Engendering Muheza District in the Early 2000s

Gender Mainstreaming in the District Development Programmes

Muheza District is earmarked for at least 10 years of Ireland Aid support through the District Development Programme support (DPP). At present they are completing their first 3 year DDP phase. It was observed that gender mainstreaming was somehow evident in some of the project cycle stages. For instance at the pre-design phase (e.g., in the report of the District Appraisal Mission in 1997, cross-cutting issues were considered) consultations were held with community members including women. It is claimed that during the development of the strategic plan, consultations were again held with both men, women and youth groups through PRA interventions.

It was also alleged that objectives in the programme support documents aims at addressing women’s participation in decision making at village level, and increasing women’s capacity to address own problems through various committees at village level. It is evident in the strategic plan that the DDP overall objective states “improved and equitable access to socio-economic sources and increased production”. While the specific objective focuses at “equitable empowerment of women and men in building and sustaining their social economic life”. The programme matrix therefore has elements of gender in the form of activities targeting women (e.g., the training of village leaders in gender issues). The Master Logical Framework similarly addresses gender in the results (e.g., greater and more equitable empowerment of women and men in decision making and planning).

Gender mainstreaming was similarly somehow visible in use of gender indicators, e.g., the 1999 benchmarks or development indicators as regards education enrolment and participants in training of traders, or proportion of women in activities. The programme has also used gender specialists and women consultants (e.g., in formulation workshop of the Phase I and in a gender workshop), meanwhile there is currently a gender team existing within the council. Gender trainers (from Community Development Department – Gender Team), have been used to train councilors and heads of department.

A semblance of gender activities does exist through village development committees, school committees, and water or health committees. NGO actors with a gender focus were engaged in promoting lending to women.

However, the programme is relatively male dominated as regards the staffing in the council. Out of 13 departments, only 1 is lead by a woman (the Trade Department). All of the chairpersons at the District Committee, District Council, Ward Development Committee levels are male. Female chairpersons are to be found only at the hamlet (8%), village government (1%), and village committee levels (3%).  Discussions with the District Gender Team revealed that the council seems to be gender strong in regards to: attitudes towards gender mainstreaming (e.g., receptivity), and engendering of it staff (e.g., efforts to create gender awareness).

Gender mainstreaming is weak a regards: policies and implementation (e.g., no gender strategy and action plan at district level in the current plans), roles and responsibilities in gender mainstreaming (e.g., staff have no formal obligations for addressing gender issues), and flexibility for change (e.g., some male staff being stiff to changes). Debatable support for gender mainstreaming was seen to be present in the following: in staffing (e.g., no apparent targets for balancing the sexes in recruitment), in room for change (e.g., limited acceptance to desired changes to accommodate mainstreaming), and in decision making.

In summary, although the Gender Team exists it is plagued with problems such as: lack of resources for coordination; non-formalised existence (e.g., not institutionalized); limited departmental membership (e.g., not all departments represented); and, inactivity in the current phase (e.g., limited action).  Moreover, gender mainstreaming has been mostly about following up on quantitative participation of women in certain activities (e.g., committees), and forgetting the promotion of qualitative aspects. Monitoring of changes and improvements has been generally lacking. Although cross cutting issue are said as being instrumental in endorsement of plans, there are no practical guidelines for gender mainstreaming at the district level. Perhaps these guidelines shall soon be achieved through the gender strategy and action plan designing exercise to be engaged in early June 2002. 


[Extracted from a Report By Edward H. Mhina, Titled "Report on Establishment of gender strategy and gender mainstreaming action plan for Muheza District Council." - June 2002]