Appendix 1. Gender analysis in practice
For gathering information to understand the local situation and to fill in the profiles, several participatory tools and research methodologies can be used.
The analysis of influencing factors and trends in the environment focuses on e.g. marginalization, environmental degradation, migration, commercialization, policy changes, sanskritization, etc. These factors can reshape gender relations. Information thereon can be derived from secondary data, interviews, and observation.
A useful tool to get insight in the gender division of labour are time allocation studies (see appendix 2). It can be useful to make a distinction between three categories of work: productive, reproductive and community work. In order to get a full picture additional information on the workload and seasonal changes in it is required. It can be collected through non-participant observation, through informal interviews, and through compiling participatory seasonal calendars (see appendix 2). All this information will reveal the tasks performed by men and women separately. In order to get an understanding of process taking place over longer periods, life histories can be recorded, and village or forest time lines can be made (see appendix 2).
Related with the gender roles are the gender specific needs. Ranking exercises are valuable tools to determine the participants' preferences. During the planning process many choices must be made: which species do we grow, what livestock do we buy, which income generating activities do we want, etc. When such questions arise, the decision can be facilitated by introducing a participatory ranking exercise (see appendix 2).
For assessing access to and control over resources the framework makes two distinctions. Firstly, the difference between access (the opportunity to make use of something) and control (the ability to define its use). E.g. women can have access to cash income, but no control over it. Secondly, a distinction between resources, services, and the benefits derived from their use can be useful. Examples are land, labour, knowledge and skills, employment opportunities, health, control over fertility, income, ownership, etc.
From the activity analysis information regarding access to resources can be derived. From participatory Venn diagrams (appendix 2) an insight in access to actors and social networks can be compiled. From non-participant observations and discussions, an insight in control over resources can be gained.
Regarding the social-political aspects of women's and men's position, it is important to analyze their participation in decision-making in the household, community and society at large, their (self) esteem and organizational capacity. These social-political aspects should be operationalized according to the specific circumstances. E.g. which stereotype-images based on gender exist; how do women conceptualize self-esteem: in terms of literacy, caste, sense of control, acquisition of skills, performance of hard work?
Tools are again participant observation and informal interviews, focusing on the locus of decision-making within the host family and community. Tools to analyze the (self) image of women and men are checklists developed for 'locus of control' studies, which indicate to which extend people think they control their own world or life. Asking respondents to tell folk tails and life histories is another tool. Tools to assess organizational capacity are evaluation of self-organized indigenous organizations (such as for labour sharing and diary collection), and various kinds of games in which the participants have to cooperate.
Referring to assessing people's views and expectations towards the project, considerable time should be spent with the group members or a host family so that first a trust relation is built. Another tool is to share the project's views with women beneficiaries in a workshop where the women outnumber the project staff and set the agenda. Within such a workshop tools like metaplan (appendix 2) can be applicable if the participants are all literate.
Tools to analyze the gender sensitivity of project ideas and institutional arrangements are interviews with key informants within and outside the organization, review of policy papers, project documents, progress reports, and formats for reporting and monitoring. Another tool is to organize workshops with staff members. It is inevitable to screen assumptions, objectives, definition of target group, strategies, approaches, activities, outputs, etc. Are these referring to or stated in gender-specific terms or in general terms?
