Women’s Empowerment in an Expanding Europe · Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Bosnia and Herzegovina...
76
T o the Farthest Frontiers: Women’s Empowerment in an Expanding Europe Eurostep Social Watch WIDE Karat
Transcript of Women’s Empowerment in an Expanding Europe · Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Bosnia and Herzegovina...
To the Farthest Frontiers:Women’s Empowerment in an Expanding Europe
Eurostep Social Watch WIDE Karat
Impressum:
Author:Mirjam van Reisen (EEPA)
Editorial AssistanceMaxi Ussar
Project Coordination:Camilo Tovar (EEPA)Karina Batthyány (Social Watch)
Research:Barbara Ann DelcourtBen MooreCamilo TovarKarina BatthyányMaxi Ussar
Cover & Page Design:Benny Gommers
Copyrights:Eurostep & Social Watch
Copyrights of images on cover:European Commission - Europe Aid
Published by:Eurostep & Social Watch
First Edition: 1500 copies, 22 February 2005
Produced by:
Acknowledgement & DisclaimerAll rights reserved; no part of this work may be reproducedin any form, by mimeograph or any other means, withoutpermission in writing from the publishers.
To the publisher ’s knowledge all details concerningorganisations and publications are correct as given.However, the publishers would be glad to hear of anyinaccuracies so that they may be put right in subsequentimpressions.
We would like to thank UNIFEM for its support for theproduction of this report.
The report is a contribution to the review of the effectiveimplementation of the Beijing Platform for Action.S tatements of fact and opinion appearing and opinionappearing in this publication are made on the responsibilityof the author alone and do not imply the endorsementUNIFEM.
UNIFEM is the women’s fund at the United Nations. Itprovides financial and technical assistance to innovativeprogrammes and strategies that promote women’s humanrights, political participation and economic security.UNIFEM works in partnership with UN organisations,governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs)and networks to promote gender equality. It links women’sissues and concerns to national, regional and global agendasby fostering collaboration and providing technical expertiseon gender mainstreaming and women’s empowermentstrategies.
4
Table of contentToc
List of abbrevations ........................................................................................................................................ 6List of country abbrevations........................................................................................................................... 7Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................................... 8About the organisations ................................................................................................................................. 9Foreword ....................................................................................................................................................... 10Note from the editor ...................................................................................................................................... 12Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 14
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 16
The CEE/CIS region in Europe .............................................................................................................. 20-21
II. Legal Framework .................................................................................................................................... 22• General Law ................................................................................................................................................. 22• Enlargement & Accession ............................................................................................................................ 24• European Neighborhood Policy .................................................................................................................... 25• Development Co-operation Policy................................................................................................................ 26• Regional Assistance Programmes ................................................................................................................. 28
III. Financial Framework/Budget ................................................................................................................ 29• Pre-Accession aid - PHARE ......................................................................................................................... 29• CARDS, TACIS & Pre-Accession Assistence to Turkey ............................................................................. 30
IV. Programming and Implementation ....................................................................................................... 32• Accession Partnerships.................................................................................................................................. 32• Country Strategy Papers ............................................................................................................................... 32
• A. Commission Guidelines ................................................................................................................. 32• B. Country Analysis............................................................................................................................ 33• C. EC Response Strategy .................................................................................................................... 33• D. Multi-annual & National Indicative Programmes ......................................................................... 34
V. Evaluation and Impact ............................................................................................................................. 36• Candidate Countries’ Annual Progress Reports ............................................................................................ 37• Poverty eradication ...................................................................................................................................... 38• Gender equality ............................................................................................................................................. 37
VI. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 39
VII. Recommondations ................................................................................................................................. 41• Towards an integrated social Europe ............................................................................................................ 41• Developing a European Union Policy for gender equality in the CEE/CIS region...................................... 41• Recommendations to the European Union and CSOs .................................................................................. 42
5
Endnotes ......................................................................................................................................................... 43Bibliography................................................................................................................................................... 46Annex 1: Background of the European Union ........................................................................................... 52Annex 2: Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) ..................................................................................... 54Annex 3: The MDG & the Bejing Platform for Action Critical Areas of Concern ................................. 55Annex 4: Social Watch Tables
4: Legend............................................................................................................................................ 574: Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 584a: Gender gap in economic activity and earned income.............................................................. 604b: Education..................................................................................................................................... 624c: Women’s empowerment ............................................................................................................. 664d: Gender Ranking.......................................................................................................................... 704e: Reproductive health .................................................................................................................... 71
Annex 5: DAC List of Aid Recipients - As at 1 January 2003 ................................................................... 75Notes................................................................................................................................................................ 76
Table of content Toc
Tables & Graphs• Table 1: Percentage of Women Parliamentarians as of May 2004 ........................................................... 17• Graph 1: Changes in % of marriages in the CEE/CIS region 1989-1999 ................................................ 18• Table 2: Summary of analysis of the legal framework .............................................................................. 23• Table 3: Summary of the analysis on enlargement and accession ............................................................. 24• Table 4: Summary of the analysis of the European Neighborhood Policy................................................ 25• Table 5: Comparison of Council Regulation 806 & the Beijing Declaration & Platform for Action critical
areas of corncern ................................................................................................................................... 26• Table 6: Summary of the analysis of the EC Development Co-operation analysis................................... 27• Table 7: Summary of the analysis of regional assistance programmes ..................................................... 27• Graph 2: PHARE Commitment 1999-2003 ............................................................................................... 30• Table 8: Summary of the analysis of the financial framework .................................................................. 30• Table 9: Where does the money go ? ......................................................................................................... 31• Table 10: Summary of the analysis of programming and implementation................................................ 35• Table 11: Evaluations carried out by Europe Aid 2000-2003 ................................................................... 37
6
List of abbrevations
BPfACARDSCEDAWCEECFSDPCISCSPCTDACDGECECHOEDFENPEUEU15EU25MDGsMEDAMIPNIPOAODAOECDOSCEPfAPHARERIPRSPTACISTEUUNUNIFEMUNWSSDWTO
Beijing Platform for ActionCommunity Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stability in the Balkans
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against WomenCentral and Eastern Europe
Common Foreign, Security and Defence PolicyCommonwealth of Independent States
Country Strategy PaperConstitutional Treaty
Development Assistance CommitteeDirectorate General
European CommunityEuropean Community Humanitarian Office
European Development FundEuropean Neighbourhood Policy
European UnionEuropean Union prior 1 May 2004European Union after 1 May 2004
Millennium Development GoalsEuro – Mediterranean Partnership
Multi-annual Indicative ProgrammeNational Indicative Programme
Official AssistanceOfficial Development Assistance
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and DevelopmentOrganisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe
Platform for ActionPologne-Hongrie Assistance à la restructuration des Économies
Regional Indicative ProgrammeRegional Strategy Paper
Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent StatesTreaty on European Union
United NationsUnited Nations Development Fund for Women
United Nations World Summit for Social DevelopmentWorld Trade Organisation
Abb
7
ALBARMAZEBELBIHBULCROCZEESTGEOHUNKAZKYRLATLITMCDMOLPOLROMRUSSLKSLNTAJTKMUKRUZB
Country abbrevations
AlbaniaArmenia
AzerbaijanBelarus
Bosnia and HerzegovinaBulgariaCroatia
Czech RepublicEstoniaGeorgia
HungaryKazakhstanKyrgyzstan
LatviaLithuania
MacedoniaMoldova
PolandRomania
RussiaSlovakiaSlovenia
TajikistanTurkmenistan
UkraineUzbekistan
Abb
8
Acknowledgements
This report is the joint effort of many who havecontributed to bring understanding andanalysis to the report.
Karat is the network of women’s organisations in theCEE/CIS region monitoring the implementation of theBeijing Platform of Action with an invaluable knowl-edge and understanding of the reality of women’s lifein this region. This report has benefited from Karat’sexperience, knowledge, analysis and information onthe reality of gender equality in the CEE/CIS. Karat’sexecutive director, Kinga Lohmann, the members ofthe secretariat, particularly co-editor of Polish GenderAssessment of the Impact of EU Accession on the Sta-tus of Women in the Labour Market in CEE – AnitaSeibert, board members, particularly Pavlina Filipova,authors of Bulgarian and Czech Gender Assessments -Jivka Marinova and Michaela Tominova , and an ex-pert cooperating with Karat - Silke Steinhilber havemade extensive contributions and comments during aseries of meetings in Warsaw, Berlin and Brussels.
Special thanks also go to various colleagues in theCEE/CIS region who provided constructive andinsightful comments on this study. Roxana Tesui fromthe Centre Partnership for Equality in Romania, ErikaKvapilova and Shamil Tyncherov contributed greatlywith their expert knowledge on women across thisregion. All those present at the consultation meetingin Geneva on 11 December 2004 have also addedgreatly to this study.
Further, the report has benefited profoundly from theexperience, contributions and analysis provided bySocial Watch, under the leadership of Ms KarinaBatthyány and the social research team, based inMontevideo, who provided the gender indicators, andtheir analysis, used in the report.
The work of WIDE and the research on how genderequality has been incorporated as an objective in thepolicies of the EU through accession of New MemberStates is extensive and their contributions have beenvery important to the realisation of this report.
The Alliance 2015, and its members HIVOS (Nether-lands), Concern (Ireland), German Agro Action(DWHH), Cesvi (Italy) and IBIS (Denmark) havekindly permitted the methodology of 2015Watch to be
Ack
used as a framework for the approach developed inthis report. Their support is gratefully acknowledged.
The support in Eurostep of Paddy Magguinness(Deputy Director Concern, Ireland), Sylvia Borren (Di-rector Novib-Oxfam Netherlands), Gunta Berzina (Di-rector Latvian NGO Platform), and Olive Towey (Con-cern) has been vital for the realisation of this report.Rutta Kaupe made important contributions during aconsultation in Brussels.
UNIFEM provided funding for the report and the nevertiring support and confidence given by its staff hasbeen invaluable. The report benefited greatly from thecomments made on an earlier draft by, amongst oth-ers, Zina Mounla, Osnat Lubrani, and DamiraSartbaeva, during a consultation meeting that tookplace in Brussels.
Europe External Policy Advisors (EEPA) has been incharge of the production of this report. The researchof the project was supervised by Camilo Tovar, withcontributions from Maxi Ussar, Barbara Ann Delcourt,Gianni Balduzzi, Ana Stefanovic and Ben Moore. Thecover, lay-out, maps and pictures were produced byBenny Gommers.
Simon StockerDirector, Eurostep
9
About the organisations
About EurostepEurostep is a network of 16 major NGDOs from 12European countries. Collectively they work in around100 countries and have a combined annual budget ofover • 650 million. Eurostep was established in 1990to co-ordinate activities of its members at the Europeanlevel. Its two principal aims are first to influenceofficial development co-operation policies ofmultilateral institution, and in particular those of theEuropean Union; and secondly to improve the qualityand effectiveness of initiatives taken by NGOs insupport of people centred development.
More information on Eurostep can be found on itswebsite: http://www.eurostep.org
About Social WatchSocial Watch is an international network informed bynational citizens’ groups aiming at following up thefulfillment of the internationally agreed commitmentson poverty eradication and equality. These nationalgroups report, through the national Social Watchreport, on the progression - or regression - from thesecommitments and goals. The Social Watch groups,organized on and ad hoc basis, have a focal point ineach country that is responsible for promoting theinitiative; submitting a national report for the yearlypublication; undertaking lobbying initiatives before thenational authorities to hold them accountable for thepolicies in place regarding the agreed commitments;promoting a dialogue about the national socialdevelopment priorities and developing an activeinclusive strategy to include other groups into thenational group. The international secretariat of SocialWatch is hosted by the Third World Institute inMontevideo, Uruguay
More information on Social Watch can be found onits website: http://www.socialwatch.org
About WIDEWIDE is a European network of development NGOs,gender specialists and human rights activists. WIDEmonitors and influences international economic and
development policy and practice from a feministperspective. WIDE’s work is grounded in women’srights as the basis for the development of a more justand democratic world order. WIDE strives for a worldbased on gender equality and social justice that ensuresequal rights for all, as well as equal access to resourcesand opportunities in all spheres of political, social andeconomic life.
More information on WIDE can be found on itswebsite: http://www.wide-network.org.
About KARATKARAT is a regional coalition of organizations andindividuals that works to ensure gender equality in theCentral & Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth ofIndependent States countries, monitors theimplementation of international agreements andlobbies for the needs and concerns of women in theRegion at all levels of decision-making. KARATmembers include NGOs from 20 countries:Armenia, Azerbaijan, Albania, Belarus, Bosnia &Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic,Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia,Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia &Montenegro, Slovakia, Ukraine.
More information on KARAT Coalition can be foundon its website: http://www.karat.org
About EEPAEurope External Policy Advisors (EEPA) is a Brussels-based centre of expertise on the EU’s external policies.EEPA’s objective is to strengthen the participation ofactors that can contribute to a responsible social Europein EU policy dialogue. EEPA liaises on behalf of NGOsand international organisations with EU institutions,implements research, provides analyses, offers adviceto campaigns and disseminates information on EUdevelopment and humanitarian assistance, providestraining and event organisation related to EU externalrelations.
More information on EEPA can be found on itswebsite: http://www.eepa.be
Org
10
Kinga Lohmann,Executive Director, Karat
Foreword
This is the first joint report of Karat, WIDE,Eurostep and Social Watch. It marks a crucialmeeting of civil society organisations in Eu-
rope. Karat, a women’s network in the CEE/CIS,WIDE, a European network of development NGOs,gender specialists and human rights activists, Eurostep,a network of European development organisations,mainly based in the European Union and Social Watch,a global coalition of citizen’s organisations: four coa-litions with, a joint constituency in the New MemberStates of the European Union.
Karat, Wide, Eurostep and Social Watch share a com-mon understanding that the Beijing Platform for Ac-tion must inform the strategies to achieve the Millen-nium Development Goals (MDGs). The objectives of
F
gender equality and women’s empowerment are notonly independent Millennium Development Goals butalso an essential condition for achieving all of them.
This report sets this political agenda in the context ofEurope, the European Union and the CEE/CIS region,with the New EU Member States having a foot in both.It is our strong desire that the European Union willcontinue to play a global role in promoting social jus-tice and human rights, and to contribute convincinglyto the eradication of poverty and the achievement ofgender equality, world-wide.
We thank UNIFEM for their support in the realisationof this report.
Sylvia BorrenMember of the SteeringCommittee, Eurostep
Meagen Baldwin,Executive Director, WIDE
Roberto BissioCoordinator Social Watch
11
There is no time to lose if we are to reach the Millennium Development Goalsby the target date of 2015. Only by investing in the world’s women can we
expect to get there.
Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations, message on International Women’s Day, 2003”“
12
Note from the Author
This study focuses on the question of howEurope is overcoming its former division.Since 1989, Europe has changed beyond all
expectations. But while Europe is transcending itsformer separation, new borders are being put in place.We now use terms such as ‘old Europe’ and ‘newEurope’ or ‘those inside the European Union’ and those‘outside’, and we have created ‘new neighbours’. Onemight argue that a new process of inclusion andexclusion has begun, with former partners now dividedby the border of the EU.
