innovating agriculture through gender lenses

8/2/2019 Innovating Agriculture Through Gender Lenses

1/104

1

InnovatingAgriculturethroughGenderLenses

Presentedby:SilviaSarapura,PhDCandidateProfessorAdvisor:JamesMahone

SchoolofEnvironmentalDesignandRuralDevelopment

UNIVERSITYOFGUELPH

December2009


2/104

2

TableofContents

1. Introduction

2. AreaofConcentrationandKeyDefinitions2.1.Theanalysisofgenderindevelopmentstudiesandpractice

2.1.1. FromFeminizationofDevelopmenttoEngenderingDevelopment2.1.1.1. TheWomeninDevelopmentPerspective(WID)2.1.1.2. WomenandDevelopment(WAD)Perspective2.1.1.3. GenderandDevelopment(GAD)Approach2.1.1.4. PolicyApproachestoWomeninDevelopment

2.1.1.4.1. WelfareApproach2.1.1.4.2. TheEquityApproach2.1.1.4.3. TheAnti-PovertyApproach2.1.1.4.4. TheEfficiencyApproach2.1.1.4.5. TheEmpowermentApproach

2.1.1.5. WhatisFeminism?

2.1.1.6. Otherfeministperspectives2.1.1.6.1. Liberalfeminism2.1.1.6.2. ClassicalMarxism2.1.1.6.3. Radicalfeminism2.1.1.6.4. Socialistfeminism2.1.1.6.5. TheEco-feministperspective2.1.1.6.6. Feministenvironmentalism2.1.1.6.7. Feministpoliticalecology2.1.1.6.8. TheGender,EnvironmentandDevelopmentperspective

2.1.2. WomensRights

2.1.3. GenderMainstreaming

2.2.Innovationsystemsanditsapplicationtointernationaldevelopment2.2.1. Conceptsininnovation,systemsandinnovationsystem

2.2.1.1. ApplicationoftheInnovationSystemConceptinAgriculture2.2.1.1.1. NationalAgriculturalResearchSystems2.2.1.1.2. AgriculturalExtensionandAdvisoryServices2.2.1.1.3. Agriculturalknowledge,andinformationsystem,(AKIS)

Perspective

2.2.1.1.4. AgriculturalValueChainandClusterDevelopment2.2.1.1.5. TerritorialDevelopment


3/104

3

2.2.1.2. InnovationSystems2.2.1.2.1. Introduction of IS in Agriculture in Developing

Countries

2.2.1.2.1.1. StrengtheningCapacities2.2.1.2.1.2. SupportingNetworking

3. CoreQuestion:DoesGADInformInnovationsSystemsinAgriculture?

3.1.GenderRolesandResponsibilities3.2.KnowledgeBase3.3.Participationindecision-makingprocesses3.4.GenderRelations3.5.Genderentailsdifferencesinpowerandknowledgeproduction3.6.The Root of the Problem: Gender and Unequal Access to Resources in

AgriculturalSystems

3.6.1. LandtenureandFoodSecurity3.7.EmergingTrendsAffectingGenderRolesinAgriculturalInnovation

4. TheChallengeofIntegratingGenderandInnovationinAgriculture

4.1.Institutionsandgovernanceissues4.1.1. Institutions4.1.2. Governance

4.2.Fromknowledgetransfertointeractivelearning4.3.Powerandinnovationimplicationsforgenderrelationsinhouseholds,

communitiesandmesolevels

5. FinalSynthesis

5.1.Examplesofcurrentinitiativesforgenderand innovationinagriculture5.2.Towardsimprovedpolicyandpractices

6. Conclusion

References


4/104

4

1. Introduction

Overthelastdecade,agriculture1indevelopingcountrieshasbecomemorecomplexhencetherelationsinsideit(IFPRIResearchReport162;Ekboir,Dutrnit,Martnez

V,TorresVargas,&O.Vera-Cruz,2009)asaresultofglobalization,urbanization,theemergence of high-value agriculture, climate change, the deterioration of naturalresources, migration, and changes in the livelihood strategies of rural households

(Reardon2005;WorldBank2006a,2007,2008).Nowadays,thestrategyisnotonly

to bring about knowledge to produce innovations that increase agriculturalproductivityandreduceneworadaptedpoverty(Asenso-Okyere,Davis,&Aredo,

2008);butalsotooperationalizeAISunderasetofprinciplesinstakeholdersowncontextsandinwaysthataresuitedtotheirowngoals(HallA.,2007).Asaresultof

these replenishements, two main streams of thinking have emerged to prioritize

agricultural innovation. The first group defends that investment in science andtechnologyhas tobe increasedin agriculturalproductivity2.Thesecondgroupcan

becharacterizedasthosewhoputmoreemphasisonimprovingmarketsand,morebroadly,theinstitutionalenvironment3(Meijerink,Eaton,&Mosugu,2006).

Therefore,thechallengeofapplyingscientific,technicalandotherformsofappliedresearcheffectivelytoagriculturalandruraldevelopmentisnotsimplyoneofthat

strengtheningtechnologytransferandinformationdisseminationmechanisms,yet,

itisnecessarytoreconfigurepatternsofinteractionbetweenscientistsandtheeverchangingandexpandingrangeofactors,marketsandpoliciesinwhichtheprocess

ofsocialandeconomicchangeisembedded(Hall,2008).Thisreconfigurationwouldnecessitateapplyingnewconceptstoanalyzeexistingpatternsofinteractionandto

planandimplementnewapproaches.

Inthisinnovativevision,agricultureassumesaprominentroleinthedevelopment

agenda.Creatingmoreunderstandingoftheroleofagricultureindevelopmenthas

becomeatopicofinterest.FAO(2006)statesthat:

If properly managed, agriculture can have a positive impact on povertyalleviation, food security, rural and urban population distribution and the

environment. Evidence suggests that these indirect contributions to welfare

1Forthepurposeofthepaper,agriculturereferstolivestock,forestry,fishing,andagricultureitself.2Thefirstgroupischaracterizedbyemphasizingthatinvestmentinscienceandtechnologyhastobeincreasedinagricultural

productivity,whichinturnwillkick-startagriculturaldevelopmentandachievethefirstMillenniumDevelopmentGoalsof

eradicatingpovertyandhunger.Incrementingagriculturalproductivityis seenbythisgroupas anecessaryrequirementtoachievefoodsecurity.InitiativesanddocumentsthatfitmoreorlessintothisgrouparetheKofiAnnanReport,theinitiative

byRockefellerFoundationandtheBillandMelindaGatesFoundationtolaunchAfricasownGreenRevolution(TheAlliance

foraGreenRevolutioninAfrica(AGRA),andtheSachsReport.3 This group seems more diverse, with pro-market advocates to those who are less in favour of markets and market

liberalizationandadvocateasupportivepolicyenvironment(linkedto amorepro-activeroleof governments).Gettingthe

institutionsrightisoneoftheargumentsthatthisstreamofthinkinghasusedasaprerequisitefordevelopment.Thisgroup

ismoreheterogenouswheremembersmayhaveconflictingviewsaboutinstitutions,butconsistofallthosethatemphasize

goodgovernance,markets.Forexample,TheWorldBankormorebroadlythePostWashingtonConsensus,aswellasthe

various initiativesthat aims to improve markets for smallfarmers suchas RegoverningMarkets, Agri-pro Focus, Making

marketsworkbetterforthepoor.


5/104

5

andtheirmechanismsarenotwellunderstood,seldomanalyzedinthecontext

ofdevelopment,andrarelyreflectedinnationalandruraldevelopmentpolicy

strategies.

The most important is that agriculturecan work inconcertwith othersectors to

produce faster growth, reduce poverty, and sustain the environment (Pleskovic,May2008).Agriculturealsocontributestodevelopmentasaneconomicactivity,asa livelihood, and as a provider of environmental services, making the sector a

uniqueinstrumentfordevelopment(Mundlak,2000).

Effervescentnewmarkets,technologicalandinstitutionalinnovations;newrolesfor

the state, the private sector, and civil society all characterize the new context foragriculture. An innovative agriculture for development redefines the roles of

producers,theprivatesector,andthestate(Buntrup,2008).Productionismainly

bysmallholders, whofrequentlyremainthe mostefficientproducers,in particularwhensupportedbytheirorganizations.However,whentheseorganizationscannot

capture economies of scale in production and marketing, labor-intensivecommercialfarmingcanbeabetterformofproduction,andefficientandfairlabormarketsarethekeyinstrumenttoreducingruralpoverty(WorldBank;etal,2009).

Theprivatesectordrives theorganizationthatbringsthe marketsto smallholdersand commercial farms. The state, through enhanced capacity and new forms of

governance, corrects market failures, regulates competition, and engages

strategically in public-private partnerships to promote competitiveness in theagribusiness sector and support the greater inclusion of smallholders and rural

workers.

In that way strategies stress participation and empowerment of farmers and

communities, as well as partnership and networking development among allstakeholders.Genderrelationsandrolesat thecommunityandfamilylevelsplaya

crucialroleinthesuccessof theireffortstoharmonizeagriculturalinnovationand

promote social equality of all actors involved in agriculture. Approximately 1.3billionpeopleworldwidearelivinginpoverty;andwomenareseventypercentof

thisgroup(UNDP,1995).Thisfeminizationofpovertyhasbecomeinfluentialinthedevelopmentofpolicyandidentificationofpracticalsolutionsandthishasresulted

in the development and implementation of several programmes focusing only on

women (e.g. micro-credit initiatives, fisheries and forestry programmes).Experienceshowsthatifwomenratherthanmenaretargetedwithresources,the

end result is that welfare benefits will accrue directly to them and their children

(Buvinic and Gupta, 1997). However, providing women with access to resourcesalonewithoutgivingdueregardtochangingorchallenginggenderpowerrelations

maynotleadtoempowermentofwomen.


