Training Process 3: Gender analysis framework

Introduction

Material for this training process was based on case studies from the following projects:

• Improving Information on Women's Contribution to Agricultural Production for Gender-Sensitive Planning (Namibia and Nepal);
• Client-Oriented Extension Training (Ethiopia)
• Development of Small- Scale Livestock Activities (India)

The focus is on awareness raising, capacity building and reorientation of agricultural extension.

The gender analysis framework

In many countries, governments are the main providers of agricultural extension support services. This is, perhaps, particularly the case in Africa. Unfortunately this support has, more often than not, been top-down in nature. Yet there is a growing awareness in government circles that this traditional style of service delivery is not working, and a more responsive, bottom-up approach is needed if agricultural productivity is to be improved and rural livelihoods sustained.

As the focus shifts towards developing strategies for sustainable rural livelihoods, some governments are becoming aware of the role that women play in rural and agricultural development. In Ethiopia, Namibia and India the role of women has been recognized in official policy documents.

The recognition that women, as well as men, have a significant role in agricultural and rural activities has provided opportunities to pilot projects that are aimed at developing client-oriented, gender-responsive approaches to agricultural extension. The projects in Ethiopia, Namibia, Nepal and India are examples. Each of these projects used a gender analysis framework as its core analysis, training and planning tool.

The gender analysis framework draws on experience from the farming systems approach, rapid rural appraisal (RRA) and PRA. In particular, three of the projects adapted methodology described in FAO, 1995c. The analytical framework employed in the Ethiopian project is very similar, having adapted that used in the 1992 FAO gender analysis workshop.

The projects

The projects in Namibia and Nepal were supported by FAO's Women in Development Service (SDWW). They were pilot projects, focused specifically on developing gender and participatory approaches to agricultural extension and planning. As a result, they had the following similar project objectives:

• improving information on the situation of rural women and men and analysing their different needs and constraints as a basis for focusing agricultural planning;
• raising awareness of gender issues among agricultural planners and policy-makers;
• increasing rural women's and men's participation in the process of planning in the agricultural sector.
• making the agricultural extension services more client-oriented.

The Ethiopian project also had a focus on participatory, gender-responsive planning and making extension services more client-oriented. In contrast, the Development of Small-Scale Livestock Activities project in India started with a conventional livestock development approach; there was no specific gender focus and initially the project targeted men. However, with the encouragement of SDWW a strong gender focus was built into the project design.

Steps in the gender analysis framework

The gender analysis framework is an analytical planning tool to help extension workers understand the communities that they are working with and identify, with those communities, the support they can provide. The main focus of the tool is the analysis of difference and, in particular, gender differences. The framework leads extension workers through four planning steps³:

There are similarities among the training activities of the four projects. For example they all:

• provided PRA and gender analysis training to project staff - in the case of Namibia, to field-level agricultural extension workers; in Nepal, to district outreach staff and planners; and in India, to agricultural extension and community development workers;
• conducted PRAs - in Namibia and Nepal, these were later used to sensitize agricultural planners on the importance of gender analysis to agricultural development strategies; in Namibia, the PRAs were also used as a training tool to sensitize and provide field-level extension workers with the skills to take a more participatory extension approach.

A key feature of both the Namibian and Ethiopian projects was the concern to build gender-responsive planning into the mainstream of agricultural extension work. In Namibia this involved establishing a cadre of master trainers - extension workers who have been trained as gender analysis framework trainers. Master trainers now have the responsibility of training other field-level extension workers to use and apply the framework approach to their field activities.

In Ethiopia, capacity building was based on a sequential system of TOT, training of field staff and implementation of the client-oriented extension approach at the village level. The gender analysis framework was a key tool in this process. The training workshops were complemented and reinforced by a training video and guidebook.

The livestock project in India had a more grassroots focus. The PRAs had considerable influence on the type and focus of project activities. For example, it had been assumed that goat keeping was the sole responsibility of men, but the PRAs showed that this was wrong and that women also have a major responsibility in the rearing of goats. The PRAs also revealed that the contribution of goat keeping to family welfare is strongly influenced by other factors.

After the PRAs, there was a shift away from a strategy that focused solely on men and goat production activities to a strategy that includes women and a more diversified range of agricultural activities, such as poultry rearing and fodder production. A deliberate decision was also made to concentrate on resource-poor communities.

Training process and methods - best practices

One of the strengths of these projects was the integration of the PRAs into training and capacity-building activities. The PRAs were used as a tool to sensitize planners and field workers on gender and agricultural development. In Namibia, training case studies were prepared from the PRAs which highlighted the division of labour, as well as the various patterns of control over and access to resources, of different farming systems in the country.

In the training workshops the case studies were used to demonstrate how the gender analysis framework can be utilized to identify farmers' needs, prepare extension plans and make agricultural extension more responsive. The use of case studies from actual farming situations in Namibia made the training and gender analysis more realistic and relevant. In Nepal, the PRAs were also used to help prepare community action plans (CAPs) that could be incorporated into district-level plans.

