Gender assessment in energy projects: perceptions, practices and the role of a regional directive in ECOWAS

ABSTRACT

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is the first regional organisation, globally, to have a Directive on Gender Assessment in Energy Projects. The Directive provides a framework for Member States to ensure that women and marginalised groups in project-affected communities are adequately protected from adverse impacts of energy projects. Being a recent instrument, one may wonder how this experiment will pan out. Drawing from scholarship on regionalism and using social impact theory, this paper adopts a forward-looking approach to consider if the recently adopted Directive will now become practice. We find that ECOWAS has the procedural legitimacy to successfully impact the domestic institutions of its Member States through this Directive – with ECOWAS being seen as a strong and influential institution by its members. However, ECOWAS’ consequential legitimacy, regarding this Directive, may be slightly weakened by its lesser ‘immediacy’, i.e. its level of interaction with ministries, departments and agencies, when compared to other actors such as international financial institutions. The paper concludes with the recommendation for stronger regional oversight and guidance from ECOWAS. We also call for action to financial institutions, private investors and community-based organisations to make gender assessment in energy projects a consistent and meaningful practice.

KEYWORDS:

• Regionalism
• gender mainstreaming
• human rights
• West Africa
• economic development
• ECOWAS Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (ECREEE)

1. Introduction

On 28 May 1975, West African countries, represented by their Heads of State, signed a treaty establishing the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).¹ According to Article 3 of the revised treaty, the purpose of recognising these countries as one community is in order to

promote co-operation and integration, leading to the establishment of an economic union in West Africa in order to raise the living standards of its peoples, and to maintain and enhance economic stability, foster relations among Member States and contribute to the progress and development of the African Continent. (ECOWAS 1993)

Member States, through the treaty, are obliged to create, at the national level, legislative and statutory texts for the implementation of the treaty and its supplementary laws. All decisions adopted at the annual meetings of the Heads of State are binding on all Member States.²

In 2017, the ECOWAS Heads of State adopted the Supplementary Act A/SA.2/06/17 Relating to the ECOWAS Policy for Gender Mainstreaming in Energy Access. The Act expressed the authorities’ awareness of the need to mainstream gender in energy access, in order to better address the needs of all citizens as it concerns access to modern and sustainable energy services for an improved standard of living and productivity (ECOWGEN 2017).

In that same year, the ECOWAS Energy Experts (directors of energy ministries, departments and agencies) validated the ECOWAS Directive on Gender Assessment in Energy Projects (the Gender Directive), which established the legal framework for implementation of the regional policy (ECREEE 2017c). The Gender Directive aims to ensure that vulnerable and marginalised persons are not excluded as participants in and beneficiaries of energy infrastructure development, by: ensuring meaningful participation of women and men; identification, avoidance and mitigation of potential adverse and discriminatory impacts deriving from projects; improving transparency in planning and implementation processes; and encouraging harmonised policy, legal regulatory frameworks and operational strategies in each Member State (ECOWAS 2017). In practice, the Gender Directive requires the development of a Gender Assessment, a Gender Management Plan and Gender Performance Monitoring for those energy projects that meet established criteria and thresholds in terms of expected social impacts and benefits. The minimum content and scope of the Gender Assessment and Plans is established by the Gender Directive and is based on the results of a specially commissioned study and subsequent consultations (ECOWAS 2017; ECREEE 2017a, 2017b, 2017c). Furthermore, each Member State can establish Additional Criteria that address the specific countries’ and projects’ relevant gender issues. The Gender Directive requires the identification of vulnerable groups and specific gender vulnerabilities, impacts and opportunities but does not prescribe a specific approach or perspective to the assessment, such as intersectionality (ECOWAS 2017).

The Directive, since its validation by the ECOWAS Energy Experts, has been presented and discussed at the higher echelons of the ECOWAS approving bodies. Furthermore, with coordination from ECREEE, Member States have developed, validated and adopted National Action Plans (NAPs) for implementing the ECOWAS Policy for Gender Mainstreaming in Energy Access (ECREEE 2020). These NAPs include implementation strategies for the Gender Directive, which is the legal instrument developed for achieving Objective Two of the regional policy, that is: ‘Ensure that all energy policies, programmes and initiatives, including large energy infrastructures and investments, are non-discriminatory, gender-inclusive, gender-balanced and directed towards addressing inequalities, particularly energy poverty, differentially affecting men and women in the region’ (ECOWGEN 2017, p. 16).

This, however, invites the question: Are these aforementioned activities at the regional level an indication of the widespread acceptance of gender assessments as a practice at the national level? In other words, does the successful validation and adoption at the regional level mean that we can expect its successful execution at the national level, including through the effective implementation of the NAPs that have been generated?

