1 / 12

Gender and public works

Gender and public works . Lessons from Ethiopia and India Nicola Jones Overseas Development Institute . 1. Gender and public works . Although public works programmes (PWPs) have technical and political benefits, women’s participation has been historically low due to:

bevan
Télécharger la présentation

Gender and public works

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gender and public works Lessons from Ethiopia and India Nicola Jones Overseas Development Institute

  2. 1. Gender and public works • Although public works programmes (PWPs) have technical and political benefits, women’s participation has been historically low due to: • Care burden/ time poverty (Dejardin, 1996; ILO, 2002) • Socio-cultural mobility constraints (McCord, 2004) • Gender-biased piecemeal rates (Quisimbing, 2004) • Programmes often target male household heads (Antonopoulos, 2007) • In contexts of job scarcity women often pressured not to compete for public works jobs (Dejardin, 1996) • Recent attention to promoting women’s participation, although gender analyses of PWPs remain limited

  3. 2. Ethiopia’s PSNP • Public works programme aimed at reducing reliance on ad hoc emergency food aid appeals • Initiated 2004; now reaches 8 million food insecure beneficiaries nationwide • Focuses on creation of community assets aimed at environmental rehabilitation • Implemented by Government of Ethiopia, supported by coalition of donors • ODI mixed methods research focused on 4 kebeles (sub-districts) in two regional states: SNNP and Tigray

  4. 3. India’s MGNREGA • Public works programme aimed at fulfilling citizens’ constitutional right to 100 days of work at minimum wage per hh per year • Initiated in 2005, now reaching 45 million households nationwide • Community assets are infrastructure focused • Funded by Government of India but implemented by state governments with varying efficacy • ODI research focused on 2 districts in Madhya Pradesh State

  5. 4. Engendering programme design • Strengths: • Quotas for women/ female headed hhs • Guarantee of equal wages • Provisions for gender-specific lifecycle needs • Childcare facilities • Creation of gender-sensitive community assets • Mechanisms to promote women’s involvement in programme governance • Linkages to complementary programmes • Weaknesses: • Limited definition of community assets • Limited attention to equitable access to complementary extension services

  6. 5. Programme impact: individual • increased economic opportunities and remuneration for women • enhanced knowledge, skills and confidence among women • greater mobility for women; and • subtle changes in men’s attitudes But gendered impacts are still limited: “the programme is good for household consumption on a daily basis but not for transforming lives’ (Female FGD, Shibhta, Ethiopia, 2009).

  7. 6. Programme impact: household • Meeting women’s practical gender needs, esp. female headed hhs • Improving access to credit and protecting assets • Greater psychological security in times of crisis • But limited impact on intra-household power relations

  8. 7. Programme impact: community • Enhanced social capital; especially valuable for women given limited participation opportunities • Focus on quantitative participation in programme governance has not been matched by a focus on quality participation

  9. 8. Political economy dynamics • Gender-related objectives are secondary at best • Limited high level support for gender-related goals evidenced by under-investment in capacity building and minimal integration of gender indicators in M and E • ‘The activities are not gender sensitive. There is no gender mainstreaming. The programme is theoretically well developed but practical application is flawed: women were not consulted during design, implementation and evaluation processes, which are just top down’ (Project Manager, Wolayta, Ethiopia, 2009). • Weak inter-sectoral coordination hindering programme potential to tackle economic and social risks synergistically

  10. 9. Policy implications • Ensure sensitivity to lifecycle demands including: • alternative direct support for nursing/pregnant women; • providing child care facilities that are culturally sensitive; and • offering flexible working hours to help balance domestic responsibilities and employment activities. • Commit to equal wages between men and women and ensure that women have access to this income. • Promote cross-institutional linkages to complementary programmes, e.g. agricultural extension and rural financial services, and support capacity strengthening of programme implementers to take advantage of this.

  11. 10. Policy implications (cont.) • Provide appropriate types of work in accordance with men’s and women’s skills sets as well as household labour availability. • Invest in community assets which reduce gendered vulnerabilities such as time poverty. • Encourage the involvement of women in programme governance, especially in terms of defining community assets to be undertaken through public works labour. • Embed sex-disaggregated M&E indicators within programme design and reporting requirements

  12. For more information see: http://www.odi.org.uk/work/projects/details.asp?id=1020&title=gender-vulnerability-social-protection

More Related