|
Gender
research methodologies include the theories and methods employed to conduct
gender research or gender-sensitive research that takes into account the
differing needs and interests of women and men and their unequal
representation through specific design, sampling, analysis and other
criteria.
This
section provides an overview of three common gender research methodologies in
the development field: the gender analysis approach, participatory
research methodologies, and the rights-based approach. Each
overview includes a description; a list of key texts and critiques; and a
list of selected international organizations that have used the approach, either
for research or in policy and programme development.
|
1. Gender Analysis
|
|
A. Description
Gender
Analysis Approaches (or Gender-based Analysis) have been adopted by many
development organizations in order to achieve gender mainstreaming goals.
The Institute for Development Studies has defined gender analysis as: “the
systematic gathering and examination of information on gender differences
and social relations in order to identify, understand and redress
inequities based on gender.” [1] Gender Analysis includes several
different approaches (see 1.1-1.4) that share specific features, such as
sex-disaggregated data and the analysis of women and men’s roles and access
to and control over resources. However, the approaches differ in the degree
to which analysis is extended beyond the sphere of production, the degree
to which they consider other social relations (class, ethnicity, age,
sexuality, etc.), and also in the extent to which they are based on gender
equity principles. [2]
|
|
B. Key Principles
Though
Gender Analysis encompasses various methodologies, they commonly include:
- Consideration of gender throughout the research
process
- Recognition that “gender” does not equal women and
a focus on the social dynamics and power relations between men and
women
- Use of sex-disaggregated data
- Use of qualitative data and other data sources to
complement or supplement quantitative data
- Definition of target groups, survey samples, etc.
to take into consideration the broadest and most diverse population
(including women, men, girls and boys from different social strata,
ethnic groups, etc.) and acknowledging that women are not a single
homogeneous group
- The participation of all actors – not researchers
or development workers – but those affected by the research/policies
in question, NGOs working in similar areas, etc.
- Reflexivity at all stages of the research process
|
|
C.
Main Critiques
- In practice, and especially in the realm of policy,
the focus on “gender” is often confused with an exclusive focus on
women.
- There is some tension over the interpretation of
“gender” by researchers and practitioners in the development field;
specifically, some have critiqued development organizations for
“co-opting” gender (see IDS 2004).
- Bias in the development arena towards
policy-making, meaning that “short-term problem solving and immediate
action” are prioritized over in-depth analytical thinking and
political insight that could produce longer-term, more transformative
change (see Lewis 2004).
- Specific critiques are dependent on the type of
approach used: see critiques of methodologies 1.1-1.4.
|
|
D.
Examples
Different
Gender Analysis approaches (discussed individually below) include:
1.1 Moser/DPU Framework
1.2 Gender Roles/Harvard Framework
1.3 Social Relations Approach
1.4 Longwe/Women’s Empowerment Framework
|
|
E.
International institutions that have used the methodology include
United
Nations (UN), World Bank, CARE, ActionAid, Swedish International
Development Agency (SIDA), Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA), International Labor Organization (ILO), US Agency for International
Development (USAID), Oxfam
|
|
F. Key texts and
critiques
- Kabeer, Naila. 1992. “Triple Roles, Gender Roles,
Social Relations: The Political Subtext of Gender Training.”
Discussion Paper No. 313, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex.
- Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html
- Moser, Caroline O.N. Gender Planning and
Development: Theory, Practice and Training. New York: Routledge, 1993.
- Elson, Diane (ed.). Male Bias in the Development
Process. Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1991. Harding,
Sandra, ed. Feminism and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University,
1987.
- Institute of Development Studies (IDS).
Repositioning Feminisms in Development. IDS Bulletin 35 (4).
University of Sussex. October 2004.
- Kabeer, Naila. Reversed Realities: Gender
Hierarchies in Development Thought. London: Verso, 1994. Lewis,
Desiree. “African Gender Research and Postcoloniality: Legacies and
Challenges.” Council for the Development of Social Science Research in
Africa, Gender Series, Volume 1, November 2004. Available online: www.codesria.org/links/conferences/gender/LEWIS.pdf
- March, Candida, Ines Smyth, and Maitrayee
Mukhopadhyay (1999) A guide to gender-analysis frameworks. Oxfam
Skills and Practices Series.
- Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
Alternative Paradigms.” UNDP. Available online: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html
- Moser, Caroline. Gender Planning and Development:
Theory, Practice and Training. Routledge, London, 1993. Sen, Gita and
Caren Grown. Development, Crises and Alternative Visions. Earthscan
Publications, London, 1988.
|
|
1.1.
Moser/DPU Framework
|
|
A. Description
This
framework was developed by Caroline Moser at London University’s
Development Planning Unit (DPU) in order to demonstrate the need to use
development interventions to transform unequal gender relations,
highlighting the political nature of gender-sensitive research and
planning.
|
|
B. Key Principles
- Recognition that women’s roles in society are
differentiated and multiple. Moser describes women’s roles as triple
roles, which includes productive, reproductive, and community
management.
- Consideration of practical gender needs and
strategic gender interests.
- Schematization of policy approaches to women
(welfare, equity, efficiency, empowerment) – making explicit the
extent to which different policy objectives prioritize the elimination
of gender hierarchies.
|
|
C.
Main Critiques:
- The approach is too focused on the household,
incorporating little analysis of the institutions that perpetuate
gender inequality, including the state.
- The approach is too focused on roles, ignoring
social relations and the fact that men also have practical gender
needs and strategic gender interests.
|
|
D.
International institutions that have used the methodology include:
World
Bank, Christian Aid, Oxfam UK, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
ILO, United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), and Save the
Children America
|
|
E. Key Texts and Critiques
- Kabeer, Naila. 1992. “Triple Roles, Gender Roles,
Social Relations: The Political Subtext of Gender Training.”
Discussion Paper No. 313, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex.
- Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html
- Moser, Caroline O.N. Gender Planning and
Development: Theory, Practice and Training. New York: Routledge, 1993.
|
|
1.2.
Gender Roles/ Harvard Analytical Framework
|
|
A. Description
First published in 1984, the Harvard Analytical/Gender Roles Framework is
one of the oldest gender analysis and planning frameworks. It was developed
by the Harvard Institute for International Development in collaboration
with the Women in Development (WID) Office of USAID. It is based on the
assumption that women were unable to fully benefit from the development
process because planning efforts did not recognize women's actual and
potential contribution to development.
|
|
B. Key Principles
- The Women in Development (WID) efficiency approach:
women’s productive contributions, both actual and possible, provide
the rational for allocating resources to women and including them in
the development process.
- Gender equity defined in terms of individual access
to and control over resources.
- Emphasis on “intra-household dynamics” – the
household has a gendered system of resource allocation and a gendered
division of labour.
- Data on the distribution of roles and resources
within the household should be used to overcome the ideologies and stereotypes
that render women's work (and contribution to development) invisible.
|
|
C.
Main Critiques
- The approach is too focused on the household, with
little analysis of the institutions that perpetuate gender inequality,
including development institutions and the state.
- The exclusive focus on women ignores gender and
other social relations such as the labour, class, racial and other
divisions among women themselves (assumes women are a homogeneous
entity).
- Employs a “top-down” approach that is not
participatory. Women are treated as instruments for development, not
empowered individuals.
- Often relies on gender-neutral interventions rather
than those that can transform existing gender relations.
|
|
D.
International institutions that have used the methodology include
ILO,
USAID, CIDA, Oxfam, and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
|
|
E. Key Texts and Critiques
|
|
1.3.
Social Relations Approach
|
|
A. Description
Developed
at the Institute for Development Studies (University of Sussex, UK), many
of the tenets of the Social Relations Approach came out of the
Subordination of Women (SOW) Workshop in the mid-1970s, which critiqued the
Women in Development approach on several grounds. Through this approach,
ending women's subordination is viewed as more than a matter of
reallocating economic resources, or as useful to the development process –
the central focus is on generating a shift in power relations. The approach
involves investigating the way that women are integrated into the
development process and questioning the free-market approach to development
that instrumentalizes women as productive actors. Instead, the final goal
of development is reconceptualized as the achievement of human well-being
through three basic principles: survival, security and autonomy. The Social
Relations Approach is often viewed as laying the foundation for the Gender
and Development (GAD) approach to integrating women in development.
|
|
B. Key Principles
- Consideration of the gendered processes of
production, reproduction, distribution and consumption, and the broad
range of institutions through which they operate including: the
household, the community, the market and the state.
- The concept of gender relations, which refer
specifically to those dimensions of social relations that create and
reproduce differences between men and women.
