CANADA NEPAL GENDER IN ORGANIZATIONS

Section I: Executive Summary

3. Key Findings

Findings on gender projects:

To repeat a well known fact, gender equality takes many years - generations - to see change. More debate is on how donors can assist to promote that change. HMG/Nepal advocates gender as a cross-cutting theme rather than gender focused projects. In the consultant's view, this is ill-advised; perhaps when gender equality has progressed further, sustaining the change can be achieved by cross-cutting projects. Nepal is not yet at that stage. Projects are still needed that specifically promote women's rights and challenge the power relationships that result in gender inequality.
Many more men and women are able to conceptualize and articulate gender theory yet talk is as far as they go. Many women who were interviewed commented that men can easily talk about gender concepts now but still they are unwilling to change their attitudes and behaviour sufficiently to bring women to an equal status.
Even if gender equality is practiced within the PNGO (and this varies among the PNGOs), once outside their office doorstep, the gender divide in Nepalese society privileges men: their concerns, time and access to development benefits. The women members of the PNGOs still perform most household and family duties, so that there is less time for organizational focus.
When women can bring economic relief (group savings and access to easy loans) to families they are regarded as capable and important. But changing the existing harmful social norms and values that affect negatively on girl's and women's development takes a longer time and a focused gender approach.

Findings on NGO capacity building for gender equality

Leadership within the PNGOs is both a success factor and a cause of the failure of some PNGOs to mature. Where the leaders were able to share power and their organizational vision, the PNGO has become strong. Where the leadership refused to change or was not able to accommodate the changing interests in the organization, the PNGO was less successful (and in one case resulted in CNGO not continuing the partnership).
Respecting the autonomy of the PNGO and their ownership of capacity building sometimes conflicted with CNGO expectations of PNGOs to internalize and practice gender equality and democratic, transparent practices. Sometimes respecting autonomy meant that CNGO compromised on its results for gender equality. CNGO could have requested PNGOs to only target socially excluded groups for the CBI Fund, for example, or include more women on their executive committees, rather than leave these decisions to the PNGOs.
All of the PNGO members interviewed confirmed that the CNGO model to build capacity in local organizations for gender advocacy was a good strategy. Once they have internalized gender concepts, they are able to influence the community and local government more effectively than outsiders. They are able to constantly engage with people and build relationships from a sound base of knowledge.
While CNGO advised PNGOs to design CBI Fund projects that were small and with modest objectives, inevitably expectations were raised and requests made to continue support. The PPNGOs in particular needed more time to internalize the gender integrated capacity building.
Success among the mixed PNGOs resulted from women taking their space, and a willingness to risk conflict to demand their rights. Affirmative action is needed to strengthen women to stand up to their male colleagues and the societal pressures that pull them back down. CNGO took such measures, yet even more effort was probably needed.
Women PNGOs are a success story. They were more marginalized at baseline than the mixed PNGOs, and faced social pressure belittling their boldness in forming an NGO. Now they are the stronger gender advocates. Yet they may face more challenges in sustaining their organization as GROs since donors are less responsive to them. There is a preference from donors for staff NGOs or for politically affiliated NGOs. Men have easier access to politicians (VDCs) to access development budgets. Thus women PNGOs have both less time available and less access to resources compared with men.
Women organizations felt that they were not taken seriously before CNGO both increased their personal and organizational capacity, and gave them a profile by having a donor partner. Women who participate in PNGOs make a personal sacrifice to participate.
PNGOs were supported to work through and with other organizations to influence society for gender equality. They have done good work. To continue this focus, they need financial support and institutional encouragement to build gender capacity among other organizations and to advocate for gender inclusion.
PNGOs that showed stronger results in women's empowerment and gender equality in the organization and strategic linkages were able to influence the district environment more effectively. All these capacities are needed.
PNGOs that scored high in empowerment also scored high on commitment to their work. They directly assisted women victims as well as linked with government to bring justice to the abuse case.

Findings at district level

The period when district level structures such as the DDC-NGO committee and Gender Equality Committee were to institutionalize and demonstrate their value was during the time of increasing conflict and the absence of local bodies³ . CNGO continued the work, deciding that it was better to keep a presence and implement activities than cease all work. With hindsight, these factors were sufficient to severely constrain opportunities for local government capacity building. Thus the intended outcomes were not fully realized at district level, although some positive outcomes were achieved and continued. The responsibility now lies with the central Ministries that have taken up the model.
A donor project partner gave weight (status) to the PNGOs, and helped opened doors for them to local government. With CNGO's emphasis on linkage building, the PNGOs are able to influence local government.
The consultants conducted a short period of comparative field work in a non-CNGO district (Dhanusha). They observed that a project with a focus on gender equality that works for change through NGOs to influence other district stakeholders (local government, LA, NGOs, communities) can make a solid contribution to gender equality results. Districts without such a focus by key NGOs - even with projects having a gender cross-cutting component - lack coordination and linkages among the district stakeholders, thereby minimizing opportunities for advocacy for gender change.