6/104

6

Gender4, that is socially constructed relations between men and women, is an

organizing elementof existingagriculture practices worldwide and a determiningfactor of ongoing agricultural innovation and restructuring (Ferguson, 1996) that

needsto beconsideredfromananalytical,institutional,personalandpoliticalside(IDRC, 2008). These socioeconomic variables are very important and useful to

analyze roles, responsibilities, constrains, opportunities, and incentives of thepeopleinvolvedinagriculture(Poats,1991).Unfortunately,developmentresearchinagriculturehasbeenignoringcomplexaspectsofgenderrelationsandrolesthat

resultsinincompleteandorbiasedresearch,whichinturnleadstotheformulation

ofincompletedevelopmentpoliciesandprograms(Feldman,1995).

The importance of addressing gender in agricultural innovation is also theknowledgeofdealingwithdeeplyembeddedpowerrelationsandembeddedroles

which are oftenlegitimizedby stronglyculturaltraditions,beliefs andprejudices.

Power relations between men and women are complex, multi-dimensional andpervasive, a diversity of tools and angles are needed to disentangle and contest

them(Lewis,2004:7).It isalsoknownthatboththeserelationsof powerandthebeliefs surrounding them can change. Among some of the critical methodologicalshiftsingenderstudiesinrecentyearshasbeentheemphasisonunderstandingthe

powertrajectoriesingenderrelationsinsteadofcontinuingto viewtheseas beingbased upon altruistic notions. Gender inequalities are appraised in contextual

realitiesatthemicrolevel,namely,thepositionofwomeninthehousehold.Thus,

theemphasisisonanalyzinghowtheweakereconomicbargainingpowerofwomenisrootedinanunequalinstitutionalandculturalparadigm(Sweetman,1999).While

thereisboundtoberesistance,thereishugescopeforchange,andruralmenandwomenthemselvesaretheprimaryagentsof thatchange.Buttheyneedsupport

andwideralliances-toinfluencecurrentpowerstructuresintheirfavour(Mayoux,

2007).

MorethanthirtyyearshavewitnessedEstherBoseruppioneeringworkonwomens

role in agriculture (Boserup, 1970), and she first alerted the developmentcommunity to the importance of womens role in agriculture, and triggered its

current concern with gender (El-Bushra, 2000). In development, the worlds ofgender equalityand innovation aretoo often separated. Innovation initiatives are

seen as both a means and an end to economic development, and gender is

entrenched in donor goals and strategies. However, there is very little crossoverbetweenthesetwoareasdespitestatedcommitmentstogendermainstreamingand,

on occasion, commitments to also mainstream science and technology. There is

evidence ofthe importanceof linkingtheseareasto ensurethatinnovativeeffortsdo not enhance inequalities at the minimum and can ideally be used to further

genderequality.Forgenderequality,it isclearthatinnovationplaysanenormousroleindevelopmentthatwillonlyincreaseinthecomingyears.

4Genderrefersnottowomenormenperse,buttotherelationsbetweenthem,bothperceptualandmaterial.Genderisnot

determinedbiologically,asaresultofsexualcharacteristicsofeitherwomenormen,butisconstructedsocially.Itisacentral

organizing principle of societies and often governs the processes of production and reproduction, consumption and

distribution.(FAOPlanofActionforWomeninDevelopment,19962001)


7/104

7

Thepaperwillbegin bydelineatingthe main aspectsthatare consideredessentialfor the inclusion and incorporation of gender thoughts into the Agricultural

Innovation Systems in developing countries. After the introductory section, thesecond part will provide a description of the area of concentration and key

definitionsofthemaintopicsofthepaper:theanalysisofgenderindevelopmentstudiesandpractice,inwhichthemaintheoriesof genderanddevelopment(WID,WAD and GAD) will be highlighted and these will emphasize their vision of

agricultureandspeciallywomensrolewithinit.Theotheraspectthatisconsidered

important is AIS and its application to international development and how it hasrecently been introduced in the international arena especially in developing

countries.

Thethirdsectionconcentratesinthecorequestion: DoesGADInformInnovations

Systems in Agriculture? This question brings many other questions and concernsthatarecontestedaccordingtotheinformationgatheredbyconsideringthenovelty

ofthefieldandthepreliminaryworkoffewagenciesthatareincorporatinggenderintotheirprogrammesandinterventions.However,itcanbenoticedthattheroleofwomeniscrucialandimportantforitsfunctioning.Untilnow,theprogramscallfor

aninclusionofgendereventhough;theseareonlyspeakingaboutwomen.Thereisaneedtoaddingenderanalysisandmixedgroupswheremencanplayarolemore

importantwhenevaluatingwomensadvance.

Because of the findings, a section is dedicated to appraise the challenge of

integratinggenderandinnovation inagriculture.Before,I cover theimportance ofinstitutionsandgovernanceissues,powerandinnovationimplicationsforgender

relations in households and communities and the analysis of the influence of

knowledgetransfertointeractivelearninginAIS,Iwillcoversomeissuessuchasgenderrelations,powerandknowledgeseenfromtheperspectiveforfeministand

genderspecializedacademics,practitionersandactiviststohaveabetterideaofthe

rootofinequalitiesandexclusionofwomenfromtheagricultureparamount.

Afinalsynthesisofthepaperisprovidedwithsomeexamplesofcurrentinitiativesforgenderandinnovationinagricultureindevelopingcountries.Toconclude,some

policy and practices are recommended for future work in AIS with a gender

perspective.

2. AreaofConcentrationandKeyDefinitionsGenderissuesarenewneithertofarmsystemsnortoagriculturalsystems,indeed,

their importance in agricultural research and womens roles in agriculturalproductionandfoodsystemshavebeendiscussedfromtimetotime.Whilesome

have made exceptional progress in adopting and implementing gender in their

programsandinterventions,ingeneral,theiradoptionisworldwideuneven.Nextsteps should be considered to ensure system-wide attention to gender in the

agricultural innovation systems by taking into account and emphasizing that


8/104

8

innovationdoesnottakeplaceinisolation.Rather,itispursuedincloseinteraction

betweentheinnovatorandher/hisenvironment(Fagerberg&Nelson,2006).Therelevantcomponentssurroundingtheinnovatorhavebeenidentifiedtoconsistof

all important economic, social, political, organizational, institutional, and otherfactorsthatinfluencethedevelopment,diffusionanduseofinnovations(Fagerberg

&Nelson,2006:182).Innovationsystemsarethusunderstoodtobeembeddedinawidersocio-economicsysteminwhichpoliticalandculturalinfluencesaswellaseconomicpolicieshelptodeterminethescale,directionandrelativesuccessofall

innovative activities (Fagerberg & Nelson, 2006 pp.183). Organizations and

institutions have been mentioned as being the main components of innovationsystems (Fagerberg & Nelson, 2006 pp.188). Specifically, in the model of triple

helix5threesectorsareidentifiedas mainparticipantsininnovationsystems(thepublic sector, the private sector and the academic sector) (Fagerberg & Nelson,

2006)whereallactorsconvergeandintegrateintotheinnovationsystems.

In order to achieveequal integrationandparticipation of allactors in agriculture

innovation systems, the visualization of the programs as gender neutral orcharacterizingtheseasmasculineonasymboliclevelhastocometoanend.ThisisconfirmedbyBlake&Hanson,2005exposinghowinnovationhenceisvaluedin

accordancewithadualisticconstructionofgender,discerningmenandwomen,aswellasfeminineandmasculineareasofinnovation,asdifferingininnovative

capacity6 (Blake; et al, 2005). The logic behind this pattern of inclusion and

exclusion of actors within agricultural innovation systems are based on twomechanisms;theconstructionofgenderandtheconstructionofinnovationsystems.

Whetheraninnovatororinnovationisacknowledgedassuch,andisascribedvalueas such, depends upon the geographical and social context (Faulkner, 2007). The

construction of gender is one such contextual factor. For that reason, it is most

productivetoregardtheconstructionofgenderandinnovationasintertwined,asnot separated to achieve successful results. After more than three decades of

research,itisclearthatmenandwomenplaydifferentroles,duetotheresultsof

theirrelationships,withinparticularsystemsofagriculturalproduction,andoccupydifferentsocioeconomicpositionsasaresultofthesedifferentrolesandrelations

(Carr,2008).

2.1.Theanalysisofgenderindevelopmentstudiesandpractice5TheTripleHelixthesisarguesthattheuniversitycanplayan enhancedroleininnovationin increasinglyknowledge-based

societies(Leydesdorff&Meyer,2006).Theunderlyingmodelisanalyticallydifferentfromthenationalsystemsofinnovation

(NSI)approach(Lundvall,1988,1992;Nelson,1993)thatconsidersthefirmashavingtheleadingroleininnovation,andfrom

theTrianglemodelofSbato,1975,inwhichthestateisprivileged(SbatoandMackenzi,1982).6According to Hallet al. (2007) innovativecapacityrefers to skillsand knowledgeheld by individualsand organizations,

institutions, patterns of interaction and policies developed, which enhances the knowledge processes ranging from its

generationtoutilization.Asaresultofthedifferentrolesintheproductiveandreproductivespheres,menandwomenare

exposedto differentenvironments,skillsandexperiences,and arelikelyto developgender-specificdomainsofknowledge.

Departing from this assumption, many academics identify four main forms of thinking in relation to the differences of

gendereddifferences. (1) Men and womenposses a different knowledge of similar things; (2) Men aswell womenhave

differentknowledgeofsimilarthings;(3)bothgroupshavedifferentformsoforganizingtheirknowledge;and(4)theyhave

differentwaysof preservingandtransferring knowledge.(Norem;YoderandMartin,1989:94).Scholarshavealsoevidence

showingthatnotonlyknowledgeconstructions,butknowledgenetworksaregenderedinnature(Hassanein,1997;Howard,

2003;RamdasYakshi,AnthraandGirijana,Deepika,2001).


9/104

9

Importantinformationgapsintheliteraturearepresentinrelationtogenderanddevelopment.Genderissuesaremostlytobefoundtobeexcludedfromthedesign

andplanningofempiricalresearchanddatacollectionbothatthemicro,andmacrolevels.Also,theconceptualunderstandingofgenderinthebodyofliteratureispoor.

Themeaningofgendershouldgobeyondwomenandchildrensstudiestoincludeabalancedanalysisofwomensroles,responsibilities,constraintsandopportunitiesindifferentactivitiesinrelationtothoseofmen(El-Bushara,2000).Ontheother

hand,theissueofwomen,andlatergender,indevelopmenthasassumedanever-

increasing prominence and popularity within the development community.However, despite (or perhaps because of) numerous theoretical and practical

advancesandvariations,thereismuchconfusionanddebateconcerningthemeansby which gender considerations can be integrated into development practice.

