Gender Transformative Approaches in agrifood systems A course in four modules Version 2 (2025) Elizabeth Costenbader, Anjalee Kohli, and Steven Cole Welcome RECAP In chat: Share one thing you learned in Module 2 Ask people to share in chat or verbally 2 RECAP In chat: Are there any lingering questions or comments before we dive into Module 3? Ask people to share in chat or verbally 3 COURSE Learning Objectives Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Understand the value of using gender transformative approaches in agrifood systems Understand concepts important to gender transformative approaches Understand how gender transformative approaches are operationalized Understand how to measure gender transformative change Read Slide Our Roadmap 1 2 3 4 We are here! Measuring gender transformative change Operationalizing gender transformative approaches Characteristics important to gender transformative approaches Gender transformative approaches in agrifood systems Read Slide How to operationalize gender transformative approaches Module 3 Read Slide 6 Learning Objectives 1 Understand the process and practice involved in implementing a gender transformative approach 2 Learn about how some of the key characteristics of gender transformative approaches can be operationalized throughout the project cycle 3 Gain exposure to some gender transformative methodologies   Read Slide Structure of Today’s Session Operationalizing gender transformative approaches Gender transformative approaches: Formative phase Gender transformative approaches: Design and Implementation phase Gender transformative approaches: Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning phase Case study using gender transformative approaches in all project phases 1 2 3 4 5 Read Slide Operationalizing gender transformative approaches Section 1 Read Slide Image source: adapted from FAO, IFAD & WFP 2022 Operational Distinctions of GTA Gender transformative approaches: Have an additional focus on the underlying root causes of gender inequality Are iterative and integrated across the project cycle Use a strong participatory nature of process Use gender transformative tools and methodologies There are a few operational distinctions between gender transformative approaches and other gender aware approaches. These include…Read Slide and draw attention in the figure to the root causes. 10 Gender transformative methodologies Source: FAO 2021 GT methodology                        GTA Bring context-specific insights to inform gender transformative interventions Help challenge unequal gender norms, attitudes and power relations Help build critical consciousness Generate learning and develop an evidence-base of how change happens Are suites of participatory methods and tools that help facilitate gender transformative change and can be used at different stages of the project cycle Create opportunities for women, men and stakeholders at various levels to participate Many are qualitative, but quantitative approaches can be used as well Throughout this module we are going to provide examples of gender transformative tools and methodologies that are out there that can be used in gender transformative approaches. It is important to understand that GTAs are not the tools themselves (gender transformative methodologies are not by themselves gender transformative approaches) but rather they are…Read Slide 11 GTA: Iterative AND Integrated Gender transformative programming refers to taking a GTA to project and program design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. It involves integrating a gender transformative perspective/lens across the project cycle. Sources: FAO, IFAD & WFP 2024a; Wong 2019 GTA is an iterative process, whereby gender considerations inform and are accounted for during each part of the project cycle. The “doing” provides knowledge that informs learning and further action and reflection. — Wong 2019 The project cycle in research and development programs is typically depicted in a cycle like this diagram. While there are different versions of how this project cycle is depicted basically it is showing how a project moves from diagnosis or formative to design and implementation to evaluation and then those results are fed back into the next project cycle. So we are going to break this cycle down a bit in this module and talk about how gender transformative approaches are integrated across each phase of this project cycle and that their integration into each phase occurs as part of an iterative process. Read Slide 12 Integrating gender across all aspects of an organization Operationalizing gender transformative approaches requires integration of gender across all aspects of an organization: Build plans for a formal gender analysis into the current project or program-level workplan. Gender analysis can take place at any phase of the program cycle. Gender analysis is critical to integrating gender into an organization’s work. 2. Explicitly budget resources in new and existing projects for formal gender analysis, integration and related capacity building. This includes finances and time for staff capacity building and ongoing resources for gender analysis and integration. 3. Incorporate gender-related objectives and indicators into the performance monitoring plan. 4. Report and disseminate key gender research and program results. 5. Identify gender-related technical assistance or capacity-building needs and request support from gender experts. Sources: FAO 2021; FHI 360 Gender Integration Framework 2012 Read Slide and note that participants should pay attention to terms in bold that draw attention to 5 key steps. Also read the footnote and state that - Operationalizing gender transformative approaches across aspects of an organization is often referred to as gender mainstreaming. 13 GTA integrated Characteristics of a GTA integrated into agricultural research and development Outcomes Inclusive and sustained socio-ecological transformation Gender equitable systems and structures (social enabling environment) More and better life choices for poor women and men Research process Understands people and social diversity in their context Source: Kantor 2013 Practice Engages with both women and men Addresses unequal power dynamics across social groups Challenges oppressive norms, practices and structures Integrates with agricultural systems interventions Crosses scales Multi-scale Enables critical learning, reflection & questioning Dynamic & iterative Here is another visual showing how GTA is also integrated within research, practice and outcomes. Read Slide and draw attention to arrows which show that research feeds into practice and vice versa which then affects outcomes which then affect the research process again in an iterative cycle. 