Your pages title here

In a patriarchic society, women suffer more as a result of drought induced vulnerability. Watershed Based Livelihoods Projects aim reducing this vulnerability. Though benefits of project interventions should reach the deserving women and men, without any bias, special policy provisions and process instruments are created that enable women to "access, control, decide and benefit" from watershed projects. Though women are users and managers of natural resources, their contribution is not recognized. APRLP aims at sensitizing men on these imbalances in the society and reduce these differences in a systematic manner. Both men and women are sensitized to support each other and benefit from the project. Project aims at creating collaborative and separate institutional spaces for women to interface with men and gain useful benefits of the projects. Several functional responsibilities are allocated to women in all components of Watershed Based Livelihoods Projects. Process instruments are designed in Guidelines to transform this vision into a reality.

Several processes which address the gender concerns are described as part of the project management cycle. However, some of the important process instruments/ steps are put together in this section to consolidate the field level observations on this theme in a single place. The bench marking data is presented in the following framework to conduct a "reality check" on "gender concerns" in the project processes.

Framework for Gender Analysis of Processes in Watershed Based Livelihoods Projects:

The process designs that address gender concerns are briefly mentioned. The field level observations against these process designs are presented in a structured manner, in the following manner.

Access: How women gained access or could not gain access, as a result of observed process?
Control: How women could control or could not control the process?
Decision Making: How women could decide or could not decide?
Benefits: How women got benefits or denied benefits?

Since many of these processes are already presented in previous sections, this part of the report only presents "process descriptions" that have addressed any one or all of the above parameters.

Designed Process at Key Event	PFA makes special efforts to interact with women. Target women who are not reached so far.
ACCESS	Neglecting women during awareness camps is still a common practice (in 40% cases). PFA does not interact with women are not members of these groups.
CONTROL	Women Sarpanch and leaders (of caste groups) organized special events to explain about the project contents to women.
BENEFITS	Another common practice is to talk to women who are already organized in SHG and VO.
Designed Process at Key Event	Common meetings are organized between and women to discuss the opportunities of Watershed Based Livelihoods Projects
ACCESS	Majority of the villages (50%) do not have common meetings for men and women
CONTROL	In 50% of the watersheds, women are identified as most affected communities. In all types of projects, single women and women headed families are recognized.
DECISION MAKING	Men dominated in these meetings.
BENEFITS	Women and men could discuss issues together on equal plane, in limited number of cases (10%).
Designed Process at Key Event	Identification of institutions of women and conduct situation analysis around issues related to women
ACCESS	In majority of cases SHGs and VO are identified as the project recognizes them an important and formal partner.
BENEFITS	Poor women are identified mainly for Watershed + activities. This process created an entry point for women in the project
Designed Process at Key Event	Issues related to women are discussed
ACCESS	In 25% of watersheds, the issues related to women are not discussed at all. Equal wages and other infrastructure related interventions (washing/ bathing places) are also discussed in 10% of watersheds.
DECISION MAKING	It is observed that as many as 75% watersheds could not achieve 100% enrollment of members (particularly women members in SHGs). This phenomenon is observed in all types of watersheds.
BENEFITS	Though women played minimum role in the identification process, major issues identified are drinking water, livestock and fuel wood. These issues related to normal roles that women perform generally
Designed Process at Key Event	Supporting the existing institutions
BENEFITS	In 94% watersheds, identified SHGs are strengthened.
Designed Process at Key Event	Consultations with wife and husband in planning
ACCESS	Through net planning process, wife and husband are consulted in preparing action plans for private lands in all APRLP projects (both categories of PFA). However, in remaining 40% of projects, men dominated the planning process on private lands.
CONTROL	Institutionalization of net planning tool helped to ensure gender integrated action planning on private lands in 60% of watersheds.
DECISION MAKING	Though the drinking water scarcity was identified as a priority in 45% of projects, no efforts are made to address the same.
BENEFITS	In 38% of projects, drinking water facilities are created as part of watershed plans. All APRLP projects, where GO PIA operates the drinking water issues remained unaddressed during planning process.
Designed Process at Key Event	Action Plans for Livelihoods and Productivity by Village Organization. In remaining cases, the action plans for productivity enhancement are prepared in an ad hoc manner involving a top down process.
ACCESS	Top down process followed in preparing action plans for livelihoods and productivity in all watersheds.
CONTROL	SHG and VO are forced to accept the interventions. Or they remained as mere suppliers of information.
DECISION MAKING	Leaders of VO or PIA dominated the planning process and decided the interventions.
BENEFITS	Livelihoods Action Plans are treated as an administrative requirement to get funds. After receiving the funds, the funds are equally shared among all members of groups. This practice will ruin the livelihoods promotion.
Designed Process at Key Event	Gender Scrutiny of Action Plans. Village Organization ensures that womens needs are adequately addressed in action plans.
ACCESS	Village Organization has a say only in 12% watersheds. The process of gender scrutiny is fairly weak process.
DECISION MAKING	About 68% watershed plans did not give any priority to the needs of women.
BENEFITS	Only in one case, action was revised to accommodate needs of women.
Designed Process at Key Event	Deciding on priorities of Watershed Based Livelihoods Projects by Village Organization and Grama Panchayati.
DECISION MAKING	In 42% projects, VO played some role in decision making and choice of beneficiaries for the project. Remaining cases, either Village Organization is absent or inactive
Designed Process at Key Event	Capacity building inputs to give priority to women and sensitize men on gender issues.
ACCESS	In majority of the training programs (75%), women participated, in all categories of projects.
BENEFITS	In majority of the training programs (75%), women participated, in all categories of projects.
Designed Process at Key Event	The rights over assets/ usufruct rights over CPRs are conferred formally to women SHG or user groups which are dependent on these assets.
ACCESS	In 32% watersheds, works are not implemented on CPRs. In 56% projects, works are implemented on CPRs, but rights are not conferred
BENEFITS	Informal rights are conferred to women (over trees and water bodies) in 30% villages. In a single watershed (NGO PIA and Non APRLP), rights are conferred on several CPRs in the village (water bodies, trees and so on) to women SHGs.

Integrating Gender in Processes...