Rhetoric and Reality World Bank and CIDA Gender Policies

Jennifer Hales

RHETORIC AND REALITY: WORLDBANK AND CIDA GENDER POLICIES

The past fifty years have seen more progress in improving the humancondition than has occurred at any other time in history. Per capita incomes,

a measure of average living standards, have more than doubled throughoutthe world ... The 5 billion people alive today are on average more healthy,better fed, better housed, better educated, and better clothed than all those

who lived before them.

George Psacharopoulos, World Bank (Psacharopoulos 1995, 1-2)

Significant progress has. been made in improvingthe situation of women across the world.

Armeane M. Choksi, Vice-President, Human Capital Development andOperations Policy, World Bank (World Bank 1995a, v)

Convergence, Volume XL, Number 1-2, 2007

147

Abstract

The picture the World Bank paints of the world is an optimistic one: livingstandards are higher than ever before, humanity is progressing, and situationsfor women are improving. If this is really the case, why then does 'theimpoverishment of hundreds of millions of people' throughout the worldcontinue? (Chossudovsky 1997, 33). Why do 'the disparities between rich andpoor, within and between countries, continue to grow?' (Wilson and Whitmore2000: 15). And why, in the face of increased awareness about the status andrights of women from feminists and women's rights groups globally, are'women ... overwhelmingly and everywhere the poorest of the poor?' (Pettman1996, 15).

Why does this contradiction exist? Do the development and gender policiesof international development agencies simply amount to rhetoric, serving tomask the realities of poverty while simultaneously promoting another agenda?

This article discusses how a neoliberal economic agenda of powerfulinternational development institutions, such as multilateral organisations likethe World Bank, can limit and even impede the advancement of theirproclaimed goals of achieving gender equality and promoting women's rights.

The first section analyses the World Bank's approach to gender equality(1994, 1995a, 1995b, 1998, 2001) and its underlying neoliberal economicagenda. In so doing, it questions whether gender policies framed withinneoliberal, free-market ideology can actually achieve their claimed goals.Understanding the neoliberal tendencies of the World Bank's policies will allowa more effective critique of policies of other organisations, such as the CanadianInternational Development Agency (CIDA), a bilateral aid agency, or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) which provide aid to developing countries.

The second section analyses CIDA's gender document, CIDA s Policy onGender Equality (CIDA 1999). While CIDA's gender policy is comprehensive,it does contain elements which could indicate the presence of an alignment withWorld Bank ideology, thus raising questions about the effectiveness of CIDA'spolicy in practice.

The third section relates to the gender policies of smaller, non-governmentaland grassroots international development organisations and the role they canplay in reinforcing, implicitly or explicitly, a neoliberal approach. This sectioncomprises a list of questions to which these organisations can refer whenanalysing, critiquing and revising their own stance on and approach to genderequality.


148

Neoliberalism and the World Bank

According to neoliberal ideology, the market is central in governing economic,political and social life (Wilson and Whitmore 2000). The neoliberal corporate-driven agenda is advanced through structural adjustment policies (SAPs). SAPstypically lead to greater decentralisation, the privatisation of public enterprisesand services, and government spending cuts to social services such as healthcare, education, social security and public housing. These policies, in turn, canlead to the weakening of union power, the repeal of labour laws, anddeteriorating working conditions. All this is done in the name of greatereconomic efficiency and in the interest of maintaining economic equilibrium.Neoliberal ideology, furthermore, assumes value neutrality and objectivity.Sparr (1994), however, argues that neoliberal economic reforms are notobjective or value-neutral; nor are they gender-neutral - rather they impactdifferentially on women and men. After twenty years of these policies, thereexists a 'grotesque and dangerous polarization between people and countriesbenefiting from the system and those that are mere passive recipients of itseffects' (UNDP 1999: 1).

The impacts of the World Bank neoliberal economic agenda and structuraladjustment programs (SAPs) on women have been well documented andcontinue to be vigorously debated. On the one hand, there are such positive sideeffects of restructuring as 'employment gains for women' (Bakker 1994, 17),'the reduction of poverty among ... female-headed households' (Tsikata andKerr 2000, 8), and the challenge to 'men's traditional views about theadvantages of [women] playing a less conspicuous economic role in thehousehold' (Sparr 1994, 30). On the other hand, feminist criticsoverwhelmingly argue that World Bank neoliberal restructuring policies are notonly 'gender-blind" and exploit and oppress women (Bakker 1994; Sparr 1994;Tsikata and Kerr 2000), but actually 'reinforce women's oppression and rely onit in order to work' (Sparr 1994, 184). Restructuring is reported to have hadsuch negative effects as:

"* the deterioration of working conditions for women"* increases in wage differentials"* an increase in the number of women entering the informal sector and

losing job security and benefits"* women's unpaid work escalating and subsidising cuts to social spending"* detrimental effects on girls' health and education.

According to Tsikata and Kerr, the World Bank does 'not accept that theeconomic policy framework is, in many instances, reinforcing existinginequalities' (2000: 2) that disadvantage women.


149

A free-market and supposedly 'value-neutral' (and, therefore, 'gender-neutral') neoliberal economic ideology is embedded within World Bankdevelopment policy documents and discourse in general. Economic growth,prioritised over social justice and 'improved living conditions for all', is theaccepted measure of progress and well-being. It is not surprising, therefore, tofind the existence of this neoliberal paradigm within the rhetoric of World Bankgender policy documents as well (1994, 1995a, 1995b, 2001). In this light, it isdifficult to view the World Bank's gender policies as anything other than a'semblance of commitment to social change' (Chossudovsky 1997, 43) and therights of women.

The World Bank gender policy

Three examples illustrate ways in which the neoliberal economic rationale inthe World Bank's gender policy creates a 'semblance of commitment'(Chossudovsky 1997: 43) to gender equality: targeting women and girls indevelopment, appropriating development jargon and policies, and collectingdata that reinforce stereotypes of and assumptions about women.