Thesedebatesconcernnotonlythetheoreticalapproachundertakenandintended

goals and objectives, but also the practical strategies and methods which can beused to implement these and incorporate gender into development projects and

programmes(Kilby&Olivieri,2008).Neverthelessthepresenceofthesefissures,developmentstudiesandpracticeshas

remarkably advanced since the United Nation's First Development Decade in the1960swhereeconomicgrowthandthe"trickle-down"approachwere thesolution

to reduce poverty. One of the improvements in the debate has been the move to

considergenderequalityasakeyelementofdevelopment.Women'sconcernswerefirstintegratedintothedevelopmentagendainthe1970s.Disappointmentoverthe

trickle-downapproachpavedthewayfortheadoptionofthebasic-needsstrategy,which focused on increasing theparticipation in and benefits of the development

process for the poor, as well as recognizing women's needs and contributions to

society. Activists articulated women's issues in national and international forums.Following these events, the women-in-development movement endorsed the

enhancement of women's consciousness and abilities, with a view to enabling

women to examine their situations and to act to correct their disadvantagedpositions. The movement also affirmed that giving women greater access to

resourceswouldcontributetoanequitableandefficientdevelopmentprocess.

Ever since the First World Conference on Women in Mexico City in 1975,

approachestowomensissueshavechangedconsiderably.Theendofthe1970sbrought in theconcern with gender relations in development.Micro level studies

drew our attention to the differences in entitlements, perceived capabilities, and

social expectations of men and women, boys and girls. Contrary to the unified-household model, the household has been considered an arena of bargaining,

cooperation,orconflict.Reflectingthenorms,laws,andsocialvaluesofsociety,thedifferences in the status of men and women have profound implications for how

they participatein market or nonmarket work and in community life asa whole.

Thesedifferencesembodysocialandpowerrelationsthatconstitutethesettingforthe implementation of development programs, and these differences therefore

influence programoutcomes.Inthe 1980sand1990s,researchdemonstrated that


10/104

10

gender relations mediate the process of development. For example, analyses of

stabilization and structural-adjustment policies showed that gender inequalitieshaveanimpactontheattainmentofmacroeconomicobjectives.

Theconcernwithgenderrelationsindevelopmenthasstrengthenedtheaffirmation

thatequalityinthestatusofmenandwomenis fundamentaltoeverysociety.Andthisconcernhaspromptedtorefineperspectivesonwhatdevelopmentshouldbeandhowtobringitaboutefficiently.Developmentrequiresmorethanthecreation

of opportunities for people to earn sustainable livelihoods, it more importantly

requiresthecreationofafavourableenvironmentformenandwomentoachievethoseopportunities.Developmentimpliesnotonlymoreandbetterschoolsbutalso

equal access to education for boys and girls. Development requires goodgovernmentsthatgivemenandwomenequalvoicesindecision-makingandpolicy

implementation(El-Bushara,2000).

Having inmindthe perspective that gender matters in development, it is time to

examine and define the considerable change of feminist and gendered schools ofthoughtthatresultedasresponsestothemarginalizationofwomenindevelopment.Oneofthemostfundamentalachievementshasbeenthemovefromafeminization

ofdevelopmentto anengenderingofdevelopmentperspectiveanevolutionthatisreflectedinthedifferentapproachestakenbyfeministsinexploringtherelationship

betweenwomen,menanddevelopment.Italsomarksthesignificantachievements

and limits of the broad feminizing development approach, as well as the recentneedtobroadenouttheengenderingdevelopmentperspective(bydepartingfrom

a Woman in Development (WID) approach to a Gender and Development (GAD)approach(Razavi&Miller,1995).

2.1.1. FromFeminizationofDevelopmenttoEngenderingDevelopment

Because of the gender-blind andmale-centered conceptualizationof development

practice and theory in the past, feminist responses have become central todismarginalization. The concept of womens development has now become an

integral partofthedevelopmentandpolicyinitiatives.Thisdevelopmenthasbeeninformed by a remarkable though gradual shift in the perception about women,

from the stature of victims and passive objects to that of independent agents. A

significantimpetustoraisingsuchaninformedplatformcamewiththeadoptionofdevelopmentissueswithintheUNsystem,inthebackgroundofincreasingactivism

of development practitioners (Pillai, Vijayamohanan, Asalatha, & Ponnuswamy,

2009).

Emergingforalmostfourdecadesago,feministresponsestothemarginalizationofwomen in development have gone through a remarkable move. One of the most

fundamental was the progress from a feminization of development to an

engendering of development perspective, progress reflected in the differentapproaches taken by researchers from the west and feminists from the South in

exploringtherelationshipbetweenwomen,menanddevelopment.AsMcIlwaine&


11/104

11

Datta (2003) state development also symbolizes the great achievements and

restrictionsoftheextensivefeminizingdevelopmentapproach,aswellastherecentneedtobroadtheengenderingdevelopmentperspectivetoincorporateissuessuch

ashumanrights,gender-basedviolenceandsexualities,andtheneedtointerrogatewomen andmenas gendered beings (McIlwaine & Datta, 2003).It alsoexamines

how new and exciting debates and critiques of globalization, development, andfeministtheorizingarechangingtheexistingframeworksandcreatingnewones.

The field has been productive for a fundamental shift in the perspectives of and

approaches to women in development. Rathgeber (1990) identifies three distinctschools of thought on gender and development, namely, Women in Development

(WID), Women and Development (WAD) and Genderand Development (GAD). Asthe oldest and most dominant approach, the WID arose out of the search for

practical solutions to the failures of development concept and the growth of

feminism based on a more systematic assessment of the roots of womensdisadvantage.Itwasbornasatrans-nationalmovement;henceitsemergencewas

built upona strong sense of cohesion among women across national boundaries(Grant and Newland 1991:122). Below, a brief account of these three schools isexplained

2.1.1.1. TheWomeninDevelopmentPerspective(WID)

The term WID came into vogue in the early 1970s, as used by the WomensCommittee of the Washington, DC, Chapter of the Society for International

Development, a networkof female development professionals, in their attempttobring to the attention of American policymakers the works of Ester Boserups

Womensroleineconomicdevelopment(Boserup,1970(FirstSouthAsianEdition

2008))andothersonThirdWorlddevelopment(Maguire,1984).AdvocatesofWIDarguedthattraditionaldevelopmentprocesseswereatbestbypassingandatworse

impoverishing women in developing countries. Technical-fix approaches to rural

economies(agriculture,fishing,forestryandsoon)wereaddressingproblemsfacedbymen,butignoringtherolewomenplayedinruraleconomies.Asthesignificant

productive contribution made by women became apparent so the argument wasthat development needed to target women specifically in order to better their

position.Itwasrecognizedthatwomenssubordinationcamefromtheirinabilityto

secureaccesstoresources,markets,educationandhouseholdsecurity.Programmethus emerged which focused on womens employment and income-generating

opportunities.Aprocessofempoweringwomentodemandchangeintheiraccessto

credit,health,educationandresourcesbegan.Overall,WIDassumedthatthelackofdevelopmentforwomenwastheresultofanover-sightbypolicymakers(Reeves

andBaden,2000:33).

WID movement gained recognition from various governments and international

bodies. In1973,theUSgovernmentamendedtheUSAIDlawthefamousPercyAmendment;thenewamendmentrequiredthataproportionoftheagencyfundsbe

specificallychanneledtowomensactivities,andaWIDofficewascreatedinUSAID


12/104

12

departments.In1975,aspartofWIDsoutreach,theUnitedNationstookstepsto

establish an Institute for Training and Research for the Advancement of Women(INSTRAW),anditequallyincreasedfundsforwomenanddevelopment,presently

known as UNIFEM. Virtually every section of the United Nations set up one oranotherformofprogrammeforwomenandfordevelopment.Otherinstitutionslike

theWorld Bank, Ford Foundation and theRockefellerFoundation alsorespondedwith different projects of development assistance, and many other governmentscameouttocreateministriesofwomensaffairs.

TheWIDapproachwascloselylinkedwiththemodernizationparadigmwhichwasdevelopedintheUSasanalternativetotheMarxistaccountofdevelopmenttheory

after the World War II, and pronounced that modernization, usually connectedwithindustrialization,wouldimprovethestandardoflivingindevelopingcountries.

Economicgrowthwasthemajorgoal;investmentwastargetedtoareaswithhigh

growthpotential,withtheassumptionof"trickledown"effectinfavourofthepoor.However,therealityfailedthisexpectation;theconsequencesofmodernizationand

commercialization of agriculture only worsened the inequality, and marginalizedvarioussocialgroups,especiallywomen,andbytheendofthe1970s,thisviewofmodernization became increasingly questioned by many researchers. As the WID

approach was grounded on an acceptance of existing social structures, it, ratherthanexaminewhywomenhadnotbenefitedfromearlierdevelopmentstrategies,

focused only on how women could better be integrated into those development

initiatives.

In other words, it avoided questioning the sources and nature of women'ssubordination and oppression in line with the more radical structuralist

perspectives such as dependency theory or Marxist and neo-Marxist approaches,

and advocatedinstead fortheirequalparticipationin education,employment,andotherspheresofsocietyonthepremisethatthepeopleinvolvedaretheproblem

and that the solution lies in overcoming the internalized impediments of poor

womenbychangingattitudesandprovidingeducation.TheWIDapproachalsohadatendencytobeahistoricalandoverlookedtheimportanceofclassesandrelations

ofexploitationamongwomen(MarjorieMbilinyi,1984;GeertjeLycklamaNijeholt,1987);andalsoitdidnotrecognizethisexploitationasbeinginitselfacomponent

ofaglobalsystemofcapitalaccumulation(LourdesBeneriaandGitsSen1981).