- Gender should be considered along with other social
relations: e.g. class, ethnicity, age, religion, sexuality, etc.
- Recognition that gender relations are conflictive
and collaborative: that is, there is a constant process of bargaining
and negotiation between men and women.
- A “bottom-up” approach, focusing on participation
and empowerment.
|
|
C.
International institutions that have used the methodology include
CIDA,
Institute for Development Studies (training modules)
|
|
D. Key texts
- Kabeer, Naila. 'Gender-Aware Policy and Planning: A
Social-Relations Perspective', in M. Macdonald, ed., Gender Planning
in Development Agencies. Oxfam: Oxford, 1994.
- Kabeer, Naila. Reversed Realities: Gender
Hierarchies in Development Thought. Verso: London, 1994.
- Kabeer, Naila. and Subrahmanian. 1996.
'Institutions, Relations and Outcomes: Framework and Tools for
Gender-Aware Planning', Discussion Paper 357, Institute for
Development Studies, Sussex.
- Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html
- Young, K. and C. Wolkowitz. Of Marriage and the
Market. CSE Books, London, 1981.
|
|
1.4.
Longwe/Women’s Empowerment Framework
|
|
A. Description
Developed
by Sara Longwe, instead of focusing on economic objectives, the Women’s
Empowerment Framework views the empowerment of women as central to the
development process. The approach recognizes that gender inequities do not
merely arise from differences in gender roles, but from the gendered
division of labor and the allocation of benefits and resources. The
approach distinguishes between women’s issues, which pertain to equality
with men in any social or economic role and women’s concerns, which pertain
to women’s traditional, sex-stereotyped gender roles.
|
|
B. Key Principles
- The framework operates at five levels. In practice,
some organizations (see UNICEF, 1994), use a “gender profile grid” to
measure how the planning and implementation of projects contribute to
each level of empowerment:
- Welfare: zero level of
empowerment - women are the passive recipients of benefits from a
“top-down” approach
- Access: first level of
empowerment - women improve their own status, relative to men, by
increased access to resources
- Conscientization: second
level of empowerment – motivated by women themselves as they realize
and attempt to understand the underlying causes of their problems,
and to identify strategies for action
- Mobilisation: the third
level of empowerment – motivated by their awareness, women come
together to analyze problems and formulate solutions
- Control: final level of
empowerment - reached when women have taken action towards greater
gender equality in decision-making over access to resources, and
therefore their socio-economic status
|
|
C.
Main Critiques
- Little attention to the complexities of gender
relations, which are primarily examined from the perspective of
equality alone.
- Women tend to be presented as a homogeneous
category, with little focus on other social relations (such as class,
age, ethnicity, religion).
- The framework is static, there is no attention paid
to how situations change over time.
|
|
D.
International institutions that have used the methodology include
United
Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF,) UNIFEM
|
|
E. Key Texts and
Critiques
- International Labor Organization, South-East Asia
and the Pacific Multidisciplinary Advisory Team. “A conceptual
framework for gender analysis and planning” (online). Available from: www.ilo.org/public/english/region/asro/mdtmanila/training/unit1/empowfw.htm
- Longwe, Sara. “Gender Awareness: The Missing
Element in the Third World Development Project,” in Candida March and
Tina Wallace, Eds., 1995, Changing Perceptions: New Writings on Gender
and Development, Oxfam, Oxford.
- Miller, Carol and Shahra Razavi. “Gender Analysis:
Alternative Paradigms” (online). UNDP. Available from: www.sdnp.undp.org/gender/resources/mono6.html
- UNICEF. 1994. Gender Equality and Women's
Empowerment: A UNICEF Training Package. UNICEF, New York.
|
|
2.
Participatory Research Methodologies
|
|
A. Description
Developed
in response to the “top-down” methodologies used for development research
during the 1950s and 1960s, Participatory Research Methodologies stress a
“bottom-up” approach guided by the principle of participation. Influenced
by social scientists from the global south such as Paulo Freire,
participatory approaches critique research (and development in general) as
something that is “done to” people by governments, development agencies and
international NGOs from the global north. In response, these methodologies stress
the importance of recognizing that those who are the targets of research
and development policies should have a say in their formulation and that
local knowledge should be privileged. Feminist researchers have adapted
many of these methods, and Participatory Research Methodologies are among
the most used in the field of gender-specific research.
