By Vani S. Kulkarni and Raghav Gaiha
PHILADELPHIA AND BOSTON, Nov 10 2015 (IPS)

Few dispute that women’s autonomy and betterment of their lives are moral imperatives. But whether these are also key to economic development is contested.

In an admirably cogent article, Esther Duflo (2013) evaluates a bi-directional relationship between women’s empowerment and development. Although somewhat overemphatic about the role that development alone can play in driving down gender inequality, she highlights that affirmative action has an important role, too. Amartya Sen, in several influential writings, however, has forcefully argued that continuing discrimination against women can hinder development. We are inclined to this view as “masculinity” is unrelated to development.

Dominance and control over women are set in male attributes and behaviour (“masculinity”), regarded as a shared social ideal. Masculinity is characterised by two factors — namely, “relationship control” as a behavioural attribute and “attitudes towards gender equality” as an underlying value. Behavioural changes are, however, slower than changes in male attitudes (UNFPA, 2014).

Women’s empowerment is defined “as improving the ability of women to access the constituents of development—in particular health, education, earning opportunities, rights, and political participation” (Duflo, 2012).

Gender equality and empowerment of all women and girls are enshrined in SDG 5. This is an ambitious goal. The litany of sub-goals is impressive but daunting. These include ending of all forms of discrimination against all women and girls; elimination of all forms of violence against them in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual exploitation; ensuring their full participation in opportunities for leadership in political, economic and social spheres; universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights; and equal rights to all economic resources including land.

Duflo argues that gender inequality is often greater among the poor, both within and across countries. Moreover, within countries, gaps between boys and girls persist in poorer and more isolated communities. But economic growth, by reducing poverty and expanding livelihood opportunities, has the potential for reducing gender inequality.

Are girls treated differently than boys? Yes, but only during crises. In India, for example, the excessive mortality rate of girls, relative to boys, spikes during droughts. So, in extreme circumstances, improved access to health services would disproportionately help girls, even if parents do not change their behaviour toward them. This flies in the face of mounting evidence of female foeticide, infanticide and pervasive neglect of girls in education, and wage disparities in some of the more affluent northern states in India. In fact, the selective abortion of female foetuses, usually after a first born girl, has increased over the past few decades, and has contributed to a widening imbalance in the child sex ratio. Cultural taboos prevent women from reporting, for example, gynaecological disorders unless they become acute. So we are far less sanguine about improved access to health services as a by-product of growth –a somewhat dubious proposition in itself – benefiting girls and women disproportionately.

At all level of incomes, women do the majority of housework and care and, correspondingly, spend less time in market work. Constrained in these ways, they are more likely to be engaged in informal but hardly remunerative home-based enterprises. So if economic development frees their time, they are more likely to switch to more productive activities. But this overlooks the imperfections of credit markets that deny them credit for being not creditworthy. Besides, social norms restrict their mobility.

Are labour market outcomes likely to be more favourable? A recent World Bank study (2015) is far from reassuring. It reports that in the workplace, females earn between 20 per cent and 80 per cent lower average wages than do males, depending on the country. Evidence from India’s Labour Bureau is more definitive. The data show that there has been little progress in terms of parity of salaries for men and women for equivalent work. Even more alarming is the fact that, in some spheres of activity in rural areas, the divide has widened. As of 2013, the discrimination in wages paid to women tends to be higher in physically intensive activities (such as ploughing and well-digging), but lower in the case of work such as sowing and harvesting.

So development alone will not accomplish much –indeed, much less than conjectured by Duflo – in empowering women. She doesn’t of course overlook the case for affirmative action to ensure greater participation of women in the political, economic and social spheres. But she remains sceptical of women’s empowerment contributing substantially to development as women are not always the best decision-makers.

Let us consider two examples from her research in which women made a positive contribution to development.

In an earlier but highly influential study (with Chattopadhyay) of Panchayats (village councils) in two Indian states, headed by women elected through quotas, it is demonstrated that these Panchayats invest more in infrastructure that is directly relevant to the expressed development priorities of women. In West Bengal, for example, where women complained more often than men about water and roads, the Panchayats invested more in water and roads. In Rajasthan, where women complained more often about drinking water but less about roads, the councils invested more in water and less in roads. Whether such choices would have been made in the absence of quotas for women heads of Panchayats is highly unlikely. Besides, there may be dynamic gains through changes in male attitudes towards women as decision-makers. Questions, however, remain about complaints by women as a preference revelation mechanism in a rural setting, as also about women Panchayat heads’ autonomy or ability to ignore or circumvent investment allocation priorities handed down from “above”.