According to the structuralists, on the other hand, since the system is inherently

exploitativeofwomen,furtherincorporationintothesystemcannotbethesolution;

womenarealreadyfullyintegratedintotheglobaleconomy,butonunequalterms,throughdomesticandsubsistencelabour.(LycklamaNijeholt,1987,Plewesand

Stuart,1991)TheyrepresentWID asa blameof thevictimstrategy,whichignoresthe structural context that frames women's underdevelopment. The factors

determining people's lives are both internalized culture and external material

factors(Naiman,1995),bothhavetobeconsideredwith.


13/104

13

2.1.1.2. WomenandDevelopment(WAD)PerspectiveOutofthedisappointmentwiththeexplanatorylimitationsofmodernizationtheory

that stoodas the basis ofWID arosea new movement, WomenandDevelopment(WAD), based onneo-Marxist feminism, inthe second half of the 1970s. Itdraws

some of its theoretical base from dependency theory, which, in opposition to theoptimistic claims of modernization theory, maintained that the failure of Thirdworld states to achieve adequate and sustainable levels of development resulted

from their dependence on the advanced capitalist world. WAD approach begins

from the position that women always have been an integral part of developmentprocesses in a global system of exploitation and inequality, and it is from this

perspective that needs to be observed why women had not benefited from thedevelopmentstrategiesofthepastdecades,by questioningthesourcesandnature

of women's subordination and oppression. In this respect, both the Marxist and

liberalfeministssharetheviewthatstructuresofproductiondeterminetheinferiorstatus of women; while the liberals solely focus on technological change as the

causal mechanism, the Marxists consider its impact on class differentiation also(Jaquette,1982).ThestudiesoftheMarxistfeminists

show that the changing roles of women in economic production aredetermined by the convergence ofa number ofhistorical factors: the sexual

division of labour in reproduction, local class structure, the articulation of

specificregionsandsectorsofproductionwithinnationaleconomiesandthe

international economy.The result isa great diversity andcomplexity in the

integration of women into the processes of capitalist development.

(Bandarage,1984:502)

The WAD approach recognizes that Third World men also have been adverselyaffectedbythestructureoftheinequalitiesandexploitationwithintheinternational

system, and discourages a strict analytical focus on the problems of women

independent of those of men, since both the sexes are disadvantaged within theoppressiveglobalstructuresbasedonclassandcapital.Thusthereislittleanalytical

attentiontothesocialrelationsofgenderwithinclasses.Itfailstoundertakeafull-scaleanalysisoftherelationshipbetweenpatriarchy,differingmodesofproduction,

andwomen'ssubordinationandoppression.Thatis,itgivesscantattentiontothe

sphere of reproduction and household level relations between men and women(Kabeer, 1994). The WAD perspective seems to implicitly assume that women's

positionwillimprovewithmoreequitableinternationalstructures,anditsideswith

WIDinsolvingtheproblemofunderrepresentationofwomenineconomic,political,and social structures by carefully designed intervention strategies rather than by

morefundamentalshiftsin thesocialrelationsof gender.SuchcommonWID-WADfocus oninterventionstrategiesintermsof thedevelopmentof income-generating

activities,withoutcaringforthetimeburdensthatsuchstrategiesplaceonwomen,

showsthesingularpreoccupationoftheseapproacheswiththeproductivesectorattheexpenseofthereproductivesideofwomen'sworkandlives.


14/104

14

The labour invested in family maintenance, including childbearing and -

rearing,housework,careoftheillandelderly,andthelike,hasbeenconsidered

to belong to the "private" domain and outside the purview of development

projectsaimedatenhancingincome-generatingactivities.Inessence,thishasbeen a reflection of the tendency of both modernization and dependency

theoriststoutilize exclusively economicorpolitical-economy analysesand todiscount the insightsof the so-called softer social sciences (EvaRathgeber

1990:493).

2.1.1.3. GenderandDevelopment(GAD)Approach

Feminists in general, when assessing the past decades of WID policyimplementation, have pointed out that although WID policies have been to some

extentsuccessfulin improvingwomenseconomiccondition,theyhavebeenmuch

lesseffectiveinimprovingwomenssocialandeconomicpowerrelativetomenindevelopmentcontexts.Theconcernoverthisproblemledtoaconsensustoreform

the WID, with arguments for approaches informed by a gender analysis of socialrelations (Kabeer1994) and aspiration for the ultimate empowerment of women(Moser 1989, 1993); that is why the shift to Gender Analysis in Development or

simplyGenderandDevelopment(GAD)inthe1980s.Thefocusongenderratherthan women was influenced by the feminist writers such as Oakley (1972) and

Rubin(1975),whowereworriedaboutthegeneralwayofperceivingtheproblems

ofwomenintermsoftheirsex,theirbiologicaldifferencefrommen,ratherthaninterms of their gender, the social relationship between men and women, where

womenhavebeensystematicallysubordinated.

Thefocusongenderratherthanwomenmakesitcriticaltolooknotonlyat

thecategorywomen,sincethatisonlyhalfthestory,butatwomeninrelationtomen,andtheway inwhichrelationsbetween thesecategoriesaresocially

constructed(Moser1993;3).

GAD draws its theoretical roots from the strands of socialist feminism that

challenged the orthodox Marxist assertion that only class analysis could explainwomensoppression, andhas complementedthemodernization theory by linking

the relations of production to the relations of reproduction and by taking into

account all aspects of women's lives (Jaquette, 1982). More than just a change ofname,itinvolvesachangeofapproachandachallengetothedevelopmentprocess

as a whole. WID approach was based on a politics of access, getting women into

development programmes. The GAD approach on the other hand recognizes thesignificanceofredistributingpowerinsocialrelations.

Beyondimprovingwomensaccesstothesamedevelopmentresourcesasare

directedtomen,theGADapproachstressesdirectchallengestomalecultural,

socialandeconomicprivileges,sothatwomenareenabledtomakeequalsocial

andeconomicprofitoutofthesameresources.Itinvolveslevelingtheplaying

field,inotherwords,changinginstitutionalrules(AnneMarieGoetz1997:3)


15/104

15

The GAD approach was grounded in the argument that an analysis focusing onwomen alone could not adequately capture the nature of subordination without

lookingattheconcernedsocialandinstitutionalrulesandpracticesthroughwhichgenderrelationsare constructed. And poweris ageneralcharacteristicof gender

relations(Whitehead,1979).Therefore,ananalysisofsocialrelationsofgenderanddevelopmentmuststartfromdomesticarenaandgobeyondthebroadereconomicarenainwhichtheserelationsarearticulatedandreconstituted(Young;etal,1981).

Gendersubordinationisembeddedinthehierarchicstructuresof divisionoflabor

andgender,asoneaspectofsocialrelations,isnottheonlyformofinequalityinthelives of women and men as there are other forms of social inequalities resulting

from class and race differentiation. Hence, a holistic framework that looks at thetotality of social organizations and economic and political life is needed to

understand any particular aspect of relations. The WID strategy of groupings is

necessary,insofarasitsproductivepurposestandstoincreasewomen'sbargainingpowerintheeconomicsystem,buttheemphasisisonwomensself-organization,

whichhelpstoincreasepoliticalpowerwithintheeconomicsystem.Theprocessofproduction alone would not put an end to women's subordinate position in thesociety.

Exploration of the position of women in socialist countries emphasized the

inadequacyofeconomicanalysesofgenderrelations(Young;etal,1981).Women

are agents, but may not have perfect knowledge or understanding of their socialsituation or structural roots of discrimination and subordination (Young, 1992).

Henceconscientizationhasbeenseenasanimportantstepinthestrugglethroughwhichwomenincrease theircapacity todefine and analyzetheir subordination,to

constructavisionofthekindofworldtheywant,andtoactinpursuitofthatvision

(Kabeer,1995:299).Thissocialrelationapproachacceptsthatthewelfareandanti-poverty approaches are often necessary preconditions for equity. They critically

consider,challengingwelfareforequity,'whetherrelyingonfightingforreformsis

sufficientorwhetherradicalsocialchangeisimperative'(Young,1992:51).Whilethislineofargumenthashadconsiderableinfluenceonacademics,inreality,ithas

onlyrarelybeenintegratedintodevelopmentplanning(Moser,1989).

The GAD approach has three departuremain points from WID. First, it shifts the

focus fromwomen to gender andidentifies the unequal power relations betweenwomenandmen.Second,itre-examinesallsocial,politicalandeconomicstructures

anddevelopmentpoliciesfromtheperspectiveofgenderdifferentials.Andthird,it

recognizes that achieving gender equality and equity demands transformativechangein gender relations from householdto global level. Under thisconceptual

adaptation,developmentprogrammeshavestartedtofocusonthepoliticsofgenderrelationsandrestructuringofinstitutions,ratherthanofjustequalityinaccessto

resources, and gender mainstreaming has emerged as the common strategy for

actionbehindtheseinitiatives.


16/104

16

Gendermainstreamingwasfirstformulatedasatransformativestrategytoachieve

genderequalityattheFourthWorldConferenceonWomenatBeijingin1995.In1997,theEconomicandSocialCounciladoptedthefollowingdefinition,meantasa

guideforallagenciesintheUnitedNationssystem:

Mainstreaming a gender perspective is the process of assessing theimplicationsformenandwomenofanyplannedaction,includinglegislation,

policies and programmes, in all areas and at all levels. It is a strategy for

making womens as well as mens concerns and experiences an integral

dimensionofthedesign,implementation,monitoringandevaluationofpolicies

andprogrammes inall political, economicand social spheres sothatwomen

andmenbenefitequallyandinequalityisnotperpetuated.Theultimategoalis

toachievegenderequality.(EconomicandSocialCouncil,agreedconclusions

1997/2;IA)

Atthehouseholdlevelthegendereddivisionoflabourtraditionallydefineswomen's

roleprimarilyintermsofprovisionofcare,whichisunpaid,takenforgrantedandinvisibleineconomicterms.AstheHumanDevelopmentReportfor1999pointsout,unpaidworkinthehouseholdandcommunityisanimportantproviderofhuman

developmentalongwithprivateincomes,publicprovisioning,andthebountyofthenatural environment (UNDP 1999: 44). The Report emphasizes the interpersonal

provisionof careasa keydimensionofhumandevelopment,bothbecausethisisa

vitalingredientfordevelopinghumancapabilities,andalsobecauseitisinitselfanimportant aspect of human functioning (one of the qualities that makes us truly

human. Womens unpaid work at home has however significant impact on thequality of their lives and well-being. When women assume paid work, they also

assumethedoubleworkday,paidandunpaid.