Scholars on regionalism, or regional institutional building, explain that the underlying reason why sovereign states form regional organisations is for material benefits, which could be for strengthening economic systems or addressing issues with distributional effects (Börzel 2016; Hartmann 2016). On the effect that regional organisations could have on institution building of their member states, however, Börzel (2016) argues that besides the European Union (EU) other regional bodies are less likely to produce a strong effect on their domestic institutions considering that the power of delegation and pooling, on the side of the regional organisation, is limited. Furthermore, Hartmann (2016) argues that when regionalism does not strongly involve the harmonisation of policies then consensus among members might be the most efficient decision tool.

This paper aims to fill a gap in the study of regionalism, specifically as it pertains to the African region. As acknowledged by Börzel (2016), for instance, ‘the broader effect of regionalism on domestic policies, institutions and political processes have so far been systematically explored for the case of the EU’ (p. 12). We also address the question of ECOWAS’ legitimacy as an institution capable of dictating or directing how Member States should operate. According to Rittberger and Schroeder (2016), research on legitimacy of non-EU regional organisations is rather scarce. On African regionalism, Hartmann (2016) notes that challenges with studying regional organisations on the continent stem from the difficulty with accessing data on decisions and policies taken by regional organisations as well as their decision-making processes. Taking the Gender Directive as the case study, this paper will shed light on these assertions. Furthermore, we document some of the processes and perspectives of key government actors in the domestication and implementation of the Gender Directive, a topic that has not been addressed in academic literature.

In addition to the literature on regionalism, we employ ‘social impact theory’ (Latané 1981). Social theory, although constituting different schools of thought, provides a systematic approach for observing, analysing and interpreting occurrences in our society (Harrington 1966). ‘Social practice theory’, for example, has been used to understand energy-environment discourses and to comment on how accepted practices associated with meeting everyday energy needs create a lock-in effect on how energy is used (Hampton and Adams 2018). Maduekwe et al. (2019) use social practice theory to analyse how the ECOWAS Policy for Gender Mainstreaming in Energy Access could alter the existing practice associated with gender in the energy discourse. ‘Social cognitive theory’, on the other hand, was used by Wang et al. (2021) to analyse the interplay of societal factors that could lead to public acceptance of large-scale energy projects. We have chosen ‘social impact theory’ for this paper as it provides a useful framework, in our opinion, to analyse the impact social forces (actors and their actions) have on their target, in this case the impact of regional organisations (i.e. the actors and their actions) on the domestic policies and processes in ECOWAS Member States (i.e. the target).

In addition to a literature review, the paper is based on 13 semi-structured interviews with some of the directors and deputy directors of energy and gender focal points in the energy ministries in ECOWAS. These representatives were selected from a mix of 10 Anglophone and Francophone West African countries.³

The interview questions were developed by the authors, specifically for this paper. The first author, as coordinator of the ECOWAS Gender and Energy Programme (ECOW-GEN), led the work to formulate the Gender Directive and managed its validation and adoption process at the regional level. The second author has extensive international experience in environmental, social and human rights impact assessment, conducting due diligence of energy projects in Africa for financial institutions. Furthermore, she was an adviser during the development and consultation process of the Gender Directive.

Our findings are that ECOWAS does have the procedural legitimacy to successfully impact the domestic institutions of its Member States through this Directive, thus refuting the argument made by Börzel (2016) for the case of ECOWAS. However, the authors find that, while ECOWAS may not be lacking in the area of delegation and pooling, the regional organisation is not optimising the influence exactable over its Member States by interacting frequently with the organs of government responsible for executing the decisions made at the regional level. What we find is that non-state actors such as international finance institutions (IFIs) and development partners are ahead of ECOWAS, interacting more frequently with ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) responsible for energy. We caution that this threatens ECOWAS’ consequential legitimacy as far as it concerns the successful implementation of the Gender Directive. We therefore argue for a significant expansion of ECOWAS’ engagement with the energy MDAs through a more frequent regional-national oversight structure, to monitor the Gender Directive’s implementation, if implementation of this Directive is to become common practice in the region.

Section Two of the paper presents the Gender Directive, specifically the process followed in its development. The section also discusses relevant literature on regionalism, specifically as it concerns the issues faced by non-EU regional organisations in having impacts on their members. Section Three introduces the theoretical framework – social impact theory – and the approach adopted for the interviews and literature review for the paper. In Section Four we present and discuss our findings. Section Five addresses challenges for gender assessments to become an established practice and Section Six concludes.

2. The process of making a case for a legal instrument to monitor gender in energy projects

The Gender Directive was drafted by the ECOWAS Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (ECREEE), with the support of the ECOWAS Commission’s Department of Social Affairs and Gender. ECREEE as a specialised agency under the ECOWAS Commission’s Department for Energy and Mines has the mandate to undertake such activities to produce recommendations that are ultimately sent by the ECOWAS Commission to the ECOWAS Council of Ministers, who adopt these recommendations in the form of decisions (ECOWAS 1993). According to the ECOWAS Treaty, the decisions and directions of the Council are binding on the institutions of the ECOWAS Member States.