However, the transformation of Europe also embodiesthe notion that the distinction between ‘internal’ and‘external’ is artificial and that – in terms of socialdevelopment, the borders are entirely permeable.Those who were ‘outside’ yesterday, form part of theEuropean Union today. Today’s ‘new neighbours’ maywell be formulating the European Union’s policiestomorrow as its new members. Moreover, the socialdimension of the European Union and the CEE/CISregion has become increasingly mutuallyinterdependent, with problems in one part clearlyaffecting the other.
It is clear that the transformation of the Europeancontinent is a thoroughly dynamic process. TheEuropean Union is incorporating a large number ofCEE countries. These new Member States aretransforming the European Union as much as theEuropean Union is changing them. More thananything, the New Member States bring to the EU anintimate knowledge and understanding of Central andEastern Europe as well as of the Commonwealth ofIndependent States, and a desire to cherish the invisiblelinks and connections that history has bestowed uponthis region.
These connections between Eastern and WesternEurope are the most positive consequence of what hasemanated from overcoming Europe’s divide. It wouldindeed be regrettable if Europe’s final unificationwould ultimately result in the creation of moredemarcations and borders that include and excludedifferent parts of the continent. The European Unionshould not miss the historic opportunity of a profound
unification in the wider region. Indeed, the eastwardenlargement has, more than ever before, provided theEU with an excellent opportunity to realise peace andprosperity inside the Union as well as within the widerregion in its entirety. The EU now has the potential torealise the very values upon which it was founded:equality, democracy, and an undivided Europe.
Among Europe’s core objectives are the protection andpromotion of human rights, the eradication of povertyand the promotion of equality between women andmen. None of these objectives can be achieved inisolation – and all of them are relevant for the EuropeanUnion both internally and externally. They constitutethe backbone of Europe’s social democracy that in turnprovide the philosophical foundation of its existence.
Unfortunately, while progress has been made in manyareas in the last decade in the CEE/CIS region , it is ofgreat concern to find that poverty has in fact increasedand gender equality has deteriorated in recent years.
The Central Asian Republics are now the poorestregion in the world after Sub-Saharan Africa. This isshown by the large number of people living in extremepoverty. It is been estimated that currently nearly 20million people are living in poverty across the poorestgroup of CIS countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia,Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. In somecountries, the poverty situation is particularly grave.According to World Bank estimates, 68% of thepopulation of Tajikistan and 55% of that of Moldovaare living in absolute poverty.
It is important to see these income levels in the contextof the reality of some of the regions. Poverty in theNorthern parts of the CEE/CIS region is particularlydevastating, given the long periods of extremely coldweather in countries such as Belarus.
Poverty negatively impacts on gender equality. InCentral and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealthof Independent States numerous gender-relatedproblems, such as gender-based violence, segregationin the labour market and insufficient participation of
N
13
women in parliaments and decision-making structuresare serious matters of concern.
This state of affairs calls for soul-searching in howthis situation came about and what can be done torectify it. The following report aims to add to thiseffort. It provides an analysis of the extent to whichthe EU specifically promotes poverty eradication andgender equality in its assistance to countries in theCEE/CIS region. It looks at both the internal andexternal dimensions of the EU’s gender policy,including policies affecting the New Member Statesfrom the CEE/CIS, the so-called New Neighbours, andthe countries furthest away from the current EUborders.
To be a truly socially responsible Europe, the EU mustuphold its values of equality, democracy and humanrights in its external as well as in its internal policies.
Mirjam van ReisenDirector, EEPA
Note from the Author N
14
Executive Summary
T he year 2005 is important for theinterna-tional agenda on the promotion of gender equality and the eradication of poverty. The
implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action andthe Millennium Declaration are undergoing a reviewprocess. In the context of the Millennium Declarationand the related Millennium Development Goals(MDGs), in particular MDG 8, attention is given todonors’ commitments to promoting gender equality andpoverty eradication in their external assistance.
This publication is an attempt to add to the debatessurrounding these reviews by providing an assessmentof the EU’s commitment to promoting gender equalityin its assistance to Central and Eastern Europe and theCommonwealth of Independent States (CEE/CIS).
The EU has strongly committed itself to the promo-tion of gender equality and poverty eradication. Nota-bly, it is a signatory to the Beijing Declaration andPlatform for Action (BPfA), and the Millennium Dec-laration. All of its Member States have ratified theConvention on the Elimination of All Forms of Dis-crimination against Women (CEDAW). Numerous in-ternal EU documents contain similar commitments.Therefore, the EU should clearly promote gender equal-ity and poverty eradication in its external assistance toall countries, including those in Central and EasternEurope and the Commonwealth of Independent States.
However, there are other reasons beyond these legaland political commitments that should encourage theEU to promote gender equality and poverty eradica-tion specifically in Central and Eastern Europe and theCommonwealth of Independent States.
Firstly, while recognising the heterogeneity of the re-gion, this report establishes that gender inequality andpoverty are pressing issues in most countries acrossthe region. Although standard indicators for genderequality, such as the literacy ratio between men andwomen and the share of women in non-agriculturalwage labour, suggest that gender issues are not mat-ters of great concern in CEE/CIS countries, considera-tion of other aspects like employment segregation andviolence against women shows the alarming extent ofgender inequality.
Secondly, the relationship between the EU and thisregion has undergone considerable changes over re-cent years and it is likely that it will continue to do so.On 1 May 2004 eight CEE countries joined the Unionand, once the appropriate instrument has been ratified,all the countries bordering the “new” EU will fall withinthe European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). Thus, cat-egories such as “inside” and “outside” the EU are be-coming somewhat fluid and artificial.
The changing relationship between the EU and theCEE/CIS countries has a considerable effect on thepolicies and instruments applicable to these countries,including policies on gender equality and poverty eradi-cation. This has led to an increased concern that thechanging nature of the EU might result in the creationof new divisions, exclusions and inequalities in theregion.
This concern is clearly less acute if the EU’s policiesand instruments towards the region have a strong, clearand coherent commitment to promoting gender equal-ity and poverty eradication.
But, do they?
This report attempts to answer this question. The as-sessment is based on a four-fold division of the policyprocess. The legal framework; the budget; program-ming and implementation; and assessments and evalu-ations are examined in order to establish whether com-mitments to gender equality and poverty eradicationare carried through the whole policy process.
The general finding of this report is that there is a largegap between policy and implementation.
The legal framework is largely satisfactory, featuringclear commitments to poverty eradication and thepromotion of gender equality, enhanced through a two-fold approach of women specific projects and gendermainstreaming. However, as soon as one looks at morespecific policy instruments outlining strategies to acertain group of countries, commitments become muchweaker and in some cases are completely left out. Somevague references to gender mainstreaming are often
ES
15
included in one paragraph of the documents with noreference to the overall objective of achieving genderequality, and with no definitions or explanation of howthis should be achieved.
A look at the financial framework shows that virtuallyno money is specifically dedicated to women’sempowerment and the expenditure on the social sectoris alarmingly low. The amount of money which is spenton projects and programmes that effectivelymainstream gender is difficult to identify, as there isno specific EU instrument available to track the data.The Gender Equality Marker devised by the OECD/DAC suggests that in 2003, only three out of all theEC funded projects to Central and Eastern Europe andthe Commonwealth of Independent States includedgender equality as an objective. Programmingdocuments also lack a clear gender perspective, andthis oversight is subsequently carried through to theimplementation documents.
Finally, evaluations carried out by the EuropeanCommission hardly ever consider the impact ofprojects on gender equality and poverty eradication.This comes as no real surprise, as the specificCommission Guidelines for Evaluations do not requiresuch a consideration. Even when gender equality isconsidered, the evaluations merely consist of onesentence suggesting that gender mainstreaming is notproperly applied, but do not provide recommendationsto improve the situation.
The report concludes that, for the EU to be true to itsfounding principles, to be a socially responsible globalactor, to avoid creating new divisions on the Europeancontinent and to substantially contribute to achievingthe MDGs, it must significantly increase its efforts topromote gender equality and the empowerment ofwomen in its assistance to Central and Eastern Europeand the Commonwealth of Independent States.
ESExecutive Summary
16
Introduction
2005: a crucial year for gender equality and poverty eradication
The year 2005 is crucial for the international agenda of poverty eradication and the promotion of genderequality. The implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, and the MillenniumDeclaration are undergoing a 10 and a 5 year review process respectively. Actual progress towards thetargets outlined in these documents is being measured. Crucially, the commitment of various donors tothese targets in their external assistance to the wider world is also assessed.
This report is an examination of gender equality in one specific region: Central and Eastern Europe andthe Commonwealth of Independent States (CEE/CIS), in light of its changing nature and increasinglyclose relationship with the European Union (EU). Particular focus is given to the EU’s commitments topromoting gender equality and poverty eradication in its assistance to the region.
I.
The European Union’s (EU) relations with itsneighbours on the East were fundamentally changedin 1989, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and in 1991,after the collapse of the Soviet Empire. In the followingperiod significant developments took place thatculminated in eight of the EU’s previous Easternneighbours becoming members of the Union on 1 May2004.
The inclusion of some, implies the exclusion of others.At present the EU’s policy towards the region can beroughly divided into four, and soon, five differentcategories – relating to different policies, and supportinstruments. (1)
Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealthof Independent States (CEE/CIS) is extremely vast,covering 17% of the world’s land, holding 9% of theworld’ s population, and comprising many differentcultural, linguistic and religious traditions. At the sametime, some aspects of the countries’ social fabric,notably the level and particular nature of genderinequality and poverty, stem from a shared regionalhistory. Until 1989 all the countries of the region wereunder communist regimes. Since then, they haveundergone substantial political and economic reformprogrammes. These have increased gender inequalityas well as poverty and have led to the inequalities ingender taking a simelar form across the region.
The EU’s assistance to the CEE/CIS region as a wholeshould prioritise these particular aspects of genderinequalty and poverty.
However, does it?
In light of the review of the implementation of theBeijing Declaration and Platform for Action(2) and theMillennium Declaration(3) in 2005, in which the EUand its Member States clearly committed themselvesto focus on the eradication of poverty and thepromotion of gender equality in all their actions,including their external assistance, this is a particularlypressing question.
This report is an attempt to add to the debatessurrounding the reviews by analyzing theoperationalisation of the EU’s commitments to genderequality and poverty eradication in its assistance tothe CEE/CIS region.
Gender Equality and Poverty in Central and EasternEurope and the Commonwealth of Independent StatesThe struggle of transition from centrally-planned,Soviet-style economic policies and dictatorialgovernments to democratic market-economies hasdeeply affected every aspect of life in the CEE/CISregion. Economic upheavals combined with the factthat the majority of states emerging out of the SovietUnion have very little experience in independentstatehood and/or building of democratic institutions,
17
I.
has led to numerous conflicts over the past fifteenyears.
The transition has had a particularly severe impact onpoverty and gender equality. Absolute poverty hasincreased five-fold, GDP has fallen, social securitysystems have been dismantled and employment andwages have fallen considerably. The effects oftransition on gender equality are more difficult to
measure, as thesituation for womenis still affected by theremnants of theSoviet regime. As aresult most of thestandard indicatorsused to measuregender equality suchas information onhealth and
education, have traditionally been relatively good inthe region. According to the Human DevelopmentIndex, for example, none of the countries in the CEE/CIS region fall within the low gender relateddevelopment index or the low gender empowermentindex. Indeed, 11 out of the 28 countries are listed ashaving a higher gender related development index.(4)
Notably, the literacy rate of women throughout theregion is as high as it is for men, in some cases even
indicating an imbalance in favour ofwomen and as many boys as girlsenrole in education at all levels. Theshare of women in non-agriculturalwage employment also indicates avery positive picture. Research bySocial Watch shows that the shareof women in the non-agriculturalsector in the CEE/CIS is higher thanin the EU 15.(5)
Similarly, figures on the gender gapin economic activity and earnedincome show that, on the whole, theCEE/CIS countries tend to do betterthan the EU 15. Social Watch foundthat the worst performing countriesare Austria – where women earnonly 36% compared to men-,Ireland, Greece and Spain. (seeannex 4a)
However, consideration of otherindicators paints a very differentpicture. Figures on the share of seatsheld by women in nationalparliaments show that the average
Introduction
In the countries with economies in transition, women’s politicalparticipation declined, in part as a result of the dramatic political andeconomic changes that took place in those societies, although a reversal ofthe decline has been observed more recently.
Review of the Further Implementation of the World Summit for Social Development andthe outcome of the twenty-fourth Special Session of the General Assembly, Economic andSocial Council, 1 December 2004, E/CN.5/2005/6.
”“
:1elbaT4002yaMfosasnairatnemailraPnemoWfoegatnecreP
nemoWfoegatnecrePyaM1tasasnairatnemailraP
4002
roelgniSrewoLesuoH
reppUroesuoH
etaneS
htoBsesuoHdenibmoc
segarevalabolG %6.51 %4.41 %4.51
seirtnuoccidroN %7.93 A/N %7.93
saciremA %6.81 %3.81 %5.81
rebmemECSO-eporuEcidroNgnidulcniseirtnuoc
seirtnuoc%1.81 %3.51 %6.71
rebmemECSO-eporuEcidroNgnidulcxeseirtnuoc
seirtnuoc%1.61 %3.51 %9.51
aisA %1.51 %8.41 %1.51
acirfAnarahaS-buS %6.41 %0.31 %4.41
cificaP %1.11 %5.02
SIC/EEC %1.31 %5.01 %7.11
setatSbarA %0.6 %5.7 %4.6
18
percentage of women is 13%,putting the CEE/CIS region inthe second worst placeglobaly. (see table 1)Indicators measuring maternalhealth also show that genderinequality is still a pressing issues across the region.Social Watch found that maternal mortality rates arehighest in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan andAzerbaijan, while they are lowest in Sweden, Slovakia,Austria and Spain. (see annex 4d)
Research also indicates that, across the region, thesituation of women in the labour market is a particularcause for concern. Discrimination in the employmentsector and employment segregation has increased.Women are increasingly concentrated at the lower endof the labour markets and mainly employed in theservice sector. The combination of this with thedismantling of social security systems has led manywomen to feel a loss of economic and social security.This loss on the one hand, along with greater choiceon the other, is reponsible for the severe changes inwomen’ s life cycles (6) in the CEE/CIS region overthe last fifteen years. (see graph 1)
Violence against women, including domestic violenceis a very serious problem in the CEE/CIS region. 21%of women in Ukraine, 22% in Russia, 29% in Romaniaand 53% of women in Armenia report experience ofspousal physical abuse. .(7) In Uzbekistan and Tajikistansexual harassment at the workplace has becomeincreasingly commonplace and the rate of suicidethrough self-immolation has increased. (8)
Finally, the economic hardship and desperation
endured by women, combined with numerous conflictsand loosening of border controls, has led to an increasein trafficking of women and children across the region.Trafficking is not only sexual exploitation and labourexploitation, it also often results in physical violence,sexual assault, rape, threats and other forms ofcoercion.(9)
All the above shows that, while keeping thegeographical, economic, cultural and religiousheterogeneity of the CEE/CIS in mind, it has to berecognized that gender inequality is a very serious issueof concern across the region. Due to the region’s sharedhistory, certain commonalities in the way in whichgender inequality manifests itself in the countries ofthe CEE/CIS can be identified and should inform anydonor’s assistance to this region.
