Women’s Empowerment:the HEART of the challenge

Elisa Martinez, CARE USA Program Impact, Knowledge and Learning TeamCI Global Conference – November 10 2008

Section 1: Awakening to the challenge

CARE International’s SII on Women’s Empowerment

Section 2: Deepening the challenge

Engaging the whole

Session Overview: Tell the truth (or as close as you can

get)

Section 1: Awakening to the challenge CARE International’s SII on Women’s

Empowerment

• The why and how of impact research in CARE (2005-2008)

• What have we learned about CARE’s impacts?

• What are some of the strategic implications, and how are we pursuing these in our work today?

Section 1 Overview

Starting Points: CARE’s Vision & Principles

We seek a world of hope, tolerance and social justice, where poverty has been overcome and people live in dignity and security.

CARE will be a global force and a partner of choice within a worldwide movement dedicated to ending poverty. We will be known everywhere for our

unshakable commitment to the dignity of people.

CARE International Programming Principles1: Promote Empowerment2: Work in partnership with others3: Ensure Accountability and

Promote Responsibility4: Oppose Discrimination5: Oppose Violence6: Seek Sustainable Results

Driving our Discourse: Strategic Impact Inquiry at CARE

GoalDeepen a culture of learning and critical inquiry

through:

Accountability

Offer stakeholders in and out of CARE

evidence to assess our work

Continuous Improvement Empowering Analysis Use participatory, rights-

based methods that are empowering in themselves

Research for organizational action.

Aggressively share lessons with others

ADVOCACYPROGRAMQUALITY

RIGHTS BASED APPROACH

The SII on Women’s Empowerment: In a Nutshell

What contributions are CARE programs making, if any, to the

empowerment of women and the advancement of gender equity?

What internal, organizational variables are associated with higher –

and lower – levels of impact on women’s empowerment and improving gender equity?

Year 1 - Launching•In depth site research (5 sites); Desk analyses of evaluations, proposals, C-Pin

Year 2 - Broadening•In depth site research (24 sites); Desk analysis of C-pin, Promising Practices Inquiry

Year 3 - Probing•In-depth comparative research (6 sites) on empowerment and HIV/AIDS risk

Year 4- Knowledge Sharing•Summarizing, producing program guidance, publishing and promoting externally

24 countries35 (+1000) projects+350 staff; 5 CI members

Defining Women’s Empowerment

We understand empowerment as the sum total of changes needed for a woman to realize her full human rights – the interplay of changes in:

in her own aspirations and capabilities (agency),

in the environment that surrounds and conditions her choices

(structure),

in the power relations through which she must negotiate her path

(relations).

Any individual indicator of progress can only be properly assessed and valued

in the context of how it advances that whole.

Women’s Empowerme

nt Framework

StructureRoutines, conventions, relationships and taken-for-

granted behavior

Institutions that establish agreed-upon significations (meanings), accepted forms of domination (who has power over what or whom), and agreed criteria

for legitimizing the social order

RelationsConnecting with other social actors, building relationships, joint efforts, coalitions, and mutual support, in order to

claim and enact agency, alter structure,

and so realize rights and livelihood security

AgencyCarrying out our own analyses, making our own decisions, and

taking our own actions.Empowerment

involves poor women becoming the agents

of their own development

23Sub-

Dimensions

Agency

RelationsStructure

Carrying out our own analyses, making our own decisions, and

taking our own actions.

Empowerment involves poor women becoming the agents of their own development

Routines, conventions, relationships and

taken-for-granted behavior

Institutions that establish agreed-upon significations (meanings),

accepted forms of domination (who has power over what or whom), and

agreed criteria for legitimizing the social order

Array and quality of social interaction.

What are the preferences, habits, expectations that women have of their relations with other women,

men, and institutional actors?

Agency-based1.Self-image; self-esteem

2.Legal / rights awareness3.Information / skills

4.Educational attainment5.Employment / control of labour

6.Mobility in public space7.Decision making and influence in household finance & child-rearing

8.Group membership / activism9.Material assets owned

10.Body health / integrity

Structural1.Marriage/Kinship rules and roles

2.Inclusive & equitable notions of citizenship 3.Transparent information and access to services

4.Enforceability of rights, access to justice5.Market accessibility (labour/credit/goods)

6.Political representation7.Share of state budgets

8.Density of civil society representation

Relational1.Consciousness of self / others

as interdependent2.Negotiation / accommodation habits

3.Alliance / coalition habits4.Pursuit / acceptance

of accountability5.New social forms

So… impacts of CARE’s work?

Phase 1 : Dodging Structures and Relations

Phase 2 : Wide-screen dreams, narrow screen tools

Phase 3: Rethinking empowerment, once more.

