International Women’s Day – Breaking Down the Principles of Gender Mainstreaming in Humanitarian Action

Mar 7

Every year on March 8th, the global community celebrates International Women’s Day. In many countries, it is a public holiday commemorated with festivals and parades in recognition of the power of women.

While progress has been made with women rising to the highest positions of political power, reports from the World Economic Forum and McKinsey reveal that significant gender gaps remain across all sectors. Unfortunately, the knock-on effects of COVID-19 have further widened the gap.

As humanitarian practitioners, researchers, and donors plan for the future, it is imperative gender be integrated across all programs, policies, and investments. The question is how to do this effectively?

In honor International Women’s Day 2022, EQUAL spoke with Cica Dadjo, Chief Gender Equality Diversity and Inclusion Officer at the International Rescue Committee to better understand the concept of gender mainstreaming, its importance, and concrete recommendations for how to advance gender equality priorities in a meaningful and inclusive way.

1. You recently became the Chief Gender Equality Diversity and Inclusion Officer at the International Rescue Committee. You have an incredible history working on gender equality at global and national levels including in Benin and Cameron. How did you become involved in this work?

My mom is a feminist activist so I was raised with gender equality at the center of our household. From the earliest age my mother taught me that gender shouldn’t define who you are, who you will be, or what you will be allowed to do. My brothers, sisters, and I lived this every day in our house. Yet even knowing the inequities that were so common outside of our home, it was quite a shock – as well as a call to action – to be confronted by these realities in school and in the workplace and to witness those inequities in all aspects of society.

As I grew up, I started getting more involved in my mom’s work – she created one of the fist NGOs in Benin focused on women’s rights, she was part of the country’s delegation to Beijing for the historic 1995 Women’s Conference, and she was involved in politics with a focus on women in leadership. I watched and I learned and so I was naturally led to a career and a lifelong commitment to advancing gender equality.

2. Have you seen gender equality and gender mainstreaming evolve throughout your career?

Throughout my career, I have seen an evolution within the sector with perhaps the biggest being a shift from women focused interventions to mainstreaming gender across everything we do. 20 years ago, addressing gender was a one-off approach like providing livelihood support to a group of women. Gender work was treated as separate silo of programming with little integration across other sectors. More and more we’ve seen organizations working to address gender in a more holistic way – thinking about it in everything we do. Given that gender impacts and is impacted by every sector, this shift is key.

The other big change I’ve seen is a greater understanding that gender issues are not just “women’s” issues. Working to tackle inequality is good for everyone – it has a positive impact on all communities and helps promote the development of entire societies. There is substantial research and evidence that support this.

We have a lot of work to do but there has been progress. Now, we also need to see more work done to reflect the diversity that exists within gender – women are not a homogenous group and we can’t treat them like they are. We also need to work more consistently on other forms of inequality such as those based on nationality, race, religion ethnicity, sexual orientation, and class that equally affect women. It is almost impossible to effectively tackle gender inequality without talking about those forms of inequalities as well.

3. Gender mainstreaming was adopted as a key strategy for promoting gender equality at the Conference of Women in Beijing in 1995. However, to this today, I think many people find the terminology confusing. Can explain “gender mainstreaming” in detail, how it works in practice, and why it is so crucial for humanitarian actors to understand?

Simply put, gender mainstreaming means that in every action and every decision you take, you seek to understand how the situation impacts women, men, and their needs differently.

With this understanding, you can then intentionally identify the unique barriers women or men face, take action to address those barriers, and respond to people’s needs. This is important because of the reality that we live in a gendered world. What you have access to, what you are able to do, where you can go, the opportunities you have or don’t have, your specific needs and experiences, are somehow defined by your gender identity.

Gender equality and gender mainstreaming isn’t about having a gender uniform society – there is huge value in diversity. The problem is when those differences lead to systemic inequities. For humanitarian actors to be effective, we must understand that. There is no way to be effective without considering gender in every step of the process. If you are preparing to provide non-food items to a group of refugees for example, are you going to give a pregnant woman or a menstruating woman the same kit and supplies as a male adult? Are you going to install a water pump in a location that only one gender group can safely access? No – that is having a gender lens. I am being a bit simplistic here because of course there are deeper issues related to norms and systems that created those inequalities in access that need to be addressed when you are working on gender transformative programs.

4. In your career – especially working in humanitarian settings – what strategies have you found to be most effective for encouraging and enabling gender mainstreaming in programs, research, and research efforts?

There are many but I would like to point out four key strategies:
First, you need to systematize gender analysis. If you don’t understand the whole scope of the problem, you can’t solve it. Gender analyses provide a critical entry point to assess the different experiences and needs people have and then respond to it more effectively.
Second, systematically engage women and men to understand their needs and work with them to shape the solution. I have seen so many projects that have all male teams and I have often wondered, how can you expect to address the health and wellbeing of women, if you aren’t seeking their input? Project teams need to be diverse.
Third, engagement as part of the solution. Gender inequality is a result of power dynamics between men and women. These issues cannot be solved by working only with women – you have to work with men too. They can and should be part of the solution.
Fourth, while gender mainstreaming is essential, there is as always a need to have targeted actions to address barriers and close the gender gap.