From 26 to 28 June 2017, ECREEE convened the ECOWAS Energy Experts, the technical arm of the Commission for Energy and Mines, for a 3-day meeting in Accra, Ghana, to deliberate on the contents of the draft Gender Directive.

The meeting of the ECOWAS Energy Experts brought together representatives of ministries of energy and regulatory agencies in the ECOWAS region; representatives of relevant specialised agencies under the ECOWAS Commission, representatives of the donor community; representatives of civil society organisations (CSOs), academia and research institutions; and other relevant stakeholder institutions.

With an attendance of over 100 delegates, at the end of the 3-day deliberation the Gender Directive was adopted and recommended to the statutory bodies of ECOWAS (ECREEE 2017a). The Gender Directive was adopted based on the findings of a background study report, Developing a Legal Instrument for Gender Assessment in Energy Infrastructure Planning and Development within ECOWAS, which revealed that energy sector governance was largely gender-blind (ECREEE 2017b). Moreover, compared to widely applied environmental impact assessment (EIA) practices, incorporating gender considerations in energy infrastructure planning is not widespread, even though gender-differentiated risks, impacts, and benefits are in many cases significant (ECREEE 2017b). Case studies from West African energy projects included in the study demonstrated how the lack of gender responsiveness in the development of energy projects led to expensive work stoppages from community members who felt their needs and interests were not taken on board (ECREEE 2017b). This situation is not unique to ECOWAS: a global study by the World Bank and energy sector gender profiles of countries in the African region show similar results (AfDB 2016; Orlando et al. 2018).

The Gender Directive requires that Member States develop legislation that ensures that, before permits to develop public or private sector-led energy projects are granted by the public regulator (in many cases the ministries of environment), gender assessments are conducted and gender management plans are developed for situations where significant gender impacts are expected (ECOWAS 2017; see also Sauer and Stieß 2021, this volume). As stated in the ECOWAS Treaty, the Member States have the freedom to decide how best to execute regional directives. Thus, in this case, countries may choose to develop a stand-alone gender assessment act or integrate the provisions of the Gender Directive into the existing country-level environmental impact assessment acts. Projects, according to the Directive,

means the execution of construction works or of other installations or schemes, or other interventions in the natural surroundings and landscape, including those involving the extraction, production, transformation, transportation, storage, generation, transmission and distribution of Energy, energy products and energy services, and related projects that have a significant Energy component. (ECOWAS 2017, p. 4)

Despite the general consensus on the Gender Directive, concerns were raised during the ECOWAS Energy Expert’s Meeting, specifically if the Directive will be effectively implemented, given past experiences with Member States’ timely implementation of regional directives (ECREEE 2017c).

The Gender Directive is the first time the region is regulating gender assessment in any sector. At the Energy Experts meeting to validate the Directive the fact that the legal instrument seems to focus on the energy sector only was deliberated, with consensus reached that the Directive could also serve as a template for other areas of infrastructure development (ECREEE 2017c). The successful implementation of this Directive is therefore key as this could serve as the impetus for gender assessment practice across other areas of infrastructure development (see also Götzmann and Bainton 2021; Hill et al. 2021, this volume).

2.1 Regional organisations and the question of legitimacy

It can be argued that the ECOWAS organ, through its officials, fulfils the condition of legitimacy, i.e. conferred power. The supreme institution of the community are the Heads of State and/or Government of Member States, who are officials elected by their electorate. Other institutions of the community include the Council of Ministers, responsible for the general functioning of the community, comprised of ministers appointed by their heads of government; the ECOWAS parliament, which is selected based on elections held in the respective Member States; the Court of Justice and others, such as the President of the Commission, the Commissioners and the staff of the community (international civil servants).

Concerning decision-making procedures, decisions adopted by the highest governing body of ECOWAS, which is the Authority of Heads of State and Government, must go through a process of democratic deliberations at various levels starting at the technical expert levels (including sectoral ministers), progressing to the Council of Minister, before, ultimately, getting to the Heads of State.

ECOWAS as a regional organisation arguably embodies the qualities of representation, inclusiveness, transparency and political accountability, referred to as democratic benchmarks (Rittberger and Schroeder 2016) when looked at from the angle of procedural legitimacy (which is concerned with the processes adopted in the selection of political representatives and in decision-making). Notwithstanding this, when examined from the consequentialist perspective of legitimacy, which concerns the ability of a political power to achieve its goals, can ECOWAS be said to be just as effective? In order to assess the impact ECOWAS has on its members, we now apply social impact theory.

3. Social impact theory

Latané (1981) describes social impact as changes in one’s behaviour, values, beliefs, etc., as a result of the actions or presence of another. These actions could be real, implied or imagined. Social impact theory is comprised of three principles, namely: (1) social forces; (2) the psychosocial law; and (3) multiplication versus division of impact.

The theory has been applied across various fields of studies. Seltzer et al. (2013), for instance, apply the theory in studying factors that influence the political attitude of an individual. Vega et al. (2016) employ social impact theory to examine factors that determine the efficacy of a social media marketing campaign. Akyol and Alatas (2019) use social impact theory-based optimisation in a sentiment analysis study looking at online social media.

