Case Studies on

Rights-based Approaches to
Gender and Diversity





Carol Miller
Marilyn Thomson
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

ii






























Published by:

Gender And Development Network
c/o WOMANKIND Worldwide
Development House,
56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4JX
UK

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7549 0360
Fax: +44(0) 20 7549 0361

Email: [email protected]
Website: www.gadnetwork.org.uk


First published 2005



Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity iii
Contents


Abbreviations and acronyms..................................................................................... iv

Section 1: Background and overview......................................................................... 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
Rights-based approaches ........................................................................................... 2
Discrimination ........................................................................................................... 4
Social inclusion or exclusion..................................................................................... 6
Process of participation ............................................................................................. 8
For diversity, against discrimination in the EU......................................................... 9
Making the links between internal organisational culture and programmatic
effectiveness ............................................................................................................ 10
Concluding remarks................................................................................................. 12

Section 2: Case studies ............................................................................................. 14
CARE India: gender and diversity in the RACHNA Programme........................... 14
Save the Children UK: Integrating diversity into child rights programming.......... 23
HelpAge International: Inclusion of older people ................................................... 30
Minority Rights Group International: Gender and minority rights ......................... 37
Single Parent Action Network: Diversity and participation course ........................ 43
What are the lessons from gender mainstreaming for disability mainstreaming?... 48


Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

iv
Abbreviations and acronyms


APRODEV Association of World Council of Churches Related Development
Organisations in Europe
CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women
CRP child rights programming
DfID Department for International Development (UK Government)
ECOSOC Economic and Social Council, United Nations
ERJ Exclusion, Rights and Justice Team (DfID)
EU European Union
GAD Gender and Development
HAI HelpAge International
ILO International Labour Organisation
ISOFI Inner Spaces Outer Faces Initiative
KaR Knowledge and Research Programme
OCM Older Citizens Monitoring project (HAI)
LSE London School of Economics
MDG Millennium Development Goals
MIPAA Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing
MRG Minority Rights Group
NGO non-governmental organisation
ODG/DEV Overseas Development Group/School for Development Studies
ODI Overseas Development Institute
PRS Poverty Reduction Strategy
RACHNA Reproductive and Child Heath, Nutrition and AIDS Programme
RH reproductive health
SPAN Single Parent Action Network
SRH sexual and reproductive health
UN CRC UN Convention on the Rights of the Child




Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 1






Section 1: Background and overview


Introduction

This report presents the findings of the second phase of the GAD Network project on
gender and diversity. The first phase explored conceptual approaches to gender and
diversity that underpin debates around diversity within the UK context and examined
how diversity is being taken up in a range of international development organisations in
response to these debates. The phase one report found that discourse around the term
diversity reflects primarily an organisational development and management approach
emanating from human resources departments and driven by the UK political and
legislative context. When queried about approaches to diversity in programmatic work,
many of the organisations described their work related to specific identity groups (e.g.
work with women, disabled people, ethnic minorities, children, older people) and/or
discussed their approaches to discrimination, to social inclusion and to human rights.
There was no standard approach to diversity, as such.

Six case studies are presented in this report. Five are drawn from organisations and
networks that represent a specific community (Save the Children UK/children; HelpAge
International/older people; Minority Rights Group/ethnic minority communities; Single
Parent Action Network UK/single parents; the KaR Programme/disabled people).
1
The
sixth is from a large international development organisation working with the poor to
eradicate poverty (Care International). Of the six case studies, only Single Parent Action
Network (SPAN) focuses on work with communities in the UK context. Drawing on the
case studies, we explore the way in which issues of diversity are being addressed in
programming across different organisations. While many organisations may not use the
term diversity explicitly in relation to their programmatic work, they are attempting to
address diversity through a number of different entry points. Several organisations
(ActionAid Brazil, ActionAid India and Oxfam GB) were generous in sharing
information about their work with marginalised groups (e.g. sex workers, black women
and disabled people) and their work on social exclusion (Department for International
Development, DfID). However, due to time constraints, we were unable to develop case
studies on their work.

The case studies demonstrate how attempts to operationalise a rights-based approach to
programming bring issues of difference to the fore; and with this, the need to tackle
head on discrimination and social exclusion experienced by certain groups in every
society. In the sections below we attempt to provide greater clarification of some of the
key concepts (e.g. rights-based approaches, discrimination, social exclusion,
participation) and through the case studies to provide some examples of approaches and
tools that are being used by different development organisations. Where relevant, we
also draw on examples beyond the case studies to explore approaches being used by
other organisations. There is still some confusion within organisations over how these

1
The case study on disability mainstreaming draws on a research project that is part of the DfID-
supported Disability Knowledge and Research (KaR) Programme, which is managed in partnership by the
Overseas Development Group at the University of East Anglia and Healthlink Worldwide, a London-
based international non-governmental organisation.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

2
key analytical concepts are related and where the distinction lies between analytical
constructs and operational approaches. Here we present these concepts as related and
overlapping.
2


The case studies also suggest that there are no standard methodologies or tools currently
being used to address diversity in programming. What we find, instead, is a variety of
approaches and tools that are being used at a number of different levels. Where possible,
we have documented these tools in the Resources Section of the Gender and Diversity
Resources Kit.

Like the first phase, one of the main concerns of this phase of the GAD Network
research has been to consider how far gender equality stays in focus in rights-based
approaches to programming. In this paper we continue to explore the tension between
efforts to make specific identity groups visible to policy makers and efforts to address
issues of difference and discrimination in a more integrated way. We conclude with
reflections on some of the most promising strategies that have emerged from the case
studies.


Rights-based approaches

In recent years, rights-based approaches to development have been adopted by non-
governmental organisations (NGOs) and international agencies, and written about
extensively by academics. But there is no coherent set of approaches or understanding
of what it means in development practice.
It is a general statement in favour of equitable development, involving
widespread participation of those with no direct control of, or access to, the
power of the state. In this case it may be acceptable to support a rights based
approach as a means of moving forward in development.
3


Rights-based approaches are closely related to international human rights standards and
consist of activities on three core principles: accountability and transparency, equality
and non-discrimination, participation and empowerment.

Some organisations see rights-based approaches as a set of values that guide
development practice, while others consider that rights create entitlements for rights-
holders but duties for states and a range of other duty bearers. These organisations
therefore focus on the actions of governments that violate or fail to support the
realisation of rights and which contravene obligations that governments have signed up
to.
A rights-based approach thus assumes the creation of an enabling
environment in which human rights can be enjoyed. A rights-based approach

2
See related discussion in Appendix 2: Technical Annex, Beall, J. and Piron, L.H, 2002, DfID Social
Exclusion Review, LSE and ODI, December.
3
Rights or Values? Ontrac, No.23, Jan 2003.

Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 3






also promises an environment which can prevent the many conflicts based on
poverty, discrimination and exclusion.
4


The case studies presented here show how a rights-based approach operates at different
levels. For example, in programmes a key element is to enable the community or
specific stakeholders to participate in the formulating of policy by supporting them in
the process of identifying their demands, raising awareness and advocating at a local
level for the rights of the excluded groups. Rights-based programmes might also involve
lobbying for policies that remove barriers to accessing rights, or targeting key duty
bearers who are responsible for ensuring that rights are respected. This might include
training programmes for the judiciary to ensure they understand new legislation that
gives rights to excluded groups (such as the rights of widows to inherit land) or new
legal measures to protect boys and girls from sexual exploitation, rather than
criminalising them under prostitution legislation.

A good example of rights-based programming at the community level is the HelpAge
International (HAI) Older Citizens Monitoring project. This helps groups of older
citizens to participate more fully in society by supporting them to identify their rights
and by offering practical support, such as getting the necessary documentation to enable
them to access the social services and benefits to which they are entitled. Another
example is the CARE Reproductive and Child Heath, Nutrition and AIDS (RACHNA)
Programme which attempts to reorient long-standing approaches to reproductive health
in relation to international agreements on reproductive rights. In this context,
participatory community processes help to uncover the underlying factors impacting on
womens health and reproductive rights. Community-level exercises have pinpointed
issues of identity-based exclusion, marginalisation and abuse as critical to health
impacts. For Save the Children, child rights gives the focus to their programming and
advocacy work and they have developed a range of tools and approaches to ensure that
young people are made aware of their rights.

A rights-based approach also consists of advocacy activities with governments and
international institutions to hold them to account to meet their obligations, to strengthen
existing policy and to bring in new legislation. In the case studies we have included
examples of organisations that have been successful in influencing UN committees and
processes. They work through the framework of international conventions and
mechanisms to influence at the highest level in order to improve the conditions of the
group for whose interests they are lobbying. Although the organisations represent a
specific community HAI working on the rights of older people, Minority Rights
Group (MRG) with ethnic minority groups and Save the Children promoting child
rights they also highlight the linkages and relationships between different groups. For
example, HAI makes the inter-generational links between older people as carers and
orphaned children in their work on poverty and HIV/AIDS.

The case studies show how these organisations are integrating some activities to address
other strands of discrimination on the grounds of different identities (ethnic, religion,
disability, age, gender, class, caste, sexual identity, among many others)
5
and how these

4
Goonesekere, R., 2002, A Rights-based Approach to Realizing Gender Equality, DAW
5
For example, the Ford Foundation has identified 22 different grounds for discrimination in their asset
building and community development programme www.fordfound.org
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

4
aspects of diversity affect their specific stakeholders. They are involved in networks
with other organisations, such as the GAD Network which advocates on womens
rights. They do this to ensure their specific constituency groups concerns are included
in GAD activities and in the UN Commission on the Status of Women and other UN
bodies and events. The MRG case study illustrates an example of a workshop for
members of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW) in which they raised issues of concern to the rights of minority women. HAI
was also successful in lobbying for and inputting into the Madrid International Plan of
Action on Ageing (2002).


Discrimination

The principle of non-discrimination is fundamental to the 1945 Charter of the United
Nations which states that human rights and fundamental freedoms should be available to
all human beings, without discrimination on the basis of race, sex, language or religion.
Since its foundation the UN has adopted a whole range of international instruments and
human rights standards concerned with non-discrimination that have been ratified by
many governments around the world. (See Tools Section for relevant UN International
Treatise)

Despite these universally recognised rights, discrimination is present in every society, in
different forms and at different levels from individual acts to wider social oppression.
Discrimination can be broadly defined as the unfavourable treatment of one group by
another based on racial, religious, sexual or other categorisation. Acts of discrimination
begin with stereotypes. These are preconceived and oversimplified generalisations
about a particular ethnic, religious, gender or other group that categorise all members
of such groups as thinking and behaving in the same way. If these stereotypes are
reinforced by society this can lead to prejudice, and when people act out their prejudices
based on these generalised beliefs and attitudes, then they discriminate. Discrimination
may be the result of the norms and values of a given society, or of the structures and
practices within organisations that directly or indirectly deny equal access to specific
groups. The different forms that discrimination can take are:
intent discrimination: the deliberate act of biased or prejudiced persons
unequal treatment: routinely different treatment for different groups of people
institutional (systematic): social and cultural norms are entrenched in processes
and practices within organisations and institutions that have a negative impact
on individuals and minorities
inter-institutional: intentional discrimination in one field can result in
unintentional discrimination in another.
6


Societies very often classify people according to perceptions of one aspect of their
identity be it gender, disability, ethnicity or sexuality whereas people often have
more complex identities. The MRG case study presents the findings of research which

6
Parker, A.R., Lozano, I., Messner, L.A., 1995, Gender Relations Analysis: A Guide for Trainers. USA:
Save the Children.

Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 5






emphasises the importance of advocacy activities that recognise the intersection of
discrimination on the basis of different identities. They have taken action to address
discrimination within the framework of existing international legislation focussing on
the UN level, but are also supporting their partners through capacity building to use the
existing mechanisms to address discrimination issues at regional and national levels.

In order to tackle discrimination at the programme level it is essential to analyse
different social identities and which groups in the community are excluded or
discriminated against and why. This would include disaggregating data to ensure that
different categories of people and their specific needs are made visible in baseline
studies and needs assessments. NGOs often adopt participatory approaches to ensure
that the voices of socially excluded groups are heard. For example, a range of
participatory research and other tools have been developed to support the participation
of members of these groups to come together to formulate demands. The case study on
CARE Indias RACHNA programme provides one example of the way in which
participatory approaches can help uncover discrimination and exclusion based on age,
gender, caste and sexuality.

A rights-based approach involves identifying the power relations between different
groups in decision-making and in accessing resources, and understanding the specific
cultural contexts in which discrimination occurs. So, for example, if the programme
aims to ensure inclusive basic services, such as education, in a given community, the
first step would be to find out why some children are able to go to school and who is
excluded from school. The next step might be to raise awareness of the rights of the
group that is excluded. A common strategy is to strengthen the capacity of local civil
society organisations working on these issues, so they can define their own rights and
needs, and demand the services they want. As outlined in the case study, this is one of
the main aims of SPAN, which works in the UK with single-parent self-help groups to
build capacity and skills for influencing policy makers at the local level.

As noted above, the MRG case study points to the importance of advocacy activities
that recognise the intersection of discrimination on the basis of different identities. This
is equally important for other programmatic interventions by development agencies.
While the case studies do not refer explicitly to intersectional analysis being used as a
tool, it is clear that there are efforts to address the intersection of multiple identities.
One observation is that, in practice, programmes tend to address the intersection of two
areas of identity (e.g. gender and ethnicity; gender and disability; age and gender). In
organisations dealing with single issues (such as HAI, Save the Children and MRG) the
case studies illustrate efforts to explore how the key defining aspect of identity in focus
(older people, children and minority ethnic groups, respectively) intersects with other
areas of identity to produce multiple forms of discrimination that demand attention from
policy makers.

The RACHNA programme attempts to understand the impact on sexual and
reproductive health outcomes of the intersection of a wider range of identities (e.g.
gender, caste, sexuality, age, migrant status), whilst recognising that flexible approaches
are needed to respond to the particular ways in which discrimination and
marginalisation are played out. It also points to the importance of participatory
processes for providing people with the space to identify, for themselves, the key
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

6
defining features of their identity and for recognising that these may change depending
on the context in which they find themselves. SPANs diversity and participation course
explores the usefulness of participatory approaches for addressing issues of multiple
identity (e.g. single parenthood and age, ethnic minority group, disability, sexual
orientation, migrant status, geographical location) and for exploring commonalities that
can be used as a basis for collective action and social cohesion.


Social inclusion or exclusion

International development agencies such as the World Bank, and some NGOs, use the
concept of social exclusion in order to promote social inclusion, while others stress the
inclusion of disadvantaged groups in development programmes. Others consider that
focussing on inclusion ignores the rights of groups to exclude themselves in societies
that discriminate against them on the grounds of religion, caste or other identity issue.
7


The concept of social exclusion has a number of definitions and is used in different
ways. At one level, it is a process and the result of power relations between individuals
or between groups. Exclusion is associated with poverty, the denial of rights and of full
participation in society for certain groups. The concept has come to the fore since the
Social Summit in 1995 and has been taken forward by international organisations for
example, by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in relation to the labour
market and employment opportunities. Exclusion from economic life includes exclusion
from labour markets, livelihood strategies and other opportunities. Exclusion from
services, social security and protection must be addressed in order to ensure
participation in social life, while exclusion from political life relates to access to
decision-making and citizenship.

