| |
| EC (1997) Equal Opportunities
for women and men in the European union annual report 1996, D-G Employment
and Social Affairs, Luxembourg |
| |
| As a strategy ‘mainstreaming’
is at an early stage of development and practice is evolving. There are
no examples where ‘mainstreaming’ can be said to be fully implemented;
evaluations are therefore premature. However the following lessons can be
drawn from ‘mainstreaming in progress’ in our various case study
countries and institutions. |
| |
There are certain key prerequisites
or conditions which are needed for the successful introduction of ‘mainstreaming’
as a strategy.
- political will
- specific gender equality policy
- gender statistics
- comprehensive knowledge of gender relations
- knowledge of the administration
- necessary funds and human resources
- participation of women in political and
public life and in decision-making processes
|
| |
| There are substantial shortfalls
in knowledge, awareness and techniques which appear common to the experience
of ‘mainstreaming’ in most countries and suggests ‘mainstreaming’
is a long term strategy requiring substantial investment in training and
specialist support, the employment of multiple strategies and tools, and
the involvement of wide range of external actors including specialist practitioners,
equalities agencies, academics, social partners and ‘ordinary’
women and men. It is also dependent upon consistent and high profile political
commitment. |
| |
| However, it is also clear that
‘mainstreaming’ has been viewed by some as a political ‘quick
fix’ and potentially a cheaper alternative to existing equalities structures
and machinery. As a strategy ‘mainstreaming’ can very easily turn
into a cosmetic exercise with ‘fine promises’ on paper but no
action. In a number of countries, the policies have been constructed as
highly visible ‘political monuments’ rather than as concrete measures.
There are explicit resource implications for mainstreaming and experience
from a number of our case studies suggests explicit budget lines may facilitate
its successful operation. These must be contrasted with the hidden costs
of not ‘mainstreaming’. |
| |
| The importance of political
will |
| |
| 'Mainstreaming’ is a strategy
that can, without care, degenerate into tokenism where public commitment
is given in principle but where in practice little concrete or specific
is achieved. Equality policies both mainstream and specific depend upon
clear political commitment and the recognition that the state can act as
a site of social justice. We see this demonstrated most clearly in Sweden,
where it has contributed to an integrated approach to mainstreaming. The
case of New Zealand underscores the fact that well devised strategies will
not get off the starting block without political and organisational will.
Explicit, high profile and sustained political support is perhaps the single
most important variable in the success or failure of ‘mainstreaming’.
|
| |
| The need for structures for
co ordination, monitoring and championing ‘mainstreaming’ |
| |
| ‘Mainstreaming’ without
structures for co ordination, monitoring and championing can very easily
become diluted and fragmented. However ‘mainstreaming’ as a new
strategy has been interpreted in different ways and in some cases has resulted
in governments, particularly at local level, disbanding specialist structures
or staffing, or not establishing equalities machinery in the first place.
This sort of ‘mainstreaming’ does not appear to fulfil the conditions
put forward by in ‘mainstreaming’ guidelines drawn up by organisations
such as the EOC, the EC and the Council of Europe. There are concerns that
it results in ineffectual tokenism, in the absence of adequate knowledge,
resources and structures; and without the strong presence of women in senior
management and as elected members. |
| |
| Mainstreaming appears to work
best where there is a track record in equalities work and established equalities
machinery at a number of levels. Equalities machinery such as women’s
units are often the key co ordinating mechanism for ‘mainstreaming’
as well as the major source of specialist knowledge and training. It is
important that individual departments are responsible for implementing ‘mainstreaming’
with the support of the relevant equalities machinery. Monitoring and evaluation
systems emerge from the case studies as areas of particular weakness. |
| |
| Although it is still to be systematically
empirically tested, experience so far suggests that parliaments - particularly
equality parliamentary committees - are important partners in progressing
equality. |
| |
| The need for gender balance
in decision making |
| |
| Gender balance in decision making
positions is a central feature of ‘mainstreaming’ and a key variable
in its likely success. The under-representation of women in political, economic
and social decision making persists and in some sectors lacks documentation.
The Equal Opportunities Committee of the Committee of the Regions monitors
the gender balance of each new intake of members and has called upon Member
States to achieve a better gender balance in nominees. In a number of other
cases, equalities committees have acted as internal lobbies to map under
representation and to press for targets or quotas which improve the representation
of women as elected members or appointees and as senior officials. In a
number of cases, legislation or ‘eye opener targets’ have been
introduced to ensure a minimum of 40% representation of either sex on public
bodies such as appointed committees of enquiry or boards. No information
was available during the time scale of this research about parliamentary
mechanisms in this respect. |
| |
| The need for gender balance in
the Scottish Parliament has already been well recognised. It is therefore
likely that the new Scottish Parliament will rank amongst world leaders
in terms of elected members. It is important that gender balance continues
to be considered in terms of membership of parliamentary committees and
the distribution of convenorships and other positions. |
| |
| The need for expertise |
| |
| In many of the case studies,
much of the innovative practice is dependent on the commitment and experience
of a surprisingly small number of elected members and officers, who understand
equality issues very well. Despite increasing public statements of commitment
to equalities principles by governments and councils, there is little evidence
that the majority of politicians or officers understood how this might be
applied to specific issues. This is even in the case in Sweden which represents
the most progressive case study country. In these circumstances, it is necessary
to provide expert support in terms of gender disaggregated statistics and
other ‘mapping’ data, detailed guidance and support. The need
for awareness raising and equalities policy appraisal training cannot be
over emphasised and must be seen as an on going process rather than a ‘one-off’.