The principle of social forces postulates that the impact experienced by a target of a social force is a multiplicative function of the strength (S), immediacy or proximity (I) and number (N) of the sources acting on the target. That is, I = f (SIN) (Latané 1981). To further explain: S could connote real or perceived power, importance and/or intensity of the source to the target; I the spatial and temporal distance between the source and target; and N refers to the number of people involved. I = f (SIN) therefore means that I should increase with an increase in the influence or power the source is perceived to have, its proximity to the target and if more people, as sources, are involved in influencing the actions of the target.

The psychosocial law is explained as I = _sN^t, t < 1. Latané (1981) explains that individuals (or entities) are constantly influenced by others – whether through their actions or expectations, and that these actions of others have bearing on the behaviour of the individual (or entity). For this principle, he postulates that the amount of social impact an individual faces is a function of N, the number of sources exerting this influence, raised to a power t, with a scaling constant s.

The principle of multiplication versus division of impact means that, in situations where the source is a minority facing several targets, the social force exerted by S is divided among the large number of targets (Latané 1981). The equation is written as follows: I = f (1/SIN).

This paper will focus on the principle of social forces, as the paper is intent on studying the question of if I = f (SIN) at this point. Using social impact theory as our framework, specifically the social forces principle, we can contemplate the impact the Gender Directive may eventually have on the target group (i.e. ministries in charge of developing and approving energy infrastructure projects). Having developed NAPs for the domestication of this regional legal instrument, will Member States follow through the necessary legislations and implementation?

3.1 Methodology

As part of the research for this paper, we conducted 13 semi-structured interviews with select key public servants, specifically the directors, or deputy directors, of energy and gender focal points in the energy ministries of 10 ECOWAS countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Liberia and Togo, although all the 15 Member States were invited to participate in the study. These country representatives were selected from a mix of Anglophone and Francophone West African countries.

The semi-structured interview questions were framed under three categories – strength (influence, pressure); immediacy (level of interaction); and number (role of external actors) – following social impact theory. The questions to explore the three categories were designed to be answered mostly by grading (i.e. frequently to never), ranking (i.e. most to least influence) or selecting among pre-determined options, with the possibility of providing alternatives, comments or providing details for each of the answers if desired. Open questions were used for exploring the biggest challenge for gender impact assessment to become an established practice and reasons for considering (or not) ECOWAS directives in the decisions of energy MDAs.

The interviews were conducted in the respondents’ country’s official language (i.e. English or French), and held over telephone or online communication platforms by research assistants employed by ECREEE and the Community Insights Group (CIG). An average call lasted for an hour and thirty minutes. The respondents are treated as anonymous in the research.

4. Presentation of findings and analysis

4.1 Strength

The questions in this category were designed to assess the perceived strength of ECOWAS as a regional law-making body and, by extension, the perceived potency of the Gender Directive. The questions here specifically speak to the statement by Börzel (2016), that ‘Other regional institutions (excluding the EU) are less likely to have institutional effects on their members given that delegation and pooling is more limited’ (p. 12).

Classification of questions here include:

• extent of consideration of ECOWAS initiatives in decisions implemented by energy MDAs;

• influence exerted by different types of interactions;

• influence of other institutions in making the Gender Directive operational; and

• pressure on energy MDAs to promote gender assessments in energy projects.

4.1.1 Extent of consideration of ECOWAS initiatives in decisions implemented by energy MDAs

ECOWAS directives are largely taken into consideration when energy MDAs plan and implement their annual work programmes. This was reported by the majority of the respondents. On the reasons behind the high level of adoption of the Gender Directive, the respondents noted that energy MDAs’ policies need to tie in with regional and international policies. Therefore, any guidelines of action points provided by ECOWAS will be highly considered. Moreover, ECOWAS directives are considered to contribute to the harmonious development of the energy sector.

These observations of the respondents are in line with ECOWAS’ vision of harmonisation and coordination of action for the purpose of uniformity in operations, across the different economic sectors of the community. On the other hand, in country cases where ECOWAS directives are considered to a lesser extent in the implementation of decisions taken by energy MDAs, factors behind this include circumstances where the country may have more advanced goals or targets than the regional benchmark. Another factor concerns ‘delays in the domestication of the directive into local regulations and procedures’ (interview).

4.1.2 Influence exerted by different types of interactions

When asked to identify types of interactions⁴ that exert the most influence on what energy MDAs decide to implement, respondents noted directive on what should be done and policy or regulatory setting. These interactions were identified as strengthening the position of ECOWAS as an institution that creates such directives as well as its role as a policy- and regulatory-making institution.