In DfID the concept is used to analyse social disadvantage and is also used operationally
in programme work. The European Union (EU) uses the term social exclusion but
prefers to emphasise social integration or cohesion rather than inclusion. An extensive
review of DfIDs social exclusion work was recently carried out by the LSE and ODI
8

in consultation with DfIDs Exclusion, Rights and Justice (ERJ) Team. Since then the
Department has adopted the following working definition:
Social exclusion is the experience of certain groups that suffer discrimination
on the basis of their social identity and that are disadvantaged economically,
socially or politically as a result.
9


According to the review, social exclusion was seen as less threatening than demanding
gender equality and less intimidating than a rights-based approach and was seen as
providing the space to address difficult issues of social discrimination such as caste or
race. Social exclusion is a concept that DfID has taken on board both within its policy
and programme approach and within the structure of the organisation, as indicated in the
review.
10
DfID has reorganised and within its Policy Division, the ERJ is responsible

7
Beall, J.and Piron, L.H. DfID Social Exclusion Review, LSE and ODI, December 2004
8
ibid.
9
We are grateful to Cindy Berman, Julia Chambers and Stephanie Tuffee, Exclusion, Rights and Justice
Team, Policy Division, DfID, for sharing information about DFIDs work on social exclusion.
10
Beall, J.and Piron, L.H. op.cit.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 7






for taking forward work on social exclusion. There are four work streams: Gender
Equality, Tackling Exclusion, Human Rights, and Safety Security and Access to Justice.
The role of the ERJ is to develop policy and provide support to regional and country
offices on the above issues. Other teams in DfID (such as the PRS Team) work more
specifically on implementation tools and mechanisms. Although they do adopt an
integrated approach to tackling exclusion, they also have staff responsible for
specific groups, such as disabled people, children and older people.

The Analytical Matrix on Social Exclusion that was used to synthesise DfIDs
programme work provides a helpful breakdown of different categories of exclusion for
analysis, problem identification and operations. It emphasises four categories of
exclusion: in relation to rights, on the basis of social identity, on the basis of place
(regions affected by conflict, refugees and displace people for example) and exclusion
from the labour market.

Social exclusion is related to concern for equality before the law, to non-discrimination
and to another related concept that of inequality.
11
Another report commissioned by
DfID from ODI
12
identifies two dimensions of inequality: inequality of outcomes and
inequality of opportunity. Economists often favour the concept, as inequality can be
measured quantitatively across different dimensions. The differentials between social
groups and individuals are measurable using human development indices, for example
in relation to income, ownership of land and other assets. Economists measure human
outcomes such as access to health or education or the extent of civil society
participation, and can measure inequality according to the differences between
individuals or social groups in different categories. However, in order to measure
inequality according to dimensions of difference the disaggregation of data is essential,
and this information is not always available or is not in a standardised format for
comparison across regions.

The review of DfIDs work points out that discrimination and social exclusion
contribute to the inequality of outcomes for different groups. Interestingly, the root
causes the social, political and economic drivers are often similar for inequality and
for social exclusion. However, not all inequality between groups can be explained by
social exclusion. This point is of particular relevance in relation to gender. As the ODI
paper observes (p.40), while some see gender and social exclusion as equivalent
concepts, others warn against this. For example, Jackson (1999) argues that women are
oppressed as women through the particular operation of gender relations, which, she
argues, is not the same as women being socially excluded. Womens experience of
exclusion, like that of men, may be gendered. She argues, however, that the gendered
nature of womens exclusion relates to the power relations between the sexes that are
founded on the specifics of gender relations. The ODI paper compares Jacksons
position to that of Kabeer (2000, p.88):
Gender by itself does not translate unproblematically into exclusion.
However, gender can differentiate, and exacerbate, other forms of
disadvantage, and thus feed into the destructive synergies, which underlie

11
ibid. p42.
12
Anderson E., et al, 2004, Inequality in Middle Income Countries, ODI (commissioned by DfID ) cited
in DfID Social Exclusion Review, p.42.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

8
hard-core exclusion. For instance, while the stigma of leprosy operates
regardless of gender, gender mediates and exacerbates it.

The ODI paper points out that while gender and exclusion should be seen as closely
linked, they are not synonymous. This is important and it suggests that a social
exclusion framework must explicitly take into account other cross-cutting issues such as
gender. While this may seem obvious, and a social exclusion approach should in theory
provide space for addressing discrimination of different social groups, putting this into
practice is not easy. The case study on disability mainstreaming below, for example,
explores some of the challenges of keeping gender or disability in focus when using a
social exclusion approach.

The response to the social exclusion of different groups in some organisations is to
promote socially inclusive approaches. HAI, for example, indicates that older people are
often invisible in data and that there should be a greater emphasis in public policy on
analyses from an age perspective. They also recognise that the social exclusion or
inclusion of older people depends on factors such as gender and material circumstances.
Therefore, policy should be based on disaggregated data according to age, gender,
ethnic origin and ability, and should acknowledge the entitlements of the poorest as a
group but also as citizens, migrants and bearers of rights. The principles for inclusive
approaches promoted by HAI are to ensure that older peoples voices are heard, to
support civil society to raise the concerns of older people, and to ensure that their rights
and roles are not overlooked in policy processes and development programmes. HAI is
concerned that national consultation processes such as those related to Poverty
Reduction Strategies (PRS) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have not
included the perspective of poor, older people and other excluded groups, despite being
specifically mandated to include these. HAI maintains that there is an inherent link
between inclusive approaches and social progress and, if some groups continue to be
marginalised, then we are not doing development very well.
13
In order to achieve
inclusion, HAI and other organisations promote participation as a key approach, which
we consider in the following section.


Process of participation

Participation is a term that is central to rights-based approaches and rooted in human
rights standards. Full participation in social, economic and political life is considered a
basic human right, but there is a variety of interpretations of what participation actually
means in development practice. It is generally understood as the active involvement of
adults and children in decisions about processes, programmes and projects that affect
them. In practice, the term covers a wide variety of activities and is not without its
critics, who argue that it can be used as a new form of manipulation. For example,
increasing the economic participation of excluded groups can mean exploitation of their
labour, rather than bringing them increased benefits. The term empowerment is closely
associated with participation. This is generally taken to mean supporting groups and
individuals to develop their potential in order to mobilise local resources, participate in
decision-making, build consensus and hold local authorities to account. Addressing

13
Case study by Sylvia Beales in APRODEV, HAI, One World Action, WIDE, 2004, Transforming the
Mainstream, p.12
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 9






power relations is often a central component of participatory approaches, as
empowering marginalised groups to negotiate and put forward demands can lead to
positive social changes.

There is a whole methodology on participatory research and planning with a range of
tools and approaches that are used to enable different groups to be involved and have
their voices be heard.
14
Participation strategies such as the timing of meetings,
separate meetings for women or different age groups, and improving leadership and
negotiating skills are employed in projects to address the constraints to participation
of certain groups. This is a slow process; it requires time to get the different groups
involved and therefore requires commitment and resources in order to be sustainable in
the longer term.

The organisations presented in the case studies have adopted participation as a positive
and integral part of their rights-base approaches. HAI is committed to building
participation into programmes, its network and within the organisation. This includes:
integrating older peoples experience into the formulation of targets and indicators;
analysing barriers to participation, including time, costs and resources; internalising the
principles of participation in its governance and working practices; and supporting older
peoples groups to advocate in their own rights. Save the Children also has included
children and young people in research and advocacy activities and has developed
accessible resources for young people on citizenship and child rights. Childrens
participation in the governance of the organisation is also being discussed.

The SPAN UK case study focuses on the innovative diversity and participation course
that was piloted in 2004. The course is designed to support single-parent self-help
groups to develop awareness of their own diversity and to strengthen strategies and
skills to widen participation of other single parents living in their local communities.
The case study provides an interesting example of the way in which participatory
approaches can be used to make visible the most marginalised or excluded groups (e.g.
black and ethnic minority groups, refugees and asylum seekers, disabled people) within
a specific community (single-parent families) and thereby enable the organisations
and/or networks developed to support single parents to become more inclusive. The
case study asks how far development interventions, aimed at encouraging community
organisations to reflect on their own diversity and develop more inclusive approaches
within their organisations, would serve as an effective entry point for addressing gender
and diversity.


For diversity, against discrimination in the EU

As noted in the phase one GAD Network report, there are some important developments
with regard to diversity and discrimination legislation that will affect organisations
based in the UK and in Europe. These agreements need to be monitored by civil society
organisations to ensure that the commitments to promote and protect diversity and
equality are in fact carried out by governments.


14
See for example, Slocum, R, et al (eds) 1995, Power, Process and Participation: Tools for change.
Intermediate Technology publications, London.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

10
In the past two years there has been a strong push from the EU on diversity and non-
discrimination. This will have an impact on the cultural environment and the policies of
UK-based international NGOs. For example, as employers they will be regulated by
new anti-discrimination legislation. Governments will have a duty to actively promote
gender and racial equality from 2005, and the priorities and criteria for EU development
assistance will also be influenced, which in turn will impact on programme funding. So
it is important to highlight the nature of these new initiatives on diversity and non-
discrimination.

The Amsterdam Treaty (1997) gave the European Community new powers to combat
discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age
or sexual orientation, and the power to combat sex discrimination was widened. In
2003, the EU Commission launched a five-year campaign For Diversity, Against
Discrimination which included a consultation exercise throughout 25 member states on
a green paper on discrimination. Two new directives from the EU strengthen rights and
combat discrimination: The Racial Equality Directive and The Employment Equality
Directive. (For further information go to: www.stop-discrimination.info.)

The UK Government now has a public duty, not only to respond to cases of
discrimination but to promote gender and race equality. One outcome of this new
legislation on the domestic front is that the UK Government has decided to create a
single Commission for Equality and Human Rights which will change the way equality
issues are promoted and enforced in this country (see discussion of the 2004
consultation in the GAD Network phase one report). Legislation has been introduced
and is likely to be approved in the current parliamentary session. However, the new
Commission will not be fully operational until 2006, so it remains to be seen how this
new diversity focus will operate in practice.


Making the links between internal organisational culture and
programmatic effectiveness

The report of the first phase of the GAD Network research outlines how UK-based
international development organisations have responded to the changes in the UK/EU
legislative framework with regard to diversity. Many organisations, including DfID,
Oxfam UK and ActionAid UK, have undertaken diversity audits of their own internal
policies, practices and procedures. DfID cites many of the above-mentioned legislative
influences as factors behind the introduction their first Annual Report on Diversity in
February 2004. DfID, along with some NGOs (Oxfam, ActionAid UK, Voluntary
Service Overseas), has developed diversity policies and/or strategies to support it in
implementing its obligations under the new legislation. Most of these policies/strategies
are designed to broaden the diversity of staff and to promote changes to the culture of
the organisation in ways that are supportive of diversity.

The phase one report notes that questions have been raised about the appropriateness for
country offices of diversity strategies developed in response to the UK/EU political and
legislative context. Nonetheless, there are some interesting examples available of DfID
country offices developing their own diversity strategies to reflect the specific contexts
in which they work (e.g. Nepal and Zambia). In this report, the CARE India case study
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 11






provides one example of the efforts of a country office to respond to wider efforts
across CARE International to address diversity issues internally (the CARE website
provides examples of diversity audits carried out by some CARE country offices).
International development organisations are increasingly making links between an
internal organisational culture that values diversity and improved programmatic
effectiveness. Not only is practising what they preach seen to increase credibility, it is
also argued that a more diverse staff will strengthen an organisations understanding of
local societies and broaden knowledge and professional expertise. These issues were
addressed in some detail in the first phase report. The case studies presented below
confirm that organisations are thinking about their own diversity and how this impacts
on their work with poor and marginalised groups. SPAN, for example, has specific
criteria for the representation of diverse groups on its National Co-ordinating
Committee to ensure that gender and diversity are embedded in its decision-making
processes. The discussion on disability mainstreaming explores some of the lessons
from gender mainstreaming for other areas of diversity with regard to the importance of
making links between internal organisational structure/culture and programmatic work
on gender equality.

The case study on CARE Indias RACHNA Programme is also of particular relevance
in that it explores the dynamics between staff attitudes around sensitive cultural and
social issues and programme effectiveness. Importantly, its strategies for addressing
gender and diversity from a rights-based perspective operate at two integrated levels:
programming strategies and internal organisational strategies to support a culture of
reflection and attitudinal change about issues of gender and diversity. Also within the
RACHNA programme, an innovative pilot has been launched called Inner Spaces Outer
Faces Initiative (ISOFI). ISOFI addresses the dynamics between internal organisational
culture/values and programmatic effectiveness. The pilot is based on the understanding
that staff attitudes and cultural norms about sexuality and gender have hindered the
effectiveness of programmes promoting sexual and reproductive health. Among the
aims of the initiative is to deepen staff members personal understanding of the concepts
of gender and sexuality and strengthen their gender and sexuality analytical skills.

Save the Children has a handbook and other resources to support staff to integrate a
diversity analysis in their work but recognises that this is not sufficient. As an
international organisation, Save the Children employs a wide range of people across the
world and therefore a diversity approach requires an understanding of the range of
cultural, political and social contexts within which they operate. In its diversity primer it
suggest that staff teams have to be aware of the power dynamics affecting their work.
An examination of all aspects of operations, from programming to human resources
practices, as well as the staffs own beliefs is essential. There are also inevitable
differences in working styles, attitudes and communication. Save the Children suggests
that people who work for an international organisation should be aware of those
differences and how they impact in the workplace. This has to go in hand with
management responsibility to oversee and take forward a diversity approach.




Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

12
Concluding remarks

The case studies suggest that there is no standard approach to diversity apparent in
programming, but that diversity issues are being raised through a number of different
entry points (e.g. right-based approaches, discrimination, social exclusion/inclusion,
participation). There is considerable effort underway to clarify key concepts and to
understand how they are inter-related and how they can be operationalised. Much more
could still be done to disseminate the existing work (such as the recent reviews on
human rights and on social exclusion prepared by ODI for DfID) and to strength
understanding across different institutions.

The case studies also illustrate that there are pockets of innovative work to address
issues of diversity more systematically in programming. All the case studies
demonstrate the importance of understanding different cultural contexts, the need for
disaggregation of data, the importance of participatory research and stakeholder
involvement in planning and activities. They also recognise the importance of
highlighting the obstacles to accessing rights and that these might require different
interventions according to the stakeholders involved. Again what we find is that there is
no uniform approach to programme interventions to address diversity issues but that
these are dependent on the context. A growing understanding of the reality of peoples
multiple identities and the need to tackle multiple forms of discrimination is evident
from the case studies. However, the examples given suggest that in practice it may only
be manageable to work through targeted interventions focussing on the intersection of
two or three areas of identity. From the perspective of gender, the case studies suggest
that rather than being side-lined by a concern with a wider range of diversity issues, the
approaches being taken by the organisations are, on the whole, enabling more nuanced
understandings, and programmatic responses, of the lived experience of multiple
identities.

The case studies also highlight the tension between demands for greater policy attention
to specific identity issues (e.g. gender, race and ethnicity, age, disability, sexuality) and
moves towards more unified approaches to addressing issues of difference (such as
rights-based approaches, social exclusion/inclusion, diversity strategies). From the
examples explored in this paper, it is possible to argue that while more holistic and
integrated approaches are important, they will not do away with the need for a specific
focus on women/gender inequality (and for specific attention to other identity issues as
well). Nonetheless, networking and collaborating across organisations/networks to
understand and address the underlying causes of discrimination/exclusion of different
groups needs to be emphasised. The APRODEV/HAI/One World Action 2003
workshop on mainstreaming and inclusive approaches in EU development policy, and
the recent work on lessons from gender mainstreaming for disability mainstreaming, are
examples but much more could be done. This is particularly important in relation to
identifying joint advocacy actions at an international level as well as co-operating at
local and country level.

