Section C: Gender Analysis Frameworks

AusAID, What is Gender and Development, p. 14

Key Areas of ConcernGender Division of LabourMost societies allocate diff e rent roles, responsibilities, and activities to women and men. Although the nature of the work varies greatly between and within countries and cultures, there are some general patterns in the social and economic roles of men and women. Both men and women are involved in productive, re p rod u c t i v e , household/community service and community management and political activities. The collection of sex disaggregated data about the gender division of labour is an essential first step in gender analysis, including who does what, w h e re and when the work is done, and how long it takes. Age and socio-economic groupings also need to be considered. The general patterns noted below should only be seen as a starting point for direct observation and v e r i f i c a t i o n . In their productive capacity, women generally provide for the household’s daily consumption with activities such as subsistence farming, fishing, foraging in the forests and care of livestock. Women also contribute to household income through trading surplus production from subsistence and cash cropping, food processing, other micro-enterprises and participation in the informal and formal labour force. Women’s re p roductive role is significant for their economic and social roles. Pre g n a n c y, childbirth, breast-feeding and child rearing are interlinked with women’s social status, health status and needs and participation in economic activity. Essential household and community s e rvices are generally the responsibility of women, including care of the elderly and sick, provision of clothing and s h e l t e r, and household work such as food processing and preparation, cleaning and laundry. In their community management and political roles, women may be involved formally or informally in local development and political o rganisations, and may have responsibilities to contribute to cultural, religious and other social activities. Wi t h these multiple roles, poor women often have little or no spare time for new development activities, unless measures are taken to reduce their existing workload.

Access and Control of Resources and BenefitsAccess to productive re s o u rces, control over these re s o u rces and who benefits from the use of the re s o u rces are all significant factors for determining gender impacts of development activities. Reduced access to productive re s o u rces can strongly inhibit women’s and men’s capacity to provide for daily consumption or earn an income.Resources may include land, forests, waterways, foreshores, equipment, labour, productive inputs, capital/credit and education/training. For example, when new technology is introduced, it is important to consider the impact that it may have on both men’s and women’s tasks and access to other re s o u rces, as well as who is likely to have control over or access to any income earned. R e s e a rch suggests that women are more likely to devote time to new development activities when they have some control over the income and other benefits generated (Hunt 1997: 27). Men’s and women’s responsibilities and priorities for spending income also vary between and within countries. In general, women tend to spend more of their income on family maintenance, household nutrition, education and basic welfare (UN 1995: 129; World Bank 1990: 37).

Factors and TrendsWo m e n ’s and men’s roles and responsibilities in a society or culture are dynamic and change over time. Social, cultural, religious, economic, political and legal factors and trends all have a complex and profound influence on gender roles and responsibilities. Many of these factors can constrain women’s participation in development activities. For example, cultural or religious factors may restrict women’s and girl’s access to services or prevent them from attending mixed training classes. Changing attitudes, economic circumstances and other trends may also provide opportunities for improving women’s social, economic and legal status. Analysing these factors may assist planners to identify areas where development activities can address both women’s practical needs and strategic interests to re d ress current inequalities in the gender division of labour, and in women’s access to and ownership of productive re s o u rces (Hunt 1997: 38).

Canada Nepal Gender in Orgs (CNGO). Training package #1: I nterpersonal Growth and Gender in Groups; MODUL E # 3: Gender and Development.

http://www.cngo.org.np/pdf/genderanddevelopment.PDFPage 7. Gender Analysis:

Gender analysis is a basic tool for understanding differences in gender roles, activities, needs andopportunities. In project planning it involves:· disaggregation of quantitative data by sex; analysis of roles (who does what);· analysis of access to/control over resources; · identification and analysis of socioeconomic and political factors that affect roles and resource access and control; and identification of the gender considerations needed for the project.

CIDA, Accelerating Change: Resources for Gender Mainstreaming

CIDA, Accelerating Change: Resources for Gender Mainstreaming. p. 30

Differentiates between "enabling tools" and "technical tools" - enabling tools would be things like having a GM policy in place; having a training course on GM available, etc. These tools are not addressed here as I assume they will be taken up in the "what is gender mainstreaming" section. Focus here on technical tools.

CIDA, Accelerating Change: Resources for Gender Mainstreaming. p. 36

Technical ToolsTechnical tools for gender mainstreaming include those employed for gender-responsive policy analysis, implementation, budgeting and monitoring/evaluation. These tools are designed to turn plans into action. Here are illustrations of how some of them have been used in various situations.

Gender AnalysisGender analysis is the most important implement in the gender mainstreaming toolbox. Unless it can be proven that current policies have different impacts on men and women, and unless mechanisms are developed to predict what kind of gender equality impacts proposed new policies will have on one gender or the other, progress toward gender equality is likely to stall.