The invisibility of women's unpaid work remains a critical issue in national and

international macro policy. For example, the application of IMF and World Bank

stabilizationand structural adjustment policies(SAPs)has caused many countriestocutbackongovernmentsponsoredorsubsidizedsocialservices,whichinturn

hasadverselyaffectedthewellbeingofwomen,whobeartheincreasedburdenofunpaid work on their alreadystretched energy and resourceswhen public sector

servicesswitchtothehousehold.Inthislight,womenandpro-equalitydevelopment

practitioners have advocated mainstreaming gender analysis into all policy andprogrammingbothindesignandimpactassessment.

Achieving gender equality requires reorganizing gender roles and the basicinstitutionsofsociety,thatis,themarket,stateandthefamily.Thus,mainstreaming

genderaimsattransformativechangeinordertobringaboutanequalpartnershipbetween womenand men. This in turn requires womento take an active part in

politics and decision-making at all levels of society. And it is here that the most

aspiring goal of women empowerment becomes significant in developmentdiscourse and policy. However, it should also be noted that women today are

demanding,beyondGADandgendermainstreaming,thefullexerciseoftheirhuman


17/104

17

rightsandareontodeveloparights-basedapproachtoeconomicpolicy,whichaims

directlyatstrengtheningtherealizationofhumanrights,includingsocial,economicand cultural rights, as well as civil and political rights. The world has already

adopted a number of basic human rights instruments and declarations andinternationalcovenants andconventions,whichaddresswomens rightsas human

rights, as well as commitments to integrating a perspective of gendermainstreaming with developmental goals, such as: Article 2 of the UniversalDeclarationofHumanRights;Article3 oftheInternationalCovenantonEconomic,

Social and Cultural Rights; Article 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and

PoliticalRights;thePreambleoftheInternationalConventionontheEliminationofAllFormsofRacialDiscrimination;theConventionontheEliminationofAllForms

of Discrimination Against Women; the Convention on the Rights of the Child; ILOFundamental Non-Discrimination Conventions 100 and 111; International

Conventions on the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of

theirFamilies;theDeclarationandPlatformforActionoftheWorldConferencesonWomen,theFourthConferenceinBeijingandBeijingPlus5inNewYork;andthe

other World Conferences of the 1990s; the Earth Summit in Rio, the WorldConferenceonPopulationinCairoandplus5;theSummitonSocialDevelopmentinCopenhagenandCopenhagenPlus 5in Geneva; theHabitatConferencein Istanbul

andPlus5inNairobi;theWorldFoodSummitinRome.

A rights-based approach goes beyond viewing gender concerns as primarily

instrumental to growth, as is sometimes the case, because it recognizes womensagency and their rights and obligations as citizens. This approach illustrates a

profound political shift that became evident at the Fourth World Conference onWomenatBeijing,wherewomenno longerfocusedon anarrowrangeofso-called

womenseconomicandsocialissuesbutweredemandingforvoiceinallarenasof

economicandsocialpolicymaking.Comparedwiththeless threateningapproachofWID,

Genderplanning,withitsfundamentalgoalofemancipation,isbydefinitionamoreconfrontationalapproach.Basedon thepremisethatthemajorissueis

one of subordination and inequality, its purpose is that women throughempowermentachieveequalitywithmeninsociety.(Moser,1993:4).

2.1.1.4. PolicyApproachestoWomeninDevelopment

As already explained, the WID movement has occasioned an increasing space for

policy initiatives and interventions in favour of poor women in the Third world.Initially, Buvinic (1983 and 1986) categorized the policy approaches under the

threeheadsofwelfare,equityandanti-povertyinanincreasingorderofshiftinfocus. Later on Moser (1993) added two more categories of efficiency and

empowerment.Thislist mirrorsthe general trendsin Third World development

policies, from modernization policies of accelerated growth, through basic needsstrategies associated with redistribution, to the more recent compensatory

measuresassociatedwithstructuraladjustmentpolicies.(Moser1993:55).


18/104

18

2.1.1.4.1. WelfareApproach

The welfare approach, one of the earliest, is called the pre-WID. Womensdevelopmentpoliciesandthemostpopularduringthe1950sand1960s,perceived

motherhoodaswomensprimaryroleinsociety.ItwasbuiltupontheFirstWorldssocial welfare model, initiated in Europe after the World War II, and specificallyintendedforthevulnerablegroups(Moser1993:59).Itsinitialconcernswereon

whatcouldbedonetoensurethatwomenhadtheconditionswhichenablethemto

meet the needs of their children and family (Young 1993: 43), since they werelargelyseenasmothersandcaregiversratherthaneconomicactors.Thisapproach

createdagenderededucationalsystemandclassificationofjobsasbeingthemaleorfemaleprofession.Threeassumptionsunderliethewelfareapproach:(1)women

are passive recipients of development, rather than active participants in the

developmentprocess,(2)motherhoodisthemostimportantsocialroleforwomen,and(3)child-rearingisthemosteffectiveroleforwomeninallaspectsofeconomic

development (Moser, 1993:59-60; Snyder and Tadesse, 1995:87). Thus with itsfamily-centred orientation, this approach restricts the role of women toreproductive ones motherhood and childrearing whereas mens work is

identified as productive, and it identifies the mother-child dyad as the unit ofconcern. The development programme is implemented through top-down

handoutsoffreegoodsandservicesandhenceitdoesnotincludewomenorgender-

awarelocalorganizationsinparticipatoryplanningprocesses(Moser,1993:60).

Theprogrammegenerallyconsistsindirectprovisionoffoodaid,additionalfoodforchildrenandnutritioneducationformothers,andpopulationcontrolthroughfamily

planningprogrammes.Thewelfareapproachhaspromoted(anddoespromote)the

availability of much-needed maternal and child health care (MCH), with theconsequentreductionininfantandto someextentmaternalmortality.However,it

is argued that the top-down nature of so many welfare programmes has only

succeededincreatingdependencyratherthaninassistingwomentobecomemoreindependent (Wallace and March, 1991:162; Moser; 1993:61). Besides, welfare

programmeswerenotconcernedordesignedtomeetwomensstrategicinterestssuch astheir right to have control over their own reproduction or even practical

genderneeds.However,thewelfareapproachisstillverypopular,asitispolitically

safe,withoutquestioningthetraditionallyascribedroleofwomen.

Molyneux (cited by Moser 1993:19) stressed the importance of recognizing that

women and girls have both strategic and practical gender needs7 which are7Strategicneedsrefertothestatusofwomenrelativetomenwithinsociety.Theyarecontext-specificandarerelatedto

genderdivisionsoflabour,resourcesandpower,andmayincludelegalrights,protectionfromdomesticviolence,increased

decision-making,and womens control overtheir bodies. Practicalneeds arethose immediatenecessities within a specific

context,andgenerallyincluderesponsesto inadequatelivingconditionsinrespectofpotablewater,shelter,income,health

careandsocialsecurity.Notethattheseconceptsarenottobeusedinaneither/orfashion.Benefitsthatonlytargetpractical

needswillnotbesustainableunlessstrategicinterestsarealsotakenintoaccountUNEP(2001);alsoseeMoser(1993);and

MaxineMolyneux(1985),whofirstmadethethree-foldconceptualizationofwomensinterests,strategicgenderinterestsand

practicalgenderinterests).


19/104

19

associated withtheirgenerally subordinated rolein society.These includegender

division of labour, power and control that adversely affects them, and the lack oflegalrights;domesticviolence,equalwagesandtheircontrolovertheirownbodies.

She believed that the practical gender needs within those subordinated roles aregenerallyconcernedwithshortfallsinlivingconditions,andsheadditionallyargued

that meeting strategic gender needs helps women to achieve greater equality.Strategicgenderneedschangesexistingrolesandconsequentlychallengewomenssubordination that aims to restore a sense of fulfillment and self-confidence to

women.Molyneuxdistinguishedthatpracticalgender needs,in contrast,arethose

that are formulated from the concrete conditions women experience. Practicalneeds, consequently, areusually a response to an immediate perceived necessity,

which is identified by women within a specific context: these include waterprovision,healthcareandemployment.

Disappointmentwiththewelfareapproachstartedtoarisebythe1970s,outofthefailureofmodernizationtheoryaswellastheincreasingevidenceonthenegative

effects of Third World development projects on women. Development plannerswereunabletodealwiththefactthatwomenmustperformtworolesinsocietywhereasmenperformonlyone.(Tinker,1976:22).Theconcernswereheardby

theUNandledtotheFirstInternationalWomensYearConferenceinMexicoCityin1975thatformallyputwomenontheagendaandtothesubsequentdevelopments,

especially of a number of alternative approaches to women, namely, equity, anti-

poverty,efficiencyandempowerment.Itshouldbenotedthatdespitetheircommonorigin and the consequent confusion of including them all in the WID approach,

therearesignificantdifferencesamongthem.

2.1.1.4.2. TheEquityApproachEquity approach is the original WID approach, introduced during the 1976-85

UnitedNationsWomensDecade.Itseekstogainequityforwomenandrecognizes

thatwomenwhoareactiveparticipantsinthedevelopmentprocessthroughboththeir productive and reproductive roles that provide a critical, but unrecognized

contribution to economic growth (Moser 1993:63). Within this framework it isassumedthateconomicstrategieshavefrequentlyhadanegativeimpactonwomen,

andadvocatesforaplaceforwomenindevelopmentprocessesthroughaccessto

employmentandtothemarketplace;thusitacceptswomenspracticalgenderneedtoearnalivelihood.

Buvinic (1983, 1986) described the equity approach as primarily concerned withinequalitybetweenmenandwomen,inbothpublicandprivatespheresof lifeand

acrosssocio-economicgroups.Itidentifiestheoriginsofwomenssubordinationnotonlyinthecontextoffamilybutalsoinrelationsbetweenmenandwomeninthe

market place. Hence, it places considerable emphasis on economic independence

andequalityassynonymouswithequity;andequityprogrammesarerecognizedasuniting notions of development andequality. The underlying logic is that women

beneficiarieshavelostgroundtomeninthedevelopmentprocesses,andtherefore,


20/104

20

inaprocessofredistribution,menhavetoshareinamannerthatentailswomen

from all socioeconomic classes gaining and men from all socio-economic classeslosing or gaining less, through positive discrimination policies if necessary (see

alsoBuvinic,LycetteandMcGreevey,1983).

