4 ways to successfully implement gender programs

Does mainstreaming gender into development programs work? That’s a tricky question that often comes up when organizations for instance need to include provisions for gender equality in their project proposals, especially since more and more donors are now insisting that gender be integrated in all of the programs they fund. These include leading donor agencies such as the U.K. Department for International Development and the U.S. Agency for International Development. For gender expert Maxine Molyneux, the answer is yes, provided gender mainstreaming is done right. Indeed it is now better understood that societies in general are held back by gender inequality. A professor at the University College London, Molyneux believes this is an effective strategy as it reminds aid practitioners that gender inequality affects development outcomes — a basic point that several development partners sometimes forget. But it is not enough to integrate gender in development programs. Positive outcomes depend in large part on the willingness of governments, local nongovernmental organizations and practitioners to implement gender-sensitive policies. It was only when policymakers realized how gender relations contributed to poverty that policies began to succeed, Molyneux pointed out. At the same time, designing programs specifically for women can be more successful than just gender mainstreaming as they address the specific conditions that make women particularly vulnerable to poverty. For example, in societies where women are not allowed out of the home or the community without a male guardian, women-only skills training programs such as those that teach them how to work with computers or balance their accounts can be very valuable. The challenge then for implementing partners is to determine when mainstreaming gender in their development programs is enough and when designing programs focusing exclusively on tackling challenges specific to women is needed. Regardless of which type of program will be implemented, however, aid workers often face myriad challenges in running gender programs, often from the local communities they are trying to serve. How then can they deal with these obstacles? Take time to explain and educate Molyneux — who has served as senior adviser, consultant and researcher to the United Nations and has led funded research for DfID, CARE International and other development agencies and NGOs — said she has seen too many programs fail as development agencies had not done the initial research with experienced people in the region. Local communities often refuse to accept programs if aid workers were unable to explain clearly what they were meant to achieve. With targeted programs, including those targeted at women, it is important to explain why some people are included and others not. To avoid discontent, it is often necessary to hold meetings with both men and women, so men can raise objections on the spot and have them discussed. “In some programs where men have been suspicious of the program and resented women being involved,” she recounted, these men are likely to take out their frustrations on their partners. When anti-poverty cash transfer programs were first introduced in Latin America, for instance, reports of domestic violence increased. These programs gave cash directly to women without properly educating men or seeking their input. Some of the men did not accept this arrangement and resorted to violence to gain control of the funds. In time, and as the men grew to understand and accept the rules and rationale, violence against women did diminish. Reward not penalize It is important to build positive incentives into programs that address gender inequality, Molyneux said, citing Oportunidades in Mexico as an example. “In order to improve girls’ access to education, families were given financial incentives to send their daughters to school,” the gender expert explained. “Over time, this helped to overcome the gender gap in education — now girls generally outperform boys at school.” But her experience has also shown that programs that use punitive measures to encourage changes in behavior are morally problematic and are not as successful as those that use incentives. As the name implies, conditional cash transfer programs link disbursements with certain conditions. These often involve requiring beneficiaries to send their children to school or to health centers for regular check-ups. Some programs in Latin America, however, penalize families that fail to send their children to school or health centers. This shouldn’t be the case, according to Molyneux, who believes the main reason to impose conditions to participate in the program is to legitimize the idea of girls going to school, for instance, in the face of strong local resistance. Know when to step back But despite efforts to engage the community and highlight the positive benefits of participating in gender programs, there may still be strong local opposition, Molyneux conceded. In Afghanistan, for example, considerable efforts to send girls to school were met by violent response in some regions, where some families received death threats and a number of teachers murdered. In circumstances like this, should organizations still push forward with their programs? Molyneux believes the decision depends on the local and regional context: Would the organization be able to eventually gain the support of local elders or mobilize the community to back the program? And perhaps more importantly, will pushing through with an unpopular program risk affecting other equally important development outcomes? In the case of Afghanistan, one strong reason for failure is because local communities did not trust the organization and the program enough to believe their girls were not being indoctrinated in school. The program failed because it was tainted by links to the war on terror in the country. Look beyond microcredit Microcredit has been one of the most widely trumpeted successes in raising women out of poverty and empowering them. It was conceived by Muhammad Yunus, founder of Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, and for which he and the bank were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006. But for Molyneux, microcredit — and indeed all gender programs — can be an important tool to help women manage their resources better and improve their lives, but only if it is accompanied by other measures that can empower women. Else, it can turn out to be a failed “magic bullet.” In Bangladesh, for example, asset transfer programs promote women’s savings accounts and aim to link women to credit sources as they graduate from the program. Similar bridges to credit schemes are also being scaled up in a cash transfer program in the Palestinian territories. In Colombia and Chile, program designers have addressed key social vulnerabilities by providing access to domestic and sexual violence prevention and protection services. Some public works schemes, such as India’s Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Program, have established quotas to ensure that women can participate and benefit from them. The Ethiopian program offers women opportunities to access credit and savings programs, provides flexible working hours, and requires women to receive preferential work placements close to their homes, with day care centers available for small children. Involved in the implementation of gender programs? What challenges did your organization face during the implementation and how did your team overcome them? Share your experience in the comments below. Check out more insights and analysis for global development leaders like you, and sign up as an Executive Member to receive the information you need for your organization to thrive.