A Gender Sensitisation Committee was set up to oversee the management of the two projects and was chaired by the Deputy Permanent Secretary of MAWRD (who later became Permanent Secretary). The Division of Rural Development Planning took the lead role in executing the projects on behalf of the Ministry in collaboration with the Directorate of Extension and Engineering (DEES), and the Division of Agricultural Training. The Deputy Director of Rural Development Planning led the project management team in her role as National Co-ordinator. The Co-ordinator was chosen from within the ranks of the Ministry to reinforce linkages between the projects and the institutional framework.
Two local organisations - ACORD, a non-governmental organisation with expertise in PRA and the Gender Programme of the Social Sciences Division (SSD) of the University of Namibia - were contracted to backstop the PRA, organise the workshops and write the Gender Action Plan in collaboration with the Division of Rural Development. Although the project was mainly implemented under local guidance and with local consultants, limited use was made of international consultants from FAO to carry out the first planning mission and to design and deliver the training programme.
Activities started off in June of 1994 with a mission by an international consultant to do the initial project planning and work with national counterparts to identify constraints within the current extension system and determine who should participate in the training of trainers programme. She and the National Project Co-ordinator also organised and carried out pilot research in two communities to develop training case studies that would be used later on in the training programme.
In October, the FAO trainer arrived. She organised and delivered the first training workshop on the "analysis of difference for agricultural extension". The objective of the workshop was to enhance extension workers' abilities to identify communal farmers' extension priorities, and to understand how these priorities differ by gender, age, wealth, ethnicity and farming system. The focus was on learning how to work with rural people to plan extension interventions using a combination of gender analysis and participatory rural appraisal techniques (GA/PRA).
The participants were a group of 23 agricultural extension technicians who are responsible for the most grassroots level of operations within the extension service. This group had just attended a UNICEF sponsored training workshop where they were introduced to the principles of participatory training, the importance of community participation, and to household food security issues. They had therefore been chosen to participate in the training of trainers programme by the in-service training division of MARWD to build upon what they had just learned and utilise their comprehensive experience to create a core group of trainers for the Ministry. Six of the participants were female.
The workshop used a participatory training methodology based on several kinds of activities, including role plays and games designed to show the participants what the analysis of difference means and why it is important. Through application of the "Gender Analysis Framework: A Training Tool for Agricultural Extension"13 to the two case studies prepared during the first Consultant's mission, the participants learned a step-by-step gender analysis methodology (see table below ).
Through practice sessions during the workshop followed by fieldwork, the participants learned to use 10 different participatory rural appraisal tools. The chart below shows how gender analysis and PRA tools were combined to facilitate learning in the workshop and during the fieldwork.
The GA/PRA Framework
Step of the GA Framework |
Answers the question |
PRA tools |
|
1. The context |
What is getting better? What is getting worse? In terms of the environmental, economic, social and political patterns that support or constrain development. |
Village maps Transect walks Trend diagrams |
|
2. Activities |
Who does what? In terms of the division of labour for productive and reproductive activities. |
24 hour clocks Seasonal diagrams |
|
3. Resources |
Who has what? In terms of access to and control over resources and benefits. |
Venn diagrams Decision-making matrices Income and expenditure matrices |
|
4. Workplan for Success |
What should be done? In terms of delivering extension services that will be sustainable, effective, and equitable. |
Force field analyses Priority matrices |
Trainers from ACORD (an international NGO with many years experience of using PRA in Namibia) were brought in to assist in the PRA training. The ACORD trainers accompanied the trainees on the one-day fieldwork and would later play a crucial role in backstopping the participatory research supported by the two projects.
Despite the fact that many of the trainees showed a great deal of scepticism at the onset, they evaluated the workshop very positively. The most frequently mentioned weakness of the workshop was lack of time, especially during presentation of the PRA tools.
Four regional teams of trainees carried out participatory field research in April of 1995 in nine villages, two each in the four extension regions of the country (see map in Annex 2). As mentioned above, the NGO ACORD was contracted to provide technical support for this activity. Prior to the fieldwork, ACORD organised a workshop to review the PRA tools with the trainees and go over the research plans before departure to the field. It is also important to note here that ACORD also organised a workshop for the trainees supervisors (Chiefs of the various Agricultural Extension Offices) before the PRA exercises were to take place to sensitise them on what the agricultural extension technicians would be doing during the research and gain their support for the activities. Unfortunately, only three of them attended.
The objective of the research was to gather basic information about the agro-ecological features of the area and the perceptions of men and women farmers about their work, their access to resources and their extension needs. The information gathered would be adapted into:
· training case studies for use in the regional training courses under the gender training project and
· regional reports on gender issues in agriculture in Namibia.