14 Gender transformative approaches: Formative phase Section 2 Read Slide Diagnose: Use a social and gender analysis to develop a deep understanding of the social, historical, cultural, and gender context (e.g. gender norms, power dynamics) of households, communities and organizations that underly gender inequalities. GTA in Formative Phase Although this is a cycle if you are first starting out you will want to start by seeking deep understanding of the social, historical, cultural, and gender context (e.g., gender norms, power dynamics in the household and value chain) is an essential first step. To accomplish this, you will want to begin with social and gender analysis. Read Slide 16 What is a social and gender analysis? Is the process of identifying and addressing the different impacts of a policy, program, action and initiative on women and men Details the social processes, gaps, differences and similarities in the situation of those of differing gender identities in a particular sector Helps ensure that proposed development interventions equally meet the needs of those of differing social and gender identities and have beneficial impact on gender equality in general Should be planned and budgeted for as early in the project design process as possible Social and gender analysis Source: FHI 360 Gender Integration Framework 2012 A Social and Gender analysis… Read Slide 17 Understanding gender inequality Who does what? Who has access to what? Who owns what? Who decides what? Who benefits from what? Source: FAO, IFAD and WFP 2024a Note if you wanted to make this point more interactive you could add a slide before this one asking participants what questions or things they think they would want to know in order to understand gender relations in their programs. Then show this slide and state: These are some questions to ask to understand gender inequality: Who does what? Distribution of roles and responsibilities among women, men, girls and boys (paid and unpaid work); Who has access to what? Gendered access to services, technology, knowledge, finance and assets, sexual and reproductive health services (including gender-based violence), social protection services, education, and nutritious and diverse food, all relevant to improving the livelihoods and well-being of women, men, girls and boys in food systems; Who owns what? Gendered ownership of productive resources and assets, including land, water rights, bank accounts, house titles, transport, etc.; Who decides what? Gendered decision-making power dynamics regarding assets, resources (e.g. use of water), production (e.g. decisions on implementingclimate-resilient agricultural technologies, decisions on prices for sale or purchase), use of income, physical mobility (e.g. attending public gatherings, visiting friends and family), food and nutrition (choosing what to buy and cook), and political and economic mobility of self and others; and Who benefits from what? Distribution of social and economic benefits among women, men, girls and boys (e.g. distribution of income and food within the household) FAO, IFAD and WFP. 2024. Step-by-step guide to integrating a gender transformative approach throughout the project cycle. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cd2629en 18 Understanding underlying causes of gender inequality To dig into the root causes of gender inequality, requires additional questions about: What are prevailing gender norms that delimit the roles and behavior of women, men, girls and boys in agrifood systems? How do formal institutions influence the well-being of women, men, girls and boys and their opportunities in agrifood systems? Source: FAO, IFAD and WFP 2024a But to conduct a gender transformative analysis you will want to seek understanding of underlying causes of gender inequality and therefore you will need to further dig into norms and formal institutions… Read Slide 19 Understanding underlying causes of gender inequality: example questions Source: FAO, IFAD and WFP 2024a How are women, men, girls and boys expected to behave? Which gender norms dictate what they should do or not do? What are the consequences when they deviate from societal expectations regarding their behavior? Do these prevailing gender norms differ for women, men, girls and boys of different social class, wealth, ethnicity and ability status? Are there sanctions and rewards around these expected behaviours? How do informal social institutions (e.g. norms, religious beliefs) interact with formal institutions (e.g. laws)? Are there any legal restrictions (within statutory or customary law systems) on women’s property or inheritance rights (e.g. land)? These are some questions you might want to ask to find out about underlying causes of gender inequality. Read Slide 20 DOMAIN FRAMEWORK Access to assets and resources Practices and participation: household and community division of labor Institutional barriers/facilitators: how people are regarded and treated by formal and informal legal and judicial systems Beliefs and norms: perceptions and beliefs related to men’s and women’s socially constructed identities and roles Power: ability to decide, influence, control and enforce decisions Source: Jhpiego: Gender Analysis Toolkit For Health Systems 2016 Here is an example of a framework that can be used for gender transformative analysis that was developed under USAID’s Capacity Project. It provides a way to systematize areas of inquiry about gender differences and gender inequalities across different domains of social life, and to examine how these differences affect the lives and health of men, women, boys, and girls and what are there underlying causes. Read Slide 21 How to do gender AND gender transformative analysis Disaggregate and analyze existing data with a gender perspective Collect sex-disaggregated data and use gender sensitive indicators Involve a gender expert Consult different groups of beneficiaries before and