“WID APPROCH VS GAD APPROCH”
HISTORY
APPROCH
CONCLUSION
CPMPARISON
Women in development history.
is an approach of development projects that emerged in the 1960s, calling for treatment of women's
issues in development projects. It is the integration of women into the global economies by
improving their status and assisting in total development. Later, the Gender and development (GAD)
approach proposed more emphasis on gender relations rather than seeing women's issues in
isolation.
Theoretical approach
The term “women in development” was originally coined by a Washington-based network of female development
professionals in the early 1970s. who sought to question trickle down existing theories of development by
contesting that economic development had identical impacts on men and women. The Women in Development
movement (WID) gained momentum in the 1970s, driven by the resurgence of women's movements in developed
countries, and particularly through liberal feminists striving for equal rights and labour opportunities in the United
States. Liberal feminism, postulating that women's disadvantages in society may be eliminated by breaking down
customary expectations of women by offering better education to women and introducing equal opportunity
programmes, had a notable influence on the formulation of the WID approaches.
The focus of the 1970s feminist movements and their repeated calls for employment opportunities in the
development agenda meant that particular attention was given to the productive labour of women, leaving aside
reproductive concerns and social welfare. This approach was pushed forward by WID advocates, reacting to the
general policy environment maintained by early colonial authorities and post-war development authorities,
wherein inadequate reference to the work undertook by women as producers was made, as they were almost
solely identified as their roles as wives and mothers. The WID's opposition to this “welfare approach” was in part
motivated by the work of Danish economist Ester Boserup in the early 1970s, who challenged the assumptions of
the said approach and highlighted the role women by women in the agricultural production and economy.
A dominant strand of thinking within WID sought to link women's issues with development, highlighting how such
issues acted as impediments to economic growth; this “relevance” approach stemmed from the experience of WID
advocates which illustrated that it was more effective if demands of equity and social justice for women were
strategically linked to mainstream development concerns, in an attempt to have WID policy goals taken up by
development agencies.The Women in Development approach was the first contemporary movement to specifically
integrate women in the broader development agenda and acted as the precursor to later movements such as the
Women and Development (WAD), and ultimately, the Gender and Development approach, departing from some of
the criticized aspects imputed to the WID.
Criticism
The WID movement faced a number of criticisms; such an approach had in some cases the unwanted consequence
of depicting women as a unit whose claims are conditional on its productive value, associating increased female
status with the value of cash income in women's lives. The WID view and similar classifications based on Western
feminism, applied a general definition to the status, experiences and contributions of women and the solutions for
women in Third World countries. Furthermore, the WID, although it advocated for greater gender equality, did not
tackle the unequal gender relations and roles at the basis of women's exclusion and gender subordination rather
than addressing the stereotyped expectations entertained by men. Moreover, the underlying assumption behind
the call for the integration of the Third World women with their national economy was that women were not
already participating in development, thus downplaying women's roles in household production and informal
economic and political activities. The WID was also criticized for its views on the fact that women's status will
improve by moving into “productive employment”, implying that the move to the “modern sector” need to be made
from the “traditional” sector to achieve self-advancement, further implying that “traditional” work roles often
occupied by women in the developing world were inhibiting to self-development.
Gender and development- historical background
The United Nations Charter of 1945 and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 established the
first official worldwide recognition of women’s equality and non-discrimination on the basis on sex. However up
until the late 1960’s the focus was on women’s reproductive roles, as women were seen as wives and mothers
and their main issues were supposed to be obtaining access to food, contraceptives, nutrition and health care.
The 70’s and 80’s marked a new phase in which the debate moved beyond women’s equality and the domestic
sphere of women’s role as wives and mothers onto the global stage where the role of women was promoted as
an aid for economic development. The important events such as the First World Conference for Women held in
Mexico 1974, the UN decade for women “76-85” and the promotion of the Women In Development (WID)
approach emphasised women’s right to development, recognition of women’s economic role in national
economies and, most significantly, gave a voice to women in developing countries.
Some of the shortcoming of the approaches such as the WID applied in the 70’s were that they fell short of
improving unequal relationships, and a significant number of projects were unsustainable as development
projects failed to consider the multiple roles carried out by women, leading to a development model that in the
end disadvantaged women.
In the late 80’s the Gender and Development (GAD) approach was developed with the idea of improving the
development model by “removing disparities in social, economic, and political balances between women and
men as a pre-condition for achieving people-centred development” (GWA, 2006:11).
However, since the 1990’s the gender perspective is still struggling to be clearly set into the development
agenda of international treaties or objectives such as the Millennium Development Goals. The principles only
focus on gender equality and do not concentrate enough on women’s centrality to other development areas
(Bunch, 2006).
Gender and development (GAD)
Theoretical approach
The Gender and Development (GAD) approach focuses on the socially constructed . differences between men and
women, the need to challenge existing gender roles and relations, and the creation and effects of class differences
on development. This approach was majorly influenced by the writings of academic scholars such as Oakley (1972)
and Rubin (1975), who argue the social relationship between men and women have systematically subordinated
women, along with economist scholars Lourdes Benería and Amartya Sen (1981), who assess the impact of
colonialism on development and gender inequality. They state that colonialism imposed more than a 'value system'
upon developing nations, it introduced a system of economics 'designed to promote capital accumulation which
caused class differentiation'.