Targeting women and girls in development

According to the World Bank, 'targeting women can be an effective strategy forreducing poverty. Where gender differences are wide, targeting, for example,the availability of stipends so girls can attend school, may be needed to capturesocial gains and increase internal efficiency' (1995b, 6). While on the surface,the World Bank's acclaimed goal of reducing gender differences is valid andgives the appearance of a commitment to women's rights in development, it isnecessary to examine the Bank's economic rationale. Women are targeted ifdoing so increases economic efficiency. 'As one World Bank economist put itso clearly: "I'm unconvinced that structural adjustment really has a negativeeffect on women, but I am convinced that gender inequality is having a negativeimpact on growth"' (Tsikata and Kerr 2000, 11). Under World Bank policies,women are seen as a means to other (economic) ends. The World Bank's(1995b) micro-credit programmes provide another example of how women aretargeted in development for economic reasons. Micro-credit programmes,while potentially giving women greater bargaining power in the household, forexample, ultimately can be seen as a way of incorporating women into themarket to improve the economy (Rankin 2001).

Appropriating development jargon and policies

By adopting the development jargon and approaches of feminists andalternative development groups, the World Bank perpetuates its appearance ofbeing committed to social change. Blaikie says:


150

Neo-populist sentiments such as the poverty agenda, grassrootsparticipation and decentralization have been used by the WorldBank in its Development Reports since about 1989, while at thesame time consistently promoting its own neo-liberal approach toenvironment and development ... the World Bank appropriatedparts of the neo-populist agenda where it also reflected its ownanti-state and anti-centralized bureaucracy sentiments, andgrafted it onto its own. (1998: 15)

'Women's empowerment'

In 1998, the World Bank wrote that it was 'making progress toward the equalityof the sexes and the empowerment of women by eliminating disparities inprimary and secondary education by 2005' (1998, 11). The use of the term'empowerment' is, however, problematic (Baden and Goetz 1998; Jahan 1995;Sparr 1994). According to Sparr: 'Empowering people has become thebuzzword of the 1990s. Advocates and policy-makers have discovered thepolitical capital available in this concept. Unfortunately, beneath their rhetoriclie wildly differing philosophical and political agendas which need criticaldissection' (1994, 185). By 'critically dissecting' the World Bank's agenda, anumber of questions emerge, responses to which demonstrate the Bank'sneoliberal economic paradigm.

First, one has to question why the World Bank chose to measure women'sempowerment through education. According to the World Bank, 'primaryeducation is the largest single contributor to the predicted economic growthrates of high-performing Asian countries' (Psacharopoulos 1995, 3). Investingin education will lead to an improved economy. The education of girls,therefore, and the resulting 'empowerment' of women, are justified in theBank's view because they lead to economic growth. Again, women and girls aremeans to economic ends.

Second, one must question if it is even possible to achieve empowermentthrough education. The Bank fails to address the issue that the very educationgirls (and boys) receive may in fact serve to reinforce and replicate, rather thanchallenge and transform, gender stereotypes: 'Girls' learning and self-esteemcan be undermined by lessons and textbooks filled with implicit and explicitmessages that tell them girls are of less value than boys' (Bellamy 1999, 59).How can this lead to 'empowerment?' It is not simply a matter of increasing thenumber of girls attending school that will bring about girls' and women'sempowerment. It is also a matter of the quality and method of education.Furthermore, it is not only education that will bring about the empowerment ofwomen. Fundamental changes to societal and institutional structures are neededat the same time (Goetz 1997; Young 1997).


151

Third, was it not unrealistic of the Bank to assume it could achieve'women's empowerment' (not to mention 'equality of the sexes') in the shorttime frame of seven years? Finally, how does the World Bank define'empowerment?' None of the World Bank policy documents mentioned heredefines women's empowerment, and yet the empowerment of women is anexpected outcome of World Bank policies (World Bank 1998). The assumptionthat empowerment can be achieved through access to education, the unrealistictime frame in which empowerment can be achieved, and the lack of a cleardefinition of empowerment are indicative of the rhetorical nature of WorldBank policy and reflect its neoliberal approach to gender issues in development.

'GAD'

Similarly problematic is the World Bank's use of the Gender and Development(GAD) approach to development. Feminist scholars concerned with the GADapproach assert that focusing 'on gender rather than women ... has allowed thediscussion to shift from a focus on women, to women and men, and, finally,back to men' (Baden and Goetz 1998, 21). The use of the term 'gender' can leadto the denial of the existence of women-specific interests and issues and theneed to address them (Baden and Goetz 1998). As Razavi and Miller point out,when co-opted by mainstream institutions, the concept of gender becomes 're-interpreted ... to suit their institutional needs' (1995, 41). Whether or not theBank has even implemented the GAD approach remains questionable. Whilethe World Bank (1994) identified GAD as its framework, it 'frequently refersto women as a separate target group, rather than identifying women's prioritiesin terms of men's; in addition, the term gender is used interchangeably withwomen, such that the distinction between them is not clear' (Moser, Tormqvist,and van Bronkhorst 1999, 6). In light of the Bank's lack of clarity surroundingits definitions and uses of the terms women and gender, it becomes necessaryto question the authenticity of claims the Bank makes regarding genderequality. Will neoliberal economics supplant gender equality? Is the Bank'sgender policy simply rhetoric?

Data-reinforcing stereotypes of and assumptions about women

Examining the type of data that the World Bank collects on women shows bothits neoliberal economic approach to development and its assumptions regardingthe valuing of women. The World Bank states:

Over the past two decades, considerable progress has been madein reducing the gender gap worldwide ... Since the 1950s thefemale labour force has grown twice as fast as the male labourforce. Worldwide, more than 40 per cent of women over 15 yearsof age are now in the labour force; in developing countries womenaccount for 30 percent of the labour force. (These figures, it


152

should be noted, do not fully reflect women's participation in theinformal sector or as unpaid family members in agriculture).(1 995b, 2) (brackets in the original)

Three points in the above statement require analysis. First of all, by explicitlystating that its statistics on women's labour do not include the unpaid work thatwomen do in the home, on farms or in the informal sector, the World Bankshows how it values women. Women's labour is valuable only if it ismeasurable by the Bank's economic indicators. The World Bank does notacknowledge or account for the contribution women's unpaid work makesdirectly to communities and indirectly to the economy. 'Women's work, read ashousework, becomes a form of bonded, unpaid work, where her body as wellas her labour is given over to others' use ... Women are contained withinideologies or discourses of motherhood, marriage and femininity, disguising thework that women do as "naturally" women's work' (Pettman 1996, 165).Furthermore, women's unpaid work has actually increased as a result of WorldBank restructuring programs that result in the removal of subsidies on socialservices (Tsikata and Kerr 2000).

