Is EU gender practice minding the GAP?

It’s one of the most commonly accepted facts within the global development community: Equality between women and men, and girls and boys, is crucial to achieving sustainable development and meeting internationally agreed goals. Upon its adoption, the Gender Action Plan 2010-2015, or GAP, was hailed as a major milestone in the European Union’s commitment to gender equality and women’s empowerment. But five years in, ambition has yet to translate into tangible progress. In 2012, only 28 percent of new EU project proposals had gender as a primary or significant objective — far below the target of 80 percent for 2015. Meanwhile, observers note that implementation has been slow and patchy, an assessment also shared by EU ministers of foreign affairs and development. As discussions begin on the GAP’s successor — a draft of which is expected in September — consensus is growing around the need to demonstrate more sturdy leadership to ensure that gender equality and women’s empowerment stay visible and high on the agenda. In an exclusive interview with Devex associate editor Richard Jones, European Commissioner for International Cooperation and Development Neven Mimica conveyed his intention to bump up the profile of gender equality in EU development activities abroad. This has raised hopes that the new Juncker Commission will steer the 28-member bloc toward becoming a global champion of gender equality. Although the EU has come under intense scrutiny — and fire — for its work on gender in recent years, its missteps will be critical in informing the design of a more robust framework to succeed the current GAP. Off-target Despite not being results-driven, the nine objectives, 37 actions and 53 indicators included in the GAP offer a good starting point for better gender reporting and mainstreaming. All member states, EU institutions and 117 EU delegations worldwide are committed to implementing and reporting on these targets annually. But in practice, implementation suffers from a range of shortcomings. For one, gender reporting is not happening to the degree anticipated, failing to spur participation from all member states and EU delegations. In the 2013-2014 period, only 26 delegations included a gender analysis in at least one of their annual reviews — and the number dropped down to 22 when considering gender country profiles. This points to the differing levels of attention accorded by EU institutions and member states to gender equality, as well as the lack of initiative attached to it as an issue. “Many EU delegations and member states do not even report on their implementation of the GAP, which clearly shows that it is not a priority for them,” Jessica Poh-Janrell, coordinator for gender equality at Concord Sweden, told Devex. Where delegations actually do report on their progress, the use of gender-specific indicators and checklists is either superficial or subject to interpretation. Gender considerations, for instance, are often taken into account in the screening project proposals — but not as much throughout the project cycle. “Gender sensitivity and analysis could be further improved during the implementation and monitoring phases,” noted the 2014 report on the implementation of the GAP, adding that “approaching these tools as a “tick box” exercise limits their potential.” “Project design and implementation is weak in terms of including a gender perspective,” Poh-Janrell agreed. “Application forms and reporting formats do not specifically require it to be included.” Slow progress on the GAP is also largely due to the continued perception of gender as a “fringe issue”, Poh-Janrell said. Indeed, most EU delegations typically have junior gender focal points with little time to work on gender equality, and very limited influence on major decisions. As part of preparatory work for the next GAP, a recent internal survey of the EU’s network of gender focal points — of which the final findings have yet to be published — found that time constraints, marginalization from major initiatives and limited support from heads of delegations were some of the most common challenges faced by gender specialists in EU delegations. According to James McNulty, an evaluation specialist who took part in the design of the survey, this points to the fact that organizational culture is holding back gender equality efforts. “We must first critically examine the way we organize our work, our investment (time and money) in building technical capacity and innovation, and perhaps even more importantly, the way we manage and incentivize our people to collaborate on gender mainstreaming,” he wrote in a blog post. Another organizational obstacle is the tendency to systematically couple gender equality with human rights, without ever linking it to more “mainstream” activities such as trade, macroeconomic policy or energy. In 2014, only six EU delegations prepared a specific political report on gender issues, but the latter were prioritized in almost all human rights country strategies. As underlined by Josephine Tsui, research officer at the Overseas Development Institute, delegation staff often lack the capacity to understand how gender equality relates to other areas of work — leading to a narrow approach on gender equality and women’s empowerment. “[For example] it’s often difficult for management to understand how gender can intersect with different projects such as infrastructure or roads,” she said. Despite a slight improvement over the years, only 16 percent of all projects funded by the EU in 2013-2014 had gender either as a primary or a significant objective — a far cry from the set target of 75 percent. Similarly, most multiannual and national indicative programs still don’t have specific budget lines to address the specific needs of women and girls, a situation emphasizing the GAP’s failure to generate a positive impact on program priorities and funding volumes. “When the budget and the funding instruments for 2014-2020 were adopted, gender equality and women’s empowerment did not receive any more prominence or funding than in the programs from 2007-2013,” Concord’s Poh-Janrell highlighted. Closing the gap For all its limitations, the GAP has spurred some noteworthy outcomes. In particular, it has helped foster significant political dialogue on gender issues, may it be in EU delegations, national coordination groups, civil society or international organizations. “The EU clearly has a strong convening power and is able to raise gender in a number of ways, through a variety of channels and with a wide array of stakeholders,” the authors of the 2014 progress report noted. The current GAP has also led to “the establishment of some routines in terms of reporting and gathering of data,” Poh-Janrell told Devex. But to build on these islands of success, the EU will have to adopt a more proactive and consistent approach. “The new GAP must focus on actual results and have clear mechanisms to ensure implementation,” she explained. “Reports must be mandatory and lack of progress must be followed up by adjusting the working methods.” Coupled with careful stewardship, increased investments in gender analysis capacity at delegation and headquarters levels will also be instrumental in ensuring the successful implementation of the next GAP. “There is a need for more human resources with gender expertise and for staff in management positions to increase their knowledge of gender awareness,” Poh-Janrell asserted. “Gender equality must also be part of the portfolio of senior management.” Beyond such general considerations, there is some good practice the EU can emulate. In Afghanistan — one of the top recipients of EU gender-focused aid — gender equality is systematically raised within the framework of political dialogue with government officials, civil society and other donors. In the meantime, 100 percent of all projects funded by the EU in India, where gender inequality is still stark, are reported to integrate women and girls’ perspective in their activities. What other concrete steps can the EU institutions take to speed up tangible progress in mainstreaming gender equality? Have your say by leaving a comment 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.