I started to see the zero draft CFS voluntary guideline at a glance and it seems very comprehensive in terms of content and well-articulated. From my professional observations, I want to forward the following points for you to consider it in the guideline as appropriate.
To ensure gender equality - there are different actors and initiatives going on across the world. And as studies revealed the progress made thus far isn’t reassuring compared with the amount of resources invested on it. For example there is no organization be it humanitarian or development working without involving gender issue as one of the main pillars of its intervention areas. I think this creates huge resources or effort duplications. Thus, it is good for this guideline to address this matter somewhere in the document (e.g. to avoid it by designing feasible and applied strategies complemented for each other based on the countries contexts).
The gender inequality matter is chronic and result of years and years of traditions, it also interconnected with deep rooted societal norms, cultures, religions and therefore open for different interpretations and dialogs by the community themselves. Hence, context and evidence based programming worth much more than the predefined recommendations, like one fits for all mightn’t work and it is good to consider this in the guideline.
As well discussed in the document, food security and nutrition related problems, one way or another attributed by the gender inequality and women disempowerment. Therefore, working on women empowerment may be a prerequisite to address the issue of food security and nutrition and on the way gender equality could be ensured. Here what makes the big difference is the country’s specific context applicable/feasible programming approach. E.g. something successful in the pacific region might not work for African or Asian society. However, what we observe in reality is this, and might be one of the contributing factors for the low result achievement in ending violence against women and girls. So the guideline good to present general principles by recommending further country specific programming approaches/strategies.
My last point is issue of men/public figures engagement in the women empowerment/ gender equality interventions. In most VAWG prevention and response projects, I observed that men/public figures engagement mentioned for the sake of meeting discussions but less attention given with practical programming. However, the men/public figures active engagement is very crucial to address the chronic causes of gender power dynamics associated with the societal deep rooted sociocultural perceptions and attitudes. This could be one of the most important thematic areas in the gender/ food security and nutrition programming. Wishing gender equality to happen without men/public figures engagement is like simply ‘providing counseling and analgesics only for a malaria patient without giving antimalarial drugs’. And then this patient either will die of malaria or remain weak and debilitated as he/she couldn’t get the right treatment.
Therefore, to ensure gender equality, food security and nutrition through successive women empowerment efforts, first multitude of contributing factors for the matter need to be investigated, analyzed and context specific and appropriate recommendations advised to be applied openly and freely.
Mr. Gashawbeza Haile