UNIFEM Comments on the EU Gender Action Plan by iqm86975


									 UNITED NATIONS                                         NATIONS UNIES

           DEVELOPMENT (2010-2015)

                              PROVIDED BY:


                          DECEMBER 11, 2009

                          BRUSSELS, BELGIUM

United Nations Brussels Team Comments on the Draft EU Plan of Action on Gender
Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development
I.     Introduction

UNIFEM and the UN Brussels Team1 welcome the draft Action Plan and commend the
European Union (EU) for its leadership in developing an Action Plan inspired by those
same values that inspired its own creation, and which seeks to advance democracy, rule
of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights as guiding principles of EU
international development Cooperation.

We also recognize the EU Consensus on Development (2005) which identified gender
equality as a goal on its own right and one of five pillar principles of development
cooperation, subsequent Council Conclusions on gender equality and women’s
empowerment in Development Cooperation, and broader EU policy on gender equality.
Based on these instruments, the draft EU Plan of Action on Gender Equality and
Women’s Empowerment in Development was conceived and proposes a series of
activities for increased efficiency and larger impact of EU gender equality interventions
in partner countries.

In the following sections we begin with general observations on the Action Plan and
then offer more specific comments on its various sections and elements, followed by
suggestions and proposed actions drawing on our field experience and knowledge. We
hope that these suggestions would contribute to strengthening the Action Plan
approach, focusing the proposed specific actions and indicators, enhancing coordination
and coherence of EU external and internal gender policies, and capturing the
momentum of important structural and institutional changes, brought forward by the
Lisbon Treaty, to introduce “system-wide” gender mainstreaming and integration of
gender equality in all EU policies, decisions, procedures and processes.

II.        General Observations and Recommendations

While the Action Plan aims to strengthen coordination and coherence of EU and
Member States’ (MS) gender equality initiatives and enhance the impact of gender
equality programs and effectiveness, we highlighted six main areas that we believe
require attention:

      1.      The Action Plan makes no reference to potential structural and institutional
              changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty that may have direct impact on
              gender mainstreaming and integration in various EU units, bodies, Working
              Groups and EU Delegations.

 The comments presented in this paper reflects inputs from the UN Brussels Team (UNIFEM, UNDP,
     Recommendation: we view these changes as presenting the EU with
     potential opportunities for EU “system-wide” gender mainstreaming and
     integration of gender equality policies at various levels, and in external and
     internal procedures and processes. We support this action as compatible to
     the UN Gender system-wide coherence and the UNGA Resolution
     (A/RES/63/311) to support the establishment of a new Gender Architecture
     aiming at enhancing coherence, coordination and accountability.

2.   While the Action Plan acknowledges scarcity of human and financial
     resources allocated to implementing gender mainstreaming, it does not
     however, provide any information or details on what kind of measures the
     EU will put in place and what funding instruments would be designated or re-
     designed to ensure adequate funding is secured to implement this plan. But
     rather it adds ‘This Action Plan focuses on a better prioritization and
     coordination based on existing resources, instruments or mechanisms”. This
     means no additional resources are being put forward in support of the Action

     This discussion is particularly important in light of the structural changes
     introduced by the Lisbon Treaty which President Barroso indicated “should
     offer the platform for a powerful vision for horizontal development policy
     delivered through the ACP and through the European Development Fund”.
     This discussion is also important in light of the three crises facing the world
     today: the food crisis, the financial/economic crisis and the climate change
     crises. Available data shows severe and particular impact on women as a
     result of these crises.

     Recommendation: taking into account that EU’s financial instruments will
     change during the period covered by the Action Plan, we suggest the
     inclusion of action points or commitments on using the occasion of the
     preparation of the new financial instruments to review the outcome of
     gender actions to date, to provide input from the European gender and
     development experts' group on the gender dimension of the new financial
     instruments for development, or to change the allocation in the financial
     instruments to further support gender equality.

3.   The objectives and approach are written in general terms. The objectives
     would be much focused if they are linked to EU Council Conclusions on
     Gender      Equality   and      Women’s       Empowerment,        specifying
     substantive/thematic areas for “integrating” gender equality policies, (other
     than general and sector budget support) and clearly defining geographic
     focus or priorities.
              Recommendation: we recommend the Action Plan is linked to EC
              commitments and Council decisions and build on the results achieved in the
              UN/EC partnership on Aid Effectiveness, Gender Responsive Budgeting and
              implementation of UNSCR’s 1325 and 1820. We recommend that the
              objectives include a special focus on assessing the differential impact of
              crises such as food security, climate change, economic/financial crisis,
              HIV/AIDs epidemics and sexual violence and conflict.

