INCLUDING HERSTORY IN HISTORY -A gender-based policy analysis of Participatory Rangeland Management in relation to Participation, Influence and Empowerment

INCLUDING HERSTORY IN HISTORY

AILA NILSSON

INCLUDING HERSTORY IN HISTORY

A gender-based policy analysis of Participatory Rangeland Management in

relation to Participation, Influence and Empowerment

Aila Nilsson

Örebro University

Supervisor: Camilla Berglund

Master’s program in Public Planning for Sustainable Development

Department of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences

Acknowledgments

I want to start by highlighting that this thesis was written during the strange circumstances the whole world is experiencing in 2020 as a result of the pandemic COVID-19. The initial idea and aim of this thesis was to, in corporation with International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), undertake a field-study in Kenya to examine women's participation within the decision-making processes of Participatory Rangeland Management. Only one week before departure the trip was cancelled, and the thesis needed a new turn. This was sad news in several ways, but fortunately I am privileged and have the opportunity to stay safe at home. With good support from my supervisor Camilla Berglund, the new approach – to do a document-based policy analysis on the subject - became an easier task than I first thought. For this, I am grateful to her. Furthermore, I want to send a big thank you to my mother for all the reading, advising, discussing, and listening. Also, a huge thanks to Erica Axman for fulfilling my wishes of the design for the cover illustration.

Abstract

This thesis examines how preparatory, policy and review documents of the Participatory Rangeland Management (PRM) in East Africa, problematize and represent the ‘problems’ which resulted in the design of the development program. The focus is on how these problematizations can hinder or facilitate participation, influence and empowerment of women and marginalized groups in decision-making processes. The findings are based on a gender-based policy analysis undertaken of five documents written by the NGOs involved in the planning and implementation of PRM in Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania. A conceptual framework measuring the level of participation, empowerment and influence was constructed to assess the policies and their possible outcomes.

The document analysis showed that the implicit ‘problem’ themes identified appeared to be that communities were unmodern, undeveloped, and had under-representation of women and pastoralists in rangeland management. These problematizations seem to originate from a development discourse characterized by solutions focussing on ‘modernization’ and ‘technical fixes’. These pre-conceived ideas of the ’problems’ call for more communication and inclusion of community groups in problem formulation and program design.

The analysis further revealed that expert-assisted and gender-mainstreaming initiatives such as the PRM could have a positive impact on the level of participation, influence, and empowerment of women. When training was carried out for both women and men by the PRM to raise awareness of women’s rights, it resulted in an increased number of women participating in activities. However, gender-mainstreaming should not stop with participation, it should be further developed towards influence and empowerment. The PRM could consider promoting a change of power relations by combining efforts to demonstrate the benefits of meaningful consultations to decision-makers and efforts to enhance the knowledge and skills of marginalized groups so that they can better engage with these decision-makers. Furthermore, there is a need to expand the discussion on how to design gender-mainstreaming policies and practices, without labelling women as one.

Keywords: Participatory Rangeland Management (PRM), participation, influence, empowerment, women, gender-based WPR, feminist epistemology, development discourse.

Content

Introduction ... 1

Participatory Rangeland Management ... 3

Overall Aim ... 6

Outline of Thesis ... 6

Problem Statement ... 7

Aims and Objectives ... 8

Research Questions ... 8

Definition of Key Terms ... 9

Previous Research and Theoretical Framework ... 10

Political ecology ... 10

Policy as Discourse ... 13

Participation ... 15

Participatory approaches ... 15

Influence and Empowerment ... 17

Conceptual framework ... 19

Methodology ... 22

Feminist Epistemology ... 22

Analytical tool ... 24

What’s the Problem Represented to be? (WPR) ... 25

Gender-based WPR ... 26

Selection of policy documents ... 28

Challenges and Limitations ... 30

Results ... 32

Analytical conclusions ... 50

Further research ... 55

References... 56

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

PRM Participatory Rangeland Management

RECONCILE Resource Conflict Institute RMI Rangeland Management Institution

SSA Sub-Saharan Africa

1

Introduction

The initial chapter gives a general introduction to the subject of women within decision-making processes in relation to their participation, influence, and empowerment. The chapter also provides a brief overview of NGOs' role and influence on development programs and how the Participatory Rangeland Management has evolved, especially in

relation to gender aspects.

[…] I have become more convinced than ever that the real makers of history are the ordinary men and women of our country; their participation in every decision about the future is the only guarantee of true democracy and freedom.

- Nelson Mandela

Within development programmes, the concepts participation, influence, and empowerment are often seen as important components of sustainable processes and drivers of equality within communities. This has led to the development of several approaches and methods (based on the mentioned ‘buzzwords’) that are referring to almost everything that signifies people’s involvement. These approaches are seen as a prerequisite for good governance, embedded with positive, persuasive and promising outcomes (Cornwall 2003; Swapan 2016). It is not uncommon for these concepts to include a gender perspective, where women are described as being more likely to find both themselves and their interests marginalized within decision-making processes in communities (Cornwall 2003). Women’s involvement in development processes is often limited to the implementation phase, where assumptions about women’s caring roles and the community come into play. Some participatory approaches and researchers emphasize the importance of addressing obstacles related to the structural dimension of power, while others focus more on the individual agency and empowerment of women (Cornwall 2003). The roles of women assumed in a given society may change over time, but their subordination may not, and this (patriarchy) may be found globally, but differs across regions and cultures.

Therefore, it is of great importance to scrutinize and study how participation, influence, and empowerment are problematized in policy documents for designing development interventions and programmes. Also, to examine the underlying discourses affecting the conceptualization of participation. This study highlights the deliberate efforts to understand herstory (emphasize the role of women or told from a women’s point of view) as a complement to history (often told and written by

2 privileged men), which can include important aspects of women’s participation, influence, and empowerment within decision-making.

Since the 1980s, interventions of western aid agencies and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) in ‘developing’ countries have grown significantly. Many NGOs are working to fill service gaps unaddressed by the public and private sector (service providers), while some NGOs are taking on roles as mobilisers for change and advocates for improvements in social, economic or cultural areas (Earle & Simonelli 2000). Many aid agencies, including the United Nations (UN), have adopted a human rights-based approach (HRBA) which means that interventions should be designed to empower rights to understand and demand their rights and duty bearers (the state) should be supported to fulfil their commitments to people (as stated in the various UN conventions) (Sida 2015). Furthermore, the principles of non-discrimination, participation, accountability, and transparency should be cornerstones of all interventions. Similarly, aid agencies and NGOs often demand a gender equality perspective within the supported programs. Often, this has led to approaches that treat women as a separate category and using women as flag-bearers for ‘gender issues’ (Cornwall 2003). These segregated approaches have bureaucratized gender issues to become a technocratic measurement towards evaluation and planning (Arora-Jonsson 2011), e.g. counting women reached by services rather than measuring changes in norms and practices in society. More recently, many aid agencies and NGOs advocate for approaches that focus more on ‘mainstreaming’ of gender equality as an integral part of all development and humanitarian programs and on targeting men as important champions for change.

