Ownership and Women's Organisations Participation

INPUTS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE ROUND TABLE 1 ON DEMOCRATIC OWNERSHIP 3rd HIGH LEVEL FORUM – ACCRA 2008

BRIEF ISSUE PAPER ON COUNTRY OWNERSHIP AND GENDER EQUALITY 1. Introduction The 3rd High Level Forum that will take place in Accra in September 2008 will have 9 Roundtables (RT), providing space for in-depth dialogue on selected topics. This Brief Issue Paper was prepared by a group of women’s rights organisations: DAWN, WIDE, AWID, and FEMNET1, to give inputs for the preparation of the Roundtable 1 on Country Ownership.

This document provides a brief review of some of the concerns highlighted by women’s rights organisations related to the implementation of the Paris Declaration Principle on Country Ownership; it also introduces proposals and key questions for the discussion of the RT 1 on how to promote further harmonisation of the so-called cross-cutting issues, specifically in terms of gender equality and women’s empowerment; and finally it presents a list of possible speakers to be considered in the design of the RT. 2. Challenges for the implementation of the Country Ownership principle from the women’s rights perspective Challenge 1: Gender Equality and women’s empowerment as cross cutting issues within the PD risk to be marginalised in development processes The Generic ToRs for the Roundtables2 integrates the so-called cross-cutting issues (also called the Dublin Issues)3. As per the Dublin + 1 Workshop, the use of the term ”crosscutting issue” to describe these cornerstones of development, is being replaced by ”policy priority issue” or ”central goals to development”, as the continued use of the term ”crosscutting” was furthering their marginalisation.4 From the civil society perspective5 and particularly the women’s rights and women empowerment organisations, environmental standards, gender equality and women’s empowerment and human rights are not parallel

1

This Brief Issue Paper was coordinated by Gigi Francisco (DAWN), with contributions from Nerea Craviotto (WIDE), Therese Nyondiko (FEMNET), Cecilia Alemany, Fernanda Hopenhaym and Michele Knab (AWID).

2 OECD Roundtables Generic Terms of Reference, December 17, 2007.

3 GENDERNET organized a first workshop to discuss the so-called cross-cutting issues in Dublin in 2007 and this meeting was a turning point on the so-called cross-cutting issues discussion. The key messages from the Dublin workshop were: Gender equality, human rights and environmental sustainability: are fundamental cornerstones for achieving good development results; can be advanced through implementing the principles and partnership commitments of the Paris Declaration; and must be harnessed to advance the implementation of the Paris Declaration. In 2008, DFID and Gendernet followed this initiative in the Dublin + 1 workshop, on March 12 and 13 in London.

4 Irish Aid, Joint Assistance Strategies Brief.

5 See the position paper prepared by the International Steering Group (ISG) in April 2008 as an input to the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA) preparation process and sent to the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness, as well as the Recommendations from the Advisory Group on Civil Society and Aid Effectiveness.

1

debates of the aid and development policies, but central development goals. 6 In this sense, it is also important to highlight that the women’s rights organisations refer to gender equality and women’s empowerment and not only to the concept of gender as it was suggested in all the documents related to the Accra preparation process. We strongly suggest the Co-chairs so to integrate the perspective of gender equality and women’s empowerment in the current ToRs, as well as in the discussions of the RT1, instead of using the term gender alone. This is because the current definition of gender doesn’t recognize the existing inequalities between genders and the need to focus on development outcomes that will promote gender equality and women’s empowerment.

This input is informed by the perspective that the Paris Declaration (PD) constitutes but one particular technical modality in aid management which is viewed in correspondance with other aid modalities, sources of financing and persistent systemic issues within the larger context of financing for development and development cooperation. Moreover, such a view holds that efforts must be expended to make the PD, together with the other aid modalities, accountable to the more encompassing multilateral platform of the United Nations in order to have a more balanced development agenda and practice.

Challenge 2: Country Ownership is applicable to both donor and recipient countries and democratic ownership, transparency and accountability are relevant to both sets of countries.

