THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN INTRODUCING GENDER-RESPONSIVE BUDGETING IN SERBIA (UN WOMEN EXPERIENCES)Nevena Ivanovic, UN Women Serbia

Vienna, February 29 2012

INITIATIVES IN SERBIA 2007-2011: TWO PHASES Phase 1: Entry points identified (2007-2009):

Provincial government (gender equality authority since 2002, legal act on gender equality 2005, team)

Civil society eager to engage at the local/municipal level No national GE framework, weak mechanisms Pilot GRB projects mostly done as a combination of ‘service’

to and pressure on local government Phase 2: Support for analysis, advocacy and capacity building

(2010-2012) UN Women project in Serbia & Montengro (2010-2012)

includes component on gender advocates and monitoring of (local) policies and budgets Funding to projects to monitor, analyse, advocate Capacity building for a group of NGOs (on GRB too) Environment somewhat changed – GE Law passed in

2009, some results achieved, although challenges remain

BACKGROUND – CIVIL SOCIETY AND GENDER Relatively strong women’s movement and civil society

in general: grassroots presence long history of antiwar and antinationalist activism and

on GBV issues, political representation 36 organizations participate 2005-6 in creating a National

Plan of Action on Women Push for quota in local elections in 2004, e.g. But weak on economic issues/governance – still true in

2012 Legal and institutional framework for gender equality

in place since 2009 (Vojvodina first, but GEL 09, NAP) Capacity building efforts and initiatives since 2001 –

STAR initiative, NOR Women Can Do It – integrated economic decision making and considerations of budgets in gender equality trainings for women in all sectors: it’s a long road

PHASE 1: BACKGROUND: FRAMEWORK

No national Gender Equality Law at time project began

Province: legal act on gender equality 2005, affecting GEMs in its territory (stronger)

Constitution introduces “equality between women and men” and “positive measures policy” in 2006

Gender Equality Mechanisms (GEMs): voluntary, different institutional solutions, highly dependent on political will and personal enthusiasm

Political representation at time of project beginning: after quota in 2004, % of women local councilors 20% on average (diverse across municipalities)

PHASE 1: CONTEXT FOR PILOT GRB INITIATIVES

Slow and partial transfer of powers to the units of local government

Volatile coalition politics Still predominant line budgets No obvious legal foundation for the

mainstreaming of gender concerns into local decision-making processes

Non-existant or weak local mechanisms

PHASE 1: WHAT (THEN)UNIFEM SUPPORTED Who: Three NGOs from Vojvodina; Where:

municipalities, mostly in Vojvodina 2007-08: Backi Petrovac; Pančevo, Valjevo and

Kragujevac 2009: Kovačica, Bački Petrovac, Žitište; Stara Pazova, Irig,

and Pančevo Against the backdrop:

pioneering civil society efforts to set up some of the preconditions for GRB

Their focus: raising awareness about the connections between

budgets and issues of women’s condition and gender equality, advocacy + pressure

setting up a legal and policy background that requires gender issues to be taken into account

learning about and training others on basic tools for integrating a gender perspective into local decision-making processes and administrative practices

Performing small scale gender analysis (spectrum of sophistication…)

PHASE 1:CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED No genuine political will or interest in supporting

a gender-equality initiatives (even when agreements made)

Line item budgets and “traditional” budgetary process (weak links to priorities or policies, where they have been defined), coupled in 2008 with the crises in funding

Weak institutional capacities for policy development; resistance to change

Weak institutional legitimacy and internal capacity of gender equality mechanisms (GEM) (no clear mandate or weak mandate); or, no GEM at all (the case of Bački Petrovac municipality)

Lack of gender-disaggregated data and other data needed to monitor gender; lack of capacity and knowledge on using data

PHASE 1: RESPONSES (1) Adjusting the scale, aims and tools based on

context/environment Basic skills building and awareness raising for

environments where talk of gender and gender equality is new;

Supporting GEMs and developing new, contextualized tools for those environments where previous gender equality-related work has been done;

Assessing data availability and conducting gender analysis and reviews of documents and policies, to define needs for data collecting and targeted research efforts;

Looking for gender in policy and strategic documents and for women in decision-making; budget scrutiny is, however, limited by the line item approach, and usually is done last, with recommendations on allocations likely to be general

Criticism of local government practices needs to be carefully presented as it may strain already weak partnerships between civil society and local government

