Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
PRO WO+MAN
Research Report
2
Pro WO+MAN
Research Report
Authors: Albulena Metaj and Driton Zeqiri
Project manager: Ajete Kërqeli
The views and interpretations expressed in this report are the authors’.
Copyright: PEN and the authors, 2013
Special thanks to Annica Holmberg, OPIC external consultant
______________________________________________________________________________
This research report is part of the project “Pro WO+MAN”, implemented by Peer Educators
Network – PEN from Prishtina, financed by Olof Palme International Centre and supported by
Swedish Government
This publication can be downloaded from: http://www.ngo-pen.org
3
Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................. 4
METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................... 14
DEMOGRAPHICS .......................................................................................................................................................... 16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 18
I. GENERAL REFLECTIONS ON GENDER EQUALITY ........................................................................................... 19
II. INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AND STEERING DOCUMENTS .................................... 25
III. AWARENESS AND ATTITUDES OF STAFF AND LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION .............. 27
IV. METHODS, STRATEGIES, TOOLS AND POLICIES.......................................................................................... 40
V. CAPACITIES TO PRACTICALLY APPLY GENDER TOOLS IN THE WORK OF THE ORGANIZATION ..... 48
CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................................................................. 56
RECCOMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 58
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................................. 61
ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................................................... 62
4
INTRODUCTION
Gender mainstreaming is a globally accepted approach to achieving gender equality and
constitutes an essential part of Human Development and Human Rights. Of the multiple layers of
identity – including age, ethnicity, religion, class, disability, sexual orientation, and education,
gender is one of the most important factors that determines how an individual is perceived in
society, the roles they are expected to play as well as the access they have to resources,
opportunities, and power to influence decision – making.1
Among many challenges faced by developing countries, policies and transition period appear to
be indicators of gender based inequalities and other forms of social exclusion. While several
countries have relatively strong economies and stable democracies, the situation in Region
appears to be different.
It is important not to conflate gender with women, but it is also essential to note that in spite of the
progress made in achieving greater gender equality, women continue to be among the poorest and
most marginalized segments of the population in parts of the world. 2 While men and women
have experienced hardships during the transition periods, women by and large have suffered
greater losses socially, politically, and economically than men. The historical and cultural
background, dominated by a patriarchal mindset revealed the inadequate treatment and the issue
of women’s position in society. The basic principle of gender mainstreaming begins with the
acknowledgment that gender equality is a key and absolute aspect of sustainable human
development and the achievement of human rights.
Rapid dynamics and new circumstances of transitional process of Kosovo, socio – economic,
political, health and welfare policies promoted during the transition phase, highlighted gender
perspective as significant, especially relevant to contribute toward building of a more inclusive
society. Kosovo could be said to be in a developing phase with regards to the engendering of
1 Gender mainstreaming in Practice, A Toolkit. Regional programme of the United Nations Development
Programme’s Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS (UNDP RBEC). 2007 (third edition)
2 Ibid
5
social and political structures and minds as well. Despite that, although necessary, changes in
gender relations and roles appear to be of a long term nature. Gender architecture and formal
measures such as the gender quota3 or the gradual presence of women in traditionally male
spaces, such as police service, security force, other relevant bodies, may have contributed to
progressively normalize the presence of women in traditional male public spaces and, ultimately,
to promote gender equality. 4
Kosovo has moved forward and established a good foundation of legal and institutional
mechanisms in the field of gender. It has been depicted as the most progressive in the whole
Balkan region by local and international actors. The overall infrastructure is based in an
important principle which respect and promote gender equality, human rights and equal
involvement. The Kosovo Gender Equality Law, adopted by the Assembly of Kosovo in 2004,
states that all economic, financial, employment and social welfare legislation and finance
programs, including the right of inheritance and property, loans and natural resources shall enable
the equal and full participation of both women and men. Yet, in the economic, health and
education sectors challenges still remain to properly address gender equality concerns. The
unemployment rate in Kosovo is 43% whereas women’s unemployment rate is about 57%. The
lack of women in the workforce actively perpetuates poverty at the household level. Education
remains a problem as young girls tend to drop out of higher level of education at a higher rate than
their male counterparts. There has been significant progress in women’s school attendance,
however lower rates of attendance remain in rural areas.
The socio-economic situation of women in Kosovo still needs to be improved. By adopting the
Gender Equality Law and the Action Plan, the Government has acknowledged the importance of
investing in the empowerment of women as key to sustainable economic development and
prosperity. This important legislative framework has resulted in a legal obligation on all public
and private sector employers to provide equal rights and opportunities, and equal pay, for females
3 Since 2002, following a decision by the Central Elections Commission, all political parties in Kosovo are obliged to have
women represented at one third of candidates in their election lists. As a result, after the 2010 election, 33.3 % of members of
parliament in the Assembly of Kosovo are women. Quota is integrated also in the Constitution of Kosovo, as a provision on
affirmative action pertaining to women.
4 An Approach to the Kosovo Post-War Rehabilitation Process from a Gender Perspective. QUADERNS DE CONSTRUCCIÓ DE
PAU Nº 2, January 2008.
6
and males. The law treats women equal to men in all economic, financial and social welfare
programs thus stipulating the equal access to resources and economic opportunities.5 Despite
progress being made, efforts still remain to be done so that gender dimension is understood,
socialized, institutionalized and translated into pro – gender equality action.
The promotion of gender equity and mainstreaming of gender in transitional context in Kosovo
have been and still are complex processes. Political will and continuation of efforts and
commitment from Civil Society to jointly improve the wellbeing and the socio-economic position
of men and women are crucial toward achieving gender equality goal. The role of the
international agenda in advancing human rights and gender issues in Kosovo has been crucial as
well in supporting the establishment of Institutional and Legal framework, and other relevant
gender mechanisms. The review of the relevant literature but practices as well, highlight that
gender mainstreaming, as a strategy to promote gender equality, is possible and sustainable in the
context of strong, well placed and well-resourced institutional mechanisms, cooperation and
support from all partners. The role of Civil Society is well recognized in social developments, and
in particular in addressing gender specific issues. In Kosovo’s context, Civil Society played a
crucial role in the developmental processes, as active agents in informing institutional structures.
A great number of active Civil Society Organizations located throughout Kosovo continue to play
a crucial role in this regard. Conversely civil society has been influential on social developments.
Kosovar civil society is successfully engaged in promoting human rights. It is also successful in
positioning women within the sector and promoting gender equality; indeed women take some of
the most influential roles with the NGO. 6
In this regard, it is worth mentioning that in Kosovo, as
in other contexts, the promotion of the gender perspective and of the goal of gender equality has
been pushed forward by certain groups of women acting as catalytic agents. This active
mobilization is combined with specific international and local socio –political context, it must be
highlighted that the lead advocating and action role in terms of gender has been played by gender
– aware women. 7
5 Women’s summit booklet, UN WOMEN, 2012 6 Policy Action Brief Civicus Civil Society Index for Kosovo. Kosovar Civil Society Foundation, March 2011.
7 An Approach to the Kosovo Post-War Rehabilitation Process from a Gender Perspective. QUADERNS DE
CONSTRUCCIÓ DE PAU Nº 2, January 2008.
7
The aim of the study
Acknowledging the importance of gender dimension in developing societies, with the support of
Olof Palme international Centre, Peer Education Network In Kosovo – PEN, within the project
Pro Wo+man, undertook an initiative to review the situation of 13 Partner NGO’s who are active
in Kosovo since 2000, mainly working and addressing essential developmental issues in
respective communities. The main scope of this study is to assess the extent Partner Organizations
integrate gender mainstreaming perspective into their internal organizational structure and area of
work. The extent of conceptual understanding of gender related terms such as: gender equality;
gender mainstreaming; gender perspective; and the applicability of these concepts into practice,
identification of needs, capacities and adequate resources for gender mainstreaming are objectives
of the study as well. Majority of PEN’s Partner Organizations are active in Kosovo since 2000,
with a wide range of their working area. A summary of their focus areas include, but not limited
to: promoting and developing civil society, youth, supporting disability persons rights,
integrations of marginal groups in society, connecting local institutions and local citizens and
promotion of process of return and dialogue; work in the field of art, culture and media;
community, improvement of citizens’ lives, develop public policies through independent research
in the areas of socioeconomic, governance, development of political parties and advancement of
inter-ethnic relations; advocacy, influence public policies and processes in creation, wider
inclusion, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of public policies; facilitate forums for
discussion and exchange of experiences in a wide spectrum of sectors; policy research, training
of political parties and government institutions and administration; with the overall aim to
promote democracy and democratic values in Kosovo and the region. Yet, despite a wide range of
working area of Partner Organizations, the situation in practice show that the need to emphasize
gender dimension into their work and the demand for effective understanding, tools and
mechanisms to facilitate gender mainstreaming remains high and a challenging process.
Therefore, the aim of the study is twofold: it aims to find out how partner organizations
(participants) approach issues concerning gender, in specific gender equality and gender
mainstreaming, and what knowledge, capacity and experience they have to mainstream gender
into their area of work. The study will help PEN and Olof Palme International Centre to identify
relevant areas and forms for capacity building initiatives for the staff of the partner organizations
8
and organizational development. Secondly, it aims at revealing the level of participant’s
conceptual understanding of gender mainstreaming and gender perspective as a relevant strategy
and integral part of their working area, from a personal and professional point of view.
Findings from this research will to help PEN to plan the focus of forthcoming workshops, team
work and individual coaching to support this conceptual approach, which will be implemented
according to the particular institutional, social and cultural context.
What is gender mainstreaming?
Gender mainstreaming is a globally accepted approach and to promote the achievement of gender
equality and constitutes an essential part of Human Development and Human Rights.
In addition, gender mainstreaming is known as a globally accepted strategy for promoting gender
equality and other policy goals in a most effective manner. This implies the understanding that the
mainstreaming of gender aspects is not an end in itself but rather a strategy, an approach which
highlights the relevance and implication of the different conditions, situations and positions of
women and men within a specific cultural and social context and how these features affect women
and men differently in relevant segments of life.
This concept was first proposed at the 1985 Third World Conference on Women in Nairobi,
Kenya, to be developed further in the United Nations development community, which was
formally featured in 1995 at the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, resulted from
the conference, the Beijing Platform for Action. There are several definitions for gender
mainstreaming strategy/ approach, depending on the contexts, backgrounds, systems and bodies,
organizational culture, etc.