It was noted by one interviewee that ‘once regulatory settings are in place, the rest follows’. This brings to light a very important point; which is that it is not enough to merely give directions of what should be done. Such measures need to be accompanied with setting standards, as this plays a very strong role in ensuring that the directions given are implemented. When it comes to setting standards, inclusivity, participation and transparency in the development process increases the potency of the regional instrument in influencing domestic institution building. A respondent who identified directive on what should be done as having the strongest influence on interactions that determine what energy MDAs implement, buttressed this point noting that ‘the Ministry has participated in all the activities related to the development of the [Gender] Directive’.

Technical advisory/training and capacity building was also ranked by the interviewees as an influential type of interaction (see also Sauer and Stieß 2021, this volume). It was indicated that this type of interaction should not be limited to government officials, but extend to ‘informing the population and creating awareness’ (interview). Technological assistance (except when complementing technical advisory) and funding were considered to be the least influential types of interaction, although lack of funding was identified as a challenge for the effective implementation of gender initiatives.

4.1.3 Influence of other institutions in making the Gender Directive operational

Half of the interviewees considered their government to be the most influential body with regard to the implementation of the Gender Directive. For the other half, some respondents noted that the government is yet to be fully aware of the Gender Directive and are, therefore, yet to take actions to enforce it. For this group, the influential bodies identified include ECOWAS, followed by IFIs and development partners. Interestingly, all interviewees considered that private investors have the least influence. The rating is better for CSOs, which are regarded as having a limited influence in most of the countries covered in the interviews.

4.1.4 Pressure on energy MDAs to promote gender assessments in energy projects

Although the eventual success of the Gender Directive lies in the hands of the national governments, respondents noted that some pressure to implement it could come from ECOWAS. When asked to identify the top three institutions that can exert the most pressure in promoting the practice of gender assessments for energy projects, respondents identified government organisations, ECOWAS, and IFIs and development partners. ECOWAS was identified by all interviewees, the other two categories by all but two respondents. Several informants consider CSOs to play an important role, especially through capacity building and other forms of support given to women to participate actively in project assessment consultations as well as gaining access to jobs. None of the interviewees mentioned private investors as influential institutions or actors. It was noted by one interviewee that in the case of private investors, ‘the demand of gender assessments depends on who is funding the project’, indicating that financial institutions are directly linked to the performance of private investors, through their internal environmental and social safeguard standards and requirements for financing.

The interviews were not specific on which financial institutions, development partners or type of investors demand gender assessments. It is also unclear if the demand for gender assessments is implemented systematically by certain financial institutions and investors, or if it depends on the individual judgment of the environmental and social officer in charge. Delving into such details could constitute an interesting avenue for further research (see also Götzmann and Bainton 2021; Hill et al. 2021, this volume).

Based on these responses, our conclusion is that ECOWAS is perceived to have a strong influence and, thus, may be able to impact the domestic institutions in its member countries through its actions, which includes this Gender Directive. This is mainly because ECOWAS is perceived to be a legitimate policy- or law-making body by its Member States. The generally positive attitude of the interviewees towards the Gender Directive, the promotion of gender assessments in energy projects in general and the influence of ECOWAS corroborates the support expressed during the approval of the Directive. The answers also seem to indicate that there is room for more leverage by IFIs regarding private investments, and the investors themselves, an opportunity that we think should be explored further.

4.2 Immediacy

Questions on immediacy dealt with whether or not the ECOWAS organ and decision-making processes (and the products of these processes, such as a regional directive) are perceived to be ‘removed’ from national governance processes (actions national governments prioritise). As discussed in Section 3, above, immediacy concerns proximity. The assumption is that the closer the proximity between the source and the target, the more the interaction, and vice versa. Moreover, this question group speaks to the issue of consequential legitimacy of ECOWAS as a regional organisation.

Question categories include:

• level of interaction with entities regarding the activities of energy MDAs; and

• demand for inclusion of gender assessments or gender considerations in projects.

4.2.1 Level of interaction with entities regarding the activities of energy MDAs

Energy MDAs were asked to identify those entities with which they interact the most, especially when it comes to receiving recommendations that help to shape the energy MDAs’ work activities. In this regard, half of the interviewees indicated that the ministry interacts most with their governments (executive, legislative and judicial arms), all the time or frequently, some describing the interaction as daily. The other half of the interviewees reported different degrees of interaction with their government, including none in two country cases. For countries that selected none, this low frequency of interaction was often described as a temporary situation that is being addressed. In cases where the level of interaction with the government is low, the respondents identified IFIs and development partners, and then ECOWAS, as the actors most often providing recommendations for the ministry’s work activities.

A similar trend on the level of interaction is observed with regard to IFIs and development partners, with half of the respondents interacting with this group frequently or all the time. Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), funded by the United States development agency Millennium Challenge Corporation, was cited as a positive example of engagement, and the International Finance Corporation, World Bank and the African Development Bank cited as institutions with which the energy MDAs have interactions with. Only a small fraction of the respondents indicated that they receive recommendations from private investors. For another small group of countries, interviewees noted that there is no record of private investors providing recommendations that define actions ultimately implemented by the energy MDA. It was pointed out that ministries normally do not initiate meetings with private investors, but that private investors often have meetings and forums where energy MDAs are invited to attend. One interviewee stated that investors seem to resist the idea of gender initiatives.