Participation and participatory approaches are prioritised in all case studies and it is
crucial that approaches adopted are supportive of real participation and empowerment
rather than tokenistic or rhetorical. The case studies suggest that enabling the voices of
the most marginalised and excluded groups to be heard is not only central to rights-
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 13






based approaches but is essential for ensuring appropriate and effective development
interventions.

Strategically, the case studies indicate the importance of working simultaneously at a
number of different levels to address issues of diversity: internal organisational level;
programming level; and advocacy level. They also suggest multiple-tracked approaches
to diversity are required. For example, this might involve:
1. identifying what is common in the shared experience of discrimination and,
from this, what can serve as the basis for collective work
2. identifying when and where single-strand issues warrant targeted interventions
(in addition to mainstreaming)
3. identifying and addressing multiple identities and multiple forms of
discrimination.

While more work needs to be done to strengthen the ways in which diversity issues are
addressed in programmatic work, the case studies document some promising
approaches being used by different organisations and should be of considerable
relevance to other members of the GAD Network.


Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

14
Section 2: Case studies


CARE India: gender and diversity in the RACHNA Programme
15



Introduction
This case study explores the recent experience of gender equity and diversity integration
in CARE Indias Reproductive and Child Heath, Nutrition and AIDS (RACHNA)
Programme. The RACHNA programme should be of interest to GAD Network
members for a number of reasons. First, RACHNA attempts to address gender and
diversity issues through interventions at two levels: programming strategies and internal
organisational strategies. RACHNA thus provides an important illustration of the
dynamic relationship between addressing diversity as an internal organisational issue
and addressing diversity in programme work.

Second, CARE is in the process of reorganising its reproductive health (RH)
programme to encompass more fully the range of interventions outlined in the Cairo
Programme of Action, adopted by governments after the International Conference on
Development and Population in 1994. This re-orientation relates to the rights-based
framework being adopted by CARE, which addresses the underlying causes of poverty
and injustice in all its programmes and seeks to ensure diversity and gender equity in all
country programmes. CAREs RH programmes are thus beginning to address
underlying social and structural causes of poor health, including issues of discrimination
and marginalisation (e.g. inequities related to gender, class or ethnicity), national,
district and local priorities and social norms. Of particular relevance in this regard is an
innovative pilot launched within the RACHNA programme, the Inner Spaces Outer
Faces Initiative, which supports a process of mainstreaming sexuality and gender as
fundamental components of reproductive health and rights.



The case study suggests that there is no one tool or checklist for working on gender and
diversity from a rights-based perspective. Instead the RACHNA programme provides an
example of how CARE has embarked on a process of organisational and personal
change to support its commitment to human rights and social justice as well as the
different entry points that are available. Here we can only give a schematic overview of
some of the highlights of the RACHNA programme, focussing primarily on processes
and approaches that are being used to support its reorientation.

Background on CARE
CARE is an international confederation of twelve national Members; each an
autonomous NGO in its own right. CAREs Member offices in North America, Europe,
Asia and Australia carry out a range of project-related, advocacy, fundraising, and
communications activities in support of CARE Internationals relief and development
programmes in over 65 countries worldwide. In the great majority of the countries in
which CARE International works, all programmes and projects are implemented

15
We are grateful to the following people for providing information: Geetika Hora, RACHNA
Programme, CARE India; Elisa Martinez, Senior Programme Advisor, Impact Evaluation and Gender
Equity, CARE USA; and Madhuri Narayanan, Senior Advisor, Gender and Diversity, CARE USA.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 15






through a single integrated operational presence, termed the Country Office, under the
leadership of the CARE International Country Director.

CARE Internationals mission is to serve individuals and families in some of the poorest
communities in the world. CARE attempts to work with local communities to address
root causes of poverty and to empower communities and households to make lasting
changes in their lives. CARE has developed a set of six Programming Principles to
inform and guide the way it works: Promote Empowerment; Work in Partnership with
Others; Ensure Accountability and Promote Responsibility; Oppose Discrimination;
16

Oppose Violence; and, Seek Sustainable Results. CARE Internationals Programming
Principles represent the fruits of several years of effort to distil the essence of CAREs
rights-based approach. There is ongoing work by CARE staff around the world to attach
specific behaviours and indicators to each principle in order to ensure that interventions
will examine power, identity and accountability as well as pay attention to underlying
causes of poverty. This work will also support the use of the Programming Principles as
tools for effective planning, programming, and monitoring and evaluation.

One example is the CARE Rights-based Rating Scale to rank interventions on a scale
from one to five for each of the Programming Principles. A specific tool on addressing
gender and diversity issues in relation to each Programme Principle has been developed.
Many of these documents are available from the CARE Rights Based Approach
Resource Centre which brings together various papers, tools and manuals that describe
CAREs experience in applying a rights-based approach to development. At this
juncture it is also worth mentioning CAREs excellent Gender Equity Building Blocks,
which are a collection of field examples and methods that integrate gender equity and
diversity issues into programming (with sections on concepts, analysis, strategic
choices, implementation methods, partnerships, and information systems). Links to
many of these tools and action research projects are given in the Resources Section of
the Gender and Diversity Resources Kit. All of the above should provide some
indication of the broader context in which the RACHNA programme is evolving.

Gender and diversity in CARE India
Since 1950, CARE India has worked primarily with women by implementing
programmes to improve their health, nutritional and socio-economic status within their
local contexts. Although these programmes were working towards meeting some of the
more obvious and practical needs of women, over the years there has been growing
awareness that, while important, such interventions may not ensure that women have
more control over their own lives. Over the past five years there has been considerable
effort by CARE India to strengthen its approach by identifying and addressing the
structural inequities that create and perpetuate the subordination of women.

In 1999, a Gender Task Force was set up, with the aim of creating a more gender-
sensitive organisational climate and articulating the connections between CARE Indias
vision, goal and gender objectives. In the same year, the Design, Evaluation, Monitoring
and Organisational Learning Team developed a gender training manual. In 2000, a

16
Of particular relevance here is Principle 4: Oppose Discrimination, which states: In our programs and
offices we oppose discrimination and the denial of rights based on sex, race, nationality, ethnicity, class,
religion, age, physical ability, caste, opinion or sexual orientation.

Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

16
gender vision and goal and a Gender Integration Institutional Plan were developed to act
as a unifying framework, providing guidelines to integrate gender in all organisational
policies and programmes. Throughout 2001 and 2002 a number of regional workshops
were held to support staff in understanding key concepts around gender and rights-based
approaches, organised by the Design, Evaluation, Monitoring and Organisational
Learning Team.

What is clear from the documentation surrounding these various activities is the very
conscious effort of staff to grapple with the implications for their work of a shift to a
rights-based approach. This has involved a reorientation away from thinking about
project design and strategies with a narrow focus on the symptoms of gender
discrimination (womens ill health, nutrition, illiteracy, income poverty etc.) and away
from the perspective of technical outcomes (e.g. reductions in mortality, improved
nutrition, literacy, income generation). It has meant thinking about approaches and skills
for recognising discrimination and for supporting a more holistic analysis of the
underlying causes of discrimination and the dynamics through which denial of rights
and discrimination perpetuates poverty (e.g. social and gender analysis, PRA/PLA). It
has also meant thinking about new ways of working to challenge discrimination
(negotiation, advocacy and more).

A report in February 2002
17
pulled together some of the learning emerging from the
above-mentioned workshops and analysed some of the gaps on gender and diversity that
needed to be further explored. Among these was the recognition of the challenges of
supporting staff to break the thinking that gender issues exist only in the communities
in which they work. At the same time, the workshops generated considerable discussion
of diversity issues beyond gender, such as those of caste, religion, class, language and
the rural-urban divide which are all sensitive issues in Indian society. It was also noted
that the question of how CARE India could be more conscious of recognising and
addressing a wider range of diversity issues was an equally sensitive one for staff. The
report concludes that the current focus has been on gender alone and that CARE India
needs to build its internal expertise in other diversity issues as well.

The RACHNA programme provides one example of CARE Indias reorientation
towards thinking about gender and diversity within the framework of a rights-based
approach.

The RACHNA programme
18

The RACHNA programme represents the current phase of a 40-year partnership with
the Government of India and USAID, aimed at impacting maternal and child health.
The programme reaches over 100,000 villages and 22 cities of India. It targets families
with pregnant women and children under two years, men and women of reproductive
age, youth, female sex workers, migrants and truckers. While much has been achieved
over the past decade in using participatory methods to enhance the effectiveness of
programmes, it is argued that:

17
Towards a gender-sensitive organisational culture: Learnings and challenges in CARE India, February
2002.
18
Much of this section draws on the document: CARE India, October 2004, Experience of gender equity
and diversity integration in RACHNA: Towards lasting improvements in the health and well-being of
vulnerable communities in India.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 17






the paradigm shift has come when staff had the courage, and made the
commitment, to address such previously taboo subjects as caste-based
exclusion, son preference, gender and sexuality, and violence against women.

It is beyond the scope of this case study to capture in full the multi-faceted and multi-
layered approach that is being used to support the process of re-orientating the
RACHNA programme. There have been numerous background papers prepared and
participatory community processes used to uncover the underlying factors impacting on
womens health and reproductive rights. As a first step, key gender issues specific to the
target groups within RACHNA were identified. Through this process the following
objective of the programme was defined:
Enhancing capabilities of women to negotiate decisions that affect their health
and well-being within and outside the household.

Community-level analysis exercises pinpointed the issues of identity-based exclusion,
marginalisation and/or abuse as critical to health impacts. These helped to demonstrate
the central relationship between health outcomes and gender/social dynamics that had
previously been off the table, including:
active exclusion from health services, based on gender and caste
harmful cultural practices which inhibit health practices
the importance of adolescence as a time when gender roles and differentials
crystallise
power inequities sustained by rigid gender roles, where checks on womens
mobility and sexuality reflect fears about social control, and undermine
womens status and health
violence in public and private domains, as both cause and consequence of
womens disempowerment.

Building on the above, a series of facilitated dialogues was held with the RACHNA
team to help move the programme closer to really understanding what it means to
address the underlying causes of poverty and, related to this, what is required to
mainstream gender and diversity. To give one example, staff attempted to articulate in
measurable terms what RACHNA would hope to achieve in each of the priority
issues/areas (e.g. those bulleted above) that had been identified through investigation
into underlying causes.

Here the CARE Programming Principles were used to identify what might be changed
to bring RACHNA to a fuller rights-based approach, asking questions such as:
What might be a minimum standard for the issue? (Indian law, human rights
law, ethical and religious norms)
What are some concrete and sustainable contributions that RACHNA could
make to move in this direction?
What kinds of internal measures could be used to hold ourselves accountable for
these goals? (Here, the Programming Principles were used to map out activity-
level commitments for RACHNA to strengthen Empowerment, Opposition to
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

18
Discrimination, Opposition to Violence, etc.).

The outcome of all the above has been the identification of two inter-related sets of
operational strategies to address gender and diversity issues in RACHNA: Programming
Strategies and Internal Organisational Strategies.

Programming Strategies include:
working with women as primary target groups
organising women into collectives
creating a strong cadre of change agents in communities
implementing short learning cycles and innovative pilots (see discussion on
ISOFI below)
facilitating meaningful engagement with the government system.

Internal Organisational Strategies include:
building staff capacities for gender and social analysis
promoting a culture of reflection and questioning
investing in reflective documentation and learning
gaining mission-level support to strengthen work on gender and diversity
engaging in state-level networks and alliances.

Again, we cannot provide the details on the rationale and modalities for each of these
areas of work. However, it is worth elaborating a few points. With regard to
Programming Strategies, for example, there has been a conscious effort to address
diversity issues in a number of ways. Recognising the existence of caste and class-based
divisions has led to the selection of change agents from different groups in the
communities. Other innovations have been the inclusion of men as change agents and
youth as peer educators. By including youth, RACHNA is attempting to ensure that
young people are taught at an early age to challenge stereotypes and mindsets. This is
also reflected in the life-cycle approach which RACHNA has adopted in addressing
reproductive health issues.

With regard to Internal Organisational Strategies, significant emphasis is placed on
strengthening internal team skills to integrate gender and issues of social exclusion for
achieving greater impact, rather than depending solely on external expertise. Through
workshops, debates and cross-visits to other organisations, staff are being enabled to
challenge their beliefs and attitudes about issues of gender and diversity and find
meaningful ways of addressing these in their own lives and through their work. Linked
to this is the challenge of promoting a culture of reflection and questioning. There are
efforts to move away from merely focusing on carrying out tasks in a routine manner.
Instead there is a move towards constantly reminding themselves of the RACHNA
programme goal and of the need to ensure that those left out from health services are
encouraged to participate in programme activities. This means constantly asking the
following questions:

Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 19






Are the most vulnerable groups in the communities being reached?
Is the current data collection and monitoring system tuned to track impact on
vulnerable groups?
How is the social position of women in the communities being improved?
Are partner organisations skilled to address these issues?

Although this new approach is still at an early stage, a number of lessons have been
documented so far. The two main findings are that:
Communities are not homogeneous and therefore the women RACHNA works
with cannot be viewed as a homogeneous group. They have significant
differences based on other identities such as religion, caste and class, and
therefore are able to participate and benefit from the programme differently.
While having common goals and unifying principles, RACHNA has to allow for
flexible approaches to respond to different community realities and change
processes.
Changing mindsets, which have been fostered by patriarchal values, requires
intensive engagement with the communities it works with. But social change
must begin within CARE staff need to be encouraged to challenge their own
mindsets, biases and behaviours in order for them to facilitate positive change
among partners and communities with which CARE works.

Inner Spaces Outer Faces Initiative
19

The two-year pilot ISOFI was launched at a workshop in May 2004 as one of the
innovative short learning-cycle projects within the RACHNA programme (another
ISOFI pilot is being implemented in CARE Vietnam). The project was developed by
CARE USA in partnership with the International Centre for Research on Women
(ICRW) and co-funded by the FORD Foundation. It aims:
to facilitate a strong foundation in CARE for integrating sexuality and gender
in its programmatic approach for achieving reproductive health both in
terms of stronger health results and gender equity, by a systematic and
deliberate analysis of sexuality, gender, power relations and identity.
20


Silences around issues of sexuality, gender, identity and power are understood to have
hindered the effectiveness of programmes promoting sexual and reproductive health.
CARE is now working to mainstream gender, sexuality and a rights-based approach into
its reproductive health programme worldwide.
At a minimum this requires understanding that sexuality is socially defined
and constructed, that institutional arrangements for sexual behaviour (such as
marriage systems) define gender-based power relations and that social norms
and ideologies manifest idealised views of male and female sexuality. It also
requires understanding how in a given social setting, existing institutions and

19
This section draws on two sources: Inner Spaces, Outer Faces: Integrating Sexuality and Gender into
CAREs Reproductive Health Programs, ICRW and CARE Proposal to the Ford Foundation, August
2003; and the CD-ROM of the ISOFI Launch Workshop, May 25-29, 2004.
20
CARE India, October 2004, Experience of gender equity and diversity integration in RACHNA:
Towards lasting improvements in the health and well-being of vulnerable communities in India.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

20
norms define knowledge, behaviour, [selection of] partners, motivations, and
power dynamics within men and womens sexual relationships and
behaviour.
21


The central challenge here is that while
sexuality and gender affect reproductive health, they are rarely addressed
directly in reproductive health programmes due to the culture and habit of
silence that prevails both at the community level and within the lives of staff
members who implement the programmes.
22


Even where staff members have learned to talk technically about gender and
reproductive health, they tend to skirt around or ignore sensitive issues and cultural
norms about sexuality that underlie reproductive health needs and outcomes due to
their own personal discomfort about addressing issues of sexuality and gender. This has
profound implications for reproductive health and other development programmes, but
particularly for those aimed at preventing or managing the consequences of HIV/AIDS
and gender-based violence.

