Investigating Women s Empowerment for Implementation and Assessment Selected HKI Experiences

Transcription

1 Investigating Women s Empowerment for Implementation and Assessment Selected HKI Experiences Stella Nordhagen, PhD, Regional M&E Advisor, HKI Africa June 14, 2016 WFP Workshop, Dakar

2 CONTENTS A case study in methods applied in northern Cote d Ivoire Qualitative formative research Participatory Action Research Quantitative impact evaluation Quantitative program monitoring Qualitative impact assessment Context Methods & Results Open questions 2

3 CONTEXT AND RESEARCH QUESTION

4 CHANGE PROGRAM ( ) Aimed to improve nutrition of women and children by supporting small-scale female farmers to grow and sell micronutrient-rich fruits, vegetables, and poultry Communal gardens and henhouses, home gardens Education on nutrition and hygiene practices Nurturing Connections: a four-month series of participatory exercises to facilitate conversations on gender equality and enhance communication around food production and nutrition decisions, division of labor, resource allocation 4

5 KEY QUESTIONS Goal: improve women s decision-making power within their households, with a focus on agriculture, nutrition, and spending Design: what is women s (and men s) current power in these areas? What levers can be used to influence it? Implementation: (How) do local women and men see this power within their communities? (How) are they willing to change it? Evaluation: Did women s decision making power change due to the impact of the intervention? 5

6 ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS: DIVERSE METHODS AND RESULTS

7 LONGITUDINAL INCOME ANALYSIS Formative research to inform implementation Conducted in 2 villages, different regions Focus groups with 8-10 women and 8-10 men (covering a range of ages) Individual questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with 10 couples from each village Income and expenditure over the year Sources of food and person responsible for provision Workload Financial decision making Repeated 3 times (seasonal) In-depth and human-resource intense 7

8 LONGITUDINAL INCOME EVALUATION Sources of income for women: vegetables, firewood, shea nuts, occasional day labour. Income is little but often. Sources of income for men: cash crops. Income is much more substantial but at one or two points in the year In most couples partners do not share information on the amount they earn In general, both men and women control how they spend their own income Women stated ability to access/use land, labour and investment capital as major barriers to increasing income Cycle of dependence on the man s income to meet family needs leaves the woman with little economic power and a weak position for negotiation Revenue over Time Mari Femme 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Femme Mari Mars Juin 39.77% 46.34% Juillet Oct % 14.36% Nov. Fev % 39.31%

9 PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH Part of project activities considered an intervention in itself Gender-specific group activities: games, visualizations, and theater sketches that explore gender themes Example: distribution of decision making (including around revenues and spending) Requires highly trained facilitators and community engagement 9

10 PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH Women have little role in some types of decision making, particularly around cash cropping and land use Men have limited role in others e.g., children s nutrition Participants (men and women) consider desire to address these gaps and explore ways to do so Interactive learning process Revision to implementation activities

11 QUANTITATIVE IMPACT EVALUTION Individual questionnaires with ~500 participants, men and women Long, in-depth interviews (2-3 hours) Repeated baseline and endline (longitudinal) Village-level Randomized Control Treatment Sample Key topics: Decision making Communications Opinions on gender norms, roles Health and nutrition practices Agricultural production Revenues and spending Triangulation of key indicators across sections Analysis: quantitative econometrics 11

12 IMPACT ANALYSIS 33 questions asked regarding roles in key household decisions IMPACT Factor analysis EVALUATION (PCA) used to reduced these to 5 indexes, representing dimensions of decisionmaking Indexes created for each, with higher numbers (0-10) indicating higher levels of decision-making authority Significant positive impact seen on 3 of 5 indexes: Children, spending and health; Cooking and domestic work; and Livestock But NOT 2 linked to Agriculture: partner's plot, own plot Non NC village, Baseline Non NC village, Endline 13.04% 16.13% 22.83% 53.26% 17.2% 53.76% 10.87% 12.9% NC village, Baseline NC village, Endline 17.46% 15.17% 35.86% 17.46% 55.56% 31.72% 9.524% 17.24% No participation Some input but final decision made by other Joint decision Make final decision Graphs by EHFP-Nurturing Connections village and Timepoint- Endline

13 SUMMARY & DISCUSSION

14 Initial Design (Formative Research) Reflection (qualitative research) Implementation (Participatory Action Research) Assessment (Impact evaluation) Ongoing Refinement of Design Revised implementation (Monitoring)

15 SUMMARY Emerging Methodological Questions Triangulation across methods? How to verify contradictory results in the absence of external truth? Who to ask and how? And when? Which indicators for empowerment? (decision-making, income, asset ownership, views on gender equity, self esteem, GBV, communications.) Validation across contexts? What is the goal for decision-making : joint? Women? Men? Does it vary by domain? How much information is too much? Balance between research and implementation Results for participatory research? Are there research results? Are there correct results? 15

16 THANK YOU. MERCI. BARKA. DJERIDJIEFF. Questions? Please contact