Gender Research & Methodologies

Gender Research Guide

FAQs

BACKGROUND

METHODOLOGIES

HOW TO GENDER YOUR RESEARCH

DATABASE

GLOSSARY

1. Gender Analysis

A. Description

Gender
Analysis Approaches (or Gender-based Analysis) have been adopted by many
development organizations in order to achieve gender mainstreaming goals.
The Institute for Development Studies has defined gender analysis as: “the
systematic gathering and examination of information on gender differences
and social relations in order to identify, understand and redress
inequities based on gender.” [1] Gender Analysis includes several
different approaches (see 1.1-1.4) that share specific features, such as
sex-disaggregated data and the analysis of women and men’s roles and access
to and control over resources. However, the approaches differ in the degree
to which analysis is extended beyond the sphere of production, the degree
to which they consider other social relations (class, ethnicity, age,
sexuality, etc.), and also in the extent to which they are based on gender
equity principles. [2]

B. Key Principles

Though
Gender Analysis encompasses various methodologies, they commonly include :

• Consideration of gender throughout the research
  process

• Recognition that “gender” does not equal women and
  a focus on the social dynamics and power relations between men and
  women

• Use of sex-disaggregated data

• Use of qualitative data and other data sources to
  complement or supplement quantitative data

• Definition of target groups, survey samples, etc.
  to take into consideration the broadest and most diverse population
  (including women, men, girls and boys from different social strata,
  ethnic groups, etc.) and acknowledging that women are not a single
  homogeneous group

• The participation of all actors – not researchers
  or development workers – but those affected by the research/policies
  in question, NGOs working in similar areas, etc.

• 
  Reflexivity at all stages of the research process

C.
Main Critiques

• In practice, and especially in the realm of policy,
  the focus on “gender” is often confused with an exclusive focus on
  women.

• There is some tension over the interpretation of
  “gender” by researchers and practitioners in the development field;
  specifically, some have critiqued development organizations for
  “co-opting” gender (see IDS 2004).

• Bias in the development arena towards
  policy-making, meaning that “short-term problem solving and immediate
  action” are prioritized over in-depth analytical thinking and
  political insight that could produce longer-term, more transformative
  change (see Lewis 2004).

• 
  Specific critiques are dependent on the type of
  approach used: see critiques of methodologies 1.1-1.4.

D.
Examples

Different
Gender Analysis approaches (discussed individually below) include :

1.1 Moser/DPU Framework
1.2 Gender Roles/Harvard Framework
1.3 Social Relations Approach
1.4 Longwe/Women’s Empowerment Framework

E.
International institutions that have used the methodology include

United
Nations (UN), World Bank, CARE, ActionAid, Swedish International
Development Agency (SIDA), Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA), International Labor Organization (ILO), US Agency for International
Development (USAID), Oxfam

F. Key texts and
critiques

• Kabeer, Naila. 1992. “Triple Roles, Gender Roles,
  Social Relations: The Political Subtext of Gender Training.”
  Discussion Paper No. 313, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex.

• Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
  Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html

• Moser, Caroline O.N. Gender Planning and
  Development: Theory, Practice and Training. New York: Routledge, 1993.

• Elson, Diane (ed.). Male Bias in the Development
  Process. Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1991. Harding,
  Sandra, ed. Feminism and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University,
  1987.

• Institute of Development Studies (IDS).
  Repositioning Feminisms in Development. IDS Bulletin 35 (4).
  University of Sussex. October 2004.

• Kabeer, Naila. Reversed Realities: Gender
  Hierarchies in Development Thought. London: Verso, 1994. Lewis,
  Desiree. “African Gender Research and Postcoloniality: Legacies and
  Challenges.” Council for the Development of Social Science Research in
  Africa, Gender Series, Volume 1, November 2004. Available online: www.codesria.org/links/conferences/gender/LEWIS.pdf

• March, Candida, Ines Smyth, and Maitrayee
  Mukhopadhyay (1999) A guide to gender-analysis frameworks. Oxfam
  Skills and Practices Series.

• Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
  Alternative Paradigms.” UNDP. Available online: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html

• 
  Moser, Caroline. Gender Planning and Development:
  Theory, Practice and Training. Routledge, London, 1993. Sen, Gita and
  Caren Grown. Development, Crises and Alternative Visions. Earthscan
  Publications, London, 1988.

1.1.
Moser/DPU Framework

A. Description

This
framework was developed by Caroline Moser at London University’s
Development Planning Unit (DPU) in order to demonstrate the need to use
development interventions to transform unequal gender relations,
highlighting the political nature of gender-sensitive research and
planning.

B. Key Principles

• Recognition that women’s roles in society are
  differentiated and multiple. Moser describes women’s roles as triple
  roles, which includes productive, reproductive, and community
  management.

• Consideration of practical gender needs and
  strategic gender interests.

• 
  Schematization of policy approaches to women
  (welfare, equity, efficiency, empowerment) – making explicit the
  extent to which different policy objectives prioritize the elimination
  of gender hierarchies.