On investors resisting the idea of gender initiatives, this statement echoes the observations and experience of the authors from working in energy projects in the region. Anecdotal evidence suggests that objections of investors regarding gender assessments and interventions are related mainly to not being a specific requirement for permitting or financing; perceptions of additional time and expenses without an evident business case; and worry of undermining the goodwill of local leaders if gender norms and traditional decision-making processes are challenged.

While all interviewees acknowledge some degree of interaction with ECOWAS, which in turn helps in shaping the activities implemented by energy MDAs, the level of interaction varies from country to country, and no particular trends or reasons behind a higher or lower level of interaction emerged from the interviews – compared to results for IFIs, which show a consistent and strong interaction with energy MDAs.

This result therefore underlines the importance of ECOWAS putting in place an annual planning and quarterly monitoring and reporting structure between the ECOWAS organisation charged with reporting on the Gender Directive’s implementation (this will be ECREEE) and the ministries of energy in the respective Member States, which will be coordinating and reporting on behalf of the departments and agencies under the energy ministry.

It is important to note that ECOWAS does have a structure for implementing regional-national oversight and ensuring constant interactions with Member States, specifically where it concerns economic and financial policies (ECOWAS 2012). The National Coordinating Committees (NCC) work under the authority of the Ministries of Finance in each Member State to report quarterly on implementation of the region’s macroeconomic convergence programmes (ECOWAS 2012). For the case of the Gender Directive, a similar structure was recommended in the ECOWAS Policy for Gender Mainstreaming in Energy Access, whereby Gender Focal Units (GFUs) are set up in the respective Ministries of Energy (ECOWGEN 2017). The success of this GFU-ECOWAS planning, monitoring and reporting structure will depend on availability of human and financial resources on both sides, as well as an accountability structure leading up to the authorities responsible for adopting ECOWAS directives at the regional and national level. For example, in the case of the NCC, the chairman of each Member States’ NCC is appointed by and reports to the Minister of Finance and thereafter, to the ECOWAS Commission on a regular basis (ECOWAS 2012).

4.2.2 Demand for inclusion of gender assessments or gender considerations in projects

Measured by how frequent institutions’ demands for gender assessments or considerations in energy projects are, ECOWAS is seen to be a leader, with the majority of interviewees noting that ECOWAS requires this frequently or all the time. More than half of the interviewees consider IFIs and development partners to demand gender considerations at the same rate. Half of the respondents consider their governmental organisations (energy MDAs) to demand gender considerations frequently, and the other half only occasionally or never. Private investors in the energy sector are reported not to demand gender considerations, except for one case.

A key point from the responses under the Immediacy category is that, when it comes to working closely with energy MDAs to shape and influence what activities are eventually selected as priorities, IFIs and development partners are much closer to energy MDAs compared to ECOWAS. The implication of this is a weakened overall impact, although in instances when ECOWAS does interact, gender issues are seen as key. One possible interpretation of the results is that the financing, capacity development, and technical support provided by IFIs and development partners play an important role in influencing the agenda and priority actions of energy MDAs. It could also indicate that ECOWAS has been particularly vocal in the promotion of gender assessments, but progress on the implementation of the Gender Directive at national level may require more significant commitment of IFIs and development partners.

4.3 Number

The analysis of Number looks into the involvement of other institutions (local CSOs, decision-makers, national legislators, as well as external actors like UN organisations, donors, etc.) in the same space, i.e. those actors concerned with promoting gender assessments in energy projects. It also looks into how having more players could ultimately contribute to the promotion and enforcement of the Gender Directive.

Question categories include:

• entities that are demanding for the inclusion of gender considerations in projects; and

• third-party influence on decisions implemented by energy MDAs.

4.3.1 Entities that are demanding the inclusion of gender considerations in projects

All interviewees noted that ECOWAS demands gender assessments and gender considerations in projects, and similar results are observed for IFIs and international development partners. The majority of the interviewees identified CSOs as expressing similar demands; only over half can say the same about government organisations such as head of states, other ministries, parliamentary bodies or the judicial system. Except for one case, country respondents do not experience or know of private investors who demand gender assessments or considerations in projects they promote.

4.3.2 Third-party influence on decisions implemented by energy MDAs in their respective countries

The point of this question is to assess if indeed the actions of the sources of impact affect the target (energy MDAs). The responses show that decisions of ECOWAS and others do have an impact on domestic institutions, albeit to varying degrees. Decisions of the ECOWAS Heads of State are considered to be the most influential, followed by donor funding. As explained by one interviewee: ‘the Head of State validates and the minister applies’.