Gender-mainstreaming is increasingly part of global policies such as the United Nations Global Goals for Sustainable Development, where one of the 17 goals are achieving gender equality (UN n.d.). The enhanced gender-mainstreaming has led to intensified efforts and interventions by NGOs in humanitarian relief, sustainable socio-economic development, and linking ‘gender issues’ to development programs in general (Srivastava & Austin 2016). It is important to evaluate and study how supported NGO-programs can affect and contribute to increasing women’s participation, influence, and empowerment within decision-making processes. Also, it is important to see the distinction between the concepts (participation, influence, and empowerment), remembering that just because someone is given a voice, it does not automatically translate into influence or empowerment (Cornwall 2003).

3 The dynamics in different activities and roles that ‘developing’ communities engage in to address their social and economic needs through rangelands and agricultural production systems, is also reflected in the gender dimension of rangeland management and decision-making processes. In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) where differences between men and women in participation, influence, and access to knowledge, services, and inputs are tangible has created (according to many NGOs) a need for a more inclusive rangeland management. This is problematized particularly being the case for pastoral women, as pastoralists, in general, tend to be (doubly) marginalised (Bullock & Tegbaru 2019).

Participatory Rangeland Management

The Participatory Rangeland Management (PRM) was introduced in 2010 as an approach in Ethiopia in conjunction with the publication of an Introductory Guideline, developed by Save the Children USA. These guidelines were an effort to offer and potentially test a model for better-securing rights to resources and improving rangeland management in pastoral areas by formally recognize and protect customary rangeland management institutions and arrangements (Flintan & Cullis 2010). In the following years, PRM was piloted by several organizations (see Box 1) and in 2014 it significantly upscaled in Ethiopia1 _{which worked across the pastoralist}

areas of Oromia, Afar and Somali regions. A recent review by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) (Flintan et al. 2019) about the implementation of PRM in Ethiopia concluded that PRM strengthens local governance institutions, including the participation and

1 _{Project by CARE Ethiopia as part of the USAID-funded PRIME (Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement and Market}

Expansion)

Box 1. Abbreviated timeline of key milestones in development of PRM 2010 - Publication of introductory guidelines 2009-2013 - Save the Children USA implemented PNRM in Oromia (Borana)

2007–2012 - Bale Eco-Region Sustainable Management Project by Farm Africa and SOS Sahel implemented PFM (Participatory Forest Management)

2012 - PRM included in the Government of Ethiopia’s Country Programming Paper for Ending Drought Emergencies

2013 - Pilot of PRM in Afar region by Farm Africa 2014–2018 - CARE started implementing PRM though PRIME in Oromia, Afar, Somali regions 2018–2022 - EU-funded project through the International Land Coalition (ILC) and the Coalition of European Lobbies for Eastern African Pastoralism (CELEP) piloting PRM in Kenya and Tanzania learning from Ethiopia (Flintan et al. 2019)

4 role of women in these, the management of rangeland resources, and improves rangeland productivity. At present PRM is being adopted in other countries such as Kenya and Tanzania by a consortium of partners, mainly members of the International Land Coalition (ILC) working with the local governments and NGOs.

As demonstrated, PRM is mainly an NGO-led program and funded by the European Union (EU). The PRM is a collaborative effort drawing on contributions from various partners, projects and donor agencies on different levels, promoting the participation of all stakeholders in land use planning processes, including pastoralists and their organizations, to ensure improved rangeland management (RECONCILE 2020). The PRM process is a series of sequential steps in order to produce a participatory rangeland agreement. The objective of PRM is to support community leaders to carry out inclusive consultations in their communities on land use planning and to use this to inform, government policy on effective range management and sustainable development of the rangelands. The idea is to test a model for better-securing rights to resources and improving rangeland management in pastoral areas (Flintan & Cullis 2010). In pastoral communities, the indigenous knowledge of rangeland management to make decisions is dominant, often with the lack of scientific research. The indigenous knowledge is though crucial for regulating livestock grazing patterns, this incorporation, and integration with systems of resource management towards environmental monitoring (Oba 2012). When involving experts in the participatory approach, knowledge can be provided to communities to assist their efforts to develop their own assessment strategy such as basic knowledge about institutional processes and linkages between various components of the system – to strive towards developing them into resource experts.

5 The economy of the mentioned countries is largely dependent on the performance of the agriculture sector and inhabits a high share of female employment. But as in many economies in SSA, there can be gender differences in how and if women and men participate and have access to resources, with significant inequalities between men and women in terms of school attainment, health outcomes, political representation, and labor force participation. For example, The Global Gender Gap Report (World Economic Forum 2017) stated that Kenyan women face lower access to land (around 6 percent own land) and credit despite constitutional reform, and unpaid care and domestic work (mere 0,5 percent accessing financial services) (Sida 2018; Diiro et al. 2018). These limitations within decision-making are described as often maintained by inherited laws and cultural norms, which on the other hand also can generate social harmony. These norms involve implicit rules on mutual roles and responsibilities, right and obligations, that defines the social relation between gender, generations and social (re)production of the communities (Andersson Djurfeldt 2020; Rantalaiho & Heiskanen 1997).

When piloting and implementing PRM, it has been stated that a particular focus should be given to ensure that women and men benefit from activities and processes, that women are included in and have the opportunity to contribute to decision-making processes, and that their own particular needs are addressed through the PRM process. Due to the fact that women provide most of the labour force (approximately 80 percent) for the agriculture production in most SSA-countries (Food and Agriculture Organization 2011), but also possess a small amount of land, gender-mainstreaming is stated as an important cross-cutting issue for the project, and particularly in terms of improving the

Map over Africa. SSA-countries marked in color. Retrieved from ESA (2014). Ethiopia and Kenya marked in red. Edited by author.