    4.        The Action Plan does not mention mainstreaming gender into key external
              policies, such as trade, agriculture, energy and climate change. (See Council
              Conclusions on Policy Coherence for Development paragraph 42).
              Recommendation: We recommend developing a procedure for ensuring not
              only “policy coherence for development” but “policy coherence for gender
              equality” as a guiding principle, and establishing the policy framework for a
              whole- of-the Union approach. Without specific attention to the gender
              dimension of these policies that can have a significant impact on
              development, there is a clear risk that gender equality gains achieved
              through specific development actions are diminished by negative impacts
              from other external policies and global crises. For example, adding a gender
              lens to the EU Food Facility, given the figures for women’s participation in
              the agricultural sector.

         5. The emphasis the Action Plan places on measuring and monitoring progress
            by the EU and partner countries, particularly by ensuring the use of gender
            disaggregated indicators in sector support programmes, and the tracking of
            gender-specific and gender-mainstreaming in EC/EU interventions, is very
            welcome. However this needs to be accompanied by direct support to
            partner governments. The Action Plan requires more elaboration on EU
            support to partner governments. For any efforts in support of gender
            equality to be effective and sustainable, it needs to be owned and led by
            national actors. Reponses supported by the international community should
            build on existing capacities rather than replacing them. Further gender
            violence is multi-faceted and cross-cutting, and cannot be addressed by one
            actor alone. At the national level, this calls for a whole-of-government
            approach in which line ministries dealing with internal security, justice,
            health and education, to name a few, operate jointly and as part of one

   “The Council welcomes the increased emphasis on PCD in the European Commission, the better use of the inter-
service consultation mechanism and the strengthening of the development dimension of the impact assessment tool as
important instruments to improve PCD and the regular screening of the Commission Legislative and Work Programme
from a PCD perspective.” External Relations Council Conclusions on Policy Coherence for Development , 19 November
2009: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/gena/111278.pdf
          Recommendation: The Action Plan could include specific recommendations
          on how the EC/EU will support partner governments and address gender
          mainstreaming in more holistic way. How can funding provide incentive to
          ensure gender mainstreaming integrated in cross-ministerial coordination
          and planning and how the EU will help address the fundamental issue of
          capacity development of national actors to ensure long term prevention
          efforts takes in account women’s human rights and equality? In other words,
          how the leadership of the EU, on the ground, will help governments think
          and address gender equality and gender violence issues comprehensively.
          We suggest including in the text an explicit reference to the role of gender
          equality mechanisms, such as gender mainstreaming, women’s
          empowerment, and fighting violence against women, as a measure of
          good/improved governance in partner countries.

       6. The Action Plan could be more explicit in recognizing the changing nature of
          conflict, with sexual violence against women and girls being increasingly used
          as a weapon of conflict. Conflict affects women not only as victims of war
          and violence, but also as important actors in peace negotiations, peace
          building, development and post-conflict reconstruction.

          Recommendation: While the EU policy framework to respond to women’s
          needs and rights in conflict is in place, additional efforts are needed to close
          the gap between commitments and implementation to ensure policy
          coherence, consistence and effectiveness. Clear links should be made
          between UNSCR 1820, which established violence against women in conflict
          as a security issue; and implementation of 1325 through the integration of
          tools for implementing SCR 1820 and 1325 into the CFSP and CSDP.

One final comment: the Plan makes no reference to the opportunities that the EEAS
may offer in strengthening the EU’s work in gender equality in partner countries, and
only touches upon the need to strengthen the partnership with some parts of the UN.
 For example, there is significant work and developments taking place in the UN in the
context of 1325, 1880, 1888 and 1889, both at the agency-specific and inter-agency
levels. It would seem a real lost opportunity if the EU and the GAP delinks from that
discussion, expertise and partnership.
I.         Observations on the EU Common Agenda on Gender Policies

The European Commission (EC) and the MS have implemented policies and strategies on
gender equality for a number of years and have gained experience on how to make
these measures more effective. To that effect, we offer few observations on this
    i) Move from “promoting” to “integrating” gender equality and women’s
         empowerment in external and internal policies and procedures;

       ii) Implement commitments on gender equality within an accountability
            Framework. If the EU is to transform its commitment to implementation, it
            must look urgently at its own institutional capacity and enhance its
            accountability, both external and internal, and strengthen its transparency on
            how the EU is “integrating” and mainstreaming gender throughout its
            institutions and delegations.