UN policies and declarations were ranked as the third in level of influence, and almost as influential as donor funding. Specifically, in terms of gender initiatives, donors are recognised to have ‘respect for gender equality’ (interview). Only two interviewees ranked CSOs as having high influence on the decisions of the ministries, one even asserting that ‘the pressure is high’. Nevertheless, overall, the level of influence of CSOs is ranked as the lowest. Similarly, while lobby and pressure from international interest groups is also considered to exist, it was considered to have low influence. One interviewee noted that ‘due to others promoting it, there is always pressure and demand for gender equality’.

In summary, there are other players, besides ECOWAS, requesting that gender assessment be taken into consideration when energy projects are developed. However, based on these responses, not all parties that can demand for this are taking advantage of their role in the energy sector. This refers specifically to private investors and, to some extent, government officials. For government officials, specifically, this could be an effect of the low Immediacy level, regarding ECOWAS’s interaction with energy MDAs, as discussed in the previous section. It is apparent that from the government perspective, more awareness is needed regarding linkages between energy and gender equality, as in the same countries there is more attention and demand for gender considerations and measures towards gender equality in sectors like mining, oil and gas, and agriculture. The same applies for private investors, for whom it is apparent that the business case for gender equality measures in energy projects needs to be more explicit.

5. Challenges for gender assessments to become an established practice

Lack of local expertise on gender assessments, and lack of awareness on why gender assessment is important, were clearly identified by interviewees as the two biggest challenges to gender assessment becoming a more established practice (see also Götzmann and Bainton 2021; Levac et al. 2021, this volume). In the words of one of the interviewees: ‘I believe that the public authorities are decision-makers and responsible for the implementation of all development policies. Training them on the gender issue and equipping them to face up to their responsibilities will ensure the successful implementation and enforcement of the Directive.’

Two other aspects highlighted by several interviewees were: (1) the low participation of women in consultations and in the sector in general; and (2) pushback from project developers to implement such assessments, citing its complexity, as well as the time and cost implications.

On the first point, issues like cultural barriers hindering active participation in consultations, and the limited number of female operators and women with the technical skills required to work in the energy sector were mentioned as barriers for women to participate – both in consultations as well as in opportunities provided by the energy sector.

As stated by one interviewee: ‘The most important factor remains lack of awareness and the limited supply of women having the requisite technical skills and qualifications. Some parts of society still equate energy, and more precisely electricity, as a male’s field.’ Recent gender and energy studies worldwide (e.g. Orlando 2018) and in ECOWAS countries (e.g. AfDB 2016) report the same findings.

The issue of cultural barriers is relevant in that they may significantly influence the outcome of a gender assessment. Besides the issue of women as stakeholders being consulted, there is also the issue of women’s needs and priorities as community people not being taken on-board when the project is developed and implemented.

Training on gender, training of government officials on gender assessment, and an increased level of participation of women in project assessments and stakeholder consultations, were considered as the three most important actions for promoting the practice of conducting gender assessment in energy projects. The authors suggest that the targets of the training should be directors and deputy directors of energy and members of the GFUs in the energy ministries, as well as environmental licensing authorities at the national level and relevant sub-national levels in ECOWAS. These persons will be responsible for taking measures to ensure that the Gender Directive is enforced and for ensuring that the right expertise is sourced for the implementation of gender assessments in the country.

Furthermore, clear guidelines on how to perform gender assessments as well as pressure from ECOWAS on governments to implement the Gender Directive were also indicated as important measures to facilitate the Directive’s enforcement. Given the fact that monitoring of this Directive will be done at the regional level, as well as national level, the authors believe it is best that ECOWAS provides the guideline document for Member States to follow when conducting gender assessments. This would ensure that implementation is uniform and harmonised across the region, in line with the objectives of the ECOWAS Treaty on harmonisation of standards and measures adopted by Member States to ensure that implementation takes place in all countries at the same pace and at the same level. A common guideline document provided by ECOWAS can also contribute to a more rapidly gained readiness to roll-out the Gender Directive, as well as reduced costs of capacity building through a common strategy, training materials and technical support. This is especially significant for Member States with fewer resources and capacity constraints. Furthermore, common guidelines could ease the sharing of learning and good practices within ECOWAS once the implementation starts. The following were considered as less important in the interviews with representatives in the energy ministries in ECOWAS: training of local consultants, pressure from IFIs on developers and governments, and the development of case studies.

6. Conclusion

Gender assessment is increasingly promoted by various stakeholders as a mechanism for more inclusive infrastructure project development. The purpose of gender assessment is to adopt a detailed, gender-based approach in examining whether an infrastructure project will benefit men and women equitably, if both have similar avenues of expressing their opinions of the project, how the impacts affect them differentially, and if the management measures proposed adequately and effectively address the impacts for both men and women (ECOWAS 2017).

While the actual adoption of gender assessment in the ECOWAS region may not be widespread, some projects are developed taking into consideration these factors, at least to some extent. It is against this background that ECREEE and the ECOWAS Commission’s Department of Social Affairs and Gender drafted the Gender Directive in 2017. The aim of which is to harmonise and promote a widespread adoption of gender assessment practice in the development of energy projects in the region.