In a test of whether income in the hands of women of a household has a different impact on intra-household allocation than income in the hands of the men, she found that pensions received by women in South Africa translated into better nutrition for girls. In contrast, no such effect was found when the pension was received by a man and no corresponding effects were obtained for boys.

Duflo is, however, far from convinced that women generally make the best decisions for development and thus there is a real risk of exaggerating their contribution. The fact that returns on loans given to women to run small enterprises are lower (or even zero) relative to those run by men is not conclusive evidence of women entrepreneurs’ inefficiency. This is a muddled inference for two reasons: as noted by her, women are often compelled to engage in home-based but hardly remunerative enterprises by their family responsibilities and binding time constraint. Relaxation of not just this but other constraints enhances their returns substantially.

A recent World Bank study (2015), as a synthesis of empirical evidence, is illuminating.

Women running subsistence-level firms are prone to external pressures to divest some of the cash from loans or grants to relatives or household expenses.

Evidence shows that women’s demand for saving accounts is high. A review of nine randomized field experiments in countries covering different regions (including Kenya, Philippines, Nepal and Guatemala) shows that savings are a promising way to improve rural women’s productivity. In Western Kenya, for example, women with access to savings accounts invested 45 percent more in their businesses and were less prone to sell business assets during health emergencies.

Capital in-kind (e.g. a physical asset such as livestock) works better than in cash to nudge women to keep the money in the business rather than to divert it for household use or pass it on to relatives.

Many of women’s additional constraints can be overcome by simple, inexpensive adjustments in programme/intervention design.

A two-month grace period versus immediate repayment requirements for poor urban women borrowers in Kolkata, India, significantly raised long-run (three-year) business profits by encouraging risk taking.

Women enjoy greater autonomy if they are able to use mobile money services to conduct financial transactions in private, receive reminders to save and obtain information on prices in real time without having to travel long distances.

Panel household survey data for Bangladesh, covering a twenty-year period, show a beneficial effect, greater for females than for males, of 20-year cumulative microcredit borrowing on household per capita income and the reduction of extreme poverty.

Business skills matter. A vocational training programme in slums in New Delhi imparting skills in tailoring enhanced employment, self- employment and earnings of women but attrition rate was high due to lack of child care support and distance.

In conclusion, the evidence supports the view that economic development and women’s empowerment reinforce each other. If women’s empowerment is a by-product of development, it is just that. That women’s empowerment is a major driver of development is contested but highly plausible.

(End)

Excerpt:

A women-led village council in rural Bangladesh prepares a “social map” of the local community. Credit: Naimul Haq/IPS

By Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka
SANTIAGO, Feb 27 2015 (IPS)

This weekend, at the invitation of President Michelle Bachelet and myself, women leaders from across the world are meeting in Santiago de Chile. We will applaud their achievements. We will remind ourselves of their contributions. And we will chart a way forward to correct the historical record. History has not been fair to women – but then, women usually didn’t write it.

This meeting will be an opportunity to take a hard look at the world that is, and the world that will be. The case is urgent, not only for individual women and their human right to equality, but for everyone. The “perfect storm of crises” as one expert has called it, threatens food, energy and water supplies. It threatens political and economic stability in all our countries. It could upend any prospects for balanced and sustainable development.

On the other hand, mobilising the potential of women and maximising their contribution will turn aside some of the worst effects of climate change and help ensure food and water supply; will help correct massive economic inequality between the few and the many; will mitigate conflict and political instability, and help to build lasting peace. Women’s rights are human necessities.

At the heart of our discussion is how to put more women in positions of power. Across the 192 U.N. member countries:

• Only 19 women are heads of state or government;
• One in five parliamentarians are women;
• One in 20 city mayors are women;
• One in four judges and prosecutors, and
• Fewer than one in 10 police officers are women.