Although it is recognized that country ownership as a principle of the PD strongly emerged from the advocacy by partner countries, its relevance to donor countries is as obvious and critical. Nevertheless, the section on country ownership in the Paris Declaration fails to spell out any obligation that donor countries must deliver on, beyond the current donor country commitment to “Respect partner country leadership and help strengthen their capacity to exercise it.” Glaringly absent from the PD is the ownership by donor countries of their longstanding 0.7 share of ODA commitment to the international community. Instead there is a single overarching indicator for country ownership which concerns the need for partner countries to have operational development strategies with clear priorities and annual budgets linked to a medium-term expenditure framework. Moreover, the issue of divergence of country development agendas between donor and partner countries is not addressed.

An enlarged view of country ownership that moves beyond aid management technicalities and where the principles of democracy, transparency and accountability are key, points to the need for integrating indicators and measures that will ensure that donor and partner countries behave in democratic, transparent and accountable ways in relation to aid management, including delivering on and being held accountable for actual amounts of aid that has been pledged.

The report Financing Development 2008: Whose Ownership? published by the OECD Development Center7 recognizes that ”broad participation in policy design is a crucial

6

See the Recommendations from the International Consultation of Women’s Organisations and Networks and Aid Effectiveness organized by the Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID), Women in Development Europe (WIDE) in Ottawa at the end of January 2008. Download from: http://www.awid.org/go.php?pg=ottawa_recommendations 7 OECD Development Center Studies, Financing Development 2008: Whose Ownership?, May, 2008, pp. 30.

2

determinant of ownership in practice and deserves closer monitoring” and suggests to use the definition of Participatory Ownership.

On the other hand, the International Steering Group (ISG)8 proposed to integrate the concept of democratic ownership in Accra, as a way to introduce the participatory approach and broad the definition used in the PD, as it follows: ‘Ownership’ should be understood as democratic ownership, which means that citizens’ voices and concerns must be central to national, regional and local development plans and processes, through legitimate and open mechanisms involving parliaments and civil society, including women’s organizations. This needs to be explicitly stated and reflected throughout the AAA, which should deepen commitments to democratic ownership of the development process, by developing indicators and measuring the participation of citizens, civil society and parliaments in deciding, planning, implementing and assessing national plans, policies, programmes and budgets. Donors must recognize that policy conditionality undermines democratic ownership.

We support this definition, adding that a particular concern for women’s rights organizations everywhere is how gender equality and women’s empowerment goals and measures are integrated in development plans of both donor and partner countries. Inconsistencies may exist in donor country policies, namely, between home-based financing policies on gender equality and women’s empowerment, including public expenditure for social welfare, as well as external aid policies that target gender equality and women’s empowerment goals and outcomes in partner countries. Measures must be put in place that allow for broad and inclusive in-country reviews and monitoring of development agendas and government spending, including the giving and receiving of aid. Supporting women’s rights organizations and civil society organizations to engage more effectively as government watch-dogs may lead to more vibrant national policy spaces for both donor and partner countries and contributes to realizing country ownership as both a condition and a goal of aid effectiveness within the PD.

Challenge 3: Inclusive and participatory development policy dialogues that determine the pace and direction of development needs to take place at national, regional and multilateral spaces.

The PD is not a development package nor is it about financing development. Rather it is a very specific aid management framework and modality. It is important that the international community and all stakeholders understand that the PD needs to be engaged with, used and assessed from a platform where broader development policy dialogues take place.

There are several experiences around the world that show that building multistakeholder spaces and processes deliver better development results, more aid effectiveness and a sustainable consensus that is broadly supported, the role of women’s rights and empowerment organizations has been crucial to put gender equality at the center of national debates around poverty and inequalities reduction and building development and inclusive strategies.

8

See the position paper prepared by the International Steering Group (ISG) in April 2008 as an input to the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA) preparation process and sent to the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness, as well as the Recommendations from the Advisory Group on Civil Society and Aid Effectiveness.

