DISCUSSION POINTS

1. Women's perspective in all programmes
   • What efforts have been made by development education and action groups to ensure a women's perspective in all programmes? What problems have been encountered? How could these be overcome?
   • What resources exist on the women's aspects of major areas of interest to development education and action groups? By sector? By country? Human resources? Material resources?
   • How can these be shared between women working in development education and action groups?
   • How can lobbying help promote a women's perspective in all programmes? Lobbying from within the organization? Lobbying from outside?
2. Women in development: concern of all staff
   • What initiatives have been taken by development NGOs to raise awareness among staff of the need to consider women's role in development as central?
   • How successful have these initiatives been? What problems have been encountered? How could these be overcome?
   • How can initiatives be supported? From within the organisation? From outside?
3. Staff member(s) responsible for women's perspective
   • How successful have initiatives been to set up women's desks, women's bureaux or employ 'animatrices'?
   • What were the limitations to effectiveness? How could their effectiveness be improved?
   • How can such initiatives be lobbied for and supported? From within organisation? From outside?

LINKS WITH OTHER WORKSHOPS

• consciousness raising of NGO staff (6)
• networking (5)

INTRODUCTIONS TO WORKSHOP 3

MAKING WOMEN IN DEVELOPMENT A CENTRAL CONCERN OF DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION AND ACTION GROUPS

Jane Goldsmith (Britain)

If we take the definition of development put forward by the World Bank or similar organizations, that is industrial development, then I would say that some countries are more developed than others. But if development is justice, equality, peace and the quality of life, then no country in the world is developed and very few are actually developing towards these goals. In fact, I would say every country can be seen as having some imbalance in the way it uses its social resources which are not channeled towards the people.

Therefore we have a great responsibility in defining what development is and the problems, accordingly, with development education. It's assumed that development education in the West is targeted only for people in the West. To improve these programmes, and above all to have a more justified definition for development, we should learn from people thousands of miles away.

I met an Indian woman from the YWCA in the UK. She said that she had some problems since many women in her group came from middle-class families. She didn't know how to do development education with these women with all the models, vocabularies and approaches from a global scale.

What do we mean by a global scale?

The first criterion will be: can these models, ideas and approaches be used for discussions in rural, neighborhood or any meetings anywhere? If yes, then it is a good development education resource material.

The second criterion is very practical: how could we make development education a central concern, so that it is not just a small group sharing the same idea? Four years ago, I was the only woman in the UK working on women's education in general. This programme has become a central campaign within the UK now. Every development agency in the UK has started some women's groups. The Voluntary Services Overseas, OXFAM, Christian Aid and also solidarity organizations like Amnesty International all have women's groups. But how can they make women's issues a central concern/area within the organizations? It seems that in organizations like the EEC and the UN, big funds have been coming in for women's development education programmes now and that all the men are suddenly interested in them since they bring money into the organizations. The men take over whatever subjects/ programmes relating to women and subsume then into the traditional hierarchies.

It is important that we not only make women a central concern of development but also change the ways development is happening.

We have to challenge the existing models, approaches and vocabularies and ask what they mean. We are not trying to bring women to sit up there as directors of any old hierarchical establishments. Nothing will change. We have to have new ways of working, new ways of bringing people together, for instance a meeting like this, and some mechanisms to bring rural women to Nairobi. For an example, we could charge fees from all the western countries which send people to conferences. If this money is then put into a fund financing rural women's participation to conferences and meetings, there would be a broader representation of women at these international events. We need to come together in a different way and with different principles.

At the same time, we also have to see how women can survive within international organizations with old traditional hierarchical structures and how we can challenge them. It is much easier to talk to women like ourselves. I feel relaxed and easy. We women at all levels have to learn to speak up. There is still no mechanism to do so. That's what I've been working on. If 90% of the participants here were men, I think we would have many more difficulties.

We have limitations because we are women at whatever level we are. We have to struggle first of all to get women represented and then to make ourselves effective. How could we promote ourselves? Through what structures, images and languages are we going to do it in all these development education programmes? ...These are the things we have to tackle and to be aware of.

Hilkka Pietilla (Finland)

I would like to start the discussion with a few rhetorical questions. Which women are we talking about when we say WOMEN IN DEVELOPMENT? Are they the women in industrialized countries? Or, the women coming from the developing countries? Women from the villages? Other questions that follow are why do we have to involve these women and make them a central concern of development education? Above all how are we going to do it?