According to the United Nation System, gender mainstreaming was defined and adopted in 1997;
the official definition of gender mainstreaming is:
“…the process of assessing the implications for women and men of any planned action, including
legislation, policies or programs, in all areas and at all levels. It is a strategy for making women’s
as well as men’s concerns and experiences an integral dimension of the design, implementation,
9
monitoring and evaluation of policies and programs in all political, economic and societal spheres
so that women and men benefit equally and inequality is not perpetuated”.8
Furthermore, the Council of Europe in 1998, defined gender mainstreaming as: ”The
(re)organization, improvement, development and evaluation of policy processes, so that a gender
equality perspective is incorporated in all policies, at all levels and at all stages, by the actors
normally involved in policymaking.”
Through gender mainstreaming approach, gender equality is no longer viewed as a separate or
isolated issue, but rather a concern for all policies and programs. As a strategy, Gender
Mainstreaming highlights that interventions, policies, contexts, and other related dimensions
affect women and men differently.
A gender mainstreaming approach does not make obsolete the need for specific policies,
programs, or projects on gender equality. The level of intervention (from basic “gender
sensitivity” to comprehensive, targeted programs for women and men) will depend on the specific
needs and priorities revealed by gender sensitive situation assessment. 9
The idea of mainstreaming gender derives or starts from the recognition that the differences and
disparities between women and men the life conditions, possibilities and opportunities are closely
linked and impact all aspects of society. Therefore, policy makers, advisers, program and projects
managers, researchers, and other relevant actors, who recognize the importance of addressing a
gender dimension into their work must embrace the Gender Mainstreaming Strategy and put
efforts to support technical and human capacities to integrate such perspective into their working
area.
When mentioning the working area, it is important to highlight that a strategy to integrate gender
perspective into working area, should be also followed by a strategy to ensure that working
environment is gender sensitive as well. This means that within the organization, equal
opportunities and equal treatment to both women and men as employees are guaranteed and
respected. The gender equality perspective in development cooperation is not only important for
8 The Report of the Economic and Social Council for 1997. United Nations, 1997 9 Gender mainstreaming in Practice, A Toolkit. Regional programme of the United Nations Development Programme’s Regional
Bureau for Europe and the CIS (UNDP RBEC). 2007 (third edition)
10
the project itself and for the project area, but is also necessary in Organisation’s own internal
structures. In this regard, it is essential that the Organisations’ and its employees have positive
attitude toward gender equality. The personal attitudes of every individual within the organisation
to the importance of gender equality have crucial effects on the quality and sustainability of
development cooperation.
Often, it can happen that men and women both take part in activities but the women are not in
decision-making positions or their suggestions are ignored when decisions are made.
Engendering10
the workplace means that decisions are made as democratically as possible as well.
It is essential to highlight that within the certain context, gender equality does not just concern the
relative numbers of men and women, an attention should be paid to the internal effects of gender
on work and in the work place ( i.e. attitudes of the organization toward people in the workplace
community, equal payment for women and men, equal division of responsible tasks, making
decisions together, taking a positive attitude to combining professional and personal life for both
men and women, etc) .
10 To make visible the different impact on, or impact of women and men and their genders in a given context. For example,
engendering involves the recognition that the gender division of labor and its associated norms, values and ideologies about
masculinity and femininity are defined by a complex of power relations which tend to accord to women lesser political voice,
social / cultural value, and access to and control over economic resources.
11
List of abbreviations
ATRC - Advocacy Training & Resource Center
CSD – Communication for Social Development
CO – Civil Society
D4D – Democracy for Development
FGD – Focus Group Discussion
GE – Gender Equality
GM – Gender Mainstreaming
PEN – Peer Educators Network
NGO – Non Governmental Organization
KIPRED – Kosovar Institute for Policy, Research and Development
KDI – Kosova Democratic Institute
M&E – Monitoring and Evaluation
YAHR - Youth Association for Human Rights
WAGJ – Woman Association of Gjakova
12
Glossary of key gender terms
It should be noted that different organizations and bodies have different working definitions of the
terms below, and of the terms’ inter-relationship. As such, the following should be taken as a
guide only.
DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS11
GENDER: The political, social and cultural significance attached to biological differences
between men and women, boys and girls. A focus on gender not only reveals information about
women and men’s different experiences, it also sheds light on ingrained assumptions and
stereotypes about men and women, the values and qualities associated with each, and the ways in
which power relationships can change. The Secretary-General defines the term in his 2002 report
Women, Peace and Security as: “the socially constructed roles as ascribed to women and men, as
opposed to biological and physical characteristics. Gender roles vary according to socio-
economic, political and cultural contexts, and are affected by other factors, including age, race,
class and ethnicity. Gender roles are learned and are changeable.”
GENDER ANALYSIS: The variety of methods used to understand the relationships between
men and women, their access to resources, and the relative constraints they face. Gender analysis
recognizes that gender, and its relationship with race, ethnicity, culture, class, age, disability,
and/or other status, is important to understanding the different patterns of involvement, behavior
and activities that women and men have in economic, social and legal structures. (Definition used
by the Canadian International Development Agency, CIDA.)
GENDER BALANCE: The degree to which men and women hold the full range of positions in a
society or organization (more accurately, “sex ratio”). The long-term objective, as defined by the
UN General Assembly, is to achieve a 50/50 gender balance.
GENDER EQUALITY: Equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities for women and men;
accordingly equal consideration to the interests, needs and priorities of women and men. Gender
11
Source: http://peacewomen.org/pages/about-1325/key-gender-terms
13
equality does not imply a goal of non-differentiation between the sexes, but rather the elimination
of adverse discrimination based on sex (e.g., lower remuneration for women doing the same work
as men). Gender equality exists when both sexes are able to share equally in the distribution of
power and influence; have equal opportunities for financial independence; enjoy equal access to
education and the opportunity to develop personal ambitions, interests and talents; share domestic
responsibilities; and are free from coercion, intimidation and Gender Based Violence at work and
at home. (Definition used by United Nations Population Fund, UNFPA)
GENDER MAINSTREAMING: “The process of assessing the implications for women and men
of any planned action, including legislation, policies or programmes, in any area and at all levels.
It is a strategy for making the concerns and experiences of women as well as of men an integral
part 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 of mainstreaming is to achieve gender equality.” (1997 UN
Economic and Social Council, ECOSOC). Mainstreaming is not achieved by adding a
“women/gender equality component” to an existing activity, or by simply increasing women’s
participation. It means bringing the experience, knowledge and interests of women and men to
bear on the development of an agenda or programme.
GENDER PERSPECTIVE: With respect to any social phenomenon, policy or process, exposing
gender-based differences in status and power, and considering how such discrimination shapes the
immediate needs, as well as the long-term interests, of women and men. (See, e.g., 1995 Beijing
Platform for Action).
14
METHODOLOGY
Design: A mixed methods approach (design) has been used to implement the project “Pro
WO+MAN”, with the emphasis on both methods, qualitative and quantitative.
Initially a literature review took part in order to understand the relevant approach, theoretical
perspective, relevant empirical studies, in order to conceptualize the scope of research from a
more holistic approach. Global and local gender mainstreaming strategies and related documents
were also relevant to the source of information during the review of the literature.
Thirteen partner Organizations were assigned by PEN to participate in this research. The
organizations consisted of: KIPRED; Woman Association Gjakovë, Syri i Viziionit; ODA; D4D;
ATRC; KDI; EC ma ndryshe; CSD; RADC; Multimedia/CCTC; YAHR, spread around Kosovo
with their scope of work, as following : Prishtinë; Pejë; Mitrovicë; Gjakovë; Prizren; Gjilan;
Lipjan; Graçanicë, Zveçan. Furthermore, 103 individuals engaged in respective NGO’s where part
of the questionnaire administration and fifteen of them participated in the Focus Group
Discussions. (See demographic data for more detailed information!)
Instruments: Desk review, Questionnaire (compiled by PEN staff with the expertise support of
international gender expert) and Focus Group Discussion were among instruments which were
used to gather data.
Questionnaires: 103 questionnaires were administered with NGO’s staff (managerial level and
employees). The questionnaire was designed to enable the respondents to reflect on their work
and attitudes toward gender perspective and gender mainstreaming. It was intended to support the
organization participating in the research to identify areas and relevant forms of capacity building
initiatives for the internal structure of the organization and organizational culture as well. The
questionnaire consists of these main areas, issues:
General reflections on gender issues;
Internal organizational structures and steering documents;
Awareness and attitudes of staff and leadership within the organization;
Methods, strategies, tools and policies;
15
Capacities to practically apply gender tools in the work of the organization.
Focus Group discussion (FGD): Two sets of the FGD were organized in order to get an insight
perspective and an in depth reflection of the main issues which were treated in the questionnaire.
FGD enabled to get a clearer picture and to complement data analysis from the questionnaire
which was sometimes perceived rather vague or non-significant through quantitative analysis. It
also enabled to get a distinct perspective of managerial and employees on gender related issues
and relevant perspectives. The discussion consisted of four main area / thematic issues:
Conceptual understanding of gender and its relevance;
Gender Mainstreaming within the organizational structures and environments;
Tools and mechanisms;
Needs and challenges towards gender mainstreaming.
Procedure: Questionnaires were implemented during November, 2013. All related instructions
were given to the respondents and attached to the questionnaire a summary of the glossary / key
terms and concepts of gender mainstreaming was included in order for respondents to get a clear
understanding on gender and related differences of the certain concepts. Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS 21.0 V) was used to conduct a quantitative analysis. Descriptive statistics
and Cross Tabulation were among key analysis which took part for the data analysis. Data have
been analyzed and scrutinized, in order to have a clear understanding on the needs and topics to
be expended and understood from a more holistic perspective.
Two sets of the FGD (one with managerial level and another with employees of respective
organization) were conducted. The first FGD lasted 2.5 hrs, while the second one 2 hrs.
Participants were very keen to discuss and explain relevant issues of the project, although the
conceptual understanding of gender related issues appeared to have an impact in their perceptions
for a gender mainstreaming approach into their daily work and programmatic issues. All relevant
topics and thematic areas were covered and the analysis was conducted by creating appropriate
categories which were relevant to the thematic area of discussion.
16
DEMOGRAPHICS
Chart 1D. Sex data
Chart 2D. Level of education
17
Chart 3D. City
Chart 4D. Organization
18
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Majority of the respondents, respectively around 82% believe that there is still no gender
equality at the level desired.
There appears to be no gender balance within organizational structures. The discrepancy
starts at staff where we have 20% less women, gets bigger in management position where
we have 30% less women and continuous with boards where we have 40% less women
than men.
Majority of the respondents, respectively 60% believe that there should be given more
space to discussions on gender equality in planning processes within their organization.
Majority of the respondents, respectively 53% consider there is a good discussion on
gender equality within different working groups. A significant number of respondents,
respectively 29% believe that there should be done more in this direction, while 18% of
respondents believe that this issue is neglected within organizations they work.
