1. ESF 2007-2013 support to gender equality
Evaluation of the European Social Fund’s support to Gender Equality Under the Multiple Framework Contract ‘Provision of evaluation and evaluation related services to DG EMPL, including support for Impact Assessment Activities’ (Lot N° 3, VT/2009/057, Identification N° 003)
ESF support to gender equality
Evaluation’s aims, methodology, main conclusions
and recommendations
Paola Casavola
Presentation to the ESF Committee –
Plenary Session-March 10th 2011

2. Content
Aims (evaluation questions), working methodology, judgment criteria
(slide 2 to 6)
Deliverables/products of the study
(slide 7)
Main findings/conclusions [… there is more in the Report]
(slide 8 – 12)
Main recommendations [more details in the Report]
(slide 13 and 14) 1

3. Three evaluation questions:
Aims of the Evaluation
Three evaluation questions:
To what extent ESF programming in Member States has taken into consideration the promotion of gender equality ? (focus on the ‘dual approach’)
To what extent the gender-equality objective is visible in OPs’ initial implementation , in monitoring organization, monitoring systems and evaluation activities ?
In which areas the ESF will generate the most European added value (EAV) as far as gender equality ? 2

4. Methodology (1) –research tasks accomplished
Information collection and analysis for each MS
documents on ESF programming
financial data on past and current ESF programming
Other context information
Face to face Interviews
Survey covering all ESF MA
Reconstruction of the main intervention logic for the gender equality objective for each MS
Update of the 2006 version of the European Gender Equality Index for all 27 MS
Comparative analysis across MS of the information collected /analysed and of the reconstructed intervention logics 3 4

5. Methodology (2) - focus of the factual analysis
Identification for each MS of
overall importance granted to the gender equality objective
degree of adoption of the <<dual approach>>
main scope for gender mainstreaming
presence and characteristics of gender equality infrastructure
actual policy effort in pursuing gender equality in ESF considering 5 dimensions in an ad hoc indicator.
main objectives and corresponding specific actions
speed and coherence of initial implementation
areas in which ESF reinforces, complement, innovate pre-existent strategies and actions (to investigate EAV) 4 5

6. Methodology (3) Judgement criteria–
main theory concepts for assessing collected evidence
Gender equality should be measured with a multidimensional approach in which all identified critical aspects of equality among men and women (for the GEI: paid work, income, decision power, time) are equally relevant
Causes of gender inequality typically compound in complex ways, hence also effective gender equality policies are inherently multidimensional
Capacity issues are key
Institutional and organizational settings particularly key within the ‘recommended dual approach to gender equality’ 5 6

7. Products of the Evaluation study 27 Country Reports 6 Thematic Reports
a Synthesis Report
similarities and differences in Member States’ approaches and strategies and areas of EAV
enlightening issues of common interest
putting forward general recommendations for
a) improving implementation
b) future action 6 7

8. Main findings (1) Importance granted
to the gender equality objective within ESF
Most managing authorities (MA) rate this importance quite high (especially when GEI is lower or GE national stance traditionally strong) 7 8

9. Main findings (2) – Dual approach
in comparison with previous cycle much less ESF resources for gender-equality enhancing specific actions (estimate of the study: 1 billion Euro less in ESF EU contribution)
Why ?
Some specific actions to be carried out under other headings
much reliance on gender-mainstreaming practices
However
MA acknowledge difficulties in applying gender-mainstreaming
Lack of a common understanding of theoretical underpinnings and operational implications
Less has been done at the strategic level, mostly gender mainstreaming considered at the implementation level
Widespread concerns about gender skills of project promoters and implementers (and also of project assessors) 8 9

10. Main findings (3) Gender-equality Infrastructure at the OP level
Everywhere there is some kind of specialized support (which is good), but only in some cases also some permanent structure with staff leading on gender-equality issues (which is better) 9 10

11. Main findings (4) Focus of gender-equality specific actions10
Main objective is Promoting Women's employment and participation in the labour market (quantity and/or quality objectives). Other objectives present, but less spread and different among MS 11

12. Main findings (5) Theories underlying
gender-equality specific actions in MS
Most programmed actions are still of the SUPPLY SIDE type (reinforcing women’s own capacity to compete).
This implies assuming that markets and contexts work reasonably well, … it is just a matter of making individual women stronger
However, multidimensional strategies are emerging, combining SUPPLY SIDE measures with DEMAND SIDE actions (incentives to firms), and with CONTEXT measures (reinforcing the sensitivity to gender equality of the general social, economic and institutional environment).
This implies recognizing that discriminations occur, … it is important to influence many actors’ capacity of acting and deciding with greater gender sensitiveness + supporting services that ease explicit or hidden gender conflicts. 11 12

13. Main findings (6) Initial implementation and EAV
In the majority of MS implementation had started more slowly for gender-equality specific actions than for other parts of the ESF OPs and various difficulties have been reported
For a limited number of MS, the economic crisis has shifted attention and resources away from the gender-equality objective
a lack of status of the gender-equality objective ?
European Added Value
The two realms in which ESF added value is mostly acknowledged are
creation of a recognized and autonomous policy space for gender equality
gender-equality capacity building
Mostly ESF actions are now reinforcing national gender-equality strategies (already funded/pursued at the national level). Many crucial aspects and causes of gender inequality are, however, not sufficiently addressed by current ESF OPs.
Should ESF reinforce its traditional innovative drive ? 12 13

14. Main recommendations (1) To improve/reinforce current implementation
To Member States
A permanent structure to lead on gender equality issues in OP activities should be set up where this does not already exist.
Actions should be taken to encourage participation in projects by suitable applicants equipped with gender skills.
As gender mainstreaming will be a critical source of impact, self-assessment or evaluation exercises on its application are particularly recommended.
To the Commission
Reinforce attention to the effective application of gender mainstreaming through requesting :
a specific focus on gender mainstreaming implementation for the next round of national strategic reports;
an evaluation exercise concentrating on how Member States have implemented/are implementing gender mainstreaming in this programming cycle 13 14

15. Main recommendations (2) – suggestions for the future
To the Commission
have one main category of expenditure for all types of gender-equality specific actions
space for policy innovation and experimentation to be formally defined and protected by the ESF Regulation
To the Commission and Member States
Primary purposes of gender-equality specific actions and primary aims of applying gender mainstreaming to be discussed
Core ESF objectives, as employability, mainly objects of gender mainstreaming.
Gender-equality specific actions directed to other objectives now not sufficiently addressed (e.g. tackling gender stereotypes; vertical and horizontal work segregation; women’s empowerment in public life).
Implications of gender mainstreaming (both a the strategic and at the implementation level) to be explicitly and pragmatically clarified either in Regulations or (better) in Guidelines 14 15