Itisalsoarguedthatthemaindrivingforceoftheequityapproach,aconsequenceoftheconcernforequalitybetweenthesexes,reliesonlegalmethodsandisrootedinthevisionofjustice,"wherewomen,men,girlsandboysarevaluedequallyandare

crucialpartnersforsustainabledevelopment(SnyderandTadesse1995).Families

and communities arestrengthened when menrecognize and support women andgirls in all aspects of their lives, especially their education, health, access to

resources and decision-makingopportunities.Despite ofwhatwas said,theequityapproach encountered many problems, including dysfunctional schemes and

ambiguousinitiatives,unacceptableandpracticallyinapplicableinmanydeveloping

nations.Oneof the major assumptions of theequity approachwasthatlegislatedequal opportunity would ensure equal benefits for all; however, it goes without

sayingthatdespitethedecreaseindiscriminatorylawsinmanypartsoftheworld,women found that legislation or policy changes alone did not guarantee equaltreatment;equalrightstoeducationdonotmeanthatgirlsandboysareschooledin

equalnumbersortoanequaldegree.Moreover,therecognitionofequityasapolicyprinciple did not guarantee its implementation in practice a typical situationin

many developing countries. It should be noted that the equity approach was

designedtomeetstrategicgenderneedsthroughtop-downlegislativemeasures.

Additionally, the major problem linked with the equity approach, was thedenomination of Western-exported feminism to Third World women. The 1975

Conferencewentto theextentoflabelingfeminismasethnocentricanddivisiveto

WID. Thus the bottom line was the outright rejection of this approach by thedeveloping nations, who claimed that to take feminism to a woman who has no

water,nofoodandnohomeistotalknonsense(Bunch1980).Itwasfeltwithno

surprisethattheprimaryproblemtobeaddressedwaspoverty.

2.1.1.4.3. TheAnti-PovertyApproach

ThisisthesecondWIDapproach,introducedfromthelate1970s(bytheendofthe

unsuccessful First Development Decade). It advocates the redistribution of goods,andisembeddedintheconceptofgrowth,provisionofbasicneeds,andensuringan

increase in the productivity of poor women. The fundamental principle of this

approach was the assumption that womens poverty is the result ofunderdevelopment and not of subordination. For instance, it recognized the

productive role of womenand sought to increase the income earnings of womenthrough small-scale enterprises, on the basis that poverty alleviation and the

promotion of balanced economic growth requires the increased productivity of

womenin low-income households.Moser(1993) mentionsthatthisapproach wasmade on the assumption that the origin of womens poverty and inequality with

menisoriginatedtotheirlackofaccesstoprivateownershipoflandandcapital,


21/104

21

and sexual discrimination in the labour market. Therefore it aimsto increasethe

employment and income-generating opportunities of poor women through betteraccess to productive resources (reducing inequality between men and women to

achieveincomeinequality).

Modernization theory and its trickle down assumption fail led to this shift inapproach in favour of employment opportunities as a major policy objective, anearly initiative for the International Labour Organizations World Employment

Programme. The working poor became the target group and the informal sector

with its assumed autonomous capacity for employment generation, the solution(Moser 1978, 1984). World Bank followed in 1972, cancelling its preoccupation

with economic growth and embracing a new concern with the eradication ofpoverty and the promotion of growth with redistribution. This marked the

prominence of the basic needs strategy, with its primary purpose to meet basic

needs such asfood, clothing, shelter and fuel,along with the social needs such aseducation and community participation through employment and political

involvement (Ghai, 1978; Streeton et al. 1981). The anti-poverty approachencouragedthespreadofcommunityrevolvingloanfunds(traditionalmicro-creditschemes), thus opening thequestion of womens access to formal financial

institutions(SnyderandTadesse,1995).

Theanti-povertyapproach, as Moser (1993) noted has three major problems. (1)

Though it has the potential to modify the gender division of labour within thehousehold,whichinevitablyimplieschangesinthebalanceofpowerbetweenmen

and women within the family, in practice thispotentialgetsreducedbecause thefocus is specifically on low-income women and on sex-specific occupations. (2)

Since the programmes for low-income women in the developing countries may

reducethealreadyinsufficientamountofaidallocatedtolow-incomegroupsbythestate, the governments may remain reluctant to allocate resources from national

budgetsto women.Whileincome-generatingprojectsforlowincomewomenhave

flourished since the 1970s, they have tended to remain small in scale, to bedevelopedbyNGOs(mostfrequentlyall-womenincomposition),andtobeassisted

bygrants,ratherthanloans,frominternationalandbilateralagencies.(3)Income-generating projects for women meet practical gender needs by augmenting their

income,butunlessanduntilemploymentleadstogreaterautonomy,itfailstomeet

strategic gender needs. This explains the essential difference between the equityandantipovertyMoreover,theanti-povertyprogrammesassumethatwomenhave

free-time, often only succeed by extending their working day and thus increase

their triple burden. Therefore, unless the anti-poverty projects have an inbuiltmechanismtolightentheburdenofdomesticandchildcareduties,itmayfaileven

tomeetpracticalgenderneedtoearnanincome.

2.1.1.4.4. TheEfficiencyApproachThisisthethirdWIDapproach,adoptedduringthe1980sdebtcrisis,thatis,inthe

context of the Structural Adjustment Policies (SAP) imposed by the International


22/104

22

Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank in developing countries. Increased

efficiencyandproductivityarethetwomainobjectivesofSAP.ItisrecognizedasthemostprevalentapproachusedtodaybytheWIDmovement(JanetMomsen199;

Moser 1993). Although Kate Young (1993) attributes the emergence of thisapproachtothereductionof expenditureofthe anti-povertypoliciesof the1980s,

its origin is more associated with the introduction of SAP in most developingcountries.Theefficiencyapproachrestsontheneo-liberalnotionsofrestructuringto obtain the benefits of market forces, of economic growth, and of international

trade. As Pettman (1996) noted, efficiency is popular with many donor agencies,

governments, and international agencies, discovering women as workers. Thisinvolvesashiftofattentionfromwomentodevelopment,seeingWIDasaresource-

management focus. It is argued that the shift from equity to efficiency reflects ageneral recognition of a specific economic fact that 50 percent of the human

resourcesavailablefordevelopmentwerebeingwastedorunderutilized.Efficiency

indevelopmentwasinterpretedasconsistinginfullyutilizingtheseresources,asefficient allocation of resources optimizes growth rates with concomitant social

benefits (Willis 2005). This shift towards development also had an underlyingassumption that increased economic participation of Third World women isautomatically linked with increased equity; on this basis, organizations such as

USAID, the World Bank and OECD have argued that an increase in womenseconomicparticipationindevelopmentlinksefficiencyandequitytogether(Moser

1993).

Contrary to the claims of the modernization theory, the informal economy has

persistedandgrownoverthepasttwodecadesbothindevelopinganddevelopedcountries;andwomentendtobeover-representedininformalemployment,leading

to the phenomenon of feminization of labour force, more so, in the lower-paid,

lower status and more precarious forms of informal employment. Tradeliberalization has opened an easy gate for women into labour-intensive export-

oriented agriculture (UNRISD 2005), where low wages have been shown to be

importantingainingmarketshare(Choetal.2004;Hsiung1996;Seguino2000a,2000b).Thisinturnisusedforaninterpretationthatwomenslowwagesinexport

agriculture have effectively generated the foreign exchange for the purchase oftechnologies and capital goods what Seguino (2005) calls the feminization of

foreign exchange. However, there has been little positive impact in terms of

narrowinggendergaps,especiallyinwages;informalemploymenthasdrawnmorewomen than menin all developing regions,except North Africa (ILO, 2002),with

womens hourly earnings falling below those of men in identical employment

categories,especiallyin thecaseof own-accountworkers(Heintz,2005).The neo-liberalpolicieshaveresultedinagrowinggapbetweenrichandpoorhouseholdsin

many countries, both developed and developing (Cornia et al. 2004; Milanovic2003), with the unpleasant implication of growing inequalities not only between

womenandmenbutalsoamongwomen,withthoseinthebetterpaidjobsseeking

to employ those at the bottom of the pay scales for domestic support. It is nowgenerally agreedthat marketsare powerful driversof inequality,social exclusion

anddiscriminationagainstwomen,whoseunpaidcareworkheldthesocialfabric


23/104

23

together without recognition or reward (Maxine Molyneux and Shahra Razavi,

2006).

Rather than liberating women into the workplace, globalization ormodernization has bred a new underclass of low paid or unpaid women

workers.(Wichterich,2000).

Infactwhatmodernizationhasachievedisanincreasein womensproductiveand

reproductiveroles,withthisdoubledayresultingingeneralinaheavierworkload

onwomen.Moreover,thegrowthofinformalworkacrosstheglobe,alongwiththecasualization of formal sector employment, has helped employers not only lower

labourcosts,butalsoevadeslabourlawsandsocialsecurityobligations,resultinginincreasing precariousness of jobs and greater insecurity of livelihoods for both

female and male workers. The SAP in the neo-liberal framework has sought to

rewritetheroleofstateasafacilitatorofthemarketforcesratherthanasthefreeorsubsidizedproviderofpublicgoods,whicharenowmadeavailableonlyfora user

fee.Thisinturnhasmeantthatpoorerhouseholdshavetoadjustbyshiftingmoreofthecareintothehouseholdandontheshouldersofwomenasshockabsorbersandcaregivingoflastresortforhouseholdsontheedgeofsurvival(Elson,2002);

theincreasedusercostofhealthserviceshasmeantthatwomencanlessfrequentlyafford to use such services for themselves and their children (Mackintosh and

Tibandebage,2004).