PHASE 1: RESPONSES (2)

Creating legal foundations for gender-based policy and budget interventions Statute interventions (local expertise, using

existing documents) Establishing GEMs (longer process) – but it has

advanced a lot since! Local Act/Decision on Gender Equality – replication

since Cooperation with renowned constitutional law expert on

drafting it Engaging local stakeholders – GEM but also women’s groups

if active in the community Pressure to have it adopted – inside and outside Once adopted – use as grounds for further capacity building

to fulfill mandate, as well as funds for GEM and priority gender equality activities

PHASE 1: RESPONSES (3) Strategic alignments: ‘catching the

moment’ of administrative, political or policy change, or addressing a specific local issue with a gender lens Local development Strategy drafting process –

supportive mayor and ongoing drafting process of a major development document (S. Pazova)

New systematization of municipal jobs: first instance of gender equality as part of the official job description (Zitiste)

Donor support to program budgeting: gender becomes integrated in one segment in the template (Backi Petrovac)

Behind-the-scene lobbying and reliance on personal relationships, integrity or influence, or leverage of other outside actors often used to strengthen appeal

Balance between: potential for leading reforms with GRB vs. seen as challenging status quo

PHASE 1: RESPONSES (4) Conducting simple, practical and targeted research

on issues of interest to inform recommendations & build arguments for GE (examples) Stara Pazova: Under the pilot initiative, three local experts work

with the municipal GEM; conduct a survey and focus group discussions with men and women small business owners, in order to assess their needs and the problems they faced in their work Recommendations, in the shape of proposed activities and objectives,

integrated into the Sustainable Development Strategy adopted in late 2009

Strategy includes 2 programs and 8 subprograms targeting women, support to women’s entrepreneurship, and to the local gender equality mechanism

Research on women’s contribution to local economy – one set of recommendations focuses on needs for improved employability and economic activity of women (transport/mobility) (Backi Petrovac)

“Gender Barometers” in two towns – women’s and men’s skills, needs, expectations, willingness to engage in certain economic activity – important to feed into planning of subsidies, support mechanisms (conducted professionally; data has been used a since, and was published in one town)

LESSONS LEARNT FROM PHASE 1 Enthusiasm and learning by doing: significant capacity development

(civil society and independent consultants/researchers)

Realistic: seeing building of capacity as PART of “watchdog” role

Learned to employ GRB as a tool for tackling real-life problems of socio-economic development within the communities they worked in – seizing the moment

Capacity of local GEM – crucial for sustainability, good partnerships developed (capacity for influencing policies/measures)

Reaching out to non-traditional partners: working with local bureaucrats (even if women, gender blind), decisions makers (men)

Institututional framework important – but since December 2009 GEL in place, can be used to boost work in 2010 and beyond

Awareness raising: appealing and inclusive campaign by WEA in three municipalities (4 languages, members of the community speak about very practical needs of women and importance of gender equality)

LESSONS (2) Successes – depend on the political will of elected

officials and the responsiveness of senior administrators, whose buy-in and role is crucial for further mainstreaming of gender into the budgetary process

Civil society can advocate, motivate and provide support in form of expert guidance for analysis and tools development

BUT it cannot replace the will, motivation, knowledgeable engagement and strength of mandate of those whose job is ultimately to ensure that men’s and women’s needs are taken into consideration in local development

PHASE 2: CHANGED CONTEXT FOR CONTINUATION IN 2010, BUT HOW MUCH HAS CHANGED?

Law in Gender Equality finally passed, even if relatively weak

Slow and partial transfer of powers to the units of local government

Volatile coalition politics Still predominant line budgets No obvious legal foundation for the

mainstreaming of gender concerns into local decision-making processes. – to some extent still true – NGOs very important in reminding and “reading out” legislation to local governments; providing ideas in the consultation processes

PHASE 2: ACTIVITIES AND APPROACHES Funding to four NGOs (some of which learned about GRB

under another project, independent of UN women)

Parallel to this, start a series of capacity building sessions, aimed to respond to the gaps identified with women’s NGOs before – aim to improve ability to contribute to, and/or monitor, Topics: the integration of gender into local policy and budgetary processes.