ISOFI seeks to address these challenges systematically, through an organisational
strategy that promotes both personal learning and programmatic realignment. The two-
year pilot is seen as preparatory work needed for CARE staff and partners to develop
the skills necessary for this sensitive work, to document the process of organisational
learning and to disseminate the learning widely within the organisation. The launch
workshop introduced staff to the framework of the initiative. The focus is on working
with staff to:
deepen their own personal understanding of gender and sexuality concepts
strengthen their gender and sexuality analytical skills
develop their participatory gender and sexuality analysis and design skills for
programming.

Significant emphasis is also placed on managing and documenting the process of
organisational change that all of the above entails.

Some of the highlights from the launch that are of particular interest relate to the critical
thinking on clarifying the differences between traditional approaches to reproductive
health and a rights-based approach that takes into account gender and sexuality. For
example, presentations and discussions worked through the implications of taking a
rights-based approach to gender and sexuality, introducing the concepts of bodily
integrity, choice, self-determination, consent, freedom from coercion, discrimination
and violence as well as respect for diversity. Four case studies were prepared and
distributed to the group for analysis and discussion. Each case study presented a
scenario ranging from a young couple who find themselves confronted with an
unwanted pregnancy, to a service provider who feels uncomfortable with certain issues
concerning sexuality that have arisen while working with sex workers. Each case study

21
Inner Spaces, Outer Faces: Integrating Sexuality and Gender into CAREs Reproductive Health
Programs, ICRW and CARE Proposal to the Ford Foundation, August 2003, p.2
22
Ibid. p.2.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 21






presents a situation that a programme may be confronted with in practice when working
with a particular community.

Participants discussed the gender and sexuality components and the various
consequences to sexual and reproductive health programmes if these components are
not addressed. The results were divided into three general categories (1) social
consequences, (2) sexual and reproductive health (SRH) consequences, and (3) sexual
and reproductive health programming consequences. The outcomes are included here
because they demonstrate the way in which links are being made between gender,
sexuality, and underlying causes of poverty and discrimination.


Social Consequences SRH Consequences
SRH Programming
Consequences
perpetuation of unequal
sexual relations
homophobia
perpetuation of unequal
power relations
perpetuation of unequal
gender relations
silence on critical issues
cyclical nature of violence
cyclical nature of
underlying causes

unwanted pregnancy
unsafe abortion
HIV/AIDS/STIs
gender and sexual
violence
death
fistula and other serious
disabilities
psychosexual issues (no
satisfaction, fear, etc.)

decreased RH-related
morbidity and mortality
increased sexual health
people better prepared
for mutually satisfying
relationships
increased
communication
increased self-esteem of
people/self-agency
increased gender equity
decreased
marginalised/vulnerable
people/stigma
decreased poverty


The following chart was presented as part of the session and demonstrates how an
ISOFI Learning Project differs from a traditional reproductive health programme.


Analysis Action/Intervention Outcomes

Traditional RH
Projects
Traditional RH
parameters
Traditional RH
activities
Improved RH morbidity
and mortality
ISOFI Learning
Projects
Traditional plus
sexuality and gender
Traditional with
sexuality and gender
integrated
Improved RH morbidity
and mortality
Improved sexual health
Improved social justice
and reduced poverty


It is difficult to capture fully in such a short study the ISOFI approach in particular and
the reorientation of the RACHNA programme in general. As these processes are still in
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

22
their early stages, it is difficult to share more in the way of progress in implementing
either the internal or programmatic strategies. This case study nonetheless provides
some insight into the innovative and multi-faceted approach that CARE is taking to
address gender and diversity in its work. The Resources Section of the Gender and
Diversity Resources Kit provides details for those who are interested in following the
development of the RACHNA programme.

Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 23






Save the Children UK: Integrating diversity into child rights
programming
23



Introduction
This case study of Save the Children UKs work on diversity provides an insight into
how the organisation is working to address diversity and discrimination against
children. The case study focuses on the internal process of developing an approach to
work on equity and how Save the Children UK would like to integrate diversity into
programming. It also outlines the key components of child rights programming (CRP),
which includes a focus on discrimination and equity, and provides a practical example
of how the programme in South America is addressing discrimination by involving
young people in monitoring their work.

Background to Save the Children UK
Save the Children fights for children in the UK and around the world who suffer from
poverty, disease, injustice and violence. It has programmes tackling education, health
and HIV and focuses on children who are affected by emergencies, poverty and
exploitation. It also carries out research on a wide range of issues, such as the impact of
globalisation, child poverty, and child rights issues.

Save the Children UK is a member of the International Save the Children Alliance,
which brings together 27 organisations working in over 100 countries. They are
independent organisations but have similar missions and values and work together to
develop joint strategies and strengthen their collective capacity in programme work,
advocacy for childrens rights and fundraising. Together as the Alliance the
organisations actively engage with the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and
participate in major international and regional conferences to advocate for childrens
rights. In recent years they have strongly involved young people in these advocacy
activities. In their programme work they actively encourage childrens participation and
have a variety of publications and training packages for children and teachers on a range
of child rights issues.

Together with a number of other organisations, Save the Children UK is currently part
of the Make Poverty History, and as an active member of the Growing up in Poverty
network is involved in research looking at poverty and children in different countries.

Discrimination
Save the Children UKs approach to issues of discrimination has been informed by its
commitment to realising the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC), with
non-discrimination as one of its core principles. Save the Children UK has a history of
tackling discrimination experienced by the most marginalised and excluded groups of
children. Over the years, its efforts to tackle discrimination have reflected the tension
between a commitment to non-discrimination as a principle extending to all areas of
organisational operations, and being a distinct focus of work in programmes, policy and

23
This case study expands on an earlier paper by T.Hyder and C. Csaky Diversity Programming:
approaches and next steps, Save the Children, Policy and Learning Team, December 2003 and other
information provided by Tina Hyder, the Save the Childrens Diversity Adviser.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

24
advocacy. Thus the principle of non-discrimination has been central to the work of Save
the Children UK, but the implications for practical action have been harder to realise
and, as with other organisations, Save the Children UK has tried a number of
operational models.

Save the Children UK works to challenge discrimination and to help children know and
enjoy their rights, and through its advocacy work puts pressure on governments and
other players to respect childrens rights. It defines discrimination and the children most
affected by it and acknowledges that children may face multiple forms of
discrimination:
Discrimination means treating people less well than others because of who
they are, and is a denial of rights. It can include discrimination based on race,
age, disability, HIV status, sexual preference, religion and gender. These forms
are linked, so a girl who is disabled and from a particular ethnic group may be
triply disadvantaged.
Vulnerable groups such as refugees and street children are often heavily
discriminated against. This can lead to exclusion, blocked opportunities,
exploitation, abuse and even death.
24


Based on their experience Save the Children UK promotes a unified overall approach to
tackling discrimination, which it believes is most effective, for the following reasons:
25

The impacts of discrimination, whatever the root causes, are likely to be
marginalisation, social exclusion, lack of access, an increased likelihood of
poverty and lack of power. As such, there are overlaps in the actions required to
address them.
Common analytical frameworks can be used both to define problems and find
solutions to discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, disability or other factors.
The inter-relatedness of issues of identity means that it is important to have a
unified strategy to tackle discrimination, particularly multiple discrimination.

Therefore a diversity approach is promoted to tackle discrimination, in order to capture
the complexity of identity and note intersections between components of identity. In this
way the organisation believes it will be better able to find effective overall approaches
to tackling discrimination. However, it also recognises that it is appropriate in some
cases to focus on specific issues in programme and project work, such as racism or
gender inequality, in order to address rights violations against specific groups.

Diversity: a unified approach
Save the Children UK has tried various approaches to work on diversity issues.
Technical posts
26
dedicated to strengthening programme and policy impact on disability
and gender equality achieved significant progress in addressing these issues, developing
policies and guidelines for integrating them into child rights programmes. Initially,
gender, disability and HIV/AIDS were defined as cross-cutting issues and were

24
See equality and rights section at www.savethechildren.org.uk
25
Save the Children UK, 2004, Diversity Primer.
26
A disability adviser came into post in the policy section of the programmes department in 1987,
followed by a gender adviser in 1995.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 25






supposed to be considered in all programmes. However, the principles of gender and
disability equality were not integrated into all aspects of the organisations work as the
general perception was that having a few specific projects on disability or gender (e.g.
on violence against girls), targeted research and advocacy were sufficient.

In the late 1990s advisers working on disability and gender, along with the HIV and
child focus advisers, produced a working paper
27
noting the importance of finding the
common ground when working on issues of discrimination. This highlighted three
important points:
There are similar actions required by programmes to tackle and improve action
on a wide range of equality issues (for instance, training for staff and partners,
awareness raising, advocacy, creation of or implementation of legislation, action
by children from discriminated against groups to claim their rights and so on).
A focus on specific issues of discrimination (gender, disability, HIV) with
dedicated posts, meant that other issues were missed (for instance, ethnicity and
caste).
It was also acknowledged that the intersections between issues of discrimination
must be understood, as it is difficult to tackle one form of discrimination without
taking into account others. For instance, action on promoting disability equality
will only be successful if issues of gender and caste are taken into account.

As a result an organisational initiative, including a staff training programme and the
development of tools for analysing the impact of power, leading to effective
programming on issues of discrimination, was developed by the advisers. However, this
initiative failed to be rolled out across the organisation. The principle of a unified
approach to issues of discrimination was not lost and can be seen in the current
organisational approach that seeks greater coherence in applying the principles of non-
discrimination to all aspects of work.

In 2003 organisational restructuring led to a sharper focus on Save the Children UK
goals and the creation of a new team with responsibility for organisational policy and
learning. Within the Policy and Learning team a new Diversity Advisers post has been
created with responsibility for all areas of discrimination and diversity, including
gender. The Diversity Adviser works collaboratively with the Child Rights Adviser and
the Learning and Impact Adviser.

The aim is to use CRP and the country planning and review processes to integrate
awareness of diversity issues and to plan effective programme and advocacy work to
tackle discrimination in all sectors. By using management systems, the focus is removed
from only training and awareness raising, to achieving clearly stated minimum
standards in planning, monitoring, evaluation and advocacy. The focus on diversity
issues requires analysis of which groups of children experience discrimination and
acknowledges that there are many groups experiencing multiple- discrimination.

As patterns of discrimination vary from place to place, the aim of a commitment to
diversity as a means of tackling discrimination is not about imposing strategies from the

27
Internal working paper: entitled Avoiding Issue Overload (1995)
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

26
centre of the organisation. Instead, the team proposes that country programmes should
analyse patterns of discrimination and impacts on children relevant to local contexts,
and plan activities accordingly. They stress that, as there is near universal discrimination
on the basis of gender, disability and ethnicity (for reasons of language, religion,
culture, minority status, etc.) attention must be paid to these particular areas of
discrimination in all analyses.

The current challenge for Save the Children UK is to ensure agreed commitment
throughout the organisation to tackling discrimination from a diversity perspective. To
do so, the Diversity Adviser is promoting the following approach:
organisational awareness and understanding of how discrimination operates and
coherent action to tackle discrimination. This is being addressed through the
production of induction materials and training tools as well as establishing links
between human resources practices and action in policy and programmes
measures to analyse and tackle patterns of discrimination
learning from experience about what works.

Some tools have already been produced to support staff to integrate diversity into
programme work. For example, guidelines for CRP include tackling discrimination as
one of the four principles of the approach, and a useful checklist has been provided to
guide staff through the key elements to be addressed in the project cycle.

Within Save the Children UK a commitment to diversity also implies an
acknowledgement of the range of cultural, political and social contexts within which it
works. It requires awareness from staff, at all levels, of the power dynamics within
which they operate. To tackle discrimination and promote diversity the organisation
suggests that it is important to examine all aspects of its work, from programming to
human resources practices, as well as beliefs. It also suggests that it is of equal
importance to maintain technical knowledge and skills as they apply to particular areas
of discrimination, such as gender and disability.

Save the Children UK has a wide range of publications for children and young people, a
special website just for them called Global Eyes, and a number of training packs for
teachers on global issues that affect children. Among these are anti-discrimination
training resources by and for young people, activity packs on sexual discrimination as
well as a teachers guide on how to facilitate and assess childrens active citizenship.

Tackling discrimination from a diversity perspective
Save the Children UK is committed to a CRP approach in all of its programme work.
This means that child rights provide the framework within which all programme work
fits. This approach respects children as social actors and aims to maximise
sustainability, efficiency and overall impact. Non-discrimination is one of the four
general principles of the UN CRC. Article 2 of the UNCRC says that:

States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present
Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any
kind, irrespective of the childs or his or her parents or legal guardians race,
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 27






colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or
social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.
28


The UN CRC and other human rights instruments are tools through which
discrimination can be tackled and rights upheld. Although the notion of respect for
difference is at the heart of a diversity approach Save the Children UK stresses that it is
important that respect for different cultural traditions and practices does not happen at
the expense of a commitment to human rights.

Key elements of a child rights programming approach
The key principles of human rights: universality, equity, or non-discrimination apply to
childrens rights. The recognition of the complexity of identity and the ways in which
discrimination and power relations impact on people (including children), combined
with a desire to value difference has led Save the Children UK to take a unified, holistic
approach to this issue, which they refer to as diversity.

Other core principles of a CRP approach are the right to survival and development and
the best interest of the child. There are two other important elements to CRP:
participation and accountability. The right to participate in decisions that affect them
and for their voices to be heard is a key child rights and human rights principle and
considered good development practice. Therefore child participation is promoted in
every area of the organisations work and in each part of the programme cycle.
Accountability means, not only holding duty bearers to account but also seeking ways
of increasing Save the Children UKs accountability to children and to involve children
in governance (children as stakeholders). In order to be accountable to children they
monitor the impact of their work and how it affects childrens lives against five
dimensions of change (identified in the global impact monitoring process), and they
give great importance to organisational learning through monitoring their successes and
mistakes.

Diversity, equity and global impact monitoring
Save the Children UKs approach to measuring impact is known as GIM (global impact
monitoring). Dimension 4 measures changes in equity and non-discrimination in the
lives of children and young people. The information that is needed to indicate a change
in this dimension are:
1. disaggregated data which gives a general picture of which children and young
people experience discrimination
2. disaggregated data about the involvement of discriminated against groups of
children in thematic areas
3. information about the impact of activities that have promoted changes in the
ability of children to speak out; changes in attitudes and access to services; and
finally changes in policies and practices.

Equity and non-discrimination of children and young people
An example of how diversity is being incorporated in Save the Children UK programme
work is provided by the views of young people involved in their sexual and

28
Although we only refer here to the UNCRC, it is important to note that children also have rights under
the wider international human rights framework e.g. girls have specific rights under CEDAW.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

28
reproductive work in South America.
29
The context in which programme work takes
place is particularly relevant in Baha, Brazil, where the poverty and discrimination
against the majority black population is the framework for the work with young men
and women. Other elements incorporated are respect for the sexual choice of the young
people and the prevention of violence against women.