Women leaders are just as hard to find in economic life – only one in five board seats in major companies are held by women. And this is despite evidence of increased company earnings when women are on the board!

So how do we get there from here? We already have a road map. It was agreed by 189 world leaders back in 1995, at the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing. Countries have made a good start with better overall education and health care for women; but they haven’t followed through on the rest of the package, especially political participation and economic empowerment. At the present rate of progress, it will take 81 years for women to achieve parity in employment. Women, and their countries, can’t wait that long.

This year, the 20th anniversary of the Beijing conference, the year when the U.N. will adopt sustainable development goals for the next 15 years, offers a unique opportunity to make a new start.

First of all, today’s leaders must make a personal commitment to increase women’s presence in decision-making – not just in their numbers, but in their contributions. There are many ways to do this – quotas and numerical targets for women’s participation; training and mentorship to boost women’s confidence and capacity; private-sector engagement matching public-sector initiatives. Countries will find their own ways, if the will is there.

Employers must ensure equal hiring, payment and promotion policies; support to balance work-life conditions, and give women the opportunity to lead. Managers must learn to welcome women’s input and contribution.

Leaders who lead by example in their daily lives will win allies in every aspect of their work for gender equality. They can win allies in the media too – at least to avoid reflexive disparagement, negative stereotyping and casual sexism; and at best to celebrate the positive and constructive contribution of women leaders, even in the toughest environments.

Then there are many women who struggle and suffer every day. They are the everyday heroines of our age, and their fight for equality deserves a wider audience. We shouldn’t have to wait for another vicious attack or another assassination before we learn their names.

These measures sound ambitious, but they are fully realistic. We know from our own experience in leadership, that we can achieve them all. The 1995 Beijing platform for action is not a “wish list”; it’s a “to do list.” If today’s leaders front-load gender equality, if they start now to make good on those 20-year-old promises, we can look forward to serious progress by 2020, and gender equality by 2030.

“The arc of the moral universe is long,” said Martin Luther King, “but it bends toward justice.” Where women are concerned, we have to bend that arc a lot faster now, to make up for all the years it didn’t bend at all. At stake are not only justice and human rights but also perhaps survival itself.

Edited by Kanya D’Almeida

Excerpt:

The huge student protests in Chile have spread the idea that adolescents have the right to vote. Credit: Pamela Sepúlveda/IPS

By Jessica Faieta
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 16 2014 (IPS)

Women’s empowerment and political participation are not only crucial for women: they are essential for effective democratic governance, one which promotes human rights and equity.  The same can be said about the importance of boosting youth political participation.

The U.N. Development Programme (UNDP) invited three young women parliamentarians from Latin America and the Caribbean to join a recent discussion in Salamanca, Spain, on young women’s political participation in the region.In the digital age of flourishing social media activism, these protests also provide opportunities to rethink democratic governance in the 21st century.

That’s what Paola Pabón from Ecuador, Silvia Alejandrina Castro from El Salvador and Gabriela Montaño from Bolivia have in common. They are among the very few women in parliaments and they are young: They broke a double glass ceiling.

Of the 600 million people in Latin America and the Caribbean, more than 26 percent are young, aged 15-29. This is a unique opportunity for the region’s development and for its present and future governance. Even though the average regional rate of women taking up positions in parliament is 25 percent, higher than the global average, a closer look shows that women still lag behind.

Our recent survey of 25 parliaments in Latin America and the Caribbean shows a very low representation of youth in the region’s parliaments – especially those of African or indigenous descent. Only 2.7 percent of male parliamentarians in the region and 1.3 percent of women MPs were under 30 years old—even though more than one fourth of the region’s population is young.

When we look at the age of MPs below under 40, 15 percent are men and not even 6.5 percent are women.

UNDP’s regional Human Development Reports have shown that young people have enormous potential as agents of change. But despite Latin America’s remarkable progress in reducing poverty and inequality – and its strides toward strong democracies with free and transparent elections – gender, income, ethnic origin, or dwelling conditions are all decisive barriers to young citizens’ rights and civic engagement.

One in every four young people aged 15-29 in the region are poor or extremely poor. And only 35 percent of them have access to education. More worrying still: Some 20 million young Latin Americans aged 15-18 neither work nor study. That’s nearly one in every five, 54 percent of them female and 46 percent male.