3

Kenya An analysis of Kenyaʼs PRSP for 2001-2004 developed by FEMNET9 finds no detailed analysis of the gender dimensions of proposed policies in the PRSP, or anticipation of gender implications of the outcomes. FEMNET highlights also that: with respect to “local ownership” there are real problems from the donor side in terms of envisaging what this is intended to mean beyond the PRSP process. Within the PRSP process itself, there are real problems for civil society and government in terms of follow through and implementation. 10 This is the reason why harmonization, alignement and democratic ownership are so related, and a good practice example on harmonization to build development effectiveness needs to build on real democratic ownership.

In Kenya11 the division of labour between donors is being implemented for financing gender equality under the Kenya Joint Assistance Strategy (KJAS) for the period 2008-2012 in application of the Paris Declaration. The KJAS recognises gender equality as separate sector and as a cross-cutting issue, and commits to finance gender equality through a basket fund.

JASs are supposed to be aligned with national priorities and PRSPs and if not it could be a way to strength conditionalities. Apparently there are positive expectations on how the current KJAS integrates gender equality even if the experience with recent PRSPs process is not so positive. In 2006, the Kenya Government adopted a National Policy on Gender and Development, as a result of a long process where civil society and womenʼs organizations played a core role. However, funding for gender equality work tended to be small, shortterm, unpredictable and uncoordinated, and the Gender Sector Working Group highlights a need for long-terms programmatic approaches.

Increasing the capacity of national women’s machineries, women’s organizations, gender advocates, and women parliamentarians in engaging meaningfully in development policy dialogues needs to be supported. This is true not only for partner countries, as in the case of Kenya, but also for donor countries and multilateral institutions where women’s rights, gender equality and women’s empowerment setting and financing are being mainstreamed and in some cases evaporating from larger development agendas and financing packages.

Having active and effective advocacy and lobbying by women’s organizations will ensure that a global consensus around a gender responsive and sustainable development agenda that is attached to effective aid management practices is increasingly achieved, regularly negotiated and their realization at local and national spheres proactively led by countries and other multi-stakeholders.

9

Were, Maureen and Kiringai, Jane, Gender Mainstreaming in Macroeconomic Policies and Poverty Reduction Strategy in Kenya. The African Women's Development and Communication Network (FEMNET): Nairobi, Kenya.

10 Implementing the Paris Declaration: A Southern Civil Society Experience. An Address by L. Muthoni Wanyeki, FEMNET, Kenya, A Workshop Sponsored by the Canadian Council for International Cooperation, Ottawa, May 25, 2006.

11 Division of labour in practice: responding to Paris Declaration principles and a model for financing gender equality in Kenya, Case Study, presentation by CIDA and UNIFEM, Dublin + 1 workshop, March, 2008.

4

3. Key questions to the discussion of the RT and possible commitments •

• •

•

•

The PD is but one of several aid management modalities and needs to be discussed in the context of the larger framework of financing for development and development cooperation that ensures the participation of different stakeholders.

The pace and content of development must be country led but should be carried out in a democratic, transparent and accountable manner.

The principle of country ownership is applicable to both donor and partner countries but currently it has a singular and limited indicator that glosses over the complexities within and beneath the concept.

The principle of ownership has to be extended to democratic ownership or integrate the perspective of multistakeholder processes and participatory approaches to integrate the different development actors.

Capacities of women’s organizations, national women’s machineries, gender advocates, and women parliamentarians need to be supported in a regular and predictable way so that they can meaningfully engage in development policy dialogues.

Proposals for possible commitments The PD must be evaluated and reviewed in the context of a larger discussion of financing for development and development cooperation and within a more democratic platform of the United Nations.

Possible commitments related to Ownership to be considered in Accra from the women’s rights and women’s empowerment perspective12 are: - Donors and governments should deliver on their commitments to international human rights frameworks and key agreements on women’s rights and development, such as the Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the MDGs. - Donor countries must include an indicator for their 0.7 ODA commitment.

- Donors must recognize that policy conditionality undermines democratic ownership.