Secondly, the Bank's assumption that the growth in the female labour forceindicates a reduction in the gender gap is unfounded when the type of labour inwhich females are engaging is taken into account. Women are increasinglyemployed in low-paid (relative to men's wages for similar jobs), traditionallyfemale-oriented (e.g., there is an overrepresentation of women in textiles), part-time and temporary jobs. Working conditions tend to be poor, and jobprotection and security for women are rare (Bakker 1994; Pettman 1996; Sparr1994). Would not this sort of labour reinforce rather than reduce the gendergap?

Thirdly, why does the Bank not question the statistic that many women asyoung as 15 are employed in the public sector? In what labour are theyengaged? Under what conditions? What is the impact on their education? 2 Dothey have to leave school in order to work and contribute to the family income?Are they, like some women, compensating for government cutbacks to socialservices as a result of World Bank restructuring? The World Bank's statisticshide the realities of women's work, show how the Bank does not valuewomen's reproductive and unpaid labour, and raise the question of whether ornot an economically driven institution can actually bring about transformationsnecessary to achieve gender equality.

2001 gender policy

In the light of criticisms of World Bank policies on gender, it is important toacknowledge the Bank's 2001 document on gender, Engendering Developmentthrough Gender Equality in Rights, Resources and Voice. Four points that


153

indicate a more comprehensive and progressive nature of this policy overpreceding ones deserve mentioning. First, the authors recognise thatinstitutional and economic policies which profess to be gender-neutral actuallyhave differential impacts on women and men. They recommend that thesepolicies 'need to consider and address prevailing gender inequalities' beforetheir implementation (World Bank 2001, 15). Second, gender equality is seennot only as a means to economic growth, but also as a goal in and of itself,where economic growth is the means to achieve it. Third, the authors provide adetailed description of the meanings of 'gender' and 'gender equality'. Fourth,at least in rhetoric, the authors stress human well-being and gender equalityover economic growth, unlike preceding documents. However, a close readingof the document reveals concerns similar to those raised about earlier WorldBank policies.

When questioning why gender inequalities and harmful gender disparitiespersist in so many countries, the authors neglect to question the impact WorldBank economic restructuring policies have had on exacerbating thoseinequalities and disparities. Where the authors do mention the role thatinstitutions play in reproducing gender inequalities, they focus on theinstitutions of societal norms, customs, rights and laws, the household, and thefamily - thus placing responsibility on developing countries - rather thanlooking critically at the role that international institutions, like the World Bankitself, play in the process. The lack of critical self-reflexivity on the Bank's partexacerbates the rhetorical nature of the document. The message communicatedis that the World Bank itself is unproblematic. There is no mention made ofprevious gender policies and of the weaknesses within them, nor specifically ofWorld Bank structural adjustment policies and their differential effects on poorwomen and men. The document remains framed in the language of economic,human capital and neoliberal ideology. Given that, it is difficult to see how thisgender policy differs considerably from the others, and begs the question ofhow the Bank will in practice bring about transformative changes that lead togender equality.

By promoting gender equality through its development policies, the WorldBank appears to be committed to social change and improving the lives of poorwomen. However, as the previous examples have illustrated, an analysis of theWorld Bank's gender policies reveals a neoliberal economic agenda that takesprecedence over social goals of equality and justice. Attention to the WorldBank's agenda leads to the question of whether or not other internationaldevelopment agencies, such as bilateral and non-governmental ones, havesimilar approaches.


154

CIDA's gender policy

The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) has been cognizantof the need to include women's needs and interests in its development policiessince the 1970s. In 1976, it used the Women in Development (WID) guidelines(CIDA 1999). Over the following two decades, CIDA adapted its policy toincorporate many of the changes for which feminists and women's groups wereadvocating. In 1999, after reviewing and revising preceding policies, CIDApublished the document, CIDA 's Policy on Gender Equality (CIDA 1999).While CIDA's new approach to gender equality is comprehensive andprogressive, the extent to which it is in line with the World Bank's neoliberalapproach may be questionable.

Appropriating development jargon and policies

CIDA, like the World Bank, has adopted a number of development buzzwordsand policies. Whether their use simply provides a semblance of legitimacy andcommitment remains to be seen. However, a critique of CIDA's use of jargon isa necessary part of the analysis.

'Equity' and 'equality'

A significant and progressive shift in CIDA's current philosophy and approachis reflected in the move from a focus on gender 'equity' (found in the 1995 WIDand Gender Equity Policy) to a focus on gender 'equality'. As CIDAacknowledges, 'equal treatment of women and men is insufficient as a strategyfor gender equality' (CIDA 1999, 9). CIDA makes explicit the importantdifference between 'equity' and 'equality': 'Gender equity is the process ofbeing fair to women and men. To ensure fairness, measures must often beavailable to compensate for historical and social disadvantages that preventwomen and men from otherwise operating on a level playing field. Equity leadsto equality' (CIDA 1999, 7).

Gender equality means that women and men enjoy the same status. Genderequality means that women and men have equal conditions for realizing theirfull human rights and potential to contribute to national, political, economic,social and cultural development, and to benefit from the results. Genderequality is therefore the equal valuing by society of both the similarities anddifferences between women and men, and the varying roles that they play.(CIDA 1999, 7)

According to CIDA, gender 'equity' is the means to achieving the goal ofgender 'equality'. However, in focusing on the goal of equality, CIDA may losesight of or downplay the meaning of equity, what equity actually 'looks like' inpractice, and the importance of equity as a means of achieving equality. While


155

the preceding 1995 policy focused on equity and lacked a focus on equality, itseems that this current document tends to do the opposite. Do the fewreferences to 'equity' in the document amount to nothing more than rhetoric? Itis, in this light, important to heed Kabeer's warning that 'even organizationsthat have adopted goals of gender equity have frequently failed to implementthem' (1994, 87).