And the region’s youth have been taking to the streets, playing a central role in recent protests in countries like Brazil, Chile, Peru and Mexico. Such demonstrations urge us to understand the demands of young people, and to address lingering structural problems in our societies, especially inequality.

The increasing frequency of such mobilisations tells us that young people want to actively participate in their society’s development. The first Ibero-American Youth Survey – which we launched last year with the Ibero-American Youth Organization (OIJ) and other partners — shows that young people in Latin America, Portugal and Spain expect their participation to increase over the next five years.

Institutions should provide formal spaces for this, or protests will become the only effective way for young people to make their voices heard. And the region will waste an opportunity to enhance the quality of its democratic governance.

We are working towards this goal. UNDP and partners brought together 22 young MPs from 13 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean in 2013 to put together the region’s first young legislators’ network to boost young people’s political participation and inclusion.  We have been partnering with OIJ and other U.N. sister agencies and governmental youth secretaries to push this agenda.

Moreover, our youth online platform JuventudconVoz (youth voices), with the OIJ and the Spanish Cooperation agency, is also helping boost young Latin Americans political participation and leadership skills.

Protests sparked by young Latin Americans will likely continue in several countries. Beyond the street level, in the digital age of flourishing social media activism, these protests also provide opportunities to rethink democratic governance in the 21st century.

Jessica Faieta is UNDP’s Director a.i. and Deputy Director for Latin America and the Caribbean @JessicaFaieta / www.latinamerica.undp.org @UNDPLAC

Guaraní representative Justino Zambrana, president of the Legislative Assembly of Tarija. Credit: Rafael Sagárnaga López /IPS

By Rafael Sagarnaga Lopez
TARIJA, Bolivia, Dec 27 2012 (IPS)

Due to the intense political polarisation in the Chaco region, home to Bolivia’s oil and natural gas wealth, three indigenous lawmakers who entered the legislative assembly of the southern department of Tarija as representatives of their people have quickly come to wield decisive power.

For centuries, the semi-arid Chaco of Bolivia had a reputation of being inhospitable. Temperatures that often climb as high as 45 degrees and a scarcity of shade-providing trees were combined with its distance from the centres of power. During the colonial era, the Spanish invaders found it almost impossible to settle the vast dry region of open grasslands and shrubby areas.

Between 1933 and 1935, the harsh natural conditions helped defeat first the Bolivians and then the Paraguayans in the war they waged for control over the northern part of the Gran Chaco region, which they also share with Argentina.

As a result, there have always been areas in the now prosperous department of Tarija that have been the exclusive domain of the Guaraní, Weenhayek and Tapiete indigenous people, the area’s ancestral inhabitants. Even with the gradual arrival of paved roads and the development of a number of cities, driven by oil industry activity, the deepest reaches of the Chaco continue to be theirs.
Nevertheless, until 2009, they were excluded from political and institutional structures and received scant or no assistance from the state. They remained distanced by their geographical isolation, their Guaraní dialects, and their conceptions of humanity and government.

But 2009 ushered in a number of the changes for which they had risen up in protest marches on repeated occasions. “It was a historic victory for the Confederation of Indigenous Peoples of Bolivia, the Guaraní People’s Assembly, and popular forces in general,” departmental assembly member Justino Zambrana told IPS.

“We were finally able to elect representatives in accordance with our traditions and customs, under the mandate of the new political constitution of the state of Bolivia,” the Guaraní leader said.

The new constitution adopted that year proclaimed Bolivia to be a plurinational state, and officially recognised 36 ethnolinguistic groups, in a country where over 60 percent of the population of 11 million identify themselves as indigenous.

It also stipulated that the legislative assemblies of the nine departments into which Bolivia is divided must include indigenous representatives elected by the native communities, in accordance with their traditions and customs. In the case of Tarija, the assembly must include three indigenous representatives.

Previously, in January 2006, the country’s first ever indigenous president had taken office: Evo Morales, who is of Aymara descent. In 2011 he was re-elected to a second five-year term.

In Tarija, as well as supporting the demands of their particular ethnic groups, the indigenous representatives were also called upon to assume unexpected responsibilities when departmental governors and legislatures were elected in 2009.

