MAPPING DEMAND FOR WOMEN S ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT PROJECTS: A GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF U.N. WOMEN S FUND FOR GENDER EQUALITY PROPOSALS.

Transcription

1 MAPPING DEMAND FOR WOMEN S ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT PROJECTS: A GLOBAL ANALYSIS OF U.N. WOMEN S FUND FOR GENDER EQUALITY PROPOSALS UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION AND UN WOMEN FUND FOR GENDER EQUALITY BY ANNA WOLF, JADE HAWES, VALENTINA LUKETA, AND MAR MARTINEZ 1 Acknowledgements The authors wish to recognize Mayra Buvinic and Rebecca Furst-Nichols at the UN Foundation, and Elisa Fernandez and Victoria Boydell at the UN Women Fund for Gender Equality for their contributions to the project. Thank you for your thoughtful insights and support. Introduction What kinds of economic empowerment programs would implementing organizations around the world ask for if they could speak directly to donors? While practitioners and policy-makers often use research to gain a clearer understanding of what types of programs work well for women, it is rare to have insight into the kinds of projects that are most in demand in various contexts around the world. To shed light on the global demand for various kinds of women s economic empowerment programs, this project analyzes the 1,244 women s economic empowerment proposals submitted to the Fund for Gender Equality (FGE) during the and grant-making cycles. It highlights the most frequent project types, sectors, and regions for which field-based implementers sought funding support. Each proposal contained multiple proposed interventions. Of the 1,244 proposals from the dataset, training was mentioned in 93% of proposals among the proposed interventions, followed by interventions involving policy reform, advocacy, and awareness-raising (66%), asset-building measures (26%), and support for networks and cooperatives (24%) for the 2009 and 2011 grant-making cycles. Most applications came from Africa (35%), and particularly Eastern Africa, which constituted 55% of proposals from the Africa region. Among African proposals, business training was the most frequently requested intervention in 2009 (37% of proposals), and awareness-raising was the most frequently requested intervention in 2011 (52% of proposals). The least demand for FGE funding came from Europe and Central Asia (ECA), which comprised 4% of submissions for the 2009 and 2011 cycles. 1 Authors are consultants to the UN Foundation. 1

2 Background This project is part of a collaboration between the United Nations Foundation and the ExxonMobil Foundation called The Roadmap, a series of research projects designed to analyze what works to promote women s economic empowerment. As part of this commissioned work, the UN Foundation and UN Women s Fund for Gender Equality cooperated to produce a mapping of demand for economic empowerment projects from the field. The project reviewed proposals from an array of countries at different stages of development, as well as projects designed for various groups of women living in diverse circumstances. FGE is a multi-donor initiative dedicated to the advancement of women s economic and/or political empowerment through competitive grant-making and technical support of high-impact gender equality and women s rights programs at local, national, and regional levels. Since its launch in 2009, the Fund for Gender Equality has delivered grants of US$55 million to 93 grantee partners in 69 countries. Government grantees in eight countries have contributed an additional US$4 million toward their programs. Applicants include women-led civil society organizations and government agencies working directly on gender equality issues in their respective countries. Several conditions shape the pool of applicants, including the fact that UN country teams, international organizations, and groups registered in the global north are not eligible to apply. In addition, calls for proposal were made in English, French, Spanish, Arabic, and Russian for the first cycle. Finally, the Fund s eligibility criteria changed between 2009 and 2011, which potentially created differences in the profile of each grant cycle s applicant pool. During its inaugural round of grant-making in , the Fund offered two types of grants: implementation and catalytic. Implementation grants ranged from US$2 million to US$5 million, and were distributed over a period of two to four years. These grants aimed to support programs in countries with agreed-upon national or local plans, policies, or laws that advance gender equality and women s empowerment and were ready for implementation. Catalytic grants ranged from US$100,000 to US$500,000, and were distributed over a period of one to two years, and aimed at supporting plans, policies, or laws that did not yet exist. These grants supported the establishment of strategic coalitions or partnerships to catalyze the development and endorsement of national or local gender equality plans, policies, or laws. During the grant-making cycle, the Fund awarded US$37.5 million to 40 programs in 35 countries. In January 2010, the Fund announced the allocation of small (catalytic) grants totaling more than US$9 million to 27 initiatives in 26 countries. In July 2010, the Fund announced large (implementation) grants totaling more than US$27.5 million to recipients in 13 countries. Total ask for this cycle was US$2 billion, with the small grants program ending in and large grants continuing in In its second round of grant-making, the Fund offered two types of grants: economic and political empowerment. These grants ranged from US $200,000 to US $1 million, and 2

