Petra Debusscher

Mainstreaming Gender in European Union Development Policy in the European Neighborhood

This article examines gender mainstreaming in European Union (EU) development aid toward the European Neighborhood through quantitative and qualitative research of policy documents. The objective is to evaluate whether a shift has been made from a “Women in Development” paradigm to a “Gender and Development” paradigm. First, documents are examined quantitatively, looking at language, format, and budget. Next, the qualitative analysis embarks on a deeper reading of how gender equality is approached. The data indicate that a shift toward the “Gender and Development” paradigm has not been made. The internal European agenda as well as the limited space for civil society are proposed as explanations.

Gender Mainstreaming on the Ground? The Case of EU Development Aid Towards Rwanda

This article investigates why gender mainstreaming has not occurred in European Union (EU) development aid towards Rwanda despite a two-sided receptiveness from Rwanda and the EU’s Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation. I use a feminist institutionalist approach to examine formal and informal institutions as well as the actors, networks and processes involved in policy formation and implementation. I argue that the largest stumbling block to effective implementation is an institutional weakness at the EU level which involves a decoupling of formal and informal institutions and leads to the ‘ceremonial’ behaviour of gender policy actors and a limited, instrumental policy guided by gendered assumptions. These reproduce further stereotypes and contribute to an asymmetrical power play within the institutions. This can disadvantage women and staff working on gender equality. Finally, the EU’s institutional practices structurally marginalize the voices of Rwandan women and their movement which is problematic in the context of an increasingly authoritarian state.

Gender Mainstreaming in European Union Development Policy toward Latin America: Transforming Gender Relations or Confirming Hierarchies?

An examination of gender mainstreaming in the Latin American development policy of the European Union through quantitative and qualitative analysis of policy programming documents suggests that the transformative potential of this approach has been neglected. The language used in the documents is more the typical “Women in Development” language than one that reflects the inclusion of both women and men in the planning for the achievement of gender equality. Exclusion of women’s organizations from the drafting process and the gap between civil society’s and the European Union’s framings of gender (in)equality in Latin America may be responsible for this situation. Un análisis de gender mainstreaming en la política de desarrollo de América Latina de la Unión Europea basado en el análisis cuantitativo y cualitativo de los documentos de programación de la política sugiere que el potencial transformador de este enfoque ha sido abandonado. El lenguaje utilizado en los documentos es más típico del lenguaje de “Mujeres en Desarrollo” que uno que aspira a la inclusión de mujeres y hombres en la planificación para el logro de la igualdad de género. La exclusión de las organizaciones de mujeres en el proceso de redacción y la brecha entre los encuadros de la sociedad civil y de la Unión Europea de la (des) igualdad en América Latina pueden ser responsables por esta situación.

Post-conflict women's movements in turmoil: the challenges of success in Liberia in the 2005-aftermath

In Liberia, womens advocacy has been crucial in bringing peace after 14 years of conflict as well as in electing Africas first female president. While the accomplishments of the womens movement have been widely praised, some authors have suggested that the once vibrant movement is crumbling. In this article we claim that one of the most important challenges for the Liberian womens movement comes precisely from its internationally proclaimed success, provoking four related outcomes: First, different womens organisations compete for the credit of the success story; second, the national government has tried to appropriate the movement and integrate it into governmental structures; third, the relationship between the movement and its international partners has evolved towards mutual disappointment due to a lack of sustainable funding and unmet expectations; and fourth, the movement seems stuck in the peacemaker label and unable to redefine itself to engage in new battles as international aid diminishes.

The Normative Distinctiveness of the European Union in International Development: Stepping Out of the Shadow of the World Bank?

Although the EU has shown a strong ambition to put a distinctive stamp on the international aid agenda over the past 15 years, it has also been pointed out that its policies suffer from a series of collective action problems. This article explores how both relate to one another. This article examines the EUs normative distinctiveness in contrast to the World Bank, focusing on policy norms in the field of governance, aid effectiveness and social development. We argue that collective action problems do not necessarily hamper EU distinctiveness: they are also a symptom of a strong EU desire to pressure European actors to come up with norms that pacify disagreements.

Analysing European gender equality policies abroad: A reflection on methodology:

Can gender equality quality criteria developed for assessing EU internal policies be used unequivocally for evaluating EU external policies? Or might a methodological adaptation be necesary? To engage with this dilemma, the author evaluates the two-dimensional quality model of Krizsan and Lombardo and examines what a reorientation of the model would entail to better allow for the analysis of gender policy implemented outside of Europe. The author argues that to allow for an in-depth analysis of EU gender policy abroad, the model’s procedural criteria ‘empowerment of women’s rights advocates’ and ‘transformation with reference to the prevailing context’ need to be brought centre stage and mainstreamed throughout the research design. The author suggests doing this by explicitly involving the views of gender activists from the national context in the analysis and using their perspectives as a touchstone for the evaluation of quality. To examine the proposed methodological model’s suitability for analysing the quality of gender policies in EU external relations, this operationalization is applied to the case of EU–South African development cooperation. The article concludes that the inclusion of gender advocates’ perspectives is necessary to avoid stereotypical, paternalist and Eurocentric ideas about the meaning of gender equality abroad and allow for a contextually grounded reflexivity on the quality of gender policy. Finally, it is argued that it is the role of feminist research to enhance women’s capacity for self-determination methodologically and to hear the voices of national actors that might otherwise not be heard in EU external relations.

Gender Equality in European Union Development Policy

This chapter critically examines gender mainstreaming in EU development aid to assess whether or not the EU can be considered a leading and distinctive gender actor. To answer this question I will analyse the budget, gendered language and frame of high level policy programming documents. First I evaluate whether a shift has been made from a conservative Women in Development paradigm to a transformative Gender and Development paradigm to determine if the EU lives up to European and international commitments on gender equality and can be considered to be leading by example. Second I examine whether the EU advocates a distinctive ‘Europeanness’ in its gender policy towards developing countries. The chapter concludes that the shift towards a transformative Gender and Development paradigm has only partly been made. Moreover, I argue that rather than a distinctive ‘Europeanness’, the EU’s gender equality approach can be called a patchwork of approaches derived from other international institutions such as the UN or the World Bank. This implies that the EU is not the innovative leading gender power it claims to be.