6 position of women in public decision-making processes and institutions. Some key targets for the PRM Piloting Project include that:

• 30% of leadership positions in land use planning and land governance activities handled by women by 2021

• At least 10 rangeland management committees established with at least 30% female members by 2021 (Flintan et al. 2019)

Overall Aim

The overall aim of this paper is to do a gender-based analysis of policy and review documents of the Participatory Rangeland Management programmes implemented by NGOs in Ethiopia and Kenya to explore and explain how they have conceptualized and problematized participation, influence, and empowerment in decision-making processes through gender roles, relations, and responsibilities in piloting and implementation.

Outline of Thesis

In order to achieve the anticipated aim of the study, it requires several steps and clarifications. Throughout the next chapter, the problem statement of mainstreaming participatory development will be presented including the study's objectives, research questions and key terms. The third step and chapter will bring the thematic of the thesis in context and provide a brief background of previous research within political ecology, policy as discourse, participation, influence, and empowerment. The third chapter is concluded with a conceptual framework of the study.

The fourth chapter introduces the choice of methods of the study as feministic epistemology and document study. Further, an overview of the study’s analytical tool and approach, the gender-based approach to “What’s the problem represented to be?” is presented. Lastly, the selection of PRM policy documents is described and motivated to provide the reader with a brief background of them. The fifth step and chapter is the core of the study where the presentation of the results from the gender-based WPR is presented and structured in order to answer the research questions. Drawn from these results, the last chapter debouches into an analytical conclusion by discussing key findings and suggestions for further research within policy analysis and participatory approaches.

7

Problem Statement

Throughout this section, the problem statement will be analyzed. Furthermore, the research questions and key terms of the study will be defined.

During the past 40 years, especially between 1995 to 2005, there has been an increase in participatory theories and discussion of best practice methods and developments, but still, little progress has been made to explore the original claims of what serves to promote the empowerment of participants. The outcome of most discussions has ended with instrumental capacity building within communities, rather than intrinsic substantial changes in power dynamics. There is though some evidence that stresses the fact that intrinsic empowerment emerges when there is a genuine shift in power, where the formerly disempowered have the capacity to attend and exercise their latent power and agency (Mason 2016). Mainstream participatory development practice and theory often try to address the structural challenges of the disadvantaged ones struggling with attaining liberation. Some argue that the struggles are maintained and continued to enhance the power to the already powerful because technocrats, civil society organizations, and bi- and multilateral organizations relegate the importance of inequalities caused by social structures, elitism, bureaucracy, etc. (Mwanzia & Strathdee 2016). However, the field of participatory research remains limited in its ability to explain why certain outcomes occur or how to generate and create empowerment, often resulting in haphazard results. Tom Ginsburg, Zachary Elkins, and Justin Blount stress the fact that:

On the theoretical side, we find a broad consensus in the literature about the importance of public involvement as well as an apparent trend in practice. Yet many of the assumptions of proponents of participation remain untested, and the precise relationships between participation and desirable outcomes remain underspecified (Ginsburg, Elkins, and Blount 2009, p.219).

When undertaking a literature and research review of participatory research approaches to this study, it emerged that they are getting quite outdated with a notable absence of new research and evidence since approximately 2007. Regarding the lack of empirical evidence that demonstrates the long-term effectiveness of actual social changes, a lot of researchers have called for a paradigm shift for new understanding within communities (Leung, Yen & Minkler 2004; Cleaver 2001). When development programs involving increased participation, influence, and empowerment defines and problematizes

8 the concepts, they reflect the dominating discourse, which may either promote or hinder empowerment and nonetheless how it can be done (Saati 2015).

Women and men are members of a pastoral grouping most commonly, a clan. Though women’s position may be viewed as passive, marginalized and disempowered the clan can offer many benefits to women, including social protection. Pastoralist culture is often described as implicitly or explicitly excluding women from important roles, such as from community decision-making, which is often firmly in the hands of men. Further, it may also be difficult for a woman to access information – for example, extension messages and community announcements are usually made in public forums, which women may not attend – as such, they often have a poorer understanding of activities and processes going on in the community. Their participation may also be restricted due to conflicting tasks and responsibilities (such as childcare) which may prevent them from attending meetings, and/or they may have less interest or be limited by cultural norms and values. Research has shown that improvements in women’s status, both inside and outside the household, positively impact agricultural productivity, nutrition, and food security (Diiro et al. 2018). But also, when claiming and problematizing this, all women are seen as a coherent group with identical interests and prioritisations.

Aims and Objectives

The aim and purpose of the study is to examine how participation, influence, and empowerment are conceptualized, represented and problematized in policy documents for PRM and further analyze how it can affect the anticipated outcomes. The study will focus on to what extent women and gender are expressed and problematized concerning decision-making processes in relation to PRM.

Research Questions

1. How is participation, influence, and empowerment represented and problematized through a lens of gender within policy documents for Participatory Rangeland Management?

2. How could the identified discourses hinder and/or facilitate women to participate, influence, and be empowered?

3. How might the problematization of the concepts affect situations of conflicting and competing values explicit in the policy options put forward?

9

Definition of Key Terms

A short description of the key terms applied in this thesis is done in order to clarify their meaning and way of being understood.

Empowerment Being invited, included, given a voice and have the possibility to influence the decision-making process. Self-mobilization where people independently take initiatives to change and implement systems.

Participation The level of possibilities and capabilities for the participants to participate in and influence decision-making processes.

Gender-based WPR The analytical tool of the study which incorporates a mix of two approaches: gender-based analysis and critical policy analysis.

10

Previous Research and Theoretical Framework

As a theoretical background of the study, previous research within political ecology and policy as discourse will be introduced. Lastly, the development of participatory research with a focus on influence and empowerment will be

presented and applied as a theoretical and conceptual framework for the study.

For several major issues confronting SSA this century such as war, ethnic conflicts, poor human capital development, and inappropriate utilization, part of the answer to these diverse problems is often expressed through development programs to increase the participation and empowerment of women. Arguments for this is when educating girls and women and bringing them into the formal economy and decision-making processes, it generates opportunities for development and an increase of human capital base in the society (Mwanzia & Strathdee 2016). Both participation and empowerment are, nevertheless, problematic concepts. Participation is often driven by political nature, and empowerment including the word power which can be connected to different power relations (such as power within, power to, power with and power over). The existence of these different types of power within participation is not always clear, sometimes disguising the fact that participation can take on multiple forms and serve different interests (Morgan 2016). Considering this, participation needs to have transparency within decision-making processes, both to embrace a diversity of knowledge and values, but also to create flexibility and trust in changing circumstances. Through transparent and community participation within decision-making processes, it is argued that the participants can be empowered through the increase of knowledge and likelihood that the decision is perceived to be holistic and fair. By establishing common ground and trust within and between the participants, an appreciation and legitimacy of others' points of view can emerge and transform adversarial relationships (Reed 2008). To further develop an understanding of how this is communicated, represented and problematized in policy documents, and introduction to political ecology will now be represented.