3 were distributed over a period of two to four years. During this round, grantees had to select a focus of either economic or political empowerment, which represented a departure from the first grant cycle, where FGE had allowed organizations to select one or both economic and political empowerment foci for their proposals. This might explain why, during the first grant-making cycle, organizations proposed more political interventions within economic empowerment programs, while in the second cycle proposals were more clearly defined as economic interventions only. During the grant-making cycle, the Fund awarded US$17 million to 53 programs. In 2011, the Fund conducted a grant-making cycle for Arab States only and granted US $4.5 million to 14 programmes. A global grant-making cycle was conducted in 2012, where the Fund presented 39 programs in Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean with grants, for a total funding of US $12.5 million. The total ask for this cycle was US $481 million, which again indicates an unmet demand for resources and, in many cases, further potential for additional interventions to advance gender equality and women s empowerment. Methodology In order to investigate specific elements within each proposal, a coding framework was established to record areas of interest within reviewed proposals. The framework included categories to collect data on grantee information, the project budget, grant duration, the three primary interventions the project proposed, 2 characteristics of the two primary beneficiary groups the proposal targeted, 3 the proposal s theory of change, and the project scope. All of the previously mentioned elements were coded with numerical values to reflect the most common components of the dataset. 4 While the 2009 and 2011 grant cycles sought to solicit proposals aimed at both women s economic and political empowerment, analysis of both databases exposed a significant difference in the nature of the proposals submitted. Proposals from the 2009 cycle frequently miscategorized interventions as economic in focus, when the substance of the grant predominantly proposed funding for political activities, such as the promotion of women s leadership roles, political participation, and gender mainstreaming in governmental organizations. On the other hand, proposals from the 2011 grant cycle that were categorized as having a focus on women s economic empowerment almost exclusively aimed to promote women s economic empowerment. In order to maintain a focus on proposals promoting women s economic empowerment, proposals were reviewed and categorized by the coding team as having an economic or political focus. Of the 1,545 project proposals reviewed, 925 proposals were examined from the 2009 grant cycle; of these, 301 proposals were excluded due to an overt focus on political 2 Most proposals included a number of different economic empowerment interventions and the coding framework included the top three. This analysis reports on the primary intervention proposed, as well as the secondary and tertiary interventions (some proposals included less than three interventions, in which case the framework reported on the interventions included). 3 Again, many proposals targeted more than two beneficiary groups; the coding framework includes information on the primary and secondary groups targeted. 4 For complete lists of code categories for types of intervention and beneficiary, see annexes 1 and 2. 3

4 interventions, leaving 683 proposals. 5 Of the 561 proposals analyzed for the 2011 cycle, no proposals were excluded. Thus, 1,244 in total were included in this analysis. Upon competition of coding, cross-tabulation analysis was performed to provide a comprehensive picture of the interventions that organizations prioritize in their efforts to promote women s economic empowerment and the groups of women they identified to be most in need. The analysis revealed that, across the entire dataset, several interventions and beneficiary types were far more commonly included in proposals than others. The dominance of these intervention and beneficiary types obscured more subtle trends within the data, such as variations among which kinds of beneficiaries were targeted in proposals from region to region. To more fully investigate these differences, a separate analysis was conducted, where the most common intervention and beneficiary types were excluded, and the remaining intervention and beneficiary types were examined for trends. For this purpose, codes for training, policy development & advocacy, and awareness-raising & outreach were excluded from the analysis. Finally, certain sections of the analysis group codes in order to examine broader trends in the data. The construction of code groupings is based on similarities between codes selected for each group. Where codes are grouped, they are examined in comparison to other code groupings, instead of in contrast to other individual codes. For instance, different types of training activities were split into six separate codes; certain parts of the analysis regroup all training activity codes together again, placing this group in contrast to other code groupings. Global Demand for Types of Interventions Of the 1,244 proposals from the dataset, training was the most common primary intervention proposed (in 1,159 or 93% of proposals), followed by policy reform, advocacy, and awareness-raising (818 or 66%), asset-building measures, including capital transfers (cash, credit, or in-kind) or savings (326 or 26%), and support for networks/cooperatives (303 or 24%). The following sections cluster the most frequentlyrequested interventions into four major groups based on their similarities: training activities, policy development & outreach, capital transfer & savings, and networks & cooperatives. In addition, the following section explores less commonly-requested interventions, as well as women s empowerment interventions and interventions assigned the code other. The following chart provides an overview of the most common intervention groupings in the dataset. The figures below reflect primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions included in each proposal in order to measure how frequently interventions from each grouping appear in the dataset. 6 5 Proposals were only excluded if they contained little or no economic empowerment elements in the interventions they proposed. If there was a significant focus on economic empowerment, in addition to political empowerment within the grant proposal, the proposal was included in the analysis. 6 As figures in the chart reflect up to three interventions per proposal, the percentages exceed 100%. 4