Policy makers must be able to see potential differentials in impact on men and women, and understand how such differentialsmay undermine development. No matter how open a government may believe that opportunities are to all its citizens, the realities of women's and men's lives are almost always different. Equal opportunity does not necessarily translate into equal results. The challenge for policy makers is to ensure that the results of policies and legislation are anticipated, and that these results are as equitable as possible for men and women. The Canadian government employs a framework for analysis called Gender-Based Analysis (GBA). Gender analysis has also become a foundation for policy analysis and the creation of development tools in Bangladesh, the Philippines and Indonesia.

Gender analysis is a process that policy makers undertake to assess the differential impact of proposed and/or existing policies, programs and legislation on women and men, and the effect gender roles and responsibilities have on development efforts. It recognizes that the realities of women's and men's lives are different, and that equal opportunity does not necessarily mean equal results. Gender analysis forms the basis of all tools for gender mainstreaming.

CIDA, Accelerating Change: Resources for Gender Mainstreaming. p. 37lists some country-specific tools that national women's ministries use. in BG, Gender Impact Analysis Framework. In ID, Gender Analysis Pathway.

CIDA, Accelerating Change: Resources for Gender Mainstreaming. p. 41Gender Mainstreaming Tools: Factors Contributing to SuccessThe development of good mainstreaming tools is obviously crucial. But it became clear in listening to participants at the workshop that tools are ineffective unless they are backed up by sound strategies for their application. There are enabling factors attached to the use of tools that need to be understood and put in place by NWMs and the agencies with which they work:

Appropriate tools. Participants at the workshop agreed that one of the most important factors in the successful utilization of a tool was selecting the right one for the job.This means taking the time to adequately assess a situation, and to determine what gender equality issues are present before selecting and perhaps adapting a tool for best results.

Tools that add value. Individuals - whether NWM staff, public sector representatives or civilians - need to believe that the tools they are using, or learning to use, will actually improve performance. When an NWM is working with another agency, it is important that the tools selected are perceived by all parties involved as relevant to the job at hand. For example, when personnel at the Ministry of Labour are being trained to gather sex-disaggregated data, they need to clearly understand why this data is important, and how its careful collection could improve both the workings of their branch and the social and economic realities of the people they are surveying.

Consultative approach. Generic gender analysis tools may have to be adapted or new ones may have to be developed to suit the needs of a specific organization. It is important that this adaptation or development process is consultative in order to develop tools that are seen to be

"owned" by all parties involved and are deemed to be appropriate to the specific needs of the agency.

Sufficient training and ongoing support. NWMs need to work with other government agencies, training organizations and research/academic bodies to ensure that appropriate training programs are developed to assure confidence and effectiveness in the use of gender mainstreaming tools. If government agencies attempt to use these tools without sufficient training and ongoing support, results are likely to be disappointing. The sustainability of gender mainstreaming programsdepends on multi-level and multidimensional capacity development. Addressing the complex issues involved in gender mainstreaming means that the capacity to use gender tools must be developed in individuals, across organizations and throughout systems.

Top level support. Wherever possible, key decision-makers should be included in development, adaptation and training exercises for the use of gender mainstreaming tools. Their support is likely to be essential to the successful adoption and sustainability of tools within a particular agency. Again, many of these contributors to success are dynamic and interdependent, and it may be difficult to ensure that each one is firmly in place before a tool is used. However, keeping these factors in mind, and attempting to ensure they are part of a broader mainstreaming strategy is bound to facilitate the sustainable use of tools for gender mainstreaming.

CIDA, Accelerating Change: Resources for Gender Mainstreaming. ANNEX 1 has good graphic and description of Gender Analysis Pathway

DFID, Gender Manual: A Practical Guide for Development Policy Makers and Practitioners. April 2002. pages 14-15

Outline gender analytical framework: beneficiary groupsThis outline gender analytical framework is designed to assist brainstorming on gender analyticalinformation needs. It is an amalgamation between several commonly used gender planning frameworks and sustainable livelihoods analysis. See the GEM website for sector-specific guidelines.

Category of enquiry Issues to considerRoles and responsibilities_ what do men/women do?_ where (location/patterns of mobility)_ when (daily and seasonal patterns)?

_ productive roles (paid work, self-employment, andsubsistence production)_ reproductive roles (domestic work, childcare and care ofthe sick and elderly)_ community participation/self-help (voluntary work for thebenefit of the community as a whole)_ community politics (representation/decision-making onbehalf of the community as a whole)

Assets_ what livelihood assets/ opportunities domen women have access to?_ what constraints do they face?

_ human assets (e.g. health services, education,knowledge and skills)_ natural assets (e.g. land, labour)_ social assets (e.g. social networks)_ physical assets (transport, communications)_ financial assets (capital/income, credit)

Power and decision-making_ what decision-making do men and/orwomen participate in?_ what decision-making do men/womenusually control (able to make decisions)?_ what constraints do they face?

_ household level (e.g. decisions over householdexpenditure)_ community level (e.g. decisions on the management ofresources and services)_ local government level_ national government level

Needs, priorities and perspectives_ what are women’s and men’s needs andpriorities?_ what perspectives do they have onappropriate and sustainable ways ofaddressing their needs?