The research needed to be completed before the second training of trainers course which was originally scheduled to take place in early June of 1995. This put pressure on the local organisers to carry out the research in a limited time frame. As a result, ACORD faced a major constraint in supporting the activity due to lack of time for proper organisation and technical support to the research teams. Given that the research by different teams had to be carried out simultaneously to meet the time schedule imposed by the project workplan, ACORD could only send one staff person to accompany the teams and guide them in the research.
Another unfortunate logistical problem also arose. The funding for the contract with the Gender Programme of the Social Sciences Department at the University of Namibia (SSD) was not yet available from FAO. This prevented the highly qualified researchers from the University, who were contracted to prepare the regional reports, from being able to participate in the PRA and lend their experience to the process.
Although the research teams received training in how to write up the information in the form of a training case study, they were not given a sufficient amount of time away from their work to be able to do the analysis and writing. This problem was mostly due to the fact that the research teams did not have the necessary support from their Chiefs.
The second training of trainers workshop was held from 10 to 21 July 1995. Most of the first week of the training course was dedicated to going over the data, writing up the training case studies14 and giving presentations on the findings. The researchers from the Gender Programme of the Social Sciences Department at the University of Namibia (SSD) joined the training team on those days to give SSD an opportunity to go over the findings with the research teams and ACORD personnel contributed their knowledge to the review and writing process.
The second week of the workshop was devoted to practising how to run a training session based on the gender analysis framework. Overall the quality of the training was very good. However, it was apparent that the participants' understanding of gender concepts and issues was still not fully developed, and in many instances they had difficulty explaining points when challenged. This meant that the group was not yet ready to train others in gender analysis. Although it had not been planned in the project document, the FAO training Consultants strongly recommended that an additional training of trainers (TOT3) be held for a sub-group of the trainees who had the skills and conceptual understanding required to be good trainers. A third training course would help this group to consolidate their skills in the training methodology, provide them an opportunity to design the regional workshops. This third course was especially needed in order to assure that the trainees had acquired the confidence in themselves that they would need in order to train their peers.
Although the PRA data provided the basis for excellent training case studies representative of Namibia's various farming systems, it became evident during the write up process that the data was not of sufficient quality (or quantity) for the purposes of preparing regional reports on gender issues in agriculture as planned. SSD also faced another problem in writing the regional reports because two major sources of secondary data - the Agricultural Census and the Living Standards Survey - were still being analysed and the results would not be published for some months. In order to recuperate the most from the PRA material to serve the needs of both of the projects, the project management asked SSD to produce final versions of the case studies which needed editing and could be enriched with information from secondary sources.
The training and sensitisation material prepared for the project included:
· four case studies on gender issues in Namibian farming systems (prepared by the research teams with editing and supplemental data provided by SSD);
· an "issues paper" to provide a guide for the debate and discussion in the regional and national level policy workshops (prepared by SSD);
· a video called "Reaping the Harvest" which depicts gender issues in agriculture (produced by a local film-maker using footage from filming done during the PRA activities).
With the PRAs carried out and written up, it was now possible to organise the next phase of activities which involved sharing the information gathered with MAWRD staff and other actors in the agricultural sector and seeking their inputs for the Gender Action Plan. In October of 1995, the National Agricultural Policy was officially approved by Cabinet. Given that the new policy had a considerable "pro-gender" approach the regional and national workshops were also used to raise awareness about the implications of the new Policy.
Activities in this period started with a one-day Sensitisation Workshop to take senior level MAWRD managers through a series of exercises that would help them to reflect on the Ministry's approach to the integration of gender, especially in light of the on-going planning process to develop strategies for the implementation of the Agricultural Policy that all Directorates of MAWRD were involved in. Unfortunately senior level policy makers (Directors) did not attend - they sent their deputies or other staff. The project management team felt that this was really unfortunate because they knew how important it was to involve senior management in this process. They put a request to the Gender Sensitisation Committee to hold another seminar for higher management at the end of the project which was approved.
Five regional workshops were then held in October and November 1995 to:
· raise public awareness of government action to ensure that the National Agricultural Policy is implemented in a gender-sensitive manner;
· identify and elaborate regional perceptions regarding the role of women in farming systems and the means to incorporate gender into planning processes at the regional level; and
· develop gender-sensitive, region specific strategies for implementation of the National Agricultural Policy.
The participants included farmers and farmers' union representatives; government representatives, community leaders and headmen; MAWRD staff, especially from the Division of Extension and Engineering (DEES); NGOs; staff from other Ministries involved in local government and rural development, and staff from the Sustainable Animal Range Development Programme (SARDEP) and the Northern Livestock Development Programme (NOLIDEP). To reinforce learning, the trainees from the gender training project also participated as resource persons.