5 Global Demand for Types of Intervention 2009 and 2011 Networks and Cooperatives Capital Transfer and Savings 24% 26% Policy Development and Outreach 66% Training 93% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Changes in Demand for Intervention Types A comparison of changes in the intervention groupings from the chart above between 2009 and 2011 reveals that demand stays relatively stable for all groups except training and networks/cooperatives. The demand for training increases from 2009 to 2011 while various types of training are requested in 583 of 683 proposals (85%) as either a primary, secondary, or tertiary intervention in 2009, in 2011 it is often requested more than once, appearing in 576 of 561 proposals (102%). Likewise, a sharp rise in the demand for interventions involving networks and cooperatives is of note, both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the total number of submissions the demand for networks and cooperatives increased from 119 proposals (17%) in 2009 to 184 (33%) in % 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% 85% Comparison of Demand for Groups of Interventions and % Training 33% 30% 21% 17% Networks and Cooperatives Capital Transfer and Savings 69% 63% Policy Development, Advocacy, and Outreach The demand for interventions not listed in the chart above remains relatively stable from year to year, with the exception of women s political participation, which declines 5

6 sharply from 2009 to In 2009, 113 proposals (17%) ask for interventions involving women s political participation by 2011, only 34 proposals (6%) request it. Training activities 7 Training interventions include a wide range of approaches, including business management coaching, vocational training, education for careers not traditionally pursued by women, wage employment training, life skills instruction, and training in gender mainstreaming. The most frequently proposed type of training was in vocational and livelihood skills in occupations traditionally held by women, including handicrafts, sewing, cooking, agriculture, and domestic service. 206 proposals (17%) listed vocational training as the primary intervention and a total of 461 (37%) proposed this intervention among either the primary, secondary, or tertiary interventions. Gender mainstreaming was also among the most frequently proposed interventions, and refers to any training used to assist high and mid-level actors, such as policy-makers and community leaders, in incorporating gender sensitivity into organizational protocol, policies, and the processes of an institution. Gender mainstreaming appeared as a primary intervention approach in 86 (7%) proposals and was among intervention approaches in 182 (15%) proposals. Business management training is used to help women either start or improve existing businesses. These trainings could include technical assistance, basic business education, financial literacy training, or information about markets. Business training appears as a primary intervention in 135 (11%) of the proposals, and is mentioned among the 3 primary strategies in 181 (15%) of the proposals. Soft skills training interventions are aimed at improving skills necessary to succeed in the workforce, including women s degree of self-confidence, time management, and hygiene. Soft skill trainings were used as a primary approach in 78 (6%) proposals and are mentioned as an approach in 143 (11%) proposals primary, secondary, or tertiary interventions. Finally, a small minority of proposals included training in non-traditional female roles (e.g. mining, information technologies, construction work, etc.). Many projects that fell under this code specifically mentioned the desire to train women in vocational skills that had been traditionally reserved for men, and some specifically cited this as an underlying economic empowerment strategy for women included in the project. 20 (2%) of proposals selected this approach as a primary intervention, and 35 (3%) include it among 7 Many of the activities described in this report as training would be termed capacity development by UN Women. Capacity development is a core function of the UN system and is seen as critical to meeting the Millennium Development Goals. Capacity is defined as that emergent combination of individual competencies, collective capabilities, assets and relationships that enables a human system to create value. Capacity development is the process of enhancing, improving and unleashing capacity; it is a form of change which focuses on improvements, and training is one of its several components. 6