Political ecology

Political ecology is an interdisciplinary research field that scholars have referred to as a ‘research agenda’,

an approach, and a perspective. Being broad in that sense creates difficulties when defining political ecology, but also a strength when including several aspects and views. Briefly, it is about linking current

11 phenomena and historical explanations, in relation to the processes in which individuals, households and communities have or have access to resources within a community (Neumann 2005). Political ecology, instead of the often-dominating political economy, studies the ecological, political and cultural dimensions of distribution and equality (i.e. the power dimensions and exercise of environmental and natural resources management and the power-environmental relationship). Cultural meaning defines the practices that determine how nature is appropriated and utilized. Instead of looking at the economic and technical approaches, social groups and communities are examined through cultural distribution - how cultural differences create inequalities in social power through social norms. Cultural distribution can highlight the effects and aspects of dominance and hegemony through social capital such as class, gender, ethnicity, etc. As many scholars have discussed, gender is a critical variable in shaping access knowledge and the organization of natural resources, studying what enables and what hinders the access. This is where the political ecology framework can analyze the interrelations created within socio-ecological systems and development programs and policies (Escobar 2006). Political ecology provides a tool kit of concept to look beyond communities and individuals and to explain power dynamics, both in everyday interactions, and formal policy arenas (Bixler et al. 2015). Tor A. Benjaminsen and Hanne Svarstad (2017) stress the fact that it is crucial to examine which power forms are ruled out in communities and policy arenas, based on use, preservation, and distribution that are shaped through individuals’ actions. This can uncover the level of participation and influence people have within the community, and their willingness to change. The essentially contested concepts participation, influence and empowerment are profoundly ideological constructions and discourses that frame certain problems by distinguishing some aspects of a situation rather than others (Cornwall & Brock 2005). As the concepts participation and empowerment have become normalized and bureaucratized through exercises in mainstreaming, goals and targets at the global level represent – there is an emergence of displacement from the specificities of context (Cornwall & Brock 2005). For example, the relation between development discourses about equality and empowerment of oppressed ‘third world women’ is not only conceptualized and practices in the South but at the same time affecting and shaping it in the West when creating a dichotomy between them. The illusion of women's total freedom in liberal democracies creates universal categories in the global discourse of gender equality and generalizing of complex and context-dependent structures, shaped by history and culture (Arora-Jonsson 2011).

12

I argue that the assumption of uniform cooperation among rural people, especially as they are applied to women, does not reflect the social reality. The social obstacles to cooperation among rural women in East Africa have not often been recognized, and the implications of this for a program of participatory development are profound (Chaiken 1990, p.5).

Based on this citation, Miriam Chaiken (1990) further argues that participatory development programs and policies need to address the social realities and recognize patterns of the community’s everyday life that creates social isolation and less opportunity to participate (often for women). If there is no recognition of the constraints that limit the participation of the local people, there will be no success within the participatory approaches. These constraints are not homogeneous or inherently cooperative, therefore, context-dependent knowledge based upon divisiveness and inequality between individuals and within groups is crucial. Going back to development discourses and practices in the ‘third world’ that has been dominating since post-World War II period, where scholars and politicians of the West put themself in a position to solve the social and economic problems of ‘these parts of the world’ (often Asia, Africa, and Latin America) (Escobar 1995). In reality, this generated colonization of how certain representations that have become dominant and shaped images of oppressed ‘third world’. The word development is a historically produced discourse containing why countries started to define themselves as underdeveloped, how they should ‘develop’ and how this subjectification of societies leads to increased systematic and comprehensive interventions (Escobar 1995). These interventions taking place within the modes of the development discourse, characterized by ‘modernization’, ‘technical fixes’, and ‘greening’ of agriculture, farmers, and the environment (Escobar 1995). The representation and identity in much of Africa in the post-World-War II period have significantly been grounded and operated through the development discourse and its politics. This representation, Escobar argues, has its roots in colonialism and the creation of modern Europe as an ideal. “Before envisioning the global civilization of the future, one must first own up the responsibility of creating a space at the margins of the present global civilization for a new, plural, political ecology of knowledge" (Escobar 1995, p.215).

However, a woman is often seen both as a cultural and ideological composite through diverse representational (hegemonic) discourses and as a historical subject. The assumption commonly done of women is an already constituted, coherent group with the same interest and desires, regardless of their social capital, and referred to as victims of particular socioeconomic and patriarchal systems,

13 portrayed by having ‘needs’ and ‘problems’, and men as the villains. This paternalistic (deciding for/of other people) attitude can be seen as a reflection of the hegemonic idea of the West’s superiority (Mohanty 1984). Having a political-ecological perspective in this study is important considering that the objective is particularly to examine underlying presuppositions, power relations and discourses when problematizing participation, influence, and empowerment in the policy documents for the implementation of PRM.

Policy as Discourse

When reading a text, either in a book, magazine, working documents, and so on, the text tells us something of how the writer perceives the subject and represent it to the reader. To scrutinize a text in order to go beyond what it entails and mediate to us is of importance to understand its role and dimensions. This way of analyzing a text is to examine the underlying discourse, which reflects one's worldview, knowledge and shared understanding of events, and as Michael Foucault describes: “discourses are practices that systematically form the objects of which they speak; they do not identify objects, they constitute them in the practice of doing so conceal their own invention” (Focault 1972, p.49). He further discusses the fact that discourses and the knowledge they embody, are results of broader constitutive forces that are manifested in those effects and that analysis must reveal the History and Power. According to Foucault, power is productive where problems, subjects, objects, and places are produced, and when studying power, the interpretation aims to "locate power at the extreme points of its exercise” (Foucalt 1997, p.96). Foucault further argues that it is only through the contexts of exclusion (contexts marked by struggle and marginalization) that we can examine the

political force of knowledge. Regarding that discourses constitute subjects (subjectification’s) that can

enable or constrain what is thinkable in each context and contains ideas, institutions, and practices that create political boundaries of inclusion and exclusion. Thus, discourses are open-ended when open to change implying expectations about future courses of action (Vucetic 2011).