_ “practical” gender needs (needs arising in the context ofthe existing gender roles/assets)_ “strategic” gender needs (i.e. requiring changes toexisting gender roles/assets to create greater equality ofinfluence, opportunity and benefit e.g. increasingwomen’s access to decision-making)_ perspectives on improved services and delivery systemssuch as prioritised services; choice of technology;location, type and cost of services; systems of operation,management and maintenance etc.

DFID, Gender Manual: A Practical Guide for Development Policy Makers and Practitioners. April 2002. pages 27-28.

Gender in logical frameworksThe role of project frameworks/logical frameworks In the context of projects, the project framework agreed between the donor and partner government/civil society organisation is the key document for mainstreaming gender. It fulfils many functions:

it provides a structured framework for participatory project design discussions it presents in summary form the agreed key aspects of the project. It is the point at which DFID “signs off” on a project

it is an instrument of accountability. The project management are accountable for delivering what

is specified in the project framework: they are not accountable for what is not it provides the basis for budgeting, marking, and review/OPR (Out to Purpose Review)

processes.In the context of PRSPs and SWAPS, the donor project framework is an internal mechanism to agree and channel funds. It is not an instrument of accountability for partner governments. However, it is usual to find a logical framework format used by governments to summarise PRSP and SWAP objectives, activities, indicators and resource commitments. This is then the key document for mainstreaming gender within policy frameworks. It is the focus for planning, management, resource allocation, accountability and review.

When and if to include genderPolicy and project documentation, which is typically substantial, is important for planning, discussion and approval purposes. However, subsequent management, budgeting and review processes focus on the logical framework summary. Therefore:

if gender issues are relevant to the policy or project, explicit references are required in thelogical framework. Inclusion in social and institutional annexes or in social and institutional appraisal sections of the policy/project documents is not sufficient

if the policy/project is concerned with making an impact on poor people’s lives, it is hard to imagine circumstances where gender would not be relevant in some way.

How and where to include genderThe extent to which gender issues are included in logical frameworks depends on the motivation,influence and knowledge of the people involved in drawing them up. In many situations, staff with the motivation to include gender equality issues lack the influence to put this into practice. In this situation, it is important to bear in mind that almost any mention of gender/women in the logical framework is better than nothing, and advocacy activities should be geared to this end. This ensures that at least some attention is paid to gender issues in processes of management, resource allocation, and monitoring, and it opens the door to increasing attention to gender issues in review processes. However, where staff are in a position to address gender issues more systematically in the logical framework, it is useful to bear the following points in mind.

Target groupsit should always be clear from the logical framework who the policy/project is targeting:– this should be clear from the use of sex disaggregated indicators– it should be clear which activities and outputs are targeted to women, which to men and whichto both– replacing general terms such as “the poor” or “poor farmers” with, where appropriate, “poormen and women” and “poor male and female farmers” makes women as well as men clearlyvisible and avoids misunderstanding.

Purpose and goalthe promotion of gender equality (benefit for women as well as men) should be an aspect of the purpose and goal of all development policies/projects concerned with impacting on people’s

lives. This should be reflected in Indicators and, where possible, also in the wording of the purpose/goal statement. See “gender-sensitive indicators”

If benefit to men and women is part of the goal and purpose, specific activities/outputs will be required to bring this about and need to be included in the logical framework.

Outputsit may be useful to have one output specifically concerned with targeted activities for women.However, it is important not to ghettoise women’s activities within one output with a very small claim on resources and no influence on the rest of the policy/project. Targeted outputs of this kind should complement activities to mainstream gender throughout the policy/project. Benefit for women as well as men should be considered as an aspect of each output it is principally important to include gender in output indicators and associated activities. See “gender-sensitive indicators”.

Activitiesthe promotion of benefit for women as well as men requires targeted activities, backed up with human and financial resources. Resource allocation is directly linked to the activity line of a logical framework. See “outline activity framework”

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland. Navigating gender. A framework and a tool for participatory development. page 21

Gender Analysis Framework is the actual method used to organize the information.In this manual four different frameworks are introduced. Gender Analysis is verymuch an evolving area and new frameworks emerge out of specific contexts. Thebest approach is to become comfortable with how the frameworks can be used, i.e. whatquestions they ask and what resources you need in order to use one. Eventually you willadapt this knowledge and develop your own framework that serves your particular informationneeds best.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland. Navigating gender. A framework and a tool for participatory development. page 38

In choosing your framework, you may wish to consider the following:✎Are you carrying out the Gender Analysis on you own, or do you need to involve other people?✎Are all the people involved in the analysis literate?✎Is the Gender Analysis intended as a part of an appraisal or an evaluation?✎Is the Gender Analysis intended to be repeated at regular intervals?

