|
   
Gender and rural community development III: tools and frameworks for gender analysis
Christine King
PO Box 621 (BC), Toowoomba, Qld, 4350
Paper
This paper highlights a variety of tools for undertaking gender
analysis in projects and organisations. The paper begins with a brief
introduction on gender analysis. Three tools are then introduced (i)
Gender Analysis Matrix (GAM), (ii) Women’s Empowerment Framework, and
(iii) The Social Relations Approach. The paper concludes that there is
a fundamental need for gender analysis to be incorporated into rural
community development projects and activities, and within agencies that
carry out this work. This is paper III of a three paper series for this conference on Gender and Rural Community Development.
Paper I provides a critical analysis of different policy approaches to
development that can be applied in both the Australian and Global
contexts. Paper II illustrates gender issues that exist within the
Australian rural community development domain, concluding the necessity
for gender analysis in projects and organisations.
Introduction
Women are critical to agricultural production, but gender barriers
often constrain their access to resources and effective technologies.
In addition, government agencies working toward rural community
development (CD) can also be ‘gender blind’. This can lead to
detrimental effects on the design and implementation of effective rural
community development projects. Recognition of this is growing rapidly
within the agricultural research and development community,
particularly in the “developing world”. In Australia however, a variety
of studies (see Paper II) suggest that we are somewhat ignorant of the
need to incorporate gender as an analytical variable in the equation.
Feldstein and Poats (1989) state that achieving this goal requires
agricultural professionals to have a new set of conceptual and
analytical perspectives and skills in order to deal with the spectrum
of projects in which they become involved.
In paper II, a variety of gender issues that exist within the
Australian rural CD context were highlighted and the paper concluded
that (i) there is a fundamental need for gender analysis to be
incorporated into rural community development projects and activities,
(ii) addressing gender issues require the involvement of both women and
men, and (iii) there is also a need for gender analysis to be
undertaking within agencies that implement rural community development
initiatives. This paper provides a variety of tools for gender analysis
that can be used to address these needs.
Tools for gender analysis
There are a variety of tools for gender analysis available. Although
numerous gender analysis methods exist, and different methods may be
appropriate for different contexts, Parker (1993) suggests that gender
analysis usually involves four key components. These are based on the
premise that development interventions often impact on women and men
differently:
Sex disaggregation
In gender analysis, data should be separated out by sex so that it
is in a form that enables the impacts on women to be identified
separately from impacts on men.
Social construction
The social origins of the historical subordination of women are also
important to understand. These are usually manifestations of sexual
domination, language and myths. For example, the concepts of
masculinity and femininity have been changing throughout history and
continue to be changed by society.
Division of labour
Gender analysis includes understanding the division of labour and
its implications for equity. The type of work that women and men do and
how that work is valued is largely determined by how society organises
gender roles. Although, women’s work is generally less valued than
men’s work, the division of labour between women and men varies with
and between cultures, and changes over time. Therefore it is not
“natural” but is determined by society.
Access/control
It is also important to differentiate between access (such as being able to farm on someone else’s land) and control (owning
that land, being able to decide how that land is used). Having women
control the means of production or the decision making process is key
to bringing about change.
In summary, gender analysis frameworks are tools for considering the
impact that a development program or activity may have on women and men, and on the economic and social relationships between them (gender relations). Following Parker (1993) they consist of:
- Activity profile: Who does what, within the household and community (gender division of labour)
- Access and control profile: Who has what
- Analysis of factors and trends: what factors influence this gender division of labour, and access to resources
- Program cycle analysis: analysing and applying all of the above information to all stages of the program cycle
There are a number of tools for gender analysis available today. A
particularly useful reference is March, C., Smyth, I. And Mukhopadhyay
(1999) A Guide to Gender-Analysis Frameworks, published by Oxfam in
London.
In this paper, I present three tools, namely, the Gender Analysis
Matrix (GAM), Women’s Empowerment Matrix, and the Social Relations
Approach. I have chosen these three approaches as I have found them
particularly useful in my own practice of CD at the community, team and
organisational level.