During the Save the Children UK Sub-Regional Planning Meeting in 2004, in which
young people from Colombia and Peru participated alongside delegates from other
Brazilian networks, dialogue took place on Black Conscience, Poverty and
Discrimination. This prompted the visiting staff teams from Colombia and Peru to
suggest modifications in the structure of the education of young people in the project.

In Peru, emphasis is given to optimising the conditions for the participation of young
women in all spaces and reducing barriers to their access. Their partner organisation, the
Instituto de Educacin Sexual (IES) has achieved equity in the representation of young
women in school and community groups. In Colombia, focus groups were formed for
the evaluation of the second year of project activities and quality factors, including
gender equality and testimonies were gathered from young people, such as the
following:
I think that all the men and women have their own space, there is no
discrimination between the sexes in the project, we are all equal. With respect
to my peers, I have noticed that both the men and women are well-balanced.
17-year-old girl, Colombia
I have noticed a lot of respect for gender equality within the project. We all
receive the same training, have the same levels of participation, and the same
respect for what we think and feel.
16-year-old girl, Colombia
I have had the opportunity to work alongside women in multiplication work
and I dont think that there is any rivalry between the genders, rather a
complementarity that has made it possible to strengthen the project.
17-year-old boy, Colombia


Changes in the lives of children and young people
It is not possible at this point to provide consistent and relevant data on changes in the
lives of the young participants in the project. However, several surveys have been
carried out during which testimonies were gathered that will be used to study the life
histories of the participants in the project, as part of the evaluation process of the project
which will be conducted in 2005.
Now I find it easier to communicate with my peers and to have conversations
with adults. They consider me to be more responsible, they come to me for
information and they let me participate in community spaces
17-year-old boy, Brazil
I think that people listen to me, because of what is said in the evaluation
guides, and they take more notice of my opinions during debates
18-year-old young woman, Peru

29
Save the Children UK, 2004, Global Impact Monitoring Report
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 29






I have changed my way of thinking and I feel revitalized as a person. I know
other spaces, I feel more responsible and I have new horizons.
17-year-old girl, Brazil
I am a new person. I see new spaces and new opportunities.
16-year-old girl, Peru

Although at this stage it is not possible to provide data relating to the impact of the
programme work, the testimonies of young people in Brazil demonstrate a change in
their perception of prevention. They also underline the need to integrate the subject of
HIV/AIDS with other aspects such as poverty, discrimination, ethnicity and education,
from the rights perspective.
Today, when the Black Awareness Day is being celebrated in Brazil, I passed
through my neighbourhood on a bus. I felt sorrow because of the poverty. I felt
that because I am black, young and female, I have so many reasons to feel
vulnerable, but I also know that now I have the chance to help to change
things, to inform other young people so that they do not acquire HIV.
17-year-old girl, Brazil
Stop. Nobody will keep me quiet. I represent a people and I have the right to
education, the right to a dignified health system I want to have freedom of
expression I am the voice of a people that suffers and cries, but that is
happy I am a young man, but not any young man, I am a young man in
action for life.
17-year-old boy, Brazil
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

30
HelpAge International: Inclusion of older people


Introduction
This case study provides an example of how a rights-based approach has been
developed to give a voice to a largely marginalised sector of society and to challenge
the discrimination faced by different groups of older women and men. Help the Age
International (HAI) has a focus on social inclusion and participation as key elements in
its advocacy and programme work.
30


Background to HAI
HAI is a global network organisation with an affiliate membership structure of over 200
civil society organisations, largely based in developing countries. It has a decentralised
structure working through local partners who sign up to HAIs principles, which are
derived from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. HAI is committed to
strengthening the capacity of its members and partners and to balancing South and
North through its governance structure. Regional groupings operate with a yearly
calendar of regional meetings, largely based in developing countries, which provide
opportunities for members to raise issues of concern to them.

The Policy, Communications, Advocacy and Research staff are in a separate department
to Programmes, called the Development Department. Strategic goals at the programme
level are set at regional and country level with input from the Development Department
and programme staff in the London office. These goals in turn take forward the strategic
goals of the organisation, which are debated at senior management team level, with
input from all HAI departments, and agreed with the wider Board.

The Development Department works with the Programmes section to make the
connection between projects, programmes and processes at national level and HAIs
proposed policy outcomes. The aim is to use the experience and data collected in the
course of programmes for policy influence in support of older persons, as well as for
programmes development. This has led, for example, to a dialogue on how HAI
programmes should include issues of disability and children. There has also been
discussion on how the experience at programme level can be used with donors to scale
up support to older people within national poverty programmes, and the inclusion of
older people in programmes to target the chronically poor. There is collaboration with
country offices (and via them, partners) on, for example: programme content and focus;
the management of concrete projects, such as the Older Citizens Monitoring Programme
which is presented below; support for proposal development; and monitoring,
development of information systems including data disaggregation, support for
participatory research and the development of policy positions.

Mainstreaming
Mainstreaming ageing into policies and processes is a key approach to HAIs advocacy
work with governments, which includes strengthening direct dialogue and consultation

30
The information in this case study is drawn from a number of HAI documents and publications and
from interviews with Sylvia Beales and Fiona Clark, Policy, Communications and Research Section,
HAI.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 31






between governments and civil society organisations representing older people. At
programme level two key strategies guide HAIs work.
31


Social inclusion, which is rights-based and multi-sectoral, promotes participation and
furthering existing human rights obligations as a central element, to ensure that the
voices of all older people are being heard and that they participate in processes that
affect them directly.

The second strategy is social protection, especially in relation to poverty reduction and
the importance of supporting the poorest to access basic services and specific transfers
(including cash transfers). Both of these strategies emphasise the importance of
recognising difference and basing information from data disaggregated by age, gender,
ethnic origin and ability. This case study provides information on how these two
strategies are being implemented within HAIs programme and advocacy work.

Rights-based approaches
Human rights are central to HAIs vision and are integrated at two levels. Programmes
that have been designed to take forward the UN Principles of the Human Rights of
Older Persons (Care, Dignity, Inclusion, Participation, Independence); and advocacy
work to promote the rights of older people as expressed in the body of human rights
agreements and the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing (MIPAA), agreed in
2002.

HAI has increasingly focussed its efforts on promoting the rights of older people in a
dialogue with governments and international institutions, while continuing to support
the needs of vulnerable groups of old people in direct programme work. Since the
signing up of governments to the MIPAA, HAI has used this as leverage to engage with
governments, donors and communities to raise awareness of the issues facing older
people in poverty. It has also used MIPAA to advocate for the promotion of the rights
and entitlements of older people and the inclusion of issues of age in poverty reduction
plans and the MDGs.

HAI has defined a ten-point action plan to end age-based discrimination.
32
This includes
action on rights, freedom from poverty and violence, social protection, inclusion and the
participation of older women and men in policy processes and programmes. HAI aims
to deliver programmes that take forward the principles of non-discrimination and
equality. This means focusing on the poorest and most disadvantaged, being inclusive in
reach and intent, and ensuring that there is an end to discrimination on the basis of
gender, race, disability and age.

The rights-based approach is demonstrated in a range of HAIs programme activities.
These include direct legal challenges to abuses of rights in Africa; rights education; and
sensitisation and collaborative work with governments (e.g. Tanzania) to ensure older
citizens are included in the PRS processes. Programmes offer practical support to ensure
that older people have the necessary documentation to access their legal entitlements.
Examples of this are activities such as litigation in South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho
to challenge violations of the rights of older men and women. These activities have led

31
HAI Annual Progress Report 2003-4.
32
HAI, 2001, Equal Treatment, Equal Rights: Ten actions to end age discrimination
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

32
to increased access by older people to their rights for state benefits such as foster care,
disability and arrear pensions, grants and identity documents. In Tanzania and Ghana
projects have recently started to focus on gender and property rights by addressing
widowhood and inheritance issues that particularly affect women.

A good example of HAIs rights-based approach is the Older Citizens Monitoring
project (OCM), which operates in Bangladesh, Bolivia, Ethiopia, Jamaica, Kenya and
Tanzania. The stated objective of the project
33
is to ensure that the commitments to
inclusion of disadvantaged older people made at the World Assembly on Ageing are
translated into specific public policies and programmes. It aims to equip poor, older
citizens with skills and data to monitor policy implementation and service delivery, and
to empower them to claim their entitlements for example, to health services. Activities
have included the training of older peoples monitoring groups; engaging with human
rights ombudsmen, local authorities and national governments; and securing
entitlements to a range of policies that affect older people, but especially those related to
health.

As part of the OCM programme in Bolivia, HAI co-ordinated a review of health
services with the Ministry of Health and the National Ageing Programme, while at the
same time supporting older women and men to claim their entitlements by supporting
them to get the necessary documentation. The Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper in
Bolivia identified that older people are entitled to certain benefits but there are a number
of barriers to obtaining these, particularly lack of information, personal documentation,
language and literacy. Documentation is an important issue for older people who were
born before birth registration and identity cards were introduced. Members of ethnic
groups are particularly affected as they often live in isolated areas, and poverty means
that they cannot afford the bus fare or the cost of the identity card. Without an identity
card older citizens cannot access the benefits to which they are entitled. Older women
are four times more likely than older men to lack documentation in Bolivia. The OCM
project works with a separate HAI-run programme to support these identified groups to
obtain the necessary documents so they can access benefits. A key indicator of the
success of this project is the increased confidence of older women and men to tackle
community leaders and local authorities on issues that concern them.

Civil society engagement with government
A core activity in the HAI rights-based approach has been to support the organising of
older peoples groups to be centrally involved in negotiating policy improvements. For
example, this approach has been important in promoting the integration of issues of
ageing into PRS processes. The approach has also promoted these issues in the design
and formulation of National Plans on Ageing a feature of HAIs regional work across
Africa and led to close collaboration with the Africa Union to produce its Policy
Framework and Plan of Action on Ageing. In advocacy work at the local authority level
HAI has documented notable success, including engagement of older people in the PRS
processes in Tanzania, Bolivia and Uganda. This brought their partners into dialogue
with municipal offices and led to increased access to health and other entitlements for
marginalised older people, their dependants and wider families.
Another good example of the rights-based approach is work in Mozambique. A project
called Raising the Barriers on Ageing works with older people in their communities to

33
HAI, Annual Progress Report 2002-3
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 33






influence leaders and policy by raising awareness of older peoples rights. The focus is
on vulnerability and it is the community that decides who is vulnerable (widows, HIV-
positive people and orphans, for example). The work challenges the barriers that inhibit
different groups of older people from exercising their rights. This project has shown
concrete results from advocacy initiatives in Mozambique.
34
For example:
The Ministry of Labour, National Institute of Social Security and Ministry
Home Affairs have established desks to look into issues of older people.
The National Institute of Social Action is establishing documentation
programmes to reach rural older people after HAI pointed out that support was
conditional on poor older people having identity cards.
Radio Maputo linked up to old peoples homes and helped 764 older people in
reaching their families: 52 older people (34 women) have either spoken to their
family members, been visited or received a letter during the year.

Gender and diversity issues
There is recognition within HAI that ageing has a different impact on men and womens
well-being and welfare throughout the life cycle, as a result of gender. HAI policy
papers stress the need for development programmes to acknowledge and address the
different social and economic roles of both men and women throughout their lives.
Gender awareness for HAI means understanding the socially and
psychologically determined characteristics of older men and older women, and
supporting their rights equally Our aim is to contribute an ageing
perspective to gender debates and to mainstream a consideration of gender
and ageing into wider development activities around poverty, health, violence,
rights, emergencies and conflict and HIV/AIDS.
35


HAI uses its position paper on gender and ageing as a means of checking and working
on gendered issues, rather than as a specific gender policy for staff and partners to sign
up to. The paper emphasises that it is important to examine how gendered experiences
throughout the life cycle affect peoples experiences of old age, including their status
within the household. The intention is that gender issues should be addressed in all
projects, and that gender analysis includes the situation of both men and women as a
matter of course.

HAI has pushed for the inclusion of a gendered policy in international agreements on
ageing (MIPAA) and regional agreements (the African Union Policy Framework and
Plan of Action on Ageing). For example, it produced a series of briefs
36
discussing key
issues on gender and ageing for the Second World Assembly on Ageing (Madrid, April
2002) and for the UN Commission on the Status of Women. These highlighted gender
and age issues in relation to violence, poverty, HIV/AIDS as well as the participation of
older women and men in development processes.

HAI programmes are not necessarily labelled as being gender focussed or women
specific. However, in some projects women are the main users or beneficiaries because

34
HAI Annual Progress Report 2002-3, and information supplied from policy staff.
35
HAI, November 2000, Gender and Ageing Position Paper.
36
HAI, 2002, Gender and Ageing Briefs.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

34
in many societies older women are the most excluded and are less likely to have access
to services and benefits. There are some projects addressing specific womens issues
and empowering older women to organise and set up their own organisations. For
example, as a result of the rights work in Lesotho, older women formed a group
working with the Maseru Womens Association. In Bangladesh 225 older women in
two project areas have formed 20 Older Womens groups and 132 older women are
involved in income generation activities with small grants. In Sudan and Tanzania there
are older womens projects focussed on promoting land rights and freedom from
violence.
37


HAIs approach to gender discrimination also targets men. It recognises that older men
can be very isolated as age factors can deny them opportunities to participate in
community affairs; a lifetime of gender defined roles inhibit them from becoming
involved in domestic activities; and in many communities they lack the social support
networks that women have built up. Addressing gender discrimination against women,
also involves working with men. For example, in Tanzania programme work to address
discrimination against women on the grounds of witchcraft, as well as supporting
vulnerable older women, includes the training of male para-legals and work with male
traditional healers.

Programme work includes addressing diversity issues, although diversity is not a
specific focus. Other strands of diversity are often not profiled in the same way as
gender issues. For example, in Bolivia, a country with a high proportion of indigenous
peoples, HAIs programme highlights gender but not ethnicity as a strand of
discrimination, although specific issues for older ethnic people have been identified and
they have specific programmes working with older indigenous (Aymara) women.

Other diversity strands, such as disability, have been addressed in regular publications
and work on inclusion.
38
The edition on ageing and disability provided the basis for a
series of articles on the website to mark International Day of Disabled Persons and
supported the integration of disability into programme work.

Social inclusion and participation
Although not explicitly highlighted, diversity issues are central to HAIs social
inclusion approach. For example, in Tanzania considerable effort went into ensuring the
revised PRS included inclusive and intergenerational strategies and outcomes for the
marginalised poor. In order to ensure older peoples voices were heard, HAI and
partners conducted a three-day workshop inviting older peoples representatives to
discuss key issues and priorities, such as income poverty, rights, access to health
services, HIV/AIDS and basic needs. HAI encouraged older people and their
organisations to be involved in the district and village level consultations that were
launched by the government across the country. A report was submitted to relevant
government departments for consideration and HAI made specific recommendations for
goals and strategies to be included in the PRS. The final PRS includes most of these
recommendations. It contains specific goals and outcomes relating to both social

37
HAI, Annual Progress Report 2002-3.
38
HAIs Ageways, Issue 64, January 2004, focussed on disability, and Issue 65, September 2004 focussed
on mental health.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 35






protection and social inclusion of older people and older women in particular, along
with children, disabled people and people disadvantaged because of their ethnicity.