7 their 3 primary approaches. Likewise, training for the formal wage market, which includes training for employment in factories and larger businesses, is rarely mentioned 19 (2%) proposals use it as a primary intervention and 46 (4%) of projects mention it at all. Political Advocacy, Outreach, and Awareness-Raising As previously mentioned, policy development, outreach, and awareness-raising were the second most commonly-requested group of interventions. Policy development and advocacy were included together as one code, and included interventions that involved advocating to high-level bodies or lawmakers for policy change or development. A total of 136 (11%) proposals included political advocacy and policy development at national and local levels as primary interventions. This intervention is mentioned as an approach in 395 (32%) proposals. 100% % of Times Training Types Appeared in Project Proposals 75% 50% 25% 0% 37% 15% 15% 11% 4% 3% Outreach and awareness-raising were also grouped as a code, and denoted activities that involved disseminating a message to communities, targeted groups of women, or other stakeholders about a topic such as behavior change or the existence of a law. 108 (9%) of proposals include outreach and awareness-raising campaigns as a primary intervention, and proposals mention including these activities 423 times (34%) altogether. Capital Transfers, Savings, and Financial Services Capital transfers refer to programs that allocate credit, cash, or in-kind assets (small or large) to beneficiaries. Requests for these interventions were less frequent capital transfers of credit or micro-credit appeared in only 36 (3%) of proposals as a primary intervention, and in 142 (14%) of proposals total. Cash transfers are requested in only 10 7

8 (1%) cases as primary interventions, and 44 times (4%) among all the intervention approaches. Finally, only 6 proposals (less than 1%) requested small or undefined transfer of assets (in the form of seeds, fertilizers, or small animals) as the main intervention, whereas 30 proposals (2%) incorporated small transfers as a part of their project. A small minority requested large in-kind assets (e.g. cow, refrigerator, car, tractors or other assets relatively expensive in the local context). Specifically, 4 proposals (less than 1%) mentioned this as a primary intervention, and 15 proposals (1%) included it among the intervention approaches. Interventions coded as offering financial services (savings) to beneficiaries include programs designed to assist women in opening a bank account, creating savings groups, or sending text reminders to participants to save. Savings is mentioned 20 times (2%) as primary interventions and 65 times (5%) as a primary, secondary or tertiary intervention. 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% % of Times Types of Capital Transfers and Financial Services Appeared in Project Proposals 14% Cap Transfer Credit 5% 4% Financial Services Transfer Cash 2% 1% Transfer Small In- Kind Asset Transfer Large In- Kind Asset Networks and Cooperatives A fourth major group of interventions is represented by coalition-building and professional network strengthening through women-led cooperatives, trade unions, and networks. 303 proposals (24%) include these interventions in the project. In particular, the creation of networks is considered primary intervention in 44 proposals (4%), and is mentioned in a total of 174 proposals (14%). Creation or strengthening of professional cooperatives and trade unions is included in 46 proposals (4%) as a primary intervention and in a total of 129 proposals (10%). Less Commonly- Interventions Several interventions were rarely requested by proposals, including infrastructure, land titling/land certification, mobile phones, and childcare provision; these programs were requested in (less than) 1%-4% of proposals. The infrastructure category includes programs incorporating the construction of buildings, roads, and other structures, as well as electrification, clean cookstoves, or solar lamps. Land titling and certification refers to programs assisting women in attaining land rights and ownership. Mobile interventions 8