Participatory
Approaches have also been adapted for use in the monitoring and evaluation
of development programmes (see Estrella and Gaventa). Supporters of these
approaches suggest that: ”Participation is the key to sustainable
development initiatives, since it will lead to building on existing
potentials and capacities, a greater sense of ownership on the part of the
stakeholders, increased commitment to the objectives and outcomes, longer
term social sustainability, increased self-help capacities, stronger and
more democratic institutions and partnerships." [3]
|
|
B. Key Principles
- “Bottom-up” approach applied to all development
activities, including research and programme design, implementation,
monitoring and evaluation
- Empowerment through facilitation. Supporting
capacity-building – especially among marginalized peoples – to analyze
and improve their lives by validating and privileging their
experiences and knowledge.
- Facilitated dialogue. Used to recognize the various
ways in which power operates. Linking the personal (experiences) to
the political in order to understand local level problems as part of a
larger political/theoretical context, a process referred to as
conscientization [4]
- Traditional and innovative methods. A combination
of written, oral and visual communication methods are used in the
design, implementation and documentation of participatory research.
Including: theatre and visual imagery, collectively written songs,
cartoons, community meetings, community self-portraits and videotape
recordings. [5]
|
|
C.
Gender perspectives
Women
working in gender and development have both critiqued participatory
approaches and offered suggestions to strengthen their applicability to
gender and other social differences (Irene Guijt and Meera Kaul Shah,
1998):
- Use clear and commonly used terminology as
conceptual clarity lays the basis for practical application.
Problematic terms such as Gender, Empowerment, Participation, and
Community need careful attention.
- Develop appropriate methodologies in each
circumstance; e.g. understand the practical conditions that can affect
women's involvement.
- Ensure that women have access to appropriate forms
of expression to articulate their needs, interests and concerns.
- More focus on developing inclusive methods that can
analyze gender.
- Gender-sensitive participatory training must be
developed to suit the structure and objectives of specific
organizations.
- Stimulate continual critical reflection and
innovation within organizations.
- Gender-focused and sex-disaggregated monitoring is
essential to ensure that men and women's perspectives have been
incorporated into plans, and that these plans are translated into
action.
|
|
D.
Main Critiques
- When used for the larger aims of development –
driven primarily by a poverty-reduction agenda – there is a heavy
focus on class-based analyses, rather than analyses that take sex,
ethnicity, age, sexual-orientation and other variables into account.
- When gender is considered, it is often confused
with “women.” Additionally there is a tendency to focus on “women” as
one homogeneous group.
- Participatory research approaches are often
gender-neutral, which can mean that they do little to address gender
inequities unless the research expressy includes gender
considerations.
- A restricted way of looking at gender relations
(i.e. solely between spouses/partners) that does not examine relations
between mother/son, father/daughter, younger women/older women, etc.
- Tendency to romanticize both “local knowledge” and
the idea of communities as socially homogeneous and harmonious entities.
- An uncritical emphasis on the participation of
local communities can replicate or perpetuate inequitable status quos,
leaving the facilitator with little scope to work towards changing
gender inequalities (see Cornwall 2001).
- Many aspects of gender discrimination are embedded
traditions and beliefs that are perceived by many communities as
either biologically or divinely ordained – that is, gender
inequalities are not easily recognized as something in need of change.
[6]
|
|
E.
Examples
The
following are some commonly-used participatory approaches:
- Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA)
- Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)
- Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs)
- Participatory Action Research (PAR)
- Participant Observer [7]
|
|
F.
International institutions that have used the methodology include
ActionAid,
CONCERN, International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), United
Nations (UNDP, UNIFEM, FAO, INSTRAW), Oxfam, UK Department for
International Development (DFID), World Bank, SIDA
|
|
G. Key texts and
critiques
- Cornwall, Andrea. “Making a Difference? Gender and
Participatory Development.” IDS Discussion Paper 378, Brighton:
Institute of Development Studies, 2001.
- Estrella, Marisol and John Gaventa. “Who Counts
Reality? Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation: A literature
review.” IDS Working Paper 70, Brighton: Institute for Development
Studies.
- Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum
Publishing Company, 1970; -- Education for Critical Consciousness. New
York: Seabury Press, 1978.
- Guijt, Irene and Meera Kaul Shah. The Myth of
Community: Gender Issues in Participatory Development. Intermediate
Technology Publications, 1998.
- Maguire, Patricia. Doing Participatory Research: A
Feminist Approach. Amherst, MA: Centre for International Education,
1987.
