‘They will listen to women who speak but it ends there’: examining empowerment in the context of water and sanitation interventions in Ghana

Dery, Florence; Bisung, Elijah; Dickin, Sarah; Atengdem, Jeremiah

doi:10.2166/h2oj.2021.100

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Either women are not heard, “women and girls may be at a discussion, but we really need to ask questions about whether they are actually heard” (Participant D: Academia, Man) , or their suggestions are not counted “They will listen to women who speak, but it ends there. Mostly, they do not work with what was voiced out” (Dery et al., 2021, p. 240). Tokenistic engagement is not peculiar to WASH; public and political arenas use women in political power to signify progress, yet in reality this can disempower individuals due to lack of real power (Ebohon, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of gender inclusion in Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) projects: Intention vs. reality

Robinson

Barrington

Evans

et al. 2024

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MotivationGender equality is inherently bound with Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) provision, access, and usage. Gender shapes experiences of projects and services, from participation in design, to ensuring access to appropriate facilities. Many writers call for active attention to gender throughout the project cycle, but there is little evidence of the extent to which this happens in practice.PurposeThe article examines the extent to which evaluations of WASH implementation identify good gender‐inclusive practices. It explores the reasons for failings, and suggests ways gender equality could be more actively considered and effected in WASH programming.Methods and approachTextual analysis was undertaken on World Bank and UNICEF project evaluation documents to identify how gendered elements were addressed. Practices were then categorized according to a Gender Sensitivity Framework, rating these on a sliding scale measure from “gender insensitive” to “transformative.” The perceived barriers to gendered programming were subsequently triangulated using a mixed‐methods survey of WASH practitioners which used self‐identified challenges to assess consensus moderation to triangulate perceived barriers to gendered programming.FindingsLack of clarity in conceptualizing gender results in poorly defined targets that are often insufficiently context‐specific. Consequently, project objectives are either reductionist, limiting progress on “gender” to easily quantifiable measures that fail to capture the varied lived realities of gendered experiences, or comprise vague qualitative statements that cannot be accurately assessed, rendering gender inclusion unaddressed.Policy implicationsGender is a social construct which is shaped by culture. Context‐specific understanding would support more nuanced gender‐inclusion objectives that could be monitored while also correlating to people's lived realities. Regular evaluation of gender guidance would ensure organizations’ understanding and conceptualization of gender reflects the fluidity of society. Policy and practice interventions which guarantee the active involvement of multiple stakeholders and diverse voices would ensure that implementation is effective and evaluation is more accurate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%