One of Foucault’s approach to analyzing history is to study the archaeological and genealogical aspects of discourses. To discover discourses as practices ‘obeying’ certain rules and what way the set of rules is intricate to any other, the archaeology is studied. The archaeology, according to Foucault, defines types of rules for discursive practices that dominate and systematically describes a discourse-objects and uncovers alternative histories (Foucault 1972). Further on, genealogy can be interpreted through

14 critically examining discursive formations (effective formation) of power and control, “disturbing formerly secure foundations of knowledge and understanding in order to produce an awareness of the complexity and contingency of historical forms” (Hook 2005, p.7). The genealogy is a method of analyzing knowledge production and kinds of ‘truths’, and as Foucault describes it: ‘Truth’ is linked in a circular relation with systems of power which produce and sustain it and to effects of power which it induces and which extend it” (Foucault 1980, p.133). So, if archaeology studies different things (artifacts) occurring at the same time (instead of study the development of something(s) over a period of time), we can understand what kind of objects fit into the set of artifacts through study the genealogy.

However, regarding that many SSA-countries, not least Kenya, are dependent on international aid and support, NGOs play a significant role in the country. Therefore, the policy documents created by the NGOs will represent the problem and the solutions and further how the communities may be governed. What is a policy then? Commonly, the term is associated with a program and course of action, e.g. public policies for municipality programs in order to implicit control or steer a problem towards the ‘right way’. The term is often used referring to something positive and ‘fixing’ the issue it refers to – and if something needs to be fixed, a problem is defined, and something needs to change. The interesting part is, therefore, how the problem explicitly is represented in the documents, and not least, the solutions (Bacchi 2009). Even if policymakers often are seemingly neutral, they constitute deep-seated presuppositions underpinning the proposed change, solutions and understanding of the problem, involving a constructed character when defining them. For example, what is mentioned and what is left out? The policy documents are per se normative and narratives of the policymaker and reflect on the dominating discourses and a wider system of social relations. However, it is not of intention to scrutinize the individual policymaker's values, rather the broader perspective and context they constitute within.

The discourse “sets the rules that must be followed for this or that problem, theory, or objects to emerge and be named, analyzed, and eventually transformed into a policy or a plan” (Escobar 1995, p.41). Discourses are all about power - who has the power to participate and how is the power distributed? Who is privileged within this discourse? Power is, though, not automatically ‘bound’ to a specific gender, class, age, sexuality, etc. – it is socially constructed within the discourse. However,

15 when studying the documents relating to participation, influence, and empowerment, the three concepts need a deeper exploration and explanation.

Participation

Participation has a long history of associations with activists struggling for citizenship rights and voice,

used both as a goal to enable ordinary people to gain political agency, and as a means of maintaining relations of e.g. relations of rule (Cornwall & Brock 2005). In the late 1960s, the concept of participation in modern-day planning emerged as a critique against the top-down and expert-driven approach. Scholars started to have a focus on the process asking normative questions such as who

participates, who does not and why, and the development of several participation typologies, methods, and

approaches has considerably grown since. These have had the aim to set out degrees of participation to understand the level or degree of community involvement possible in the formal processes (Swapan 2016). Famous typologies and methods commonly brought up are Sherry Arnstein’s ‘Ladder of Citizen Participation’ (1969) that identified and described a range of increasing stakeholder involvement (from manipulation to citizen control), Marisa Choguill’s (1996) contribution to Arnstein’s ladder adding the degree of governmental willingness to carry out community-involvement, and Eric Mostert’s (2003) identification of methods through which level of participation could be carried out (Swapan 2016). The development of participatory approaches has moved towards an attempt to shape how development is done (Cornwall & Brock 2005). However, these theoretical discourses of participation take a stable political context for granted, that high levels of participation are the desirable goal and always progressive, and that low levels are equal with governmental restrictions and manipulation (Bruns 2003; Swapan 2016). This is not applicable in all contexts, especially not in developing countries. In other words, it is not given that formal participation of women in decision-making bodies means that women are given increased power. In countries where democracy is not well developed, there is often much that is needed for women to gain real power in important issues such as environmental management (Benjaminsen & Svarstad 2017).

Participatory approaches

Participation is a multi-facilitated concept and can be seen implied the participation of community members, as a participative process including representatives from concerned public, private and civil

16 sectors, as an end or a means, and so on (Vaidya & Mayer 2014). The distinguish between forms of participation that work through enlistment and those that genuinely open up the possibilities for participants to realize their rights and exercise voice (Cornwall 2003). Some emphasize and questions the structural dimensions of power and assumption in order to confront and transform inequalities, while others focus on the individual agency towards less essentialist approaches (Cornwall 2003). Many scholars have been discussing community participation with a focus on institutional factors affecting the level of community engagement. This approach has also frequently been applied in the context of western/developed countries, even when practicing the idea in developing countries, generating a limited capacity to recognize and explain the causes of non-participation witnessed in many developing countries (Swapan 2016).

Other scholars have highlighted citizen participation, from a psychological perspective dealing with issues of who will participate in what circumstances. These factors can be economic conditions, level of education, awareness, and trust, and status of social capital (gender, class, ethnicity, disabilities, age, etc.). Appearing in many cases in ‘developing’ countries, the levels of participation within formal processes are described as being affected by hierarchal norms and structures, poor communication and information channels, and low technical knowledge and public awareness. This stresses the fact that participatory methods and approaches continuously need to strive to increase citizen's ability, capacity, and aspirations towards higher levels of participation (Swapan 2016).

Expert-initiated and Expert-assisted

Participatory approaches and methods are commonly divided as expert-initiated (top-down), where experts provide and create the indicators to the participants, or expert-assisted (bottom-up) where the participant selects the indicators with assistance from the experts (Vaidya & Mayer 2014). The expert-initiated approach is mainly a time-effective participatory technique where the expert uses pre-existing frameworks or sets of indicators as a starting point, and the participants will help to narrow the list. This approach is often used to spend more time seeking consensus among the participant during the participatory sessions about management strategies, which often fail to address the key issues, opinions, and interests of the stakeholders (Vaidya & Mayer 2014). The expert-assisted approach does involve the participants when identifying the problems and solutions. This can be accomplished through focus group discussions, workshops, interviews, etc. to collect opinions, interests and key issues (Vaidya & Mayer 2014).