9 incorporated mobile technology in a variety of ways. Finally, childcare provision gave women the option to send children to a daycare or nursery service in order to allow for time to work outside of the home. 30% 25% 20% 15% % of Times Less Commonly- Interventions Appeared in Project Proposals 10% 5% 0% 4% Infrastructure Land titling 2% 2% Mobile Phones 0% Childcare Women s Political Participation Interventions that focused on women s political participation included gender mainstreaming (for instance, through the inclusion of women in the political arena) along with other economic empowerment interventions. This category was included separately from Gender Mainstreaming Training as it did not involve knowledge transfer. For 2009 and 2011, this intervention was included as a primary intervention in 47 proposals (4%), and 128 times (10%) total. Other Interventions were coded as other when they didn t match any of the code categories. 99 proposals (8%) included a primary intervention coded as other, and 323 proposals (26%) contained an other intervention. A large proportion of projects coded as other referred to activities to monitor and evaluate programs, research projects, rule of law/legal services/law enforcement interventions, and rehabilitation/counseling/or other psychological support services for survivors of trauma and violence. Intervention Demand by Region and Sub-Region Which regions requested FGE funding most frequently? The following section examines contrasts in the demand for FGE funding, as well as for various types of programming among these regions. The chart below depicts the demand for economic empowerment projects by region from proposals submitted during the 2009 and 2011 grant cycles. The highest demand for FGE funding came from Africa, while the fewest proposals were submitted from Europe and Central Asia. 9

10 Proposal Submissions by Region and 2011 Africa 21% 35% Arab States 4% Asia/Pacific Europe 28% 11% Latin America/Carribean Africa The majority of economic empowerment proposals from the 2009 and 2011 grant cycles came from Africa 437 proposals (35%). For economic proposals from both 2009 and 2011, the majority of interventions proposed by NGOs and government agencies were from East Africa. The following chart depicts the breakdown of project proposals by subregion: Proposal Submission by Sub-Region: Africa ( ) Eastern Africa 28% Middle Africa 6% 9% 55% Southern Africa Western Africa In Africa, the demand for programming according to locale was also analyzed according to rural, urban, nomadic, and peri-urban areas as defined in the proposals. The majority of proposals targeted a combination of rural, urban, peri-urban, and/or nomadic 10

11 populations 231, or 54%. These mostly targeted both rural and urban populations. Nomadic populations (with the exception of one proposal), as well as peri-urban areas were always targeted in combination with either urban or rural populations. Proposal Submission by Locale Combination of Areas 54% Rural 36% Urban 5% Nomadic Peri-Urban 0% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Further analysis reveals that proposals submitted from Africa for the 2009 and 2011 grant cycles demanded very different kinds of programming. The chart below explores these differences, and reveals that, while the proportion of economic proposals from Africa grew, the absolute number of proposals from Africa increased less dramatically. % From Africa Proposals from 2009 Proposals from % from Africa: 196 (29%) of the 683 proposals submitted for the 2009 cycle came from Africa. 43% from Africa: 241 (43%) of the 561 proposals submitted for the 2011 cycle came from Africa. Most Intervention Second Most Business Training: Appeared in 77 (37%) of the 196 proposals Advocacy: Appeared in 73 (37%) proposals Awareness-raising: Appeared in 126 (52%) of the 241 proposals Vocational Training: Appeared in 114 (47%) proposals Trends among Less Frequently Interventions Micro-credit and Savings Groups: Micro-credit appeared 51 times (26%) and savings groups appeared 14 times (7%); these interventions were the most commonly requested interventions when all forms of training, policy development/advocacy, and awareness- Mobile Phones & Capital Transfer: Capital transfer appeared 36 times (15%) and mobile phones appeared 30 times (12%); these interventions were the most commonly requested interventions when all forms of training, policy development/advocacy, and awareness- 11

12 raising/outreach were not taken into consideration. raising/outreach were not taken into consideration. Asia and the Pacific For both grant cycles, the second largest share of economic proposals came from Asia 351 proposals (28%). In both 2009 and 2011, the majority of proposals came from South Asia, particularly India and Pakistan. For Asia, 108 submissions (31%) came from India and 41 (12%) came from Pakistan. The following chart depicts the breakdown of project proposals by sub-region: Proposal Submission by Sub-Region: Asia and the Pacific ( ) 5% 5% Eastern Asia 22% Central Asia Southern Asia 59% South-Eastern Asia The following chart depicts the demand for programming by locale for Asia. Like Africa, most proposals focus on a combination of rural, urban, peri-urban, and/or nomadic populations, with a focus on rural and urban 209, or 52%. Again, nomadic populations (with the exception of two proposals) were always targeted in combination with either urban or rural populations. No proposals targeted peri-urban areas. Proposal Submission by Locale Combination of Areas 52% Rural 38% Urban Nomadic Peri-urban 0% 0% 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 12