       iii) Gender mainstreaming is one of many strategies implemented to achieve gender
             equality. Effective gender mainstreaming requires clear political will, adequate
             resources, an enabling environment, accountability mechanisms and technical
             capacity. The EU needs to systematically integrate gender perspectives through
             qualitative gender analysis, sex and age-disaggregated data and, where
             available, quantitative data, in particular through concrete conclusions and
             recommendations for further action on gender equality and the empowerment
             of women, in order to facilitate gender-sensitive policy development across the
             EU thematic and geographic units.

       iv) In order to maximize the existing resources to achieve greater impact, the Plan
            needs to take into account or build on EU work already undertaken on gender
            mainstreaming. No reference is made to earlier developments, such as the
            “Toolkit on Mainstreaming Gender Equality in European Development
            Cooperation”3, or the existing Gender Helpdesk, nor a reporting on whether the
            outstanding recommendations from the 2003 evaluation of gender in
            development have all been acted upon. We believe it would be useful to see
            this work referenced, with an intention to review and build on or improve the
            existing materials, and to evaluate the usefulness and impact of the Gender
            Help Desk if appropriate.

       v) There is a need to explain the similar EU approach regarding in-house gender
           equality policies and institutional capacity building.

       vi) The Plan identifies limited, overburdened gender-specialized staff in both the EC
            and EU Member States as a key constraint. Yet, it adds to the burden of existing

          staff by establishing new obligations and accountabilities. We would strongly
          recommend that the Plan proposes concrete measures on how this constraint
          will be addressed, in order to ensure its success.

      vii) At a global level, the Action Plan should address the very likely scenario where
           gender will be pushed back and would not receive primary attention as EC and
           MS struggle to stabilize their budgets. Gender Action Plans are only as good as
           the resources allocated and available, hence, the EU Plan of Action on Gender
           Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Development should include specific
           information on how the Plan will be financed and implemented in such difficult
           times of serious economic and financial constraints.

II.      The Objective and Approach

In addition to the general comment made earlier on the objective and approach, we
provide here several comments and suggestions on the stated objectives and the three-
pronged approach:

We propose that the EU integrates gender equality as a guiding principle in all its
development, humanitarian, governance and security policies, processes and programs.

Political and Policy Dialogue on Gender Equality

Political Dialogue is identified in the Action Plan as one of the main instruments of EU
external action. Drawing on the arguments presented in this section, we would like to
offer the following comments and proposed actions:

To render political and policy dialogues effective instruments of EU external action, the
cultural, historical, political and economic contexts within which these dialogues take
place should be carefully examined and analyzed. In particular, the responsiveness of
society to gender equality and how conducive the existing structures and systems are in
terms of integrating gender equality policies and measures must be assessed. It is also
important that regional, national and local specificities inform policy and political

Below are some insights and suggestions compiled from regional/national experiences
and perspectives:

The EU’s engagement in the Asia-Pacific and Arab States is in need for substantive
strengthening and this Action Plan provides the way forward. EU policy/political
dialogue in these regions should focus on the impact of the global economic and
financial crisis on women’s empowerment and the extent to which the crisis will impact
resource allocation for gender mainstreaming in EU interventions as well as recipient
countries. Dialogue should also focus on violence against women, and implementation
of 1325 and 1820 and monitor women’s human rights violations.

In Africa, policy dialogues are deemed more effective if the convergence or divergence
of African States and EU MS on major cooperation policy issues is recognized, in
particular in the context of the impact they usually have on including gender equality
issues and women’s Human Rights in negotiated agreements (for example, the
negotiations on the Agricultural Policy, and the negotiations in the framework of the
Cotonou Agreement for ACP).

In such instances, it would be useful to institutionalize some mechanisms to enable the
ownership of these discussions by gender equality and women’s human rights
advocates. This is important so that a gender perspective informs these negotiations.
For example it will be helpful for civil society of the EU and in Africa to have pre-
negotiation meetings that enable them to formulate their position. This should be in
line with the Accra Civil Society consultation established in the framework of
negotiations of the new aid modality.