5. For a project like EQUAL focused on MNH, gender is an integral aspect of the work but for other projects focused on topics like agriculture or climate resilience, the linkages may not be as clear or direct. How can researchers ensure that studies are gender sensitive, regardless of the focus topic? What advice do you have for people to better understand how to mainstream gender throughout their work?

I believe the starting point is data – compiling the evidence to help a team understand how specific issues are experienced differently by people from diverse gender identities. I would encourage teams to have focus group discussions and to get inspiration from other projects with a gender lens.

At the same time, we need to make the case that including gender has a lot of value and can increase a project’s impact. So often we think it’s just the right thing to do and make the ethical, human rights case. And of course, that is true and essential. Yet at the same time, we know people – especially program implementers – are not only driven by what is right but by what is most effective. They want to understand how the extra effort will have an impact (including on their key performance indicators). That type of case for investment is what moves people, teams, and organizations and helps them to understand the value of investing in gender equality.

6. What do you say to people who think gender mainstreaming is a “women’s” issue and therefore not a priority for humanitarian programs/responses focused on “life-saving needs”?

A humanitarian crisis is not gender blind. If we want to save lives, understanding a person’s acute needs is essential, and that isn’t going to be the same for everyone. Some would say menstruation/hygiene supplies are not life-saving and therefore not needed for an acute response. I would disagree – I don’t believe being able to manage your menstrual cycle, or to breastfeed, or to access contraception is a luxury. It is life-saving and it cannot be an afterthought.

Unfortunately, changing this perception and changing the system is difficult. Ultimately a humanitarian response is driven by rigid guidelines with categories of life saving interventions and those that are non-lifesaving. This needs to be addressed with high-level advocacy so we can see gender considerations better reflected in humanitarian guidelines and standards.

In the meantime, I do think it is critical for organizations to take a stance and show leadership and commitment in this area. If one organization clearly commits to better addressing gender through specific actions during an acute crisis, it is much harder for their teams and partners to ignore, and they will inspire the whole sector as well.

7. Gender norms differ across cultures and are often deeply engrained in society with implications on all aspects of life from access to education and healthcare to business, economic growth, peace and security, etc. For example, in some countries, women require permission from their husband to access contraception or to seek health care services, even for childbirth. Recognizing this, how can researchers and practitioners be culturally sensitive while still promoting inclusive, rights-based programs that advance gender equality?

You need to identify and cultivate allies in the communities you are working in. People are more responsive to people that belong to their community, speaking about issues and experience they share. When it is external project staff, it can feel like the ideas are being forced on them or that we are coming to give them lessons.

An ally from the community has cultural context and knows how far and how hard to push in challenging social and cultural norms. For example, I’ve seen many projects focused on gender-based violence work closely with local Imam’s to help shift norms and mobilize their communities. Any project can apply this approach and identify champions – the challenge is it takes time, something we don’t often have in humanitarian programs. Changing bias and addressing deeply rooted barriers to equality take a long time – a reality that is often in tension of donor demands and project cycles.

8. How do we effectively introduce additional gender concepts like feminism, intersectionality, gender-nonconforming, and other marginalized gender identities for communities – including researchers and practitioners – who may be hearing this language for the first time?

You need to meet people where they are and recognize that we are all at different stages in the journey to understand these concepts. One of the mistakes we make as humanitarian organizations is coming in with a set of concepts, terms, and an agenda and then not taking the time to unpack those concepts based on the unique realities of each context

We need to start by asking people to describe the realities they are living in and use their own words and experiences to explain gender. During a session I led in Mali, for example, I started by asking everyone to describe themselves using three words – we used those words to then keep unpacking the different layers of identity and the implications of each. By continuing to break the layers down, we were able to unveil intersectionality – without ever using the term intersectionality.

We need to figure out how to talk about these issues without using the jargon and focus instead on how to make sense of these issues within their own contexts rather than trying to have a template or a one size fits all approach. Couple that with being sensitize and having empathy I think we can make more meaningful progress.

9. What is your call to action to other humanitarian organizations and/or funders to better prioritize and incorporate gender across all programs and investments?

There are some minimal standards that must be met:

Disaggregate all data. That is how you see the differences and respond accordingly.
Ensure there is at least one gender specific goal in every project. When you have a specific goal, there is built in investment and effort tied to it.
Meaningfully engage women and women led organizations and ensure they have a seat and a voice at the decision-making table.

As INGOs, we have the power and influence to make these type of changes and commitments and to help lead others to do the same.

Alicia Adler