- Muraleedharan, K. Participatory Development: Issues
and Lessons. New Delhi, Serials, 2006.
- Participation Power and Social Change Team, Various
documents and articles (see their Participation Resource Centre).
Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Sussex.
Available online: www.ids.ac.uk/ids/particip/
- UNDP. Who are the question-makers? A Participatory
Evaluation Handbook. Available from: www.undp.org/eo/documents/who.htm
- Bridge. In Brief: Gender and Participation. Bridge,
Institute of Development Studies, 2001. Available from: www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/dgb9.html
|
|
3.
Rights-based Approach
(RBA)
|
|
A. Description
Marking
a shift from satisfying basic needs (“needs-based” approach) to fulfilling
and securing fundamental human rights, the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has defined the Rights-Based Approach
to development as a conceptual framework that integrates “the norms,
standards and principles of the international human rights system into the
plans, policies and processes of development.” [8] United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
describes a rights-based approach as one that “strives to secure the
freedom, well-being and dignity of all people everywhere, within the
framework of essential standards and principles, duties and obligations.” [9] Development is conceived of as a right
to be realized rather than a need to be fulfilled – as such, individuals
and groups are seen as “rights-holders” and governments and non-state
actors as “duty-bearers” with obligations.
|
|
B. Key Principles
Although
there is no universal framework for a Rights-Based Approach, the following
principles are common to this approach:
- An explicit link to human rights (economic, social,
civil, political and cultural)
- Capacity-building (for the awareness and
realization of rights)
- Accountability
- Empowerment
- Participation
- Non-discrimination and attention to vulnerable
groups
|
|
C.
Gender Perspectives
There
is also no one “formula” for using the Rights-Based Approach as a gender
research methodology. Rather the approach should be viewed as a vision and
set of tools to be used in strategic ways. Generally, a feminist
interpretation of a rights-based approach for the purpose of gendered
research, policy and analysis includes: [10]
- A focus on non-discrimination and gender equality
- Recognition of the right to self-defined, multiple
identities (including gender, class, ethnicity, sexuality and other
variables)
- Clear understanding of empowerment and
participation – and the application of these principles throughout
research, implementation, and evaluation processes
- Emphasis on the social/collective – as well as the
individual – nature of rights
- Accountability of governments, bilateral and
multilateral donors, private contractors, NGOs, etc. for respecting
and working to strengthen human rights
- Transparent and comprehensive policy responses to
the structural causes of a problem (e.g. poverty) as well as its concrete
manifestations
- Concrete and transparent legal responses to rights
violations in the process of development
Because
human rights include economic, social, civil, political and cultural
rights, the research needed to provide a comprehensive analysis must be
collected from a variety of sources – using qualitative as well as
quantitative data. However, because the rights-based approach stresses
participation and empowerment, qualitative methods are often the most
useful in terms of fostering a strong sense of involvement and ownership
within local communities.
|
|
D. Main Critiques
- The historically problematic nature of women’s
relationships to the state and to the law makes a “rights-based”
approach difficult. The state itself often ignores or works against
women’s needs, rights and interests, and in some instances can be the
main perpetrator of gender-based oppression or discrimination. [11]
- The historic emphasis on civil and political rights
has led to under-developed frameworks for economic, social and
cultural rights.
- Cultural relativism influences discussions on
women’s human rights – for example, indigenous or certain religious
principles regarding gender rights might conflict with the ”universal”
human rights framework.
- An emphasis on highly-technical legal frameworks
and language can sometimes work against the idea of empowerment,
making the concept of human rights hard to understand for the general
public.
- Accountability mechanisms tend to focus on
governments and individuals in the global south leaving few mechanisms
in place for governments, donor agencies, development organizations
and individual researchers from the global north.
- The transformative potential of the rights-based
approach is limited. The “rights” in question must be secured through
the dominant neo-liberal economic and social framework - meaning that
certain “rights” may be secured, but the overall structure of oppression
and unequal distribution is left intact.
|
|
E.
Examples
A
variety of methodologies can be combined for use under a rights-based
approach, including: [12]
- Participatory Action Research
- Women’s Empowerment Framework
|
|
F.
