Baltenweck, Isabelle

Galiè, Alessandra

Kinati, Wole

Mora Benard, María Alejandra

Mulema, Annet A.

Ochago, Robert

Rijke, E.

Specht, I.

Tafesse, S.

CGSpace (CGIAR)

Gender capacity assessment and development in four Livestock and Fish value chain countries: Ethiopia, Uganda, Tanzania and Nicaragua Annet A. Mulema, Shiferaw Tafesse, Alessandra Galie, Isabelle Baltenweck, Wole Kinati, Mora Benard Alejandra, Robert Ochago, Els Rijke, Irma SpechtILRI Capacity Development Week, 14-17 December 2015Outline of the presentation• Why  gender capacity assessment?• Framework for gender capacity assessment • Levels of analysis of gender capacities • Tools used to assess gender capacities• Number of research and development organizations per country • Major findings • Conclusions • The way forward Why gender capacity assessment of partners?• Identifies gender capacity gaps in a project, program, organization and along the value chains • Provides a starting point for working on a gender capacity development response strategy• Identifies opportunities for resource investment (human and financial)Why gender capacity assessment? Cont…• Identifies opportunities for working with partners on gender capacity development• Establishes baselines and indicators for M&E of capacity developmentThree-dimensional framework for gender CANational policies, rules and legislation, regulations, power relations and social normsInternal policies, arrangements, procedures and frameworks allowing an organization to operate and deliver on its mandateSkills, experience, knowledge, leadership and motivation of peopleThree levels of analysis of capacity for gender integrationNumber of  research and development partners assessed by country in 2014-2015 Type of organizations Ethiopia Tanzania Nicaragua Uganda TotalsResearch 3 2 2 1 7Development 3 5 5 6 17Totals 6 7 7 7 24FGD and questionnaire for organizations1Key informant interviews for enabling environment3Questionnaires for individual staff members29 Facilitated self assessment9 Management and key staff of the organization9 Assessment was made for each partner organization individually 9 Step-by-step analysis of core gender capacity, discussion and clarification9 Scoring on parameters and detailed questions for both quantitative and qualitative data9 Scoring on parameters and optional comments9 Prioritizing capacities for CD9 Print out forms or google forms9 After FGD with organizations9 For gender experts who have substantial experience and strong knowledge about national policies related to gender 9 Group interviews 9 No scoringThree tools used to assess gender capacityScoring the capacities• 1= Very Low: No evidence or only anecdotal evidence of the gender capacity• 2= Low: Gender capacity exists but has not been developed  • 3= Medium: Gender capacity exists and is under development or partially developed• 4= High: Gender capacity exists, is widespread, but not comprehensive, further development is planned or needed• 5= Very High: Gender capacity exists and is fully developed and integrated into the organization – no more capacity development neededScores are entered next to the question. The comments should be entered next to the parameter. Major FindingsOverall findings in the four  countries • The governments of Nicaragua and Ethiopia have relatively well-developed and specific gender policies• Comparing our partners in the four countries, those from Nicaragua stand out with the best-developed gender capacities. • Nicaragua partners have an overall average score of 3.2 (out of 5), compared to Tanzania (2.2), Uganda (1.9), and Ethiopia (1.8).Overall findings…• Development partners score higher on all core gender capacities than research partners in each country • Organizational ‘interest in and commitment’ to support ‘gender and leadership’ scored highest not matched by actual capacity• The capacity for ‘innovation in gender responsive approaches’ is the least developed. Overall core gender capacities of all partners in the four countries Organizational core gender capacities of research and development partners in Ethiopia 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.62.11.42.1 2.21.6 1.52.31.41.8 1.61.71.621.3Gender analysisand strategicplanningGenderresponsiveprogramming,budgeting, andimplementationKnowledgemanagement andgenderresponsive M&EEffectivepartnerships andadvocacy onpromoting genderequalityGender andleadershipInnovation ingenderresponsiveapproaches NRPDevAverageIndividual core gender capacities of research and development partners in Ethiopia 2 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.72.2 2.3 2.22.4 2.31.71.81.8 21.91.91.7Gender analysisand strategicplanningGenderresponsiveprogramming,budgeting, andimplementationKnowledgemanagement andgender responsiveM&EEffectivepartnerships andadvocacy onpromoting genderequalityGender andleadershipInnovation ingender responsiveapproaches NRPDevAverage• Within and between partners in the four countries, there are substantial differences in capacity• As conditions vary widely across partners in the four countries, partner-specific recommendations for capacity development have to be made. • Overall, development partners score higher on all core gender capacities.• A supportive institutional environment contributes to better developed capacityConclusions• Share results and discuss interventions with partners who participated in the assessment• Design and implement country-specific gender capacity development interventions for both research and development  partners • Measuring outcomes of the gender capacity development interventions The way forward: Developing the capacity of research and development partners Information sources• ILRI and Transition International. 2015. Gender Capacity Assessment and Development Guide. ILRI.• http://livestock-fish.wikispaces.com/capdevThis work is financed by Livestock and Fish CGIAR research programIt is implemented in a partnership with CIAT and ICARDAAcknowledgementsAcknowledgements• Special thanks to:– The country teams: Barbara Rischkowsky and  Aynalem Haile (ICARDA), Emily Ouma and Amos Omore (ILRI)– The national researchers  and development partners who participated in the assessment– Diana Brandes, Millicent Liani and Violet BarasaContact persons • Annet A. Mulema (A.Mulema@cgiar.org) • Alessandra Galie' (A.Galie@cgiar.org)The presentation has a Creative Commons licence. You are free to re-use or distribute this work, provided credit is given to ILRI.better lives through livestockilri.org

Gender capacity assessment and development in four Livestock and Fish value chain countries: Ethiopia, Uganda, Tanzania and Nicaragua

https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/10568/69405/1/capdev_mulema_Dec2015.pdf

Gender capacity assessment and development in four Livestock and Fish value chain countries: Ethiopia, Uganda, Tanzania and Nicaragua

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CGSpace (CGIAR)