'Women's empowerment'

CIDA's preoccupation with the process of 'women's empowerment' as ameans of creating gender equality is another example of the use of developmentjargon. In its 1999 gender equality document, CIDA states:

Women's empowerment is central to achieving gender equality.Through empowerment, women become aware of unequal powerrelations, gain control over their lives, and acquire a greater voiceto overcome inequality in their home, the workplace andcommunity ...

Empowerment is about people - both women and men - takingcontrol over their lives: setting their own agendas, gaining skills,building self-confidence, solving problems, and developing self-reliance. (CIDA 1999, 8)

While CIDA provides a clearer definition than does the World Bank of what'empowerment' means, how that 'empowerment' will be achieved remainsunclear. In order for women to become empowered, it is necessary to work notonly with women, but also, and perhaps more importantly, with men. Iftraditional, stereotypical and patriarchal perceptions of women are notaddressed and challenged, a woman's self-empowerment may amount to naughtin the face of a domineering husband, a patriarchal society or an exploitativeinternational institution. CIDA must be given credit, however, for addressingthe role men must play in the process of achieving gender equality: 'Genderequality is an issue that concerns both women and men, and achieving it willinvolve working with men to bring about changes in attitudes, behaviour, rolesand responsibilities at home, in the workplace, in the community, and innational donor and international institutions' (CIDA 1999, 9).

CIDA must also address the discrimination that exists between women.Empowering women is not only about achieving gender equality, but alsoequality on the basis of social factors such as race, ethnicity, class, age, ability,marital status, sexual orientation and type of employment. CIDA refers to theneed to provide 'information on ... the differences among women and men andthe diversity of their experiences, social relationships and consequent status(e.g. their class, race, caste, ethnicity, age, culture and abilities)' (CIDA 1999,


156

17). It is unclear, however, if CIDA is referring to, and therefore will challenge,'differences' between women as well as those between women and men.

The following quotation demonstrates that CIDA recognises that institutionsmust play a role in working towards women's empowerment: 'Outsiders cannotempower women: only women can empower themselves to make choices or tospeak out on their own behalf. However, institutions, including internationalcooperation agencies, can support processes that increase women's self-confidence, develop their self-reliance, and help them set their own agendas'(CIDA 1999, 8).

However, to merely 'support' processes leading to women's empowermentis not sufficient. Without radical changes to Western institutional structureswhich subordinate women, it is unlikely that women will be able to fully'empower themselves' in ways in which they can be setting 'their ownagendas', for example. As Young notes, 'empowerment is not just about womenacquiring something, but about those holding power relinquishing it' (1997,372). While CIDA does address the need for its own 'institutionalstrengthening' (1999, 22) and provides recommendations, the extent to whichthese have been both implemented and enacted will need to be monitored.

Also questionable is how CIDA intends to measure empowerment:'[Empowerment] is not only a collective, social and political process, but anindividual one as well- and it is not only a process but an outcome too' (CIDA1999, 8). That CIDA describes empowerment as being 'not only a process butan outcome' indicates that measurable results of empowerment will be attained.This being the case, 'empowerment' as a means of achieving gender equalityfits nicely into CIDA's results-based management framework:

CIDA launched its Corporate Renewal initiative in 1994 andadopted a more results-oriented and accountable style ofmanagement ... committed to improving the impact of [CIDA's]work and to achieving increased efficiency and effectiveness inachieving that impact. (CIDA 2007, para. 6)

At CIDA, the development results chain is composed ofoutputs, outcomes and impact level results that are linked byvirtue of a chain of cause and effect relationships ... Developmentresults should always reflect the actual changes in the state ofhuman development that are attributable to a CIDA investment.(CIDA 2007, para. 23)

While 'empowerment' is understandably both a process and an outcome, it isimportant to question (a) how the 'outcome' of something as personal andsubjective as women's 'self-confidence' or 'self-reliance' can be objectivelymeasured by an outside institution, and (b) how CIDA can be sure that the


157

resulting 'empowerment' would in fact be attributed to CIDA investment. Aslong as CIDA prioritises efficiency and cost-saving over such long-term,difficult-to-measure 'outcomes' as 'empowerment', goals like 'women'sempowerment' may actually be sacrificed.

It will be important to pay attention to the extent to which CIDA's policies,guidelines and implemented programmes actually challenge patriarchy andgender inequitable practices - both within CIDA itself and in partnerorganisations. If they do not, then CIDA's focus on 'empowerment' may simplyamount to rhetoric.

'GAD'

CIDA uses an approach to development similar to the Gender and Development(GAD) approach. Unlike the World Bank's questionable implementation ofGAD (Moser, Tornqvist, and van Bronkhorst 1999), CIDA's policy appears tobe much more in line with GAD philosophy. As previously mentioned, CIDAmoved from being more WID-focused in the 1970s, to incorporating genderequity and then gender equality into its framework. It will be important tomonitor how CIDA implements the ideals of GAD in order to ensure that thefocus on gender does not result in an eventual focus back onto men and awayfrom women (Baden and Goetz 1998).

'Partnership'

Throughout its gender policy, CIDA refers to its 'partnership' with recipientcountries. The following is one such example: 'CIDA supports people inpartner countries through a variety of international co-operation initiatives.Promoting gender equality ... means addressing [it] in all policy dialogue withgovernments, institutions, and civil society partners [and] sharing with partnersgood practices, project and program experiences, and lessons in promotinggender equality' (CIDA 1999, 19).