The EU’s commitments to gender equalityGender equality is one of the key principles of theEuropean Union. Article 3 (2) of the Treatyestablishing the EC (10) explicitly commits it to thepromotion of gender equality in all its actions. Variousother documents such as the 1998 Council Regulation,“on integrating gender issues in developmentcooperation” (11) further elaborate on this commitmentand outline the twofold strategy the EU is to pursue inorder to promote gender equality in its actions. Thisapproach consists of on the one hand, mainstreamingof gender into all development co-operation, and on
IntroductionI.
“53% of Armenian women are reported to have been
abused 1-3 times in the course of their lives”(12)
19
the other hand, inclusion of specific measures targetingwomen. The EC Treaty also refers to povertyeradication as one of the EU’s objectives in itsdevelopment co-operation policies. This commitmentto poverty eradication is even more strongly expressedin the 2000 Joint Commission and Council Statementon EU Development Policy, which presents it as the“overall objective” of EC development cooperationpolicy.(13)
The EU has also committed itself to promoting genderequality and the eradication of poverty at theinternational level. Firstly, all Member States havesigned the 2000 Millennium Declaration, which isstrongly committed to poverty eradication and includesequality between men and women as a fundamentalvalue. Secondly, all EU Member States are party tothe Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination against Women (CEDAW) (14) and arethus legally bound to actively advance and promotegender equality. Thirdly, the EC was actively involvedin the drafting process of, and is a signatory to, the1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action,which has at its heart the empowerment of women.This document includes a comprehensive range ofmeasures to be taken to achieve gender equality. Mostimportantly, the Beijing Platform for Action establishesa strong link between gender equality and povertyeradication and highlights crucial gender concerns intwelve specific areas, many of them linked to theMDGs.
The EU is therefore politically and, to a certain extent,legally obliged to promote gender equality and povertyeradication in all its actions, including in its assistanceto the CEE/CIS region.
Focus of the report – the 2015 Watch methodologyBased on these insights, the following analysis willexamine to what extent these commitments have beenoperationalized in the EU’s assistance to the CEE/CISregion. To do so, a methodology, specifically devisedby Alliance 2015 (15) will be used. The methodology isbased on the assumption that the quality ofinterventions is determined by the quality of the policyprocess which, therefore, needs more detailed analysis.
To do so the policy process is divided into thefollowing four stages:
For the purpose of this report, each policy phase in allthe different EU instruments to the CEE/CIS region isanalysed in order to determine the extent to which theEU promotes gender equality and poverty eradication.Commitments to gender equality are measured througha threefold approach: Firstly, specific references toenhancing gender equality and to the empowermentof women will be considered. This is particularlyimportant, as many of the problems specifically facedby women in the CEE/CIS region, such as domesticviolence, require a women-targeted approach.Secondly, three areas with particular effect on mostwomen’s lives (poverty reduction, access and qualityof education, access and quality of health care) willbe examined to determine whether they are givenadequate attention and whether projects focussing onthese sectors include a gender perspective. Thirdly,this report will examine to what extent gender aspectsare considered in the general priority sectors of ECassistance to the CEE/CIS, as most of them have adifferent impact on women and men.
Introduction I.
20
[Quote]10 years after the fall of the Berlin wall, Europe must not be divided by a “prosperity border”
between the European Union & its Eastern Neighbours.Gerhard Schröder
With the recent enlargement of the EUon May 1 2004 and the inclusion of8 countries from Central and Eastern
Europe, the EU’s relation to the CEE/CIS regionis divided into four and soon five differentcategories: the New Member States, AccessionCountries, Potential Candidate Countries,countries that fall within general DevelopmentCooperation Policy and, subject to ratification ofthe European Neighborhood Instrument, countriesthat are covered by the new EuropeanNeighborhood Policy. (see page 21).
The category into which a country falls in definesthe EU’s policies and programmes towards it,including provisions on gender equality andpoverty eradication. To stay true to the valuesenshrined in its founding treaty and to thecommitments made on the internal andinternational level on gender equality and povertyeradication, all EU policies should equallypromote both objectives. This is particularlyimportant if the creation of new divisions,exclusions and inequalities in Europe as a wholeare to be avoided.
The CEE/CIS region in Europe
21
The CEE/CIS region in Europe
Countries falling within EU Development Cooperation PolicyThe relation between these countries and the EU is defined through general EU development cooperationpolicy and currently the TACIS policy instrument.
New Member States of the European Union.These 8 countries are now part of the EU and take partin the internal policies of the Community, including theCommunity policies on gender equality managed by theCommission Service for Employment and Social Affairs.
Accession CountriesAccession Countries, are the countries who have beenformally approved as candidates for EU membership.The EU policy toward these countries will be definedthrough special pre-accession assistance, which ismanaged by DG Enlargement and is identified on acountry by country basis. Currently, Romania, Bulgariaand Croatia still fall within specific EU policyinstruments: PHARE and CARDS.
Potential Candidate CountriesPotential Candidate Countries have not yet beenofficially accepted as candidates for EU membership,but negotiations are under way. Currently they all fallunder the CARDS policy.
European Neighborhood CountriesThese are all the countries that border the post-enlargement EU. Once the EuropeanNeighborhood Instrument is implemented, therelation which these countries will have with theEU will be based on the European NeighborhoodPolicy. Its main objective is to offer the EU'sneighbours, "a chance to participate in various EUactivities, through greater political, security,economic and cultural co-operation." Currently,
EU Member StatesThese are the states which were members of the European Union before the enlargement on 1 May 2004.
22
Legal FrameworkII.
General EC LawPresently, gender equality is a fundamental principleof the EC. However, it was not until the Treaty ofMaastricht, 1992, that the concept was explicitlyincluded in its primary law, and then only with regardto the labour market and treatment at work. The firstgeneral and comprehensive commitment to thepromotion of equality between women and men wasmade in the Treaty of Amsterdam, 1999. Article 2 ofthe treaty states that, “ the Community shall have as itstask (...) to promote (...) equality between men andwomen (...)” . Further, article 3 (2), commits the EUto eliminating gender inequality and promotingequality between men and women in all its activities.This is a crucial amendment to the EU’s primary law,as it not only mentions gender equality as a principle,but as an objective of actions undertaken by the EU.Despite this positive framework, a closer look at theEU’s specific commitments to gender equality in itsdevelopment cooperation and external relations revealsthat no specific reference to the concept is made in
these parts of the Treaty. Notably article 177, whichoutlines the precise and general objectives of EUdevelopment cooperation, mentions principles such asdemocracy, the rule of law and general human rights,but does not include gender equality.(1)
The EC Treaty might be replaced by the ConstitutionalTreaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe, (2) onceit has been ratified by the Member States. TheConstitution for Europe also contains a strong andcomprehensive commitment to equality between menand women. The principle is enshrined in the Union’svalues and objectives, and re-affirmed in articles 83and 116, both of which are dedicated to the objectiveof eliminating inequality between men and women.Article 116 merits particular attention as it commitsthe EU to mainstreaming gender across all its activities.
This section will analyse the legalframework for the promotion of genderequality by looking at:
General EC LawEnlargementEuropean Neighborhood PolicyDevelopment CooperationRegional Assistance Programmes
What is gender mainstreaming
“Mainstreaming a gender perspective is the process of assessing the implications for womenand men of any planned action, including legislation, policies and programmes, in all areas and
at all levels. It is a strategy for making women’s as well as men’s concerns and experiences an integraldimension of the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies and programmes in allpolitical, economic and social spheres so that women and men benefit equally and inequality is notperpetuated. The ultimate goal is to achieve gender equality.(3)
“Gender mainstreaming is the (re)organisation, improvement, development and evaluation of policyprocesses, so that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at allstages, by the actors normally involved in policy-making.” (4) ?
How has the EU translated its obligations underCEDAW, its commitments under the
Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action andthe Millennium Declaration into the legal frame-
work of policies affecting the CEE/CIS region
?
??
23
It states that, “In all the activities referred to in thisPart, the Union shall aim to eliminate inequalities andto promote equality between women and men.”Furthermore, a declaration on violence against womencan be found in annexed to the Treaty.
Considering the EU’s commitments in relation to itsexternal activities, however, the picture is less positive.Article 3.4 clearly states that,
“In its relations with the wider world, the Union shall(...) contribute to peace, security, sustainabledevelopment of the Earth, solidarity and mutualrespect among peoples, free and fair trade, eradicationof poverty and the protection of human rights, inparticular the rights of the child.”
References to gender equality or women’s rights areconspicuous only by their absence. Moreover, thearticles specifically dedicated to EU developmentcooperation and external relations do not mentiongender equality as an objective or even as a guidingprinciple. Article 292 states that the guiding principleswhich the EU seeks to advance in the wider worldare:
“democracy, the rule of law, the universality andindivisibility of human rights and fundamentalfreedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of
Treaty of Amsterdam, 1999Article 3.2: In all the activities referred to inthis Article, the Community shall aim toeliminate inequalities, and to promote equality,between men and women.
Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe,2004Article III 116: In all the activities referred to inthis part, the Union shall aim to eliminateinequalities, and to promote equality betweenmen and women.
equality and solidarity, and respect for the principlesof the United Nations Charter and international law.”
Although it can be argued that the general commitmentof the EU to promote gender equality in all its actionsincludes its relations with the wider world, the generalneglect of gender issues in EU’s external relationsindicates the need for its specific re-affirmation.Regarding poverty eradication, the Treaty clearly statesthat, “Union development cooperation policy shallhave as its primary objective the reduction and, in thelong term, the eradication of poverty.”
II.Legal Framework
:2elbaTkrowemarflagelehtnosisylanaehtfoyrammuS
tnemucoDlageLsiytilauqeredneG
nasadedulcnievitcejbo
siytilauqeredneGnasadedulcni
lanretxenievitcejbosnoitaler
gnimaertsniamredneGasadedulcnisi
ygetarts
sinoitacidareytrevoPllarevonasadedulcni-polevedfoevitcejbo
noitarepooctnem
ehtgnihsilbatsEytaerTCE seY oN seY oN
agnihsilbatsEytaerTeporuErofnoitutitsnoC seY oN seY seY
nokrowemarFnommoC-1002ytilauqEredneG
5002seY seY seY elbacilppaton
24
Legal Framework
The overall commitment to gender equality is reflectedin the EU’s secondary and soft law. Notably, theCommunity Framework on Gender Equality (2001-2005) (5) provides a framework for action within whichall community activities must contribute to the goalof eliminating inequalities and promoting equalitybetween women and men. This commitment has beentranslated into legally binding and directly applicableprovisions on gender equality in the EU’s internal law,particularly in relation to employment and socialsecurity issues. (6)
Copenhagen Criteria for Accession to the EU:
Countries must:be a stable democracy where the rule of lawand respect for human and minority rights isensured.
dispose of a functioning market economy whichhas the capacity to compete within the singleEuropean markets
transpose the acquis communautaire, thecommon body of EU legislation, into nationallegislation and ensure its implementation.
Enlargement and AccessionIn preparation for membership of the EU, candidatecountries are required to meet three basic criteria,entitled the Copenhagen Criteria .The efforts to meet these criteria have had a mixedimpact on gender equality across the CEE/CIS region.Firstly, the alignment with the acquis communautaire,the transposition of all EC law, including all directiveson gender equality, has had a positive effect on thelegal status of women. Notably, it has contributed tothe creation of institutional bodies and legalmechanisms that support gender equality, if only inemployment and social policy matters. Despite thesepositive developments, it is disputed to what extentvarious changes in the law have actually improvedwomen’s and men’s lives, as there is often a starkdifference between passing and implementinglegislation. For instance, WIDE’s research on theCzech Republic suggests that, “The changes in theLabour Code concerning discrimination have gonelargely unnoticed.”(7)
Moreover, an analysis of the entire 31 chapters of theacquis communautaire reveals that gender equality isonly mentioned in chapter 13 which focuses onemployment and social policy.(8) The failure to mentiongender equality throughout the document is a seriousomission as it suggests that gender equality is not beingmainstreamed or treated as a cross-cutting issue in theenlargement process. Various women’s rightsadvocates have expressed concern about the EU’salmost exclusive focus on gender equality inemployment and social policy. (9)
II.
:3elbaTnoisseccadnatnemegralnenosisylanaehtfoyrammuS
tnemucoDlageL dedulcnisiytilauqeredneGevitcejbonasa
signimaertsniamredneGygetartsasadedulcni
sinoitacidareytrevoPllarevonasadedulcni
tnempolevedfoevitcejbonoitarepooc
airetirCnegahnepoC oN oN oN
eriatuanumoCsiuqcA detimilyrevtub,seY oN oN
25
The emphasis ongender equality inemployment and socialpolicy reflects the detailoutlined in this area inthe EU Treaties relatedto the EU’s internalsocial and employmentpolicy, and hence, theemphasis given in legalterms to this aspect ofgender equality. Whilethis is important, otheraspects of women’srights, which have remained untouched by thenegotiations on legal reform in the preparation ofaccession to the European Union, are at least equallyrelevant to the CEE/CIS region.
European Neighbourhood PolicyWith the accession inclusion of ten countries to theEU in May 2004, the Union’s external borderschanged considerably. To avoid any stark division inthe region, to encourage co-operation with its new
neighbours but also with a view to securing its borders,the EU has developed a new European NeighbourhoodPolicy (ENP). This policy, once in force, will definethe EU’s relations with 17 countries, including six fromthe CEE/CIS region. (10)
Two European Commission Communications on theENP have so far been produced. The first, entitled“Paving the way for a new Neighbourhood Instrument”(11)
does not mention gender or women at all. Povertyeradication, health and education are all mentioned,however, not as principle objective of the ENP. Asecond document, the Commission Communication“European Neighbourhood Policy Strategy Paper”, (12)
includes gender equality as one of the “shared values”to be taken into account when devising action plans inthe context of the ENP. The “promotion of equalopportunities for women” is only mentioned in thecontext of regional cooperation with Mediterraneancountries and is optional: “possible areas for furthersub-regional co-operation will be identified in thebilateral action plans and may include ... promotionof equal opportunities for women.”
In a policy which aims to create a large area of sharedvalues, peace and prosperity in wider Europe, the issueof gender equality is conspicuous only by its absence.There is clearly a need for an articulation of genderequality as an objective of the New NeighbourhoodPolicy, and an identification of parameters defining ajudicial framework for action in this area.
Regulation 806 on promoting gender equalityin development co-operationThe objectives to be pursued by this Regulation,in accordance with the goal of promoting genderequality and empowering women as specifiedby the United Nations Millennium DevelopmentGoals, the United Nations Convention on theElimination of All Forms of DiscriminationAgainst Women, the Beijing Declaration andPlatform for Action...are the following: tosupport gender mainstreaming in all areas ofdevelopment co-operation, combined withspecific measures in favour of women of all ages,with the goal of promoting gender equality asan important contribution to poverty reduction.