FEMNET: begin on page 21

Hannah Warren, Using Gender Analysis Frameworks: Theoretical and Practical Reflections. page 118-9

The demand for and emergence of gender-analysis frameworks [note: this material also provided to group B)Gender-analysis frameworks emerged initially in response to the realisation of the significance to development of the differing roles of men and women and the social construct of gender2. Until the 1970s, development was generally assumed to be gender-neutral and of equal benefit to men and women (Karl 1995; Rao 1991). However a number of studies3 illustrated not only the varying impacts of development on men and women (often citing negative effects on women), but also the failures of development interventions (what Kabeer terms ‘project misbehaviour’ (1994, 268)). These failures were identified as having occurred as a result of ignoring or making erroneous assumptions regarding the differing roles and activities undertaken by men and women in the variety of contexts in which development projects were being implemented. As Karl states, ‘The high rate of failure of development policies, programmes and projects is attributable at least in part to the neglect or lack of knowledge of women’s productive and reproductive roles’ (Karl 1995, 94, emphasis mine). Thus, the demand emerged for methods which could assist development planners to gather data from which to make informed decisions for the benefit of both men and women, prevent possible negative effects, and make development more effective and efficient (Longwe 1991; Rao 1991; Gianotten et al. 1994; Kabeer 1994; Karl 1995).

There was also a growing political desire, led principally by feminists in the development sector, and later adopted throughout the majority of development agencies (at least in rhetoric), to address and transform unequal gender relations and ‘empower’ women. Thus gender equality became an objective of development. However, this desire for gender equality alone was not sufficient and as Smyth points out, ‘For a long time, [development] agencies have been decrying the lack of expertise and methodologies that prevents them from achieving their objectives’ (Smyth 1999a, 14).

The need for appropriate methodologies was, and still is, felt by many to be the missing factor in translating the desire among those committed to ‘incorporating women/gender into development’ into practice. For instance, as Moser (1993, 5) has argued ‘many of those committed to integrating gender into their work at policy, programme or project levels still lack the necessary planning principles and methodological tools. This issue is critical; planners require simplified tools which allow them to feed the particular complexities of specific contexts into the planning process’.

Hannah Warren, Using Gender Analysis Frameworks: Theoretical and Practical Reflections. page 190Different frameworks and their theoretical underpinningsA number of accepted and well known frameworks have been developed over the years including: the Harvard Analytical Framework (HAF) (or gender roles framework); the Moser

Framework (also known as the triple roles framework and Moser/Levy framework); the Social Relations Approach (or framework) (SRA); the Gender Analysis Matrix (GAM); the Women’s Empowerment (Longwe) Framework; and the Capacities and Vulnerabilities Analysis Framework (Kabeer 1994; Mahama 2001; March et al. 1999; Tsikata 2001). In addition there are a number of less well known methods, including participatory rural appraisal (PRA) (Humble 1998) and rapid rural appraisal techniques (RRA) (Munro 1991), and others developed for use in specific sectors and/or in the South (Smyth 1999a). No doubt others are being continuously developed (Mahama 2001).

However, as indicated above, these are not neutral frameworks which merely provide different methods for achieving the same goal. They do not simply represent different ways of collecting and analysing data in order to make informed decisions regarding ‘incorporating gender’ into development initiatives, since this can in fact reflect a number of different objectives. Gender analysis frameworks have evolved in tandem with the evolution of ‘gender’ in development and are thus ‘based on very different understandings of the nature of power and inequality’ (Kabeer 1994, 270). As a consequence they differ (in some cases significantly) regarding their assumptions of what needs to be analysed and addressed. As Kabeer argues ‘There is . . . an intimate relationship between ways of thinking and ways of doing’ (1994, 303). It is important to note that significant differences exist between the various genderanalysisframeworks, although I will not attempt to provide a detailed and comprehensive account and comparison here7. For example some, such as the HAF, focus principally on the gender division of labour and the activities and roles of men and women, whereas others, for instance the SRA, give a more central place to the analysis of relationships between men and women (Kabeer 1994). This links back tothe rationales on which the frameworks are premised and, for example, whether they have efficiency or empowerment objectives (see Smyth 1999a, 25). As Boateng claims, ‘The theoretical background of a framework determines which aspects of a situation it seeks to identify and the nature of the changes that are possible’ (Boateng 2001, 216). This understanding of the origins and theory behind gender-analysis frameworks, I argue, is crucial when using such methods and facilitating gender training which aims specifically to impart skills and tools by which development personnel can ‘incorporate gender’ into their work.

