Gender mainstreaming in the DRRM programme by local stakeholders

Interviewees expressed that JICA’s recovery and rehabilitation programme was an intensive bilateral cooperation that constantly convened and worked with local officers and related divisions. For the first component of the project, which involved hazard mapping and eventually the revision of the land use and DRRM plans of Tacloban City, JICA specifically worked with the City Planning and DRRM offices. The participation of local officers was entirely based on their role in the government, which did not necessarily mean that it was representative of different sectors of society. Hence, equal opportunities to both men and women to participate in this process is entirely based on the effectiveness of the gender mainstreaming framework implemented by the Philippine government, which can help ensure that both gender have equal chances to occupy these planning positions.

Interviewees from Tacloban City attested that JICA provided accurate hazard maps and crucial technical inputs for the improvement of their DRRM and land use plans. However, interviews also found that JICA did not do any bottom-up and participatory processes in verifying the maps and in drawing recommendations. It was presented and given to the concerned offices directly without proper validation from the local stakeholders and community. This may then pose some risks to sustainability and ownership, as a coherent DRRM system requires well- coordinated planning not only with national and local government agencies, but also NGOs, people’s organisations, and most importantly, the communities (Fernandez et al., 2012; Ishiwatari, 2012; Matsuoka et al., 2012). Use of Indigenous knowledge and local capacity allows the community to participate in their own development—identifying their vulnerable points and the risks they are exposed to, and consequently to implement risk reduction measures based on their own capacity and resources. Hence, complementing the top-down approach, community-based DRRM can help build a more resilient community because the processes could empower the locals, which consequently contributes to greater sustainability of efforts (Luna, 2014; Palliyaguru et al., 2014; Shaw, 2012). The research found that JICA gave recommendations and technical input directly without having discussions about them with the concerned offices, and it was the sole effort of the local government to consult various community groups before it was fully integrated into the plan.

The research also discovered that in their technical recommendations for the DRRM and land use plans, JICA was able to integrate the needs of vulnerable groups in different times and phases of the disaster management cycle. As previous studies discussed, Japan’s extensive experience in disaster relief, response, and recovery have made it easier for them to recommend areas for improvement (Crowley Nee Donovan & Elliott, 2012; Habara, 2014; Holguín-Veras et al., 2014; Ranghieri & Ishiwatari, 2014; Shaw, 2012). However, a number of researchers have also verified that taking into account the cultural context and actual socio-demographics on the ground, which can only be obtained through proper social analyses at the planning and formulation stage, can reinforce appropriateness, effectivity, sustainability, and ownership of the programme (Izumi & Shaw, 2012; Luna, 2014; Palliyaguru et al., 2014).

Hence, despite having efforts to improve overall disaster resiliency and minimise disaster risks, failure to conduct proper social analyses and impact assessments means that the intervention

(Palliyaguru et al., 2014). Focusing on the economic aspect of vulnerability alone, such as constructing resilient infrastructure or providing livelihoods, is not enough to prevent disaster risks from future hazards. Reducing and managing disaster risks also includes addressing the political and social vulnerabilities, which includes ensuring political representation and participation in decision-making from various sectors of society (Birkmann, 2006; Wisner et al., 2014). While JICA provided exceptional technical information and support, which addressed the economic vulnerability to disaster risks, not taking into account the political and social vulnerabilities, by overlooking proper social analyses, impact assessments, gender mainstreaming, and even participatory processes, means that the intervention could not be considered holistic. The intervention failed to recognise that vulnerability, or inequitable access to resources, aggravates risks to disasters. However, the local government demonstrated that it has agency to reshape the nature of assistance by integrating its own processes into the DRRM programme.

One of the main findings of the research is that the city government’s own gender mainstreaming framework significantly, if not solely, influenced the mainstreaming of gender needs and roles in JICA’s DRRM project. This was done as part of the city’s internal organisational processes, wherein the local government customarily involves their own gender office in all projects they undertake. Despite not being a main counterpart for the project, the gender office was invited to and participated in the workshops that revised the DRRM and land use plans. For instance, a workshop on identifying men’s and women’s needs and roles was allotted and pushed for by the local government.

Ensuring that the gender office is involved in and consulted about each public project conducted by the city government is just one of the mechanisms of Tacloban City’s gender mainstreaming framework. This is based on the prevailing GAD code that the city implements. The interviews also show that senior-level management support was instrumental in enacting the GAD code, and subsequently, its adaptation to individual GAD plans of the city’s barangays. Interviews with the local gender office expressed that without the chief executive’s support, the GAD code would not be enacted into a city ordinance. The ordinance includes enforcing a number of elements that are crucial in establishing a properly working gender mainstreaming framework. Aside from the GAD plans, the mandate includes assigning gender focal persons to each division and building their capacity, allocating five percent of each division’s and barangay’s budget to GAD, and having an incentive programme. This was all

found to be applied in the bilateral recovery programme, despite not being directly part of the projects and processes introduced by JICA.

Moreover, the research also found that having an effective gender mainstreaming framework can change gender dynamics in the organisation. Interviews with women in local government positions show they do not see themselves as marginalised at work, which is an indication of an effective framework on gender mainstreaming. They see themselves as empowered and having agency and voice to influence decision-making processes. This was also seen in the results of the structured observation in a community meeting done by the research.

Hence, since JICA was not able to apply and follow their gender mainstreaming framework in the project, integrating a gender perspective was mainly based on the gender mainstreaming policy of the local government. Seeing that the project incorporated and applied elements in the local framework on gender means that the local stakeholders hold agency to govern JICA’s DRRM project. The local gender mainstreaming framework influenced the allotment of the GAD budget into the DRRM plan and the conduct of a gender analysis in the land use plan. It also enabled the equal participation of men and women in crucial community meetings like DRRM planning. However, despite the knowledge that disasters impact men and women differently, the local gender office acknowledged that they still need training to further understand how impacts on gender can be lessened. The research found that the gender mainstreaming done in the project cannot be considered exhaustive, but it shows that gender is still within the agenda of the local stakeholders notwithstanding limited technical know-how in linking gender and DRRM.

Considering JICA’s stance and performance on gender mainstreaming in the project, it can also be argued that JICA is merely following the Paris Declaration principles and aligning with the gender agenda of the local counterparts by letting them influence the processes towards gender responsive outputs and outcomes. The research found that this resulted in increased ownership of the local stakeholders in the DRRM programme. The Paris Declaration principle of alignment then posits a challenge and tension in striking a careful balance on how the donor and partner country can both contribute to and influence programme processes and outcomes equally. At the national-donor coordination level, there is minimal to no alignment endeavours related to gender. JICA Headquarters seems incognisant of the Philippines’ policy and

projects aside from the submission of the gender report. Hence this development theme is not properly integrated into JICA’s agenda and operations in the Philippines; but the research shows that the alignment on gender occurs in the local and project level. However, entrusting the local counterparts to direct such processes does not mean that the donor agency should entirely desist from addressing a crucial development concern such as gender. Not having a gender mainstreaming framework and solely relying on the local counterpart’s efforts to integrate gender perspectives may imply that JICA seems remiss in ensuring that the bilateral cooperation programme on DRRM is gender equal.