13 Additional analysis shows a regional decline in the number of economic proposals submitted from the 2009 to the 2011 cycle; vocational training remained among the top two kinds of programming proposals requested during each grant cycle. % From Asia Proposals from 2009 Proposals from % from Asia and the Pacific: 202 (29%) of the 683 proposals submitted for the 2009 cycle came from Asia. 27% from Asia and the Pacific: 149 (27%) of the 561 proposals submitted for the 2011 cycle came from Asia. Most Intervention Second Most Advocacy: Appeared in 83 (41%) of the 202 proposals Vocational Training: Appeared in 75 (37%) proposals Vocational Training: Appeared in 89 (60%) of the 149 proposals Awareness-Raising: Appeared in 66 (44%) proposals Trends among Less Frequently Interventions Savings and Land Titling: Savings groups appeared 11 times (5%) and land titling appeared 7 times (3%); these interventions were the most commonly requested interventions when all forms of training, policy development/advocacy, and awarenessraising/outreach were not taken into consideration. Capital Transfers & Savings: Capital transfers appeared 23 times (15%) and savings appeared 6 times (4%); these interventions were the most commonly requested interventions when all forms of training, policy development/advocacy, and awareness-raising/outreach were not taken into consideration. Europe Relatively few proposals came from Europe and Central Asia, with 46 submissions (4%) for 2009 and 2011 combined. The vast majority of funding requests were from Eastern Europe, the European sub-region with the largest number of countries eligible for FGE funding. Note that proposals submitted from Northern and Southern Europe were included in this analysis because the proposals were submitted, despite the fact that countries from these regions are not eligible for funding. Only countries in Eastern Europe (and Central Asia, which is included in the Asia section in this analysis) are eligible from this region. 13

14 Proposal Submission by Sub- Region: Europe ( ) 4% 4% 0% Eastern Europe Northern Europe 83% Southern Europe Western Europe The following chart depicts the demand for programming by locale for Europe. A combination of areas was again the most common approach; no proposals were submitted targeting nomadic or peri-urban populations. Proposal Submission by Locale Combination of Areas 59% Rural 20% Urban 13% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Further analysis reveals that the popularity of business training, advocacy, and vocational training remains consistent with global trends among interventions proposed. % From Europe Proposals from 2009 Proposals from % from Europe: 22 (3%) of the 683 proposals submitted for the 2009 cycle came from Europe. 4% from Europe: 24 (4%) of the 561 proposals submitted for the 2011 cycle came from Europe. Most Microcredit: Microcredit appeared in 8 (36%) proposals, frequently proposed in tandem Awareness-raising and advocacy: Some form of either advocacy or awareness-raising appeared in nearly all 14

15 Intervention Second Most with business training most likely to support the start of small businesses for trainees Business Training: Appeared in 7 (32%) of the 22 proposals 23 (96%) proposals Vocational Training: Vocational training appeared in 11 (24%) proposals Latin America and the Caribbean Region The total number of economic proposals from the Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) Region decreased by almost half between 2009 (174, or 25%, of proposals) and 2011 (85, or 16%, of proposals), for a total of 259 proposals, or 21%, from the region for both years. Overall, organizations from the Latin America and the Caribbean Region frequently propose pairing advocacy, legal reform, and rule of law interventions with various economic empowerment interventions. Most interventions of both 2009 and 2011 proposals originate from South America (as opposed to Central America or the Caribbean). The following chart depicts the breakdown of project proposals by subregion: Proposal Submission by Sub-Region: Latin America and the Caribbean ( ) 5% Caribbean 64% 30% Central America South America The following chart depicts the demand for programming by location for the Latin America and the Caribbean Region. Again, proposals predominantly targeted a combination of populations in this case urban, rural, and peri-urban, with a focus on rural and urban 118, or 46%. Proportionally there was a greater focus on urban populations (in comparison to Africa and Asia). 15

