Читать книгу Gender Equality Results in ADB Projects - Juliet Hunt - Страница 9

Gender considerations were well integrated into the project designs for the CERD and SCBD projects. Both had GAPs that were included in the loan covenants. The CERD project’s GAP included targets or strategies for the participation of women in all project components. Gender-related targets for the CERD project were included in the project design and monitoring framework (DMF) and responsibility for integrating gender equality into the project was included in the terms of reference (TOR) for several project staff.

The GAP elements were implemented and most of the targets for women’s participation were achieved. A part-time project gender adviser helped to develop ownership of the GAP among government staff and nongovernment organization (NGO) facilitators and build capacity to implement it in the districts. Sex-disaggregated data for most activities were collected and included in project reporting. However, there were no baseline data for comparison and there was no monitoring or reporting on overall GAP implementation.

The SCBD project’s GAP required district GAPs to be developed and included in regional government CBAPs. A part-time gender adviser was recruited to assist with this process. Although there were no specific targets for women’s participation in CBAP development or project training, or other gender-sensitive indicators, the loan covenant and DMF included gender-related outcomes for merit-based appointments, promotions, and training opportunities. These elements of the SCBD GAP had not been implemented due to a focus on integrating district GAPs into CBAPs, lack of attention to monitoring and evaluation, and considerable delays in project implementation.

A GAP was not included in the report and recommendation of the President (RRP) for the DBEP. However, the project design included some gender targets, which were also included in the loan covenants, but not in the DMF. While the targets were a good design feature, specific strategies to implement them were not developed. There was no provision for a project gender adviser to assist with implementation, or to build the capacity of the implementing team or their understanding of why the gender provisions were important. Consequently, while some of the targets were implemented and contributed directly to the practical benefits achieved, project implementers were unaware of other gender provisions in the project design. Despite inclusion in the loan covenant, sex-disaggregated data were not collected on some key targets, so it was not possible to verify results in these areas.