Equality experts are also needed to develop and modify techniques and tools
for mainstreaming. |
| |
| The need for ordinary voices |
| |
| Much of the literature focuses
on mechanisms and structures, in particular the need for the input of experts.
For example, in the Netherlands, outside academics have usually been enlisted
to carry out Gender Impact Assessments. The role of specialists is important
however ‘mainstreaming’ is not a technocratic strategy and is
underpinned by a recognition that ordinary people are ‘qualified’
to participate in policy making. Consultation and participation are crucial
elements of successful ‘mainstreaming’ both in terms of quality
(‘ordinary’ people can often assess their own needs more effectively
than policy makers) and democracy. Consultation and participation are areas
of growing innovation.34 |
| |
| The need for an integrated
strategy |
| |
| The Swedish multi level approach
provides a model of good practice. The Swedish approach involves high profile
and long term political support and the use of a co ordinated range of analytical,
educational, organisational, and consultative strategies. There is a commitment
to ‘mainstreaming’ at national, regional and local level and action
research has been funded to develop and systemise gender equality analysis.
‘Mainstreaming’ takes place against an established record in specific
equalities work and is supported by specialist structures. |
| |
| Mainstreaming : the case for
equal opportunities committees |
| |
| It can be argued that parliamentary
actors are important partners in any effective ‘mainstreaming’
strategy, particularly in terms of countering the recognised pitfalls of
‘mainstreaming’ involving the issues of political will, the need
for visible champions, and the need for systems of monitoring and holding
ministers and departments to account. A major plank of this work would be
the appraisal of government policy and legislative proposals for equality
implications; and the integration of equality from the outset in legislative
proposals initiated by parliamentary actors themselves. Clearly responsibility
for analysing the equality implications of legislative proposals should
lie with individual committees. However, this is likely to prove ineffective
without a range institutional supports, channels and sources of expertise.
Mainstreaming also needs robust systems of monitoring and evaluation if
it is to move beyond good intentions. |
| |
| Specialist equalities committees
are the norm at national parliament level in EU member states and within
European-level institutions. At devolved/regional parliament level the picture
is more uneven although, in the case of Germany, 13 out of the 16 Länder
have specialist committees with a wide range of functions. Drawing upon
case studies and upon the ‘mainstreaming’ literature more generally,
it is possible to identify a number of areas where specialist parliamentary
committees could potentially play a key role in ‘mainstreaming’
strategies. |
| |
- information gathering and research commissioning
- educative and awareness raising
- alternative/ additional point of contact/
access for individuals and equality groups
- scrutiny of legislation and policy makers
- initiation of specific equality legislation
- monitoring and the development of analytical
tools
- monitoring gender balance in public and
political decision making bodies within the parliament, the government
and public bodies
- monitoring equality impact of policies
and programmes
- monitoring overall performance of government
in achieving equality objectives
- as a symbolic and public expression of
parliamentary will
|
| |
| Recommendations |
| |
| A partnership approach |
| |
| ‘Mainstreaming’ strategies
need to take into account the context and specificity of Scotland and Britain.
In particular, it must be noted that many of the factors identified as facilitating
or necessary pre conditions are not (yet) met. For example, although work
is progressing on gender disaggregated statistics, there is no governmentally
produced annual report on the status of women and men in Britain or in Scotland.35 The Scottish parliament may wish to reflect upon
the fact that the knowledge base, expertise, structures and practice in
equalities work, integrated and specific, is far more developed and advanced
at local authority level than at either national British or national Scottish
level. This implies the need for parliament to draw upon the existing and
developing expertise at local government level and to work in partnership
with local government organisations such as CoSLA as well as with individual
local authorities. It may be that ‘flying experts’ (as per the
Swedish model) could be seconded from local government or statutory equalities
agencies to assist the Scottish parliament and the government. |
| |
| An equalities standing committee |
| |
| We would recommend that the Scottish
Parliament sets up an equalities standing committee. This would not negate
the necessity for all parliamentary committees to build a gender and equality
perspective into their work - but would rather act as a focus for specific
equalities work and as a monitoring committee which scrutinises the overall
performance of parliament and of the government through compulsory annual
progress reports. The committee would co ordinate and be an important channel
of two way communication with consultative machinery, such as forums for
women and for women and men in equity groups, and equalities social partner
organisations. The committee would have responsibility for monitoring gender
balance in parliamentary and government decision making and in public bodies. |
| |
| The work of the committee should
be supported by a parliamentary equalities secretariat which would also
provide support on equalities matters to other committees. The equalities
secretariat would work in co operation with equalities machinery in the
executive and with outside agencies; it would also provide training to MSPs
and civil servants. |
| |
| We would caution against ‘sunset
clauses’ whereby committees or specialist units are set up with a finite
life span. Experience in Canada and elsewhere shows these sunset clauses
make equalities machinery vulnerable to changing political situations.36 Any declaration that equality has been achieved is likely
to premature for the foreseeable future, it seems likely that the Scottish
Parliament will need to express its political will and monitor progress
for a considerable period of time. A specialist committee acts as a ‘guarantor’
that the core principles of the parliament in respect of equal opportunities
are upheld and maintained. |
| |
| Future research |
| |
| Practice is evolving, therefore
the Scottish parliament has the opportunity to develop its own model of
best practice. Future systematic research on various existing models may
be useful for the consideration of the Scottish Parliament, in particular
‘best practice’ models and the experiences of ‘most similar’.
In addition, research needs to be undertaken into gender balance mechanisms
within parliamentary structures. |
| |