Gender Analysis Matrix (GAM)
The Gender Analysis Framework (GAM) was developed by Rani Parker
(1993) to fulfil a need for a framework appropriate to grass roots
work. Parker (1993) describes GAM using What, Why, Who, When and How:
What: The GAM is a tool for gender analysis of
development projects at the community level. That is, it helps
determine the different impact development interventions have on women
and men, by providing a community-based technique for identifying and
analysing gender differences.
Why: The GAM is used to determine the different
impacts of development interventions on women and men. It separates out
the different impacts (and other vulnerable groups) so development
practitioners may accommodate the different needs and interests of
these groups.
Who: A representative group in the community does the
analysis. Where possible, the group should include women and men in
equal numbers. If the culture does not permit women and men to work
together, then each gender should meet separately, and the analysis
should be shared with the other gender.
When: The GAM can be used at the planning stage, to
determine whether potential gender effects are desirable and consistent
with program goals. The GAM also can be used in the design stage, where
gender considerations may change the design of the project. For
monitoring, the GAM can be used to periodically verify expected impacts
and identify unexpected results so that they can be addressed. During
evaluation, GAM can help to determine gender impacts.
How: to use the GAM (Parker, 1993)
- Describe the project in a few sentences
- Identify the groups that the project is intended to benefit. Try to be specific.
- Restructure the matrix (see below)
to ensure that these groups are represented. Keep the Matrix as simple
as possible. The key is to ensure the Matrix facilitates a process of
analysis, rather than serving as a comprehensive database
-
Fill out the matrix by asking what the project’s potential impact is on
women’s time, labour, physical resources and social and cultural
contexts. Next ask the same question for the men, the household and the
community.
- The categories provided in the Matrix may
be further sub-divided as needed. For example, labour could be
household labour domestic), productive labour (own business), wage
labour (paid for work) and unpaid labour (done out of social
necessity). The question for this category would be: “What effect would
the project have on women’s household labour, productive labour, wage
labour and non-wage labour?”
- As needed, the levels of
analysis can also include (depending on the project goals and the
community in question) age group, class, ethnic groups, or other
relevant categories determined by the analysing group.
-
If there is disagreement about the impact among the group, note all the
views (this can then be resolved on the basis of actual outcomes in the
future). After all the blocks have been filled out, determine whether
the effect listed in each box is desirable or not with respect to your
program’s goals, and mark with a + or – or ?.
- Use the
signs as a visual picture of the areas where expected impacts will be
consistent with program goals, and areas where impacts may be contrary
to program goals. Do not add up the signs to determine the net effect.
-
Consider the effects on those who do not participate in the project.
Will they also benefit, or will they lose? What adjustments can be made
to prevent a negative result to those who cannot or do not which to
participate?
- In the monitoring and evaluation phase,
review the analysis and verify the expected impact at least once a
month for the first few months of a project and at least once every
three months thereafter. Identify unexpected results so that they may
be addressed.
|
|
Labour
|
Time
|
Resources
|
Culture
|
Adolescent Girls
|
|
|
|
|
Other women
|
|
|
|
|
Men
|
|
|
|
|
Household
|
|
|
|
|
Community
|
|
|
|
|
This tool is very much influenced by the reality and ideology of
participatory planning (Parker, 1993). It is based on the premise that
(i) all requisite knowledge for gender analysis exists among the people
whose lives are the subject of the analysis, and (ii) gender analysis
does not require the technical expertise of those outside the
community, except as facilitators. In this sense it is a transformatory
learning tool that is used to initiate a process of analysis by the
community themselves, encouraging critical thinking about gender roles
and the different values society places on women’s and men’s labour.
Women’s Empowerment Framework (Longwe)
This method was developed by Sara Hlupekile Longwe as a way of
analysing development projects (Williams et al., 1994). The aim of the
framework is intended to help planners question what women’s
empowerment and equality means in practice and assess critically to
what extent a development intervention is supporting this empowerment.
The framework is based on five different ‘levels of equality’. The
degree to which these are present in any area of social or economic
life determines the level of women’s empowerment. The framework also
allows gender and development workers to analyse development
organisations degree of commitment to women’s equality and empowerment.