CIDA also addresses the involvement and participation of women:

Promoting the equal participation of women as agents of change... involves women's equal right to articulate their needs andinterests, as well as their vision of society, and to shape thedecisions that affect their lives ... Partnership with women'sorganizations and other groups working for gender equality isnecessary to assist this process. (CIDA 1999, 9)

Have women been consulted on the 'problem' the interventionis to solve? How have they been involved in development of the'solution'? What specific ways can be proposed for encouragingand enabling women to participate? (CIDA 1999, 28)


158

While CIDA's policy of partnership, particularly with respect to women, ispotentially transformative, unless carefully defined and respectfully formed andreinforced, 'partnership' can be problematic (Randel, German, and Ewing2000; Sadli and Porter 1999; Wilson and Whitmore 2000). Is 'partnership'based on the mutual trust and respect built up between donor and recipient?Does it amount to the equal exchange of ideas, skills and knowledge? Or ratheris it a form of technical transfer from the donor to a passive recipient (Sadli andPorter 1999)? Does the partnership replicate and reinforce, rather thanchallenge, the inherent power imbalances that exist between the culture of thedonor and the culture of the recipient and in which Western ideas dominate?(Sadli and Porter 1999; Wilson and Whitmore 2000). CIDA does not address allof these issues in its gender policy. Is 'partnership', therefore, another exampleof CIDA rhetoric?

A quotation by Joel Samoff sums up some of the concerns around CIDA'suse of development jargon. 'In its very conception, foreign aid is fundamentallydisempowering. Notwithstanding the widespread use of terms like cooperation,partnership and empowerment, in practice aid generally functions to underminelocal authority and initiative' (Samoff 1999, 74).

Mainstreaming gender equality

Another of CIDA's goals is to 'mainstream' gender equality. 'Gender equalitymust be considered as an integral part of all CIDA policies, programs andprojects. In addition to being one of CIDA's six programming priorities, genderequality is also a cross-cutting goal' (CIDA 1999, 8).

While mainstreaming gender across all aspects of CIDA's policies mayassist in the achievement of gender equality 'right across the board' (Lawrence1998, 11), it is important to be aware of ways in which mainstreaming canpotentially be problematic. One of the major dangers of mainstreaming is thatwithout explicit and practical gender policies, gender can be 'integrated intoinvisibility' (Lawrence 1998, 13). The assumption is that everyone in theagency will take care of 'gender,' without setting up 'separate gender units oraddressing the needs of women separately' (Tsikata and Kerr 2000, 10). Thereexists the concern among some feminists that donor institutions appropriate thenotion of gender mainstreaming without understanding fully 'its basic texts,concepts and methodologies' (Baden and Goetz 1998, 22). The institutions,therefore, may simply provide the appearance that 'gender,' a respectable andfashionable term, is incorporated into all their development policies. This hasled to 'accusations of donor-driven agenda' (Baden and Goetz 1998, 21).Furthermore, many organisations 'mainstream' gender without changing theexisting economic policy framework (Tsikata and Kerr 2000). Does CIDA'sattempt to mainstream gender equality as a cross-cutting goal reveal that it is


159

'driven' by a different agenda? If so, what is that agenda, and is it aligned withthat of the World Bank?

Results-based management framework

Where the World Bank operates under an economic framework that canpreclude human rights, CIDA operates under a results-based managementframework that arguably may do the same. Applying a management approachto gender equality may ultimately increase performance and prove that fundsare being efficiently used, but may not adequately address gender issues.

In the 2003-4 fiscal year, the percentage of Canadian Gross NationalIncome (GNI) allocated to Official Development Assistance (ODA) was 0.23per cent (CIDA 2006). In 2004-5, the ODA/GNI amount was 0.32 per cent(CIDA 2006).3 While the allocated ODA amount for these two years show anincrease from previous years, they are still well below the internationallyagreed-upon 0.7 per cent of GNI (CCIC 2003). CIDA is accountable to theCanadian public to prove that these limited funds are not wasted. Hence: 'CIDAwill systematically focus on results to ensure that it employs managementpractices which optimize value for money and the prudent use of its human andfinancial resources. CIDA will report on its results in order to informParliament and Canadians of its development achievements' (CIDA 2007, para.84).

However, will a focus on performance, efficiency and cost-saving come atthe expense of the rights, interests and needs of the individuals who receive theaid?

Underlying CIDA's gender equality policy, there is an economicagenda. Attention to gender equality is essential to sounddevelopment practice and at the heart of economic and socialprogress ... If the realities and voices of half of the population arenot fully realized, CIDA's objectives to 'reduce poverty and tocontribute to a more secure, equitable and prosperous world' willnot be met. (CIDA 1999, 5)

CIDA needs to attend to the economic development of partner communities -but only insofar as its economic agenda does not supersede its social andhuman rights agenda and its ultimate goal of gender equality.

Partnership with multilateral organisations

CIDA's explicit partnership with multilateral organizations such as theInternational Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (CIDA 1999) suggests,


160

however, that CIDA's gender policy may in fact be more economically andpolitically driven than CIDA would like us to think:

Multilateral organizations such as international and regionalfinancial institutions and the UN agencies are important partnersfor CIDA, offering considerable opportunities to support genderequality ...

CIDA can support gender equality in multilateral programs by... supporting dialogue and coordination on gender equality withmultilateral partners, especially in fields such as macro-economicpolicy reform and areas where CIDA and multilateral programsand projects could mutually reinforce each other's efforts. (CIDA1999, 23)

In light of the concerns raised about the World Bank's gender policy, it isconcerning also to consider CIDA's partnership with multilateral organisationsand the international financial institutions. If CIDA is willing to 'support genderequality in multilateral programs' by 'coordinating on gender equality with' theWorld Bank, what does this say about CIDA's own motivation to promotegender equality? Is CIDA driven by an economic, neoliberal motive similar tothat of the World Bank? CIDA's position regarding the World Bank policies isnot clear. What does CIDA mean by 'supporting dialogue and coordination ongender equality especially in fields such as macro-economic policy reform?'Will CIDA's 'dialogue' with the World Bank actually involve 'conductinggender analysis at the pre-design stage and reflecting its results, for example inthe design of program assistance (this could include examination of thedifferential impact of macro-economic policies ... on women and men at thenational, community and household levels)' (CIDA 1999, 22), as CIDA statesin its gender policy document? Will CIDA be able to encourage the Bank tochange the nature of its structural adjustment programs (SAPs)? Will CIDA goso far as to challenge the World Bank's neoliberal agenda? Or will CIDAultimately concur with, support and reinforce World Bank macro-economicpolicy reforms, despite the impoverishing effects they have on women? Whileasking difficult and controversial questions such as these, it is important tosimultaneously acknowledge CIDA's position vis-A-vis the World Bank. Towhat extent will CIDA be able to challenge policies of multilateralorganisations as it negotiates its identity and place within global powerrelations? Will CIDA be forced to compromise some of its goals and visions asa result of where it sits in the larger global context? It is interesting to note thatin the 2004-5 fiscal year, CIDA alone disbursed $306.89 million to theInternational Financial Institutions, $2.43 million of which went directly to theWorld Bank (CIDA 2006, Y). This further suggests that CIDA supports and isaligned with multilateral organizations and their policies.