Only 20% of respondents declared that their organization has a specific gender policy. The
majority of respondents, respectively 80% either has no information about the existence of
such policy documents or declares that such document does not exist.
Only 44% of respondents believe that within their organization a sexual harassment in the
workplace would be appropriately addressed even though they declare of not having such
a case within their organization.
Majority of respondents, respectively 60% declare of not having any tools for gender
mainstreaming which could be used in their activities.
19
I. GENERAL REFLECTIONS ON GENDER EQUALITY
1. Majority of the respondents believe that there is still no gender equality at the level
desired. Around 82% of respondents think that gender equality is yet a field which needs to
improve. 58% of respondents believe that there have been efforts toward ensuring gender equality
but effort should continue, while around 20% of respondents believe there has been done very
little in that direction.
There are some slight gender differences in answers since male respondents have a higher
percentage (M60% v. s F40%), when it comes to completely/partly agree that gender equality has
been achieved, while female respondents have a higher percentage (F56% v. s M44%) when it
comes to completely/partly disagree that gender equality has been achieved.
Chart 1. Gender equality has already been achieved for the most part
The conceptual and proper understanding of gender notions, in specific gender equality and its
relevance in the working area, appear to be an important aspect which has impacted participants
attitudes on the issue of whether gender equality has been achieved or not. Experiences and
findings revealed during the Focus Group Discussions emphasize difficulties toward
understanding, explaining and translating into the practice the concept of gender and related
dimensions such as: gender sensitivity, gender equality gender perspective and gender
mainstreaming. The issue of adequate conceptual understanding appears to be the crucial area
reflecting participants’ attitudes as well in the questionnaire. Despite what the diagram shows
20
above, reflections from the FGD appear to show a very limited conceptual understanding of
gender mainstreaming and its applicability into the practice. The limited conceptual understanding
has reflected on participants’ views, believes and real practices to figure how important and
relevant are the applicability and translation of gender mainstreaming concept into the working
area. The prominent tendency to limit the understanding of gender mainstreaming and/or gender
equality, gender issues, only to women issues, and to look only at women in isolation whenever
gender is mentioned, was among highlighted aspects that participants brought along the
discussion. This is also encountered during the questionnaire analysis, where majority of
participants with no hesitation believe that gender equality has been achieved so far. As
interpreted by the quantitative approach, around 60% of participants responded that they partially
agree that gender equality has been achieved for the most part, whereas in practice this does not
reflect on other crucial aspects of participant’s attitudes and beliefs regarding gender equality.
This limited conceptual understanding might serve as an explanation why sometimes respondents
and involved actors have the impression that they feel overwhelmed by the task of gender
mainstreaming into their work.
In general, one of the crucial aspects which have a direct impact on the way of how gender
perspective and its relevance is being perceived and integrated is linked with the reflections from
social and cultural context/background and working area as well.
Participants have mentioned few factors which have impacted and continue to have an impact in
the individuals’ mindset toward understanding and conceptualizing gender mainstreaming.
Among these factors they mention: mentality (mainly male dominated), the social system, family,
and socially constructed norms within the society.
2. Majority of the respondents, respectively around 58% strongly disagree that only well-
to-do people benefit from gender equality initiatives. Around 27% of respondents in a way believe
that to a certain point well-to-do people are more likely to benefit than other social categories.
There is a significant difference on the percentage of people who completely disagree with the
statement and their job position. Around 71% of respondents with full time positions disagree
with the statement while this percentage drops to 37% of part time employees who completely
disagree.
21
To conclude, majority of full time position completely disagree that well-to-do people benefit
from gender equality initiatives while majority of part time respondents believe that to a certain
level well-to-do people do benefit from such initiatives.
There is no significant difference between respondents of different gender and age in their
approach to the above statement.
Chart 2. Work to achieve gender equality today benefits mostly well-to-do people
The fact that participants showed tendencies sometimes to perceive that gender mainstreaming
and related concepts are being perceived and treated as ‘trendy’ or ‘hot’ topics, might leave the
impression that dealing with gender issues sometimes could be profitable. This especially was
linked with an example that there are sometimes cases where Donors imply their gender practices
without even taking into consideration the specific needs of a context.
FGD analysis reveal that participants agree that lots of initiatives and efforts have been made to
address gender equality issues, in specific equal participation, opportunities for both men and
women in developmental processes, but not to a satisfactory level. Although the strategy of
quotas12
remains a crucial mechanisms for advancing women’s empowerment and gender
12 Since 2002, following a decision by the Central Elections Commission, quota was integrated as a tool to enhance women’s
participation in decision – making levels; all political parties in Kosovo are obliged to have women represented at one third of
candidates in their election lists. As a result, 33.3 % of members of parliament in the Assembly of Kosova are women (from the
22
equality, few of participants tend to believe that if these mechanisms/affirmative measures remain
enforced for a long period of time, such in Kosovo’s context case, they could have a harmful
effect as well for the way how gender related dimensions are being perceived into society.
3. Majority of respondents, respectively 81% strongly disagree that when women rights
are increased it means that man have lost those privileges. The other 15% of respondents believe
that to a certain point by promoting gender equality lot of existing privileges are taken from men.
Within those that agree with the statement, respectively 15% of respondents, male respondents
dominate with 10% in comparison to 5% of female respondents.
Chart 3. Increased rights for women means that men lose out
It is essential to mention that in specific, the FGD with employees revealed that participants prefer
to understand and to address gender perspective within the human rights perspective. This
reassures that participants didn’t show reflections or beliefs that if we treat gender in the concept
of women’s rights or men’s rights and/or perspective, this will automatically mean that one of
them will be in disadvantage or will be superior in terms of less/more rights. They tend to show
the essentiality that this should not be seen as a competitive issue for women and men, but rather
within the framework of human’s rights.
election in 2010). Quota is integrated also in the Constitution of Kosovo, as a provision on affirmative action’s pertaining to
women.
23
In a more general context, participants’ attitudes indicate that sometimes gender discrimination
derives from individuals involved directly in public institutions, those who are supposed to
develop and advance gender policies and mechanisms to facilitate or sustain gender
mainstreaming. The fact that individuals from institutional level, but ordinary citizens as well tend
to believe that Kosovo’s society has major problems such as Poverty, Corruption, Justice System,
Infrastructure, Social Policies, etc., presents an actuality that there is a lack of proper
understanding of the importance of gender perspective integrated into all segments of society.
4. Majority of respondents, respectively 78% strongly disagree that when women work
they take jobs away from men. The other 22% of respondents believe that to a certain point
increasing the number of women employed means decreasing the number of employed
men.Within those that agree with the statement, respectively 22% of respondents, male
respondents dominate with 14% in comparison to 8% of female respondents
Chart 4. When women work they take jobs away from men
There is a small discrepancy compared to answers shown on Chart 3 which can be attributed to
existing quota employment system, where public institutions are obliged to have at least 30%
female staff.
Awareness raising activities, training, issues of affirmative measure such as quotas, equal
participation, mainly quantitative modalities, the system in which society functions, mentality,
etc, appear to be among few modalities related to gender, that participants perceive as consumed
24
concepts when attempting to understand, address and explain in depth the gender perspective
(women versus men’s rights and perspective) and its related concepts.
It was interesting to highlight that during the discussion on the conceptual understanding aspects
of the gender mainstreaming and participant’s general attitudes toward gender, a general view
among participants’, highlights a tendency to perceive gender issues as issues which are mostly
treated and addressed by women in society, dominated by a feminist13
approach. Sometimes, from
participants’ attitudes, this reflection has a tendency to stem from a more radical feminist
approach14
as well. These attitudes appear to lead participants’ on wrongly believing that gender
mainstreaming strategy is rather perceived as a tendency to look women in isolation, and not to
count for both perspectives of women and men as relevant to the developmental agendas.
Apparently, there seems to be a misunderstanding of the “feminist” approach as well in this
regard.
Interesting opinions were revealed during the FGD discussion with regard to the approach on
gender issues. Few participants’, mainly women, think that despite the crucial premises of gender
mainstreaming and gender equality, women seem to have fewer rights and more obligations,
assuming that the roles and responsibilities in the professional and personal context do not seem
to be complemented by both perspectives: women and men. This is mainly explained by the
unequal involvement in the household activities as well, making women less active in the
professional sphere due to other family obligations.
13 Feminist theory is one of the major contemporary sociological theories, which analyzes the status of women and men in society
with the purpose of using that knowledge to better women's lives. Feminist theorists have also started to question the differences
between women, including how race, class, ethnicity, and age intersect with gender. 14 Radical feminism is a current within feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes
society into a complex of relationships based on an assumption of "male supremacy" used to oppress women.
25
II. INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AND
STEERING DOCUMENTS
As shown in the charts (5.1, 5.2 and 5.3) within these organizations there is no gender balance
within organogram. The discrepancy starts at staff where we have 20% less women, gets bigger in
management position where we have 30% less women and continuous with boards where we have
40% less women than man.
Limited conceptual understanding has a tendency to be perceived as an indicator of other views
and beliefs as well, and real practices on how important and relevant is gender mainstreaming and
40%
60%
Proportion within the staff of organization
Female
Male
35%
65%
Proportion within managment
Female
Male
30%
70%
Proportion within board
Female
Male
26
its applicability into their working area, both on the internal and external structures of the
organization.
Despite the statistics, opinions from FGD indicate that participants don’t believe that there is a
substantial difference among any working position which can be fulfilled by women and/or men,
and generally they do not perceive as discriminated or comprehensive the ratio of men and
women involvement into the respective positions within their organizations. According to
participant’s attitudes, there are increasing trends of women managers and this is being viewed as
a positive indicator. The quantitative data from the questionnaire indicate few discrepancies
between working positions and the ratio of the staff within the organizations. This especially
appears more significant on the decision making levels (managerial vs. non managerial positions)
and board compositions. In general, this trend tends to highlight and support the Kosovo’s context
overall situation in the field of equal participation, opportunities and contribution. Socially
constructed norms were mentioned as well by participants as factors influencing attitudes and
ideas that there are male and female dominating working positions, but they do believe that this is
more due to the personal characteristics (attributions) and human nature, rather than the
implication of any external factor which hinders the equal participation of men and women in
different working positions.
The FGD discussion indicated that there are still prominent beliefs and perceptions that the issue
of gender and employment is subject to a great discrimination nowadays as well. This is
especially linked with cases which are still present such as age, sex, marital status, and other
related information which sometimes are required during the recruitment process, which in
principle tend to be perceived as discriminatory in vacancy announcement and following
processes. Participant’s attitudes indicate that sometimes the gender discrimination derives from
individuals involved directly in public institutions, those who are supposed to develop and
advance gender policies and mechanisms to facilitate or sustain gender mainstreaming.