In 2004, work was undertaken to explore social inclusion and vulnerability, especially
in relation to HIV/AIDS. This resulted in a number of policy publications,
39
reports and
policy recommendations on HIV/AIDS and older people. For example, over 50 per cent
of the 12 million AIDS orphans in Africa are cared for by older people, and HAI is
therefore promoting support for older carers who are looking after orphans and
vulnerable children. The organisation identified the discrimination and stigma older
people experience in accessing support including education, information, material
support and as a result has developed practical projects to enable it to care for
dependants and protect themselves and others from the disease. Advocacy and policy
work aims to ensure the inclusion of older carers issues in national HIV/AIDS
programmes, and targets older carers as agents of change in dealing with the
pandemic.
40


Participation is both a method and a philosophy to promote the principles of social
inclusion.
41
The position paper on participation stresses that older peoples participation
is a key to sound development planning. It also recognises that participation can be
challenging, that it can be conflictive and can require changing attitudes as well as
practice. Internally, HAI promotes the principles of participation in the organisational
culture and working practices; for example, in relation to hierarchy, gender, preferences
and constraints. Participation is promoted as a means to more effective working. The
network structure of the organisation can facilitate participation of partner
organisations, but barriers to participation have been identified in the position paper.
These include time, cost and resources. At programme level, activities include auditing
older peoples involvement in programme design and approval, and feeding older
peoples experiences into the formulation of targets and indicators.

International advocacy
HAI encourages its partners to be informed and to engage with national and
international debates on poverty reduction, rights and how to incorporate older peoples
issues. HAI promotes the participation of older people in national poverty debates on
the MDGs. As a result of this effort there is ongoing work with UNDP to strengthen the
case for age-disaggregated poverty data in the monitoring mechanisms, to assess
achievement of poverty reduction and MDGs. In the current international advocacy
processes and events in which HAI is involved, it stresses the importance of age
disaggregated data, the inclusion of older people in the design and planning of poverty
and MDG programmes, and the inclusion of cash transfer in aid programmes to target
and reach the poorest.

Since 159 UN member states adopted the MIPAA, HAI has worked to raise awareness
about issues facing older people in poverty and to press for action, according to the

39
See for example, Beales, S., 2003, Obligation and Inclusion: A look at EU development policy and
practice, HAI; and APRODEV, HAI, One World Action, WIDE, 2004, Transforming the Mainstream,
seminar report on mainstreaming and inclusive approaches in EU development cooperation.
40
HAI and HIV/AIDS Alliance, 2003, Forgotten Families: Older people caring for orphan and
vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS; and HAI, 2004, The Cost of Love: Older people in the fight
against AIDS in Tanzania.
41
Participation and Ageing, HAI position paper, November 2000
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

36
MIPAA, with regard to the promotion of the rights and entitlements of older people.
There are many examples of their advocacy activities that include a diversity
perspective. For example:
Collaboration with the Chronic Poverty Research Centre in the UK has ensured
the recognition of old age as a feature of chronic poverty and led to important
research collaborations in Africa, India and Bangladesh. It has also highlighted
the importance of social protection in combating the conditions of the older
chronically poor, and the inclusive and intergenerational policy responses that
are required to ensure achievement of national and international development
targets.
Collaboration with a number of NGOs and networks in the EU and in the UK
e.g. the Grow Up Free from Poverty Campaign, with Save the Children, Care
International, BOND, UK Aid Network and CONCORD highlights and
promotes intergenerational and rights approaches (as a means to deliver effective
aid to the poorest) and action on the inclusion of the chronically poor in MDG
policy and practice.
Collaboration has taken place with DfID on work relating to human rights,
exclusion and social protection; with the ILO on social protection; and with the
Commission on Africa on cash transfers and social protection overall. HAI is a
partner in UNDPs evolving work on poverty reduction and social exclusion
linked to national MDG and PRS processes.

Successes and challenges in taking forward an inclusive approach
In HAI, the development of performance indicators is ongoing and encompasses work
on monitoring and evaluation and knowledge management. For example, management
tools include key performance indicators, which contain gender disaggregated data at a
programme level. HAI is aware of some inconsistency in reporting processes, in part
because there are separate projects, donor requirements and a range of partners with
varying levels of capacity to record and store data. Furthermore, the demands on
programme staff to prepare reports for donors can impact on their availability for
developing indicators and measuring impact. There are some communication issues in
terms of documenting lessons from programme experience. HAI works through local
staff and partners, some of whom lack capacity in recording data and writing in English.
Documentation is provided in the local language wherever possible, but as in all
multilingual organisations the cost and time involved in organising translations of
materials can be prohibitive.

The challenge of agreeing priorities and documenting learning from programme work,
for both programme development and policy positioning, is an issue under discussion
within the organisation, especially in relation to expanding capacity and developing
information management within the international offices. Current work to monitor the
impact of the OCM project and supporting the analysis of different groups of
beneficiaries are examples of joint work between the policy team and programmes.
Collaborative impact monitoring is one approach HAI the policy team is exploring as a
way forward to document learning, especially in relation to social inclusion and
protection issues.

Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 37






Minority Rights Group International: Gender and minority rights


Introduction
This case study presents recent advocacy and research work undertaken by Minority
Rights Group (MRG) which highlights and brings together two strands of
discrimination: gender and minority rights. It also presents information on the process
and experience of integrating minority issues into advocacy activities in the UN.
42


Background to MRG
MRG is an advocacy and research focussed organisation working with, and on behalf
of, non-dominant ethnic, religious and linguistic communities. It has 130 partners in 60
countries, working together
to secure the rights of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities and
indigenous peoples worldwide, and to promote cooperation and understanding
between communities.
43


MRG publishes reports, training manuals, briefing papers and workshop reports
covering a broad range of issues concerning the rights of minorities and indigenous
peoples. It also works with partners to run training events on international minority
rights standards and advocacy techniques. MRG maintains a presence at international
forums including the UN and the EU promoting international human rights
standards, and advocating for and with minority and indigenous groups. It also
organises forums where minorities and indigenous peoples can meet with decision-
makers and members of majority communities in order to open constructive dialogue.

A rights-based framework
MRG works within the framework of international legislation and standards and aims to
influence decision-makers and communities in order to protect and promote the basic
rights of indigenous and tribal peoples, migrant communities and refugees. It recognises
that these groups are not homogenous some members face further marginalisation due
to age, class, disability, gender or other issues of diversity. The communities MRG
works with are among the poorest and most excluded groups in society and often lack
access to political power, face discrimination and human rights abuses, and have
development policies imposed upon them. MRGs activities focus on four key
approaches:
promoting the active participation of minorities and indigenous peoples in
decisions affecting their lives
securing the implementation of international standards
advancing conflict resolution and reconciliation initiatives
advocating the need for the integration of minority rights into development
policies.


42
The information in the case study has been taken from MRG documents and from interviews with
Katrina Payne and Angela Haynes, members of staff working on gender and diversity issues.
43
Quoted on webpage: www.minorityrights.org
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

38
Gender and diversity within MRG
MRG has recently given a higher profile to gender issues in its advocacy work. It has a
gender policy, developed by a staff working-group and agreed by the council in 1998.
The policy is included in MRGs internal handbook and all new staff receive a briefing
on gender as part of their induction. MRG also have a multiple discrimination policy.

There is an annual gender review meeting during which all staff look at how well
gender has been incorporated into their own areas of work. There is a commitment to
running staff training on gender at different levels, and two years ago the organisation
ran gender training for all staff at introductory and intermediate levels. MRG is
currently discussing whether to introduce diversity training into its staff development
activities.

Working with partners on discrimination
MRG works with groups that have similar aims and objectives to its own, on a thematic
and regional basis. It is not a donor but works together on joint advocacy and capacity
building with its partners.

MRG runs an annual (global) training programme in Geneva to which it invites
partners. This week-long training on minority rights is planned to coincide with
practical advocacy activities as MRG also engages in the UN Working Group on
Minorities during this period (which meets annually at the end of February). MRG has
been able to support partners to carry out follow-up training, dissemination, publications
and radio programmes, and to facilitate advocacy at a regional level. In 2003 it ran a
training session on minority rights for staff of the European Commission working on
human rights and democratisation. It has also run training encouraging the inclusion of
minority issues in the policy and practice of development organisations.

MRG is now giving greater emphasis to sub-regional training and aims to have a good
balance of participants from a gender and ethnicity perspective. At the global
workshops in Geneva it is often the directors of the partner organisations who attend
and the majority are men. However, it is possible that more women will attend the sub-
regional workshops. In some cases, the structure of partner organisations makes it
difficult to get a gender balance in their training workshops. MRG is aware that there
are numerous reasons why women do not always put themselves forward for training, so
it tries to take these into account in the planning of events. Workshops with partners
provide an opportunity to raise gender issues for women and MRG can suggest having
sessions on gender and also influence the active participation of women in the capacity
building sessions. MRG is finding that gender issues are being raised more frequently
by partner organisations. For example, for their next standard training course on how to
use the UN system and mechanisms, partners have specifically requested that gender-
based rights are included on the agenda.

Advocacy and campaigning
An example of MRG advocacy activities is its engagement with the EU. MRG was one
of the organisations that presented a case study at a workshop to analyse current
mainstreaming strategies and inclusive approaches in EU development. The strategy it
has adopted for integrating minority rights issues into the work of the EU includes:
identifying minorities; ensuring consultations with non-state actors, including
minorities; examining the impact of discrimination; and supporting governments to
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 39






collect disaggregated data. It also meets with the EC and EU delegations in relation to
country specific issues. For example, MRG wrote a briefing paper, in response to the
Kenyan Governments Country Strategy Paper, assessing the framework from a
minority rights perspective. This was presented to the EU.

The EU has a commitment to gender mainstreaming but not to mainstreaming on other
areas of diversity and identity. One of the recommendations in the report of the
workshop was that the EU and NGOs should work on explicit inclusion strategies to
combat the various layers of discrimination that are prevalent in the development
context.
44
The report
45
suggested strategies to close the gap between policy
commitment and effective practice. For example, basic social analyses are required at
local and national level, as well as the disaggregating of data and findings by age, social
difference and gender at national and international levels to avoid a one size fits all
approach. It also suggests that development practice should be anchored in the human
rights perspective to achieve equity and equality.

A new strategy has recently been agreed within MRG to give greater focus to
campaigns on an agreed set of issues. There will be five strands in the campaign:
anti-discrimination (which will include gender and diversity issues)
education (curriculum, the portrayal of ethnic minorities, MDGs and the
education of minority girls)
prevention of genocide and conflict
improvement of international development for minorities
land rights (which should include a focus on gender, particularly womens land
rights, and empowerment).

Gender and minority rights
In its minority rights reports MRG tries to ensure that issues of gender and age are
addressed. It always ask a gender specialist to read new reports before they are
published and six months after publication it reviews the impact of reports and identifies
issues for future reports or advocacy. In its recent programme activities MRG has
identified minority elders and women as especially vulnerable to discrimination and
therefore a focus for advocacy activities.
46


In August 2004, MRG published a new report Gender, Minorities and Indigenous
Peoples
47
that was launched in Geneva at the UN Committee for Elimination of Racial
Discrimination. The report aims to encourage organisations working on minority rights
and ethnicity to incorporate gender, and organisation focused on gender rights to
incorporate ethnicity issues. The authors of the report highlight the concept of
intersectional discrimination, which stresses the importance of identifying the racial

44
APRODEV, HAI, One World Action, WIDE, 2004, Transforming the Mainstream, seminar report on
mainstreaming and inclusive approaches in EU development cooperation p.34.
45
A set of detailed actions points on how the EU can strengthen its gender and inclusion policies and
practices are included in Transforming the Mainstream, ibid, p.35.
46
MRG published two reports on womens rights in 2003: a report of a workshop on gender rights in
Albania; and Jackson D. Twa women, Twa Rights in the Great Lakes Region of Africa.
47
Written by Fareda Banda and Christine Chinkin.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

40
elements of gender discrimination as well as the gender elements of race discrimination.
Failing to recognise how different discriminations intersect could make women
vulnerable to further discrimination. The report stresses that effective advocacy requires
an understanding of the interrelation between different forms of discrimination:
If this is not recognized minority or indigenous women are rendered invisible
in official strategies to combat gender equality and minority or indigenous
women are rendered invisible in official policies to tackle racial/ethnic
discrimination. (p.11)

The report
48
highlights that the intersection of gender and other bases of disadvantage
can be a barrier to justice. It also stresses the importance of disaggregating and
differentiating between minorities, as the term is used for a range of different peoples
and circumstances, which generally come under one category. For example, minorities
can be self-identified groups on the basis of ethnic origins or traditions, or a range of
peoples from different countries who become minorities through migration, conflict and
in response to globalisation, who are not always identifiable because of their ethnic or
cultural origins.

There is no UN treaty specifically on minority rights. The observance of these rights are
monitored by the Committee on the Elimination of Race Discrimination and a UN
Working Group on Minorities, which was set up by the Commission on Human Rights
to promote the UN Declaration on Minorities. The report notes that the international
legal instruments relevant to minorities and indigenous rights generally use gender-
neutral terms and are based on an assumption that the same protection is automatically
provided for men and women. However, a gender focus might bring out customary or
religious practices that discriminate against groups of women and girls and that do not
affect men. Equally in CEDAW there is no separate reference to the particular
discrimination faced by minorities or indigenous women because of their identity. Each
of the separate UN Committees has developed comments and recommendations on
specific provisions of their Convention to address these omissions.

More recently, the declaration from the World Conference against Racism (2001)
recognises that victims of discrimination can suffer multiple or aggravated forms of
discrimination. The Beijing Platform for Action, published in 1995 and reaffirmed in
2000, recognises that not all women are the same, and explicitly states that:
many women face additional barriers to the enjoyment of their human rights
because of such factors as their race, language, ethnicity, culture, religion,
disability or socio-economic class or because they are migrants, displaced
people or refugees.
49


The Beijing Platform for Action also includes a separate critical area of concern in
relation to the girl child.

Traditionally, human rights law is more male dominated. MRG is therefore trying to
break new ground on specific issues in its Legal Cases Programme, for example on land
rights. The MRG report highlights that the international human rights regime is

48
Ibid. p.8
49
UN, 1996, Beijing Platform for Action, paragraph 226, p.125
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 41






beginning to recognise the incidence of multiple discrimination and how these can
operate independently but intersect and reinforce each other with cumulative adverse
consequences for the enjoyment of human rights.
50


The report will be used for advocacy activities in 2005, for example during the UN
review of the Beijing Platform for Action (Beijing +10) and other activities. The
findings of the report were presented at a special workshop for members of the UN
Committee on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women in January 2005. During
the workshop, the authors of the report made some important points on the intersection
of discrimination for minority and indigenous women. Such women are discriminated
against two fold due to their status as members of a minority and as women (for
example in relation to inheritance laws). Minority women who claim their rights are
open to accusations from their communities that they are rejecting their culture and
want assimilation into the majority group. The majority group views those women, who
do not actively accept the majority view, as oppressed. There is no recognition that
women may wish to both improve their rights and defend their culture. For this reason
promoting non-discrimination without addressing gender is not an appropriate model,
especially regarding reproductive rights that might require different approaches. Women
have multiple (or intersecting) identities and these must be taken into account in order to
ensure the rights of minority and indigenous women.