March et al., (1999) outline the two main tools of Longwe’s Framework:
Tool 1: levels of Equality
The Longwe Framework’s five ‘levels of equality’ indicate the extent
to which women are equal with men, and have achieved empowerment. The
levels of equality are:
- Control:
This term refers to women’s control over the decision making process
through conscientisation and mobilisation, to achieve equality of
control over the factors of production and the distribution of
benefits. Equality of control means a balance of control between men
and women, so that neither side dominates.
- Participation: The
framework considers women’s equal participation in the decision making
process, in policy-making, planning, and administration. It is a
particularly important aspect of development projects, where
participation means involvement in needs-assessment, project
formulation, implementation, and evaluation. Equality of participation
means involving women in making the decisions by which their community
will be affected, in a proportion which matches their proportion in the
wider community.
- Conscientisation: This is
understood in the Longwe Framework as a conscious understanding of the
difference between sex and gender, and an awareness that gender roles
are cultural and can be changed. ‘Conscientisation’ also involves a
belief that the sexual division of labour should be fair and agreeable
to both sides, and not involve the economic or political domination of
one sex by the other.
- Access: This is defined
as women’s access to the factors of production on an equal basis with
men; equal access to land, labour, credit, training, marketing
facilities, and all public services and benefits. Longwe points out
that equality of access is obtained by applying the principles of
equality of opportunity, which typically entails the reform of the law
and administrative practice to remove all forms of discrimination
against women.
- Welfare: Longwe defines this as
the level of women’s material welfare, relative to men. Do women have
access to resources such as food supply, income and, medical care?

In this framework, the levels of equality are hierarchical. March et
al (1999) suggests that if a development intervention focuses on the
higher levels, there is greater likelihood that women’s empowerment
will be increased by the intervention. If the intervention focuses only
on welfare it is very unlikely that the women will find the project
empowering.
Tool 2: Level of recognition of ‘women’s issues’
Longwe also suggests that it is important to establish whether
women’s issues are ignored or recognised by identifying the extent to
which project objectives are concerned with women’s development. In
this context, women’s issues relate to all issues concerned
with women’s equality in any social or economic role, and involving any
of the levels of equality. That is, an issue becomes a women’s issue
when it considers the relationship between men and women, rather than
simply at women’s traditional and subordinate sex-stereotyped gender
roles (March et al., 1999).
This tool assumes that women’s empowerment is the concern of both
women and men. March et al (1999) describes the three levels of
recognition (defined by Longwe) in project design as:
- Negative Level:
the project makes no mention of women’s issues. Experience has shown
that the project is likely to be detrimental to women (ie. women are
very likely to be left worse by the project).
- Neutral level:
Project objectives recognise women’s issues, but concerns remain that
the project intervention does not leave women worse off than before.
- Positive level: the project objectives are positively concerned with women’s issues, and with improving the position of women relative to men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Levels of Recognition
|
Level of Equality
|
Negative
|
Neutral
|
Positive
|
Control
|
|
|
|
Participation
|
|
|
|
Conscientisation
|
|
|
|
Access
|
|
|
|
Welfare
|
|
|
|
This method is particularly useful in illustrating how the role
of empowerment is intrinsic to the process of development. It
highlights to the practitioner and the community (in an effort to
change attitudes), aspects of development work that were not previously
recognised or appreciated.
The Social Relations Approach
The Social Relations Approach to gender and development planning has
been developed by Naila Kabeer in collaboration with policy makers,
academics, and activists, primarily from the South (March, et al.,
1999). Key elements of the approach are (i) the goal of development as
human well being; (ii) the concept of social relations; and (iii)
institutional analysis.
This approach is intended as a method of analysing existing gender
inequalities in the distribution of resources, responsibilities, and
power, and for designing policies and programs which enable women to be
agents of their own development. The framework uses concepts rather
than tools to concentrate on the relationships between people and their
relationship to resources and activities – and how these are re-worked
through ‘institutions’ such as state or the market. March et al (1999)
describe this concepts as follows:
Concept 1: Development as increasing human well being
Human well-being concerns survival, security, and autonomy (the
ability to participate fully in those decisions that shape one’s
choices and chances). Broader goals of survival, security and human
dignity are just as important as technical efficiency. The concept of
production includes all tasks that people perform to reproduce human
labour (caring, nurturing, and looking after the sick) which people
perform in caring for their environment to assure their livelihood. It
is not merely market production.