161

While concerns regarding CIDA's gender equality policy exist, it isimportant to recognise that the policy contains many progressive andpotentially transformative elements that may pave the way for the realisation ofgender equality. CIDA acknowledges, however, that 'gender equality is moreapt to be achieved if ... the objective of gender equality is not lost in rhetoricor in preoccupation with agency process' (1999, 26). It will be necessary tocontinue to monitor CIDA's actions and to challenge any steps CIDA takes thatdemonstrate its alignment with a neoliberal paradigm such as that of the WorldBank.

Smaller grassroots organisations and NGOs

Seeing and understanding neoliberal tendencies in international developmentorganisations can be disturbing and potentially paralysing. What does one do inthe face of the power of organisations like the World Bank? How does knowingabout the existence of neoliberalism in mainstream institutions serve thoseworking in smaller, grassroots, non-governmental organisations?Understanding what neoliberalism looks like and knowing that policy rhetoriccan hide an underlying neoliberal agenda can help smaller organisationsidentify problematic areas in their policies. The following is a list of questionsto which those working in smaller, grassroots and non-governmentalorganisations can refer when critically examining the gender policies of andassumptions held by the organisations to which they belong.

1 What is the organisation's overarching or prioritised framework? Does itcontain an underlying economic agenda? Does, or could, the frameworkin any way preclude goals of social justice and human rights?

2 What development approach regarding women has the organisationadopted? WID? WAD? GAD? What are the implications of thisapproach?

3 Is the organisation engaged in critical self-reflexivity and prepared tomake its own institutional changes to policies that affect gender equalitywithin the organisation itself and with partner organisations? Forexample, are gender equity and gender equality policies reflected in thedonor agency itself? Are gender inequalities and disparities reproduced?If so, are they being challenged and altered?

4 Is the organisation engaging in increasing its awareness andunderstanding of gender issues through, for example, gender training?

5 Is the organisation aware of systemic, structural and cultural causes ofwomen's oppression? Is it actively addressing and challenging patriarchyand working to change men's attitudes, behaviours and roles? Is itactively addressing and challenging discrimination based on other socialfactors such as race, class, ethnicity, religion, age, ability, sexualorientation and marital status against women by both men and women?


162

6 Is the organisation using development jargon, such as equity,empowerment, mainstreaming, and sustainability? If so, has theorganisation fully examined how it defines these terms and theimplications of using them? Or are they simply rhetoric?

7 What is the organisation's definition of 'partnership?' Is it built onmutual trust and respect? Does it hinge on an equal exchange of ideas,skills and knowledge? Are women actively involved in decision making?Does the organisation reinforce or challenge the inherent powerimbalances between it, as a Northern, Western donor, and its partners?

8 How does the organisation assess or measure 'empowerment?' Has itcritically questioned the possibility and feasibility of doing so?

9 Is the organisation in any way reinforcing stereotypes of women and/orincreasing women's burden by the types of projects it supports? (Forexample, income generators such as weaving, craft-making, fruit-canning and other traditionally female, 'domestic' types of work; andgirls' education projects for which the curriculum is not gender-sensitive).

10 Does the organisation challenge the assumption that women will benefitfrom development projects alongside and in a similar manner to men? Ordoes the organisation address specific gender issues and consider howprojects might impact differentially on men and women?

11 What sort of data and statistics is the organisation collecting and basingits decisions on? Do the statistics actually measure objectives such asempowerment and equality?

12 How does the organisation attempt to help women find their voice inpolicy- and decision-making?

13 Is there any overt or implicit alignment with multilateral organisationslike the World Bank and IMF? Does the organisation disburse money tothem, receive funding from them, or support or adopt their policies, suchas those that incorporate women into the economy in marginalising orexploitative ways? Or does the organisation actively oppose theneoliberal agenda of these institutions?

14 Does the organisation perceive development projects as 'experiments'that can be abandoned when they 'fail?' If an implemented project'fails,' does the organisation examine why, and look deeply at the rootcauses of 'failure' (for example, problems with the design andimplementation of a project, or the failure to address patriarchy)?

15 Does the organisation ask, 'For whose benefit are we doing this?' Aredevelopment projects ultimately supporting the eventual flow of capitalfrom poor to rich countries? Is participation in 'development' worksimply serving to satisfy Westerners' philanthropic needs? Or is the workbeing done actually and truly benefiting the people it is intending toreach?


163

The actions that can come about as a result of asking these questions anddiscussing the ramifications of their answers may lead to challenging neoliberalapproaches of international development organisations, and creating genderpolicies that are, potentially, transformative.

Conclusion

As the analysis of the World Bank's gender policies from 1995 to 2001 shows,while some of the policy rhetoric has changed, the underlying neoliberalparadigm and economic agenda have remained. CIDA's (1999) policy haselements indicating the existence of a similar paradigm and agenda. As such,their focus on gender equality may amount to mere rhetoric providing only a'semblance of commitment to social change' (Chossudovsky 1997, 43). TheWorld Bank and CIDA must be held responsible for institutional changes withintheir own organisations and also for continued critical self-reflexivity on theirassumptions, beliefs, priorities, goals and practices. Smaller grassrootsorganisations and NGOs also have a necessary role to play in critiquing boththeir own policies and practices and those of the multilateral and bilateralagencies. If we do not address and attempt to change the neoliberal economicagenda of international development organisations, how will the needs,interests and rights of women whom the policies of those organisations claimto be serving be fully met? As Pamela Sparr so clearly states: 'As long as a free-market orientation remains the critical precondition and everyone accepts thispremiss, then the institutions will not engage in the transformative kind ofdialogue feminists are attempting' (1994, 35).

