Sending mixed messages: gender‐based analysis and the “status of women”

Abstract

Sommaire: Adoptée en 1996 en tant qu'élément clé de la stratégie du gouvernement libéral fédéral visant à promouvoir l'égalité des femmes, strategie énoncée dans Ouvrant la voie au siècle prochain: le plan fédéral pour l'égalité des sexes, l'analyse basée sur le sexe a été conçue pour favoriser la formulation et l'évaluation des politiques selon une perspective qui tient compte du sexe. Ce processus est un début, mais cet article examine les limitations de l'analyse basée sur le sexe. Il soutient qu'en mélangeant les objectifs d'égalité des femmes à ceux de l'égalité entre les sexes, le Plan fédéral et l'analyse basée sur le sexe sèment la confusion chez ceux qui formulent les politiques lorsqu'il s'agit de savori comment incorporer des mesures qui tiennent compte des réalités sociales et économiques propres aux femmes. Cette confusion découle des contraintes conceptuelles et de l'étroitesse du terme «sexe», étant aggravée encore par la capacité organisationnelle limitée qu'a Srtatut de la femme canada pour mener et coordonner une solide analyse basée sur le sexe. Abstract: Unveiled in 1996 as one of the key components of the federal Liberal government's wider strategy to promote women's equality, outlined in Setting the Stage for the Next Century: The Federal Plan for Gender Equality, gender‐based analysis was devised to facilitate the development and assessment of policies from a gender perspective. While acknowledging that weaving gender into the policy process is a beginning, this paper examines the limitations of gender‐based analysis and argues that given the intermingling of women's equality goals with gender equality, the Federal Plan and gender‐based analysis are sending mixed messages to policy developers about how to incorporate into policy‐development measures that attend to women's specific social and economic realities. These mixed messages derive from the narrowness and conceptual constraints of the term gender and are exacerbated by the limited organizational capacity of Status of Women Canada to effectively lead and coordinate substantive gender analysis.

What's the problem with gender‐based analysis? Gender mainstreaming policy and practice in Canada

“…2 Rather than being present only within specialized policy units, gender analysis would take centre stage within policy planning and development within the federal government. Responsibility for gender mainstreaming, ''gender-based analysis,'' as it is known in Canada, was placed within the Status of Women Canada, a horizontal department charged with coordinating the government's gender priorities across all departments and agencies (Doern 1974;Grace 1997). The department is responsible for implementing gender-based analysis, including its development and training, as well as monitoring and enforcement.…”

“…Despite enthusiasm for gender-based analysis, it has been met with considerable criticism since its adoption. As noted above, for example, the position of Status of Women Canada within the bureaucracy has been flagged as a key concern (Burt and Hardman 2001; Grace 1997). Not only does the department have limited political influence but its limited resources have also meant implementation problems for gender-based analysis.…”

“…In addition to contextual problems, several conceptual limits that direct attention to the degree to which gender-based analysis is, or can be, transformative in Canadian context have been acknowledged. For example, a number of scholars have criticized the expert-bureaucratic model employed by the federal government (Grace 1997;Rankin and Wilcox 2004). Pauline Rankin and Krista Wilcox argue that the model works to the detriment of state-civil society relations by privileging expert voices over women's groups (2004), which in turn have limited access to the state (for a more general discussion of this phenomenon, see Judith Squires 2007).…”

“…While there seems to be general agreement about its transformative potential, exactly how such potential can or will be realized remains a matter of debate. 1 In Canada, debates about the limits of gender mainstreaming have focused on its peripheral location in the bureaucracy (Burt and Hardman 2001;Grace 1997); the impact of neo-liberalism, which has constrained both the political will and resource allocation for gender analysis (Burt and Hardman 2001;Hankivsky 2009;Teghtsoonian 2000Teghtsoonian , 2003Teghtsoonian , 2004Teghtsoonian , 2005Teghtsoonian and Chappell 2008); the expert-bureaucratic model employed, which marginalizes women's groups (Rankin and Wilcox 2004); and its privileging of gender as the primary axis of oppression, which obscures and potentially exacerbates differences between women (Hankivsky 2005(Hankivsky , 2007. While analyses of these issues have enhanced our understanding of the limited outcomes of gender mainstreaming, they also explore gender mainstreaming as an ''instrument,'' that is, as a tool with which to alleviate gender inequality.…”

Gender equality: striving for justice in an unequal world

“…As developed over the years, and articulated in Canada's Federal Plan for Gender Equality presented to the United Nations Conference of Women, gender based analysis is consistent with the emphasis in the Beijing Platform for Action on the importance of mainstreaming a gender perspective in all policies and programs in order to determine the impacts on women and men (Status of Women 2000). Critics observe that the impact of gender based analysis can be minimized by limited leadership capacity, neo-liberal policies accompanied by the absence of resources (Burt and Hardman 2001;Grace 1997; also see: Teghtsoonian 2004) and by the narrow focus on gender alone (Grace,1997;Hankivshy 2004), Nevertheless, following the representation of several NGO women's groups (Walton-Roberts 2004), gender based analysis did provide a framework for more gender sensitive changes in several sections of Canada's recent Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), effective June 2002 (Canada 2002c). Starting in 1995 in the United States, a President's Interagency Council on Women was mandated to encourage gender mainstreaming; this agency was replaced in 2001 with the Office of International Women's Issues.…”