17 There is, however, no consensus on the optimal representation system, approach or method in participatory assessments, this is a contexts-specific decision (Vaidya & Mayer 2014). Still, within participatory research, there is a need for new types of knowledge that are not gender-neutral, rational or objective, rather adding another nuance that is useful and local for the participants (Caretta 2015). Bringing in a gender perspective, creating ‘gender-awareness’ on the practice of participation in development may identify strategies for strengthening the voices and influence in the decision-making process of those who tend to be marginalized or excluded by mainstream development initiatives. Gender is, nevertheless, social construction and inhabits several meanings. It is not a synonym for women, rather a set of interdependent relations that help to structure people’s social world through which people constitute everyday life. By this said, gender should not be seen as something dichotomous or a binary variable, it can also occur e.g. inequitable between women (Cornwall 2003; Feldman 2018). Generally, when bringing in a gender perspective, it automatically refers to ‘women’s issues’, concerning lack of access to resources and disempowerment. Even if not explicitly studied within this paper, the voices of marginal men are easy to submerge within the gender spectra, which involves other gender issues and concerns with participation. Bearing in mind that identities always are contingent and depend on specific forms of identification, rather than pre-assumption of homogenous identities (Cornwall 2003). But, as Stephen Sheppard (2005) argues, participation cannot be fulfilled or achieved effectively and equitably without adequate time to empower participants to fully influence the decision-making processes. To this, I will now turn and discuss further.

Influence and Empowerment

The interest of this study is to scrutinize how the concept of participation is problematized considering that NGOs' responsibilities are often ascribed to empower local communities through participatory processes by increasing the influence of local people. The essentially contested concept of empowerment has developed from a vast range of sources and scholars such as feminists, religious groups and business management (Arora-Jonsson 2011). In the past decade, empowerment has become more prominent concerning gender in relation to power, becoming a buzzword and calls for closer attention to the discourses of which they form part and take place. In line with that empowerment has become a buzzword in development approaches, the transformative, radical, and challenging aspect slightly has been blunted (Cornwall & Brock 2005).

18 Women’s empowerment often emphasizes the agency to define goals, meaningful choices and to achieve desired outcomes, either individually, relationally or collectively (e.g. decision-making) (Galié & Farnworth 2019; Kabeer 1999). Empowerment can be described as the capability for self-determination, to take control over their circumstances and to realize their aspiration in order to live a life they have reason to value. One aspect of empowerment is the ability of the individual choice, which in that way can be seen as a normative ideal, but can as well be understood in groups, institutions, and relations (Galié & Farnworth 2019). It is important to create openness towards different capacities of women’s liberation, with differences regarding how women may act both individually and collectively, in relation to hegemonic gender and social norms (Arora-Jonsson 2011). By creating openness and understanding of the norms is not about simply reproduce them, rather to work with the community to identify and work towards changing norms which are harmful – and strengthening the ones who are not (Galié & Farnworth 2019).

Furthermore, a standpoint taken within this study is that without any influence – there cannot be empowerment. It is about creating influence by giving the disempowered ones a place within existing structures and paradigms, instead of confronting and seek to transform (in this case gendered) inequities more directly (Cornwall 2003). For example, it is argued in many development programs that land ownership in favour of women will increase women’s access, control, and stronger bargaining power and income, but reality points in the other direction. It is shown that they will not be perceived as household heads or have better access to public resources – this is still done by the men. It is, therefore and again, required to go beyond the actions towards looking at gender norms around the division of labour and women’s often limited mobility (e.g. harder to reach markets, dangers of moving around alone) (Andersson Djurfeldt 2020).

Even if the participation approaches include the disempowered to participate and enable them to have a voice and speak, by inviting and claiming formal spaces and forums for participation, as Andrea Cornwall (2003) argues, these invited spaces for participation do not automatically translate or generate political influence. Participation as a style for policymaking is commonly used in order to be able to deal with ineffective governmental policies, often by empowering citizens to participate in deliberations over public policy issues over an extended period of time (Geurts & Joldersma 2001). There is a need for strategies to increase their confidence and awareness of their right and public processes, so they have the knowledge to influence and in that order the opportunities to empower

19 themselves. Although there is an emphasis on including more women within decision-making and committees, much depends on the goodwill of its head (primarily a man), and only serve instrumental goals but not the fundamental issues of power. It is not as simple and ‘quick fix’ just to include women, but to address gender equity (Cornwall 2003). In order to understand the relationship between gender, there is an importance not only to theorize the social interests ascribed to gender but also to understand the mutual dependencies that exist between them (Arora-Jonsson 2011). The relationship between gender and participation is characterized by tensions and contradictions, but when seeking to challenge and transform relations of power, it can bring feminist and participatory practitioners together concerning influence and empowerment, to confront and address power and powerlessness (Cornwall 2003). Professor Gayatri Spivak (2006) discusses powerlessness and empowerment through the concept of the subaltern and subaltern theory, referring to the subaltern as the oppressed subjects having no history and may be given a voice but no influence. I.e. subaltern women having no political agency because they cannot be represented, claiming that there is no space from which the sexed subaltern subject can speak. Spivak continues arguing that there is not a universal gender division or representation and that feminists should rather focus on the broad variety that exists among women. Power should not only be seen as something vertical but horizontal through intersectional aspects. Also, when referring to differences between men and women, it is explained through and referred to the past to legitimize inequalities embedded within existing power relations. Power is, nevertheless, not only about the past – it is ongoing and reproduced through discourses (Arora-Jonsson 2011).

Conceptual framework

However, the terms do mean different things in different contexts and for different people, it is therefore of great importance to clarify them within the framework for this study. To sum up, the concepts of participation, empowerment, and influence need to be specified within this study. This is not an attempt to define what participation, influence, and empowerment is, rather to have a conceptual and analytical framework when analyzing policy documents. The framework can be developed and used in order to evaluate development programs concerning participation.

At first, participation should answer who participates and in what level of participation. This does though only give a shallow picture and needs include how to deliver and create actual influence and empowerment. The first variable is to scrutinize the level of participation at various stages within

decision-20 making processes, here typologies and methods from Arnstein (1969), Jules Pretty (1995), Choguill (1996), Mostert (2003), and Robinson et al. (2018) are applied.Once more, in this study, the level of empowerment will be drawn from the level of influence within decision-making. Therefore, the other variable is the level of influence and empowerment. As demonstrated in Table 1, the level of participation is listed in stages, which affects the level of influence and not least empowerment. The first level is

functional and mainly characterized by a therapeutic, one-way information and expert-initiated approach

which generates no given voice or influence, some people are disempowered. The second level,

instrumental, opens up for minor discussions, tokenism, and diplomacy, and the participants can be

given a voice, but no influence on the decisions which generates that some people still are disempowered. The third level is consultative, where more interactive participation is performed characterized by dissimulation, conciliation, and placation. It is still not the participants alone who define problems or solutions, but in co-decision with external agents. Through the consultative stage, the participants can be given a voice and influence the decision-making process, and in some situations, be empowered. Lastly, the fourth level is transformative and is accomplished when the participants have developed political consciousness and capabilities so that they can define problems, solutions, and control how resources are used. This stage is often expert-assisted and gives participants possibilities to influence and be empowered. The third variable will be the characteristics of those who participate (class, marital status, gender, education, employment, ethnicity, and so on) in relation to the level of participation, influence, and empowerment and can further be added in different contexts and communities to accomplish an analytical framework.