Jennifer Hales holds a MA in Comparative, International and Development Educationfrom the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto (OlSE/UT).She works as an independent researcher and global and social justice educationconsultant and is on the Board of two Canadian-based international developmentNGOs. Emal<[email protected]>

Notes

I According to feminist critics such as Bakker (1994), Sparr (1994) andTsikata and Kerr (2000), structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) are'gender-blind' in that they do not acknowledge or take into account thedifferential impacts of restructuring on women and men. They argue that theoppression, exploitation and marginalisation of women that can occur in thename of economic growth are rarely considered or acknowledged. In thisrespect, SAPs are not value- or gender-neutral as neoliberal economicsprofesses they are. These feminists have moved beyond doing impactstudies alone to critiquing the 'gender-blindness' of the policies themselves.


164

2 There is evidence that economic restructuring since the 1980s has impactedon girls' education: 'The United Nations found that since 1980 there hasbeen a slowdown in the rate of improvement in female:male enrolmentratios in general education second-level schools in Africa and Asia. Thismay have been a consequence of economic recession' (Sparr 1994, 27).Beneria, in her study of Mexican families, found that 'a common responseto the crisis was the increase in the number of household membersparticipating in the labor market in order to contribute to the family income... [for example], teenagers who had to discontinue their education in orderto earn an income' (1992, 92).

3 It is perhaps important to note the exceptional nature of this increase.According to CIDA, 'this exceptional increase was mainly due to twofactors: a $430 million loan repayment by India which had the effect oflowering the ratio in 2003-2004, and secondly a significant increase in aidallocations to initiatives by multilateral organizations ... through CIDA'sMultilateral Programs Branch to support victims of the December 2004Indian Ocean Tsunami ... as well as special payments ... to internationalhealth partnerships' (CIDA 2006, i).

References

Baden, S., and A. M. Goetz. 1998. Who needs (sex) when you can have(gender)? Conflicting discourses on gender at Beijing. In Feminist visions ofdevelopment: Gender analysis and policy, ed. C. Jackson and R. Pearson,19-38. London: Routledge.

Bakker, 1. 1994. Introduction: Engendering macro-economic policy reform inthe era of global restructuring and development. In The strategic silence:Gender and economic policy, ed. I. Bakker, 1-30. London: Zed Books.

Bellamy, C. 1999. The state of the world's children 1999: Education. NewYork: UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund).

Beneria, L. 1992. The Mexican debt crisis: Restructuring the economy and thehousehold. In Unequal burden: Economic crises, persistent poverty, andwomen 's work, ed. L. Beneria and S. Feldman, 83-104. Boulder, CO: WestviewPress.

Blaikie, P. 1998. Paradigms for environment and development. In Looking atmaps in the dark, ed. L. de Haan and P. Blaikie, 15. Utrecht/Amsterdam:Netherlands Geographical Studies, Royal Dutch Geographical Society. Quotedin D. Tsikata and J. Kerr, Demanding dignity: Women confronting economicreforms in Africa, 6, Ottawa: North-South Institute, 2000.


165

CCIC (Canadian Council for International Cooperation). 2003. Internationaldevelopment community applauds foreign aid increases. CCIC,http://www.ccic.ca/e/archives/flash_20030228.shtml (accessed 14 March2003).

Chossudovsky, M. 1997. The globalization of poverty: Impacts of IMF andWorld Bank reforms. London: Zed Books.

CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency). 1999. CIDA 's policy ongender equality. CIDA, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/INET/IMAGES.NSF/vLUlmages/Policy/$file/GENDER-E.pdf(accessed 4 November 2007).

CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency). 2006. Statistical reporton official development assistance fiscal year 2004-2005. CIDA,http://www.acdi-cida.gc. ca/INET/IMAGES .NSF/vLUImages/stats/$file/Stat rap_04-05.pdf (accessed 15 November 2007).

CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency). 2007. Results-basedmanagement in CIDA: An introductory guide to the concepts and principles.CIDA, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/CIDAWEB/acdicida.nsf/En/EMA-218132656-PPK (accessed 4 November 2007).

Goetz, A. M. 1997. Introduction. In Getting the institutions right for women indevelopment, ed. A. M. Goetz, 1-30. New York: Zed Books.

Jahan, R. 1995. The elusive agenda: Mainstreaming women in development.London: Zed Books.

Kabeer, N. 1994. Reversed realities: Gender hierarchies in developmentthought. London: Verso.

Lawrence, W. 1998. Gender mainstreaming: reflections on experience in CIDA.In CIDA, Gender equality news - November 1998 edition, http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/cida ind.nsf/vLUallDocByIDEn/8700C460E686FBE98525693B0083 1F3 I?OpenDocument (accessed 30 November 2000).

Moser, C., A. Tornqvist, and B. van Bronkhorst. 1999. Mainstreaming genderand development in the World Bank: Progress and recommendations.Washington, DC: World Bank.

Pettman, J. J. 1996. Worlding women: A feminist international politics. London:Routledge.

Psacharopoulos, G. 1995. Directions in development: Building human capital


166

.br better lives. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Randel, J., T. German, and D. Ewing. 2000. The reality of aid. London:Earthscan.

Rankin, K. 2001. Governing development: neoliberalism, microcredit, andrational economic woman. Economy and Society 30(1): 18-37.

Razavi, S., and C. Miller. 1995: From WID to GAD. Conceptual shifts in thewomen and development discourse. Geneva: UNRISD (United NationsResearch Institute for Social Development).

Sadli, S., and M. Porter. 1999. Importing/applying western feminism: Awomen's studies university linkage project. Women s Studies InternationalForum 22(4): 441-9.

Samoff, J. 1999. Institutionalizing international influence. In Comparativeeducation: The dialectic of the global and the local, ed. R. F. Arnove and C. A.Torres, 51-89. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Sparr, P. 1994. Mortgaging women s lives: Feminist critiques of structuraladjustment. London: Zed Books.