The workshop with the CEDAW Committee showed the potential for discussing
discrimination against indigenous minority women at the highest level. The authors of
the MRG report and representatives of minority womens organisations were able to
raise a range of concerns with Committee members. For example, a representative of a
womens organisation in Kenya raised the issue of marginalisation of minority and
indigenous women within mainstream development efforts, particularly education,
access to land and land rights. The representative from Thailand outlined the barriers to
citizenship and how this negatively affects all aspects of minority womens lives. Many
minority and indigenous women face gender-specific difficulties in applying for Thai
citizenship, without which they face numerous problems. Citizenship for all minorities
and indigenous people is very important in guaranteeing their rights. Given the
particular problems facing minority and indigenous women, citizenship is an especially
pressing issue. There are also important issues raised for minority groups in Europe: for
example, the dilemma for Roma women in Europe of preserving their identity and
ensuring the participation in the majority society; and the issue of the veil in France,
given the recent change in legislation.

A representative at the workshop highlighted the difficulty of conveying the concept of
gender and gendered approaches within indigenous communities. She explained that
lack of knowledge about and access to CEDAW is a significant barrier to indigenous
and minority womens use of human rights instruments. It was necessary for the
Committee to improve dissemination of information about and documents produced by
CEDAW in more languages. The workshop provided an opportunity for members of
CEDAW to ask the opinion of the panel on the best methodology for examining state
reports, and on the types of questions (with regard to gender and minorities) to ask
delegations when they appear before the Committee. It was suggested that the
Committees General Comment 25 could be used as a framework as it highlights that

50
Banda F. and Chinkin C., 2004, Gender, Minorities and Indigenous People, p.11.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

42
states may need to take temporary special measures to eliminate the negative effects of
multiple forms of discrimination. Another improvement would be for the Committee to
hold longer sessions, allowing more time to be spent with the delegations in order to
ensure that all questions and relevant issues are raised.

The report has already been translated into eight languages by partner organisations.
South-east European countries (e.g. Bulgaria and Romania) have shown a particular
interest on this issue. It has generated a lot of enthusiasm within MRG which is now
discussing next steps with partner organisations. For example, it is planning to work
with partners on shadow CEDAW reports, as these arise (signatories to the Convention
report on progress to the Committee every four years). MRG is trying to bring the UN
process closer to partners by engaging them with their own governments and the
commitments they have entered into by signing CEDAW.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 43






Single Parent Action Network: Diversity and participation
course
51



Background
Single Parent Action Network (SPAN) UK is a broad umbrella organisation seeking to
represent the diversity of one parent families across England, Northern Ireland, Scotland
and Wales. Membership includes small self-help groups, individual single parents, large
charitable organisations and all kinds of one parent family support groups. Members
may be divorced, separated, never married, heterosexual, gay, lesbian and from many
different backgrounds and cultures. SPAN UK is run by a National Co-ordinating
Committee of volunteer single parents who represent self-help groups across the UK.

SPAN aims to give a voice to one parent families living in poverty and isolation and to
empower them to take control of their lives. It supports the setting up and development
of single parent self-help groups. It also works with a range of anti-poverty partnerships,
including those with Oxfam UK and the UK Coalition Against Poverty, to raise
awareness of poverty, improve childcare and campaign on issues that affect the lives of
one parent families.

The focus of this case study is a recent SPAN initiative: a diversity and participation
course offered to SPAN members. One of the reasons for including this example among
our case studies is to provoke discussion on the strategic importance within a broader
diversity approach of strengthening diversity and participation within community
groups themselves. For example, how far would development interventions aimed at
encouraging community-based organisations to both reflect on their own diversity (or
absence thereof) and develop more inclusive approaches within their organisations serve
as an effective entry point for addressing gender and diversity? In many contexts,
participatory approaches are used to ensure that projects managed by international
development agencies are as inclusive as possible of different groups within a
community. But few appear to address head on issues of diversity within community-
based organisations themselves. This is one of the strengths of the SPAN course.

SPANs approach to diversity
As noted above, the purpose of SPAN is to represent the diversity of one parent
families, and there is a conscious effort to seek out and support single parents from the
most marginalised and disadvantaged communities in the UK. This includes initiatives
targeting single parents in isolated rural areas, deprived urban settings, in black and
minority ethnic communities, as well as refugee and asylum seekers. Regarding the
latter group, there is awareness in SPANs work of the need to identify and address the
specific ways in which women refugees and asylum seekers, and their children, are
vulnerable to discrimination because of their status (with regard to shelter, the one-year

51
We are grateful to Sue Cohen, SPAN Coordinator and Shannon Smith, SPAN Network Development
Officer, for the information they provided and for comments on earlier drafts.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

44
marriage rule,
52
poor diet, work in the grey economy, language diversity, lack of
financial independence).
53


Concerns about being inclusive are also evident in SPANs governance structure.
Currently, the National Co-ordinating Committee has six places reserved for black
members and six for white members with the aim of ensuring that equality and
diversity are deeply embedded in SPANs structural decision-making processes.
54
Discussions revealed that there is awareness within SPAN of the need to widen out
diversity of decision-making processes and staffing to reflect, for example, the
participation of disabled people as well as single fathers, whose specific needs have
often remained invisible to policy makers.

Diversity and participation course
The diversity and participation course seeks to explore commonalities and differences
among diverse single parents; challenge stereotypes; and explore individuals
understanding of their own diversity and that of other cultures and ethnic groups within
their local communities. At the same time, it seeks to translate thinking about diversity
into practice. It does this by working with participants to support awareness of how
diversity benefits their groups and to develop strategies and skills to widen participation
of other single parents living in their local communities. The rationale behind the
training is a strong belief that addressing diversity is a key factor in the sustainability of
self-help groups.

It should be noted that SPANs diversity and participation course has only recently
completed the pilot stage. There has been no formal assessment of the pilot sessions, but
perceptions of the courses success can be measured in the decision to launch the course
as part of the programme of SPANs Model Action Study Centre in Bristol. In addition
to training focused on personal development and raising self-esteem, SPAN offers (on-
line or long-distance) courses to single parents on Managing Your Self Help Group, and
Making Changes. The latter is designed to develop the skills and understanding to
influence decision-makers in local communities. As discussed in more detail below, the
diversity and participation course will be evaluated through the Diversity and
Participation Research Project. One of the aims of the project is to assess the impact of
the SPAN course on changing social attitudes of participants and empowering new
actions and interventions to promote social cohesion.

The content of the SPAN course is in some ways similar to other training sessions on
equality and diversity offered to staff by many organisations, including development
NGOs. However, the way the course is designed (change at the individual level as well
as at the group level) and the target of the course (members of community-level self-
help groups) sets this type of training apart from that commonly offered to
professionals, who then support communities through delivery of services or
development programmes.


52
This applies to women who have married a British citizen. Women must stay in the marriage for one
year, even if they are facing domestic violence, etc. If they leave before this period they become illegal
immigrants, and may be deported.
53
Spangle, No.13, November 2004.
54
SPAN UK Information Sheet, n.d.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 45






Planning the training course
Considerable emphasis was placed on planning the training, particularly on logistical
support. It was felt that the participatory aspect needed to be built into the course to
ensure ownership from the very start. This involved initial meetings with each group to
assess what needed to happen to enable members to participate freely and to pre-empt
any concerns that might impact on their learning experiences. In addition to putting in
place support for, or covering, the costs of childcare, transport and subsistence, the
initial needs assessment provided opportunities for influencing on the content of the
course.

Content of the training course
The course explores cultural, religious and ethnic diversity within the group of lone
parents, looking at historical and new migration to the UK, and the impact on the
cultural and ethnic diversity of the communities in which participants live. The course is
made up of five modules: single parenthood in society (shared identity/differences);
majority and minority culture; stereotypes; cultural values; and diversity in multi-
cultural SPAN. The specific content of each training offered so far was designed
according to the needs and concerns identified by each group.

Overall, the course is informed by approaches to adult learning as well as methods for
supporting change in attitudes and behaviours at the individual level. While some of the
exercises and approaches are similar to those found in equality and diversity training
particularly those for exploring stereotypes, discrimination and inequality the course
goes beyond a focus on change at the individual level to look at implications for the
group. Participants discuss the impact of migration and cultural and ethnic diversity on
their local communities and what groups can do to break down barriers, challenge
racism and stereotypes and increase community cohesion.

Some of the exercises are designed to support the participants to examine their single
parent groups, and to identify the issues they need to work on to widen participation.
For example, exercises for thinking about the identity of the group are designed to
address questions such as what do we look like as a group and what would we do if
someone different came along?. Such exercises are supplemented by a Tool Kit on
Practical Ways to Help with Diversity and Participation. These tools are targeted at the
self-help groups and include the following strategies: developing an equal opportunities
policy; organising exchanges with diverse groups in the community; holding diversity
events and activities, such as world cuisine days; producing information packs for the
self-help groups about diversity in the local community. Discussions and exercises also
address issues related to marketing and communication strategies of the single parent
groups, and how these could be strengthened to promote diversity and inclusion (e.g.
identifying and reaching key target groups; disability access; providing materials in
different media and languages; providing crches; timing of meetings).

The pilot sessions were facilitated by a trainer from SPAN but the longer-term vision is
for peer training seen to be a key factor in ensuring the sustainability of the training
programme. There has also been discussion of possibilities for providing diversity and
participation training to anyone who has a remit for working with single parents (e.g.
health and education services, social services, further education colleges, other
voluntary groups). The aim is to help members of these communities overcome
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

46
stereotypes about single parents and to understand that different groups of single parents
may have specific issues that need to be addressed in addition to their common
experience of potential/actual poverty and discrimination as lone parents.

Pilots in the four nations
Throughout 2004 there were four pilot sessions carried out in each of the four nations
(England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales). The courses were usually held over two
days and involved about ten participants. The training in Scotland brought together
three lone parent groups from the region: The Glasgow group (Umoja), supporting
African lone parent women asylum seekers and refugees; and groups from Falkirk
(Parents Alone Lending Support) and Edinburgh (One Parent Families Scotland),
comprising mainly white single parent women. An effort had been made to involve a
group of single fathers but this did not materialise. In Northern Ireland, the training
involved one self-help group of white, Catholic women. The Wales group was made up
of white single parent women. The Bristol and South West training involved two groups
that included white, black and Asian women.

Anecdotal feedback from the training suggested that participants wanted to learn more
about each other and to understand how much they had in common as single parents,
and/or how the issues and challenges they faced differed depending on their specific
identities. Clearly, the exploration of identity considered not only issues related to
minority culture and ethnic identity but other differences, as well (e.g. socio-economic
status, geographical location, period of residence in UK, number of children, age of
children, age of parent, gender, etc.). Such exploration also considered the impact of
these differences on experiences and needs of single parents. The training with the self-
help groups was described by SPAN as the beginning of encouraging wider
participation in their communities and with each other and learning about other single
parent cultures.
55
To give one example, white single parents living in poverty in St.
Mellons (a very deprived area of Cardiff) and who had little or no experience of visible
black and ethnic minorities, were able to explore their own assumptions, particularly
around Somalian people. As a result of the course, members of the St. Mellons group
visited Beat Route, a group supporting black women in Bute Town, an inner city area
that they had previously been afraid of visiting. These two groups are now developing a
Link-Up Network, drawing in other local projects as well as undertaking joint work on
domestic violence.
56


The above example illustrates an important point about the focus of the diversity and
participation course. The course aims to support participants in exploring diversity and
discrimination from the basis of a common oppression which unites them single
parenthood while at the same time enabling marginalised people to relate to the
diverse oppression experienced by other individuals and groups. Through challenging
attitudes and stereotypes about other groups, participants are not only able to better
understand their shared interests as lone parents but also to develop shared actions, such
as those described above. In addition to working together to challenge the
disadvantage/discrimination as lone parents, these shared actions can also promote
social inclusion and community cohesion.

55
Spangle, No.12, July 2004.
56
This example is cited in the proposal for the SPAN UK Diversity and Participation Project, very kindly
shared by the SPAN UK Co-ordinator.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 47






Diversity and Participation Research Project
SPAN UK is currently seeking funding for a Diversity and Participation Research
Project that has been developed as a result of piloting the diversity and participation
course.
57
One of the aims is to see whether, and in what ways, participation on the
course changes social attitudes and stereotypes about other groups and empowers new
activities and actions by lone parent groups that further social interaction, inclusion and
cohesion. The methodology of the research will be qualitative, with the central aim to
record the natural discourses of the course participants in order to determine whether
the course inputs and processes have altered this discourse. The research will evaluate
the courses as social interventions which may interrupt the discourses of racism, and
will monitor the possibilities of new actions and shared projects.

Specifically, the research will centre on investigating and comparing the experiences,
perspectives and strategies of new migrant and long-term resident one parent families
with regard to community involvement, immigration and diversity. The project will
explore the extent to which any new community activities and networks, developed as a
result of the course, can make settlement of new migrant one parent families a more
positive experience for both new migrant and long-term resident families in the UK.
The findings will inform the development of more effective, appropriate actions, policy
and practice with regard, in particular, to the settlement of new migrants and, more
broadly, to the national policy agendas on social inclusion.

57
The information in this section is from the SPAN UK Diversity and Participation Research Project
proposal.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

48
What are the lessons from gender mainstreaming for disability
mainstreaming?


Introduction
This case study draws on a recent piece of work reflecting on lessons from gender
mainstreaming that are of relevance for disability mainstreaming.
58
The exercise formed
one part of a research component on mainstreaming disability in development being
carried out by ODG/DEV
59
, University of East Anglia, for the DfID-funded, Disability
Knowledge and Research (KaR) Project. Although the entry point was a focus on
disability mainstreaming, there may be issues raised of interest to other areas of
diversity as well.

The ODG/DEV paper took as its starting point the assumption that calls for the
mainstreaming of disability in development are based, if only implicitly, on
perceptions about the experience of gender mainstreaming. The paper explores recent
recommendations that have been made for mainstreaming disability and compares these
recommendations with what is currently seen to be good practice on gender
mainstreaming.

There is no official definition of disability mainstreaming to compare with that on
gender mainstreaming put forward by the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
and widely used in the development community:
Mainstreaming a gender perspective is the process of assessing the
implications for women and men of any planned action, including legislation,
policies and programmes, in all areas and at all levels. It is a strategy for
making womens as well as mens concerns and experiences an integral
dimension of the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies
and programmes in all political, economic and societal spheres so that women
and men benefit equally and inequality is not perpetuated. The ultimate goal is
to achieve gender equality.
60


In reading the above, the observation was made that one could easily replace gender
with disability and men and women with disabled people. For the purposes of the
paper, the ECOSOC definition was seen as equally pertinent to mainstreaming concerns
and experiences of disabled people. With this in mind, the paper explored approaches
that have been part of the gender mainstreaming repertoire. Drawing on the experience
of gender mainstreaming, the paper pulls out lessons that are likely to be of particular
relevance for developing a coherent strategy for disability mainstreaming across a
development organisation. These lessons are presented in the section below while the
final section widens out the discussion to reflect on mainstreaming single-strand issues
in developing policy and practice, in general.


58
Miller, C. and Albert, B., 2005, Mainstreaming Disability in Development: Lessons from gender
mainstreaming, draft version, Disability KaR Programme, ODG/DEV, January
59
Overseas Development Group/School for Development Studies.
60
ECOSOC, 1997, Gender Mainstreaming in the United Nations System, E.1997.L.10. Para.4, Adopted
by ECOSOC July 1997, UN, New York.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 49






Some lessons from gender mainstreaming
This section provides a schematic outline of the main lessons for disability
mainstreaming that can be drawn from the experience of gender mainstreaming.