C.
Main Critiques:

• The approach is too focused on the household,
  incorporating little analysis of the institutions that perpetuate
  gender inequality, including the state.

• 
  The approach is too focused on roles, ignoring
  social relations and the fact that men also have practical gender
  needs and strategic gender interests.

D.
International institutions that have used the methodology include:

World
Bank, Christian Aid, Oxfam UK, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
ILO, United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), and Save the
Children America

E. Key Texts and Critiques

• Kabeer, Naila. 1992. “Triple Roles, Gender Roles,
  Social Relations: The Political Subtext of Gender Training.”
  Discussion Paper No. 313, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex.

• Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
  Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html

• 
  Moser, Caroline O.N. Gender Planning and
  Development: Theory, Practice and Training. New York: Routledge, 1993.

1.2.
Gender Roles/ Harvard Analytical Framework

A. Description

First published in 1984, the Harvard Analytical/Gender Roles Framework is
one of the oldest gender analysis and planning frameworks. It was developed
by the Harvard Institute for International Development in collaboration
with the Women in Development (WID) Office of USAID. It is based on the
assumption that women were unable to fully benefit from the development
process because planning efforts did not recognize women’s actual and
potential contribution to development.

B. Key Principles

• The Women in Development (WID) efficiency approach:
  women’s productive contributions, both actual and possible, provide
  the rational for allocating resources to women and including them in
  the development process.

• Gender equity defined in terms of individual access
  to and control over resources.

• Emphasis on “intra-household dynamics” – the
  household has a gendered system of resource allocation and a gendered
  division of labour.

• 
  Data on the distribution of roles and resources
  within the household should be used to overcome the ideologies and stereotypes
  that render women’s work (and contribution to development) invisible.

C.
Main Critiques

• The approach is too focused on the household, with
  little analysis of the institutions that perpetuate gender inequality,
  including development institutions and the state.

• The exclusive focus on women ignores gender and
  other social relations such as the labour, class, racial and other
  divisions among women themselves (assumes women are a homogeneous
  entity).

• Employs a “top-down” approach that is not
  participatory. Women are treated as instruments for development, not
  empowered individuals.

• 
  Often relies on gender-neutral interventions rather
  than those that can transform existing gender relations.

D.
International institutions that have used the methodology include

ILO,
USAID, CIDA, Oxfam, and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

E. Key Texts and Critiques

• International Labor Organization, South-East Asia
  and the Pacific Multidisciplinary Advisory Team. “A conceptual
  framework for gender analysis and planning” (online). Available from: www.ilo.org/public/english/region/asro/mdtmanila/training/unit1/harvrdfw.htm

• Overholt, Anderson, Cloud and Austin, Gender Roles
  in Development Projects: A Case Book, 1984, Kumarian Press:
  Connecticut.

• 
  Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
  Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html

1.3.
Social Relations Approach

A. Description

Developed
at the Institute for Development Studies (University of Sussex, UK), many
of the tenets of the Social Relations Approach came out of the
Subordination of Women (SOW) Workshop in the mid-1970s, which critiqued the
Women in Development approach on several grounds. Through this approach,
ending women’s subordination is viewed as more than a matter of
reallocating economic resources, or as useful to the development process –
the central focus is on generating a shift in power relations. The approach
involves investigating the way that women are integrated into the
development process and questioning the free-market approach to development
that instrumentalizes women as productive actors. Instead, the final goal
of development is reconceptualized as the achievement of human well-being
through three basic principles: survival, security and autonomy. The Social
Relations Approach is often viewed as laying the foundation for the Gender
and Development (GAD) approach to integrating women in development.

B. Key Principles

• Consideration of the gendered processes of
  production, reproduction, distribution and consumption, and the broad
  range of institutions through which they operate including: the
  household, the community, the market and the state.

• The concept of gender relations, which refer
  specifically to those dimensions of social relations that create and
  reproduce differences between men and women.

• Gender should be considered along with other social
  relations: e.g. class, ethnicity, age, religion, sexuality, etc.

• Recognition that gender relations are conflictive
  and collaborative: that is, there is a constant process of bargaining
  and negotiation between men and women.

• 
  A “bottom-up” approach, focusing on participation
  and empowerment.

C.
International institutions that have used the methodology include

CIDA,
Institute for Development Studies (training modules)

D. Key texts

• Kabeer, Naila. ‘Gender-Aware Policy and Planning: A
  Social-Relations Perspective’, in M. Macdonald, ed., Gender Planning
  in Development Agencies. Oxfam: Oxford, 1994.

• Kabeer, Naila. Reversed Realities: Gender
  Hierarchies in Development Thought. Verso: London, 1994.

• Kabeer, Naila. and Subrahmanian. 1996.
  ‘Institutions, Relations and Outcomes: Framework and Tools for
  Gender-Aware Planning’, Discussion Paper 357, Institute for
  Development Studies, Sussex.

• Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
  Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html

• 
  Young, K. and C. Wolkowitz. Of Marriage and the
  Market. CSE Books, London, 1981.