16 Proposal Submission by Locale Combination of Areas 46% Rural 24% Urban 10% Peri-urban Nomadic 1% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% As mentioned, analysis shows that less than half as many economic proposals were submitted for the 2011 cycle as the 2009 cycle (in absolute numbers; when examined as a percentage of the total number of proposals for each year, the decline is not quite by half). Pairing economic empowerment programming with political interventions focused on rule of law and policy implementation was a particularly common approach from this region. % From America & Caribbean Proposals from 2009 Proposals from % from the Latin America and the Caribbean Region: 174 (25%) of the 683 proposals submitted for the 2009 cycle came from this region. 16% from the Latin America and the Caribbean Region: 88 (16%) of the 561 proposals submitted for the 2011 cycle came from this region. Most Intervention Second Most Trends among Less Frequently Advocacy: Appeared in 60 (34%) of the 174 proposals Rule of Law and Policy Interventions: Interventions coded as other appeared in 56 (32%) of proposals, and frequently referred to interventions focused on rule of law, policy implementation, legal advice, and legal reform. Gender Mainstreaming Gender Mainstreaming appeared 35 times (20%); this intervention was the most commonly requested intervention when Business training: Appeared in 19 (22%) of the 88 proposals Vocational Training and Savings Groups: Vocational Training and Savings Groups each appeared in 14 (16%) proposals Capital transfers: Capital transfers appeared 5 times (6%); this was the most commonly requested intervention when all forms of training, 16

17 Interventions all forms of training, policy development/advocacy, and awarenessraising/outreach were not taken into consideration. policy development/advocacy, and awareness-raising/outreach were not taken into consideration. Arab States and North Africa The number of economic proposals from Arab States and North Africa totaled 139 proposals, or 11%. A slightly higher number of interventions for 2009 and 2011 came from North Africa than the Middle East. The following chart depicts the breakdown of project proposals by sub-region: Proposal Submission by Sub- Region: Arab States and North Africa ( ) North Africa 45% 55% Arab States The following chart depicts the demand for programming by location for the Arab States and North Africa Region. Again, proposals predominantly targeted a combination of populations 67 proposals, or 48%, targeted a combination of areas. Proposal Submission by Locale Combination of Areas 48% Rural 27% Urban 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 17

18 Analysis shows that fewer economic proposals were submitted for the 2011 cycle than the 2009 cycle. The following chart depicts trends for the region: % From America & Caribbean Proposals from 2009 Proposals from % from the Arab States and North Africa Region: 79 (12%) of the 683 proposals submitted for the 2009 cycle came from this region. 11% from the Arab States and North Africa Region: 60 (11%) of the 561 proposals submitted for the 2011 cycle came from this region. Most Intervention Second Most Trends among Less Frequently Interventions Awareness-raising: Appeared in 31 (39%) of the 79 proposals. Advocacy: Advocacy appeared in 27 proposals (34%). Gender Mainstreaming Gender Mainstreaming appeared 17 times (22%); this intervention was the most commonly requested intervention when all forms of training, policy development/advocacy, and awarenessraising/outreach were not taken into consideration. Vocational Training and Awareness- Raising: Each appeared in 24 (40%) proposals Business training: Appeared in 18 (30%) of the 60 proposals Cooperatives: Cooperatives appeared 16 times (27%); this was the most commonly requested intervention when all forms of training, policy development/advocacy, and awareness-raising/outreach were not taken into consideration. Conclusion This project offers an analysis of 1,244 women s economic empowerment proposals submitted to UN Women s Fund for Gender Equality during 2009 and 2011, highlighting common project types, regional trends, and other proposal components of interest. Each proposal comprised multiple interventions. The analysis intended to describe the types of interventions proposed, in addition to shedding light on the regional concentration of proposals submitted for a better understanding of the coverage and reach of the demand received by FGE. Of the 1,244 proposals from the dataset, training was proposed most frequently, appearing in 93% of proposals, followed by interventions including policy reform, advocacy, and awareness-raising (66%), asset-building measures (26%), and networks and cooperatives (24% of proposals) the for 2009 and 2011 grant-making cycles. The majority of applications came from Africa (35%), and of these, predominantly Eastern Africa, which 18

