Gender Issues in Development

The Women in Development13 (WiD) approach has been translated into a series of development objectives, namely welfare, equity, anti-poverty, efficiency, and empowerment. Gender planning emerged from the critical review of these objectives. The first four objectives had top-down characteristics whereby women were perceived as mere tools rather than active agents to achieve the outcome of emancipation for themselves. Therefore, gender planning adopts an empowerment approach, which seeks for alternative development where education of women must lead to empowerment (Yokozeki 1998:16).

The orientation in policy approach has shifted in the course of the last four decades (Yokozeki 1998:14). Moser (1989, 1993) analyzes five aspects of orientation adding to ‘efficiency’ and ‘empowerment’. These shifts mirrored general shifts in development policies, “from modernization policies of accelerated growth, through basic needs strategies associated with redistribution, to the more recent compensatory measures associated with structural adjustment policies” (Moser 1989:1807, in Yokozeki 1998:14).

Gender issues are not necessarily women’s issues (Molyneux 1985, in Yokozeki 1998). Molyneux (1985:232, in Yokozeki 1998) articulates “the false homogeneity imposed by the notion of women’s interests” and differentiates between women’s interests and more specific gender interests. Gender interests are further divided into strategic gender interests and practical gender interests. The former addresses women’s emancipation or gender equality, while the latter responds to an

12 _{The Women in Development (WiD) approach states that if education is to have any value for women, it must be a means} to raise their consciousness about the oppressive structures that keep them in positions of powerlessness. Most educational systems do not provide a climate for such thinking skills to develop. In developing societies, most educated women- the leaders, academicians, professionals in establishment organizations- perpetuate the status quo. The reasoning behind this is that if the patriarchal system has worked for them, it should work for all women. When a woman is relatively powerless and has little control over what is happening in her environment, education for literacy is meaningless. What she craves is knowledge of why she must bear so many children, work endless hours without respite, be beaten and raped, have an alcoholic husband and go hungry. Existing educational systems have not provided women with the tools to understand and analyze the true nature of social, political and economic systems that govern their lives and repress them, and this is why they have failed. If women are to be change agents in their societies, the education offered them must be a tool for consciousness raising and action. Although the WiD approach may seem very radical, it may be useful to consider these points in the context of improving relevancy and quality of education for girls (UN ECA 1999).

13 _{In order to understand the historical contexts of the Women in Development (WiD) approach, we need to look at WiD in} relation to WaD (Women and Development) and GaD (Gender and Development) approaches. The concept of ‘WiD’, articulated by liberal feminists, became a “common currency both inside and outside academic settings” in the 1970s to mean the “integration of women into global processes of economic, political, and social growth and change” (Rathgeber 1990:489). The movement was facilitated by international concern with equity issues at the time (Blumberg 1989). WaD, derived from the socialist feminist approach, had a more critical view of women’s position than WiD. GaD emerged in the 1980s as an alternative to WiD. GaD’s approach focuses on the totality of social organization, economic and political life and recognizes women as agents of change with an emphasis on empowerment and female solidarity (Rathgeber 1990:492-4). Although GaD’s approach is considered more advanced and favorable, it is rarely used in current projects (Rathgeber 1990; Moser 1993). WiD has been accepted and used in both the research and implementation of projects while WaD is seldom used (Yokozeki 1998:13).

immediate perceived need. Her analysis contributed to the stratification of women’s interests (Yokozeki 1998).

Moser (1989) further developed Molyneux’s framework into gender planning, which identifies different needs of women derived from different roles men and women play in societies in developing countries. This view provides both the conceptual framework and practical tools for assimilating gender into planning. The recognition of the fact that women and men have different societal roles as well as the identification of the triple role of women, i.e., reproductive, productive and community management work, should have important implication for policy makers. Reproductive and community managing work has not been valued, and only productive work was considered to be important. Structural adjustment policies’ narrow definition of economics was criticized from this perspective. It includes only marketed goods and services but excludes women’s

reproductive work, such as bearing and raising the next generation (Moser 1989, Elson 1991, in

Yokozeki 1998:14).