Further, the Joint Africa-EU Strategy (JAES), adopted in December 2007, clearly states its
goals as enhancing political dialogue on peace and security issues and the realization of
a professional, African-led military infrastructure by June 2010. This dialogue must
concentrate on ensuring that gender perspectives inform these negotiations as well as
the implementation of relevant resolutions in all countries. Central to this is the
establishment of mechanisms that will ensure the delivery of justice to women in
conflict countries.

Effective EU political/policy dialogue in CEE region requires serious attention to
integration of gender equality issues into demands for political reforms and criterion
required for EU accession. The Stabilization and Association Agreements (SAA) signed,
have little or no mention of gender equality or human rights. Requirements for EC
Delegations to set gender-sensitive targets or ensure allocation of funds seem to be
loose. On the other hand, countries that qualify for the “neighbourhood policies” and
those categorized as “developing” receive more incentives to deal with gender equality
issues than those countries under consideration for EU accession.

Political/policy dialogue on violence against women is urgently required to engage with
the EU on the new legal instrument on mutual recognition of protection orders. The
new instrument focuses on protection of victims of crime in general, but is expected to
serve, in particular, victims of gender-based violence. The new law will ensure that a
woman’s protection order in one EU country is automatically recognized in another EU
country. UNIFEM, as well as other UN agencies, is well positioned to support this
important dialogue and work on both internal and external work of the EU on VAW.
At a global level, we would suggest that when the EU engages in political and policy
dialogue on gender equality, involving the European Parliament, the National
Parliaments of Member States, and the Parliaments of partners countries, to make
specific requirement for a minimum number of women parliamentarians should be
amongst parliamentary delegations from partner countries.

System-Wide Gender Mainstreaming and Integration of Gender Equality

Gender mainstreaming is seen as the backbone for progressing on gender equality. We
have provided specific comments and suggestions on effective gender mainstreaming
above. However, we recommend that the EU seizes the momentum of the Lisbon Treaty
and the changes introduced to adopt a “system-wide” gender mainstreaming and
integration of Gender Equality.

The draft is debated at the time the Lisbon Treaty has just come into effect, introducing
important and major institutional and structural changes aimed at increasing the
consistency and coherence of the EU’s external actions. We view this as an opportune
momentum to adopt Gender Equality as a driving principle defining and shaping
external and internal work of the EU in a systemic and coherent manner.

The Lisbon Treaty modifies the way the EU relates to its international partners through
two new leading figures in external relations: the HR/VP and the President of the
European Council. The Lisbon Treaty Confers powers to the HR/VP to organize the
coordination of Member States’ actions in international organizations. As Such, and
amongst her duties, the new High Representative of the European Union, Lady Ashton,
would have to ensure the coherence of the external policy of the EU.

We would like to propose an effective and concrete action to ensure coherence and
harmonization of implementing the EU Plan of Action on Gender Equality by creating in
the HR/VP cabinet a unit that would oversee, monitor and integrate gender equality in
all the different functions of the EU, and demanding gender equality is placed
consistently on the EU political agenda.

Moreover, as Vice President of the European Commission, Lady Ashton could play a key
role in mainstreaming gender equality on external and internal work of the EU.

As HR/VP, Lady Ashton’s powers will include decision-making over Common Foreign and
Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP). Considering the
Comprehensive Approach to the EU Implementation of the UNSCRs 1325 and 1820,
recognizes the close links between peace, security, development and gender equality,
we would propose that gender equality and women’s empowerment are integrated
into the broader range of CFSP and CSDP actions and decisions. Further, subsequent
Security Council Resolutions 1888 and 1889 (September and October 2009) call for tools
for implementing SCR 1820 and 1325 such as agreed global indicators, a Security Council
accountability mechanism, and a monitoring and reporting mechanism on conflict-
related sexual violence. These create an unprecedented opening for member states and
the EU to fast track the implementation of SCR 1325 and ensure effective prevention of
sexual violence as well as proactive measures to engage women in all facets of peace
making, peace keeping, and peace building.

We would encourage the new HR/VP to lead a process of integration of such tools for
implementing SCR 1820 and 1325 into the CFSP and CSDP and we would welcome a
discussion or exchange on adding these tools and mechanisms into the CFSP/CSDP.
III.   The Operational Framework

Generally, we believe that the operational framework should be more ambitious. If we
aim at making a difference on gender equality, we should ensure that all annual reviews
include a gender analysis, and activities and indicators are all gender sensitive. Aiming at
30% of EU technical staff at HQ and at country level having undertaken gender training
by 2013 seems a not sufficiently ambitious figure.