II.Legal Framework
:4elbaTyciloPdoohruobhgieNnaeporuEehtfosisylanaehtfoyrammuS
tnemucoDlageLsiytilauqeredneG
nasadedulcnievitcejbo
redneGsignimaertsniam
asadedulcniygetarts
noitacidareytrevoPnasadedulcnisi
foevitcejbotnempoleved
noitarepooc
noissimmoCyluJ,noitacinummoC
3002oN oN nasatontub,seY
evticejbollarevo
noissimmoCyaM,noitacinummoC
4002oN tontub,seY
yrotagilbo oN
26
Legal Framework
Development Co-operation PolicyCountries of the CEE/CIS region which are classifiedas developing countries by the Development Assis-tance Committee (DAC) of the OECD are eligible forOfficial Development Assistance (ODA). EU ODA isarranged through a number of legal instruments underthe EU Development Cooperation Policy.
A Council resolution adopted in 1998 sets a frameworkfor gender policy in development co-operation.(13)
Though not legally binding it provides an importantreference to a framework for action in this area. Theresolution contains a two-fold approach to gender: (i)gender mainstreaming in the conception, design,implementation, monitoring and evaluation of allprogrammes and interventions, and (ii) support tospecific activities with women.
In 2000 a Joint Commission and Council Statementon EU Development Policy was adopted. This whitepaper seems to be shifting from the approach set outin the resolution, as it exclusively focuses on gendermainstreaming and does not mention women specificprojects. The statement outlines six priority areas ofEU development cooperation, and presents genderequality as a cross-cutting concern, alongside thepromotion of human rights, children’s rights and theenvironment. It is stated that these concerns, “shouldbe mainstreamed at every stage of execution”. Thestatement does not explain how the strategy of gendermainstreaming is to be implemented.
The development policy on gender mainstreaming hasbeen further elaborated in the 2001 Programme ofAction for the mainstreaming of gender equality inCommunity Development Co-operation. (14) Thedocument highlights the link between genderinequality and poverty and presents gendermainstreaming as an important tool for achieving theeradication of poverty. It states that,
“The main objective of the European CommunityDevelopment Policy is to foster sustainable develop-ment designed to eradicate poverty in developingcountries. Gender mainstreaming is an essential partof this.”
Gender should be “analyzed and integrated into thesix priority areas of EC development cooperationactivities.” The document gives a very useful outlineof what kind of gender issues arise within these,seemingly neutral, priority areas.
II.
:5elbaTdna608noitalugeRlicnuoCfonosirapmoC
rofmroftalPdnanoitaralceDgnijieBehtnrecnoCfosaerAlacitirCnoitcA
fo4002/608noitalugeRtnemailraPnaeporuEeht
nolicnuoCehtdnaredneggnitomorp
tnempolevedniytilauqenoitarepo-oc
dnanoitaralceDgnijieBnoitcArofmroftalP
lauxesdnaevitcudorpeRhtlaeh
dnaseitilauqenIdna,niseicauqedani
htlaeh,otsseccalauqenu.secivresdetalerdnaerac
nemowtsniagaecneloiV nemowtsniagaecneloiV
gniniarTdnanoitacudE
dnaseitilauqenIdna,niseicauqedani,otsseccalauqenugniniartdnanoitacude
tnemnorivnE
ehtniseitilauqeniredneGlarutanfotnemeganam
ehtnidnasecruoserehtfognidraugefas
tnemnorivne
sthgirnamuH
dna,roftcepserfokcaLdnanoitomorpetauqedani
namuheht,fonoitcetorpnemowfosthgir
noitneverptcilfnoC
rodemrafostceffeehTnotcilfnocfosdnikrehto
esohtgnidulcni,nemowngierofrednugnivil
noitapucco
dnanoitazitarcomeDninemowfonoitapicitrap
dnacimonoce,lacitilopgnikam-noisicedlaicos
ssecorp
nemneewtebytilauqenIgnirahsehtninemowdna
-noisiceddnarewopfoslevelllatagnikam
27
Regulation 806 “on promoting gender equality indevelopment cooperation” re-focuses EC genderpolicy in development cooperation on the twofoldapproach of (i) mainstreaming and (ii) specificaction.(see page 25) Presenting gender equality as itsoverall aim, as well as recognizing the importance ofgender equality to eradicating poverty, the regulationcalls for gender mainstreaming in the six priority areasof EC development policy and for specific measuresfor the empowerment of women. In particular, it callsfor action in the field of reproductive and sexual health,violence against women, girl-child issues, educationand training of women, the environment, human rights,conflict prevention, democratization and the
II.
participation of women in the political, economic, andsocial decision-making process. Thus, it endorsesalmost all the critical areas of concern outlined in theBeijing Declaration and Platform for action, as shownin table 8.
Moreover, the regulation specifically reiterates theimportance of CEDAW, as well as the BeijingDeclaration and Platform for Action and theMillennium Development Goals. It provides acomprehensive understanding of gender equality aswell as a strong and clear commitment by the EU topromoting equality between men and women indevelopment cooperation.
Legal Framework
:6elbaTsisylananoitarepo-oCtnempoleveDCEehtfosisylanaehtfoyrammuS
tnemucoDlageLytilauqeredneGnasadedulcnisi
evitcejbo
fonoisulcnIdetegratnemow
snoitca
redneGsignimaertsniam
asadedulcniygetarts
ytrevoPsinoitacidarenasadedulcni
foevitcejbotnempoleved
noitarepooc
,licnuoCtnempoleveDnaeporuEgnitargetnI:noituloseRlicnuoCtnempolevedniseussiredneg
naeporuE,slessurB.noitarepooc.5991rebmeceD02,licnuoC
seY seY seY oN
licnuoCdnanoissimmoCtnioJtnempoleveDUEnotnemetatS
0002,yciloPoN oN seY seY
:7elbaTsemmargorpecnatsissalanoigerfosisylanaehtfoyrammuS
tnemucoDlageLytilauqeredneGnasadedulcnisi
evitcejbo
fonoisulcnIdetegratnemow
snoitca
redneGsignimaertsniam
asadedulcniygetarts
ytrevoPsinoitacidarenasadedulcni
evitcejbo
noitalugeRlicnuoCERAHP oN oN oN oN
noitalugeRlicnuoCSDRAC seY oN oN seY
noitalugeRlicnuoCSICAT oN oN seY oN
yekruTotecnatsissAnoissecca-erP
htiwylno,seYlaicoSotecnerefer
dnayciloPtnemyolpmE
oN seY oN
28
Legal Framework
PHARE:
Countries covered by PHARE are:Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia,Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania andBulgaria.
Central objective: Provision of assistance tocountries in their preparation for EU accession1
CARDS
Countries covered by CARDS are:Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbiaand Montenegro.
Central objective: Provision of assistance tosupport the participation of these five countries inthe Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP).
TACIS
Countries covered by TACIS areArmenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova,the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.
Central objective: support the transition to marketeconomies and democratic societies through grant-financed technical assistance.
Pre-accession financialassistance to Turkey
Country covered: Turkey
Central objective: Provision of assistance tosupport Turkey to carry out reforms required formembership to the EU as stated in the AccessionPartnership for Turkey.
II.
Regional Assistance ProgrammesAs outlined above, cooperation with all countries inthe CEE/CIS region is further defined through specificpolicies and programmes: PHARE, CARDS, TACIS,and Pre-Accession Assistance for Turkey. An analysisof the commitments to gender equality and povertyeradication in all these policies reveals that overall,they are very weak and inconsistent. The PHAREregulation does not refer to gender equality, womenor poverty at all. CARDS and TACIS do mentiongender, although in rather weak terms. CARDS statesthat Community Assistance shall be for, “socialdevelopment, with particular reference to povertyreduction, gender equality...”. The formulation in theTACIS regulation is even more cursoury: ¨ Measuresshall be implemented taking into account (..) thepromotion of equal opportunities for women.” Thereis no explanation as to which opportunities are referredto or with whom women should be equal. Thus, genderequality is not explicitly considered as an objective inPHARE, CARDS or TACIS. Further, gender
mainstreaming is not included as a strategy in any ofthe regulations.
The pre-accession assistance to Turkey containsslightly stronger commitments to gender equality. Inthe Accession Partnership, equal treatment for womenand men in relation to Social Policy and Employmentis included as an objective. Moreover, gender aspectsshould be taken into account, “prior to appraisals ofprogrammes and projects”.(15)
This analysis shows that the strong commitments atthe highest legal level, are not followed through in thespecific regulations, defining the EU’s relation to theCEE/CIS region. Nowhere is there a clear and explicitcommitment to gender equality as an independentobjective of the EU’s assistance to these countries.Gender mainstreaming, if included at all, is referredto in very weak terms, and in the case of TACIS(reference to “equal opportunities of women”) seemsmisunderstood. Commitments to poverty eradicationare also very weak.
29
How much EC aid to the CEE/CIS region isdedicated to the promotion of gender equality
?
This section will analyze resourceallocation through:
PHARE InstrumentCARDS InstrumentTACIS InstrumentPre-Accession Assistance to Turkey
Facts and Figures:The EU and its Member States providemore than 50% of ODA and OA(2) worldwideThe European Commission provides 10%of ODA world wideThe EC Budget 2003 commited 35% ofEC external aid to the CEE/CIS region.More than 50% of this aid was given tothe PHARE programme.
T his section gives an overview of the financialinstruments and their sectoral allocation, and
provides a budget analysis of available resources forpromoting gender equality in the region.
Pre-Accession aid – PHAREThe PHARE programme is for the largest part allocatedthrough annual National Programmes bilaterallyagreed with each country. Assistance to the currentten New Member States was arranged under thissystem until 2003. Each country has its own systemof categorisation of assistance, making any comparisonclose to impossible. This is a likely explanation whythe European Commission does not providecomparative figures of sectoral allocation under thePHARE programme. The Commission also does notencode the allocations under the programme under asystem of agreed categories for further analysis. Thiscreates an obstacle for a comparative analysis of howresources support measures to promote genderequality.
The budget line for PHARE contains an explicit remarkregarding gender mainstreaming in all the measurestaken under these budget lines. It states that, “All themeasures should be subject to gender mainstreaming.Furthermore, an appropriate yet nonethelesssubstantial portion of the Phare budget, to be usedexclusively for projects aimed at women, will beearmarked for this purpose”. (1)
An analysis of projects allocated under the financialagreements in 2003 shows that many do not have anyspecific allocation of funds to the social sector. Evenif they do, a closer look suggests that most of themoney is dedicated to the promotion of businessdevelopment and support for small and medium-sizedenterprises, such as in the case of Bulgaria and Poland.Depending on the design and goals of this support,business development can positively impact on theempowerment of women, however nothing in theprojects analysed suggests that a gender perspectiveis included in any adequate or consistent manner ofthe projects analysed seem to be directly relevant topromoting women’s equality or to addressing specific
III.Financial Framework
?
OECD instruments to measure budgetaryallocation to the promotion of genderequality and the empowerment of women
Credit Report System Sector: Women inDevelopment (WID)
This considers projects whichspecifically target women.
Gender Equality Marker:This measures whether thepromotion of gender equality inany given project is
1. the principle objective2. the significant objective3. not an objective at all
30
Financial Framework
gender problems such as: domestic violence,reproductive health-care and maternal health care,HIV/AIDS, child care, discrimination against womenin employment (wage differential), womens’unemployment, women’s access to productiveresources (land, etc), and the lack of politicalrepresentation of women. In fact, social supportsystems are hardly supported and poverty and socialexclusion are not focused on by the activities fundedunder the PHARE programme.
Despite the legal obligation included in the budget toearmark funds for gender, the implementation of thiscannot be tracked because the EU does not adequadelyuse the OECD Gender Equality Marker which wouldallow the measurement of resources allocated to gendermainstreaming. (see page 29) Thus, the only way toestablish whether any EC assistance under PHAREmainstreams gender in an adequate way is to screenevery project individually. This would require veryextensive research and is beyond the scope of thisstudy. Although some tentative research on projectsin Romania suggests that various projects, not recordedas mainstreaming gender or as having women as aspecific target group, do indeed promote genderequality,(3) no comprehensive conclusions can bedrawn from this. What, however, clearly emerges from
the above is the need for the EU to adequately use theOECD Gender Equality Marker. Only when this isthe case will the aid process be transparent and allowfor accountability on the part of the EU institutions.
CARDS, TACIS & Pre-Accession Assistance toTurkeySimilar to PHARE, CARDS and the Pre-AccessionAssistance to Turkey contain a commitment topromoting gender equality through its financialassistance, while TACIS does not mention gender atall. The actual implementation of these commitmentscan be tracked through figures provided by the OECD/DAC through CRS/WID and the Gender Equality
III.
:8elbaTkrowemarflaicnanifehtfosisylanaehtfoyrammuS
tnemurtsnI nitnemtimmoCeniLtegduBeht
rotceSDCEOninemoW
tnempoleveD
redneGrekraM
cisaBlaicoSsecivreS
noitacudE htlaeH
ERAHP
sselehtenonteyetairporppana"erahPehtfonoitroplaitnatsbus
rofylevisulcxedesuebot,tegdubeblliw,nemowtademiastcejorp
"esoprupsihtrofdekramrae
%00.0 elbaliavaonatad
%02:airagluB%01:aivtaL %00.0 %00.0
SDRAC etomorpottnemtimmoclarenegytilauqeredneg %00.0
tcejorpenoelpicnirpevitcejbo
%35.0 %00.6 %36.1
SICAT rednegnognihton %00.0tcejorpeno
tnacifingisevitcejbo
%00.0 %85.4 %00.0
noisseccA-erPotecnatsissA
yekruT
etomorpottnemtimmoclarenegytilauqeredneg %20.0
tcejorpenotnacifingis
evitcejbo%00.0 %00.0 %00.0
31
The European Community has invested extensiveamounts of resources in the CEE/CIS region. Howeverthese investments have, by and large, not been used toaddress increasing problems of social exclusion andpoverty. The allocation of resources fails to reflect thepriority given to ‘social cohesion’ in the legal definitionof the programme. Additionally, gender problems havebeen entirely ignored, despite the legal obligations insome instruments such as PHARE, to address issuesrelated to gender equality.
Marker (see page 29).These show that no ECfunds under TACIS orCARDS werecommitted to projectsspecifically targetingwomen. The analysis offunding to Turkeyreveals one EC fundedproject specificallytargeted at women,which accounts for only0.02% of the total ECcommitments to Turkeyin 2003.(4) (see table 8)
With regard to theGender EqualityMarker, data on ECcommitments in 2003show that only threeprojects have beenmarked as includinggender equality as asignificant objective,and one project ashaving gender as aprinciple objective.(5) (see table 8)
Commitments to basic social services in all thefinancial instruments is, if existent at all, alarminglylow. For details please see table 12.Conclusion
III.Financial Framework
Distribution of EC aidCommunity Aid has become increasinglyskewed from Lower Income Countries toMiddle Income Countries during the lastdecade.