Hannah Warren, Using Gender Analysis Frameworks: Theoretical and Practical Reflections. page 191 -2Gender-analysis trainingGender training, similar to the desire for gender analysis frameworks, is often undertaken in response to the demand among development organisations to equip personnel with necessary skills and tools. Thus it is often seen as a technical solution to the difficulties of incorporating gender into development (Porter and Smyth 1999; Seed 1999), particularly in the case of gender-analysis (and planning) training. For example, in my experience of facilitating gender training courses, particularly those with a focuson gender analysis, such as the INTRAC training course ‘Gender Planning in Development’, there is often a high demand from participants for a package of tools and frameworks which enable them to ‘do gender’8. This has led to the ongoing observation, criticism, and dilemma that gender training risks being divorced from theory, becoming no more than a technical fix (Seed 1999; Tsikata 2001). However, as outlined above, the frameworks and tools which are conveyed

in gender training are themselves premised by, and interwoven with, theory and political ideology. Therefore it is crucial in any training to ensure that these practical tools are combined with a sound understanding of the values and ideology which underpin them, as well as providing participants with a necessary critical consciousness regarding the differing approaches which can be adopted in relation to gender in development. To ensure this, trainers need to be fully conversant with the theory underpinning gender-analysis frameworks.

When I facilitated my first gender training courses in Ghana in 1999, although I was familiar with theories surrounding ‘gender and development’, my understanding of the nuances of the various frameworks and their differing theoretical underpinnings was not fully developed. As a result, while my own philosophy behind incorporating ‘gender’ into development was based on a feminist desire to transform gender relations and combat gender inequalities, this was no doubt counterbalanced andconfused by my use of the Harvard Analytical Framework (HAF) in order to provide others with the tools to facilitate this. I used the HAF in this instance as it provided a simple way of enabling participants to gather data regarding men’s and women’s activities, and access to and control over resources. What I did not fully appreciate was that when used in practice, taking this information into consideration may do little more than ensure that an intervention is more efficient, with no overt focus on the intersections and relationships between men and women and the power relations which exist (see Kabeer 1994). At the time my inexperience and ignorance surrounding these frameworks meant that I, like others9, thought it as simple as selecting one of the numerous frameworks by which participants would be able to gather and analyse the necessary data in order to make their work ‘gender sensitive’. But the use of frameworks demands an appreciation of their underlying principles, as well as a clear understanding of the aims of the work being undertaken. As Porter and Smyth point out ‘if gender training is seen only in terms of the access to technical skills, the concepts and tools will be misunderstood and ineffective’ (1999, 332).

Hannah Warren, Using Gender Analysis Frameworks: Theoretical and Practical Reflections. page 192-3Training individuals within institutionsIn addition to the trainer’s knowledge and understanding of the theory underpinning gender-analysis frameworks, other challenges are faced in the training of others in these methods. These mirror some of the more general problems experienced in gender training. Some of these relate back to both the lack of coherence within, and between, development organisations regarding the goals of ‘incorporating gender’ and the varying theoretical underpinnings of these frameworks. Although it is generally acknowledged that gender training needs to be part of an organisation-wide strategy (Mukhopadhyay and Appel 1998; Seed 1999; Acquaye- Baddoo and Tsikata 2001), this is often not the case, and training is frequently undertaken by only a selection of staff, often from the lower ranks in an organisation(Mukhopadhyay and Appel 1998). However, training a few staff in the application of frameworks will never be adequate, or appropriate, particularly if there is a lack of direction or coherence in terms of an overall policy in which this work can be framed and on which informed decisions regarding the choice of framework can be based. As Smyth argues ‘Clarity about their gender-specific objectives and strategies is essential to clarify the ‘‘why’’ and ‘‘what’’ an individual organisation is trying to achieve, before

they can make informed choice on the ‘‘how’’, in terms of the methodologies they promote’ (Smyth 1999a, 14, emphasis mine). In addition the ad hoc training of a selection of staff is unlikely to address the lack of necessary understanding, commitment and skills among other staff, doing nothing to aid a widespread organisational adoption of these methods and consequent changes in practice. However, even if organisational policies and goals of gender work are clear, difficulties are still likely to occur, as training often takes place with individuals from a range of institutions attending the same course. While this has benefits in terms of enabling participants to share experiences, the existence of different approaches and beliefs among the different participants and organisations represented poses aparticular challenge for the trainer in terms of identifying the appropriate framework(s) to use.

To tackle the above, a potential solution in training can be to provide participants with the necessary knowledge to make their own choices regarding the most appropriate frameworks to use, depending on the gender-related goals they hope to achieve. This would entail a different kind of pedagogy, involving experiential learning10 and enabling participants to assess frameworks based on the extent to which they suit their organisation’s ideology. However, participants will remain constrained by their organisation’s goals and approaches to gender or the lack of clarity on these. Perhaps the only truly appropriate solution is to provide more organisational-wide long-term capacity building support, which includes focusing on the why and the what in addition to the how, as opposed to one-off trainings for individual staff. But, as Wallace and Wilson illustrate, an organisational approach does not necessarily solve these issues. They highlight the resistance to a reflective and analytical approach in their work with WaterAid, and the demand for tools, packages, and immediate solutions (Wallace and Wilson 2005).

