender and Development, 13(2): 2-10.
Percy (1999) “Gender Analysis and Participatory Rural Appraisal: Assessing the current
debate through an Ethiopian case study involving Agricultural Extension Work”,
International Journal of Educational Development, 19: 395–408.
Parfitt. T, (2004) “The ambiguity of participation: a qualified defence of participatory
development”, Third World Quarterly, 25(3): 537-555.
Rao, A. and Kelleher, D. (2005) “Is there life after gender mainstreaming?”, Gender &
Development, 13(2): 57 — 69.
Rees, T. (1998) “Reflections on the Uneven Development of Gender Mainstreaming in
Europe, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(4): 555-574.
Roggeband, C. and Verloo, M. (2006) “Evaluating gender impact assessment in the
Netherlands (1994-2004): a political process approach”, Policy and Politics, 34(4): 617-634.
Sardan, O. (2011) “The Eight Modes of Local Governance in West Africa” Institute of
Development Studies Bulletin, 42(2):22-31.
Samuel, A. (2002) Theory of Participatory Development, web paper,
http://alexandrasamuel.com/netpolitics/studentsites/publicsites/JeffMcK/index.html (last
consulted: 20 December 2015).
Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom, New York, Anchor Books.
Shakya, K. R. (2007) “Formulation of Development Plans-Planning Techniques”,
Administration and Management Review, 19(2):8-17.
Squires, J. (2005) “Is Mainstreaming Transformative? Theorizing Mainstreaming in the
Context of Diversity and Deliberation”, Oxford Journals, 366-388.
Tanga, P. and Fonchingong, C. (2009) “NGO-State Interaction and the Politics of
Development in Cameroon in the Context of Liberalisation”, International NGO Journal,
4(4):84-96.
Uphoff, N. and Cohen, J. (1980) “Participation's Place in Rural Development: Seeking
Clarity through Specificity”, World Development, 8(3) 213-235.
UNESCO (2013) Adult and Youth Literacy: National, Regional and Global trends, 1985-
2015, UNESCO Institute for statistics, Montreal, Canada.
http://www.uis.unesco.org/Education/Documents/literacy-statistics-trends-1985-2015.pdf
(last consulted: 19 December 2015).
UN ECOSOC, (1997) ‘Report of the Economic and Social Council for 1997’, A/52/3,
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/docs/52/plenary/a52-3.htm (last consulted: 5 December,
2015).
60
UNFPA (2012) “Child Marriage Country Profile: Cameroon,
http://www.girlsnotbrides.org/child-marriage/cameroon/ (last consulted: 21 July 2015).
UNICEF (2005) Cameroon FGM/C country profile,
www.childinfo.org/files/Cameroon_FGC_profile_English.pdf (last consulted: 19 December
2015).
UN Women (2014) Guidance Note: Gender Mainstreaming in Development Programming,
UN Women, New York.
Verloo, M. (2001) “Another Velvet Revolution? Gender Mainstreaming and the Politics of
Implementation” IWM Working papers 5: 1-27.
World Development Report (2012) Gender Equality and Development, The World Bank,
Washington DC.
World Bank (2012) Cameroon – The Path to Fiscal Decentralization: Opportunities and
Challenges, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management-Africa Region, Report No
63369-CM, World Bank.
Walby, S. (2005) “Introduction: Comparative Gender Mainstreaming in a Global Era”,
International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(4): 453-470.
Woodward, A. (2008) “Too Late for gender mainstreaming? Taking Stock in Brussels”,
Journal of European Social Policy, 18(3):289-302.
World Bank (2001) “Gender in the PRSPs: A Stocktaking”, World Bank, Poverty Reduction
and Economic Management Network, Gender and Development Group.
World Bank (2003) Cameroon - Community Development Programme Project, World Bank
Group Washington DC,
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2003/10/23034563/cameroon-community-
development-program-project (last consulted: 26 November 2015).
White, S.C (1996) “Depoliticizing development: the uses and abuses of participation”,
Development in practice, 6(1): 6-15.
Law and legal instruments
Law N° 74/23 of 5 December 1974 to organize councils, Republic of Cameroon.