Monitoring of policies, gender analysis and gender responsive budgeting

Advocacy and lobbying for gender budgeting/policy initiatives + monitoring

Understanding and using data (from sources at national and local level) and developing/working with indicators

PHASE 2: DIFFERENT FOCUS OF PROJECTS – EXAMPLES: Different focus of projects – examples:

Engendering of local development policies/proposing amendments to existing development strategies (including on rural tourism) based on genders audits of local development programs and the mapping of women’s resources (3 new municipalities in Vojvodina, including the city of Subotica)

Gender mainstreaming of employment measures – monitoring and gender analysis of the implementation of the local employment action plan and proposing additional or improved measures based on a small scale survey of unemployed marginalized women (Krusevac)

Monitoring and analysis of agricultural measures and allocations, and the local employment action plan, to improve opportunities for rural women – proposing reallocations; based on grass roots work, propose new employment schemes for women (Uzice)

PHASE 2: KEY RESULTS

Case of Uzice Statute change, stronger mechanism Budget reallocations – some New employment schemes – adopted for local plan in

2012 (public works for hard to employ women + environmental benefits)

Grass roots based and working directly with rural women

New recognition among decision-makers (resistance to ‘issue’ (gender equality), respect for advocates and realization that needs and development benefits are genuine

Responses to challenges in work on project/advocacy – capacity building by UN Women reported to help

PHASE 2: OVERALL CHALLENGES (FOR GRB) REMAIN Political will to support gender-equality initiatives – does exist in

place, often has to do with personal respect and loyalties to NGO advocates

Line item budgets and “traditional” budgetary process – still true Weak institutional capacities for policy development; resistance to

change – some advances made, lots of donor-assisted processes and opening towards using domestic outside expertise

Weak institutional legitimacy and internal capacity of gender equality mechanisms (GEM) (no clear mandate or weak mandate); or, no GEM at all – changed a good deal, at least 25 mechanisms quite active, and up to 80-90 exist on paper; there is more networking and cooperation with NGOs – at NGO initiative most often, but some are good allies

Lack of gender-disaggregated data and other data needed to monitor gender; lack of capacity and knowledge on using data – it’s a work in progress, but tools have been made and disseminated; more actors recognize this as a key need + now we have legal ground (GEL); skills improved among advocates

PHASE 2: LESSONS AND LOOKING FORWARD… Women’s NGOs better equipped to advocate, motivate and provide support in

form of expert guidance for analysis and tools development – more than before, significant capacity development and now experience

BUT – need to continue; and recognize limitations, include other NGOs - this is bound to happen anyway…

Connection to real-life problem: it is the reason why work is done Realistic: not so much building of capacity of local government – focus on GEM, or

just working on their own as advocates, with administration and government Capacity of local GEM – have become allies in some cases, although few, more

work needs to be done so GEMs too have capacity for influencing policies/measures

Institututional framework important – has definitely helped, but implementation at local level can remain illusive

Awareness raising: not so much a compontent in current projects, will see whether it will have been a weakness; more work with decision-makers

Still true: successes depend on the political will of elected officials and the responsiveness of senior administrators to concrete proposals benefiting women

BUT NGOs ARE the crucial actors who can maintain the attention, drive gender equality agenda if included in GEMs, participate in development through working groups and informal connections

POST SCRIPTUM: ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS – REGION

ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS – BOS, MAC, REGION Bosnia 2006-10: NGO United Women Banjaluka

successfully advocates for state funding for shelters for women victims of violence (RS entity)

Macedonia 2008-09: gender analysis of social services and education allocation in two municipalities

Bosnia – present: capacity building to local rural women’s groups to do

small scale budget review and policy advocacy (done by strong gender mechanism at entity level)

NGO analysis and initiative to harmonize maternity benefits across BiH (ongoing)

Regional NGO training for B. and M. NGOs (present), focus on: Role of NGOs in policy/budgeting cycle Possible points for intervention identified

(CONTINUED) ALBANIA: NGO role in identifying key issues and problems for

women in two municipalities where UN Women piloted budget and policy analysis in 2009, with focus on how national policies and assistance schemes actually work

Major issue identified through beneficiary analysis of the Law on Social Service and Assistance (remit of the national government): law assumes head of household is a man, many women-headed h. do not qualify; also, when women receive the aid, money spent on essentials more often (not bars and phones)

In 2011, amendments passed, include expanding category of “female headed households” eligible for economic aid to women: victims of DV, women in a process of divorce from their husbands, trafficked women

and families in blood feud.