during project Use participatory analysis methodologies with communities and stakeholders to explore and uncover deep-rooted norms and institutional structures Here are some suggested approaches to conducting a social and gender analysis and gender transformative analysis. Note that the first 4 suggested approaches here can be used for all gender analyses but as shown by the plus sign to do a gender transformative analysis you will also need to…. Read Slide 22 Social Norms Exploration Tool (SNET) Social Norms Exploration Process Source: IRH, Georgetown 2020 SNET PAGE 7 In terms of participatory methodologies, a few notable tools include the SNET The SNET is a rapid and participatory learning and action tool for social norms exploration. It provides guidance and exercises to explore social norms that influence specific behaviours within a group or community. It can be used as a starting point to inform new or existing interventions and provides a 5 step process to do so which includes: Plan and Prepare – this is where the reading, training and planning happens Identify the Reference groups – this is where field work starts Explore norms – this is the bulk of the field work Analyze findings – the SNET includes rapid processes to analyze findings And Apply Findings – the SNET provides guidance to apply what you’ve learned as your designing or revising your program. 23 Source: CARE Sri Lanka 2017 Social Norms Analysis Plot (SNAP) Framework Another participatory tool that has been widely used to facilitate exploration of social norms is the Social Norms Analysis Plot (SNAP) framework which was developed by CARE. The SNAP framework provides practical guidance to understand and evaluate the influence and strength of norms. The SNAP framework identifies the key components of a norm to help measure changes over time and inform interventions for greater impact. The five components of the SNAP framework are: 1) empirical expectations, which is the same thing as descriptive norms, 2) normative expectations, which is the same thing as injunctive norms, 3) sanctions, 4) sensitivity to sanctions, and 5) exceptions. The first three components describe the nature of the norm in a given context, while the other two characterize the strength of the norm in question and its current state 24 Diagnostic Guidance on gender norms in financial inclusion Deconstruction of a sample gender norm from diagnostic undertaken in Egypt Source: Koning, 2021 Finally, a third participatory tool that you could consider using if your project has an aim to enhance women’s financial inclusion is the Diagnostic Guidance on gender norms in financial inclusion developed by CGAP and MarketShare Associates. This tool helps to integrate a financial inclusion lens into existing social norms diagnostics and to inform the design of interventions to support women’s financial inclusion. The tool outlines a process to assess the influence of gender norms on the financial behaviours of women and, in turn, their financial inclusion. The process consists of four phases: 1) design and planning, 2) behaviour and gender norms exploration, 3) gender norms deep dive, and 4) analysis and synthesis… As shown here on the right is one exercise included in this tool which uses a series of 5 Why questions to continue to probe into the root causes of an identified normative constraint and on the left is analysis that was undertaken on a harmful gender norm identified in Egypt. Read Slide 25 Gender transformative approaches: Design AND Implementation phase Section 3 Now let’s talk about GTA in the design and implementation phase. Design: Design interventions to address the underlying causes of gender inequalities by changing power relationships, transforming structures and norms and building agency. Use a theory of change and participatory approaches. Implementation: Implement the intervention within different levels of influence over time. Engage men and women, promote participation in project processes and include reflective processes and dialogues. GTA in Design and Implementation Read Slide 27 GTA in Program Design Start with the findings of a gender analysis. Then… 1 Identify gender-specific barriers to opportunities for achieving the objectives. Source: Adapted from FHI 360 Gender Integration Framework 2012 Articulate or strengthen synergy in project objectives between gender and agrifood systems and development goals. 2 Identify specific strategies and approaches to address harmful norms, behaviors and structures and to promote the equitable participation of women and men. 3 Incorporate identified strategies into the project design, activities and workplan. 4 Identify levels of influencers, and ensure interventions are developed at multiple levels to address underlying causes. 5 Start with the findings of a gender analysis. Then: 1) Identify gender-specific barriers to opportunities for achieving the objectives. 2) Within the project’s objectives, articulate or strengthen synergy between gender and agrifood systems and development goals. 3) Identify specific strategies and approaches to address harmful norms, behaviors and structures and to promote the equitable participation of women and men in programs as appropriate. 4) Incorporate the identified strategies into the project design, activities and workplan; and 5) Identify levels of influencers, and ensure interventions are developed at multiple levels to address underlying causes. 28 Develop Interventions at Multiple Levels Develop interventions at multiple levels across the socio-ecological model (SEM) Read slide & draw attention to potential gender transformative interventions at each of the different levels of the SEM 29 USE A Theory of Change (ToC) Is a comprehensive explanation and illustration of how and why a desired change is expected to occur in a particular context by defining a systemic and coherent pathway Identifies long-term goals and then works backward to identify the root causes of an issue and the conditions that need to be in place for change (the achievement of outcomes and outputs) to occur Maps out how these elements are causally related to each other Source: FAO, IFAD and WFP 2024b JP GTA’s ToC for gender transformative programming for food security, nutrition & sustainable agriculture GTAs typically use a ToC, such as the example ToC shown here, because by developing and adopting a ToC the project is making a commitment to addressing the root causes of gender inequalities. A ToC is…Read Slide and assure participants that it is okay if they are not able to read all the detail on this ToC illustration that this is shown here just to give them a sense of what types of things a ToC might address and how a ToC might look and be organized. 