Involving the trainers in the PRAs and preparation of the case studies also proved to be good practice in both Namibia and Ethiopia. Participation helped to create a sense of ownership of the training process, as well as strengthening the capacity-building process. Through the PRAs, the trainers' gained a better understanding of participatory approaches and gender issues. They had the opportunity to see at firsthand why gender is an important issue, and were able to give practical examples in the training workshops.

The figure below illustrates the link between PRA training and planning in a farmer to planner and back model.

Links in the PRA to planner chain

Another good practice was the focus on training at all levels. This was particularly the case in Namibia and Ethiopia, where experience emphasized the need for extension workers, their managers and policy-makers to be gender-aware if participatory, gender-responsive planning is to become a reality. Field-level extension workers need the active support of senior and middle-level management if community-level action plans are to be implemented.

The experience of these two projects shows that, if managers and planners at the intermediate and national levels do not know or understand the purpose and value of the PRA/gender analysis approach that is being introduced at the field level, participatory, gender-responsive agricultural planning is unlikely to be implemented.

An integrated training approach is more effective. Training at the field level needs to be supported by training at the national and intermediate levels.

The projects highlight a number of other good training practices, including:

• Focusing on facts helps to break down resistance to gender analysis. Using methods that encourage participants to explore the facts and reach their own conclusions is an important part of this process. Involving them in practical PRA field activities and pairing "resisters" with "supporters" are some of the techniques that can be employed to overcome the resistance of those participants who feel threatened by gender and are more used to conventional, top-down extension strategies.
• One-off training is not sufficient. Training is as much about attitude change as it is about skill development. It takes time for people to shift their thinking from a top-down approach to embracing a responsive, bottom-up planning approach.

One of the major lessons from these projects is that field workers and trainers need to be well-grounded in the skills of gender analysis, PRA and participatory planning if they are to adjust their attitudes and work effectively with women and men farmers.

A table gives an overview of some of the training and PRA methods and techniques used to focus participants' attention on the facts.

The Namibian experience

In the Namibia project, there was a strong link between field activities and policy formulation. There was also a deliberate strategy to train not only field workers but also extension managers at the intermediate level, and planners and policy-makers at the national level. The training workshops for all these levels were based on the same timetable and used the same methods.

TOT was an important part of the Namibian project. TOTs used the same methods and materials as the master trainers were expected to use when they conducted their own field-level workshops.

In Namibia, there were four types of training events. These were all linked; one event designed to support and lead into the next:

The training events

In Namibia, there were four types of training events. These were all linked; one event designed to support and lead into the next:

• PRA training. Training in the use of PRA tools, with practical fieldwork to prepare training case studies on the different farming systems in Namibia
• TOT Training a selected group of extension workers to be master trainers. They were trained in general and facilitation skills, and in how to use the gender analysis framework
• Supervisory staff training. Sensitising senior and middle-level management of the Ministry of Agriculture about the importance of the analysis of difference and the role of the master trainers, so that they can support and encourage the use of the gender analysis framework by their field staff.
• Field staff training. Training of field staff in how to use the framework to plan their extension activities.

The master trainers participated in three TOT workshops. It took time for them to understand all the concepts, learn the appropriate facilitation skills and develop the confidence to train their fellow extension staff. Each of these workshops lasted for one to two weeks.

Sequence of events

Gender analysis framework training methods and tools

The training workshops for the supervisory staff and field-level extension workers used the same approach and materials. Senior management participated in a condensed day-and-a-half long workshop of intensive learning.

Middle-level management and field-level staff participated in three-day workshops. These allowed for more detailed analysis of the farming systems and deeper discussion of why the analysis of difference is important in agricultural extension. An overview of the timetable for the field-level training workshops is given in the figure on the facing page.

These methods were used to introduce the basic concepts and get things started. The rest of the training was based on the work sheets in the gender analysis framework. Examples and guidelines on how to use these and other methods are given in: Williams, 1994; and Wilde and Mooij, 1998.

In Nepal a different exercise was used to differentiate between sex roles and gender roles. Workshop participants were given a number of pictures to look at. These pictures illustrated such situations as: a woman breastfeeding; a man ploughing the land; a father feeding milk to his son through a bottle; a husband cooking food for his family; a man taking his son to school; a woman carrying fuelwood from the forest; women wearing saris and blouses; women giving birth to babies; women transplanting rice fields; and a father looking after a newborn child while the mother collects fuelwood. Participants were then asked to decide which pictures illustrate a sex role and which a gender role.

Of course the illustrations had to be adapted to suit a specific cultural situation and to respond to the activities of a particular farming system. Instead of pictures, the situations could be described in words. Whatever adaptations are made, the exercise is an example of a more participatory approach to helping participants to understand the difference between sex and gender roles.

As part of the introduction to gender analysis, trainers and workshop participants assessed the constraints facing women farmers. First, they identified the different types of women farmers according to their socio-economic conditions, and then they analysed the constraints faced by each type. An example of this analysis is given in following table.

Such an exercise allows workshop participants to identify the common constraints, but also the differences. The analysis could be done for each category of household and could be linked to Steps 2 and 3 of the gender analysis framework.