Per capita receipt of EC aid by:Low Income Countries :$ 0.55Middle Income Countries: $ 1.2CEE/CIS region: $ 5.44
:9elbaT?ogyenomehtseoderehW
( )srotceseerhtpoT
tnemurtsnI rotceS tegdublatotfo%
SDRAC yteicoslivicdnatnemnrevog %83.33
tnempolevedlaiciduj %04.7
ygrene,erutcurtsarfnicimonoceylppusdnanoitareneg %13.91
SICAT ygrene,erutcurtsarfnicimonoceylppusdnanoitareneg %55.43
ylniam,secivreslaicossnoitutitsnicifitneics/hcraeser %68.42
tnempoleveddnacimonocegninnalp/ycilop %34.12
ecnatsissAnoisseccA-erPyekruTot yteicoslivicdnatnemnrevog %95.74
tnempolevedlarur %60.13
diarotces-itlum %74.12
32
Programming & Implementation
This section will analyse programmingand implementation by looking at:
Accession PartnershipsCountry Strategy Papers:
Commission GuidelinesCountry AnalysisEU Response StrategyMulti-Annual and NationalT he EU defines its strategies of assistance to
the CEE/CIS region through AccessionPartnerships and Country Strategy Papers.
The Accession Partnerships provide an assessment ofpriority areas of the acquis communautaire, in whichthe candidate country needs to make progress in orderto prepare for accession, and outline the ways in whichthe PHARE Programme will support such accessionpreparations. The Accession Partnerships thus providea single framework for the programming of thepriorities of each candidate country and of the financialmeans available to implement those priorities.Accession Partnerships are revised annually.
Country Strategy Papers (CSPs) are drafted accordingto specific guidelines from the European Commission.CSPs provide a country analysis which outlines theoverall situation in a recipient country and defines thepriorities of the EC response strategy. This strategy isthen translated into a specific range of programmesand projects in a Multi-Annual or National IndicativeProgramme (MIP or NIP).
Accession PartnershipsAn analysis of the previous Accession Partnershipsshows that most countries must make a special effortto align with Community legislation on genderequality. However, as outlined in chapter II, focus ongender equality is limited to issues of Social Policyand Employment and gender is not mainstreamedthroughout the 31 chapters of the acquis. None of theAccession Partnerships refer to education and healthissues in relation to women or gender or to povertyreduction.
Country Strategy Papers :A. Commission GuidelinesThe drafting of CSPs is mainly guided by the EuropeanCommission “Guidelines for implementation of the
Common Framework for Country Strategy Papers” (1)
of May 2001, which includes a list of principles thatshall motivate all aspects of programming. Whilepoverty reduction and gender equality are included,their consideration is optional. Gender is presented asa cross-cutting issue to be “main streamed”. However,no guidance is given as to how this should be done.Moreover, inclusion of a gender perspective in the ECresponse strategy is made conditional upon whetherthe country analysis indicates a, “major disparity oftreatment between men and women”. This isproblematic, as the guidelines do not require aconsideration of gender inequalities in the countryanalysis. An examination of all CSPs for the CEE/CISregion reveals that gender inequality is included in onlyfive out of the fourteen country and regional analyses.Therefore, only in these five countries is the EUrequired to take gender issues into account. This pointis further elaborated in the section on country analysisbelow.
IV.
?
EC Programming Documents• Country Strategy Paper (CSP)• Regional Strategy Paper (RSP) contain:
Country AnalysisEC Response Strategy
• Multi-Annual Indicative Programme (MIP)• National Indicative Programme (NIP) contain:
Specific range of projects and programmes that will be undertaken bythe EC.
Are the EU’s commitments to promotinggender equality and poverty eradication ad-
equately reflected in programming and implemen-tation of assistance to the CEE/CIS region
?
33
Although poverty eradication appears as one of thefundamental principles in the Guidelines, it is not oneof the main criteria for the drawing up of CSPs. Areferences to poverty appears in one of the six commonelements that a CSP should include, but this is notdefined as an objective or a priority and do not haveto be included as a matter of obligation. The CSPguidelines do not include any reference to basiceducation and/or health as criteria to be addressed inthe strategy papers.
CSPs must be coherent and consistent with other EUpolicies, and there are certain areas where coherencemust be ensured. This is specified in the EuropeanCommission document “Country Strategy Papers andPolicy Mix: Guidelines for the examination of the issueof Policy Mix in CSPs.”(2) Accordingly, policies ondevelopment, trade, agriculture, fishing and foreignand security policy must be at the centre of thecoherence analysis.
B. Country AnalysisAs stated above, the guidelines do not require CSPs toinclude an assessment of gender inequality or povertyin the country analysis. Despite this, most of thecountry or regional strategies analysed for this reportacknowledge the existence of the problem of poverty.Concerning gender equality and the situation ofwomen, only four out of the twelve country strategypapers considered include these issues in their countryanalysis.(3) Even within these four, some are veryrestrictive and limited in the extent to which theyconsider gender issues. The Country Strategy Paper2002-2006 for Serbia and Montenegro merelyrecognizes that, “Gender discrimination is still an issuethat requires attention,” but does not elaborate furtheron this point. Concerning the regional strategy papers,only in the case of Central Asia is an analysis of thestatus and situation of women provided.
Issues concerning education are considered in nine outof the twelve country analyses examined. The CountryStrategy Papers for Belarus and the Russian Federationdo not analyse the state of education in the respectivecountries. Moreover, none of the regional strategypapers analysed (Central Asia and CARDS) includeany reference to education in their regional analysis.The main problems identified in the education sectorare the decline in quality, the decrease in enrolment
rates and the increase in drop-out rates in primary, andsecondary education as well as access to educationfor minorities (i.e. Roma in Former Yugoslav Republicof Macedonia). Only the country analysis on Armeniaincludes a gender perspective regarding education. Itstates that the, “decline of the educational system hasput back the cause of women particularly in the ruralsector”.
An analysis of the state of health and the health caresystem is included in nine out of the twelve countrystrategy papers considered with only Albania, Armeniathe Russian Federation not including any reference.Some of the most pressing problems outlined includethe general deterioration of people’s health, especiallythat of women and children’s.
C. EC response strategyAn examination of the inclusion of gender equality orgender mainstreaming in the proposed EC responsestrategies shows that they are generally not integrated.Nine out of the thirteen documents analysed do notcontain any reference to gender at all. Four documentsinclude mainstreaming as a strategy; however, do soin weak terms. The EC response strategy for CentralAsia is a good example to illustrate the weakness ofthe language used. First, gender mainstreaming is onlyincluded in the “Track 3: Pilot poverty reductionschemes” and does not seem to be an element thatshould apply to other priority areas of the ECcooperation. Secondly, the terms used relegate gendermainstreaming to a rather minor priority as it states:‘Finally, development of civil society, gender issuesand promotion of participation in public decision-making will be central to efforts aimed at povertyreduction”.
Furthermore, gender equality is not considered as anobjective in any of the response strategies, with theexception of Albania and Georgia. The EC responsestrategy for Albania states that, equality between menand women, ‘is a question of fundamental humanrights and a precondition for fair, democratic andsustainable development. Development co-operationshould focus on the structural reasons for inequalityand promote the participation of both men and womenin the process of increasing gender equality. Focusshould be on the relation between men and womenrather than on women exclusively. The gender
IV.Programming & Implementation
34
Programming & Implementation
perspective should be an integral part of alldevelopment co-operation with Albania’.
Poverty eradication is clearly stated as a ‘criticalobjective’ for most EC support to the CEE/CIS region,with the exception of the Russian Federation andBelarus.
Throughout the CSPs analysed, education is givenmuch attention. Mostly, however, reference is madeto vocational education training (VET) and to highereducation (TEMPUS) and no gender perspective isincluded. Only four out of thirteen strategy papersinclude health reform in their EC response strategy
and again no specific reference to gender or particularissues primarily affecting women, such as reproductivehealth, is included.
D. Multi-Annual and National Indicative ProgrammesAn analysis of the Multi-Annual and NationalIndicative Programmes (MIPs/NIPs), which give anoverview of specific programmes and projects showsthat none explicitly refer to poverty eradication. Withthe exception of the NIP 2005-2006 for Central Asia,none of the programmes make any reference to genderequality or the strategy of gender mainstreaming.
It is important to note that none of the other countries
IV.
35
IV.Programming & Implementation
which showed problems of gender inequality in thecountry analysis (Serbia, Armenia and Belarus) orwhich according to their EC response strategyshould include gender aspects (Albania, Georgiaand Serbia) actually include any commitment togender mainstreaming or specific projects in theirMIPs/NIPs.
Education, in particular support to vocationaleducation training (VET) and to higher education(TEMPUS), is included as a priority sector in allMIPs/NIPs of the CEE/CIS countries. TheTEMPUS programme focuses on the developmentof the higher education systems and its mainbeneficiaries are universities. For example inArmenia, the programme of 2002-2004 addressesthe following issues in particular:
· curriculum development and renewal inpriority areas;
· reform and modernisation of the structureand management of higher educationinstitutions in view of strengthening theirrole in the society;
· development of skills related training toaddress specific higher and advanced levelskills shortage during the transition, in
particular through improved and extendedlinks with industry;
· contribution of higher education and civilsociety training.
This focus on higher education and vocationaleducation training suggests that the EC strategy oneducation in the CEE/CIS region outlined in the NIPs,does not correspond to the needs and problemsidentified in the country analyses.
Concerning health, only four MIPs1 include specificprogrammes on health sector reform while the povertyalleviation programmes described in the IP 2005-2006for Central Asia require a specific focus to thestrengthening of preventive and primary healthcare.As an example, the expected results of the programmesthat support health sector reform in the MIP 2004-2006for Georgia are:
· functioning and more efficient health services;· sustainable financing of health system;· improving access to primary health care;· preventive medicine activities expanded.
However, none of these programmes include specificfocus on gender or on issues of specific importance towomen.
:01elbaTnoitatnemelpmidnagnimmargorpfosisylanaehtfoyrammuS
rednegsIdedulcniytilauqe?evitcejbonasa
:senilediugroFrednegseod
otevahytilauqe?evitcejbonaeb
rednegsIgnimaertsniam
asadedulcniyroslupmoc
?ygetarts
:senilediugroFrednegseodgnimaertsniam
ebotevah?dedulcni
ytrevopsInoitacidare
nasadedulcni?evitcejbo
noisseccAspishrentraP oN - oN - oN
PSCsenilediuG - oN - oN -
PSCyrtnuoCsisylanA
31/4niylnO - seY - 31/9seY
CEPSCesnopseR
ygetartS31/1niylnO - 31/11niseY - sucofrednegon
PIN/PIM sucofrednegon - oN - oN
36
Evaluation & Impact
This section will analyse evaluations bylooking at:
Candidate Countries’ AnnualProgress ReportsEuropean Commission EvaluationGuidelinesFive EC Evaluations
CARDSRussian FederationMoldovaTurkmenistanUkraine
S ince 2000, the European Commission hasemphasised that its programmes should bemeasured in terms of actual impact in recipient
countries. For candidate countries, annual progressreports are produced, assessing the progress of thecriteria for accession in every country. Assistance tothe other countries in the CEE/CIS region is evaluatedthrough European Commission Evaluations. For thepurpose of these evaluations, specific guidelines weredrawn up by the European Commission in 2001.
Candidate Countries’ Annual Progress ReportsIt is clear from the Annual Progress Reports that nosystematic analysis of the legal and de facto progressof candidate countries in the field of equalopportunities has been undertaken. Statements on thesituation of women and on gender equality are scarce,remain very general, and do not allow for year-to-yearor country-to-country comparisons of progress.Criteria and indicators for assessing progress are notexplained. Moreover, information in the AnnualReports on gender inequality in candidate countries isoften incomplete or obsolete.
For instance, the Regular Report on Poland’s ProgressTowards Accession, only includes a few references togender equality in the chapter on social policy andemployment addressing the progress towards adoptingthe acquis communautaire on the equal treatment ofwomen and men. Furthermore, the comments werelimited to the proposed legislative changes. The reportstates that progress has been made because the acquiscommunautaire on equal treatment of women and menhas more or less been transposed through amendmentsto the Labour Code. This ignores the de facto situationin the country.
In none of the reports has gender been mainstreamed.
European Commission Evaluation GuidelinesThe guidelines for Commission evaluations ofdevelopment programmes are enshrined in thedocument, “Evaluation in the EuropeanCommission”(1) issued by the Evaluation Unit in 2001.They define the evaluation principles, criteria and basicissues to be taken into account in EC evaluations.Gender equality, poverty alleviation and theenvironment are included in the annex as “key cross-cutting issues for consideration in the evaluation ofEC aid programmes”. However, there is no obligationto take any of the cross-cutting issues into account.The document states that they only need to beconsidered, “when carrying out an evaluation of anyproject in which they could be of significance.” Alsothe analysis of the actual impact of projects on cross-cutting issues is optional. The guidelines state that,“Where appropriate, all gender related, environmentaland poverty related impacts and any lack of overallimpact resulting from neglect of these issues” shouldbe examined. Thus, it is not obligatory that evaluationsconsider gender and poverty eradication as part of anyevaluation procedure.
The lack of focus on gender and poverty in theevaluation guidelines is carried through to the actualevaluations done by the Commission. Below it isassessed whether poverty eradication and gender wereconsidered in the evaluations examined. In the nextsection an overview of the actual impact reported inthose evaluations in terms of poverty and gender isgiven.
V.
To what extent is the impact of ECprogrammes and projects on gender equality in
the CEE/CIS region evaluated
?
?
37
Consideration of ‘poverty’ and ‘gender’ inevaluation reportsIn the sample of five evaluations examined for thisstudy(2), poverty eradication is mentioned in four andgender equality in only three.
Poverty eradication:The country evaluation of Moldova recognises povertyas a very serious problem. However, it does notevaluate the impact of EC assistance on povertyreduction. The evaluation of the CARDS regionsimilarly mentions poverty as a crucial problem in theregion and concludes that the EC strategy should havea stronger poverty focus. Also the evaluations onTurkmenistan and Ukraine consider the impact of ECassistance on poverty reduction, while the evaluationof the assistance given to the Russian Federation doesnot consider poverty at all.
Gender equality:Gender equality, or any reference to women’s rightsor women’s issues, is missing from the evaluations onEC assistance to the Russian Federation and Moldova.Although the evaluation of the CARDS regionconsiders gender, it does so in a very limited way. Thereport simply concludes that, “gender mainstreaminghas been (..) weak in most countries” and recommendsthat gender mainstreaming should be included in mostsectoral programmes. This is problematic as firstly noexplanations or strategies for improvement are
provided. Secondly, the evaluation only recommendsinclusion of gender in most sectoral programmes. Thisis similar to the findings in the evaluation forTurkmenistan. It states that, generally, no evidence ofactivities in favour of gender equality is found, butprovides no recommendations to improve the situation.
Gender equality is also mentioned in the countryevaluation of Ukraine. One of the evaluation questionsin the report is: “How far have the Commission’sprogrammes taken into account cross-cutting issuessuch as equal opportunities for women...?” Thejudgement criteria for this question include whetherprogrammes/projects have systematically taken intoaccount cross-cutting issues and the indicators are thepercentage of programmes/projects that have includedrelevant cross-cutting issues in their objectives andactivities. This does not provide relevant informationof the actual impact of projects on gender inequalities.
The above shows that, if included at all, genderequality, presented as a cross-cutting issue, has beenfundamentally misunderstood.
Apart from the above, it is important to note that,although rhetorically stressing the importance ofevaluating the effectiveness of its programmes since2000, there has been a dramatic decline in the numberof evaluations carried out since then.