However, it has been noticed that there is a huge discrepancy in perceiving the linkage between
gender mainstreaming in programs/projects and the reflection into the Organizational Structures
and Environments. More concretely, much is required to understand that a strategy to integrate
gender concerns into programming area of the work must be accompanied by a strategy to ensure
27
that the working environment is gender sensitive as well, in order to guarantee equal opportunities
and treatment for men and women within the organization and beneficiaries as well.
III. AWARENESS AND ATTITUDES OF STAFF AND
LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION
1. Majority of respondents, respectively 83.5% believe that they contribute to ensuring
respectful environment within their working place. Within 16.5% of those that think that they do
not give enough attention or give some there is a domination of male respondents under thirty
years old. When performing a comparison with answers in Chart 6, Chart 7 and Chart 8 we can
see an increase in the percentage of respondents being indifferent toward relationships between
man and women in workplace. The difference between Chart 6 and Chart 7 or 8 can be attributed
to the fact that some respondents choose not to be involved if there is an issue affecting their
female colleges because they believe that is a private matter of the person/s being involved. The
increase between Chart 7 and Chart 8 can be attributed to the fact that there is increased attitude
that man should protect themselves.
Chart 6. How much attention do you pay to ensure that there are respectful working
relations between men and women in your work/activities
It is important to highlight that quantitative and qualitative analysis indicate that the participants
of this research perceive their working environment and interpersonal relations as a very crucial
aspect, followed by a positive climate and mutual respect. They declare that they have never
28
encountered problematic gender related issues and feel very competent and supported within their
working positions. The same belief if reflected with projects beneficiaries, including both men
and women.
Chart 7. When you identify problems affecting female colleagues, do you take action?
Chart 8. When you identify problems affecting male colleagues, do you take action?
2. Majority of respondents, respectively 92% believe that there are no obstacles that
prevent women from fulfilling any function, role or task within their organization. Within 8% of
those that think that there are some obstacles that prevent women from fulfilling any function
there is a domination of female respondents. According to respondent answers all obstacles are
29
related to the fact that in a role of a mother a women has obstacles into adapting to long working
hours and especially working late in the evening. Among obstacles was also the issue of driving
the car while performing field activities. Some respondents also raised the issue related to
patriarchal mentality, when a woman having a job can face obstacles from their male family
members
.
Chart 9. Are there any obstacles that prevent women to fulfill any functions/roles or
positions in your organization
Analysis of the FGD revealed interesting reflections, separate beliefs and judgments within the
issue of discrepancy on working position and gender. In this regard, the FGD with the managerial
structure tends to show basic beliefs that there might be differentiation among working positions
related to gender, mainly in the field of Logistics and positions which require more technical
skills, as mentioned from the quantitative analysis. Nevertheless, they do admit that these
perceptions have undergone a lot of changes as well, and recently, new trends of the working
positions and gender tend to break the prejudices that there’s a discrepancy on the working
positions and the effectiveness related to gender involvement. A fact to support this attitude was
justified by a new trend of the position of Financial Manager, which recently is being perceived as
a position which has more tendencies to get occupied by women rather men.
3. Majority of respondents, respectively 99% believe that there are no obstacles that
prevent men from fulfilling any function, role or task within their organization.
30
Chart 10. Are there any obstacles that prevent men to fulfill any functions/roles or positions
in your organization?
An issue worth mentioning does not have to do directly with the ratio and the position that women
and men occupy but rather the extent to which women and men get involved into whole processes
and become key actors in the programmatic issues and the whole cycle of the program/project.
Other reasons which tend to describe the discrepancy between gender and working positions
within the organizations among participant in FGD included also the multiple roles, overloads
which women usually carry – household activities, the misbalance between personal and
professional life, etc. According to participant’s beliefs, the fact that there is a very limited access
or lack of the inadequate social services for women as mothers as well, might have impacted that
sometimes they cannot be fully effective or overly engaged in the working area or their
professional life. If we add to this reason the dynamic of the social life and the change in the
society’s system of organization, the dynamic where the men’s involvement in family obligation
is crucial as well, the tendency to set a balance between professional and personal life for women
appears to get difficult. This is believed to have an impact and to reflect into the working
engagement as well. Therefore, there is the general belief that despite so many commitment and
efforts to mainstream gender as a tool to promote gender equality, women seem to be more extra
overloaded rather than perceived equal and empowered from the efforts to integrate gender
concerns into all spheres of life. In general, participants shared their common belief that the
women’s role and voice in the meeting and working discussions, assessment of situation and
31
sometimes even in the reduction of tensions in the working place is very crucial. In this regard, it
is worth mentioning the attitudes of employee’s participants; they unanimously believe that there
are no differences between working positions and gender.
The disproportionate ratio and the leading roles by women and men, in this case could be
described only by personal factors, attributions that women or men carry within their personality.
They tend to believe that it is human nature in the first place, which has an impact and then the
socially constructed roles and gender identities that sometimes impact the perceptions of gender
roles within the working position they occupy.
They tend to describe this belief with the insights from their working perspective, that often
during their area of the work with men and women, for example the submission of business plans
in the field of agriculture, despite the fact of the affirmative measures to encourage women, there
are cases when women participants lead in the ratio, due to the meritocracy and the quality of the
business plan proposals and their ambitions and commitments on this field. An example of project
aiming to provide a critical view of Government’s work, managed by women, is an example
which reaffirms the women’s role in positions, not only that inquire ambition, knowledge and
adequate qualities, but courage as well.
4. Majority of the respondents, respectively 97% believe that their organization gives
orientation on including women in project cycle
Chart 11. How often does your organization give orientation on including women in project
cycle?
32
There are strong indications that respondents were referring to specific requests which are usually
done by donators. Only few of participants believe that women appear to be the most
marginalized group of society, especially on rural areas, while the other part of FGD participants
believe that so far, a lot of efforts took place to address gender inequalities and that gender
perspective is being mainstreamed to a satisfied extent. Nevertheless, participants believe that the
Donor’s persistence to mainstream gender has had a positive impact as well, because with time, it
has really impacted the society in general and especially the civil society organizations that
gender perspective is relevant and crucial aspect of the developmental agendas, and it should be
as such.
The FGD with employees, indicate that from their perspective and attitudes on gender,
participants perceive quite essential that women and men get involved in almost every process,
not only the managerial level but into the whole cycle of the project in general. However, the
practice shows that only few of these organizations are committed to integrate gender perspective
within the project cycle, or mainly, a great part of the organizations integrate gender perspective
only through specific “project activities”, which very often are an ad hoc initiatives. This
approach is believed to have an impact in sustainability later on as well.
33
General views of respondents
Column 1
It is important to highlight that quantitative and qualitative analysis indicate that participants of
this research perceive their working environment and interpersonal relations as a very crucial
aspect, followed by a positive climate and mutual respect. They declare that they have never
encountered problematic gender related issues and feel very competent and supported within their
working positions. These indications derive directly from their personal role and characteristics
within the organization. It is worth mentioning that when these issues and general beliefs are
treated within a wider perspective, from socially constructed gender norms in the society, the
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
agree/ strongly agree
34
same situation has tendency to be reflected in a different way, attributing a lot of inequalities and
discriminations.
Experiences within the organization
Majority of respondents , respectively 94 % of respondents feel valued as an employee
Chart 1. 1. I feel I am values as an employee
Majority of respondents , respectively 96 % of respondents feel free to express their views openly
Chart 1.2. I feel free to express my views openly
35
Majority of respondents , respectively 94 % of respondents feel that colleagues and boss listen
to their opinion.
Chart 1. 3. I feel that colleagues and my boss/es listen to my opinion
Majority of respondents , respectively 63 % of respondents disagree with the statement that male
staff tend to talk more in meetings
Chart 1.4. Male staff tend to talk more in meetings
36
Majority of respondents , respectively 78% of respondents disagree with the statement that female
staff is expected to fix tea/coffee for meetings
Chart 1. 5 Female staff is expected to fix tea/coffee for meeting
Majority of respondents , respectively 72 % of respondents disagree with the statement that only
female staff stay home when their child is sick.
Chart 1. 6. Only female staff stay home when their child is sick
37
Majority of respondents , respectively 76 % of respondents disagree with the statement that it is
normally that male staff represent the organization at external events.
Chart 1. 7 It is normally male staff that represent the organization in external events
Majority of respondents , respectively 95 % of respondents would recommend their organization
to their male friends.
Chart 1.8. I would recommend this organization to my male friend
38
Majority of respondents , respectively 97% of respondents would recommend their organization
to their female friends.
Chart 1. 9. I would recommend this organization to my male
Majority of respondents , respectively 95 % of respondents consider that there is someone at
their organization that they can speak to on confidentially about any gender issue that is of concern
to them.
Chart 1. 10. There is someone here that I can speak to confidentially about any gender issues that is of
concern to me
39
Column 2
Participants (both from managerial level and employees) have presented their working
environment as pretty supportive, with a positive climate and complemented by both women and
men. In general, participants shared their common belief that the women’s role and voice in the
meeting and working discussions, assessment of situation and sometimes even in the reduction of
tensions in the working place is very crucial and has a positive impact in many cases.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Display or send you pictures or jokes of a sexual/sexist nature
which you find offensive
Making repeated and unwelcome remarks,
suggestions or jokes of sexual/sexist nature to
you
Having inappropriate/unwanted
physical contact with you
Someone has discriminated against
you on the basis of your sex
Yes
No
40
IV. METHODS, STRATEGIES, TOOLS AND POLICIES
1. Majority of the respondents, respectively 60% believe that there should be given more
space to discussions on gender equality in planning processes within their organization. There is
no significant difference in gender, age or education when giving their opinions regarding
practicing gender equality discussions while planning.
Chart 12. Is gender equality discussed in the organization at meetings (when you plan,
follow-up or report on your work)?
The general belief that there shouldn’t be a specific person, who deals with gender issues within
the organization, tends to show the lack of relevant understanding and institutionalizing the
mainstreaming strategy. Participants (mainly managerial perspective) show that gender issues are
discussed in meetings and follow up activities, but mainly on individual basis, not as a well-
placed strategy. One of the NGOs shared their experiences on a committee composition which
reviews the design of the project proposals and reflects the feedbacks. The committee is always
composed by men and women, staff of the organization and this they believe has an impact in
perceiving the project’s issues with a gender lens. However, the indication of other experiences,
show that this could be considered more as an individual will or initiative rather than a structural
issue practice, which should be institutionalized with the organizational culture.