Hannah Warren, Using Gender Analysis Frameworks: Theoretical and Practical Reflections. page 194-5care needs to be taken in relation to the specific data to be collected and analysed. Although many of the frameworks suggest the kinds of data to be sought, whether these concern roles and activities (i.e. in the HAF), or relationships (i.e. in SRA), adequate care and consultation need to be employed in order to avoid privileging certain information, or excluding other data, and ensuring shared understanding between those collecting as well as those supplying information. For example, in my experience of using the GAM, during a project evaluation in Ghana, confusion arose due to a misunderstanding around assessing the impact of the project on different members of the community. The way in which this concept was translated and interpreted meant that initially, impacts on what had, prior to the project, been considered ‘leisure time’ were ignored. Once realised this was remedied by further explanation and discussions; however, this indicates the care and attention which need to be exercised. Frameworks are by no means universal (Smyth 1999a), despite often being presented as such, and their use in different cultures has been noted to be problematic due to their outside origins, clashes with local perceptions and beliefs, and difficulties relating to translation (Mukhopadhyay and Appel 1998; Wendoh and Wallace 2006).

In addition, the use of any framework or methodology to facilitate the gathering of data is only part the process. As Smyth points out ‘it is essential to remember that no framework will do the work for you. It may help you plan the work that can be done . . . [but] the work must still be

done’ (Smyth 1999a, 22). The challenge remains to use the information gathered appropriately. For example, in my experience, although using the GAM meant that the current (and future potential) impacts of the project on men and women became clearer, how this knowledge could be translated into concrete practice aimed at addressing gender inequalities was less clear. Thus, while the framework provided an adequate methodology for gathering data, it provided us with no easy answers. Therefore, despite claims (in this case on behalf of the HAF) that frameworks may ‘provide a sufficient basis for designing and implementing projects that can best benefit women and benefit by women’s participation’ (Rao 1991, 11, emphasis mine) alone they are insufficient, and need to be combined with other skills and knowledge, along with a clear strategy and a commitment to implementing this. If organisations andimplementers are not clear on what they hope to achieve in terms of ‘gender’ related goals, no amount of frameworks will assist. As Mahama argues: ‘Achieving gender sensitivity implies analysing gender concerns and incorporating them throughout the process . . . Even where planners are able to gather some gender-sensitive data using appropriate . . . tools, they still fall short of incorporating this information adequately in the design, implementation and monitoring process’ (2001, 414). Indeed, a number of other stages also are required for achieving ‘gender sensitivity’ in the planning process (ibid.).

UN-HABITAT, Gender and Local Government: A Sourcebook for Trainers, pages 38-39

Gender AnalysisGender analysis is a research and planning method for a better understanding of the realities of being a woman, a man, a girl or a boy. Gender analysis is an effective method of promoting equality. Gender analysis also includes the intersection of gender with other social relations such as race, ethnicity, age, caste, class, sexuality, language, ability/disability, religion, etc. For example, gender analysis can assist in organizing data and information in a municipality in a way that recognizes these different realities, so that the impacts of any policy, programme, project or activity on all urban residents can be assessed. Gender analysis is critical for inclusive and democratic decision-making. Sexdisaggregated data is a fundamental pre-requisite for gender analysis. [...]Many methodological frameworks are available today that assist with gender analysis. However, a fundamental premise is a recognition of women’s labour at home (social reproduction) as well as outside the home (production). These frameworks were developed to assist with gender analysis of specific activities and contexts such as feasibility studies, community-based planning, project assessment and planning, policy analysis and development, institutional change, impact assessment, as well as monitoring and evaluation. However, the best approach will be determined by what is needed in a specific context. It is helpful to “mix and match” or borrow from different methods to create an approach that best suits local needs and realities.

Broadly speaking, gender analysis explores the following: Questions about the current division of labour and responsibilities between women and

men and girls and boys. Who is doing what? When? Where? Questions about access and control of knowledge, resources, services and

decisionmaking.

How are things getting done and with what means? What are the implications of the gender division of labour?

What are the power relations and influencing factors? What is the prevailing social, political, economic, cultural situation and who and what institutions have the power and influence to determine these social relations? What are the cross-cutting issues?

NOTE: the below list was culled from a number of manuals. we might want to consider creating a similar list for inclusion as an annex in our training manual. This is all cut-and-paste, so there are areas of redundancy.

Gender Analysis Frameworks:1. Carolyn Moser (1993) Gender Planning and Development: Theory, Practice & Training.

This is particularly important for anyone aiming to train in Gender Analysis, or anyone doing more in-depth research into the topic. Moser covers a number of important concepts, such as practical gender needs vs. strategic gender needs, and differences between productive and reproductive labour.

2. The Socioeconomic and Gender Analysis Programme (SEAGA) of Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) is a one of the biggest initiatives in the field. This gigantic package contains parts for every user of Gender Analysis, whether in the field or in the office, whether a trainer or a trainee. You can get more information at: http://www./fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/SUSTDEV/seaga

3. The World Bank has developed useful gender checklists and other tools, such as policy documents. These are available at: http://www.worldbank.org/gender.