Gender planning differentiates gender needs from women’s needs, and gender needs are further divided into strategic gender needs and practical gender needs. Moser (1993:39-4, in Yokozeki 1998) clearly points out strategic and practical gender needs as follows:

- Strategic gender needs are the needs women identify because of their subordinate position to men in their society. Strategic gender needs vary according to particular contexts. Meeting strategic gender needs help women to achieve greater equality. It also changes existing roles and therefore challenges women’s subordinate position aspiring for emancipation and empowerment.

- Practical gender needs are the needs women identify in their socially accepted roles in society. Practical gender needs do not challenge the gender division of labor or women’s subordinate position in society, although rising out of them. Practical gender needs are a response to an immediate perceived necessity, identified within a specific context.

While the latter deal with more immediate issues perceived by women themselves, the former aim at the more fundamental issues of the emancipation of women. Such a framework is useful in clarifying gender needs in education and development, for these two kinds of needs are essential for achieving gender equality in education (Yokozeki 1998).

Strategic gender needs stem from the gender inequality existing in society, and the concept is akin to the radical feminism perspective. It is described as women’s ‘real’ interests and essential for emancipation and empowerment (Molyneux 1985; Moser 1993, in Yokozeki 1998). Practical gender needs, on the other hand, are most functional. They are practical in nature. They deal with more immediate needs in everyday life, such as water, health care and employment. Both strategic and practical gender needs can be described as prerequisites for each other. The emancipation of females in education can be achieved through the process of addressing practical needs at appropriate times in order to achieve further objectives. For instance, improvement in economy in a certain area might make the people more willing to send their daughters to school, which, in turn, may lead to change the education policy in the direction of making a wider choice of courses for female students’ available (Yokozeki 1998:15-16).

More specifically, gender-planning strategies value women’s organizations, stressing women’s solidarity. Schooling and formal education are seldom referred to as a means of empowerment. Instead, conventional education is often viewed as a ‘false focus’ for changing women’s relation to technology. The underlying notion here is that the educational systems tend to reflect the existing cultural bias and values of the societies, which support male dominance in technology (Conway and

Bourque 1995; Bourque and Warren 1990, in Yokozeki 1998). However, a framework of gender needs can be utilized to clarify needs perceived in education.

In general, the contribution of gender to the field of education and development should not be ignored. First of all, it is helpful in analyzing the nature of inequalities and in changing women’s perceived role from that of recipients of welfare to active agents for transformation. It has also helped to clarify the issue of north-south relations in academic thinking. Studies in both gender and education should be academic as well as practical, and therefore they should continue to be in touch with the gender reality and the educational reality in order to further productive research. The two fields are likely to enrich each other as long as forthright dialogue continues (Yokozeki 1998).

Gender Mainstreaming

To be effective, development planning must understand and be able to respond to gender-based differences and power relations. It must develop and apply policies and tools to integrate gender into all mainstream programs. The ‘Gender and Development’ (GaD) approach looks not just at women’s participation in development projects but also at the type of development. Women scholars from the south started questioning mainstream development theories on the grounds that development could not be seen solely in terms of economic growth and/or redistribution. The goal must be long-term, equitable and sustainable development.

Since the mid 1990s, gender mainstreaming has become the key tool for redressing women’s subordinate role in society. Mainstreaming involves more than simply ensuring women’s consultation or participation. Rather, it involves giving adequate attention to gender issues at all levels, most importantly at the levels of analysis, policy development and planning. Attention must be given to both women and men; both must have equal opportunities for involvement; women and men must have equal opportunities for benefiting from development. This approach, with its strong emphasis on gender analysis, presents opportunities for deepening the understanding of the structural origins of gender inequalities. The change must come from within in order to ensure that both men and women are equal partners in the development process (Emiliana Topia 2001).

In general, gender mainstreaming is understood as a means by which the role of women in development is made visible. However, lack of practical implementation is the major problem in the process of gender mainstreaming. This is due to resistance within organizations, within countries, among the beneficiaries of gender mainstreaming, and so on. The rationale behind this view is that greater inclusion of men in projects helps in providing for the advancement of women (PEFG 2001:22).