International institutions that have used the methodology include:
Association
for Women's Rights in Developemtn (AWID), United Nations High Commissioner
for Refugees (UNHCR), United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), FAO, World
Bank, SIDA, DFID, CARE, ActionAid
|
|
G. Key Texts and Critiques
- Association for Women’s Rights in Development
(AWID). A Rights-Based Approach to Development, Women’s Rights and
Economic Change, No 1, August 2002.
- Duvvury, Nata and Aanchal Kapur. 2006. A
Rights-Based Approach to Realizing the Economic and Social Rights of
Poor and Marginalized Women [online]. ICRW, Washington D.C. Available
from: www.icrw.org/docs/2006_Rights-basedEconandSocial.pdf
- Nyamu-Musembi, Celestine and Andrea Cornwall. 2004.
What is the ‘rights-based approach’ all about? Perspectives from
international development agencies. IDS Working Paper 234. Institute
for Development Studies, University of Sussex. Available from: www.ids.ac.uk/ids/bookshop/wp/wp234.pdf
- United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
What is a Rights-Based Approach to Development? Available from: www.unhchr.ch/development/approaches-04.html
|
[1] Reeves, Hazel and Sally Biden. “Gender and
Development: Concepts and Definitions,” [online]. Bridge Report, No 55.
Institute for Development Studies, University of Sussex. Available online: www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/reports/re55.pdf
[2] Miller, Carol and Shahrashoub Razavi. “From WID to GAD:
Conceptual Shifts in the Women and Development Discourse.” UNRISD, Occasional
Paper, 1, 1995. Available online: www.unrisd.org/unrisd/website/document.nsf/d2a23ad2d50cb2a280256eb300385855/d9c3fca78d3db32e80256b67005b6ab5/$FILE/opb1.pdf
[3] Muraleedharan, K. 2006. Participatory Development: Issues
and Lessons. New Delhi, Serials.
[4] Sohng, Sung Sil Lee. “Participatory Research Approaches:
Some Key Concepts.” International Development Research Center, Canada, 2005.
Available online: www.idrc.ca/en/ev-85051-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
[5] Sohng, Sung Sil Lee. “Participatory Research Approaches:
Some Key Concepts.” International Development Research Center, Canada, 2005.
Available online: www.idrc.ca/en/ev-85051-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
[6] Naila Kabeer. Gender Mainstreaming in Poverty Eradication
and the Millennium Development Goals: A handbook for policy-makers and other
stakeholders. Organizations: Commonwealth Secretariat; International
Development Research Centre; Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA), 2003. Available online: www.thecommonwealth.org/shared_asp_files/uploadedfiles/{EEEA4F53-90DF-4498-9C58-73F273F1E5EE}_PovertyEradication.pdf
[7] International Institute for Sustainable Development.
Participatory Research for Sustainable Livelihoods: A guide for field
projects on adaptive strategies [online]. Available online: www.iisd.org/casl/CASLGuide/ParticipatoryApproach.htm
[8] United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. What is
a Rights-Based Approach to Development? Available online: www.unhchr.ch/development/approaches-04.html
[9] United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). The Human
Rights-Based Approach. Available online: www.unfpa.org/rights/approaches.htm
[10] AWID. 2002. A Rights-Based Approach to Development,
Women’s Rights and Economic Change, No 1, August 2002; Duvvury, Nata and
Aanchal Kapur. 2006. A Rights-Based Approach to Realizing the Economic and
Social Rights of Poor and Marginalized Women [online]. ICRW, Washington D.C.
Available online: www.icrw.org/docs/2006_Rights-basedEconandSocial.pdf;
Nyamu-Musembi, Celestine and Andrea Cornwall. 2004. What is the ‘rights-based
approach’ all about? Perspectives from international development agencies.
IDS Working Paper 234. Institute for Development Studies, University of
Sussex. Available online: www.ids.ac.uk/ids/bookshop/wp/wp234.pdf
[11] See, for example: Afshar, Haleh , ed. Women, State, and
Ideology: Studies from Africa and Asia. State University of New York Press,
1997; Kandiyoti, Deniz, ed. Women, Islam, and the State. Temple University
Press, 1991; Yuval-Davis, Nira. Gender and Nation. SAGE Publications, 1997.
[12] Duvvury, Nata and Aanchal Kapur. 2006. A Rights-Based
Approach to Realizing the Economic and Social Rights of Poor and Marginalized
Women [online]. ICRW, Washington D.C. Available online: www.icrw.org/docs/2006_Rights-basedEconandSocial.pdf
|