4. OECD/DAC has produced interesting papers that define many of central themes and concepts, as well as suggest appropriate uses of gender analysis. These papers can be found at: http://oecd.org/dac/htm/gender.htm.. In addition, other agencies (such as SIDA, CIDA etc) have all produced relevant materials on gender that can be accessed either through their web-sites or directly from them.

5. Rapid Gender Analysis (RGA) developed by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs (Finland) in the 1980s [see Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland. Navigating gender. A framework and a tool for participatory development.]

6. The Gender Analysis Framework developed by the Forests, Trees and People Programme of the FAO (FAO) in the early 1990s. [Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland. Navigating gender. A framework and a tool for participatory development]

7. The Gender Analysis Matrix (Matrix) developed by Rani Parker (1993). [Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland. Navigating gender. A framework and a tool for participatory development]

8. UNDP's The Development Planning Unit (DPU) Framework: The DPU works with a gender policy and planning framework which aims to integrate a gender perspective into development practice. Gender relations are understood as interwoven with other power relations like class, ethnicity, religion and age in different contexts. Recognizing both the resistance and opportunities emerging from particular power relations in specific contexts, the framework puts forward a gender policy and planning process which is an interative, rather than a linear process.

An initiating component of this process is gender diagnosis. Central to this is the 'web of institutionalization', a tool developed by Caren Levy based on the DPU's work with practitioners and activists at local, national and international levels. The 'web' is used to assess how a gender perspective is currently institutionalized in the context under

consideration. It identifies at least thirteen elements which are crucial to the process of institutionalization. Each element represents a site of power of social relations, and the elements relate to each other in a set of reinforcing triangles, making up the 'web'. The elements are women's and men's experience and their interpretation of reality, pressure of political constituencies, representative political structures, political commitment, policy, resources, mainstream responsibility for gender issues, procedures, methodology, research and theory-building. The diagnosis on each element and their interrelation is done using an adapted version of Caroline Moser's framework. This considers the gender roles (reproductive, productive, community managing and constituency-based politics roles), access to and control of resources, the gender needs (practical and strategic gender needs, building on Maxine Molyneux's work) and the underlying policy approaches implied in or impacted on each element. Based on this, the diagnosis of each element and their interrelation generates problems (relating to weak or no gender integration) and potentials (relating to opportunities which might offer an opening for gender integration). The final step in the preliminary gender diagnosis is to prioritize the problems and potentials so as to clarify the entry points for action.

Gender diagnosis is a continuous process and constantly interacts with another component of the gender policy and planning process, gender consultation. Using a variety of methods, gender consultation covers dialogue with women and men in communities to define their own gender needs, as well as with women and men involved in the particular organization acting in the context under consideration. Problems, potentials and their prioritization are refined in the process of this consultation.

On the basis of gender diagnosis and gender consultation, entry points for action are identified and utilized through the development of working objectives and entry strategies. These actions work towards widening the room for manoeuvre for gender integration by strengthening the process of gender diagnosis and gender consultation, as well as two further continuous components of the gender policy and planning process, organizational development and monitoring and impact assessment. Actions in these four components are continuously interacting, as the situation under consideration demands, guided by the working objectives and entry strategies. In this sense, the gender policy and planning process develops alongside the ways of operating in the organizational context under consideration, finding entry points into them and creating the conditions to make ongoing practices gender aware. In other words, the gender policy and planning process seeks to institutionalize or mainstream a gender perspective in development practice.

9. The Longwe women's empowerment framework: The women's empowerment framework focuses first on women's special needs, the needs women have due to their different sexual and reproductive roles. It then explores gender issues and women's gender concerns. Gender gaps arise where the division of gender roles brings with it inequalities in the amount of work input, or in benefits received. Gender discrimination is a key concept in this framework. Gender gaps originate and are maintained in any society by systems of gender discrimination. Discrimination against women is pervasive at the level of tradition and social practice. It is also supported by discrimination against women in official and government administrative practice, sometimes arising from discriminatory legislation. Gender discrimination means

giving differential treatment to individuals on the grounds of their gender. In a patriarchal society this involves systematic and structural discrimination against women in the distribution of income, access to resources, and participation in decision-making. Gender discrimination is part of a patriarchal system of oppression, where males retain more power, and use this power to ensure women get most of the work and less of the benefits.