1.4.
Longwe/Women’s Empowerment Framework

A. Description

Developed
by Sara Longwe, instead of focusing on economic objectives, the Women’s
Empowerment Framework views the empowerment of women as central to the
development process. The approach recognizes that gender inequities do not
merely arise from differences in gender roles, but from the gendered
division of labor and the allocation of benefits and resources. The
approach distinguishes between women’s issues, which pertain to equality
with men in any social or economic role and women’s concerns, which pertain
to women’s traditional, sex-stereotyped gender roles.

B. Key Principles

• The framework operates at five levels. In practice,
  some organizations (see UNICEF, 1994), use a “gender profile grid” to
  measure how the planning and implementation of projects contribute to
  each level of empowerment:

• Welfare: zero level of
  empowerment – women are the passive recipients of benefits from a
  “top-down” approach

• Access: first level of
  empowerment – women improve their own status, relative to men, by
  increased access to resources

• Conscientization: second
  level of empowerment – motivated by women themselves as they realize
  and attempt to understand the underlying causes of their problems,
  and to identify strategies for action

• Mobilisation: the third
  level of empowerment – motivated by their awareness, women come
  together to analyze problems and formulate solutions

• Control: final level of
  empowerment – reached when women have taken action towards greater
  gender equality in decision-making over access to resources, and
  therefore their socio-economic status

C.
Main Critiques

• Little attention to the complexities of gender
  relations, which are primarily examined from the perspective of
  equality alone.

• Women tend to be presented as a homogeneous
  category, with little focus on other social relations (such as class,
  age, ethnicity, religion).

• 
  The framework is static, there is no attention paid
  to how situations change over time.

D.
International institutions that have used the methodology include

United
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF,) UNIFEM

E. Key Texts and
Critiques

• International Labor Organization, South-East Asia
  and the Pacific Multidisciplinary Advisory Team. “A conceptual
  framework for gender analysis and planning” (online). Available from: www.ilo.org/public/english/region/asro/mdtmanila/training/unit1/empowfw.htm

• Longwe, Sara. “Gender Awareness: The Missing
  Element in the Third World Development Project,” in Candida March and
  Tina Wallace, Eds., 1995, Changing Perceptions: New Writings on Gender
  and Development, Oxfam, Oxford.

• Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
  Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html

• 
  UNICEF. 1994. Gender Equality and Women’s
  Empowerment: A UNICEF Training Package. UNICEF, New York.

2.
Participatory Research Methodologies

A. Description

Developed
in response to the “top-down” methodologies used for development research
during the 1950s and 1960s, Participatory Research Methodologies stress a
“bottom-up” approach guided by the principle of participation. Influenced
by social scientists from the global south such as Paulo Freire,
participatory approaches critique research (and development in general) as
something that is “done to” people by governments, development agencies and
international NGOs from the global north. In response, these methodologies stress
the importance of recognizing that those who are the targets of research
and development policies should have a say in their formulation and that
local knowledge should be privileged. Feminist researchers have adapted
many of these methods, and Participatory Research Methodologies are among
the most used in the field of gender-specific research.

Participatory
Approaches have also been adapted for use in the monitoring and evaluation
of development programmes (see Estrella and Gaventa). Supporters of these
approaches suggest that: ”Participation is the key to sustainable
development initiatives, since it will lead to building on existing
potentials and capacities, a greater sense of ownership on the part of the
stakeholders, increased commitment to the objectives and outcomes, longer
term social sustainability, increased self-help capacities, stronger and
more democratic institutions and partnerships.” [3]

B. Key Principles

• “Bottom-up” approach applied to all development
  activities, including research and programme design, implementation,
  monitoring and evaluation

• Empowerment through facilitation. Supporting
  capacity-building – especially among marginalized peoples – to analyze
  and improve their lives by validating and privileging their
  experiences and knowledge.

• Facilitated dialogue. Used to recognize the various
  ways in which power operates. Linking the personal (experiences) to
  the political in order to understand local level problems as part of a
  larger political/theoretical context, a process referred to as
  conscientization [4]

• 
  Traditional and innovative methods. A combination
  of written, oral and visual communication methods are used in the
  design, implementation and documentation of participatory research.
  Including: theatre and visual imagery, collectively written songs,
  cartoons, community meetings, community self-portraits and videotape
  recordings. [5]

C.
Gender perspectives

Women
working in gender and development have both critiqued participatory
approaches and offered suggestions to strengthen their applicability to
gender and other social differences (Irene Guijt and Meera Kaul Shah,
1998):

• Use clear and commonly used terminology as
  conceptual clarity lays the basis for practical application.
  Problematic terms such as Gender, Empowerment, Participation, and
  Community need careful attention.

• Develop appropriate methodologies in each
  circumstance; e.g. understand the practical conditions that can affect
  women’s involvement.

• Ensure that women have access to appropriate forms
  of expression to articulate their needs, interests and concerns.

• More focus on developing inclusive methods that can
  analyze gender.

• Gender-sensitive participatory training must be
  developed to suit the structure and objectives of specific
  organizations.