41
2. Majority of the respondents, respectively 53% consider there is a good discussion on
women issues within different working groups. A significant number of respondents, respectively
29% believe that there should be done more in this direction, while 18% of respondents believe
that this issue is neglected within organizations they work. There is no significant difference in
gender, age or education when giving their opinions regarding practicing gender equality
discussions within different working groups
Chart 13. Does your organization discuss the situation of women and girls (in the groups
you are working with)?
During the FGD discussion, participants appear to be aware that women and men might have
different needs and that this perspective might have an impact on the developmental agendas, yet
they don’t have an insight on how to translate this into the practice or demonstrate this with any
concrete example through their scope of work. An approach that values the diversity among both
men and women into a certain context was perceived as a missing approach in this regard.
Sometimes participant don’t even make the relevant point that the needs of women and men
within a certain context might be different. Nevertheless, there are some great initiatives within
the Partner NGOs, with the focus on Local Communities which address both perspectives. These
initiatives have started to refer to these different needs and declare their commitment to scrutinize
and address properly these issues so they could be an integral part of their project components.
Therefore, the need for Gender Analysis is pretty highlighted in this regard, as often participants’
42
are now well acquainted on the existing methodologies to assess women’s and men’s needs
appropriately.
3. Majority of the respondents, respectively 60% consider that their organization has set
specific goals in aiming gender equality. A significant number of respondents, respectively 25%
believe that there should be done more in this direction, while 15% of respondents consider that
their organization has done little or nothing in setting goals to ensure gender equality.
Chart 14. Does your organization have specific gender equality goals?
There is no significant difference in gender, age or education when giving their answers regarding
specific gender equality goals. All respondents that said that their organization has specific gender
equality goals were asked to provide further information. The ranging of the answers based on
frequencies is as below:
1. Implemented projects in which there was a component on addressing gender issues such as
number of women to be included in project as beneficiaries.
2. Project that addressed gender issues such as women participation in decision making
3. Employment policies giving women priority in employment
4. Operational yearly plans and strategies
5. Internal procedures and policy documents
43
Regarding the issue of specific gender policies, quantitative and qualitative analysis indicate once
again the participants and organizations tendency to address women issues isolated or through
stand-alone components are much highlighted. While discussing this thematic issue during the
FGD, there appears to reflect a general belief that the gender mainstreaming as a strategy, is
treated seriously within the framework of policies and strategic documents within the
organization. The experiences of staff (both managerial and employees) highlight that the usual
practice that gender specific goals are treated and addressed are mainly through training, forum
discussions with women, awareness raising activities, etc., which emphasizes again the tendency
to understand gender mainstreaming process, as a process which scrutinizes women issues in
isolation.
However, it is important to highlight that there are projects within the partner organizations which
have specific gender components to promote gender equality in communities, the inclusion of
citizens in decision making processes and in specific the inclusion of women into these processes
and monitoring mechanisms. Nevertheless, when asked about specific steps or strategies on how
these organizations have planned and implemented these gender specific goals, there are
indications that they do not use any strategy or methodology at all to make women’s and men’s
concern integral part of the project, but rather it is a spontaneous process, mainly followed by an
increase of women’s’ number in project components as beneficiaries. There is even a lack of
specific indicators to measure the achievement of these ‘specific’ goals. This fact provides an
adequate understanding that there are rare cases when these gender specific components and / or
project components have also an adequate strategy with an adequate monitoring and evaluation
plan (indicators) to make visible and assessed women’s and men’s perspective all over the project
cycle. The development of gender mainstreaming documents with specific gender related goals is
a useful way of setting out the goals in moving from policy to implementation for mainstreaming
gender, unfortunately, the same practice was not perceived during the FGD.
Instructions and examples toward a conceptual understanding of gender mainstreaming and its
relevance into the working area were given as well during the FGD. The analysis of this
discussion indicates quite interesting reflections in this regard. Once participants started to get a
clearer picture of gender mainstreaming strategy and its relevance into the working area,
suggestions by participants to simplify the concept of “mainstreaming” into “balancing the
44
perspective” appear to be interesting within the reflections of employee rather than of those
coming from the managerial level. This is an interesting point to assume that to some extent
participants’ understand the importance of making visible women’s and men’s perspective into
their working area, but they lack adequate capacity and advisory support.
4. Around 50% of respondents believe that gender perspective in well presented in the
steering documents, 37% believe that there was done good job in this direction but not enough,
while 13% consider that there have been done very little or nothing in including gender
perspective in steering documents. There is no significant difference in gender, age or education
when giving their answers regarding specific gender equality goals.
All respondents that said that their organization included gender equality perspective in the
steering documents were asked to provide further information. The ranging of the answers based
on frequencies is as below:
1. Internal policies such as code of conduct and recruiting manuals
2. Operational annual plans and strategies
3. Labor law
Chart 15. Is gender perspective integrated in any of the steering documents (like policies,
annual plans, staff regulations, communication strategies, etc) of your organization?
Despite the fact that a very limited number of participants were able to mention any of the
steering documents within their organization during the FGD as well (see also the quantitative
45
analysis above), a great part of them claimed that they had never read them or consulted at least
during their work engagement. A small number of participants (mainly employees) were not even
aware that such documents exist within their organization, and the purpose they serve for.
However, in the cases where participants mention few of the steering documents, it seems that
there is a difficulty to provide a direct link in the sense that to what extent these steering
documents support the implementation of a gender mainstreaming practice. Since the partner
organizations working scope and area is pretty wide, it is comprehended that within their scope of
involvement, there are specific strategies such as communication strategy, strategies to access
community and assess needs of citizens, strategy for monitoring policies and other specific areas,
etc. It is important to mention that there were no examples or initiatives on how to engender
15these existing strategies.
5. Only 20% of respondents declared that their organizations have a specific gender
policy. The majority of respondents respectively 80% either has no information regarding the
existence of such a policy documents or declare that such documents do not exist.
All respondents that said that their organization has a specific gender policy were asked to provide
further information and all answers were only referring to their internal policies, specific part of
manuals.
Chart 16. Does your organization have a specific gender policy?
15 To make visible the different impact on or impact of women and men and their genders in a given context. For example,
engendering involves the recognition that the gender division of labor and its associated norms, values and ideologies about
masculinity and femininity are defined by a complex of power relations which tend to accord to women lesser political voice,
social / cultural value, and access to and control over economic resources.
46
When asked for the effectiveness of such policy into practical use most of respondents believe it
is very useful for providing steer on implementing activities.
The statistics in the section above indicate quite clearly the circumstances of knowledge,
awareness and the implementation into practicing the gender steering documents, or more
concretely the gender policies within the organization. From the qualitative analysis, it is noticed
that there are participants, although very limited number who are aware of the presence of gender
policies within their organization as documents to promote gender issues internally and externally.
They seem to have a clearer understanding on gender mainstreaming as integral part of their
working area as well. However, the challenges and constrains may be identified at the very
beginning when addressing issues of standard forms, templates, and or methodologies to put into
the practice these gender specific policies. Participants refer this issue mainly to the nature of the
project or project activities, by stressing that there are projects which do not require gender
perspective. This fact supports the idea that gender mainstreaming perspective is not well
institutionalized within the organization and again the limited and coherent understanding of the
implication of gender mainstreaming into programs, projects, policies and internal structure of the
organization.
6. Only 40% of respondents declared that within their organization they have an action
plan against sexual harassment, while 60% of respondents either do not have information on the
existence of such a plan or declare that they do not have any plan within their organization
Chart 17. Does your organization have a policy and/or an action plan against sexual
harassment?
47
The experience from the FGD reveals that this issue is addressed mainly through general manuals
within the human resources and other related policies, while there is no stand-alone policy which
addresses sexual harassment; rather it is an integral part of other related documents within the
organizational culture.
7. Only 44% of respondents believe that within their organization a sexual harassment in
the workplace would be appropriately addressed even though they declare of not having such a
case within their organization. There is also a significant number of respondents who say that
within their organization the sexual harassment is not addressed.
Chart 18. Does your organization address sexual harassment in the workplace?
Statistics from the questionnaire, but also data from the FGD, indicate that participants of this
research perceive their working environment and interpersonal relations as a very crucial aspect,
followed by a positive climate and mutual respect. They declare that they have never encountered
issues related to harassment and/or any form of abuse or discrimination. Nevertheless, it is worth
mentioning that in the general context, they do not exclude that cases of harassment and/or
discrimination are present generally in the working environments.
48
V. CAPACITIES TO PRACTICALLY APPLY GENDER TOOLS
IN THE WORK OF THE ORGANIZATION
1. According to the findings majority of respondents, respectively 96% declare that gender
issues and gender perspective is part of different stages of project design and implementation
Chart 19. How well is gender issues (or gender perspective) integrated in different stages of
project design and implementation?
Data from the FGD tend to show completely different practice in the process of integrating gender
perspective in different stages of the project. The gender dimension of projects’ organizations is
integrated mainly in two phases: implementation and reporting phase. It is essential to mention
that no adequate strategy, tools or mechanisms are used/put into practice to integrate gender
perspective into the project cycle. Participants assume that the requirement to integrate such
perspective, so far has come mainly from Donors’ requirements. This is highlighted mainly in the
reporting phase mainly addressed through statistics (disaggregated data by sex) of beneficiaries’
involvement into the project activities. In general, in order to assess gender perspective at the
implementation level, three sub – levels can be identified: the level of understanding the adequate
need for gender dimension within the project scope; the level of capacity for mechanisms and
instruments put in place through which to facilitate the gender mainstreaming perspective, and the
level of actual implementation of these mechanisms in terms of addressing general and specific
needs and achieving practical result. This situation indicates the lack of tools, mechanisms,
49
expertise which of course results in a inadequate manner of putting an emphasize on gender
perspective from the very beginning phase of the project design in order to make this perspective
an integral part of the project cycle and to reflect in an in depth analysis of the implication of
women’s and men’s perspective as main actors in developmental processes and as its beneficiaries
as well. The other issue worth mentioning with regard to mainstreaming gender into all project
cycle, is the issue that Monitoring and Evaluation are not seen as the indivisible aspects of gender
mainstreaming Plan (M&E). It appears that there is a lack of gender sensitive M&E Plans, and
gender sensitive Targets and Indicators, in order to monitor the progress and the implementation
process from a gender perspective.
2. Majority of respondents, respectively 60% declare of not having any tools for gender
mainstreaming which could be used in their activities
Chart 20. Do you have specific practical methods and tools for gender mainstreaming that
you use in your work?
