Advocates, practitioners, and scholars: who's behind the WID movement?

First what is the WID movement? It refers to 'Women in development,' and to the first activists and scholars who attempted to point out gender inequities in development, and seek and propose ways to address them. Each of these three groups has differing, sometimes complementary sometimes conflicting, viewpoints about how to advance the field. The movement could not have succeeded without these complementary roles played by different professionals. A the same time, different professional perspectives can create confusion of the abstract ideal with the art of the possible.

I. Advocates' roles

Some history first. The UN declared a Decade of the Woman, which lasted from 1976-85 (next time a conservative politician says the UN is irrelevant, feel free to wonder whether they even know what UNIFEM, WHO, UNDP, FAO, UNESCO, or UNICEF are).

Key events

• Ester Boserup’s 1970 book was discovered—widespread use of scholarly work to promote WID. There was a need for empirical studies of woman's work and its contributions to economies--so much of their work had been 'statistically invisible.'
• USAID (US Agency for International Development, part of the U.S. State Department) was directed to focus on programs likely to lead to economic integration of women. This was referred to as the Women in Development (WID) initiative. They still have an office.
• There was a subtle shift from equity movement (based in U.S.) to economic development as the primary emphasis.

Conferences, gatherings

Movements often gain their strength from efforts to develop networks of professionals, and WID was no exception:

• Mexico City, Copenhagen, Nairobi lent international support (these were all UN conferences for and about women) - -  How did they advance the movement(s)?
• Increased worldwide networking opportunities were available, connecting women from different parts of the globe, from different disciplines, and from different perspectives. There was a great deal of mobilization of women (at non-governmental meetings, often running parallel to 'official' conferences)
• These conferences enhanced the status, visibility of the WID movement
• Increased pressure was put on governments who were ‘statistically exposed’ (that is, had little positive to show in the way of involving women in development or showing that women have made any progress). 

Early conceptions of WID (The five Es)

return to top

II. Practitioners' roles

Those working within the system (e.g., NGOs, government agencies), on the ground, in the field, concerned with the practical problems of 'how to reach goals' and achieve development (presumably defined). The focus of the practitioners was on:

• Welfare--focused on poverty alleviation; women-only; exclusion of poorest (how to reach them?); welfare agencies were marginal players in development; also a focus on health care projects.
• Efficiency--welfare programs focused on women as mothers; economic development could not be achieved without women's participation in the economy. It was basically believed that increased income would lead to increased power and status for women

III. Scholars' roles

• Empirical contributions (research that has documented actual conditions, women's work, gender biases, inequities, etc.)—These contributions have provided important documentation of women’s work, ther contributions. It provides evidence to make the base that bias, inequities exist, to try to force policy makers and government officials to engage in the debate.
• Theoretical contributions—Proposed frameworks for analyzing, incorporating, mainstreaming gender issues (e.g., WID, GAD), economic policy (e.g., SAL).

How has each group made important contributions to advancing women's interests? Is one more important than the others?

• Toward greater diversity of perspectives in development (this is seen as a strength--why?)
• Growing awareness of importance of political power for women, gender issues (versus economic—economic power may not change real power structures; remember, there are differences between men and women's resources, but also differences among women in any given locale, village, ethnic group, etc.)
• Greater protections, recognition by states of women’s rights. This doesn't always mean women can exercise these rights, but then again without the constitutional rights, there's nothing to exercise ...

return to top

WID and social actors (from Tinker 1991)

These three general groups often took different positions on different issues affecting women and development, as the following table suggests. You might take a few minutes (hint) to think about how the different views suggest different approaches to development (either strategies, or even levels, for instance national-level versus community-level versus household-level versus individual).

Comparison of WID and GAD (from Young 1997)

Do the different perspectives imply different strategies for reaching women? You might want to think about examples of how a WID and a GAD approach might differ on the ground (i.e., in terms of actual policies or projects).