HEADLINES

•a portfolio on the rise, the payoff from 10 years of investment

•Important empowerment gains – strongly focused at the level of women’s individual capabilities for more that 20 million men, women, and children over the past decade or more.

•Some substantive and wider changes in structural aspects of women’s marginalization and in the social relations through which lasting changes in women’s empowerment will be achieved.

Yet…•Deep confusion about what women’s empowerment should mean for CARE, with little space/support for staff to clarify own beliefs and biases in the midst of competing visions among diverse women, men, and opinion leaders (donors, academics, other NGOs..).

•Tension over competing theories of change, and their implications for how CARE should invest to achieve both best-in-class impacts on key dimensions of poverty/injustice AND lasting impacts on gender power relations

a portfolio riddled with missed opportunities to achieve deeper, faster, and more lasting changes in poverty and social justice.

The SII Bottom Line

How to interpret?

13% of projects in one sample (of evaluations) conducted gender analysis

Portfolio Sketch – 2005/2006 – some gaps

2% of CPIN projects did gender analysis as part of project design; 12% had an explicit gender strategy; 1% did gender training for partner organizations; 1% raised awareness about violence against women; 9% raised awareness on women’s rights.

Of 32 project proposals in 2005, only about 10% articulated empowerment goals with a clear, context specific strategy and measures backing them up.

2006: How Many CPIN Projects state they deploy…

Empowerment approaches 57%

Empowerment + GED approaches 37%

Empowerment + GED + Policy Advocacy 17%

Emp. + GED + PA +rights-based approaches 15%

Emp+GED+PA+RBA +focus on marginalization 11%

Emp+GED+PA+RBA+Marg +citizen participation 10%

15% promise of deep impact 60% agency level impact 25% not so good

CARE Bangladesh - RMP

A good project,

But what might have been?

CARE Bangladesh Rural Maintenance Project

• Technical focus on road maintenance, project coverage noted in terms of population served by roads. Major change noted in SII is the acceptability now of women working outside their homes, but associated challenges not addressed.

• 166,750 women employed over 23 years in RMAs, show increase in incomes through savings investment, and some improvement in social status. Yet use of solidarity groups since mid-1990s could have increased numbers 3-5 fold, and resulted in more widespread social and political gains for women

• Women staff known for being first on motor bikes in Bangladesh – but used only to supervise and monitor activities, not to reflect on methodology. When engaged, staff involved in SII produce a set of recommendations with far reaching implications – as project is closing

• Capacities built of Union Parishads across Bangladesh, but no ongoing engagement on gender issues. Leverage potential used randomly by other CARE projects to gain acceptance by UP officials because of legitimacy provided by RMP

CARE Guatemala - FODEMH

A good project. But what harms?

CARE Guatemala - FODEMH

• Technical Diversion: Plan to support the position and voice of a nascent Mayan women’s citizenship rights organization, converted to more “classic” organizational strengthening and (literacy) service delivery project.

• Accountability Conflict: Donor-required creation of a new development organization (ADIMH) from an existing women’s movement (FODEMH). Growing pains, internal conflicts, and deep staff-partner tensions arising from results management.

• Spectacular Results: ADIMH grows from 10 to 110 members, and reaches 8,000 women with cascading rights training, and 1,350 with literacy training (70% literacy achievement among enrollees).

• Weak Politicial Voice: Platform and capacity for policy advocacy on wider women’s issues not developed: advocacy alliances hostage to inter-organizational rivalries.

• Mission Shift?: ADIMH seen as solid development partner (GTZ, CEFA), but not financially sustainable at project’s end, and in competition rather than coalition with wider women’s and Mayan political movements.

What Good Projects Do Well, Their Impacts, Their Opportunity Costs and Harms

Good women’s empowerment projects typically…

…Deliver tangible, technical, gender

disaggregated outputs under

contractual obligations

…Focus on women’s capabilities, skills, knowledge without trying to influence

gender norms

…Begin and frequently ends with a donor

contract (a “project”)

…that lead to impacts that are…

…strongly individual, psychological, asset/service

focused

…able to mitigate the effects of poverty and

social injustice, not eradicate/eliminate them

…”seedlings” for such sustainable

impact on underlying causes

of poverty

…and create harms such as…

…reversible gains; longer

term irrelevance of output and

effects

…increased workloads and

violence against women and girls

…Male abdication and

feelings of worthlessness

…Weak sustained learning between projects

So what’s it gonna take?Understanding context (and questioning our assumptions about it)• Equipping staff to face internalized and entrenched gender norms• Building community with others –movements, NGOs, donors• Challenging and strengthening a collective understanding of underlying causes of

gender inequity in a given context, analyzing policies north & south• Working to truly understand the specific population groups we seek to serve

Program Design (planning a coherent system of actions over time, for impact)• Articulating a transformational goal• Proposing a theory of social change (broadly), and hypotheses of what

CARE/partners can do to shape impact across all TOC components• Building dynamic learning system to track progress: method & indicators• Design projects and non-project activities as a reinforcing system of entry points for

change – linking concrete gains to relational work building solidarity groups and engaging men and elites, and advocacy to shift structures.