A significant number of respondents, respectively 40% declare that they do have tools for gender
mainstreaming within their organization. All respondents that said that their organization has tools
for gender mainstreaming were asked to provide further information and all answers were only
referring to their internal policies or specific part of manuals usually related to recruitment
policies.
Quantitative analysis regarding thematic issues on tools and mechanisms to mainstream gender
into organization (internal structure and programmatic issues) indicates that participant’s
50
reflections appear to be very vague, or completely irrelevant. (Refer also to the description of
chart 19 above!). From the participants’ attitudes, it might be perceived that few of them
(managerial but also employee level) are aware of the presence of gender policies within their
organization as documents to promote gender issues internally and externally but the main
hindrance remains at the fact that they do not use them as tools and mechanisms to implement
these policies. The lack of knowledge on specific methodologies to integrate gender perspective
within the internal structure of the organization and programmatic issues is highlighted.
Participants’ sometimes seem to have a clearer understanding on gender mainstreaming as
integral part of their working area as well and may have good ideas to address gender perspective.
However, the challenges and constrains may be identified at the very essential phase, when
participants’ where asked on the “know how” process of gender mainstreaming in practice.
Participants justify this essential process as an issue mainly depended to the nature of the project
or project activities, emphasizing that there are projects which do not require gender perspective
at all. From the quantitative but also qualitative analysis, it may be concluded that both
perspectives, (managerial and employees), mentioned modalities which they tend to call “tools
and mechanisms” to mainstream gender within their organization. Among them are mentioned:
communication, training, encouragement for equal employment opportunities, forum discussions
with women, social dialogue as a tool to identify needs, reporting statistics from a gender
perspective, awareness raising activities, etc, as tools and mechanisms through which they tend to
use to address gender mainstreaming and/or gender perspective. This fact supports the idea that
gender mainstreaming perspective is not well institutionalized within the organization; that there
is lack of knowledge and awareness on specific tools and mechanisms to mainstreaming gender;
which brings back to the issue of the limited and coherent understanding of the implication of
gender mainstreaming into programs, projects, policies and internal structure of the organization.
Despite very limited knowledge on adequate tools that participants have mentioned during the
administration of the questionnaire, as tools which they use to mainstream gender, the practice of
the qualitative analysis indicate that gender mainstreaming continues or tends to be perceived as a
strategy which looks only at women issues, solely isolated. The need to explore basic principles of
gender equality, gender mainstreaming and its relevance appear to be crucial in this regard. This
will open doors for insight perspective to consider gender analysis and gender impact assessment
as relevant tools and methods to gender mainstreaming practices as well.
51
3. Majority of respondents, respectively 90% declare that within their organization they
apply gender perspective in planning activities
Chart 21. Do you apply a gender perspective in the planning of your activities?
All respondents that said that their organization applies gender perspective in planning activities
were asked to provide further information. The ranging of the answers based on frequencies is as
below:
1. Making sure that while implementing projects women are included in project as
beneficiaries
2. Making sure that women are included in project designing by giving their inputs
3. Making sure that women are part of annual planning and designing of strategies
The same practice as mentioned in the quantitative analysis does not appear to be consistent with
qualitative analysis as well. The general belief that there should be a specific person, who deals
alone only with gender issue within the organization, without coordination from all staff members
reveals a lot on the understanding gender mainstreaming perspective as a cross – cutting
perspective throughout the project. Very often, practices such the involvement of women in
project designs by giving their inputs, involvement in projects’ strategies and targeting women
beneficiaries are mentioned as indicators among partner organization to say that they include
gender perspective since the design and planning phase of the project. Although few NGOs tend
to show very good examples on steps they undertake since the design and planning phase,
constrains to institutionalize this practice are visible. Lack of practices of an in depth analysis of
52
gender perspective of a certain issue is perceived as well as a disadvantage to use this analysis as
an informative mean and justification for the design and planning phase. In general this shows to
be considered more as an individual will or initiative supported by donors rather than a practice
which should be institutionalized within the organizational culture and driven by managerial
structures.
4. Majority of respondents, respectively 87% declare that within their organization they
apply gender perspective while implementing activities
Chart 22. Do you apply a gender perspective in implementation of your activities?
All respondents that said that their organization applies gender perspective while implementing
activities were asked to provide further information. The ranging of the answers based on
frequencies is as below:
1. Appoint women as project coordinators or including women as project staff
2. Through gender balanced working groups
3. Making sure that while implementing projects women are included in project as
beneficiaries
Quantitative data from the analysis of the questionnaire tend to show a huge discrepancy between
participants attitude toward gender mainstreaming and its relevance at work, and the way of how
this concept is translated into their practice (knowledge, tools, mechanisms and needs). The
analysis of the FGD, revealed that participants many often feel that in many cases where gender is
53
discussed and has tendencies and / or mandates to get addressed, a lot of NGO’s within their area
of involvement (see the paragraph on the background of participant Organization) make efforts
only in putting nice wording (terminology wise) and “beautiful strategic papers and action plans”,
which remain among practices to say that they address gender perspective and affirm its
relevance to the working areas.
The analysis of other thematic topics, but this one as well, indicate that to a great extent, these
NGOs apply gender perspective mainly in an implementation phase, by referring examples of
including women in internal structures of the organization to implement specific project
components, inclusion of women as key actors to address specific project issues but also targeting
women beneficiaries who will benefit from the project components. Same as discussed in the part
of including gender perspective in the design and planning phase, there seems to be no adequate
strategy (in place) to track the progress from the implementation phase on the next project phases
as well.
5. Majority of respondents, respectively 89% feel confident on their knowledge regarding
gender equality and gender mainstreaming. We have indicators that the answer is more related to
knowledge on gender equality. This can be attributed to a social consciousness in transitional
societies where a gender issue becomes a topic in media and therefore people get lot of
information through media.
Chart 23. Do you have sufficient knowledge on gender equality and gender mainstreaming
to advise/help others?
54
It is important here to make a distinction on two main sets of perceptions among participants,
regarding the issue of sufficient knowledge and expertise on gender. Participants show that there
are examples where depending from the nature of the project, beneficiaries of specific projects
receive training on the awareness raising on gender issues, mainly gender equality and how to
approach women in different contexts. The second issue which appears to be a concern, is related
to the fact that the great part of participants, directly involved in implementation of specific
project components, feel they don’t have enough information on how to properly mainstream
gender and are not well equipped with adequate tools and mechanisms. The discrepancy among
statistics on questionnaire and experiences within FGD might be explained with the tendency to
perceive gender mainstreaming or gender perspective as a women’s’ isolated issue and to have an
approach of highlighting women’s perspective through a project implementation which could be
equal to a gender mainstreaming strategy.
Since gender mainstreaming implies an integrated perspective and concerns into several, crucial
area (internally and externally) , this implies also that the level of cooperation and coordination
with internal staff, relevant actors, but inside partner organization as well, should be increased.
The issue of consortium and coordination within partner organizations in general is perceived at
satisfactory level, but it was highlighted that a profiling of these NGOs is quite necessary. This
will have an impact and could be seen as a referent point, if for example a specific advice or
expertise is needed on gender mainstreaming from media perspective, community, policy and
research perspective, etc, or any other related issue, partner organizations can assist each – other
on the specific issues related to gender and their working area. Participants highlight that there is a
great number of women organization without clear mandate, strategy and action plan. The
profiling and expertise of these organizations has been seen as precondition to strengthen and
improve gender mainstreaming knowledge. The discussion of knowledge and potential advice to
help others, highlighted other relevant issues among participants, which were summarized as
concrete needs toward gender mainstreaming practices. The need for a comprehensive
understanding of what gender mainstreaming is and provision of a detailed guidance on how
gender mainstreaming can be put in practice, remain crucial. Since most of the organizations
address relevant issues through their project component, where gender could be integrated as a
cross – cutting issue (see the part of a background of these organizations) , it is believed that the
findings from this report will make an added value in the better understanding of the ways in
55
which gender mainstreaming works in practice; how it will affect the work – plans, staff,
components and can subsequently incorporate gender mainstreaming into their performance
appraisal and beneficiaries as well, while also allocating adequate resources. Other related NGOs
and advocacy groups could benefit from this experience as well.
56
CONCLUSIONS
1. From the Focus Group Discussion analysis, it is noticed that there is a very limited
conceptual understanding of gender mainstreaming and its applicability in practice.
2. Among surveyed organizations there was noticed a prominent tendency to limit the
understanding of gender mainstreaming only to women issues and to address gender issues
as matter of human rights.
3. Among surveyed organizations there was noticed a tendency to treat gender issues as a
stand-alone components within programs or projects.
4. There is no gender balance within organizational structures of partner organizations
neither at employee level nor at management level.
5. Lack of information on steering documents, policies and strategies of gender
mainstreaming was noticed. There are no genders mainstreaming manuals within policy
documents of surveyed organizations. Many often, gender perspective is addressed mainly
through general manuals within the human resources and other related policies, while
there is no stand-alone policy which addresses sexual harassment; rather it is an integral
part of other related documents within the organizational culture.
6. Gender issues are not consistently addressed while planning, implementing or reporting in
most of the surveyed organizations.
7. Within surveyed organizations there are no tools to steer, monitor and evaluate the
projects or programs from the gender perspective.
8. Despite very limited knowledge on adequate tools that participants have mentioned during
the administration of the questionnaires as tools which they use to mainstream gender, the
practice of the qualitative analysis indicate that gender mainstreaming continues or tends
to be perceived as a strategy which looks only at women issues, solely isolated. Therefore,
very often, gender mainstreaming strategy is perceived as equal to involving women
beneficiaries in the implementation of a project component, without prior planning.
57
9. There is lack of information (guideline) on how to conduct gender mainstreaming. The
great part of participants, involved in implementation of specific project components feel
they don’t have enough information on how to properly mainstream gender and are not
well acquainted with adequate tools and mechanisms.
10. There are indications that organizations do not use any proper strategy or methodology at
all to make women’s and men’s concern integral part of the project, but rather it is a
spontaneous process. There is even a lack of specific indicators to measure the
achievement of gender specific goals.
11. The need for a comprehensive understanding of what gender mainstreaming is and
provision of a detailed guidance on how gender mainstreaming can be put in practice,
remains crucial.
12. Focus Group Discussion with partner organizations revealed that depending from the
focus area of the project (nature), there are different needs highlighted with regard to
gender mainstreaming; it is crucial to scrutinize the individual needs so that the process of
understanding appropriately how gender mainstreaming works in practice is better
ensured.
13. Participants’ (both from managerial level and employees) general view of their working
environment and interpersonal relationships indicate that they perceive their working
environment as pretty supportive, with a positive climate and complemented by both
women and men.