Taking up women's issues in development education or in action groups, we have to clarify two things. Firstly, are we taking women as objects, for whom the programmes are planned, to whom aid goes and where some more money is allocated? Or, are they treated as subjects, with whom the programmes and policies are planned? Are they aware or should they become aware about their situation? Are they able to make up their minds? Do they know their needs and are they willing to participate in decision and policy making? The discussion will be very different for objects and subjects. We also have to identify the kind of aid we are focusinq on, be it official aid or voluntary aid.

The situation is most difficult with multilateral voluntary aid since it implies that women have to influence the policy. For bilateral aid, the people-to-people relations are prevailing.

Concern for women as subjects should be the main theme. To do this in a donor country such as Finland, we have to know:

1. Whether the women are aware of their own situations and the causes of their problems.
2. Are they aware of the consequences of development, the interrelations of their development with that in other developing countries today?
3. The situation of women in developing countries: to me most of the reports given in the media are descriptive rather than analytical.
4. Do they know their possibilities of influencing development in their own country and in the aid policies?
5. How to make these development cooperants realise the consequences of the aid?

My experience with the UN is a typical one. It has taken the UN 30 years to recognize that half the population is women and it was not until the 70s that they started to think about women's issues. Women in development is the concern of women's life in general, to create and spread awareness further and further. And if we want to make a good analysis of the process of development, and to arouse the awareness of women worldwide and to be able to see the real causes for the distortions of development here and there.

In conclusion, I think we have to analyze our own situation, exchange our experiences so as not to repeat our mistakes. We have to devote ourselves to the conscientization and awareness-raising of women in all countries. We have to interrelate concerns of women. These concerns are global and include:

1. militarism in all forms and in all consequences
2. destruction and depletion of natural systems and pollution of the environment
3. destruction of social systems
4. exploitation, suppression and persecution of women

Finally, I have to emphasize that sisterhood is global!

REPORT OF WORKSHOP 3

MAKING WOMEN IN DEVELOPMENT A CENTRAL CONCERN OF DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION AND ACTION GROUPS

Rapporteurs: Molly Kane, Jane Goldsmith

Goals

The group first discussed the meaning of education and especially education with women. Emphasis was placed on the need for women first and foremost to understand their importance as women and, through this conscientisation to gain empowerment. An international perspective was felt to be an important tool for raising consciousness and hence promoting empowerment. However, it was stressed that solidarity and not charity should form the basis of an international perspective in education.

The need was stressed for women in both developed and developing countries to gain greater understanding of their position in their own societies and to relate this to a historical perspective. Women from developing countries stressed the value to them of such analyses of developmental impact on women in industrialised societies.

Liz Willick of Canada described the work of her organisation with rural women in Saskatchewan. She emphasized the importance of using examples of rural women's role and position in other parts of the world and then relating this to the Canadian situation. She stressed also the use of historical analyses to illustrate how, through not taking control of the food system, rural women have become marginalised and isolated. She emphasized similarities in their positions.

New language and new methods

It was felt vital that women not only work for change in existing development policy but that we challenge the very language and methods of development. We must develop an "alternative development from a women's view point."

Women should develop a common language free from false dichotomies such as North and South and should develop feminist methods of education. Attention should be focused on the styles of communication used and the need for creative use of different methods to reach different audiences.

As one participant put it: "our ultimate goal should be what we want as women for women. We should not just work within male-dominated structures but define what kind of structures we ourselves want." It was felt by some that the women's movement was more dynamic than the rather stagnant development education movement so we should not spend too much effort "trying to energise a dead horse".

It was felt important to document and exchange women's experiences of self-empowerment and attempts to bring about change in the direction of development policies. Participants also stressed the need to organise more opportunities for women from 'north' and 'south' to meet, for example through exchange programmes.

Molly Kane of Canada described plans to invite a small number of women from developing countries to visit Quebec and meet with women active at community level. The visit will include a tour of rural areas, visits to neighbourhood organisations and finally one day with the NGOs.

Working within mainstream development education

There was considerable discussion about the merits of working within existing male/female organisations involved in development education. It was finally agreed that women should work simultaneously to develop their own methods and language of development education and at the same time try to have an impact on the policy and practice of existing organisations.

The difficulty of influencing male dominated structures was illustrated by Jane Goldsmith of the World University Service who described her attempts to hold a workshop on women and development at a conference of the organisation attended by 90 men and 18 women. A number of participants mentioned the need to compromise ones views and modify ones methods in order to gain credibility within traditional organisations.

In relation to these problems the group was very much in favour of all women's groups to support women working in mainstream organisations. The example of KULU in Denmark was mentioned as a place where women working in the development movement could gain strength and develop their arguments and ideas through discussion with other organisations in similar positions. It was felt important to set up similar organisations in other countries.