Jump to content

Gender and development

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Quentin.Ncs (talk | contribs) at 10:43, 26 November 2013 (Added the "WID part", 583368341 by Quentin.Ncs (talk)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The Gender and Development (GAD) approach is a way of determining how best to structure development projects and programs based on analysis of gender relationships. It was developed in the 1980s as an alternative to the Women in Development (WID) approach that was in common use until then.[1]

Theory

Women in Development

The term “women and development” was originally coined by a Washington-based network of female development professionals in the early 1970s[2] who sought to put in question the trickle down theories of development by contesting that modernization had identical impact on men and women[3]. The Women in Development movement (WID) gained momentum in the 1970s, driven by the resurgence of women's movement in northern countries, whereby liberal feminists were striving for equal rights and labour opportunities in the United States[4]. Liberal feminism, postulating that women's disadvantages in society may be eliminated by breaking down stereotyped customary expectations of women by offering better education to women and introducting equal opportunity programmes[5], had a notable influence on the formulation of the WID approaches, whereby little attention was given to men and to power relations between genders[3].

The translation of the 1970s feminist movements and their repeated calls for employment opportunities in the development agenda meant that particular attention was given to the productive labour of women, leaving aside reproductive concerns and social welfare[6]. Yet this focus was part of the approach pushed forward by advocates of the WID movement, reacting to the general policy environment maintained by early colonial authorities and post-war development authorities, wherein inadequate reference to the work undertook by women as producers was made, as they were almost solely identified as their roles as wives and mothers[7]. The WID's opposition to this “welfare approach” was in part motivated by the work of Danish economist Ester Boserup in the early 1970s, who challenged the assumptions of the said approach and highlighted the role women by women in the agricultural production and economy[8].

A dominant strand of thinking within WID sought to link women’s issues with development, highlighting how such issues acted as impediments to economic growth; this “relevance” approach stemmed from the experience of WID advocates which illustrated that it was more effective if demands of equity and social justice for women were strategically linked to mainstream development concerns, in an attempt to have WID policy goals taken up by development agencies[9].

This led to the WID movement facing a number of criticisms.: such an approach had in some cases the unwanted consequence of depicting women as an unit whose claims are conditional on its productive value, associating increased female status with the value of cash income in women’s lives[10]. Furthermore, the WID, although it advocated for greated gender equality, did not tackle the unequal gender relations and roles at the basis of women's exclusion and gender subordination rather than addressing the stereotyped expectations entertained by men[11]. Moreover, the underlying assumption behind the call for the integration of Third World women with their national economy was that women were not already participating in development, thus downplaying women's roles in household production and informal economic and political activities[12]. The WID was also criticized for its views on the fact that women's status will improve by moving into “productive employment”, implying that the move to the “modern sector” need to be made from the “traditional” sector to achieve self-advancement, further implying that “traditional” work roles often occupied by women in the developping world were inhibiting to self-development[13]. The Women in Development approach was the first contemporary movement to specifically integrate women in the broader development agenda and acted as the precursor to later movements such as the Women and Development (WAD), and ultimately, the Gender and Development approach, departing from some of the criticized aspects imputed to the WID.

Gender and Development

Unlike WID, the GAD approach is not concerned specifically with women, but with the way in which a society assigns roles, responsibilities and expectations to both women and men. GAD applies gender analysis to uncover the ways in which men and women work together, presenting results in neutral terms of economics and efficiency.[1]

Caroline Moser developed the Moser Gender Planning Framework for GAD-oriented development planning in the 1980s while working at the Development Planning Unit of the University of London. Working with Caren Levy, she expanded it into a methodology for gender policy and planning.[14] The Moser framework follows the Gender and Development approach in emphasizing the importance of gender relations. As with the WID-based Harvard Analytical Framework, it includes collection of quantitative empirical facts. Going further, it investigates the reasons and processes that lead to conventions of access and control. The Moser Framework includes gender roles identification, gender needs assessment, disaggregating control of resources and decision making withn the household, planning for balancing the triple role, distinguishing between different aims in interventions and involving women and gender-aware organizations in planning.[15]

Usage

The World Bank[note 1] was one of the first international organizations to recognise the need for Women in Development, appointing a WID Adviser in 1977. In 1984 the bank mandated that its programs consider women's issues. In 1994 the bank issued a policy paper on Gender and Development, reflecting current thinking on the subject. This policy aims to address policy and institutional constraints that maintain disparities between the genders and thus limit the effectiveness of development programs.[17]

Criticism

GAD has been criticized for emphasizing the social differences between men and women while neglecting the bonds between them and also the potential for changes in roles. Another criticism is that GAD does not dig deep enough into social relations and so may not explain how these relations can undermine programs directed at women. It also does not uncover the types of trade-off that women are prepared to make for the sake of achieving their ideals of marriage or motherhood.[1]

Notes

  1. ^ The World Bank is an international financial institution that provides loans to developing countries for capital programmes. According to their website: "Our mission is to fight poverty with passion and professionalism for lasting results and to help people help themselves and their environment by providing resources, sharing knowledge, building capacity and forging partnerships in the public and private sectors".[16]

References

  1. ^ a b c Shifting views...
  2. ^ Irene Tinker (1990). Persistent Inequalities: Women and World Development. Oxford University Press. p. 30. ISBN 978-0-19-506158-1.
  3. ^ a b Razavi, Shahrashoub; Miller, Carol (1995). [www.http://unrisd.org/unrisd/website/document.nsf/ab82a6805797760f80256b4f005da1ab/d9c3fca78d3db32e80256b67005b6ab5/$FILE/opb1.pdf "From WID to GAD: Conceptual shifts in the Women and Development discourse"] (PDF). Occasional Paper. 1. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development: 2. Retrieved 22 November 2013. Cite error: The named reference "Razavi1995" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  4. ^ Ibid., 3.
  5. ^ Robert Connell (1987). Gender and power: society, the person, and sexual politics. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-1430-3.
  6. ^ Ibid., 3.
  7. ^ Ibid., 3.
  8. ^ Ibid., 4.
  9. ^ Ibid., 6.
  10. ^ Ibid., i.
  11. ^ Bradshaw, Sarah (May 2013). "Women's role in economic development: Overcoming the constraints" (PDF). UNSDSN. UNSDSN. Retrieved 22 November 2013. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help); line feed character in |title= at position 39 (help)
  12. ^ Koczberski, Sarah (1998). "Women In Development: A Critical Analysis". Third World Quarterly. 19 (3). Taylor & Francis, Ltd.: 399. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
  13. ^ Ibid., 400.
  14. ^ March, Smyth & Mukhopadhyay 1999, pp. 55.
  15. ^ Van Marle 2006, pp. 126.
  16. ^ About World Bank.
  17. ^ World Bank 2010.

Sources

Further reading

  • Janet Henshall Momsen (2009). Gender and Development. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 0-415-77562-0.
  • Lise Østergaard (1992). Gender and development: a practical guide. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-07132-1.
  • Raana Haider (1996). Gender and development. American University in Cairo Press.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gender_and_development&oldid=583368420"