We commend the call for cooperation with regional and/or international organizations
and suggest you strengthen this point by, for instance, developing Joint strategies and
programming with Regional and International organizations. Also, we recommend to
align the local strategies developed with the strategies of other actors (UN and others)
already working on these issues.

The success of the implementation of this Action Plan is very much related to the
political commitment and follow-up at HQ level. A Gender Adviser in the office of the
High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy is crucial to
achieve this commitment. In addition, the inclusion of a Gender Adviser in all EU peace
operations, and the inclusion of mandatory gender training to both military and civil
personnel in missions is critical for a greater impact of the Plan in conflict contexts.

Recognizing that gender discrimination in all its manifestations (including violent
manifestations) does not start only when females reach the age of 18 but starts from
the moment of their birth (and even before in the case of female infanticide), it is
important to see a reference to girls as a focus of the Action Plan as well.

We strongly recommend that the Plan of Action includes involvement of men as key
allies when it comes to looking for partnerships and ensures that policy dialogues
incorporate a culturally sensitive approach to align policy benefits so they are relevant
and sustainable.

We welcome the Plan’s collaborative approach between the EC and the Member States,
and would encourage the EC to further develop it through concrete measures for
improved coordination and exchange of information, in order to ensure greater impact.

A last but not least important point is the importance of including the notion of
Transparency and Accountability to appropriately follow the implementation of the
proposed objectives of the Action Plan. For that, it is important to specify in detail the
expected results and the person/organization accountable for them.

Please refer to Annex I for detailed feedback on the Operational Framework.
Annex I

Specific Comments on the operational framework:

Comments on Specific objectives:

Concerning the Specific objectives:

Objective 3 – Perhaps rather than focusing on the EU taking a lead in coordinating
donor/development assistance on gender, it would be more strategic to stipulate that in
the instances where the EC Missions/Delegations lead key sectors (on donor
coordination), as part of this leadership role, they are obligated to advocate for and
report back on how gender and human rights are fairing in the sector lead by the EU (i.e.
Governance; Environment; Rule of Law).

Objective 6: “Strengthen EU support to partner countries in combating gender-based
violence and discriminations against women”, neither of the specified actions
specifically addresses the objective. This requires a long-term, multi-pronged approach
that includes much more than what is reflected here.

Objective 8 – EC Reports (called progress reports in the pre-accession countries) are increasingly
valued as a means of verifying progress in countries where their Missions/Delegations have
significant representation. Missions should be obligated to ensure that any formal reporting to
EU Parliament or EC bodies in Brussels has a focus on gender and human rights. Further, one
task listed could be that the EC Missions/Delegations take a greater role in harmonizing the type
of feedback/recommendations the HOMS provide their capitals when the respective host
countries are coming before the UPR – this would almost certainly provide a greater opportunity
to coordinate any gender equality advocacy messages among MS during the UPR process.

Comments on the Actions :

Increase EU support for CSO’s that combat VAW and promote women’s rights: A
dedicated comprehensive approach to address GBV should be promoted within MS (so
far, only Sweden has one. It is important to introduce a European Year against VAW in
conflict to raise public awareness

Mainstream gender issues throughout EU peace operations: The Member States of the
European Union should provide training on gender approach on women, peace, and
security to both military and civil personnel in missions.

Ensure high-level political commitment and follow-up of the Action Plan at HQ: The
indicator proposed is “Progress of Gender Action Plan and update on most relevant
issues will be discussed at least once a year in GAERC”. We think that it will be also
important to create a gender adviser in the office of the High Representative of the
Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Strengthen cooperation on the promotion of gender equality with partner regional
organizations and relevant international organizations: It is needed to be more specific
and go beyond establishing cooperation to specifically suggesting the development of
joint strategies and programming with UN and regional organizations.

Develop an online Toolkit with core know-how on gender and development; Develop
gender training within Train for Development; Mainstream gender within the Train for
DEV and Capacity for DEV initiatives: There is already a Gender Mainstreaming Toolkit
on-line and gender training packages have been developed. It is important to clarify if
theses tools are no longer in use and why. Also it is important to explain how the new
tools will be developed, and to emphasize the updating of tools on mainstreaming
gender into all areas of programming (starting with country profile, to macroeconomic
analysis and budgeting, to mainstreaming in specific sectors). We also think that the
Gender Helpdesk should be continued.