Recognising the legitimacy issues that regional organisations may face, when it comes to the domestic translation and implementation of regional or international commitments, our paper has sought to explore the question: does the successful validation and adoption of the Gender Directive at the regional level serve as an indication of the widespread acceptance of gender assessments as a practice at the national level? Using social impact theory as the theoretical framework, our exploratory analysis submits a condition-tied ‘yes’ to this question.

On strength, ECOWAS is perceived to have considerable influence over matters concerning its Member States. The majority of respondents note that ECOWAS’ initiatives are taken into consideration when energy MDAs implement their programmes (except in cases where the country is more advanced in its goals than the regional benchmark), and the fact that ECOWAS provides clear instructions, through directives, increases compliance by Member States. In addition, although the national governments have the final say on whether the Gender Directive will be successfully implemented or not, in their respective countries, ECOWAS has some influencing power. By encouraging Member States, through adequate training of government officials on gender assessment and developing clear guidelines on the application of gender assessment, ECOWAS may be able to leverage its influence over the Member States to achieve its desired goals for the Gender Directive. It is important to emphasise here that simply giving directives on what should be done may not guarantee a successful region-wide implementation of the Gender Directive, especially as countries vary in their capacity (human and financial resources) to execute. Therefore, it is important that ECOWAS provides concerete support mechanisms to enable countries to meet the expectations of the Gender Directive. This can be in terms of providing technical assistance and training of key government staff as well as through facilitating resource mobilisation to assist countries needing additional financial support in order to implement the provisions of the Gender Directive.

On the aspect of immediacy, ECOWAS’ position here is not as strong. It can be deduced that while ECOWAS does have a position of strength in the minds of the target group, in this case the energy MDAs, ECOWAS is not interacting enough with energy MDAs. The result confirming that national government institutions interact more with energy MDAs was expected by the authors, due to spatial and temporal proximity. However, it was unexpected that ECOWAS, which should have come in the next place after national governments, due to the same reasons, is vying for this position with IFIs and development partners. The implication of this is that the regional-national oversight needed to ensure that regional commitments are carried along when national plans and programmes are developed is weakened. Thus, limiting the success rate of regional directives, which may also apply to the Gender Directive explored here. Despite this setback, it is worthwhile mentioning that it seems as though energy MDAs, when they do interact with ECOWAS on energy projects, are prompted to include gender assessments and considerations in their programmes and projects.

Concerning number, this paper observes that we do not have an all-hands-on-deck situation when it comes to the promotion of gender assessments in energy projects. While IFIs, development partners, CSOs and government organisations all promote the adoption of gender assessments, in addition to ECOWAS, private investors and developers are passive or even unwilling to adopt this practice. Arguably, this is problematic because they are a significant actors in the sector and their performance will be determinant on the level and type of impacts and benefits experienced by communities, including women and girls. In our view, the lack of commitment of private investors and developers can be addressed through stronger and more decisive compliance requirements regarding the implementation of gender assessment and management in energy projects by both local authorities and IFIs. Positive incentives could include local and international recognition and reward of good practice on gender equality. CSOs have an important role to play both in promotion and advocacy of gender-responsive practice and conduct, as well as watchdogs of poor performance in the sector. In those situations where accountability for gender mainstreaming may be weak, i.e. the demand for gender mainstreaming may not be enforced by the competent authority in charge of licensing, a gender-responsive private financier may just be the solution to promoting gender assessment as a practice.

Furthermore, knowledge creation and sharing initiatives on gender and energy by IFIs, UN agencies and development cooperation agencies, including development of tailored ‘how to’ guidelines for gender impact assessment and management, research and case study publications as well as capacity building programmes, are fundamental for much-needed awareness raising and capacity building. The results of our findings seem to indicate that this work can benefit from more volume, visibility and reach among government officials of energy MDAs in order to develop and consolidate the practice of gender assessment in the energy sector. Nevertheless, the responses show that having more entities pushing for gender assessments can indeed achieve results, with decisions of the ECOWAS Heads of State being considered the most influential. It is therefore important that ECOWAS as well as other actors work together to make gender assessment in energy projects a consistent and meaningful practice.

Finally, the authors recommended to expand this research with a wider sample of actors involved in the implementation of the Gender Directive in all 15 Member States.

Notes

1. The ECOWAS region is made up of the following countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cote d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Senegal and Togo.

2. A two-third majority of the Member States is needed for such adoptions to take place.

3. Although all 15 Member States were approached and sent the questionnaires, only 10 countries responded and participated in the exercise. These countries are Benin, Burkina Faso, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Niger, Mali, Nigeria, Liberia and Togo.

4. This could be interactions with their own government (executive, legislative and judicial arms), ECOWAS (the Commission and ECREEE), international financial institutions and development partners (e.g. World Bank, International Finance Corporation, African Development Bank), civil society organisations or the private sector.