Theefficiencyapproach,relyingonallthethreeroles(reproduction,productionand

communityparticipation)ofwomenandanelasticconceptofwomenstime,onlymeets relatively practical gender needs at the cost of longer working hours and

increased unpaid work (Wallace and March, 1991). Indeed, women are seen

primarilyin termsoftheircapacityto compensateforthedecliningsocialservicesby extending their working days (and hours), thanks to SAP. Moser characterizes

thisapproachastop-down,withoutgenderedparticipatoryplanningprocedures,

she also admits that womens increased economic participation has implicationsfor them not only as reproducers, but also increasingly as community managers

being included in the implementation phase of projects (Moser 1993:70-71) aconsequenceoftheneedforgreaterefficiency:womenwerereportedtobemore

reliablethanmeninrepayingloansandalsoofgreatercommitmentascommunity

managers in ensuring the flow of services (Fernando 1987; Nimpuno-Parente1987).

AlthoughthefactthatparticipationandparticipatoryapproachesareencouragedbymultilateralorganizationssuchastheWorldBankandNGOssuggeststhatthese

aretheideaswhichhavebeentakenonboard,thedimensionsofparticipationthatcould challenge existing practices and power relations are however not engaged

with(Willis2005:105)milestogobeforeempowermentisreached.


24/104

24

2.1.1.4.5. TheEmpowermentApproachThis approach is supposed to empower women through greater self-reliance

through supporting bottom-up (grassroots mobilization) such as the microcreditscheme, indicates a growth of feminist work in developing countries. As the

cornerstone of GAD, the empowerment approach developed out of thedissatisfaction with the original WID as equity approach, and is concerned withcounteracting its marginalization,by integrating gender as a crosscutting issue in

development organization and in interventions (often referred to as gender

mainstreaming).Itemergedunlikeotherapproacheslessfromtheresearchof theFirst World feminists but more from that of the emergent feminists and NGOs in

developingcountries.TheDevelopmentAlternativeswithWomenforaNewEra(DAWN) has in general been recognized as the best-known supporter of this

approach(SnyderandTadessa,1995;Moser,1993).AccordingtoDAWN,itisthe

experienceslivedbypoorwomenthroughouttheThirdworldintheirstrugglestoensurethebasicsurvivaloftheirfamiliesandthemselvesthatprovidetheclearest

lensforanunderstandingofdevelopmentprocesses.Anditistheiraspirationsandstruggles for a future free of the multiple oppressions of gender, class, race, andnationthatcanbethebasisforthenewvisionsandstrategiesthatthenewworld

needs. (Gita Sen and Caren Grown, 1987:9-10). In this context, DAWN identifiesempowerment with personal autonomy, which means for the poor and for the

nationsofthedevelopingworldthattheyareabletomaketheirownchoicesinthe

realmsofsocial,economicandpoliticallife.Thisinturncallsforparticipationandseekstocreateself-reliance,ensuringthattargetedmeasuresreachwomenthrough

autonomous womens organizations. The fundamental assumption here is theinterrelationshipbetween power anddevelopment, the importance for women to

increasethepower.Butthispowerdoesnotmeandominationoverotherswitha

win (women) lose (men) situation. The dominant understanding within socialscienceshasbeenofpoweraspowerover,whereasthefeministunderstandingof

empowermentshouldbeadynamic one,whichconceptualizespower asa process

rather than a particular set of results. Afshar (1997:13). In this contextempowermentbecomesaprocessthatcannotbegiventoorforwomen,buthasto

emergefromthem.Thisisidentifiedastherighttodeterminechoicesinlifeandtoinfluence the direction of change, through the ability to gain control over crucial

material and non-material resources. It places far less emphasis than the equity

approachon increasingwomensstatusrelativeto men.It thusseeksto empowerwomenthroughtheredistributionofpowerwithin,aswellasbetween,societies.

(Moser,1993).Thisconceptionofempowermentasadynamic,enablingprocessin

turnhasimplicationsforpoliticalactionandfordevelopmentagencies.

Empowermentrequiresatransformationofthesocialstructuremarkedbywomenssubordination.Fundamentallegalchangesarepresupposedforjusticeforwomenin

society changes in law, civil codes, systems of property rights, labour codes,

controloverwomensbodiesandthesocialandlegalinstitutionsthatendorsemalecontrolandprivilege.Equityapproachalsoidentifiesthesestrategicneeds,butthe

modus operandi differs: while the former (for that matter, all the previous


25/104

25

approaches) relies on top-down legislations and interventions, the empowerment

approach functionsin a bottom-up,participatory planning framework of womensorganizationsatgrass-rootlevel.Importantentrypointsofinterventionarepopular

education, organization and mobilization. The welfare approach also stresses theimportanceofwomensorganizationsandutilizesthem,butasatopdownmeansof

deliveringservices.Moreover, the welfare approach acknowledges only the reproductive-homemaker

rolesofwomen.Onthe otherhand,theempowermentapproachrecognizesallthe

three roles ofwomen (i.e. community participation, reproductionand production)and seeks to raise womens consciousness through bottom-up organizations and

mobilizethemagainstsubordination(Moser1993).Italsodiffersfromtheequityapproachinrespectofthemeansofreachingthegoalofstrategicgenderneeds.The

failure or limited success of the legislative initiatives under the equity policy has

stood to temper the moves of the empowerment approach: it seeks to reach thestrategic gender needs through the practical needs used to build up a secure

supportbase,asexemplifiedbyanumberofThirdWorldwomensorganizations,such as SEWA in India, Grameen Bank in Bangladesh and GABRIELA in thePhilippines.

However, there are some postmodernist critiques of the DAWN alternative to

conventional development. Mitu Hirshman (1995) notes that by establishing

womenslabour,whichisanandrocentricideaofcapitalismandmodernism,astheclearestlensthroughwhichtounderstandandanalysetheirexperiences,itcreates

an unnecessary hierarchy among different aspects of womens lived realities. Bypositingpoorwomenslabourasthedefiningcategoryandthefoundingsourceof

womens experiences in the South, and also as the grounds for their alternative

approachtodevelopment,theauthorscommitthemselvestoaformofessentialismwhichseekstoestablishapriorianindisputablenaturalandinnateessencetoThird

World womens lives and experiences. This is derived not necessarily from

biological facts, but from secondary sociological and anthropological universals,whichdefinethesexualdivisionoflaboutMituHirshman(1995).Moreover,some

critics argue thatDAWN's agendahas in-builtbeliefsin modernization as its goal(Parpert, 1995; Crush, 1995). It also suffers from the same economistic bias as

mainstream development theory, which is entrenched in the belief that material

needsconstitutethesoledeterminantofhumanexistence.

The empowerment approach had first insignificant influence on mainstream

developmentagencies,evenafterthegeneralrecognitionoftheGADapproach,eventhough a few countries like Canada and Norway started to support the

empowermentinitiativesofNGOsbyprovidingfunds.ItchangedforabetterturnwiththepublicationoftheUnitedNationsDevelopmentProgrammes(UNDP)1995

HumanDevelopmentReport(HDR)thatrevivedtheinterestintheissueofgender

equalitywithitsefforttosupplementthehumandevelopmentindex(HDI)withthegender related development index (GDI) and a gender empowerment measure

(GEM). Afterward, other international development agencies followed, and now


26/104

26

almost every agency has an empowerment division attached to its anti-poverty

policy forum. The practical empowerment methodology, as used by most of theThird World womens organizations in terms of seeking to reach the strategic

genderneedsthroughthepracticalneedsusedtobuildupasecuresupportbase,lendsthemaconvenienttoolforcoveringupboththeiranti-povertyandefficiency

approaches thatnowappear as economicempowermentapproach. In addition toattachingthefocusofgenderissuetothispolicyofmeetingpracticalneeds,italsolooks for a substitution of the agency of civil society for that of the state in

developmentprocess(theoriginalagendaofneo-liberalism).

It is important to notice that The Gender Equality Strategy (20082011) of the

UNDP is designed to ensure gender equality and womens empowerment as anintegrated dimension in the UNDP Strategic Plan 2008-2011. It stands to assist

countries to formulate, implement and monitor Millennium Development Goals

(MDG)-based national development strategies centered on inclusive growth andgenderequality.

2.1.1.5. WhatisFeminism?

Feminist theoretical frameworks and development frameworks have influencedthinkingandpolicy.Ahistoricalcontextisimportanttounderstandingdevelopment

andfeministthinkingandhowhavetheyprogressed,impactingeachotherinthe

process.Feminism8derivesitsoriginfrommultipletheoreticalformulationsandisbased onhistorically,and culturallyconcrete realities andlevelsof consciousness,

perceptionandaction.Fromthe17thcenturytilldatethedefinitionhasevolvedtorepresentdifferentarticulation,conceptualizationandthechangingtimes.

Feminist theories seek to uncover (1) The incidence of gendered thinking thatuncritically assumes a necessary bond between being a woman and occupying

certainsocialroles;(2)Thewayswomennegotiatetheworldand;(3)Thewisdom

inherentinsuchnegotiation.

Thesocialrolesandthewayswomennegotiatetheworldalsodifferamongwomenindiversecontexts(cultural,social,political,racialorethnic,religious,etc.)andwith

diverse personal characteristics (age, education, caste etc.). Most development

approachesmakethemistakeofclubbingseemingsimilaritiesintoGroupsignoringvast difference amongst women, influenced by many factors like class, caste,

socializationprocessanditsmanifestationintheirlives.

2.1.1.6. Otherfeministperspectives

2.1.1.6.1. Liberalfeminism.-LFisrootedinthetraditionof16th-

and 17th-century liberal philosophy, which focused on the

8AbroaddefinitionoffeminismisAnawarenessofwomensoppressionandexploitationinsociety,atworkandwithinthe

family,andconsciousactionbymenandwomentochangethissituation(Pati,2006)


27/104

27

ideals of equality and liberty. The liberal conception of

equalitywasbasedonthebeliefthatallmenhadthepotentialto be rational and that any inequality had to be justified in

rational terms. The liberal conception of liberty meant thatpeopleweregovernedonlywiththeirconsentandonlywithin

certain limits, generally defined in terms of the public andprivatespheres(theformerthegovernmentcanregulate;thelatteritcannot).