Gradually develop a joint gender assessment in each partner country in collaboration
with partner countries and stakeholders: It is important to be more specific on what
gender assessment will cover (general gender situational analysis of the situation of
women and girls in the country, an analysis of country policies, etc).

Organize regular dialogue at country level with civil society organizations, particularly
women's organizations, on gender issues: We think it is important to add another
indicator to measure the activity: Civil society organizations, particularly women's
organizations, participate in and are able to contribute to country strategy papers

Offer an ad-hoc online course for EU HOMS and Delegations' staff on how to apply the
EU guidelines on Violence Against Women (VAW), including in programming of aid
and assistance: The think that the online course should also reflect SCR 1888.

Comments on the Indicators:

In 2011, a medium term strategy of cooperation with the African Union on gender
equality and women's empowerment is established: Other regional entities/unions
should also be included

1 EU MS is appointed as gender lead donor for the period 2010-2013 and 3 MS are
associated to joint work on gender: Is it necessary to indicate what functions the lead
donor takes – dialogue, promoting joint programming, etc.
In 2011, a medium term strategy of cooperation with the African Union on gender
equality and women's empowerment is established: Financing measures should also
be included, so the strategy is established AND FINANCED

By 2011 the gender sector guidelines for common reference to EU actors and partners
is updated: We think that this indicator should be clearer. Does it cover guidance on

From 2010 to 2015, every year the EU completes its gender assessment on
www.wikigender.org for 5 countries: That means that by the end of 5 years there are
25 gender assessments. Currently there are 120 countries where the EU has
delegations. We think is not sufficiently ambitious if we want to make a difference.

Next generation CSPs and NIPs are gender mainstreamed and at least 50% identify
gender-related specific actions: We propose that the CSP and NIPs should specifically
reflect gender considerations and include a gender profile, and should be supported
with external assistance.
There is already a gender profile template for CSPs and we suggest this one to become

At least 80% of all EU peace operations include a gender training in the preparatory
phase and gender-sensitive instructions: We propose to include also a gender adviser.

As from 2010, detailed information on EC expenditure on gender equality is provided
in the External Relations Annual Report: We propose to provide also the EC results on
the Annual report.

By 2013 gender training is an integrated part of the pre-posting training for COM and
EEAS staff. Gender training is part of the training catalogue. At least 30% of EU
technical staff at HQ and at country-level has received gender training: We think that it
is a very low target – also this points to an inconsistency as some indicators have targets
and some do not.

By 2011 the gender sector guidelines for common reference to EU actors and partners
is updated: we suggest including here some explanations on the way that the
implementation/use of the guidelines will be monitored.

In 2015 at least 80% of all performance evaluations of EU HOMS and staff in
development will include gender issues: We suggest coordinating this indicator with
the first indicator under point 2, in order to avoid confusion on referencing training for
one group of staff and evaluating another.
From 2010, A guidance note is sent twice a year to EU HOMS that informs on all
relevant gender issues and challenges: We propose to include the notion of
responsibility and accountability to follow guidance.

By 2013 at least 80% of all annual reviews include a gender analysis: We think that the
logical target would be that 100% should have gender analysis. It might not need to be
addressed in some cases but the analysis should be done as a matter of course, if there
is a commitment to mainstream.

Next generation CSPs and NIPs are gender mainstreamed and at least 50% identify
gender-related specific actions: We suggest increasing the percentage, if
mainstreaming is the goal, 50%is very low, especially for next generation.

Guidelines on selection and use of gender-equality indicators and gender-
disaggregated indicators are updated and sent to all Delegations: We propose to focus
on existing indicators that can just be made more gender responsive, and will be less

In 2013, at least 60% of CSPs/NIPs include in the logical frameworks gender-sensitive
indicators: We propose to increase the percentage, 60% seems to be aiming very low.

By 2013 Gender is on the agenda in at least one annual dialogue (gender policy forum)
with civil society each country: We suggest that gender is incorporated into the analysis
and planning for every meeting and added as relevant. Increasingly, this could happen
as the need is identified to fill gaps.

In 2011 at least 50% and 80% by 2015, of the EU Embassies and EC Delegations
produced local strategies for the implementation of the guidelines on VAW: We
recommend that these guidelines are aligned with the strategies of actors (UN and
others) already working on VAW.

By 2013 at least 80% of EU led and EU-funded peace operations (such as Africa peace
facility) include gender training and instructions to implement the EU comprehensive
approach: We propose to increase the target to 100% by an earlier date.

To top