21

Level of Participation

(Arnstein 1969; Pretty 1995; Choguill 1996; Mostert 2003; Robinson et al. 2018)

Level of Influence and Empowerment

(Cornwall 2003; Arora-Jonsson 2011; Kabeer 1999)

- Functional => Therapeutic, manipulation, one-way information channels. Expert-initiated.

- Instrumental => Characterized by diplomacy, tokenism, discussions. People are only being informed about what will happen, consulted or by answering questions without any possibilities to affect decisions. Often involving material incentives.

- Consultative => Characterized by more interactive participation and dissimulation, conciliation, and placation. External agents define problems and create a partnership with the people though co-designing and co-decision-making. Jointly analyzing the situation, develop action plans, and decide on the use of resources.

- Transformative => Strengthen of local institutions, creating political consciousness, political capabilities, citizen control, and interacting with external institutions to obtain resources and technical advice – with

controlling over how resources are used. Expert-assisted.

- No given voice or influence

Not included, invited, or listened to within decision-making processes (disempowered)

- Given voice but no influence

Invited, included, and given voice within the decision-making process, but no actual influence on the decisions or outcome

- Given voice and influence

Being invited, included, given a voice and have the possibility to influence the decision-making process. Self-mobilization where people independently take initiatives to change and implement systems (empowered)

22

Methodology

This section presents the epistemological choices and the method used when collecting data. Furthermore, the analytical tool gender-based WPR of the study will be demonstrated. A discussion of challenges and ethical considerations faced

during the research concludes this section.

This study aims to analyze how policies developed by NGOs that work with PRM problematizes participation, influence, and empowerment with an emphasis on gender aspects. This qualitative analysis seeks to look beyond the used concepts in the documents and attempts to understand the contexts where programmes are implemented. The selected documents have been gathered to gain a broad knowledge of how the involved NGOs problematize the represented problem. When undertaking a document analysis, the research makes use of secondary data, which implies analyzing data that already exists. The objective is to study the policy documents and sketch out if the common approaches used to create participation and facilitate influence and empowerment, can occur. As secondary data is already existing data that somebody else has collected, it is inflexible and is a cultural artefact (Flowerdew & Martin 2005). However, it is still useful for a document analysis such as this study.

Feminist Epistemology

Briefly, epistemology refers to theories of knowledge and the assumptions the researchers make of the world. It is an empirical research strategy answering the question of how something is being studied with an attempt to connect the relationship between what and who, and between the knower and what is known (Feldman 2018). When the knowledge becomes apparent, intellectual inquiry and justification, and part of social life, the situatedness of warranted knowledge occurs. Feminist thinking establishes feminist theory as warranted knowledge because the situated knowledge builds on the assumption that knowledge is concentrated on the single knowing subject. The feminist epistemology creates an effort to think outside the objectivity-relativism, where the situated knowledge works as a strong tool in investigating how structures are constructed and how contingent they are (Arora-Jonsson 2011). A core of feminist thinking is the concept of patriarchy, which inhabits the understanding of the historical relationships between men and women as basic to any analysis of how societies are ordered, where women are subordinated men. Structures through institutional arrangements constrain and

23 enable human action, while human agents can change the institutional arrangements and structures through their behavior, but individuals may though be unaware of all the causes of their behavior (Flowerdew & Martin 2005). Feminist geographers are increasingly becoming aware of the problems and constraints of first-world geographers writing about third-world women as if there is feminism rather than many (Flowerdew & Martin 2005).

Research traditions targeted as gender-aware and gender-sensitive is mainly characterized by awareness or sensitive to possible differences between women and men, but do not address the epistemological issues. Feminist research focuses on securing gender equality by addressing issues related to social inequalities in order to transform gender relations (Feldman 2018). The epistemological stance of this case study is feminist epistemology, where feminists stress the fact that women and men are not homogenous groups, they are diverse with several other attributes and identities having big importance (social capital such as ethnicity, economic status, age). Feminist research often take a stance from

realistic standpoint theory, that offers a complex model of the nature of the knower (policymakers in this

case), understanding that they operate from varying social contexts organized by social relations of gender, race, class, nation, etc. Having a realistic view refers to recognizing the relationship between the knower and the known as something socially and culturally organized, and that there is an underlying reality that can be uncovered by research. This means that this reality may not be obvious to participants in the setting (Sprague 2018).

As stated earlier, the female labor within agriculture and rangelands is quite high, although, prior research about agriculture production has been generalized from data collected from male producers. The lack of gender perspectives has failed to challenge the commonly held understanding of gender as a binary variable (female/femininity vs. male/masculinity) or identifying women’s histories and experiences. In the effort to understand who has, who does and who can participate and influence within decision-making processes, especially in relation to women, it is important to examine how social contexts not only shape behavior but are also represented and constructed in formal contexts (Feldman 2018).

The objective is not to seek generalizability or to conduct value-free research, rather to identify mechanisms of how the documents in relation to institutional and structural contexts can enhance opportunities for gender equality within decision-making processes (Feldman 2018). When adopting an explicit feministic approach to geographical research, there are several aspects to take into account.

24 For example, the researcher needs to reflect and recognize their positionality and how the approach will be gendered and pointed interpretations, and in that way also representing and problematizing the problem in one particular way. Furthermore, the topic, methods and theoretical approaches selected for this research do not only reflect dominant values and paradigms of the discipline but also of the researchers (my) own. How can I consider this both when conducting the research and writing up the results? What are the appropriate methods? (McDowell 1992).

A methodological question is referred to as the how question - how can social reality be studied? The method is a research strategy through which knowledge is produced to understand e.g. a specific set of issues, or ongoing practices, processes, and relations. The methodology entails the researcher’s assumptions and choices and, in this case, qualitative and inductive analysis (approaching an object unorthodox and create a theory in the observation that is made) (Bryman 2018) to seek understanding and meaning of how women’s participation is problematized within decision-making processes in policy documents. I will now turn to the research methods.