14. The scope of the work / area of involvement of surveyed partner organizations is wide and
diverse; within their scope of involvement, there are specific strategies (i. e such as
communication strategy; strategies to access community and assess needs of citizens;
strategy for monitoring policies, etc ) and project components which have specific gender
component (promoting gender equality in communities, citizen’s inclusion in decision
making processes, in particular the inclusion of women, etc). However, the main
challenge, need, remains at engendering these strategies and project components.
58
RECCOMENDATIONS
Main findings of the study indicate the need to make gender mainstreaming integral part of
partner organizations policies. In general the conclusions address the need to further develop
capacities and mechanisms for gender mainstreaming and therefore recommendations are
specifically addressed to key actors in process such as Olof Palme Center, PEN and Surveyed
Organizations – Partner Organizations.
Recommendation to the Olof Palme International Center and PEN regarding the continuous
process
1. We recommend to Olof Palme International Center and PEN to move further in designing
the methodology to support partner organization in the process of gender mainstreaming.
2. Briefing sessions with partner organizations, should be organized by PEN, to inform on
the main findings of the research and to reflect on the screening of individual needs of
partner organizations from the gender mainstreaming perspective.
3. Briefing sessions on a comprehensive strategy should be organized by PEN, aiming at
understanding of what gender mainstreaming is from an insight perspective; provision of
detailed guidance on how gender mainstreaming can be put in practice should be part of
the coaching sessions as well.
4. PEN should provide coaching sessions with partner organization; each of the partner
organizations should provide an individual plan on gender mainstreaming into their
working area; a brainstorming workshops should take place in order to reflect on tools and
mechanisms to mainstream gender into their working practice.
5. With the support of the Olof Palme International Centre, PEN should compile a guideline
for gender mainstreaming, which will cover basic and advanced methodologies to
understand and mainstream gender into the working practice; this should be tailored made,
in order to respond to the individual level, needs and capacities of partner organizations
for gender mainstreaming.
59
6. Olof Palme International Center and PEN should organize a series of workshops with staff
of partner organizations to ensure that their knowledge on gender mainstreaming is
increased and to reflect on the use of gender mainstreaming tools.
7. Olof Palme International Center and PEN should assist partner organizations in
engendering the Monitoring and Evaluation plans, with incorporated tools on measuring
the impact of interventions from gender perspective.
Recommendations to the Olof Palme International Center as a partner and donor
1. Provide support (expertise and funding) for partner organizations on capacity building for
gender mainstreaming.
2. Encourage partner organizations to submit project proposals with clear methodology on
gender mainstreaming / gender component should be a cross – cutting perspective within
the project proposals, this should be mandatory from the donor’s perspective.
Recommendations to Partner organizations
We recommend to decision making bodies of partner organization to immediately address
issue of gender balance within their organization. Gender balance should be reflected at
managerial level and board of directors. We consider this as first step in process of
adequately addressing all gender related issues.
We consider that after support of Olof Palme Center and PEN with guideline in gender
mainstreaming, partner organization should immediately start addressing gender
mainstreaming into the whole project cycle (designing, implementing, reporting, M&E,
etc).
The gender mainstreaming should be incorporated into policies of each partner
organizations.
60
Partner organizations should identify and pay attention to specific needs and priorities
revealed from a gender – sensitive situation assessment (i.e. gender analysis) in order to
plan appropriately interventions as well and to reassure sustainability.
Managerial level should be committed and play an active role to acknowledge, promote
and apply gender mainstreaming perspective appropriately and to seek for accountability
for gender mainstreaming from the staff as well.
It is also recommended that a staff within the organization could be appointed as a gender
focal point to steer the process of gender mainstreaming with the support of the overall
staff as well.
Partner organizations should share their knowledge, experiences and needs freely and
openly between each – other toward the implementation of gender mainstreaming
practices; they should organize discussion forums periodically with other partner
organizations and donors so that challenges and achievements/best practice of GM
strategies could be shared.
Each partner organization should integrate gender perspective into their strategic planning
documents.
Partner organizations should establish a committee to review project proposals and other
related documents since the designing phase, from gender perspective, before they get
endorsed.
61
REFERENCES
An Approach to the Kosovo Post-War Rehabilitation Process from a Gender Perspective.
QUADERNS DE CONSTRUCCIÓ DE PAU Nº 2, January 2008.
Women’s summit booklet, UN WOMEN, 2012
Policy Action Brief Civicus Civil Society Index for Kosovo. Kosovar Civil Society
Foundation, March 2011.
The Report of the Economic and Social Council for 1997. United Nations, 1997
Gender mainstreaming in Practice, A Toolkit. Regional programme of the United Nations
Development Programme’s Regional Bureau for Europe and the CIS (UNDP RBEC).
2007 (third edition)
Mainstreaming gender into the policies and the programmes of the Institutions of the
European Union and EU Member States, Good Practices in Gender Mainstreaming.
European Institute for Gender Equality. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European
Union, 2013
http://peacewomen.org/pages/about-1325/key-gender-terms
62
ANNEXES
Self-Assessment Survey
Thematic topics of the FGD
Background of the Surveyed Organizations
63
-Self-Assessment Survey
-Questionnaire-
64
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
SEX FEMALE MALE
AGE: ________
LEVEL OF EDUCATION: ELEMENTARY SECONDARY UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE
CITY: ________
NAME OF THE ORGANIZATION: ____________________________
JOB TITLE: ______________________________________
WORKING MODE: FULL-TIME PART-TIME OTHER: ____________
65
Section 1. General reflections on gender equality
Glossary of key terms and concepts for Gender Mainstreaming
SEX: Usually Sex is understood to refer to the biological difference between male and female bodies.
GENDER: “the socially constructed roles as ascribed to women and men, as opposed to biological and
physical characteristics. Gender roles vary according to socio-economic, political and cultural contexts,
and are affected by other factors, including age, race, class and ethnicity. A focus on gender not only
reveals information about women and men’s different experiences, it also sheds light on ingrained
assumptions and stereotypes about men and women, the values and qualities associated with each, and
the ways in which power relationships can change. Gender roles are learned and are changeable.”
GENDER EQUALITY: Equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities for women and men; according
equal consideration to the interests, needs and priorities of women and men. Gender equality does not
imply a goal of non-differentiation between the sexes, but rather the elimination of adverse
discrimination based on sex (e.g., lower remuneration for women doing the same work as men). Gender
equality exists when both sexes are able to share equally in the distribution of power and influence; have
equal opportunities for financial independence; enjoy equal access to education and the opportunity to
develop personal ambitions, interests and talents; share domestic responsibilities; and are free from
coercion, intimidation and GBV at work and at home. (Definition used by United Nations Population
Fund, UNFPA)
SEXUAL HARASSMENT: is unwanted sexual attention that intrudes on a person’s integrity. This
includes requests for sexual favors, unwelcome or demeaning remarks, or touching. It is a form of
discrimination and is about an abuse of power.
GENDER PERSPECTIVE: With respect to any social phenomenon, policy or process, exposing
gender-based differences in status and power, and considering how such discrimination shapes the
immediate needs, as well as the long-term interests, of women and men.
GENDER MAINSTREAMING: “The process of assessing the implications for women and men of any
planned action, including legislation, policies or programmes, in any area and at all levels. It is a strategy
for making the concerns and experiences of women as well as of men an integral part 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 of mainstreaming is to achieve gender equality.” (1997 UN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COUNCIL, ECOSOC). Mainstreaming is not achieved by adding a “women/gender equality
component” to an existing activity, or by simply increasing women’s participation. It means bringing the
experience, knowledge and interests of women and men to bear on the development of an agenda or
programme.
66
1. Gender equality has already been achieved for the most part.
1. Completely agree 2. Partly agree 3. Partly disagree
4. Completely disagree 5. Don’t know
2. Work to achieve gender equality today benefits mostly well-to-do people
1. Completely agree 2. Partly agree 3. Partly disagree
4. Completely disagree 5. Don’t know
3. Increased rights for women means that men lose out
1. Completely agree 2. Partly agree 3. Partly disagree
4. Completely disagree 5. Don’t know
4. When women work they take jobs away from men
1. Completely agree 2. Partly agree 3. Partly disagree
4. Completely disagree 5. Don’t know
Section 2. Internal organizational structures and steering documents
1. How many men and women work in your organization?
________________________________________________________________________
2. How many men and women do you have within the board in your organization?
What roles do the women and men occupy?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. How many men and women are there within the decision making bodies in your
organization? What functions do women have, what functions do men have? ________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
67
Section 3. Awareness and attitudes of staff and leadership within the organization
1. How much attention do you pay to ensure that there are respectful working relations
between men and women in your work/activities?
3 2 1 0
Very much Some Not enough Not at all
2. When you identify problems affecting female colleagues, do you take action?
3 2 1 0
Always Sometimes Seldom Never
3. When you identify problems affecting male colleagues , do you take action?
3 2 1 0
Always Sometimes Seldom Never
4. Are there any obstacles that prevent women to fulfill any functions/roles or positions
in your organization?
Yes
No
I don’t know
If "Yes", exemplify: What kind of roles/positions
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
68
5. Are there any obstacles that prevent men to fulfill any functions/roles or positions in
your organization?
Yes
No
I don’t know
If "Yes", exemplify: What kind of roles/positions
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6. How often does your organization give orientation on including women in project
cycle?
3 2 1 0
Always Often Seldom Never
strongly strongly not
Your general views disagree disagree agree agree sure
7. I feel I am valued as an employee 1 2 3 4 0
8. I feel free to express my views openly 1 2 3 4 0
9. I feel that colleagues and my boss/es 1 2 3 4 0
listen to my opinion
10. Male staff tend to talk more in meetings 1 2 3 4 0
11. Female staff is expected to fix tea/coffee 1 2 3 4 0
for meetings
12. Only female staff stay home when their 1 2 3 4 0
child is sick
13. It is normally male staff that represent 1 2 3 4 0
the organisation in external events
69
14. I would recommend this organisation
to my male friends 1 2 3 4 0
15. I would recommend this organisation
to my female friends 1 2 3 4 0
16. There is someone here that I can speak to 1 2 3 4 0
confidentially about any gender issue that is of concern to me
17. If I express concern about a gender issue
it is followed up 1 2 3 4 0
18. Most senior managers genuinely support
equality between women and men in the organisation 1 2 3 4 0
Have you experienced any of the following in this organization in the past 12 months?