Concept 2: Social relations
Social relations are the structural relationships that create and
reproduce systemic differences in the positioning of different groups
of people. These determine who we are, what our roles and
responsibilities are, and what claims we can make. They determine our
rights, and the control we have over our own lives and the lives of
others. They determine what tangible and intangible resources are
available to groups and individuals. Social relations are not fixed.
Poor women, for example, are often excluded from formal allocations of
resources, so they draw on other resources (such as networks of family
and friends) for managing their workload. Resources of this kind,
available through social relations, can be critical for survival.
Concept 3: Institutional Analysis
The underlying causes of gender inequality are not confined to the
household and family but are reproduced across a range of institutions,
including the international community, the state and the market place.
Five aspects of social relations shared by institutions:
- Rules: How things get done. What is done; how it is done; by whom it will be done and who will benefit.
- Activities: What is done? Who does what? Who gets what? Who can claim what?
- Resources:
What is used, what is produced? Institutions also mobilise and
distribute resources. These may be human (labour), material (food) or
intangible (information)
- People: who is
in, who is out, who does what? Selectivity is about who is allowed in
and who is excluded; who is assigned various resources, tasks and
responsibilities; and who is positioned where in the hierarchy.
- Power:
Who decides, and whose interests are served? Institutions embody
relations of authority and control. There are few egalitarian
institutions, even if it is claimed to be.
Examining institutions on the basis of these five aspects helps to
understand who does what, who gains and who loses (ie. which men and
which women). This is undertaking an institutional analysis.
Concept 4: Institutional Gender Policies
Kabeer classifies policies into either gender blind policies
(policies recognise no distinction between the sexes and therefore
incorporate biases in favour of existing gender relations) or gender aware policies
(policies that recognise that men and women are part of development and
that they are constrained in different and often unequal ways as
potential participants and beneficiaries). Gender aware polices are
separated into three types (although not mutually exclusive), depending
on the degree to which they recognise and address gender issues:
- Gender neutral policy approaches:
use the knowledge of gender differences in a given society to overcome
biases in development interventions. They work within the existing
gender division of resources and responsibilities
- Gender specific policies:
use the knowledge of gender differences in a given context to respond
to the practical gender needs of either women or men; they also work
within the existing division of resources and responsibilities
- Gender-redistributive policies: are
interventions, which intend to transform existing distributions to
create a more balanced relationship between women and men. They may
target both or only one group. These policies touch on strategic gender
interests.
Concept 5: Immediate, underlying and structural causes
The framework explores the immediate, underlying, and structural
factors, which cause the problems and their effects on the various
actors involved. That is, each of the three factors can be analysed in
relation to the four types of institutions: household, community,
market and state.
The Social Relations Approach is a useful approach in that it can be
applied for many purposes and at many levels. It is particularly
helpful in providing a gender analysis framework to address the third
point raised in paper II: there is also a need for gender analysis to
be undertaking within agencies that implement rural community
development initiatives.
Opportunities and Limitations of Frameworks
March et al., (1999) comments extensively on these approaches in
relation to opportunities and limitations with regard to gender
analysis (Table 1).
