Search

Synopsis This article maps an application of gender mainstreaming with the aim of investigating how gender is institutionalised within EU development aid. I consider the case of aid towards Liberia from 2008 to 2013, examining first the extent to which gender was included in policy formulation and implementation. Next I attempt to explain this by analysing institutional inputs and networks at the EU Delegation in Liberia. Based on text analysis and expert interviews, I argue that gender factors were abolished in the actual implementation, despite relative support from the Delegation leaders, and the availability of training and expertise. The largest stumbling block to effective implementation was institutional weakness, represented by the disconnect between formal and informal institutional rules; gendered assumptions at the EU external services constraining the expression of marginalised perspectives; and a gendered double democratic deficit in the power play over which ideas matter and who accumulates resources.

This paper examines gender mainstreaming in European Union (EU) development aid towards Sub-Saharan Africa. The aim is to detect how gender (in)equality in Sub-Saharan Africa is framed by the EU by critically assessing the nature and range of the differences between EU and civil society framings of gender (in)equality in Sub-Saharan Africa. Using the method of Critical Frame Analysis, 28 EU programming documents have been analysed and compared to 10 civil society texts on gender equality. I conclude that the EU’s approach to gender mainstreaming in its development aid towards Sub-Saharan Africa is to a large extent integrationist and predominantly instrumentalist as it is framed as a way of more effectively achieving existing policy goals. The more transformative issues that are put forward by Sub-Saharan African civil society organisations do not t within the EU’s dominant development paradigm that is focused on achieving the Millennium Development Goals and does not signficantly challenge gender relations or power structures. The gap between the analysed civil society views and those expressed by the EU can be explained by the EU’s reluctance to include in its policy drafting the promotion of gender equality by civil society organisations. Moreover, the gap seems to have both practical and ideological grounds. Key words: gender equality, European Union, Sub-Saharan Africa, development policy, civil society, millennium development goals, critical frame analysis

This article examines gender mainstreaming in European Union (EU) development aid toward the European Neighborhood through quantitative and qualitative research of policy documents. The objective is to evaluate whether a shift has been made from a “Women in Development” paradigm to a “Gender and Development” paradigm. First, documents are examined quantitatively, looking at language, format, and budget. Next, the qualitative analysis embarks on a deeper reading of how gender equality is approached. The data indicate that a shift toward the “Gender and Development” paradigm has not been made. The internal European agenda as well as the limited space for civil society are proposed as explanations.

Synopsis This article examines gender mainstreaming in European Commission development aid through quantitative and qualitative analysis of policy documents. The research aim is twofold. First I evaluate whether a genuine shift has been made from a conservative Women in Development paradigm to a transformative Gender and Development paradigm. Secondly I examine whether the European Commission advocates a Europeanness in its gender policy towards developing countries. The quantitative analysis assesses language, format and budgets. Next, qualitative analysis embarks on a deeper reading of how gender (in)equality is approached. I conclude that the shift towards a transformative Gender and Development paradigm has only partly been made and that the Commission promotes a Europeanness in its gender policies, which links the internal and external agenda.

This article examines gender mainstreaming in European Commission (EC) development aid to Asian countries through quantitative and qualitative study of program documents. First, gender mainstreaming is assessed as a set of techniques of policy practice focusing on gender mainstreaming language, its place in policy texts and inclusion in budgets and indicators. Next, it is approached as a philosophy or frame of analysis, evaluating its transformative potential and analyzing how the issue of gender (in)equality is tackled. I conclude that gender mainstreaming in EC-Asian relations has flourished as an expert-bureaucratic tool, but its transformative potential has been neglected. The intra-European Union (EU) agenda, as well as the lack of space for Asian civil society voices, are proposed as explanations.

The Lisbon Treaty considers ‘equality between women and men’ to be among the EU’s core values and objectives (Article 2 of TEU), and since 1997, the EU has committed to integrating gender considerations into all aspects of its operations and policies (now Article 10 TFEU). In its policy documents and public statements, the European Commission frequently stresses that gender equality is a goal in its own right that has been a part of the European project of integration since its inception (MacRae 2010). Given the rich history and growing importance of gender equality in all kinds of policy domains, it is not surprising that observers have stated that the EU stands out among international organizations in its support for gender equality (Debusscher and True 2009). The EU (Commission and member states) is also the world’s largest development aid donor, collectively disbursing 55 per cent of official development assistance globally. In several high-level policy documents, the EU has stressed that gender equality is one of the five essential principles of development cooperation and that it ‘has been increasingly active in promoting gender equality in its external action’ (European Commission 2010: 3).

This chapter critically examines gender mainstreaming in EU development aid to assess whether or not the EU can be considered a leading and distinctive gender actor. To answer this question I will analyse the budget, gendered language and frame of high level policy programming documents. First I evaluate whether a shift has been made from a conservative Women in Development paradigm to a transformative Gender and Development paradigm to determine if the EU lives up to European and international commitments on gender equality and can be considered to be leading by example. Second I examine whether the EU advocates a distinctive ‘Europeanness’ in its gender policy towards developing countries. The chapter concludes that the shift towards a transformative Gender and Development paradigm has only partly been made. Moreover, I argue that rather than a distinctive ‘Europeanness’, the EU’s gender equality approach can be called a patchwork of approaches derived from other international institutions such as the UN or the World Bank. This implies that the EU is not the innovative leading gender power it claims to be.

Among international organisations the European Union (EU) stands out in its support for gender equality. The Lisbon Treaty considers “equality between women and men” among its values and objectives, and since 1996, the EU has committed to integrate gender considerations into all aspects of its operations and policies. The Union (Commission and member states) is also the world’s largest development aid donor, providing 55 percent of official development assistance globally. But to what extent has this been used to advance gender equality goals? Has the EU promoted gender equality in its development policies in a transformative way? Or has the approach towards gender equality in its foreign aid remained rather ‘mainstream’? This paper examines the gender perspective in European Commission (EC) development aid by critically investigating the twin-track strategy. After elaborating on gender equality policies in the EU and in its development policies I delve into the analysis of the financing of measures which directly support women’s empowerment. Next I analyse formal and substantial aspects of gender mainstreaming in EC development aid. The paper concludes that only part of the twin-track strategy is travelling well within EC bureaucracies and that gender policies in EC development policy are realized in an limited, interest-guided and expert-bureaucratic manner. Such an approach severely limits the transformative potential of the twin-track strategy.