Law No 96-06 of 18 January 19996 to amend the Constitution, Republic of Cameroon,
Constitution, http://confinder.richmond.edu/admin/docs/Cameroon.pdf.
61
Annexes
Annexe 1: Quick Scan Matrix
Phases
1.Preparation SC 2. Community
Diagnosis
SC 3. Planning/
Programmi
ng
SC 4. Budgeting and
implementatio
n
SC 5. Monitoring
and
evaluation
SC
CONTENT -Community
Awareness raising
Strength/Potentials by
sector
-education
-employment (econ
activity)
-water and sanitation
-health services
-transport (roads
network)
-energy
Development
goals and
objectives
Macro-economic
framework and
medium-term
expenditure
framework
Monitoring and
evaluation
system
-Stakeholders
identification
Weaknesses/Constraints
by sector
-education
-employment
-water and sanitation
Selecting
Priority
sectors/projects
Budgeting and
resource allocation
(gender and sector
specific)
Monitoring and
evaluation
instruments
(tools for data
collection and
analysis)
62
-health services
-transport (road
network)
-energy
-Expert/ steering
Committee
Opportunities
-employment
-education
-tourism
-natural resources
-funding partners
-institutional frame
Action plan Implementation
strategies
-programs/projects
-delivery channels
Targets and
indicators
Agenda/Mandate Expected
Result/Outcome
PROCESS
Participation of
women/gender
experts
Participation of
women/gender experts
in data collection
Participation Participation of
women/ gender
experts
Participation
Facilitation Participation of
women/gender experts
in data analysis
Source: based on Holvoet (2010)
63
Annex 2: Checklist for in-depth assessment
A. CONTENT
General
Which approach is used towards gender issues in the Communal Development Plans? (pre-
WID, WID, GAD approach)
Is there a mainstreaming of gender issues or only mentioning of gender issues at some
points?
To what extent were gender issues integrated in the input of different stakeholders?
Preparation
How accessible was information about the programme made to all stakeholders and local
population (men and women)?
Were women, women groups and gender organisations identified among stakeholders?
Was gender expertise selected or recruited in the steering committee?
Community diagnosis
Does data collected on community potentials, problems and opportunities include gender
dimensions (difference in access to and control over resources, needs, constraints,
opportunities, rights)
To what extent are data analysis results disaggregated by gender
Which secondary gender data are used (national studies and international database such as
GDI, GEM, Gender Country Assessment etc)
Are existing socio-cultural norms affecting women and men identified and analysed?
To what extent are women’s /gender strategic needs identified and prioritised
How effective are women and men potentials toward addressing community problems
analysed and used
are there differences in the integration of gender issues in the different diagnosis
components and sectors
Planning/Programming
To what extent are main development goals and objectives gender sensitive
How useful are needs identified at the diagnosis phase translated into the planning
64
Are prioritised actions targeted at institutional challenges (socio-cultural) faced by women?
To what extent are existing gender equality plans taken into account? (Beijing plan for
action)
Are there differences in the integration of gender issues between different sectors?
Budgeting and implementation
Are gender components (strategies and actions) included in the budget lines?
Are there differences in budget allocation for gender sensitive actions between different
sectors?
Are there adequate implementation mechanisms foreseen for gender-sensitive strategies and
actions?
Does result-based framework integrate gender dimensions?
Monitoring and Evaluation
To what extent are the conventional indicators disaggregated by sex? Are there differences
between different sectors (e.g. more disaggregation for education and health than for
labour?)
What specific indicators regarding gender equality objectives were included?
b. PROCESS
To what extent were women, women’s groups and gender experts effectively informed and
involved
Did women/gender experts effectively participate in all phases of CDP elaboration
Did participatory processes/activities take account of analysis of the access of different
stakeholders to participatory process
Are measures taken to ensure women’s individual and collective agency (voice) at different
levels
Was the data collection process participatory (involving all stakeholders including gender
expertise, women
What are the capacities of the women and gender experts/actors involved? (women’s group,
national women’s movements, national women’s affairs ministries)
What is the gender expertise of the mainstream actors who are involved in the elaboration
CDP
Source: developed based on Holvoet (2010)