V.Evaluation & Impact
:11elbaT3002-0002ocdiA/diAeporuEybtuodeirracsnoitaulavE
ehtfotcapmiehtsIrednegnostcejorp?detaulaveytilauqe
seoD:senilediugroFrednegnotcapmieht
ebotevahytilauqe?detaulave
fonoitatnemelpmiehtsIgnimaertsniamredneg
?detaulave
seoD:senilediuGroFfonoitatnemelpmiehtgnimaertsniamredneg?detaulaveebotevah
etadidnaClaunnAseirtnuoCstropeRssergorP
oN - oN -
noissimmoCnoitaulavEsenilediuG
- oN - oN
noissimmoCsnoitaulavE oN - seY -
38
What is the reported impact on poverty eradicationand gender equality?Any examination of the actual impact of EC assistanceon gender equality and poverty eradication in the fivecountries, based on the available reports, isproblematic as the information provided is verylimited.
The few evaluations which do consider gendermainstreaming, curiously do not focus on the impactof mainstreaming on equality between women andmen, but rather on whether gender mainstreaming asa strategy is considered in the projects. This reflects afundamental misunderstanding of gendermainstreaming, as it must not be seen as an end initself but merely as a strategy to achieve the objectiveof gender equality.
V.
Where the impact on poverty eradication wasconsidered the effectiveness of its inclusion isquestionable. The projects in Ukraine were consideredas “highly relevant to the growing poverty and healthneeds of the population” while in Turkmenistan theimpact of TACIS on poverty alleviation was seen as“minimal”.
Evaluation & Impact
39
as its external policies – and this is especially vital forthe EU’s relations with Central and Eastern Europeand the Commonwealth of Independent States – giventheir ever-closer relationship.
Moreover, the EU and its Member States havecommitted themselves to the promotion of genderequality and poverty eradication in all their externalassistance, as they have signed the BPfA and theMillenium Declaration and all the Member States haveratified CEDAW.
This report has attempted to analyze to what extentthe EU recognizes its responsibilities and lives up toits commitments in its assistance to Central and EasternEurope and the Commonwealth of Independent States.
This was done by dividing the development policyprocess into four phases: the legal and financialframework, budget allocation, programme andimplementation and evalution and impact.
The overall finding is that there is a great gap betweenhigh level legal obligations and political commitmentsand their actual implementation on the ground. In otherwords, when it comes to gender equality and povertyeradication, there seems to be a “policy evaporation”the further one moves through the process.
The European Union’s commitments to promotinggender equality, as set out in the Beijing Declarationand Platform of Action, the Convention on theElimination of All Forms of Discrimination AgainstWomen and the legal framework of the EC Treaty donot sufficiently inform the more specific legaldocuments on various policies and instruments towardsthe CEE/CIS. While the new Constitutional Treaty doesaffirm the legal oblications in relation to genderequality, this rhetoric will be meaningless if systematicmeasures are not taken to tackle the pre-existingstructural inadequecies throughout the policy process.
These few and vague references to gendermainstreaming indicate a fundamental mis-understanding of the strategy. Firstly they often do notcontain the word “gender” but rather refer to “equal
ith the addition of 10 countries to the EUon 1 May 2004, eight of which come fromCentral and Eastern Europe, Europe is
overcoming the painful division it suffered during theCold War. This new era provides an historicopportunity to unify the continent. It is vitallyimportant that the enlargement of the European Uniondoes not create new divisions and new forms ofinclusion and exclusion.
The European Union has a clear responsibility toensure the inclusive nature of its relations to Centraland Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth ofIndependent States. This needs to be reflected in allits policies towards the region.
The assistance programmes of the EuropeanCommission towards the region have been very muchbiased to ends supporting businesses, liberalisation andadministrative reform - while overlooking the socialdimensions of the reform policies carried out in thelast fifteen years.
With a strong emphasis on economic reform, genderequality has been relagated down the policy agenda,and the consequences of this downgrading arebecoming increasingly visible.
There is demonstrable evidence that the economicreforms have created significant insecurity for manywomen. The labour market is characterised by stronggender segregation. There are still pressing problemsin health care, with indicators related to reproductivehealth, such as high maternal mortality rates in anumber of countries, being reasons for corncern.
The lack of representation of women in nationalparliaments is also a serious problem. With 13%women parliamentarians the region only one placeabove the Arab region. Problems of violence againstwomen, including domestic violence, need to beaddressed but suffer from a lack of adequate attentionand investment.
For the EU to be a credible global player it is essentialthat Europe’s values are reflected in its internal as well
VI.Conclusion
W
40
opportunities for women”. Secondly, they are notmatched with a general objective of gender equality.This indicates that gender mainstreaming is beingmisunderstood as an end in itself rather than as a toolin order to achieve the objective of gender equality.Worse still, is the fact that its consideration is in thefirst place restricted to the areas of employment andsocial policy. These problems of misinterpretation andrestriction compound each other, and reinforce thatstructural gap between legal obligations and politicalcommitments, and implementation on the ground.
The financial framework shows a continuation of thistrend with extremely limited resources allocated towomen specific projects, decreasing amountsdedicated to basic social services and no device tomeasure funds that go to projects which successfullymainstream gender. Data from the OECD/DACindicate that only three out of all the EC projects inthe CEE/CIS region in 2003 included some gendercomponent.
The lack of focus on gender equality and povertyeradication is carried through to the programming andimplementation documents. Although the majority ofdocuments analysed make reference to gendermainstreaming only one combines this with theobjective of achieving gender equality.
Concerning evaluations the analysis shows that overallthe total number of evaluations carried out by theCommission has decreased considerably over recentyears. Further, the evaluations examined did notadequately consider the impact of EC aid to the CEE/CIS on the promotion of gender equality.
To be true to its founding principles and it politicaland legal obligations, the EC must considerablyimprove its implementation of high level statementson gender equality and poverty eradication in itsexternal assistance to the CEE/CIS region. This isnecessary in order to realise the vision of the EU as asocially responsible, global actor in the wider Europeanregion, which actively contributes to a more peaceful,stable, and just world.
ConclusionVI.
41
Recommendations VII.
Towards an integrated social Europe1 The European Union must strive to achieve a
region of prosperity for Europe in its entirety.It is, therefore, of crucial importance thatpoverty and social exclusion is addressed in thewider region of Europe as a whole, includingthe New Member States and the other countriesin Central and Eastern Europe and theCommonwealth of Independent States.
2 The European Union’s assistance to Central andEastern Europe and the Commonwealth ofIndependent States prior to May 2004, includingassistance to the then accession countries didnot adequately address the social aspects of thereform processes that had taken place. Projectswere strongly biased towards developing andsupporting private sector enterprises. Theaccession negotiations as well as assistanceprogrammes to other countries in Central andEastern Europe and the Commonwealth ofIndependent States, should have includedgender in a more comprehensive way. Today,the countries which have now joined the Unionare in a better situation, as the internal EUgender policies are more comprehensive.However, the countries in Central and EasternEurope and the Commonwealth of IndependentStates still outside the EU need the Union tostrengthen its support for social policies andensure that assistance is geared towards pressingsocial problems such as gender inequality andpoverty in the region as a whole. The EuropeanNeighbourhood Policy - and the regulationnegotiated as part of the EU financialperspectives 2007-2013 - should adequatelyreflect this need.
3 The European Commission should organise aconference and ongoing process of dialoguewith women’s organisations of countries to beincluded in the European NeighbourhoodPolicy, on the inclusion of gender equalityobjectives and measures in the policy.
4 The European Parliament and the EU Councilshould follow with vigilance the definition ofthe European Neighbourhood Policy and ensurethat the objective of women’s equality isadequately addressed.
5 The European Commission – and the EU BudgetAuthority, must ensure that gender experts areappointed to ensure that gender equality isadequately pursued as part of the EuropeanNeighbourhood Policy.
6 In the context of agreeing the FinancialPerspectives, the EU Council must ensure thatadequate allocations are made to ensure genderequality in the context of the EuropeanNeighbourhood Policy, and the BudgetAuthority must ensure that adequate provisionsare built in to measure whether these allocationshave been implemented by the EuropeanCommission.
7 The Political Dialogue of the European Unionwith Third Countries in the CEE/CIS mustaddress gender equality issues, and in particular,address the issue of extremely lowrepresentation of women in national Parliamentsof these countries.
8 The European Parliament, the political groupsand their constituent members within EUMember States, as well as the EuropeanCommission must ensure equal politicalrepresentation of women from all MemberStates, including New Member States.
9 The EU Council and European Commissionmust ensure that accession negotiations withfuture candidates should include goals toachieve gender equality in a morecomprehensive way.
42
RecommendationsVII.
Developing a European Union Policy for genderequality in the CEE/CIS region
The EU’s legal and political framework
10 The different weight given to the objective ofgender equality in the EU’s internal and externalactions in the Treaty of the European Unionshould be re-balanced. Gender equality, theempowerment of women, and the promotion ofwomen’s human rights, must be recognized asexplicit objectives of the EU’s policies with thewider world in their own right.
11 The enlargement procedure, including theacquis communautaire, should include morespecific references to gender equality.
12 In line with the BPfA, gender mainstreamingmust be clearly presented as a strategy, alongsidewomen-specific projects, to achieve theobjective of gender equality, and not as anobjective in itself. This must be clearlyrecognized in all relevant political and legal EUdocuments, such as the PHARE, TACIS,CARDS regulations, accession aid to Turkeyand the new European NeighbourhoodInstrument. The Commission should explicitlyidentify how the programmes will ensure thatgender is to be mainstreamed.
13 Many countries that will be included in theEuropean Neighbourhood Policy are listedamong developing countries. This aspect, andrelated awareness of poverty in these countries,need to influence the shape and priorities of thepolicy. Commitments of the EU, to theregulation on gender in development, shouldalso be applied to the developing countries ofthe CEE/CIS region.
Financial support
14 Financial resources allocated to the promotionof gender equality and the empowerment ofwomen should be clearly identified. This should
be done through the OECD/DAC recordingsystem of sectoral allocations (‘reporting of thepurpose of aid’) and the OECD/DAC GenderEquality Marker. This would allow more precisetracking of financial support to countries inCentral and Eastern Europe and theCommonwealth of Independent States that isallocated to the promotion of gender equality.This would also crucially increase the level oftransparency and accountability of ECprocedures
Programming & Implementation
15 Commission guidelines for Country StrategyPapers and other national or regional planning/programming documents for Central andEastern Europe and the Commonwealth ofIndependent States should include the strategyof gender mainstreaming and the objective ofgender equality in an explicit and consistentway. The promotion of gender equality must bepresented as a matter of obligation in all countrystrategies and not made dependent upon theverdict of the country analysis on the status ofwomen in the given country.
16 The participation of civil society organisations,particularly women’s organisations, in thepolitical dialogue process should bestrengthened and should be institutionalised.The EU should establish structures for ongoingcivil society participation in the programmingphase where the country analysis is undertakenand priorities for action are identified.
Evaluations & Impact
17 Commission guidelines on evaluations mustinclude explicit reference to gender and mustmake an evaluation of the impact of any projecton gender equality compulsory.
18 Commission Evaluations must be carried out ona more frequent basis to allow for greateraccountability.
43
19 Annual Progress Reports on EU AccessionCountries must include an assessment of thesituation of gender equality in the country as amatter of obligation.
20 The Commission must develop indicators tomonitor whether European Community aid ishaving an impact on promoting gender equalitygoals. Civil Society, including Women’s Rights’organisations could play a role in monitoringthe Commission’s gender equality goals.
Human resources
21 The European Commission should establish sixpermanent positions for gender experts in DGExternal Relations, DG Development,EuropeAid, DG Trade, DG Enlargement andECHO. There must be coordination betweenthese officials to ensure policy coherence.
22 Gender awareness training of EC staff shouldbe compulsory, periodic and aimed at staff atall levels.
Strengthening women’s organisations
23 The European Commission should engage in adialogue and follow up with women’sorganisations from the Central Asian Republics.The European Commission should identify howit can ensure that gender equality is promotedin this region, with a view to ensure that theEuropean value of equality between men andwomen is promoted in these countries. Specificgender expert(s) should be appointed to addressthis issue, and work with Member States tostrengthen common action in this regard. Specialfinancial allocations to supporting genderequality in the CIS region should be identified.
24 The European Commission should strengthenits engagement with Civil Society Women’sOrganisations in the countries included in theEuropean Neighbourhood Policy, as well as inCentral Asia, with a view to strengthen civil
society and women’s organisations in thesecountries and their ability to engage in EU co-operation with their countries and regions.
25 The European Commission should identifyspecific financial support in the context of theEuropean Neighbourhood Policy to strengthenwomen’s organisations in its neighbouringregion.
VII.Recommendations
44
EndnotesAX
Introduction:1 New Member States, Accession Countries,
Potential Candidate Countries, countries thatfall within gender EC DevelopmentCooperation Policy and, subject to ratificationof European Neighborhood Instrument,countries that are covered by the newNeighborhood Policy.
2 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action,Fourth World Conference on Women, 15September 1995, A/CONF.177/20 (1995) andA/CONF.177/20/Add.1 (1995).
3 UN, United Nations Millennium Declaration,UN General Assembly 55/2, N.Y., 8September 2000.
4 UNDP, Human Development Report: CulturalLiberty in Today’s Diverse World , 2004,available at: http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2004/
5 In Malta, Luxembourg and Spain theparticipation of women in the non-agriculturalsectors is less than 40%, whereas in Sweden,Bulgaria, Estonia, Slovakia, Ukraine, Latvia,Moldova and Belarus it is more than 50%.See Social Watch, Annex 4a
6 The term “life cycle” refers to different stagesin a woman’s life depending mainly on herage.
7 see: http://www.astra.org.pl/violence.htm
8 Ibid.
9 see: http://www.stopvaw.org/Traffikcing_in_Women.html
10 European Union, Treaty establishing aConstitution for Europe, at: http://europa.eu.int/constitution/index_en.htm.
11 Council of the European Union, CouncilRegulation (EC) No 2836/98 of 22 December1998 on integrating of gender issues indevelopment cooperation.
12 see: http://www.astra.org.pl/violence.htm
13 Council of the European Union, Declarationby the Council and the Commission on theEuropean Community’s development policy,Brussles, 16 November 2000.
14 Convention on the Elimination of All Formsof Discrimination Against Women, UN GA,1979, available at: http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/cedaw.htm.
15 Alliance 2015 is a group of developmentNGOs across Europe who are dedicated tocontribute to the realization of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals.see: http://www.alliance2015.org
Chapter II: Legal Framework1 European Union, Consolidated version of the
Treaty on the European Union and the Treatyestablishing the European Community,Official Journal of the EuropeanCommunities, article 177: “Communitypolicy in the sphere of developmentcooperation...shall foster: the sustainableeconomic and social development of thedeveloping countries...the smooth and gradualintegration of the developing countries intothe world economy, the campaign againstpoverty in the developing countries...TheCommunity Policy in this area shallcontribute to the general objective ofdeveloping and consolidating democracy andthe rule of law, and to that of respectinghuman rights and fundamental freedoms.”