The women's empowerment framework aims to address gender gaps at all of the following levels with the aim of increasing equality between men and women, and increasing women's empowerment. Welfare refers to the gender gap between women and men in their material well-being. A project confined entirely to this welfare level treats women as passive recipients of project benefits, since they are not involved in the 'higher' levels of empowerment which denote more active roles in the development process. Narrowing the gender gap in welfare is the ultimate objective in women's development, to which the process of empowerment must lead. Access is the means or right to obtain services, products or commodities. Gender gaps in access to resources and services are a major obstacle to women's development. Women's achievement of equality of access to resources and services is a key objective for women's equality; women's mobilization to achieve equality of access is a key element in the process of empowerment. Conscientization is the process of becoming aware of the extent to which problems arise not so much from an individual's inadequacies, but from systematic discrimination against a social group which puts all members of the group at a disadvantage. In women's development, conscientization involves the process by which women collectively analyse and understand the gender discrimination they are up against. This is the basis for action to overcome obstacles which have been holding them back. Participation denotes having a share in decision-making. Gender equality in decision-making is one of the essential aspects of women's empowerment. Participation is concerned with collective participation in decision-making, a process integrated with conscientization. Control means the ability to direct, or to influence events so that one's own interests are protected. The women's empowerment framework recognizes this as the 'highest' aspect of women's development - where women ensure that resources and benefits are distributed so that men and women get equal shares. Whereas conscientization and participation are essential to the process of women's empowerment, it is only gender equality in control which provides the outcome.

10. The Institute of Development Studies (IDS) social relations framework: The IDS social relations framework looks at social relations, institutions, dimensions of social relationships, interventions and needs, interests and empowerment. Social relations are defined as the way people are positioned in relation to resources and power. They include not only gender relations but also relations of class, ethnicity, nationality and religion. They vary across cultures. Social relations refer also to the resources and networks of groups and individuals. Institutions comprise four categories: state (legal, military and administrative organizations); market (firms, corporations and farming enterprises); community (village committees, patron-client relationships) and household.

The dimensions of social relationships comprise rules (official and unofficial rules, values, traditions, laws and customs); people (who is in and who is out); resources (what is used and what is produced); activities (what is done, and who does what); and power (who decides and

whose interests are served). At the level of interventions, gender neutral policies are policies which intend to leave the gender division of labour and the gender division of resources intact but attempt to target the appropriate actors to achieve certain goals. Gender-specific policies look at the existing distribution of labour and resources but intend to achieve a goal which will entail targeting one gender or the other. Gender-redistributive policies are about change and transformation, interventions designed to transform existing asymmetries and inequalities.

The social relations framework distinguishes between practical gender needs and strategic gender interests. 'Needs' tend to be defined from the top-down, as in defining and administering to needs. 'Interests' is the language of rights. We need to talk about strategic gender interests in order to remind ourselves as planners and academics to be modest about what we cannot do.

11. CARE's Gender Analysis Framework: structure of the Gender Analysis Framework is based on six Gender Equity Strategic Directions. They also form the key categories of gender analysis in the framework (poverty reduction, empowerment, rights and social justice, governance, education, institutional gender mainstreaming). In the GAF, each of the Gender Equity Strategic Directions forms an area of data collection, analysis and action; For each of these categories, guidelines are given for the types of information that may be needed, questions that might be useful to ask, analysis to be done, actions that could be taken and results that could be achieved in projects.

from Kenya training, pages 47-49:

12. Harvard gender analysis framework: It is one of the early frameworks of analysis and was developed by researchers at Harvard Institute for International Development in USA. It is based on the understanding that women and men are affected by development activities differently. The framework emphasizes the role on data and information because provision of data makes women and men to be more visible in projects. It uses tools like activity profile, access and control profile, analysis of determinant factors and project cycle analysis.

13. Gender Planning In The Third World Countries (By Caroline Moser): It takes the view that gender planning is technical and political in nature and involves a transformative process. There are six (6) tools in the framework. These tools are, gender role identification, gender needs assessment, balancing of roles, WID/GAD policy matrix, disaggregating control of resources and decision making within the household and gender awareness.

14. Gender equality and empowerment framework (By Sarah Longwe): It focuses on what women’s equality and empowerment means and the extent to which development interventions supports empowerment. Empowerment refers to the enabling women to take an equal place with men and to participate equally in the development process to achieve control over the factors of production on an equal basis. It introduces five levels of equality by which to assess the level of women empowerment. The levels are, control, participation, access, welfare, conscientisation.

15. People orientated planning (UNHCR): It lays emphasis on participation of the people and takes into consideration change to be of essence in planning but does not challenge the existing gender relations.

16. Social Economic of Gender Analysis (SEGA): This framework focuses on the issue of gender analysis mainly in socio-economic context. It emphasizes the need for economic empowerment and equality in distribution of resources.

17. Gender Analysis Matrix (GAM): It seeks to establish the different types of impacts of development interventions on women and men at community levels. It helps the community to carry out analysis and to identify gender roles and challenge their assumptions on these roles. It is a participatory planning tool. GAM is used to carry out analysis at the level of women, men, households and the community. It looks at impacts on four areas of labour, resources, time and social-cultural factors. It allows for community participation.

18. Social relations approach: This framework lays emphasis on gender relations and particularly social construction of gender. It emphasizes that planners examine their organizations and institutions and understand how they can bring biases during the planning process.

19. Capacities and vulnerabilities analysis framework: The main emphasis on this framework is carrying out analysis to specifically identify the vulnerabilities of both women and men and how these vulnerabilities can be addressed. It is meant for emergency situations. The analysis looks at cause of vulnerability.