They became members of the Departmental Legislative Assembly of Tarija, the Chaco region department that is now the energy and economic heart of Bolivia, as well as a major source of oil and natural gas for the entire continent. Its massive reserves supply energy to the megalopolis of São Paulo, Brazil, as well as the north of Argentina.

The department’s strategic importance gave rise to a heated political dispute in its capital, Tarija, 896 km south of La Paz.

The tight race between the political parties that back the Morales administration and the opposition resulted in a virtual parity of forces.

This meant that, among the 30 assembly members in Tarija, the votes of Tapiete representative Vicente Ferreira, Weenhayek representative Antonio Tato and Guaraní representative Zambrana became strategic.

“At first they didn’t take us into account, but when they realised that our votes were worth something, they started to seek us out,” Ferreira told IPS. “It was very difficult for me. Sometimes we didn’t know which way to decide, and in the meantime I had to learn about laws and take part in debates with lawyers.”

A series of rapid developments put the trio to the test. On May 27, 2009, the president of the assembly had to be elected. Out of affinity with the platform of Morales’ party, the Movement to Socialism (MAS), they voted for its leader, Aluida Vilte, also of Aymara descent.

This took the small indigenous caucus a step closer to the upper echelons of power in Tarija, and Zambrana was elected vice president of the assembly.

Seven months later, the assembly had to decide on whether or not to impeach Governor Mario Cossío, of the opposition party Camino al Cambio (Road to Change), who had been charged with acts of corruption by the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

The three indigenous votes were decisive in separating Cossío from his post and opened the way for a MAS member, Aymara deputy Lindo Condori, to be designated governor in his place.

“We do not do political favours for anyone. In the case of Cossío, we had to enforce the law, and that’s what we did. That was why we supported his removal,” Zambrana said.

“In indigenous assemblies we take great care to avoid any kind of political interference. When someone needs to be challenged, we challenge anyone, and sometimes this (national) government has played a divisive role and wants indigenous people to dominate other indigenous people,” he added.

“I was taught that one people cannot subjugate another people, that there has to be respect. We are always ‘yambae’ (free, with no owner, in the Guaraní language),” he declared with a smile.

And in fact, in May 2010, at the beginning of the second year of the departmental legislature’s five-year term, Zambrana became its president, but was elected with the votes of the opposition to MAS.

It is said that a committee from the national government came from La Paz to persuade the three indigenous representatives to change their stance. “Why would an indigenous person want to be president of the assembly? D

Do you want to side with the right?” an emissary is reported to have asked, and was met with the reply, “And is the indigenous president Evo Morales governing the country to side with the right?”

A year later, Zambrana was re-elected to the presidency of the legislative assembly. He says he was even approached to run for governor, but turned down the idea.

Analysts in Tarija believe his stance helped to avoid exacerbating the frequent belligerence that characterises the department’s legislature. Accusations and counter-accusations about pressures of various kinds have also affected the decisive indigenous caucus.

At the time of Zambrana’s re-election as president, a group of MAS supporters allegedly cornered Weenhayek representative Tato for three hours, in an attempt to intimidate him.

The notoriously timid legislator avoids speaking with the press. At the end of 2012, he was back in his home community, where he was called on to account for his actions to the “captains” or leaders of the Weenhayek people.

Weenhayek grand captain Moisés Sapirenda referred to the possibility of Tato’s removal as the indigenous ethnic group’s representative. “There are many things he has not reported. Next year we will consider if his mandate should be withdrawn,” Sapirenda told IPS.

The Weenhayek leader is also less than satisfied with the work of the rest of the indigenous caucus in serving the people they represent.

“We are happy with the opening that allowed us to elect our authorities through our own traditions and customs. We were hoping for laws that would benefit our people, but it seems that when it comes to deciding on works that could change our lives, we are a minority once again. We continue to be far away, like always,” he said.

Sapirenda’s warning should not be taken lightly. The Weenhayek have already revoked the mandate of a national assembly member and a regional assembly member in a neighbouring department.

In the meantime, the Tapiete and Guaraní captains are waiting until their next regular assemblies to assess the reports made by Ferreira and Zambrana, who will be expected to render accounts on how they have responded to the challenge of suddenly being thrust into positions of power.