2 European Union, Treaty establishing aConstitution for Europe, at: http://europa.eu.int/constitution/index_en.htm.
45
AX
3 ECOSOC, Mainstreaming the genderperspective into all policies and programmesin the United Nations system, July 1997.
4 Council of Europe, Gender mainstreaming:conceptual framework, methodology andpresentation of good practices, May 1998.
5 European Commission, CommunityFramework Strategy on Gender Equality.(2001-2005)
6 Council Directive 75/117/EEC; CouncilDirective 76/207/EEC; Council Directive256/EC and 1999/311/EC.
7 WIDE, Information Sheet, Gender equalityand EU accession: The situation in the CzechRepublic, November 2003.
8 WIDE , Steinhilber, S., Women’s Rights andGender Equality in the EU Enlargement – anOpportunity for Progress, October 2002.
9 Ibid.
10 Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia,Moldova and Ukraine.
11 Commission Communication, Paving the wayfor a New Neighborhood Instrument COM(2003)393FINAL, 1.07.2003.
12 Commission Communication EuropeanNeighborhood Policy Strategy Paper COM(2004) 373FINAL, 12.05.2004.
13 European Development Council, CouncilResolution: Integrating Gender Issues inDevelopment Co-operation, Brussels,European Council, 20 December 1995.
14 European Commission, Programme of Actionfor the Mainstreaming of Gender Equality inCommunity Development Cooperation, 2001/295 (2001).
15 Council of the European Union, CouncilRegulation (EC)2500/2001 of 17 December2001 concerning pre-accession financialassistance for Turkey and amendingRegulations (EEC)3906/89, (EC)1267/1999,(EC)1268/1999 and (EC)555/2000.
Chapter III: Financial Framework1 Council of the European Union, Council
Regulation (EC)99/2000 of 29 December1999 concerning the provision of assistance tothe partner States in Eastern Europe andCentral Asia.
2 The OECD divides aid receipients into twogroups (see annex 5). Group one recievesOfficial Development Assistance (ODA) andgroup two receives Official Assistance (OA).
3 Information provided by Roxana Tisuy, centerpartnership for equality in Romania, 2004.
4 OECD/DAC, International DevelopmentStatistics, available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/50/17/5037721.htm
5 Ibid.
Chapter IV: Programing and Implementation1 Commission of the European Communities,
Guidelines for implementation of the CommonFramework for Country Strategy Papers,Secretariat of the IQSG, D(2001), Brussels, 4May 2001.
2 European Community, CARDS Programme,Albania Country Strategy Paper 2002-2006and National Indicative Programme 2002-2004, 20 November 2001.
European Community, Republic of Armenia,Country Strategy Paper 2002-2006 andNational Indicative Programme 2002-2003,27 December 2001;
Endnotes
46
European Community, Armenia, TacisNational Indicative Programme , 2004-2006,18 September 2003;
European Community, Azerbaijan , CountryStrategy Paper 2002-2006 and NationalIndicative Programme 2002-2003, 27December 2001;
European Community, Azerbaijan, TacisIndicative Programme 2004-2006, 22 May2003;
European Community, Belarus, CountryStrategy Paper and National IndicativeProgramme 2005-2006, 28 May 2004;
European Community, Bosnia andHerzegovina, Country Strategy paper 2002-2006 and Multi-annual Indicative Programme2002-2004;
European Community, CARDS AssistanceProgramme to the western Balkans, RegionalStrategy paper 2002-2006 and Multi-annualIndicative Programme 2002-2004;
European Community, Central Asia, RegionalStrategy Paper 2002-2006 and IndicativeProgramme 2002-2004, 30 October 2002;
European Community, Tacis Central AsiaIndicative Programme 2005 – 2006, 20August 2004;
European Community, Croatia CountryStrategy Paper 2002-2006;
European Community, Former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia, Country StrategyPaper 2002-2006 and Multi-annual IndicativeProgramme 2002-2004;
European Community, Georgia, CountryStrategy Paper 2003-2006 and Tacis National
Indicative Programme 2004-2006, 23September 2003;
European Community, Moldova, CountryStrategy Paper 2002-2006 and NationalIndicative Programme 2002-2003, 27December 2001;
European Community, Russian Federation,Country Strategy Paper 2002-2006 andNational Indicative Programme 2002-2003,27 December 2001;
European Community, Federal Republic ofYugoslavia, Country Strategy Paper 2002-2006 and Multi-Annual IndicativeProgramme 2002-2004;
European Community, Ukraine, countryStrategy Paper 2002-2006 and NationalIndicative Programme 2002-2003, 27December 2001;
European Community, Ukraine, NationalIndicative Programme 2004-2006, 4 August2003;
Chapter 5: Evaluation and Impact1 European Commission, Guidelines for the use
of Indicators in country performanceassessment, DG Development, December2002.
2 European Commission, Evaluation of theAssistance to Western Balkan countries underRegulation 2666/2000 (CARDS) - 06/2004 -ref. 951651;
European Commission, Evaluation of ECCountry Strategy in Turkmenistan - 12/2000 -ref. 951587;
European Commission, Evaluation of ECCountry Strategy for Ukraine 1996-2003 - 06/2003 - ref. 951643;
AX Endnotes
47
Endnotes
European Commission, Evaluation of TacisCountry Strategy in Moldova - 12/2000 - ref.951574;
European Commission, Evaluation of TacisCountry Programme in Russian Federation -02/2000 - ref. 951500;
3 European Commission, Evaluation of ECCountry Strategy for Ukraine 1996-2003 - 06/2003 - ref. 951643.
Annex 4b: Legend & Methodology1 The question of the accessibility of information
is another issue altogether. Most internationalinstitutions’ large databases can only beaccessed by paying high-cost subscriptions.
2 These problems include, for example, the factthat the dates for which information is availableoften do not coincide, and the significantdifferences in the figures provided by differentsources for the same year.
3 Large databases can be consulted that refer tothe original source from which the informationwas taken.
4 For this the variable was normalised (bysubtracting the mean and dividing by thestandard deviation) and then the mean positivevalues and the mean negative values for thenormalised indicator were calculated. The fourcategories were established according to thevalues above and below the mean positivevalues for the normalised indicator, and thevalues above and below the mean negativevalues for the normalised indicator.
5 In the case of the table showing morbidity andmortality rates the child immunisation rankingwas included as another indicator in thecalculations of the average value for the area.The immunisation table is presented separatelyand ordered according to the average value ofits indicators.
6 The possible range for the average of the areawas divided into four groups as follows: group1 (between 4 and 3.26); group 2 (between 3.25and 2.6); group 3 (between 2.5 and 1.76); group4 (between 1.75 and 1).
AX
48
BibliographyAX
Agence Europe, Daily Bulletin of Wednesday 13 October2004.
APRODEV & One World Action 2002: AssessingGender Mainstreaming in EC Development Cooperation,2002.
APRODEV, One World Action, WIDE, HelpAgeInternational: Transforming the mainstream, Seminarreport on mainstreaming and inclusive approaches inEU development cooperation, undated.
Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action , FourthWorld Conference on Women, 15 September 1995, A/CONF.177/20 (1995) and A/CONF.177/20/Add.1 (1995).
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination against Women, UN GA, 1979, availableat: http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/cedaw.htm.
Council of Europe, Gender mainstreaming: conceptualframework, methodology and presentation of goodpractices , May 1998.
Development Researchers Network, Linden ConsultingPartnership, An Evaluation of the Tacis CountryProgramme in the Russian Federation, January 2000.
DRN-ADE-NCG-ECO Consortium, Evaluation of theAssistance to Balkan Countries under CARDSRegulation 2666/2000, June 2004.
ECOSOC, Mainstreaming the gender perspective into allpolicies and programmes in the United Nations system ,July 1997.
Expanding Rights, creating space for action? EU reformand enlargement from gender perspective. Position paperby NRO Frauenforum and Karat Coalition. Berlin, 2003.
Investment Development Consultancy, France &Development Strategies, Italy, Evaluation of TacisCountry Strategy: Turkmenistan 1996-2000.Lohmann Kinga, Seibert Anita (ed.): Gender Assessmentof the impact of EU Accession on the Status of women inthe Labour Market in CEE, National Study: Poland.Warsaw 2003.
MWH-ECDPM-ODI Consortium, Evaluation of theEuropean Commission’s Strategy for Ukraine, June2003.
NOMISMA and ECONOMISTI ASSOCIATI Bologna,Evaluation of TACIS Country Strategy in Moldova,December 2000.
OECD/DAC, Analysis of aid in support of genderequality, 1999-2003, Paris, Feburary 2005.
One World Action, Everywhere and Nowhere: AssessingGender Mainstreaming in European CommunityDevelopment Cooperation , October 2002.
PARTICIP GmbH, CIDEAL, ECDPM, IDC, CEPIA,Thematic Evaluation of the Integration of Gender in ECDevelopment Co-operation with Third Countries, March2003.
Reisen, M.,van, The Millennium Development Goals, Areality check on their past, present and future, paper,presented in Montevideo, 29 October, EEPA, Brussels,2004.
Reisen, M., van, 2015 Watch, The EU’s Contribution tothe Millennium Development goals, Special Focus: HIV/AIDS, published by Alliance2015, 2004.
Social Watch Report , Instituto del Tercer Mundo,Montevideo, editions 2002, 2003, 2004.
UN, United Nations Millennium Declaration, UNGeneral Assembly 55/2, N.Y., 8 September 2000.
UNDP, Human Development Report 2004, OxfordUniversity Press, N.Y., 2003.
World Bank, Gender in Transition, Washington DC, May2002.
WIDE Bulletin, Towards EU Accession: ForwardLooking Strategies for Gender Equality, December 2003.
WIDE, Globalising Women’s Rights: ConfrontingUnequal Development Between the UN RightsFramework and the WTO Trade Agreements, A Report ofWIDE’s Annual Conference 2004.
WIDE, Information Sheet, Gender equality and EUaccession: The situation in the Czech Republic ,November 2003.
WIDE, Steinhilber, S., Women’s Rights and GenderEquality in the EU Enlargement – an Opportunity forProgress, October 2002.
WLDI (Women, Law and Development Initiative),Women’s Economic Rights under Privatisation: Bulgaria,Poland, Russia and Ukraine, 2000.
49
EU DocumentsCommission of the European Communities, Guidelinesfor implementation of the Common Framework forCountry Strategy Papers, Secretariat of the IQSG,D(2001), Brussels, 4 May 2001.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 75/117/EEC of 10 February 1975 on the approximation ofthe laws of the Member States relating to the applicationof the principle of equal pay for men and women OfficialJournal L 045 19.02.75 p.19, Incorporated by OJ L 00103.01.94 p.484.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation ofthe principle of equal treatment for men and women asregards access to employment, vocational training andpromotion, and working conditions Official Journal L039 14.02.76 p.40, Derogation in 194N, Incorporated byOJ L 001 03.01.94 p.484.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressiveimplementation of the principle of equal treatment for menand women in matters of social security Official Journal L006 10.01.79 p.24, Incorporated by OJ L 0013.01.94 p.484.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 86/378/EEC of 24 July 1986 on the implementation of theprinciple of equal treatment for men and women inoccupational social security schemes Official Journal L225 12.08.86 p.40, Incorporated by OJ L 001 03.01.94p.484, Amended by OJ L 046 17.02.97 p.20.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 86/613/EEC of 11 December 1986 on the application of theprinciple of equal treatment between men and womenengaged in an activity, including agriculture, in a self-employed capacity, and on the protection of self-employed women during pregnancy and motherhoodOfficial Journal L 359 19.12.86 p.56, Incorporated by OJL 001 03.01.94 p.484.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measuresto encourage improvements in the safety and health atwork of pregnant workers and workers who haverecently given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth individualDirective within the meaning of Article 16 (1) ofDirective 89/391/EEC) Official Journal L 348 28.11.92p.1.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 96/34/EC of 3 June 1996 on the framework agreement on
parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and theETUC Official Journal L 145 , 19/06/1996 p. 0004 -0009, CONSLEG - 96L0034 - 16/01/1998 - 11 p.,Amended by OJ L 010 16.01.98 p.24.
Council of the European Union, Council Directive 97/80/EC of 15 December 1997 on the burden of proof in casesof discrimination based on sex Official Journal L 01420.01.98 p.6, Amended by OJ L 205 22.07.98 p.66.Council of the European Union, Council Directive 2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equaltreatment for men and women as regards access toemployment, vocational training and promotion, andworking conditions Official Journal L 269 , 05/10/2002P. 0015 – 0020.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 85 Czech Republic.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 86 Estonia.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 87 Hungary.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 88 Latvia.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 89 Lithuania.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 91 Poland.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 93 Slovakia.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 94 Slovenia.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2003 396 Bulgaria.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 397 Romania.
Council of the European Union, Council DecisionAccession Partnership 2002 398 Turkey.
Council of the European Union, Council Regulation(EC) No 2836/98 of 22 December 1998 on integrating ofgender issues in development co-operation.
AXBibliography
50
Bibliography
Council of the European Union, Council Regulation(EC) 1266/99 on coordinating aid to the applicantcountries in the framework of the pre-accession strategyand amending Regulation (EEC) No 3906/89.
Council of the European Union, Council Regulation(EC) 2666/2000 of 5 December 2000 on assistance forAlbania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia and the Former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia, repealing Regulation (EC) No1628/96 and amending Regulations (EEC) No 3906/89and (EEC) No 1360/90 and Decisions 97/256/EC and1999/311/EC.
Council of the European Union, Council Regulation(EC) 99/2000 of 29 December 1999 concerning theprovision of assistance to the partner States in EasternEurope and Central Asia.
Council of the European Union, Council Regulation(EC) 2500/2001 of 17 December 2001 concerning pre-accession financial assistance for Turkey and amendingRegulations (EEC) No 3906/89, (EC) No 1267/1999,(EC) No 1268/1999 and (EC) No 555/2000.
Council of the European Union, Declaration by the Counciland the Commission on the European Community’sdevelopment policy, Brussels, 16 November 2000.
European Commission Communication, Programme ofAction for the Mainstreaming of Gender Equality inCommunity Development Cooperation, 2001/295 (2001).European Commission Communication, Towards aCommunity Framework on Gender Equality (2001-2005), 2000/0143.
European Commission, Evaluation of the assistance toWestern Balkan countries under Regulation 2666/2000(CARDS) - 06/2004 - ref. 951651.
European Commission, Evaluation of EC CountryStrategy in Turkmenistan - 12/2000 - ref. 951587.
European Commission, Evaluation of EC CountryStrategy for Ukraine 1996-2003 - 06/2003 - ref. 951643.
European Commission, Evaluation of Tacis CountryStrategy in Moldova - 12/2000 - ref. 951574.
European Commission, Evaluation of Tacis CountryProgramme in Russian Federation - 02/2000 - ref.951500.
European Commission, Community Framework Strategyon Gender Equality. (2001-2005)
European Commission, Guidelines for the use ofIndicators in country performance assessment, DGDevelopment, December 2002.
European Community, CARDS Programme, AlbaniaCountry Strategy Paper 2002-2006 and NationalIndicative Programme 2002-2004, 20 November 2001.European Community, Republic of Armenia, CountryStrategy Paper 2002-2006 and National IndicativeProgramme 2002-2003, 27 December 2001.
