Abstract
This article examines three social protection interventions from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Peru, and discusses the extent to which they effectively integrate a gender perspective to address poverty and vulnerability. All three case studies have important design features aiming to tackle gender inequalities in both the economic and social spheres, which is critical for programme effectiveness. Despite these examples of good practice, however, there are gaps in programme design, particularly in explicitly challenging existing inequalities between men and women, for instance, such as promoting women's quality participation in the labour market, and their active engagement, voice and agency in household and community decision-making. Moreover, greater investment in the implementation of such features is often needed to effectively translate programme goals into gender equitable outcomes and impacts.
Notes
1. By practical gender needs we are drawing on Molyneux's (Citation1985) distinction between different types of gender interests – practical and strategic. Practical gender interests refer to immediate perceived needs as related to gendered roles and responsibilities. ‘By virtue of their place within the sexual division of labour, women are disproportionately responsible for childcare and family health, and they are particularly concerned with housing and food provision’ (ibid., 298). By contrast, strategic gender interests are those that are related to more fundamental and long-term transformations of gender hierarchies and inequities, such as differential access to political power or the mal-distribution of resources between men and women.
2. The details of this project are discussed fully in another article in this issue.