Table 1. Opportunities and Limitations of Gender Analysis Tools (adapted from March et al., 1999)
|
|
|
|
|
Opportunities
|
Limitations
|
Gender Analysis Matrix
- Designed specifically for community-based development workers
- Simple and systematic; uses familiar categories and concepts
- Transformatory as well as technical
- Fosters ‘bottom-up’ analysis through community participation
- Considers gender relations between women and men, as well as examining what each category experiences separately
- Levels of analysis can be added to in order to suit particularly interventions
- Includes intangible resources
- Can be used to capture changes over time
- Helps anticipate resistance, and encourages consideration of what support should be offered for those at risk
- Includes men as gendered beings, so can be used in interventions that target men
- Can be used for participatory impact assessment
- Quick data gathering
|
Gender Analysis Matrix
- Needs a good facilitator
- Some factors can get lost because categories have many aspects
- Requires careful repetition in order to consider change over time
- Does not seek out the most vulnerable community members
- Excludes macro- and institutional analysis
- Difficulties defining a community
- Subordination is often no explicit
- Risk of misleading outcomes due to power relations between funders and community members
|
Women’s Empowerment Framework
- Moves beyond the concept of practical and strategic gender needs to show them as a progression
- Emphasises empowerment
- Strongly ideological
- Useful in identifying the gap between rhetoric and reality in interventions
|
Women’s Empowerment Framework
- Not a ‘complete framework
- Hierarchy of levels may make users think that empowerment is a linear process
- Hierarchy of levels does not allow for relative importance of different resources
- Hierarchy of levels does not allow for relative importance of different resources
- Hierarchy of levels does not help to differentiate between marginally different impacts
-
Defining development only in terms of women’s empowerment can tempt
users to focus only on women rather than on gender relations
- Strongly ideological
|
Social Relations Approach
- Gives a holistic analysis of poverty
- Aims to place gender at the centre of an entirely new framework for development theory and practice
- Concentrates on institutions
- Links analysis at all levels
- Can be used in a dynamic Analysis
- Highlights gender relations and emphasises women’s and men’s different interests and needs
|
Social Relations Approach
- Emphasises structure rather than agency
- Gender may become subsumed in a complex examination of cross-cutting inequalities, posing obstacles for political action
- Complexity may intimidate
- Difficult to use with communities in a participate way
- Complexity means very detailed knowledge of context is need
- In reality, institutions do not have definite boundaries
- Difficulty in determining what is an institution
|
Conclusions
This paper illustrates a variety of tools for gender analysis, their
method, and implications on addressing gender issues in the context of
(but not limited to) rural community development. Women are critical to
agricultural production, but their access to resources and effective
technologies is often constrained by gender barriers. In addition,
government agencies working toward rural community development can also
be gender blind. This can lead to detrimental effects on the design and
implementation of effective rural community development projects. This
paper offers three tools as a means of incorporating gender in the
rural community development equation. Achieving this goal requires
agricultural professionals to have a new set of conceptual and
analytical perspectives and skills in order to deal with the spectrum
of projects in which they become involved.
References
-
Feldstein, H. and Poats, S. (1989) Working Together: Gender Analysis in
Agriculture. Volume 1: Case Studies. Kumarian Press, USA.
- Jiggins, J. and Feldstein, H. (1994) Tools for the field: Methodologies handbook for Gender Analysis in Agriculture, IT Publications, London.
- March, C., Smyth, I. And Mukhopadhyay (1999) A Guide to Gender-Analysis Frameworks. An Oxfam Publication, London.
-
Moser, C. (1991) Gender Planning in the Third World : Meeting Practical
and Strategic Gender Needs'. In T. Wallace and C. March (eds) Changing Perceptions: Writings on Gender and Development. Oxfam, Oxford.
- Mosse, J.C. (1993) Half the World, Half a Chance: An Introduction to Gender and Development. Oxfam, Oxford.
-
Parker, A.R. (1993) Another Point of View: A manual on gender analysis
training for grassroots workers: Training Manual. UNIFEM, USA.
-
Sen, G. and Grown, C. (1987) Development, Crises, and Alternative
Visions: Third World Women’s Perspectives. New Feminist Library.
Monthly Review Press, New York.
- Vandana Shiva (1989) Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development. Kali for Women, New Delhi.
- Williams, S., Seed, J. and Mwau, A (1994) The Oxfam Gender Training Manual. Oxfam, UK and Ireland.
  
|
 |
 |
 |
Quick Links
Publications
Browse our extensive list of full text [Conference Publications.....]
2008 Conferences
1st National Diversity on Boards Conference
28-29 May, Sydney NSW [more...]
14th Australian Society of Agronomy Conference
21-25 September, Adelaide SA [more...]
2nd National EMS Forum
19-22 May, Newcastle NSW [more...]
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|