30 Participatory Action Learning (PAL) When using GTAs, community members and other stakeholders work together to identify, question and begin to shift harmful or unfair gender norms and gendered power imbalances in ways that are locally appropriate. Meaningful participation of people of all genders requires: Designing activities, structures and mechanisms that provide real opportunities to participate Transparent information sharing Equal and meaningful opportunities to be involved in decision-making across during different stages of the project Accessible, safe and reliable response feedback mechanisms for complaints or feedback PAL is a group of practice-oriented approaches used to engage women and men in discussions and critical reflection around gender norms using set tools, manuals, etc. Sources: Wong 2019; CARE 2019; Hilly 2012; Lawless 2017; Lau 2021 Read Slide 31 Gender Action Learning Systems (GALS) Is a PAL tool Is a community-led empowerment methodology Uses principles of inclusion to improve income, food and nutrition security of vulnerable people in a gender equitable way Positions women and men as drivers of their own development rather than victims Identifies and dismantles environmental obstacles Challenges service providers and private actors Strengthens the negotiation power of marginalized stakeholders Promotes collaboration, equity and respect between value chain actors Source: Mayoux 2019 Can be used complementary to other value chain development approaches Read Slide. Reminder that PAL stands for Participatory Action Learning and note that the visual is an example of a framework developed by participants using GALS in Uganda 32 Intervention Co-Design Example of a gender transformative intervention that was co-designed with a partner using the leverage points and levers identified during the Tanzania stakeholder dissemination workshop. Source: Seymour 2024 This figure illustrates an example of a gender transformative intervention related to land ownership, which was developed in a participatory fashion in collaboration with Kolping Society of Tanzania, using leverage points and levers identified in a prior stakeholder dissemination workshop. Spend a minute to draw attention to the figure and in particular the levers identified by participants at the stakeholder workshop 33 GTA in Program Implementation Implementers should ask questions such as the following: Are men, women, girls and boys (as appropriate) able to participate fully in program design and implementation? Are marginalized voices and perspectives of people of all relevant genders and sexual orientations taken into account as workplans are created, reviewed and updated, and are they heard in meetings and in decision-making? Is there a balance in representation and leadership between youth, men and women? Are men, women, girls and boys (as appropriate) able to benefit from the program equitably? Is the program being implemented in a way that provides safe access for participants? Does participation in program activities put individuals at increased risk of violence, ridicule or other ill treatment? Source: Adapted from FHI 360 Gender Integration Framework 2012 Read Slide 34 Gender transformative approaches: MEL phase Section 4 Read Slide Monitoring AND Evaluation: Integrate methods and indicators for measuring gender transformative change at multiple timepoints throughout. Use participatory approaches. Learning: Learn from successes and failures. Improve and adapt. GTA in MEL Read Slide 36 MONITORING AND EVALUATION Monitoring Systematic and routine process of gathering information from different parts of a program Usually focused on short-term outcomes Usually more focused on implementation process Generally conducted by people involved in the program Evaluation Assessment of an entire program cycle Usually long-term Usually more focused on program impact Often conducted by impartial outsiders with M&E background Both can also be participatory, with insiders having historical and contextual knowledge and/or implementation experience. Source: Adapted from Passages Curriculum 2022 Note if you wanted to make this point more interactive you could ask the participants to state what they see as the differences between monitoring and evaluation before showing this slide. Just as a brief background reminder, shown here are some key distinctions between monitoring and evaluation. Read Slide 37 From THE Reach-Benefit-Empower framework Sources: Theis 2016; Johnson 2018; Kleiber 2019 REACH BENEFIT EMPOWER Objective Include women in program activities Increase women’s well being Strengthen the ability of women to make strategic life choices and to put those choices into action Indicators Number or proportion of women participating in a project activity Sex-disaggregated data for positive and negative outcome indicators Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index In many of our programs, we monitor to ensure that we are reaching potential participants and to ensure that they are benefitting from the program. When using gender transformative approaches, we also want to be monitoring for the program effects on women’s empowerment… Read through examples on slide 38 To THE Reach-Benefit-Empower-Transform (RBET) framework Sources: Theis 2016; Johnson 2018; Kleiber 2019 REACH BENEFIT Objective Include women in program activities Increase women’s well being Strengthen the ability of women to make strategic life choices and to put those choices into action Indicators Number or proportion of women participating in a project activity Sex-disaggregated data for positive and negative outcome indicators Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index EMPOWER transform Address the root causes of gender inequality, build agency and change unequal power relations and discriminatory social institutions Women’s decision- making power; gender equitable norms; changes in law and policy But in addition, when using gender transformative approaches you