- Donor and developing country governments must promote women’s rights organizations in different decision-making processes and donors’ policy planning, including in the Development Assistance Committee (DAC).

- The AAA, should deepen commitments to democratic ownership of the development process, by developing indicators and measuring the participation of citizens, civil society and parliaments in deciding, planning, implementing and assessing national plans, policies, programmes and budgets.

12

Recommendations of the International Consultation of Women’s Organizations and Networks and Aid Effectiveness, organized by the Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID), Women in st st Development Europe (WIDE) and UNIFEM, Ottawa January 31 and February 1 , 2008.

5

- The OECD-DAC Working Party on Aid Effectiveness must promote a multi-stakeholder review of the monitoring system for the PD that includes the engagement of CSOs and women’s rights and women’s empowerment organizations. The principle of Ownership should include other indicators such as qualitative information that could easily be measured: checking if the Parliaments have a sanction role related to the PRSPs and National Development Plans (NDP), checking if there is CSO participation in the preparation process of the PRSPs and NDP, and checking if CSOs are part of the formal mechanisms to monitor these policies or not.

List of suggested speakers to consider on the design of the RT1: - Josefa "Gigi" Francisco is the Southeast Asia Regional Coordinator for the Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN) and the Asia Coordinator of the International Gender and Trade Network. Ms. Francisco who finished her graduate studies in International Studies has written several articles on various issues arising from the women's movements engagement with global governance institutions. She is adviser to several civil society organizations and women's networks in the Philipines and Asia and presently heads the International Studies Department at Miriam College in Manila.

- Mariama Williams is an international economics consultant and an Adjunct Associate at the Center of Concern, Washington, D.C. She is also the Research Adviser for the International Gender and Trade Network. Williams is a member of Development Alternative with Women for a New Era (DAWN) and Member of the Board of the Association for Women's Rights and Development (AWID) and a Director of the Institute for Law and Economics (Kingston, Jamaica). Williams is a consultant on gender and trade to the Commonwealth Secretariat, London, and a member of the Gender, Globalization, and Democratization Scientific Research Committee of the International Social Science council and the International Working Group on Engendering Macroeconomics and International Trade.

- Marina Durano is an international economist who until recently was the Programme Specialist, Economic Security and Rights at UNIFEM in New York. She is associated with the International Gender and Trade Network, Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era, and the Women and Gender Institute at Miriam College in Manila. She is the coordinator of the 2008 Asia Summer School on Gender and Macroeconomics of the Heinrich Boll Foundation In the past, Ms. Durano has been Visiting Specialist at the United Nations Economic Cultural and Social Commission for the Asia Pacific, Visiting Researcher at the Center of Concern in Washington DC, and senior lecturer in Economics at the University of the Philippines.

- Gita Sen is a professor in Economics and Social Sciences at the Indian Institute of Management and Business in Bangalore and an Adjunct Professor, Department of Population and International Health, Harvard School of Public Health. A founding member of the Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era, she sits in various International Advisory Boards including the United Nations Development Programme, Institute for Development Studies in Sussex, and the United Nations Research Institute on Social Development. Earlier she was Professor at the Center for Population and Development Studies, Harvard University; Vassar College, NY; and a Fellow (Professor) at the Center for Development Studies, Trivandrum.

- Thérèse Nyondiko, Executive Director, African Women’s Development and Communication Network (FEMNET) in Nairobi Kenya. She is a Burundian and holds a Masters Degree in Communications Management from Coventry University, School of Engineering in the UK. She also holds a BA in Agricultural Economics from the University of Burundi specializing in Project management. Her professional experience includes telecommunications and ICTs, financial management, strategic planning, fundraising, conceptualisation, management and Project’s monitoring and evaluation.

She worked also as a Freelance Consultant with UN development partners working in Burundi including FAO, World Bank and international NGOs. She is a Member of the former Working Group on Gender Issues (WGGI) of International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a former member of the Executive Committee of the Collective of Burundian Women’s Associations (CAFOB).

6