• Testing / revision of the TOC – through staff reflection and external challenge

Knowledge Exchange (protecting gains from the black hole of project closure)• Regular uptake of knowledge produced by others (development and social actors)• Staff gather & contribute their knowledge regularly to a wider knowledge base

And addressing

social injustice

& inequity

CARE helps communities achieve long-term reductions in poverty by…

With a focus on

marginalized women &

girls

Developing human

capabilities & providing economic

opportunity

• Using a series of projects and related activities that demonstrate a long-term commitment to the community

• Addressing all three components of the Unifying Framework

• Leveraging our areas of expertise, informed by our deep understanding of the needs of the community

Addressing power imbalances resulting from Poor governance Gender inequities Discrimination Social and

economic exclusion

• Women and girls are the most vulnerable

• They have a differential impact on community well-being

• We acknowledge that working with men and boys will be crucial to our ongoing work

Addressing basic human conditions through sectoral interventions

CARE’s THEORY OF CHANGE: HOW WE WILL ADDRESS POVERTY

8 Characteristics of a Program1.A clearly defined goal for impact on the lives of a specific group, realized at broad scale.2.A thorough analysis of underlying causes of poverty and social injustice at multiple levels with multiple stakeholders. 3.An explicit theory of change that is rigorously tested and adapted to reflect ongoing learning.4.A coherent set of initiatives that enable CARE and our partners to contribute significantly to the transformation articulated in the theory of change.5.Ability to promote organizational and social learning, to generate knowledge and evidence of impact.6.Contribution to broad movements for social change through our work with and strengthening of partners, networks and alliances. 7.A strategy to leverage and influence the use and allocation of financial and other resources within society for maximizing change at a broader scale. 8.Accountability systems to internal and external stakeholders.

•Undeniable and valuable contributions to well-being and self-esteem of millions

•Tendency to focus on agency, and at best to sow seedlings of change in agency and structures

•Among our levers for change, two stand out:•Articulating clear a theory of change for women’s empowerment, in context•Building programs for impact, organizing project/non-project work in an agenda for long-term social change

Issues we must now confront:

•Technical challenge: how to align resources, relationships, and accountabilities in a complicated organizational change like this?

•Adaptive challenge: how to get at the underlying worldviews and power dynamics that define us as aid workers and as an industry, and that are major obstacles to doing what we know needs doing.

The SII Bottom Line – Take 2

Section 1: Awakening to the challenge

CARE International’s SII on Women’s Empowerment

Section 2: Deepening the challenge

Engaging the whole

Session Overview

Section 2: Deepening the challenge

Engaging the whole

Section 2: Deepening the challenge

Engaging the whole

Go back to your wisdom.

If your child, your neighbor, a strangeris behaving in ways you dislike?How do you intervene?

Section 2: Deepening the challenge

Engaging the whole

Bring forth your wisdom.

If I ask youhow do we tend to intervene as aid workerswhat do you say?

How might this reflect the heart of the challenge?

A Provocative Premise: We struggle to promote women’s empowerment in more enduring ways because doing so challenges the comfort zone of our projects, our industry, our societies and ourselves (the technical challenge is really just the tip of the program-shift iceberg).

Perhaps, going to the heart of the challenge meansdealing with women as they are, being genuinely open to inconvenient truths and dirty little secrets about ourselves and those we serve – without giving up the principles and goals that define us as a rights-based organization, and bind us in solidarity to pursue a better future.

Experiment with this ideaThat we each know more about empowerment than we are acting upon, and that we have much to learn…that we know more about how our intervening

must change than we are acting upon.In groups of 5, read and discuss SII research

quotes.

Confront two key questions: (a) how do these passages relate to our own

lived realities and known (if secret) truths?(b) What would CARE have to do, to relate better

to the realities these passages, and your discussions, reflect?

How shall we assess your empowerment if…

…you define power/strength in ways other than independence and autonomy?

…you are powerful in one facet of your life, but not in others?

…you accept cultural/social rules that grant you power, even as they harm you?

…you don’t use condoms in your love relationship, even knowing your HIV risk?

…you’re doing more, smarter, better… but nothing else seems to give?

…you’re not sure this “empowered woman” thing is much of an improvement

…you’re opportunistic in using strategies of confrontation and collusion to achieve your goals?

…sometimes, you play the “power over” game, taking advantage of others, or competing in ways that put collective interests at risk?

Take Away Insights

a.Women are more complicated than we allow them to be

b. Women’s empowerment = societal change

c. Women’s empowerment lies beyond the scope of any one organization, let alone one time- and resource-bound project.