Yes No
10. People you work with either:
i) Display or send you pictures or jokes of a sexual/sexist
nature which you find offensive 1 2
ii) Making repeated and unwelcome remarks, suggestions or
jokes of sexual/sexist nature to you 1 2
iii) Having inappropriate/unwanted physical contact with you 1 2
11 Someone has discriminated against you (for example, treated you less
favourably) on the basis of your sex 1 2
Section 4. Methods, strategies, tools and policies
1. Is gender equality discussed in the organisation at meetings (when you plan, follow-
up or report on your work)
1.Not at all 2. To a limited extent 3. To a moderate extent 4. To a great extent
5.To the fullest extent 0. NA Do not have information to answer question
2. Does your organisation discuss the situation of women and girls (in the groups you
are working with)?
70
1.Not at all 2. To a limited extent 3. To a moderate extent 4. To a great extent
5.To the fullest extent 0. NA Do not have information to answer question
3. Does your organization have specific gender equality goals?
1.Not at all 2. To a limited extent 3. To a moderate extent 4. To a great extent
5.To the fullest extent 0. NA Do not have information to answer question
If your answer is between 2 to 5- please explain how it is part of the goal and in what kind
of documents?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. Is gender perspective integrated in any of the steering documents (like policies,
annual plans, staff regulations, communication strategies, etc) of your organization?
1.Not at all 2. To a limited extent 3. To a moderate extent 4. To a great extent
5.To the fullest extent 0. NA - Do not have information to answer question
If your answer is between 2 to 5- please explain how it is integrated in the steering
documents and what kind of documents?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. Does your organization have a specific gender policy?
Yes
No
I don’t know
If “Yes”, How much would you say that gender perspective steer what you do and how
you analyze problems in your organization?
1. Not at All 2.Very Little 3.Somewhat 4.To a Great Extent
Exemplification or comment:
6. Does your organization have a policy and/or an action plan against sexual
harassment?
Yes
No
I don’t know
71
If so, how would you rate its effectiveness?
2 1 0
Excellent Sufficient Insufficient
Exemplification or comment:
7. Does your organization address sexual harassment in the workplace?
Yes
No
I don’t know
If so, how would you rate its effectiveness?
2 1 0
Excellent Sufficient Insufficient
Exemplification or comment:
Section 5. Capacities to practically apply gender tools in the work of the organization
1. How well is gender issues (or gender perspective) integrated in different stages of
project design and implementation?
3 2 1 0
Completely Sufficiently Insufficiently Not at all
2. Do you have specific practical methods and tools for gender mainstreaming that you
use in your work?
Yes
No
If Yes – What tools?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
72
3. Do you apply a gender perspective in the planning of your activities?
3 2 1 0
Always Usually Seldom Never
If your answer is between 1 to 3, please explain how do you apply it?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
4. Do you apply a gender perspective in implementation of your activities?
3 2 1 0
Always Usually Seldom Never
If your answer is between 1 to 3, please explain how do you apply it?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
5. How much have you used the available methods and instruments for gender
mainstreaming in your work?
3 2 1 0 99
Extensively Sufficiently Only Not at all NA
occasionally
If your answer is between I to 3 – How have you used the available methods and
instruments?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
6. Do you have sufficient knowledge on gender equality and gender mainstreaming to
advise/help others?
3 2 1 0
Yes, more Yes, just No, not No, none at all than
enough enough enough
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO COMPLETE THIS SURVEY.
73
Focus Group Discussion – Thematic Topics
Topics / issues which will facilitate the Focus Group Discussion (FGD)
1. Background of the organization (who they are, what they do, mandate, focus, scope of
activities, and the extent to which they foresee and mainstream gender perspective).
2. How do you understand the concept of gender and its relevance (gender issues, gender
equality, gender perspective, gender mainstreaming, women issues, women empowerment,
etc…)
2.1.Do you think that the overall situation of gender equality in Kosovo’s society reflect also
in your organization and scope of work, or if there is the difference?
3. Rate of male / female in your organization? Data from the questionnaire showed the
discrepancy also on the working positions (M/F)? Do you think that this comes also from
the level of education, workload also as household, or if there are any working positions
which hinder, and / or ease the involvement of male / female workers? Examples???
4. Are men and women treated with equal respect, as decision-makers, implementers
and participants? Examples…
5. Do you perceive gender perspective as relevant to your scope of activity, why, how does it
make a difference? Examples…
74
6. Is gender perspective integrated into the whole project cycle (planning, developing,
implementing, monitoring and evaluating?
6.1 To what extent have you integrated gender perspective in the process of developing projects /
programmes? Do you think that it is important and does it make a difference? (If yes, how did
you do it?)
7. Do you think that your projects and activities affect men and women (beneficiaries) in
different ways?
8. Examples of specific parameters, tools, instruments and / other related steering documents
through which you try to promote the mainstreaming of gender?
9. What do you consider main needs and challenges toward mainstreaming gender in your
organizational scope, area?
10. If you consider that there is a great need and will from your organization to mainstream
gender, and supposing that you need advise on this issue, where / with what do you think
you should start (seek advice, expertise, synergy with other projects; partnership, etc etc)?
11. Have your organization, partners with whom you work and / or beneficiaries of your
project received gender mainstreaming training and if so, did this had an impact on the
project implementation (from gender perspective)?
12. Other issues relevant to discuss …
75
Background of the Surveyed Organizations
Surveyed Organizations are active in Kosovo since 2000, with a wide range of their working area.
A summary of their focus areas include: promoting and developing civil society, youth,
supporting disability persons rights, integrations of marginal groups in society, connecting local
institutions and local citizens and promotion of process of return and dialogue; work in the field
of art, culture and media; community, improvement of citizens’ lives, advocacy; develop public
policies through independent research in the areas of socioeconomic, governance, development of
political parties and advancement of inter-ethnic relations; influence public policies and processes
in creation, wider inclusion, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of public policies;
facilitate forums for discussion and exchange of experiences in a wide spectrum of sectors; policy
research, training of political parties and government institutions and administration; with the
overall aim to promote democracy and democratic values in Kosovo and the region.
A brief History / background of surveyed organization include:
The Kosovar Institute for Policy Research and Development (KIPRED), was founded in 2002
as a non-profit, independent, impartial non-governmental organization. It is the leading think-tank
in Kosovo, and the senior staff of prominent researchers lead the public policy debate. Since its
establishment over ten years ago KIPRED’s work was centered on two pillars: i) policy research,
and ii) training of political parties and government institutions and administration. Its mission was
to promote democracy and democratic values in Kosovo and the region.
Advocacy Training and Resource Center (ATRC), is a Kosovar not-for-profit organization
that works to increase citizen and civil society participation in decision-making, as a prerequisite
for development of a democratic society and promotion of regional stability. ATRC achieves this
mission through advocacy, capacity-building of Kosovar NGOs including training and
consultancy services, outreach and communications; and promotion of multi-sect oral cooperation
through dialogues, debates and conferences.
Since its establishment in 2001, ATRC in Prishtina has assisted NGOs in Kosovo to
professionalize their work, articulate their demands, and advocate to government structures about
issues affecting Kosovo society. ATRC accomplishes its goals through long-term mentoring,
training, grant-giving, advocacy, information exchange and technical assistance.
76
Women Association of Gjakova (WAGJ), is a non-profit and non-governmental organization
that is established in 1999—immediately after the war in Kosova—and legally registered on June
2000.
Initially, the Association focused on women issues aiming at increasing women’s participation in
social life through programs of free legal aid, education, and advocacy. In this context, the
Association has also implemented other projects and activities focusing on humanitarian
assistance, rebuilding, and economic development. Being aware that gender issues do not belong
only to women, the Association has always intended to increase the range of its beneficiaries by
including men, too. Also, it has intended to extend its activity in the rural areas beyond the city of
Gjakova where the need and challenges have been greater. These intentions were reflected in the
mission statement that was adopted in 2004.
NGO „Communication for Social Development“ (CSD), from Gračanica is non-party,
independent, non-profit, local organization established in 2001 with main goal in promoting and
development of civil society, development of the youth, supporting disability persons rights,
integrations of marginal groups in society, connecting local institutions and local citizens and
promotion of process of return and dialogue. Main groups of beneficiaries of our organization
are: Minority communities, Serbs and Romas, youth and disability persons.
Democracy for Development (D4D) is a think-tank organization which was formed by
experienced and well qualified individuals who came together under the vision that democracy is
a precondition for development and it must deliver for citizens. The mission of D4D is to develop
public policies with the aim of advancing the socio-economic situation of the country and
strengthen the democratic culture of Kosovo. The specific objectives of D4D as an organization
are to: develop public policies through independent research in the areas of socioeconomic,
governance, development of political parties and advancement of inter-ethnic relations; influence
public policies and processes in creation, wider inclusion, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation of public policies; and facilitate forums for discussion and exchange of experiences in
a wide spectrum of sectors.
77
Multimedia / CCTD is actively working in the field of art, culture and Media since 2002. They
produce and co-produce cultural activities for all ages; locally and internationally. They seek to
make the power of culture as a force for change available to everyone, particularly those in
oppressed situations. Through their work, they try to to teach people how to take an active role in
their community, influence legislation and encourage the building of more civil societies and also
they try to help people of all backgrounds and ages to understand one another and to confront
social issues in a positive and non-violent manner. Thier audience is encouraged to not only
imagine change but to actually practice that change, reflect collectively on the suggestion, and
thereby become empowered to generate social action. Since 2002, CCTD has organized more than
100 cultural and Media projects in Kosovo, as well as in other countries of Europe, including
Serbia, Macedonia, France, Germany, UK, Austria, Albania etc.
Syri I vizionit: In its engagement, over the last ten years, Syri i Vizionit implemented over 100
projects in the community, activated thousands of people, constantly impacting on improvement
of their lives, supporting them on their ideas to change situation of the community, neighborhood
of village they live in. Besides the interventions for improvement of their living conditions,
infrastructure or work equipment, in these activities was always taken into account the need for
society building – ensuring that community, villages, or groups’ representatives get equipped with
necessary knowledge to become leaders of the processes within their communities.
ODA is an independent organization committed to professional development of the theatrical art,
encouraging inter-relations with other arts, and building strong arts and culture foundations for
coming generations. ODA is determined to play a role in strengthening the cultural sector of
society and powerfully influence the building of a democratic and open Kosova.
Youth Association for Human Rights – YAHR – established since 2000, on 30th
of July. The
vision of YAHR is to support the establishment of a democratic, tolerant society, where human
rights are fully respected. The mission of YAHR is related to advocacy, identification of cases
where human rights are abused, addressed mainly through the youth activities / area of
involvement. Within its involvement, YAHR has several programmes, such as: Monitoring
programe, advocacy programe, and democratuization and human rights programme.
Related Documents