19 accounted for 55% of proposals. Among proposals from Africa, business training was the most frequently requested intervention in 2009 (37% of proposals), and awareness-raising was the most frequently requested intervention in 2011 (52% of proposals). The least demand for FGE funding came from Europe and Central Asia, which comprised 4% of submissions for the 2009 and 2011 cycles. In both grant-making cycles, with the exception of the first cycle for Europe and Central Asia and the two cycles for Latin America and the Caribbean, the most requested interventions proposed in each of the regions were a combination of training and awareness raising or advocacy. Results from this analysis point to several conclusions: first, that training is the intervention of choice by program implementers in the field working on women s economic empowerment; second, that training is considered a key intervention together with other interventions such as political advocacy, outreach and awareness-raising. The demand for a combination of technical skills in the economic domain together with outreach and advocacy activities could be due to a broader understanding by applicant organizations of the concept of women s empowerment within a human rights and gender equality framework. Further research with program implementation staff is necessary to better understand the factors supporting the proposal of specific combination of interventions. Nevertheless, given the extremely high number of proposals requesting training, it is above all important to ensure that training achieves the intended results. Recent research efforts to understand the impact of training have not examined closely the way in which training is planned and delivered, or used to complement other interventions. Since training is clearly the intervention of choice, at least among those submitting proposals to the FGE, it is critical to understand how it can be designed for maximum impact. 19

20 Annex 1: Definitions and Codes for Types of Intervention 1-Training business management Includes interventions meant to teach people to start or improve their businesses Includes management/operation of the business, consulting services for businesses, technical assistance for business, financial literacy 2-Training or income-generating activities vocational skills/livelihoods (unspecified or traditional gender role) Interventions intended to help people get into small-scale production, sales, or services, sometimes with traditional female roles (e.g., sewing, handicrafts) Includes training to improve agricultural productivity, such as farmer field schools and agricultural extension services 3-Training or income-generating activities vocational skills/livelihoods (non-traditional gender role) 5 Anything intended to help people get into small-scale production, sales, or services, and with non-traditional female roles (e.g., mechanic, driver, carpentry) 4-Training for formal wage labor market Training for employment in factories, larger businesses anything to get into formal sector employment 5-Training soft skills Including self-confidence, time management, workplace readiness training, hygiene 6-Capital transfer credit 7-Capital transfer cash 8- Capital transfer in-kind asset (small or size undefined) e.g., chickens, seeds, fertilizer 9-Capital transfer in-kind asset (large) Something relatively expensive in the local context e.g., cow, refrigerator, car, tractor 10-Land titling/land certification 11- Infrastructure & conveniences e.g., electrification, clean cookstoves, solar lamps 12-Childcare provision 13-Mobile phones 14-Financial Services - Savings Opening a bank account, savings group, text reminders to save 15-Networks/Coalition-building 16-Cooperatives/trade unions 17-Policy development/advocacy 20

21 Advocacy toward a change in local or national policy 18-Outreach/awareness-raising Toward women/communities about behavior change, existence of a law, etc. 19-Other 20-Training political education & gender mainstreaming Lobbying, communal decision-making, human rights, women s economic empowerment, networking, policy advocacy, political representation 21-Women s Political participation Can include gender mainstreaming in politics, political representation Annex 2: Region and Sub-Region Codes Regions 1 Africa 2- Middle East/North Africa 3- Asia/Pacific 4- Europe 5- North and South America, Caribbean Sub-Regions Africa 1- Eastern Africa 2- Middle Africa 3- Northern Africa 4- Southern Africa 5- Western Africa Asia 6- Eastern Asia 7- Central Asia 8- Southern Asia 9- South-Eastern Asia 10- Western Asia Europe 11- Eastern Europe 12- Northern Europe 13- Southern Europe 14- Western Europe America and the Caribbean 15- Caribbean 21

22 16- Central America 17- South America 18- Northern America Oceana 19- Australia/New Zealand 20- Melanesia 21- Micronesia 22- Polynesia Arab States 23- Northern Africa 24- Middle East Iraq Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Yemen 22