have an additional objective and therefore will also need to monitor for gender transformative change by looking at GTC indicators. Read Transform column on Slide 39 Measure at Multiple Timepoints Keep in mind, social processes are often slow to change You can’t expect to see very large GT changes over the course of your project, especially if the timeframe is short So, to capture GTC, you will need to collect: data at repeated points over ideally a long period of time Read Slide 40 Baseline Monitoring time Point 1 Evaluation time Point 3 Monitoring time Point 2 Measure at Multiple Levels Remember to measure at multiple levels across the socio-ecological model (SEM) Couple communication or HH decision-making Civic committee participation & leadership Laws & policies Value chain division of labor Measure Changes in… Read slide & draw attention to measuring gender transformative change at each level of influence 41 Measuring gender transformative change = measuring complexity MEL for GTA should seek to capture the complexity and unpredictable processes of gender transformative change by measuring and monitoring: Incremental change Non-linear change Change occurring at different levels of the SEM Image source: Authors Source: Batliwala 2006 and 2010 Change occurring outside of the program that effects GTA Read slide and bring attention to how in figure the change is not straight lines linear, some things changing more rapidly than others and that other things outside of the program like in this case migration patterns may also be changing and having an effect on the process & intended outcomes 42 Availability Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 Attitude Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.55000000000000004 Norm Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 0.2 0.25 0.55000000000000004 Migration Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 Behavior Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 0.1 0.25 0.5 0.5 Participatory Action Research (PAR) Aims to create knowledge and address structural inequalities through an iterative cycle where people identify problems, design and implement plans to address them, analyze outcomes, reflect, and learn from them. Engages stakeholders throughout the MEL process in the development of indicators, in data contribution, data analysis, and interpreting and disseminating results. Engages to ensure findings are meaningful, relevant and transparent. PAR Similar to PAL but concerned primarily with generating individual and collective understanding and knowledge with those who are supposed to benefit from it. Sources: Hillenbrand 2015; Barclay 2021; Cole 2014; FAO, IFAD and WFP 2024 Read Slide 43 Participatory action research cycle: Identify a practical problem and plan to do something about it Act on this plan Observe and document how it went Reflect on the results and draw lessons Sources: van der Ploeg 2016; Apgar and Douthwaite 2013 Image source: van der Ploeg 2016 Participatory Action Research (PAR) Participatory action research generally involves a cycle in which people (1) identify a practical problem and plan to do something about it, (2) act on this plan, (3) observe and document how it went, and finally (4) reflect on the results and draw lessons (Apgar and Douthwaite 2013). This figure depicts multiple PAR cycles that were undertaken in a project that took a gender transformative approach to aquatic agricultural systems in the Solomon Islands and Malaysia 44 Example of A participatory research process Source: Mwakanyamale 2024 This figure depicts a PAR approach taken in a project seeking to identify leverage points and levers to reduce normative constraints in AFSs in Tanzania and Nigeria. Read steps in Figure 45 Learning as Part of M&E Flexible, exploratory, iterative way to integrate observations and emerging knowledge into a program on an ongoing basis Uses regular cycles of learning Recognizes that staff close to a program have the best knowledge of circumstances Uses monitoring and learning to adjust programs as they are being implemented to put learning into program action Source: Passages social norms curriculum 2022 Read Slide 46 Key considerations of GTA MEL Process documentation, whether for monitoring or evaluation, is valuable when it remains focused to ensure appropriate and resourced data collection and data use Use multi-level, multi-dimensional outcomes and indicators Privilege qualitative and participatory techniques alongside quantitative approaches Remember that measurement processes should be empowering for participants and project staff alike Ensure the participant’s voice is heard and elevated Monitor for changes in agency, structures and relations, and for signs of positive and negative unintended consequences (e.g., backlash, new economic activities) Read Slide 47 SPICED: Participatory approach to M&E Subjective: Informants have a special position or experience that gives them unique insights that may yield a very high return on the investigators’ time. In this sense, what others see as 'anecdotal' becomes critical data because of the source’s value. Participatory: Objectives and indicators should be developed together with those best placed to assess them. This means involving a project's ultimate beneficiaries, but it can also mean involving local staff and other stakeholders. Interpreted and communicable: Locally defined objectives/indicators may not mean much to other stakeholders, so they often need to be explained. Cross-checked and compared: The validity of assessment needs to be cross-checked, by comparing different objectives/indicators and progress, and by using different informants, methods and researchers. Empowering: The process of setting and assessing objectives/indicators should be empowering in itself and allow groups and individuals to reflect critically on their changing situation. Diverse and disaggregated: There should be a deliberate effort to seek out different objectives/indicators from a range of groups, especially men and women. This information needs to be recorded in such a way that these differences can be assessed over time. Source: Lennie 2011 As shown in this slide, the SPICED approach is a qualitative participatory to developing M&E indicators; it appreciates local understandings of change and is a good tool for thinking about why it is important to work with communities. It identifies that different people have different ideas about what change means. It suggests that the process follow the SPICED criterion… Read Slide and note not important for participants to remember all these details but the main point is to remember the acronym SPICED will be helpful to ensure attention to these 5 criterion during the M&E process. 