The National Agricultural Policy and the issues paper prepared by SSD were used as the departure point for the discussions during the regional workshops. The video documentary "Reaping the Harvest" was also shown. Discussions during the workshops focused on gender-sensitive, region specific strategies for each of the eight sections of the National Agricultural Policy, e.g. livestock; veterinary services; pricing and marketing; credit and savings; extension and training; research; technology, labour and inputs; and institutions.
Once the consultative process at the regional level was completed, a national level workshop was held in Windhoek in February 1996 to: (1) review the input from the regions; (2) identify individuals who are responsible for each sector of the Policy; (3) identify existing programmes/projects; (4) analyse gaps between existing programmes and problems; and (4) identify mutually supportive actions which will help fill the gaps between what already exists and what is required.
The final step in the formulation process was to synthesise the regional and national level inputs into an Action Plan for Gender-Sensitive Agricultural Policies and Programmes. The Gender Action Plan sets out to: 1) address the impact of the National Agricultural Policy on women; 2) ensure that the policy meets its stated aims and objectives through recognising the role of women in the processes which the Policy aims to influence and 3) ensure that the goal of equality of opportunity is met. The Plan is divided into sections that parallel those of the National Agricultural Policy. The final draft was published in May of 1996.
Gender Action Plan Formulation Process
Step |
Activity |
1 |
Set up Gender Sensitisation Committee (with Deputy Permanent Secretary as chair) to oversee process. |
2 |
GA/PRA in nine villages to enrich information base for policy analysis. |
3 |
Prepare sensitisation materials (case studies, issue paper, video) |
4 |
One-day sensitisation workshop to solicit MAWRD management inputs for the Plan |
5 |
Five regional workshops held to gather regional level inputs. |
6 |
National workshop |
Outcome |
Action Plan for Gender Sensitive Agricultural Policies and Programmes |
The third training of trainers workshop was held over a two week period in May/June of 1996 for the core group of eight agricultural extension workers selected from the previous training course. The overall objective of the workshop was to give the participants the skills needed to conduct regional training workshops for other extension workers in the "analysis of difference" using the Gender Analysis Framework.
Participants were grouped into regional training teams. A core team of two people was identified for each agricultural region. The main selection criteria were team members' location within the region and knowledge of the region's farming system. Each two person team would be supported by two other trainers in order to have the full range of training skills needed to run regional workshops.
The fact that the trainers graduating from the third TOT would be training extension workers of a similar rank as themselves presented a major challenge. They are likely to encounter resistance to themselves as trainers, as well as the usual resistance associated with gender-focused workshops. Again, the question of support from MAWRD emerged as an issue since a clear endorsement of the relevance of gender analysis, and the regional workshops, to extension activities needed to be given. To address this issue, a second two-day workshop for senior MAWRD management was held just after the third TOT course, this time with the full endorsement of the Permanent Secretary of Agriculture.
The workshop was conducted by the two FAO training consultants who had designed and delivered the TOT course15. There were 32 participants, including the majority of Deputy Directors and Directors of MAWRD. The Permanent Secretary of Agriculture fully participated and provided the opening and closing statements. The Director of Extension and Engineering (also acting Deputy Permanent Secretary) also attended which was crucial for building understanding and support for the extension workers' Regional Workshops.
The overall purpose of the workshop was to build support for the Regional Workshops by introducing management to the gender analysis methodology. The focus of the workshop was on using the Gender Analysis Framework to analyse two of the case studies developed from the PRA data, each of which represented very different communal farming systems. Further, the implications of the gender analysis findings were directly linked to two National Agricultural Policy priorities, namely food security and livestock production.
Despite a great deal of scepticism at the start, the majority of the top management found the training relevant and useful and recommended that similar workshops be held for other ministries and for all field-level workers.
The Regional Training Workshops for Agricultural Extension technicians, which will be conducted by the graduates from the project's training of trainers programme will be held in August of 1997.
Summary of Key Events
Date |
Event |
June 1994 November 1994 April 1995 July 1995 October 1995 Oct.-Nov. 1995 February 1996 April 1996 May 1996 June 1996 August 1997 |
Start up date 1st TOT in Analysis of Difference for Agricultural Extension The PRA Research 2nd TOT Workshop Official Publication of the National Agricultural Policy Regional Gender Planning Workshops National Workshop Draft National Agricultural Strategy circulated Final Draft Gender Action Plan ready 3rd TOT Workshop Regional Training Workshops in the Analysis of Difference for Agricultural Extension |