GAD departs from WID, which discussed women's subordination and lack of inclusion in discussions of
international development without examining broader systems of gender relations. Influenced by this work, by the
late 1970s, some practitioners working in the development field questioned focusing on women in isolation. GAD
challenged the WID focus on women as an important ‘target group and ‘untapped resources’ for development.. GAD
marked a shift in thinking about the need to understand how women and men are socially constructed and how
‘those constructions are powerfully reinforced by the social activities that both define and are defined by them.GAD
focuses primarily on the gendered division of labor and gender as a relation of power embedded in institutions.
Consequently, two major frameworks ‘Gender roles’ and ‘social relations analysis’ are used in this approach.
'Gender roles' focuses on the social construction of identities within the household; it also reveals the expectations
from ‘maleness and femaleness’ in their relative access to resources. 'Social relations analysis' exposes the social
dimensions of hierarchical power relations embedded in social institutions, as well as its determining influence on
‘the relative of men and women in society.This relative positioning tends to discriminate against women position
Unlike WID, the GAD approach is not concerned specifically with women, but with the way in which a society
assigns roles, responsibilities and expectations to both women and men. GAD applies gender analysis to uncover
the ways in which men and women work together, presenting results in neutral terms of economics and
efficiency.]In an attempt to create gender equality, (denoting women having same opportunities as men, including
ability to participate in the public sphere; GAD policies aims to redefine traditional gender role expectations.
Women are expected to fulfill household management tasks, home based production as well as bearing and raising
children and caring for family members. The role of a wife is largely interpreted as 'the responsibilities of
motherhood' Men however, are expected to be breadwinners whom are associated with paid work, and market
production. In the labor market, women tend to earn less than men. For instance, 'a study by the Equality and
Human Rights Commission found massive pay inequities in some United Kingdom's top finance companies, women
received around 80 percent less performance-related pay than their male colleagues.' In response to pervasive
gender inequalities, Beijing Platform for Action established gender mainstreaming in 1995 as a strategy across all
policy areas at all levels of governance for achieving gender equality.
Caroline Moser developed the Moser Gender Planning Framework for GAD-oriented development planning in the
1980s while working at the Development Planning Unit of the University of London. Working with Caren Levy, she
expanded it into a methodology for gender policy and planning.The Moser framework follows the Gender and
Development approach in emphasizing the importance of gender relations. As with the WID-based Harvard
Analytical Framework, it includes a collection of quantitative empirical facts. Going further, it investigates the
reasons and processes that lead to conventions of access and control. The Moser Framework includes gender roles
identification, gender needs assessment, disaggregating control of resources and decision making within the
household, planning for balancing work and household responsibilities, distinguishing between different aims in
interventions and involving women and gender-aware organizations in planning.
Criticisms
GAD has been criticized for emphasizing the social differences between men and women while neglecting the
bonds between them and also the potential for changes in roles. Another criticism is that GAD does not dig deeply
enough into social relations and so may not explain how these relations can undermine programs directed at
women. It also does not uncover the types of trade-offs that women are prepared to make for the sake of achieving
their ideals of marriage or motherhood.] Another criticism is that the GAD perspective is theoretically distinct from
WID, but in practice, a program seem to have the element of the two. Whilst many development agencies are now
committed to a gender approach, in practice, the primary institutional perspective remain focused on a WID
approach] There is a slippage in reality where gender mainstreaming is often based in a single normative
perspective as synonymous to women .Development agencies still advance gender transformation to mean
economic betterment for women
“Comparison”
. POLICY APPROACHES TO WOMEN AND GENDER IN DEVELOPMENT
Women in Development (WID) and Gender and Development (GAD) are sometimes used
interchangeably, but there are some basic differences. The WID approach was developed in the
1970s, with the objective of designing actions and policies to integrate women fully into
development. The GAD approach was developed in the 1980s with the objective of removing
disparities in social, economic and political equality between women and men as a pre-condition
for achieving people-centred development. Both approaches are still in use and are applicable in
different situations. The chart below highlights the main differences.
Women in Development Gender and Development
(WID) (GAD)
The Approach An approach which views An approach to people centered
women’s lack of participation as the development
problem
The Focus Women Relations between women and
men
The Problem The exclusion of women (half Unequal relations (between
of the productive resource) from the women and
development process men, rich and poor) that
prevents equitable development
and women’s full participation
The Goal More efficient, effective Equitable, sustainable
development development with men and
women sharing decision-making
and power.
The Solution Integrate women into existing Empower the disadvantaged and
structures women
Transform unequal relations and
structures
The Strategies Women only projects Identify/address practical needs
Women’s components determined by women and men
Integrated projects to improve their condition
Increase women’s productivity At the same time address
Increase women’s income strategic gender needs of
Increase women’s ability to women and men
manage the household Address strategic needs of the
poor through people centred
development
Source: Introductory gender analysis & gender planning training module for UNDP staff
Conclusion
Most of the people who inhabit this world live in poverty. However, women are more likely
than men to be impoverished. This is called the feminization of poverty.[1] In the 1970s,
feminists and agents of development came up with an approach to address this problem
called the Women in Development [WID] approach. As the years went by, this approach was
criticized. A new approach emerged out of this critique called Gender and Development
[GAD] approach. This paper makes two arguments: that GAD is the best approach to address
the inequalities women experience in developing countries, and that the WID approach
must also play a supportive role in addressing these inequalities.