48 Learning is an opportunity for adaptive management Adaptive management introduces flexibility in programming It involves changing to the path used to achieve goals in response to changes or new learnings The rationale and adaptations should be documented to support learning and future adaptation and scale Sources: USAID; Allen 2011 Image source: Allen 2011 Read Slide 49 Monitoring for resistance and backlash Start by mapping norms, practices and structures, and pre-existing manifestations of resistance Engage those implementing the program as well as allies in monitoring and response Pay attention to how elements of the system interact to reinforce other parts, including backlash Identify formal and informal actions that seek to block change. Look for absences and silences Continually reassess throughout all phases of programming and research Image source: da Sliva 2011 Source: da Sliva 2011 Read Slide 50 Participatory Evaluation and Learning: Validating and Sharing Findings Sense-make, validate and share findings and their interpretation with participants, including less powerful ones Enable gender and socially-inclusive participation, with equitable access, ability to feedback or critique, and to use the information and co-generate implications for action if any Check that participants and partners have, understand and can use the findings Sense-make, validate and identify implications for action with participants and partners, strategizing for scaling evidence and gender outcomes Share with relevant bodies and networks and do so in the relevant languages Sources: McDougall 2021; Mullinax 2018 Also critical to GTA MEL is how participants and stakeholders are involved in the sense-making/validation and sharing and dissemination of findings. We would suggest for Participatory Evaluation and Learning process to do all of the following.. Read Slide 51 Case study using gender transformative approaches in all project phases Section 5 Now let’s spend a few minutes practicing what we learned. Barotse Floodplain Fishing Camps Case study – PART 1 Source: Cole 2014 Now we are going to look at a case study example of a project that used gender transformative approaches throughout all phases of the project cycle and we will make this case study participatory and take a pause in the middle to ask you to reflect and suggest ideas for gender transformative approaches they could have embedded in program design and MEL 53 Case Study: Barotse Floodplain, Zambia BACKGROUND An estimated 70,000 people depend on the resources of the Barotse Floodplain for their livelihood, food and nutrition security. However, poor management, increasing fishing pressure and use of destructive fishing gear caused a 2013 Urgent Call to Action regarding rapid declines in fish stocks. TARGET POPULATION AIM Reduce post-harvest fish losses, and improve lives and livelihoods of communities. Involve both women and men in the fisheries value chain. DATE Zambia Map. Fishing camps in the Barotse Floodplain with district towns IMPLEMENTING ORGANIZATIONS WorldFish and FISH, AAS with Zambian Department of Fisheries COUNTRIES IMPLEMENTED 2014–2017 Read Slide and as needed further explain that …The Barotse floodplain comprises a wetland area alongside the Zambezi River as it passes through Western Zambia. Rural communities there have to deal with both the opportunities and constraints of the plain’s seasonal flooding which add extra challenges to biodiversity management.  For example, the communities move away from the plains during the flood season to higher ground and then return when the floods recede. Added to this already challenging environment, changes in the predictability of flood patterns, climate change, and increasingly frequent and severe extreme weather events are adversely affecting income and food security. 54 BAROTSE: Improving fish processing Piloting different, new, improved fish processing technologies to reduce harvest losses. In the Barotse Floodplain (Zambia), one-third of the total fish catch is lost every year so the project was interested in piloting different, new, improved fish processing technologies to reduce harvest losses. As shown are pictures taken as part of the project of the three primary methods that were being used there to process fish… solar tent dryers, salting and chorkor kilns. 55 Regulators Traders and retailers Processors Producers BAROTSE: Social and gender analyses AAS started by carrying out a number of participatory diagnoses that utilized both qualitative and quantitative methods, including gender and nutrition scoping analyses, fish value chain (FVC) and agro-biodiversity (ABD) studies, a gendered agricultural water management scoping, a comprehensive social and gender analysis (SGA), a seasonal food availability assessment, and a mapping of ecosystem services. All the studies to a varying degree included an analysis of key social and gender issues such as land tenure and kinship, norms, attitudes and practices that create inequalities between and within certain social groups. 56 Processors are predominantly women because: It is not seen as acceptable for women to fish Women don’t own the fishing boats/gear It is not appropriate for women to have their own market stall Women processors get lower returns on their financial investment relative to men. Women are forced to lower prices of the fish because they: Have fewer skills to negotiate prices Less access to government extension services and training Less time to attend training as they are responsible for the majority of household labor and childcare BAROTSE: Gender Analysis Key Insights Processing is where most of the fish is lost. Image sources: A Kaminski; S Cole Some of the key insights obtained from the social and gender transformative analyses they undertook were.. Read Slide 57 Regulators Traders and retailers Processors Producers Using results from the gender analysis done for the Barotse Floodplain case study: GROUP EXERCISE: Barotse Floodplain Case Study 2. What may be some data / indicators we would want to capture in our monitoring and evaluation to assess our programs’ impact? 