NOTES ON GENDER-SENSITIVE AND PRO-POOR INDICATORS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE by 7439JqI3

VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 11

									 FOUR PROPOSITIONS ON
 GENDER-SENSITIVE AND
PRO-POOR INDICATORS OF
  GOOD GOVERNANCE

       Christopher Scott
  London School of Economics
          April 2005
     THE PROPOSITIONS
1. Indicator selection is itself a
   governance process.
2. Three generations of indicators
   may be distinguished.
3. Use specific governance
   processes as units of analysis to
   identify certain indicators.
4. ‘Gender-sensitivity’ has (at least)
   four different meanings.
  INDICATOR SELECTION IS A
    GOVERNANCE PROCESS
• Competent, transparent and participatory
  IS intrinsic to good governance.
• Not an exclusively technical exercise, nor
  a once-off set of decisions.
• Ensure IS process strengthens and
  supports existing democratic political
  institutions rather than bypasses them, eg.
  importance of Parliamentary involvement.
    DISTINGUISH THREE
GENERATIONS OF INDICATORS
• 1st generation indicators (G1)
  – can be used now
  – may suffer from methodological
    weaknesses wrt relevance,coverage,etc.
• 2nd generation indicators (G2)
  – not currently available.
  – could be produced within (say) 3 years
  – promise to be methodologically superior
    to some G1 indicators.
    DISTINGUISH THREE
GENERATIONS OF INDICATORS

• 3rd generation indicators (G3)
  – experimental indicators outside
    official monitoring system.
  – often pioneered by civil society
    organisations.
  – after due process of appraisal, some
    G3 indicators may evolve into G2.
USE GOVERNANCE PROCESSES
   AS UNITS OF ANALYSIS
• Mapping specific governance processes
  provides a tool for identifying certain pro-
  poor and gender-sensitive indicators
• Suggest hierarchy of ‘governance’ →
  service lines/practice areas → processes →
  indicators.
• Process ≡ detailed sequence of
  chronological steps in a single political,
  administrative or legal procedure which is
  embedded in a set of institutions.
USE GOVERNANCE PROCESSES
   AS UNITS OF ANALYSIS
• Examples
  – Regulatory process for registering a firm
    (required for movement from urban informal to
    formal sector)
  – Criminal justice process: application in
    Honduras produced 10 indicators.
  – In some countries (Mongolia), it is likely that a
    majority of both perpetrators and victims of
    certain types of recorded crime (such as theft)
    come from low-income households.
IDENTIFY FOUR TYPES OF GENDER-
     SENSITIVE INDICATORS

1. Gender disaggregated
  – eg. % of Parliamentarians who are female
  – How far to disaggregate ? Large differences
    in indicator X (propensity to vote) may exist
    between separate subgroups of either men
    or women (by age group, income, ethnic
    group).
  – Implies average gender differential wrt
    indicator X may hide large variance across
    subgroups of the same gender. May be
    relevant to policy.
IDENTIFY FOUR TYPES OF GENDER-
     SENSITIVE INDICATORS

2. Gender specific
  – eg. number of reported rape cases
    prosecuted in courts (victims almost
    exclusively female)
  – eg. incidence of domestic violence
    (victims predominantly female)
  – relevant for measuring dimensions of
    welfare which are female-specific.
IDENTIFY FOUR TYPES OF GENDER-
     SENSITIVE INDICATORS

3. Implicitly gendered:
  – eg. distance from nearest health and
    education facilities (defined as a
    governance indicator in Kosovo HDR).
  – If it is women rather than men who take
    children to health clinics and accompany
    them to/from school, this indicator is
    implicitly gendered.
  – Importance of obtaining information on
    time-use by (poor) men and women.
IDENTIFY FOUR TYPES OF GENDER-
     SENSITIVE INDICATORS

4. Chosen by women rather than men
  – need not refer to gender at all.
  – such indicators reflect differences in
    preferences/priorities as between men
    and women regarding different
    dimensions of governance.

								
To top