2.1.1.6.2. Classical Marxism.- argues that throughout historypeople have found many different means of feeding,

sheltering, clothing, and reproducing themselves, that is, ofproducingtheirmateriallife.Inproducingtheirmateriallife,

peopleworktogetherandenterintosocialrelationswithone

another. The means and social relations of productionconstitute the modes of production. The subordination of

womencameintoexistencewiththemodeofproductionthatintroducedprivateproperty.

2.1.1.6.3. Radical feminism.- emerged in the 1960s in the US inresponsetothesexismexperiencedbywomenworkingwithin

thecivil-rightsand antiwarmovements.Traditional Marxism

stated that class was the prime factor in the oppression ofworking people and thatgender equalitywould follow upon

the abolition of class society. Radical feminists argued thatmaking gender equality secondary to class equality

diminished the importance of, and deferred action on,

womens concerns. Radical feminists insist that womenssubordinationdoesnotdependonotherformsofdomination,

suchasclass.Theyarguethatpatriarchy,orthedominationof

women by men, is primary and existed in virtually everyknown society, even those without classes. Womens

subordination,asitisdeeplyembeddedinindividualpsychesandsocialpractices,ismoredifficulttochangethanclass.

2.1.1.6.4. Socialist feminism.- emerged in the second half of the1970s. Socialist feminists argued that class and womens

subordination were of equal importance and had to be

challenged simultaneously. Socialist feminists redefined theradical-feministconceptionofpatriarchysothatitmeantaset

ofhierarchicalrelationswithamaterialbaseinmenscontroloverwomenssexuality,procreation,andlabourpower.They

added an historical dimension to the concept of patriarchy,

arguing that it takes different forms in different historicalperiods and in different racial, cultural, political, economic,

andreligiouscontexts.


28/104

28

2.1.1.6.5. TheEco-feministperspective.-ItisalsoreferredtoastheWomen,EnvironmentandDevelopmentperspective.This

perspectiveholdsthatthereisanaturallinkbetweenwomen

andenvironmentasbothareinvolvedin creationof life.The

mainstream post-colonial development characterized bycapitalismandpatriarchyexploitedbothnatureandwomenslabour. As a result of this linkage and dual exploitation,

women have a greater interest in ending domination over

nature and their own lives. The origins of this theoreticaltradition are largely associated with Shiva and Mies (1993)

whoseethepatriarchaldominanceofwomenbymenasthe

prototype of all domination and exploitation in varioushierarchical, militaristic, capitalist, and industrialist forms.

They point out thattheexploitationof nature, in particular,has gonehandin hand withthatof women, and the ancient

associationofwomenwithandnaturelinkswomenshistoryand the history of the environment, and is the source ofnatural kinship between feminism and ecology (Vandana,

Shiva and Mies, Maria, 1993). Accordingly, ecofeminists seefemale experiential knowledge as a major source for an

ecological vision of reality. Arguments tracing a universally

caringattitudeofwomentowardnaturefailtoconvinceinthefaceofvaryingbehaviouracrossclasses,regionsandcontexts.

Urbanwomenwhouselittlefirewoodor fodder,andwomen

fromrichpeasanthouseholdswhocanobtainmuchofwhattheyneedfromfamilyland,haveaverydifferentdependence

on and hence relationship with communal forests than dopoorruralwomen.

2.1.1.6.6. Feminist environmentalism.- argues that womens andmensrelationshipwithenvironmentneedstobeunderstood

inthecontextofspecificformsoftheirinteractionwithit,i.e.,

thematerialreality.Factorssuchasgenderandclassdivisionoflabour,castedivisions,distribution ofpowerandproperty

influencetheimpactofenvironmentalchangeonpeopleandconsequently their responses to it. Since knowledge about

nature is experiential, these factors also shape knowledge

basedonthisexperience.Forinstance,womenacquirespecialknowledgeaboutresourceregeneration,foodgraincultivation

inagricultureandplantspeciesformeetingsubsistenceneeds.Feminist environmentalism calls for a transformational

approach.Itrequiresacomplexsetofinterrelatedchangesin

the composition of what is produced, the technologies thatproduceit,theprocessesbywhichdecisionsonproductsand


29/104

29

technologiesarearrivedat,theknowledgesystemsonwhich

choices are based and the class and gender distribution ofproductsandtasks.

2.1.1.6.7. Feministpoliticalecologyperspective.-treatsgenderasa critical variable in shaping resource access and control,interacting with class, caste, race, culture, and ethnicity to

shapeprocessesofecologicalchange,thestruggleofmenandwomen to sustain ecologically viable livelihoods, and the

prospects of any community for "sustainable development"

(Rocheleau; et al, 1996:4). This approach provides aframeworktounderstandhowaccesstoandenjoymentofthe

materialbasisofourlivescomesaboutthroughconjuncturesoflocal,regionaland globalecologicalprovisioningandlocal,

regionalandglobalpoliticalappropriationandredistribution

of resources. It works with the notion of survival whichconnectstheglobalnorthandsouthandwhichis understood

in the context of capitalist globalization. Feminist politicalecologydrawsattentiontothewaysinwhichlocalecological

and livelihoods systems are linked to national and global

government, economic and political systems that act invarioussubtleandnotsosubtlewaystoconstrainalternative

development possibilities at the local level. Gendered

knowledgesandspacesandwomenscollectivestrugglesarealsokeythemesinfeministpoliticalecology(Rouchleau;etal,

1996). Feminist political ecology builds on an ecofeminist

argument and emphasizes gender knowledges, rights andpolitics in the context of environmental arguments

(Nightingale, 2006). Significantly, feminist political ecologyanimatesits arguments ata variety of scales and not just at

thehouseholdandcommunitylevel.

2.1.1.6.8. The Gender, Environment and Development

perspective.- draws from feminist environmentalism and

looks at the inter-linkages between organizationalrelationships, social structures and planning processes and

methods. In doing so, it outlines a strategy for moresustainable, participatory, just and gender-sensitive naturalresource management. It recognizes that men and women

interactwithnaturalresourcesdifferentlyandthatgenderisakey factor in divisions of labour, rights and responsibilities

affectingthemanagementofnaturalresources.Consequently,

itcallsforaneedtochallengeandtransformnotonlynotionsabouttherelationshipbetweenpeopleandnaturebutalsothe


30/104

30

actual methods of appropriation betweenpeople andnature

byafew.

Asitcanberecognized,therearediversefeministtheoreticalapproaches.Althoughthey converge on the core issue of womens subordination, they differ in their

assumptions about thecauses or sources of thatsubordination. These differencesreflecttherichnessofwomenslivesandtheneedtointegratetheexperiencesandknowledge of women across the globe, and a move towards a more inclusive,

sensitivetheorizingaboutbothwomenssubordinationandtheirpower.

2.2.WomensRights

Now, more and moreorganizations aremoving to thinking about womens issues

and gender equality in terms of womens human rights. For example, the

Association for Womens Rights in Development (formerly the Association forWomeninDevelopment)changeditsnamein2001toreflectthisswitch:WIDhad

becomeoutdatedandcarriednegativebaggageandbythistime,morethanhalfof[their] members identified themselves as working in human rights. Mostimportantly,thenewnamewastosignalashiftinthinkingandpracticeinthefield

Womensrightsprovidesthepowerfullanguageandmonitoringsystemtoassertthat womens rights are an inherent part of all womens lives and gender and

developmentisanenablingtoolforovercomingthesocialrealitiesthatviolatethose

rights(Kerr,2002).

Recently,otherorganizationsinterestedinimprovingthelivesofwomenandgirls,as well as in the general development community, have begun to switch to this

rights-based approach to development.A rights-basedapproach to development

builds on both the experiences of the development and human rights fields thatplaceshumanrightsasthemeans,theends,themechanism,andthecentralfocus

of human development (Symington 2002:1) Rights in this context refers to

humanrights,asopposedtolegalrights,asdefinedininternationalhumanrightsconventions,liketheConventionon theEliminationofAllFormsof Discrimination

Against Women (CEDAW), as well as declarations and the rights articulated byUnited Nations treaty monitoring bodies (Symington 2002:2). Human rights are

development goals as well, like a decent standard of living, health care, gender

equality, and basic education. Approaching these goals as human rights meansensuringthatapersoncangainaccesstothefreedomorresourcethatwillenable

them to realize their rights, such as health care or education. The rights-based

approach also establishes an obligation to implement policies and programs thatcreatetheconditionsinwhichhumanrightscanberealized.Assuch,anactionfrom

a rights-based approach might be making political demands on a government orcorporation. The rights-based approach can be used in conjunction with other

approaches,suchasgenderanddevelopment.

Becauseequalityandnon-discriminationarecentralpartsofhumanrights,gender

equality is central to ensuring human rights, rather than just an add-on


31/104

31

(Symington2002:3).Itappearsthatsomedonors,aswellasNGOs,aremovingtoa

rights-based approach to development, especially when talking about genderequality.ThismovewillbeimportanttoconsiderinregardtoSTIinitiativesbecause

the language of rights has not been used very frequently in relation to science,technology,andinnovation.Ininterviewsanddiscussionsforthispaper,therewere

large disparities among opinions regarding the potential for a rights-basedapproachtoSTI.Manyareconcernedthatthisswitchwillalienatecertaingroupsinterested in STI for example, that science and technology communities will

betterunderstandandappreciatethelanguageofgenderequalityratherthanthe

more demanding language of rights. More thought and consideration will benecessaryonthistopic.

2.2.1. GenderMainstreaming

Despite some groups switching to think more in terms of rights, the standardapproachbydevelopmentorganizationsanddonorstoaddressgenderequalityisa

strategyoftencalledgendermainstreaming9,partofthegenderanddevelopmentapproach. Gender mainstreaming usually refers to how organizations seek tointegrate gender issues into all of theirwork, including their ways of working

fromtheirorganizationalstructuresandhiringpracticesallthewaytotheprojectstheychooseandtheresultstheyseek.GendermainstreaminggrewoutoftheBeijing

PlatformforAction(PfA)in1995asastrategytoaddressinequalitiesandunequal

accesstoresourcesinareasofconcerninthePfA(Symington2004:5).Tenyearslater,manyorganizati

innovating agriculture through gender lenses

Documents