1. What would be some program design elements we could include to make it gender transformative? Read Slide 58 Barotse Floodplain Fishing Camps Case study – PART 2 Source: Cole 2014 Now that you have all had a chance to suggest ideas for gender transformative approaches they could have embedded in program design and MEL, let’s take a look at what the project actually did. 59 Barotse: GTA in the design AND implementation (PAR AND PGNA) 252 value chain actors organized into participatory action research (PAR) groups Used a practical gender needs approach (PGNA) that recognizes that gendered roles, responsibilities, and time commitments shape women’s and men’s abilities to engage in project activities Explicit attempts to adjust meeting times and venues to ensure that especially women could participate The resulting study design… Read slide 60 Image sources: A Kaminski; S Cole Barotse: GTA in the design AND implementation Also used gender transformative communication (GTC) Dramas skits on salient gender issues in the value chain Critical reflection to spark locally-led shifts in gender norms and power relations The project … Read Slide As shown are Photos of participants engaging in the drama skits and critical reflections 61 Drama performed in the fishing camp Critical reflection at the community and group levels Actions to address unequal power relations developed at the group level Barotse: Project design Longitudinal comparative design PGNA in all 6 camps Piloted improved fish processing technologies in all 6 fishing camps GTC piloted in 3 out of the 6 fishing camps Assessed improvements in fish processing and changes in gender attitudes and women’s empowerment outcomes at baseline and endline in all 6 camps Read Slide to explain the project design 62 Test improved fish processing technologies with PAR groups in all 6 camps Implement a PGNA in all 6 camps Test GTC in 3 out of 6 camps Barotse: Evaluation key results Participatory technologies assessment The project conducted a participatory assessment of technologies which showed that the technology innovations resulted in reduced losses, reduced time and value addition… Read Slide 63 Barotse: Evaluation key results Figure 3. Changes in fishing gear ownership status of men Figure 1. Changes in gender attitude scores of men *p < 0.01; **p < 0.05 Figure 2. Women who made large inputs into decisions about income from processing and trading In addition, the project also showed key results terms of gender transformation.. Review results in each Figure 64 Closing TakeAways What is one new thing you learned today? What are you curious about? Ask participants to share 66 FURTHER READING Step-by-step guide to integrating GTA Compendium of 15 good GTA practices Gender Equality and Social Inclusion Analysis Guidance Note Gender Transformative Resources List.docx 67 Adaptive management is an intentional approach to making decisions and adjustments in response to new information and changes in context (USAID 2021). Gender analysis (sometimes referred to more broadly as social and gender analysis) is a methodology that both: Describes existing gender and social relations in a particular environment, ranging from within households or firms to a larger scale of community, ethnic group, or nation. It involves collecting and analyzing sex-disaggregated data and other qualitative and quantitative information. Organizes and interprets, in a systematic way, information about gender relations to make clear the importance of gender differences for achieving development objectives (JHPIEGO 2016). Gender mainstreaming is the process of assessing the implications for women and men of any planned action, including legislation, policies or programs, in any area and at all levels. It is a strategy for making the concerns and experiences of women and men an integral part of the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies and programs in all political, economic and societal spheres. The ultimate goal is to achieve gender equality (adapted from UN Women 2023, from FAO 2023b). Gender transformative methodologies are a suite of participatory approaches, methods and tools that encourage critical reflection and examination among women and men of gender norms and power relations (FAO 2021). Glossary 68 Glossary Theory of change (ToC) is a comprehensive description and illustration of how and why a desired change is expected to happen in a particular context. It is focused in particular on mapping out or “filling in” what has been described as the “missing middle” between what a program or change initiative does (its activities or interventions) and how these lead to desired goals being achieved (What is Theory of Change? - Theory of Change Community). Participatory Action Research (PAR) is a participatory process of inquiry which seeks to answer questions about real life concerns to improve the wellbeing of those engaged. “It seeks to bring together action and reflection, theory and practice, in participation with others, in the pursuit of practical solutions to issues of pressing concern to people, and more generally the flourishing of individual persons and their communities.” (Reason & Bradbury 2008, 4). Participatory Action Learning (PAL) is a group of practice-oriented approaches used to engage women and men in discussions and critical reflection around gender norms using set tools, manuals, etc. (see Wong et al. 2019, table A page 15). 69 Allen, C. R., Fontaine, J. J., Pope, K. L., & Garmestani, A. S. (2011). Adaptive management for a turbulent future. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(5), 1339-1345. Apgar, M., & Douthwaite, B. (2013). Participatory action research in the CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Penang, Malaysia: CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Program Brief: AAS-2013-27. Barclay, K., Mangubhai, S., Leduc, B., Donato-Hunt, C., Makhoul, N., Kinch, J., & Kalsuak, J. (Eds.). (2021). Pacific handbook for gender equity and social inclusion in coastal fisheries and aquaculture (2nd ed.). Noumea, New Caledonia: Pacific Community. Batliwala, S. (2006). Measuring social change: Assumptions, myths and realities. Alliance, 11(1), 12–14. Batliwala, S., & Pittman, A. (2010). Capturing change in women’s realities: A critical overview of current monitoring and evaluation frameworks. AWID Working Paper. CARE Sri Lanka. (2017). Redefining norms to empower women: Experiences and lessons learned. CARE International Sri Lanka. CARE. (2019). Gender Marker Guidance. Atlanta, GA: CARE USA. Cole, S. M., van Koppen, B., Puskur, R., Estrada, N., DeClerck, F., Baidu-Forson, J. J., Remans, R., Mapedza, E., Longley, C., Muyaule, C., & Zulu, F. (2014). Collaborative effort to operationalize the gender transformative approach in the Barotse Floodplain. Penang, Malaysia: CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Program Brief: AAS-2014-38. da Silva Wells, C., Le Borgne, E., Dickinson, N., & de Jong, D. (2011). Documenting change: An introduction to process documentation. (Occasional Paper 47). The Hague, The Netherlands: IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre. FAO. (2021). Gender transformative approaches. In FAO – Joint Programme on Gender Transformative Approaches for Food Security and Nutrition. Rome. References 70 FAO, IFAD, & WFP. (2020). Gender transformative approaches for food security, improved nutrition and sustainable agriculture – A compendium of fifteen good practices. Rome. FAO, IFAD, & WFP. (2024a). Step-by-step guide to integrating a gender transformative approach throughout the project cycle. Rome. FAO, IFAD, & WFP. (2024b). Theory of change for gender transformative programming for food security, nutrition and sustainable agriculture – Technical note. Rome. FHI360. (2012). Gender integration framework: How to integrate gender in every aspect of our work. Hillenbrand, E., Karim, N., Mohanraj, P., & Wu, D. (2015). Measuring gender transformative change: A review of literature and promising practices. CARE USA Working Paper. Hilly, Z., Schwarz, A.-M., & Boso, D. (2012). Strengthening the role of women in community-based marine resource management: Lessons learned from community workshops. SPC Women Fish. Inf. Bull., 22, 29–35. Institute for Reproductive Health (IRH). (2020). Social norms exploration tool. Retrieved from: https://www.irh.org/social-norms-training-curriculum/ Institute for Reproductive Health (IRH). (2022). Passages social norms training curriculum. Retrieved from: https://www.irh.org/social-norms-training-curriculum/ Jhpiego. (2016). Gender analysis toolkit for health systems. Retrieved from: https://gender.jhpiego.org/analysistoolkit/ Johnson, N., Balagamwala, M., Pinkstaff, C., Theis, S., Meinzen-Dick, R., & Quisumbing, A. (2018). How do agricultural development projects empower women? Linking strategies with expected outcomes. Journal of Gender, Agriculture and Food Security, 3(2), 1–19. References 71 Kantor, P. (2013). Transforming gender relations: Key to positive development outcomes in aquatic agricultural systems. Brief AAS-2013-12. CGIAR. Kleiber, D., Cohen, P., Gomese, C., & McDougall, C. (2019). Gender-integrated research for development in Pacific coastal fisheries. Program Brief: FISH-2019-02. Penang, Malaysia: CGIAR Research Program on Fish Agri-Food Systems. Koning, A., Ledgerwood, J., & Singh, N. (2021). Addressing gender norms to increase financial inclusion: Designing for impact. Technical Guide. Washington, D.C.: CGAP. Lau et al. (2021). Gender transformative approaches for advancing gender equality in coral reef social-ecological systems: Good practice and technical brief. Lawless, S., Doyle, K., Cohen, P., Eriksson, H., Schwarz, A.-M., Teioli, H., Vavekaramui, A., Wickham, E., Masu, R., Panda, R., & McDougall, C. (2017). Considering gender: Practical guidance for rural development initiatives in Solomon Islands. Penang. Mayoux, L. (2019). Interview on Gender Action Learning System (GALS). In Game Change Network. Mullinax, M., Hart, J., & Garcia, A. V. (2018). Using research for gender-transformative change: Principles and practice. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and Boston: American Jewish World Service (AJWS). Mwakanyamale, D., Msita, S., Cole, S., Adeyeye, O., Seymour, G., Ferguson, N., Feleke, S., Jeremiah, A., Rietveld, A., Mudege, N., Achandi, E., Costenbader, E., Heckert, J., & Galiè, A. (2024). Identifying leverage points and levers to reduce normative constraints in agrifood systems in Tanzania and Nigeria. Report. CGIAR Gender Equality Initiative. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2008). The SAGE handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (2nd ed.). London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications. References 72 Seymour, G., Cole, S., Costenbader, E., Mwakanyamale, D., Adeyeye, O., Feleke, S., Ferguson, N., & Heckert, J. (2024). A guide to developing quantitative tools for measuring: Gender norms in agrifood systems. IFPRI Discussion Paper 2279. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Theis, S., & Meinzen-Dick, R. (2016). Reach, benefit, or empower: Clarifying gender strategies of development projects. In IFPRI Blog. Retrieved from: https://www.ifpri.org/blog/reach-benefit-or-empower-clarifying-gender%20strategies-development-projects/ USAID. (2021). Discussion note: Adaptive management. Retrieved from: https://usaidlearninglab.org/system/files/resource/files/dn_adaptive_management_final2021.pdf van der Ploeg, J., Albert, J., Apgar, M., Bennett, G., Boso, D., Cohen, P., Daokalia, C., Faiau, J., Harohau, D., Iramo, E., et al. (2016). Learning from the lagoon: Research in development in Solomon Islands. Program Report: AAS-2016-02. Penang, Malaysia: CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Wong, F., Vos, A., Pyburn, R., & Newton, J. (2019). Implementing gender transformative approaches in agriculture. CGIAR Collaborative Platform for Gender Research. References 73 image3.jpg image13.png image5.png image14.png image4.jpg image16.png image17.png image18.png image19.png image20.png image21.jpg image22.png image23.png image24.png image25.png image26.png image27.png image28.jpg image29.png image30.png image31.png image32.png image33.png image34.png image35.png image36.png image37.png image38.png image39.png image40.png image41.png image42.png image43.png image44.png image45.PNG image46.PNG image47.jpeg image48.jpeg image49.png image52.jpeg image50.jpeg image51.jpeg image53.png image54.png image55.png image56.png image57.png image58.png image59.png image60.png image61.png image62.png