European Community, Armenia, Tacis NationalIndicative Programme , 2004-2006, 18 September 2003.
European Community, Azerbaijan , Country StrategyPaper 2002-2006 and National Indicative Programme2002-2003, 27 December 2001.
European Community, Azerbaijan, Tacis IndicativeProgramme 2004-2006, 22 May 2003.
European Community, Belarus, Country Strategy Paperand National Indicative Programme 2005-2006, 28 May2004.
European Community, Bosnia and Herzegovina, CountryStrategy paper 2002-2006 and Multi-annual IndicativeProgramme 2002-2004.
European Community, CARDS Assistance Programmeto the western Balkans, Regional Strategy paper 2002-2006 and Multi-annual Indicative Programme 2002-2004.
European Community, Central Asia, Regional StrategyPaper 2002-2006 and Indicative Programme 2002-2004,30 October 2002.
European Community, Tacis Central Asia IndicativeProgramme 2005 – 2006, 20 August 2004
European Community, Croatia Country Strategy Paper2002-2006.
European Community, Former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia, Country Strategy Paper 2002-2006 andMulti-annual Indicative Programme 2002-2004
European Community, Georgia, Country Strategy Paper2003-2006 and Tacis National Indicative Programme2004-2006, 23 September 2003.European Community, Moldova, Country Strategy Paper2002-2006 and National Indicative Programme 2002-2003, 27 December 2001.
AX
51
AX
European Community, Russian Federation, CountryStrategy Paper 2002-2006 and National IndicativeProgramme 2002-2003, 27 December 2001.
European Community, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,Country Strategy Paper 2002-2006 and Multi-AnnualIndicative Programme 2002-2004.
European Community, Ukraine, country Strategy Paper2002-2006 and National Indicative Programme 2002-2003, 27 December 2001.
European Community, Ukraine, National IndicativeProgramme 2004-2006, 4 August 2003.
European Union, Treaty establishing a Constitution forEurope, at: http://europa.eu.int/constitution/index_en.htmEuropean Union, Consolidated version of the Treaty ofthe European Union and the Treaty establishing theEuropean Community, Official Journal of the EuropeanCommunities, 2002.
General Budget of the European Union for the FinancialYear 2003, at:http://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/budget/data/D2003_v4/EN/index.htm.
Main Web Sites consulted:http://europa.eu.inthttp://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/index_en.htmlhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/index.htmhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/development/index_en.htmhttp://www.un.orghttp://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/50/17/5037721.htm
Bibliography
52
Annex 1
Background: the European UnionThe origins of the European Union (EU) lie in theEuropean Economic Community (EEC), which wasestablished by the Treaty of Rome in 1957, and whichcame into effect the following year. Initially, the EECconsisted of just six countries: Belgium, France,Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.However, since its creation, it has undergone fiverounds of enlargement. In 1973, Denmark, Irelandand the United Kingdom joined. They were followedby Greece in 1981, Spain and Portugal in 1986, andAustria, Finland and Sweden in 1995. The biggestenlargement to date took place on 1 May 2004 whenno less than ten countries joined the EU. The accessionof Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary,Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia andSlovenia has increased the EU’s population to morethan 450 million.
The European Union (EU) is an economic and politicalunion of twenty-five democratic European countries.It was established in 1993 when the then twelvemembers of the European Community (EC) ratifiedthe Treaty on European Union, (commonly known asthe Maastricht Treaty). The EU is unique as aninternational organisation in that although it isofficially a union, it is not a federation of states likethe United States of America. Nor is it an organisationfor inter-governmental co-operation. Instead, itsmember states delegate some of their decision makingpowers on specific matters to a set of five sharedinstitutions.
The European Parliament represents the citizens of theEU. Originally, the Members of the EuropeanParliament (MEPs) were nominated by their respectivenational governments but since 1979 they have beenelected by direct universal suffrage every five years.The present parliament was elected in June 2004. Likeall parliaments, the European Parliament has threefundamental powers: legislative power, budgetarypower and supervisory power.The Council of the European Union, (commonlyknown as the Council), is the EU’s main decision-making body. It represents the governments of theMember States, and its meetings are attended by
AX
ministers from each of those governments. Althoughit is described as a single institution, there are actuallynine different Council configurations organisedaccording to policy areas. Each minister in the Councilis empowered to commit his or her government. ThePresidency of the Council rotates every six months,thus enabling the government of each Member Stateto take charge of the Council agenda and to chair allof its meetings.
The European Commission represents and upholds theinterests of the EU as a whole. It is the driving forcewithin the EU’s institutional system and it has fourmain roles: to propose legislation to the Parliamentand the Council, to manage and implement EU policiesand the budget, to enforce EC law, and to representthe EU on the international stage. It is appointed everyfive years within six months of elections to theEuropean Parliament. The current Commission tookoffice on 22 November 2004
The European Court of Justice ensures that EC law isinterpreted and applied in the same way in eachMember State. It is empowered to settle legal disputesbetween Member States, EU institutions, businessesand individuals. The Court is composed of one judgeper Member State. They are appointed by jointagreement of the governments of the Member States
The fifth EU institution is the European Court ofAuditors. Its role is to check that all the Union’srevenue has been received and all its expenditureincurred in a lawful and regular manner and that theEU budget has been properly managed. The Court ofAuditors is composed of one member from eachMember State. Its members are appointed by theCouncil.
The European Union: definitionThe European Union was established by the “Treatyestablishing the European Union”, also called theMaastricht Treaty (1993). The Treaty established theEuropean Union as a political entity of the then 12Member States, with three pillars of competence:European Community policies, where the EuropeanCommunity has exclusive competence (in areas such
53
AX
as agriculture and trade); Justice and Human Affairs(an area of intergovernmental co-operation) and TheCommon Foreign Security and Defence Policy(CFSDP, another area of intergovernmental co-operation).
The European Community: definitionThe European Community is the part of the EuropeanUnion where the Commission can act on behalf of theMember States, and where it has competence to dealwith the policy areas defined in the Treaty.Development Co-operation is an area of EuropeanCommunity competence. The European Communityshares this competence with the Member States, whoalso have retained an independent competence for thispolicy area. Enlargement is another area of competenceof the European Community, although the finalaccession of new members is decided atintergovernmental level by the Member States.
Annex 1
54
Annex 2AX
:2xennAnrecnoCfosaerAlacitirCnoitcArofmroftalPgnijieBehtdnaslaoGtnempoleveDmuinnelliMehT
sGDM nrecnoCfosaerAlacitirCAFPB
regnuhdnaytrevopemertxeetacidarE:1laoG nemownoytrevopfonedrubgnisaercnidnatnetsisrep
secruoserotsseccadnasetitinutroppocimonoceniseititilauqenI
nemowfosthgirnamuhehtroftcepserfokcaL
noitacudeyramirplasrevinueveihcA:2laoG gniniartdnanoitacudeotsseccalauqenU
nemowfosthgirnamuhehtroftcepserfokcaL
slrigfosthgirehtfosnoitaloivdnatsniaganoitanimirciD
nemowrewopmednaytilauqerednegetomorP:3laoG nemowtsniagaecneloiV
gniniartdnanoitacudeotsseccalauqenU
gnikamnoisiceddnarewopfognirahsehtniseitilauqenI
ehtrofsmsinahcemtnemnrevog-nondnatnemnrevogkaeWnemowfotnemecnavda
nemowfosthgirnamuhehtroftcepserfokcaL
slrigfosthgirehtfosnoitaloivdnatsniaganoitanimircsiD
lanretamevorpmidnaytilatromdlihcecudeR:6&5,4laoGhtlaeh secivresdetalerdnaerachtlaehotsseccalauqenU
nemowtsniagaecneloiV
nemownotcilfnocdemrafostceffE
nemowfosthgirnamuhehtroftcepserfokcaL
slrigfosthgirehtfosnoitaloivdnatsniaganoitanimircsiD
ytilibaniatsuslatnemnoirvneerusnE:7laoG tnemnorivneehtfotnemeganamehtniseitilauqeniredneG
nemowfosthgirnamuhehtroftcepserfokcaL
tnempolevedrofpihsrentraplabolgapoleveD:8laoG nemownoytrevopfonedrubgnisaercnidnatnetsisrep
secruoserotsseccadnasetitinutroppocimonoceniseititilauqenI
nemowfosthgirnamuhehtroftcepserfokcaL
aidemehtotsseccaniytilauqenidnanemowfognipytoeretS
55
Annex 3 AX
56
AX Annex 3
57
Methodology and data managementThe use of electronic media has made it considerablyeasier to access available data and other information,1but many of the deficiencies that Social Watch hassignalled in previous years continue to make it difficultto carry out comparative analysis on the evolution ofthe indicators.2 The first choice continues to be themost recent source provided by any of the internationalinstitutions that are generally recognised as providingreliable data, even if some changes appear surprisingand could be interpreted in different ways, or be seento result from a variety of causes.
In those cases in which the most recent data were notavailable from these institutions, the choice made fromamong the alternatives on offer is a “secondary” sourcewhose data for previous years most closely andconsistently matched the data published by theacknowledged authority on the subject.
If several alternative sources are available, the sourcechosen is that which is best-known and regarded asbeing (or basing its information on)3 the best authorityon the topic in question. If none of the above criteriacould be applied, the source chosen is that offeringdata from the largest number of countries. In cases inwhich the data was related to a period (for instance,1995-1997) rather than to a single year, the data isassigned to the year falling in the middle of the period(which in the above example would be 1996) in orderto allow for the calculation of the rate of variation.
Measuring countries’ present situation and the rateof changeIn each of the thematic areas the information isdisplayed in relation to the chosen indicators. Ingeneral, each indicator covers a number of columns:the first and second columns show the country’s initialsituation (data from 1995 or the closest possible year),the third and fourth columns show the latest availabledata, the fifth column shows progress or regression,and the sixth column shows the current situation relatedto the world context.
In order to assess the evolution of each indicator, twoaspects have been taken into account: the initial and
Sources: UNESCO Website Database, October 2004(www.unesco.org); World Development Indicators 2004,World Bank and World Education Report, 1998(UNESCO)
HUMAN RIGHTSThe right to non discrimination on the base of sex isenshrined in:UDHR - Art. 2 & 26CESCR - Art. 3 & 7CEDAW - Art. 7, 10 & 11CRC - Art. 29
INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTSGender equity is considered in:Millennium Development Goals – Goal 3World Summit for Social DevelopmentFourth World Conference on Women - Beijing Platformfor Action - Critical Areas of Concern
LEGENDProgress or Regression:>>>> Significant progress>> Slight progress= Stagnant<< Slight regression<<<< Significant regression
Current situation and Current situation related toworld context (for each indicator):4 Countries in progress3 Countries above average2 Countries below average1 Countries in regression
UDHR: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.CERD: International Convention on the Elimination ofAll Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1965.CESCR: International Covenant on Economic, Socialand Cultural Rights, 1966.CEDAW: Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination against Women, 1979.CRC: Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989.
Annex 4: Social Watch Legend & Methodology AX
58
final levels, and the rate of change of progress orregression. The situation of a country according toeach indicator is given by the last available value forthat indicator.
Each country is assigned a value from 1 to 4 (1indicates the worst case and 4 indicates best case)according to the distribution of values for eachindicator4. The value for all of the indicators for thatarea is then given by the average of the values foreach country.5 In this way, a self-referential ranking isobtained, independent of the distance from the goalsor from specific conceptually defined levels.
This ranking was only applied to those countries withinformation for at least half the indicators that makeup the overall thematic area. To avoid giving a falseimpression of accuracy, the average values wererescaled6 to create four country categories:
Countries in progressCountries above averageCountries below averageCountries in regression
A fifth group is also presented showing informationfor those countries which lack sufficient data to beincluded in the ranking (Countries with insufficientdata to summarise the area).
Within each group the countries are listed inalphabetical order.
The rate of change for each country is obtained byconsidering the variation in the values of the indicatorover the time period within which the measurementsare made. The quotient between the variation in theindicator and the time period reflects the rate of changefor the item in question.
The values for this rate of change have also beenrescaled in sections (using a reference scale from 1 to5), which are presented in the tables in the columnentitled “Progress or regression”. A series of symbolsis used to illustrate the changes in order to make theinformation easier to read and to avoid the false
impression of accuracy given by a numerical value.The categories defined in this rescaling are as follows:
>>>> Significant progress>> Slight progress= Stagnant<< Slight regression<<<< Significant regression
“Significant progress” applies to those countries whichare progressing at rates above the average for allcountries making progress.
“Slight progress” applies to those countries which areprogressing at rates below the average for all countriesmaking progress.
“Stagnant” refers to those countries where no changes(or quantitatively insignificant changes) have beenrecorded over the period in question.
“Slight regression” applies to those countries whichare regressing at rates below the average for allcountries regressing (i.e. they are regressing moreslowly).
“Significant regression” applies to those countrieswhich are regressing at rates above the average for allcountries regressing (i.e. they are regressing morerapidly).
Gender RankingGender equity is a complex concept involving multipledimensions of both a quantitative and qualitativenature, for many of which there are no data recordsavailable. The last Social Watch Report (2004) includesa ranking of those countries for which data is availablein terms of the different dimensions selected asindicators in the thematic area relating to gender equity.The dimensions chosen are: education, economicactivity and participation in political and economicdecision-making (“empowerment”). The ranking wasconstructed by combining the internal ranking for eachof the above-mentioned dimensions in a single finalindex of countries. The challenge faced was how tounify the different dimensions along which gender
Annex 4: Social Watch Legend & MethodologyAX
59
equity has been measured, in order to obtain a morecomprehensive ranking than that provided for eachdimension separately or in traditional indexes.
The final index measuring gender equity constructedby Social Watch for the 2004 report, takes into accountthe three dimensions of education, economic activityand empowerment, sorting countries into groups onthe basis of the average values of their indicators.
To construct the table ranking countries according totheir performance in the dimensions relating to genderequity, use is made of the same method that SocialWatch uses in other areas. That is, the values shownrelate to the average of each country’s performance inthe different dimensions of analysis, which in this caseare: education, economic activity and empowerment.The unified index is calculated by combining eachcountry’s values for the component dimensions in anunweighted average.
Each country is classified in one of four categoriesaccording to the distribution of each indicator. Theaverage for the area is calculated on the basis of theaverage of the values resulting from that classification.This first scaling exercise eliminates the gaps betweenvalues and standardises their distribution. The generalranking therefore provides no more than a basicindexing criterion referring to countries’ relativepositions and not to the indicators’ conceptual levels.When countries share the same relative position, theyare listed in alphabetical order.
There follows an updating of the Gender Ranking andits calculation as of November 2004 for the countriesconsidered in this report.
Annex 4: Social Watch Legend & Methodology AX
60
AX Annex 4a
61
AXAnnex 4a
62
Annex 4bAX
63
AXAnnex 4b
64
Annex 4bAX
65
Annex 4b AX
66
Annex 4cAX
67
AXAnnex 4c
68
Annex 4cAX
69
Annex 4c AX
70
Annex 4dAX
71
Annex 4e AX
72
Annex 4eAX
73
AXAnnex 4e
74
Annex 4eAX
75
Annex 5 AX
76
Notes
