水、环境卫生和个人卫生(WASH)项目中的性别包容分析:意图与现实

IF 2 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Hannah Jayne Robinson, Dani Barrington, Barbara Evans, Paul Hutchings, Lata Narayanaswamy
{"title":"水、环境卫生和个人卫生(WASH)项目中的性别包容分析:意图与现实","authors":"Hannah Jayne Robinson,&nbsp;Dani Barrington,&nbsp;Barbara Evans,&nbsp;Paul Hutchings,&nbsp;Lata Narayanaswamy","doi":"10.1111/dpr.12741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>Gender equality is inherently bound with Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) provision, access, and use. Gender shapes experiences of projects and services, from participation in design to ensuring access to appropriate facilities. Many observers call for active attention to gender throughout the project cycle, but there is little evidence of the extent to which this happens in practice.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>The 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.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\n \n <p>Textual 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 them 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.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Lack 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, leaving gender inclusion unaddressed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>Gender is a social construct that is shaped by culture. Context-specific understanding would support more nuanced gender-inclusion objectives that could be monitored while also correlating with 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 that guarantee the active involvement of multiple stakeholders and diverse voices would ensure that implementation is effective and evaluation is more accurate.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12741","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An analysis of gender inclusion in Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) projects: Intention vs. reality\",\"authors\":\"Hannah Jayne Robinson,&nbsp;Dani Barrington,&nbsp;Barbara Evans,&nbsp;Paul Hutchings,&nbsp;Lata Narayanaswamy\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dpr.12741\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Motivation</h3>\\n \\n <p>Gender equality is inherently bound with Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) provision, access, and use. Gender shapes experiences of projects and services, from participation in design to ensuring access to appropriate facilities. Many observers call for active attention to gender throughout the project cycle, but there is little evidence of the extent to which this happens in practice.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>The 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.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\\n \\n <p>Textual 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 them 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.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>Lack 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, leaving gender inclusion unaddressed.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Gender is a social construct that is shaped by culture. Context-specific understanding would support more nuanced gender-inclusion objectives that could be monitored while also correlating with 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 that guarantee the active involvement of multiple stakeholders and diverse voices would ensure that implementation is effective and evaluation is more accurate.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12741\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12741\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12741","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

两性平等与水、环境卫生和个人卫生(WASH)的提供、获取和使用有着内在的联系。性别塑造了项目和服务的经验,从参与设计到确保获得适当设施。许多作者呼吁在整个项目周期内积极关注性别问题,但几乎没有证据表明这种情况在实践中发生的程度。这篇文章考察了对讲卫生运动实施情况的评估在多大程度上确定了良好的性别包容性做法。它探讨了失败的原因,并提出了如何在讲卫生方案中更积极地考虑和影响性别平等。对世界银行和儿童基金会的项目评价文件进行了文本分析,以确定如何处理性别因素。然后,根据性别敏感性框架对实践进行分类,并以从“性别不敏感”到“变革性”的滑动量表对其进行评级。“随后,通过对讲卫生运动从业者的混合方法调查,对性别规划的感知障碍进行了三角测量,该调查使用自我识别的挑战来评估共识调节,以三角测量性别规划的认知障碍。性别概念缺乏明确性,导致目标定义不清,往往没有充分针对具体情况。因此,项目目标要么是简化主义的,将“性别”方面的进展限制在易于量化的措施上,这些措施无法捕捉到性别经历的各种生活现实,要么包括无法准确评估的模糊定性陈述,从而使性别包容得不到解决。性别是一种由文化塑造的社会结构。具体情况的理解将支持更细微的性别包容目标,这些目标可以得到监测,同时也与人们的生活现实相关联。定期评估性别指导将确保各组织对性别的理解和概念化反映社会的流动性。确保多个利益攸关方和不同声音积极参与的政策和实践干预措施将确保执行工作的有效性和评估的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

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

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

Motivation

Gender equality is inherently bound with Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) provision, access, and use. Gender shapes experiences of projects and services, from participation in design to ensuring access to appropriate facilities. Many observers call for active attention to gender throughout the project cycle, but there is little evidence of the extent to which this happens in practice.

Purpose

The 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 approach

Textual 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 them 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.

Findings

Lack 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, leaving gender inclusion unaddressed.

Policy implications

Gender is a social construct that is shaped by culture. Context-specific understanding would support more nuanced gender-inclusion objectives that could be monitored while also correlating with 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 that guarantee the active involvement of multiple stakeholders and diverse voices would ensure that implementation is effective and evaluation is more accurate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Development Policy Review
Development Policy Review DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信