Analytical tool

Within qualitative textual studies, there is an emphasis on analyzing words, context, discourses, and a research approach for the subjective interpretation of the content through coding and identifying themes or patterns. Analysis of discourses has increased the past decades within human geography, providing a tool to interrogate the situatedness of knowledge and the active role they play. Discourses can provide an insight into the processes through which these ‘truths’ become embodied and enacted (DeLyser et al. 2010). When undertaking a discourse analysis, the words and texts are studied regarding how worldviews and relations between humans (groups) are constructed, often to maintain prevailing identities (Bryman 2008). Policy discussions are to a large extent about values, where the influential agents responsible for policy development are affected by their ways of working, knowledge-based, information sources, contacts, culture and life experiences, which in that order influence the approach they take towards policy issues (Status of Women Canada 1998). When studying policy documents, it is to be clear that they may be expressed in language, but inhabits deeper meanings, epistemological and ontological assumptions and narratives all elaborated in discourses. Therefore, the analysis will automatically be discursive within the analytical tool, and regarding the feministic epistemological approach of this study, a gender-based policy analysis is undertaken.

25

What’s the Problem Represented to be? (WPR)

When undertaking the policy analysis, Carol Bacchi’s (2009) approach “What’s the problem represented to be?” (WPR) is chosen as it is suitable for a document analysis of this kind that aims to answer research questions of how “participation, influence, and empowerment is represented and problematized within policy documents for PRM” and “how the identified discourses hinder and/or facilitate women to participate, influence, and be empowered”. If increased participation, influence, and empowerment is the solution, then the ‘problem’ can be assumed to be underlying structures, norms, and discourses of non-participation and disempowerment of people (women). The problems represented in the policies can show how the concepts are constituted and constructed (Rehnlund 2019). The framework of WPR does not analyze policies through a problem-solving perspective, rather from a problem-questioning perspective. This can best be explained through the three key propositions of the approach:

1. We are governed through problematizations

2. It is the problematization that needs to be studied rather than the ‘problems’

3. We need to problematize the problematizations by scrutinizing the premises and effects of the problem representations they contain (Bacchi 2009, p.25)

Public policies may have a more central role in working democracies, but many developing countries' (not always possessing a working democracy) are dependent on international aid and support, the PRM may have a significant power role in the piloting sites. When analyzing participation, what is studied is the involvement of both those who affect and those that are affected by a policy (problematized and represented) problem. The WPR challenges national and international boundaries and how policies are created, extending the purview of analysis beyond the policies to include the full array of professionals and agencies involved (Bacchi 2009). The poststructuralist nature of the approach, confirming well to the feminist epistemological perspective that is used to look upon the issues at stake, such as scrutinizing ‘blind spots’ in a given representation of a problem. The gender-based WPR approach will be furtherly described in the next section.

26

Gender-based WPR

I have always thought the actions of men are the best interpreters of their thoughts

- John Locke

Considering that men have dominated history as being the main authors and storytellers, it is of big importance to involve and highlight herstory (women’s) in future studies. However, even if a gender perspective is expressed within the policy program, they may be based on a male standard or females within different contexts and prerequisites, rather than in their own right. Therefore, policy development should contend with these conflicting and competing values. In what ways can gender policies unwittingly recreate and reinforce the equalities they address through their representation of the problem? Most NGOs that implement and fund programs in developing countries are shaped by their own contextual values (from their society), which also shape their development policies applied. To increase awareness of the importance of gender as an organizing principle and to facilitate the development and assessment of policies and legislation from a gender perspective and create equitability, a gender-based analysis of policies can be done (Status of Women Canada 1998). The process of the gender-based policy analysis will follow a five-step-strategy that is a mix of Status of Women Canada (1998) Gender-based analysis, and Carol Bacchi’s theory and tool WPR (presented above). These analytical tools will be linked together. The steps and questions are followed sequentially:

1. What is the ‘problem’? Identifying, defining, and refining the ‘problem’ => Determining the nature,

scope, and importance of what the policy is problematizing through problem representations of participation, influence, and empowerment. E.g. what is the problem, who says it is a problem, why has it become an issue? At this step, an identification of desired anticipated outcomes is also done such as what are the desired outcomes of PRM in relation to participation, influence, and empowerment.

2. What presuppositions are underpinning the representation of the ‘problem’? => This question identifies

conceptual and deep-seated cultural premises and values by scrutinizing the epistemological and ontological assumptions. I.e. if there is a focus on increasing women’s participation, influence, and empowerment, there are assumptions that women lack it and are disempowered. This step involves a discourse analysis when identifying binaries (e.g.

27 male/female, empowered/disempowered), key concepts and categories within the policies. Bacchi (2009) defines discourse not only as something linguistic but also as semiotic or forms of communication (such as policies). Building upon Foucault's idea of studying the archelogy of the forms of problematization through which an issue is thought and how different things (artefacts) are occurring at the same time.

3. How has the representation of the ‘problem’ come about? => How and why did the policies and PRM

emerge, what is the history and origins of the problem representation? The development and history of the identified problem representations (Foucault’s idea of genealogy) by tracing practices and processes that have produced the problem representation. Genealogy is often connected to power relations and can be represented differently in different cultural contexts. The WPR approach considers the entities (e.g. organizations, institutions) and political subjects as emergent, and shaped by ongoing interaction with discourses and other practices - that is revealed through the genealogy.

4. How could the discourses influence program design? => What discursive (ways of thinking), subjectification

(how subjects are constituted), and lived (material impact) effects and limits are produced by this problem representation? Reflection and consideration of the problem representation done in the policies by using the discourse analysis e.g. if only one side of the binaries is mentioned, who/what is not mentioned?

5. How does the representation of the ‘problem’ facilitate or hinder participation, influence, and empowerment?

=> At this step, the conceptual framework will be applied in order to visualize how the policies may disadvantage or provide benefits for the anticipated outcomes in relation to participation, influence, and empowerment. What effects can the problem representation have and on which groups? E.g. Who will participate in choosing the option recommended? Why could this promote and not restrict women’s participation, influence, and empowerment?

This five-step gender-based WPR will reveal what is represented as the ‘problem’ by working backward from concrete proposals (the policy) to the representation of the problem. The policies are seen as productive of ‘problems’, which produces discourse, subjectification, and lived effects (Bacchi 2009).