To make the training more dynamic and to emphasize the impact of the analysis at each step, the trainers tried to make the exercises as visual as possible. In Step 2, for example, groups were encouraged to prepare 24-hour activity clocks for each member of the household and then to record the analysis on a worksheet.

In Step 3, the groups used pictures of resources to make visual displays of who controls what and who has access to what. This method was adapted from: Marayan, D. and Srinivasan, L. 1994. Participatory development kit. Training materials for agencies and communities. World Bank.

Client-oriented extension planning: Ethiopia

Preparing a work plan for success is the final step in the gender analysis framework. In the training workshop the participants were asked to review the facts that they had listed in Steps 1 to 3, and to identify the linkages between the facts in each step and the linkages between the steps. Looking for linkages was stressed because they help extension workers to understand the complexities of rural livelihoods in a particular farming system.

On the basis of this analysis, participants were able to identify key problem areas and to decide how, as extension workers, they could assist women and men farmers, households and the community. Examples of how the facts listed in the earlier analytical steps were used formulate an extension plan are given in the figure below.

In the Ethiopian project, training guidelines have been developed to extend the Work Plan for Success into an extension plan, or calendar of work. These guidelines are documented in a booklet entitled: How to make your extension programme client-oriented. A guide, published by FAO and the Extension Division, Ministry of Agriculture, Ethiopia (November 1996).

Briefly, the guide suggests that extensionists:

• look at the problems listed in the development constraints analysis and look at the solutions put forward by the community;
• look each constraint and suggested solution, work out the objective and the necessary activity.

Extensionists should then draw up a plan of work by specifying exactly what should be done, how and by whom, as shown in the figure above.

The guidelines stress the importance of gender analysis at each stage of the planning process. However, this needs to be more clearly emphasized in terms of the target groups for each activity in the work plan.

Training trainers

Creating a team of master trainers was an important part of the Namibian project. Master trainers now have responsibility for organizing gender training workshops.

Eight trainers were selected from a larger group of extension workers who participated in the PRA/gender analysis workshop and the PRAs. The original idea was that this team would start training activities after a second workshop to finalize the PRA case studies and review the gender analysis framework methodology but, in the event, the master trainers had to participate in two more TOT workshops.

An example timetable for a TOT workshop is given in the figure below. The training process at each TOT emphasized:

• the use of participatory training methods;
• the learning of training skills, such as presentation techniques and facilitating group discussions, through practising the training methods and tools used with the gender analysis framework;
• demonstrating and practising how to use the framework as they would be expected to use it in their own regional training workshops.

The third TOT workshop lasted five days. After a brief review of the gender analysis framework and its application, the master trainers were divided into pairs and each pair was asked to demonstrate one step in the gender analysis framework. Each demonstration was followed by a review session that focused on training skills (what could the trainers do better in terms of their presentation and facilitation techniques?) and the gender analysis framework content.

The discussions looked at the purpose of each step, the questions that the trainers should be asking to further the analysis, and the key points to look for when groups report.

This detailed analysis of the framework proved to be a good technique. It gave the trainers an in-depth understanding of the approach and tools involved and of the key analysis issues.

The Ethiopian Improving Client-Oriented Extension Training project held three TOT workshops. The first was designed to equip regional and zonal Ministry of Agriculture staff with the skills to train junior staff in planning client-oriented extension training. Subsequent workshops were designed to strengthen this initial training.

In many ways the Ethiopian approach was similar to the TOT strategy employed in Namibia. The focus was on a relatively small group of extension agents, the training materials drew on PRA case studies, and participatory training methods, including visualization in participatory programmes (VIPP) techniques, were a core part of the training approach.

There were, however, some differences. The Ethiopian TOTs tended to have a broader content base. Whereas in Namibia, the TOTs focused mainly on the use of the gender analysis framework, the Ethiopian TOTs included such topics as concepts of extension, adult education, and the use of audio-visual media.

For example, TOT topics on the importance of client-oriented extension included:

• What is meant by client and client-oriented extension?
• Who is the client?
• Why is client-oriented extension relevant in Ethiopia today?
• What are the foundations of client-oriented extension?
• What does client-oriented extension involve?

Example from the topic on adult education includes:

• the nature of adult education;
• professional adult education: the professional's role, the individual's needs and goals, the institution's needs and goals, the community's needs and goals;
• the meaning of education: adults' character or behaviour, experience and environment, consciousness and awareness, conditions that accelerate learning;
• preparation and pre-planning to teach adults: aims, strategies.

In the second TOT, the training covered such topics as people's participation in development, project identification and logical framework, and stakeholder analysis. The following is an outline of the main activities in the stakeholder analysis method:

• list all primary and secondary stakeholders;
• list potential supports and opponents;
• divide stakeholders into user/occupational groups, making sure that the interests of female stakeholders and vulnerable groups are listed.

During the course of the TOTs, trainers were also involved in reviewing and revising training materials, particularly during the second TOT. Regional and district trainers reported on their own courses and made suggestions on the relevance of the PRA techniques included in the training, and on suitable approaches to extension planning.