Gender Equality

The key term in ‘gender equality’ is the word ‘gender’. It really has to do with the differences between men and women, spelled out in terms of their respective social roles and needs, which are not always the same for women as they are for men. The second term of the compound (i.e. equality) implies that both should have access to equal possibilities and opportunities. It does not mean that, at the end of the day, what applies to one will also apply to the other. There are differences that are intrinsic to each and this should be taken into consideration. Gender equality looks at all the social roles women and men play. Both genders are valued as equal human beings and they are given the same opportunities based on their respective needs. Gender equality in Europe goes beyond giving women the same opportunities as men. It actually looks at and weighs the opportunities and the rights available to both genders. The argument is that the gender agenda cannot be moved forward unless all

men are taken into consideration. Besides, men constitute 50% of the population. Failure to recognize this fact can result in dissatisfaction and resistance on their part (PEFG 2001:21).

Because of the low status of women in Ethiopia, the emphasis on gender activities is always related to women. This has led to a kind of backlash. There is too much pressure, too much push from outside whereby there is too little understanding of whatever is being introduced into local contexts. People in the rural areas, where more than 85% of the population live, believe that gender mainstreaming is not what they needed at present. They need, instead, real economic empowerment, which is directly related to their daily livelihood. And this is a serious challenge many organizations are facing: how to go about gender mainstreaming, while people have other needs that demand immediate satisfaction (PEFG 2001:23).

In recent years, the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia has implemented a many-fronted program to change and improve the position of women. This has included a widespread campaign to eliminate ‘harmful traditional practices’, affirmative action programs to increase the participation of girls and women in educational and other institutions, the establishment of Women’s Affairs Office (WAO), both federally and in regions and zones, and the production of gender-disaggregated statistics in all fields. Recent evaluations regarding the effectiveness of these several policies and programs reveal that, while the structures are most often in place, there is serious lack of competent personnel who can implement them (Lexow 2003, Cherinet and Mulugeta 2003, in Narrowe 2004:1).

According to Narrowe (2004), gender activities at the College and in Ethiopia in general are heavily focused on girls and women, and not boys and men. There is no doubt that some of this focus on girls and women is justified. The problems of women in Ethiopia are enormous: there are far too few girls in schools and universities, and of those who begin, too few finish school; there are too few in the work force and in politics, and far too many are still undergoing female genital mutilation, rape, abduction, early marriage and abuse in many contexts (Cherinet and Mulugeta 2003, in Narrowe 2004:3).

Narrowe (2004) mentioned a concrete example of the strong focus on [gender-as-girls] in an “Assertiveness Training Workshop” held at the College,14 which was supposed to be obligatory only for female students. The desired outcome of the workshop, according to Narrowe, is that girls must be assertive, active, learn to speak out, and become empowered. Again and again shyness and

weakness are said to be the major problems for girls, often pointed out by female students themselves

and by faculty members. They are said to be weak on the sports field, in their academic performance, and too weak to say “no” to the sexual advances of boys. Seen this way, it is logical to institute and implement programs, which will empower them and alleviate their problems. What is lacking is a specific focus on boys and their responsibility to girls’ education. Boys are not officially targeted in the gender discourse. Thus, ‘gender’ is not generally understood as socially, contextually and culturally constructed understandings of men and women and their relationships; gender is most often ‘women’ (Narrowe 2004:3). In this connection, Bahru Zewdie (2002:12) notes that, “in Ethiopia the gender discussion has hardly begun.”

Currently, the empowerment and participation of women in political life, most often in rural contexts, have been considered crucial in the context of development (Helen Pankhurst 1992; Poluha 2002, in Narrowe 2004:6).

14 _{Kotebe College of Teachers Education, where Judith Narrowe has conducted her ethnographic research on “Gender,} Modernity and HIV-AIDS: A Study of Practices and Ponderings of Young Female and Male Teachers in Urban