Tsikata, D., and J. Kerr. 2000. Introduction. In Demanding dignity. Womenconfronting economic reforms in Africa, ed. J. Kerr and D. Tsikata, 1-44.Ottawa: North-South Institute.

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 1999. Human developmentreport, 1. Cary, NC: Oxford University Press. Quoted in M. Wilson and E.Whitmore, Seeds of fire: Social development in an era of globalism, 15,Halifax, NS: Fernwood, 2000.

Wilson, M., and E. Whitmore. 2000. Seeds offire: Social development in an eraof globalism. Halifax, NS: Fernwood.

World Bank. 1994. Enhancing women's participation in economicdevelopment: World Bank policy paper. Washington, DC: World Bank.

World Bank. 1995a. Advancing gender equality: From concept to action.Washington, DC: World Bank.

World Bank. 1995b. Toward gender equality: The role of public policy.Development in Practice series. Washington, DC: World Bank.


167

World Bank. 1998. A World Bank policy research report. Assessing aid: Whatworks, what doesn't, and why. Washington, DC: Oxford University Press.

World Bank. 2001. Engendering development through gender equality inrights, resources and voice: A World Bank policy research report. Washington,DC: World Bank.

Young, K. 1997. Planning from a gender perspective. In The women, genderand development reader, ed. N. Visvanathan, L. Duggan, L. Nisonoff, and N.Wiegersma, 366-74. London: Zed Books.

Spanish Abstract

RETORICA Y REALIDAD: BANCO MUNDIAL Y POLITICAS DEGINERO DE LA CIDA

Jennifer Hales

El panorama que pinta el Banco Mundial es optimista: los estdindares de vidason mds altos que nunca, la humanidad estd progresando, y la situaci6n estdmejorando para las mujeres. Si este es realmente el caso, entonces ipor qu6contin(ia 'el empobrecimiento de cientos de millones de personas' en todo elmundo (Chossudovsky 1997, 33)? i,Por qu6 continfian en aumento 'lasdisparidades entre pobres y ricos, entre y dentro de los paises' (Wilson yWhitmore 2000, 15)? jY por qua, en medio de un aumento global de laconciencia que tienen los grupos feministas y los grupos de derechos de lasmujeres sobre el estado actual de los derechos de las mujeres, 'las mujeres son... abrumadoramente, las mds pobres de las pobres' (Pettman 1996, 15)? ,Porqu& existe esta contradicci6n? ,Las politicas de desarrollo y de g6nero de lasagencias intemacionales de desarrollo simplemente responden a ]a ret6rica,sirven para enmascarar las realidades de la pobreza mientras simultAneamenteesconden y estimulan otra agenda?

Este articulo discute como una agenda econ6mica neoliberal, usualmenteoculta dentro de una ret6rica institucional de poderosas institucionesinternacionales de desarrollo como el Banco Mundial, puede limitar e inclusoimpedir un avance de sus metas proclamadas, de alcanzar la igualdad ypromover los derechos de las mujeres.

La primera secci6n del articulo constituye un andlisis del abordaje delBanco Mundial sobre la igualdad de g6neros (1994; 1995a; 1995b; 1998; 2001)y su subrayada agenda econ6mica neoliberal.


168

Entender las tendencias neoliberales de las politicas del Banco Mundial,permitiri una critica mds efectiva de las politicas de otras organizaciones, talescomo la Agencia de Desarrollo Canadiense (Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency - CIDA). La segunda secci6n consiste en un andlisis deldocumento de g6nero de la CIDA, la Policy on Gender Equality ([Politica sobreIgualdad de G6nero] (CIDA 1999). Mientras que la politica de g6nero de laCIDA es comprensiva, contiene elementos que pueden indicar la presencia deuna agenda 'oculta' y una complicidad con la ideologia del Banco Mundial. Latercera secci6n se refiere a las politicas de g6nero de organizacionesinternacionales de desarrollo mds pequefias y a nivel local, y el rol que puedendesempefiar en reforzar, explicita o implicitamente, una agenda neoliberal.

Esta secci6n estd compuesta por una lista de preguntas a las cuales estasorganizaciones pueden referirse en su andilisis, y por una critica y revisi6n delabordaje de ]a igualdad de g6nero. Como lo muestra el andlisis de las politicasde g6nero del Banco Mundial desde 1995 hasta el afho 2001, mientras que laret6rica de las politicas cambi6 en algo, el paradigma neoliberal subyacente yla agenda econ6mica permanecen intactos. La politica de la CIDA contieneelementos que indican la existencia de un paradigma similar en su agenda.Como tal, su visi6n sobre la igualdad de g6nero puede responder meramente auna ret6rica, proporcionando 6nicamente 'un semblante de compromiso para elcambio social' (Chossudovsky 1997, 43). El Banco Mundial y la CIDA debenresponsabilizarse por los cambios institucionales dentro de sus propiasorganizaciones y por una autocritica continuada en torno a sus premisas,creencias, prioridades, metas y prdcticas. Las organizaciones y ONG locales,mAs pequefias, tambi6n juegan un rol necesario en la critica de sus propiaspoliticas y prdicticas, asi como en la critica de aquellas agencias multilateralesy bilaterales. Si no intentamos cambiar la agenda econ6mica neoliberal de lasorganizaciones internacionales de desarrollo, Zc6mo podrdn ser totalmentesatisfechos las necesidades, intereses y derechos de las mujeres a los cualesdicen servir las politicas de dichas organizaciones? Como lo establece tanclaramente Pamela Sparr: 'Mientras que la orientaci6n al libre mercadopermanezca siendo la precondici6n critica y todos acepten esta premisa, lasinstituciones no se comprometerdn al didlogo transformativo que las feministaspretenden' (1994, 35).


169

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: Rhetoric and Reality: World Bank and CIDA GenderPolicies

SOURCE: Convergence 40 no1/2 2007

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and itis reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article inviolation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher:http://www.web.net/icae/

Rhetoric and Reality World Bank and CIDA Gender Policies

Documents

inherent power

oxford university

structural

economic policy

international

appropriating

based management

neoliberal