Lesson 1: the need for a clear mandate and implementation strategy on
disability and development
For many development organisations, statements of commitment to disability equality
are rarely backed up by an institutional policy or a clear mandate on disability. Where
such policies do exist, they often remain trapped on paper. The disability mainstreaming
paper explores the similar challenges that have been experienced by gender advocates
and signals the importance now attached to the development of a gender policy (which
makes the connections between gender equality/womens rights and the organisations
development objectives), backed up by a time-bound implementation strategy with
measurable targets and outcomes.

Lesson 2: robust institutional structures to promote a disability equality agenda
One of the principles underpinning gender mainstreaming is the notion that gender is
everybodys responsibility. However, one of the main lessons from gender
mainstreaming so far is that unless there are dedicated structures, staff and resources,
there is a danger that no one takes responsibility. There is greater awareness of the
need for both mechanisms to integrate gender throughout an organisation and for
specialist units/staff to promote attention to gender. In fact, the experience of gender
mainstreaming suggests that gender tends to get lost unless there are dedicated staff
members with responsibility for ensuring that gender issues are addressed, backed up by
a clear policy on gender equality and an implementation strategy with time-bound
targets.

At the same time, the assumption that mainstreaming does away with the need for
targeted interventions to address gender inequality has been challenged. It is now
acknowledged that mainstreaming requires a twin-tracked approach: that is, efforts to
integrate gender concerns across all programmes/sectors as well as the need for specific
gender-focused initiatives. While some development organisations have recognised the
need to take a twin-tracked approach to disability mainstreaming, few have developed
institutional structures or appointed dedicated staff to work on disability equality issues,
though there are some isolated examples.

Lesson 3: an organisational culture that is supportive of disability equality and
staff that have the skills needed to mainstream disability
Over the past decade, there has been considerable emphasis on the inter-relationship
between internal organisational values, policies and practices, and the effectiveness of
external programmatic interventions in support of gender equality or walking the
talk as it is often called. The extent to which gender equality is understood and
accepted as a core value of an organisation is seen to be a key factor in implementing
change more widely. Much effort has gone into identifying strategies that support
organisational change (gender equitable human resources policies and practices,
performance management systems, gender sensitisation training) as part of the overall
approach to gender mainstreaming.

The disability mainstreaming paper considers whether similar strategies are required
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

50
from a disability perspective, particularly in relation to understandings of the social
model of disability which if anything is more complex than the concept of gender.
Specifically, the paper raises questions about what might be needed in terms of
disability equality training, building on lessons from gender training for example the
move away from a one size fits all approach to much more targeted initiatives around
specific areas (e.g. attitude and behaviour change, technical skills, sector-specific
training, advocacy skills, etc.).

Lesson 4: the need for policy relevant research and information
One of the goals of feminist advocacy targeting development institutions over the past
three decades has been to make women visible to policy makers through promoting
rigorous analysis and research on women/gender and development. Central here has
been the process of identifying appropriate entry points from international, national,
sectoral or organisational policy commitments to gender, to generate new research
findings or analyses of sex disaggregated data. Sex-disaggregated data and gender
analysis are central to a gender mainstreaming strategy.

It is acknowledged that current information and research on disability and development
is inadequate. One of the main objectives of the wider KaR research on mainstreaming
disability is to develop data and analysis of the links between disability and poverty. In
particular the research will explore how to collect disability-disaggregated data and
what disability analysis might entail. While research and statistics are important, the
disability mainstreaming paper argues they are only one part of an overall
mainstreaming strategy. Research reports and data are likely to remain on the shelf
unless there is a clear mandate for that information to be used and there are people with
the responsibility for pushing the disability agenda.

Lesson 5: practical, relevant guidelines and tools to mainstream disability
While the call for more guidelines and tools has sometimes been an excuse for inaction,
some good practice has emerged from the experience of gender mainstreaming. One
lesson is that there are different tools for different jobs. Over the past decade, for
example, there has been an explosion of sector-specific gender guidelines, as well as
tools for gender and participation, for gender-sensitive programme cycle management,
for monitoring and evaluation, and for gender audits of an organisation. There is greater
recognition that guidelines and tools are more likely to be used if they are not overly
complex and are developed in a collaborative manner with those who will use them.

The paper did not explore in any detail the few existing guidelines and tools for
mainstreaming disability (e.g. checklists on inclusion in programming), though it is
possible to observe that in general they are not that dissimilar from those available for
gender. How far other gender guidelines and tools might be developed and adapted to
address disability issues was beyond the scope of the paper, though certainly worth
exploring further. Of course, this would involve pinpointing the common experience of
discrimination and areas of divergence. With regard to the latter, one of the key areas of
difference identified in the paper was the issue of physical and communicative access,
which is not addressed adequately by gender analytical frameworks, guidelines and
tools.

Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 51






Lesson 6: involving disabled people and disabled peoples organisations at all
levels
The experience of gender mainstreaming suggests that it is important to be clear about
the purpose of participation, consultation or inclusion. Counting the numbers of a
marginalised group who have been consulted or involved in development interventions
is an important starting point, but cannot substitute for concrete actions to address the
priorities and needs they identify. The disability mainstreaming paper also considers the
importance of not assuming that disabled people are a homogeneous group one of the
criticisms that has been levelled at the way gender mainstreaming has been
implemented. Like women, disabled people are a heterogeneous group, not only in
terms of having different impairments, but also across the range of identities (gender,
age, race, class, income, education, religion, location, etc.). It is crucial that different
voices are heard and that no section of the disability community is marginalised within
that community. The paper raises the question of the usefulness of intersectional
analysis to address the multiple identities of disabled people.

The paper also explores the concept of bottom-up mainstreaming guided and
supported by initiatives at the centre.
Such an approach is likely to be successful because it utilises the strengths
and experience of NGOs and CSOs, thus ensuring that interventions are
culturally and contextually relevant and sustainable because they build local
capacity.
61


Lesson 7: the need for upstreaming disability issues in response to new aid
modalities
The overall shift in official development aid towards non-project assistance in the form
of sector-wide approaches or other forms of direct budgetary support to national
governments connected to Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers has raised new challenges
for mainstreaming. The shift to non-project development assistance increases the
importance of effective policy dialogue between donors and partner governments,
particularly about cross-cutting issues such as gender. Thus far, however, gender issues
have tended to be sidelined in the new aid paradigm.

Current responses to the apparent failures of gender mainstreaming suggest a number of
points which are relevant for those concerned with disability. For example, in the case
of both the EU and DfID, emphasis has been placed on the need for better
institutionalisation of gender (e.g. policy/strategy, structures, staffing, training, shared
learning) for effective gender mainstreaming into key development policy instruments
and processes. Strategies to strengthen civil society groups in pushing for policy change
are also crucial, and support to gender budgeting processes is given as a good practice
example in this area.

Lesson 8: the need for appropriate tools for monitoring progress and outcomes
While gender mainstreaming strategies have called for effective monitoring tools, in
general insufficient attention has been paid to monitoring, evaluation and impact
assessment. Nonetheless, some good practice has been identified. One is the

61
See Thomas, P., 2004, DFID and Disability: A Mapping of the Department for International
Development and Development and Disability Issues, June, p.8.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

52
importance of distinguishing between the process and outcomes, and of developing
appropriate indicators for each. For example, under pressure to show results, indicators
used to measure progress in gender mainstreaming have often placed too much
emphasis on the institutional structures and practices put in place to support
mainstreaming (e.g. gender policies, gender staff, number of tools and guidelines,
demand for sex-disaggregated data and gender analytical information, etc.). The former
are important, as indicators that gender issues are being taken seriously. But there is a
danger that the means get confused with the ends that we lose sight of the prize. It is
important, therefore, to be specific about what success will look like in the longer term
and develop appropriate tools and indicators to capture measurable changes in peoples
lives.

The paper notes that the most promising approaches to monitoring, evaluation and
impact assessment emerging in recent years are those that rely heavily on participatory
methodologies. These have been important for identifying indicators of change, in
womens agency and power, that would not have been identified by development
planners on their own. Despite calls for participatory evaluation of disability projects
and in mainstream government policies, it is not clear whether this is happening in
practice, and the paper suggests that disability equality advocates need to be included in
wider discussions about monitoring and evaluation and impact assessment.

In the disability mainstreaming paper, there is a much more detailed discussion around
each theme, the aim of which is to highlight some of the challenges gender advocates
have faced and to identify emerging good practice for each area. The paper uses this
analysis to strengthen existing recommendations on disability mainstreaming (with
specific emphasis on DfID)
62
by building on the experience of gender mainstreaming.

Mainstreaming a common strategy for inclusion?
From the above it should be clear that the lessons for mainstreaming disability are
primarily about strategies for making disabled people more visible to policy makers and
planners at all levels and across all sectors. There are likely to be parallels with other
single-strand issues.

One of the challenges for development organisations, of course, is that efforts to
mainstream single-strand issues are mainly happening in parallel with each other. This
raises a number of practical challenges for such organisations if they are to address
evenly all single-strand issues. There has already been some concern about policy
overload with regard to calls for specific policies on each single-strand issue (e.g.
gender, race and ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation). No doubt similar
reservations will be raised with regard to staffing, training, the development of tools and
guidelines and so on, for all issues of difference. In this regard, it was noted in the GAD
Network Think Piece that some organisations have recognised the symbolic importance
that separate policies can have for different groups and have therefore drafted disability
policies, in addition to those on gender equality. The Greater London Authority, for
example, has developed a series of separate equality schemes to reflect diverse groups

62
The irony was not lost on the authors of the report that a similar and much more in-depth study was
happening contemporaneously on the experience of mainstreaming gender in DfIDs work, nor that the
conclusions of previous evaluations (including that by the GAD Network) have indicated weak
institutionalisation of gender in DfID.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity 53






of the population (women; disabled people; black people and people from minority
ethnic communities; older people; young people and children; lesbians; gay men and
bisexuals; trans people; and people of different faith groups).

At the same time, some organisations have begun to talk about diversity
mainstreaming or mainstreaming of excluded groups. They have also been thinking
about ways to address single-strand issues in a more unified way by grouping them
together under the umbrella of diversity and/or through a social inclusion approach (see
overview to this paper, as well as GAD Network Think Piece). The report on a recent
workshop on mainstreaming and inclusive approaches in EU development policy argues
that issues and sectors have been too compartmentalised and that there is a need to look
for common interests and identify links between gender and other cross-cutting issues.
63

The exploration of trade issues, for example, elicited the observation that we are all in
the same boat and that there was a need to focus on collective work for more impact.

It was also noted that the EU Lisbon summit in 2000 decided, at EU level, not to work
with target groups but rather to take a wider approach to social inclusion and non-
discrimination that de facto mainstreamed all groups. As the report makes clear
where groups are not yet recognised or visible the example given is older people
such an approach is unlikely to have a positive impact on enhancing their visibility, in
the absence of specific inclusion strategies for older people. A similar observation has
been made with regard to DfIDs work on social inclusion. A recent mapping study on
disability in DfID illustrated that disability issues remained largely invisible and pointed
to the need for a concerted effort to explore the relationship and relevance of disability
issues in the context of social inclusion, human rights and the MDGs.
64
Another recent
study on social inclusion prepared for DfID pointed to the importance of clarifying the
relationship between a social exclusion framework and DfIDs rights-based approach
and gender mainstreaming.
65


All of the above brings to the fore the apparent tension between moves towards more
holistic approaches within development thinking and practice (e.g. rights-based
approaches, social inclusion) and efforts to ensure that single-strand areas (e.g. gender,
disability, age, ethnicity) receive adequate attention. In theory, these approaches should
be mutually inclusive. In practice, however, it is not so easy to keep single-strand issues
in focus when more holistic approaches are adopted. Nor has there been sufficient
analysis of what is common or what differentiates the experience of discrimination or
social exclusion for each group.
66
The GAD Network Think Piece indicates that, while
recognising some of the advantages, gender advocates have reservations about the
implications that an umbrella diversity approach or diversity mainstreaming would
have for keeping gender issues in focus. Similar reservations are made regarding
disability in the disability mainstreaming paper. Indeed, as long as marginalised and
excluded people are invisible to policy makers, making them visible through targeted
mainstreaming strategies like those described above are likely remain a key priority.
This is a particular challenge in the context of current aid modalities where it appears

63
APRODEV, HAI, One World Action, WIDE, 2004, Transforming the Mainstream, p.7.
64
Thomas, P., 2004, DFID and Disability: A Mapping of the Department for International Development
and Development and Disability Issues, June. Disability Issues in DFID,
65
Beall, J. and Piron, L.H., 2004, DFID Social Exclusion Review, LSE and ODI.
66
The paper by Beall and Piron provides an important starting point for thinking through some of these
issues.
Case Studies on Rights-based Approaches to Gender and Diversity

54
even more difficult to keep specific target groups in focus or to produce disaggregated
data (e.g. by gender, ethnicity, disability, age, etc).

It is also worth pointing out that ten years after gender mainstreaming was adopted at
the Beijing Conference as an official global strategy for promoting gender equality there
are still uncertainties about its effectiveness. As noted above, there are ongoing
concerns that mainstreaming has been interpreted and implemented in a way that
renders women, or any other group for that matter, invisible. For some gender activists,
gender mainstreaming has been reduced to a de-politicised, technocratic exercise of
integrating gender (through checklists and guidelines) into existing agendas and already
formulated policies, with little or no impact on transforming mainstream policies
despite evidence that these policies may have adverse impacts on womens equality.
There are also significant questions raised about how far there has been any measurable
improvement in womens lives as a result of gender mainstreaming strategies. On this
front, mainstreaming advocates are being increasingly challenged to establish the links
between gender-related interventions and impacts (e.g. changes in gender roles or
control of resources).
67


While expectations have outstripped achievements, activists, researchers and
practitioners nevertheless continue to promote gender mainstreaming as a strategy for
achieving gender equality. This recent statement from the Director of the UN Division
for the Advancement of Women captures some of the reasons behind the continued
commitment to gender mainstreaming:
Like any other strategy, gender mainstreaming can only be as good as the
efforts made to implement it. There is clearly a need to invest greater resources
to ensure enhanced understanding of the strategy and the ways in which it
should be implemented. A lot of what is today called gender mainstreaming
and is criticised for failing to achieve the intended goals is in reality not
gender mainstreaming. It is important to be clear about what gender
mainstreaming involves particularly awareness that any process which
makes gender perspectives invisible is not gender mainstreaming.
68


The ongoing assessment of the gender mainstreaming strategy formed part of the review
and appraisal of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action, which took
place in March 2005 at the forty-ninth session of the Commission on the Status of
Women.
69
The conclusions will no doubt be of great interest to all those involved in the
struggle of making real people visible to policy makers.

67
See discussion of the problem of the missing middle described in DAC Review, Hunt, J and
Brouwers, R, 2003, Gender and Evaluation, and Watkins, F., 2004, DfIDs Experience of Gender
Mainstreaming: 1995 to 2004, Evaluation of DFID Development Assistance: Gender Equality and
Womens Empowerment.
68
Hannon, C., 2004, Gender mainstreaming: A key strategy for promoting gender equality at the
national level, presentation by Director of Division for Advancement of Women, at panel on Moving
Beijing Forward: Strategies and approaches for creating an enabling environment, at UN-ESCAP High-
level Intergovernmental Meeting, 7-10 September 2004. Available at:
www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/news/speech2004/CH-ESCAPpanelSep.pdf
69
Information on gender mainstreaming will be part of the national government reports as well as shadow
reports prepared by NGOs.