Lwamba Etienne, Shisler Shannon, Ridlehoover Will, Kupfer Meital, Tshabalala Nkululeko, Nduku Promise, Langer Laurenz, Grant Sean, Sonnenfeld Ada, Anda Daniela, Eyers John, Snilstveit Birte
International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) London UK.
Africa Centre for Evidence University of Johannesburg South Africa.
Campbell Syst Rev. 2022 Mar 8;18(1):e1214. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1214. eCollection 2022 Mar.
Across the globe, gender disparities still exist with regard to equitable access to resources, participation in decision-making processes, and gender and sexual-based violence. This is particularly true in fragile and conflict-affected settings, where women and girls are affected by both fragility and conflict in unique ways. While women have been acknowledged as key actors in peace processes and post-conflict reconstruction (e.g., through the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 and the Women, Peace and Security Agenda) evidence on the effectiveness of gender-specific and gender-transformative interventions to improve women's empowerment in fragile and conflict-affected states and situations (FCAS) remains understudied.
The purpose of this review was to synthesize the body of evidence around gender-specific and gender-transformative interventions aimed at improving women's empowerment in fragile and conflict-affected settings with high levels of gender inequality. We also aimed to identify barriers and facilitators that could affect the effectiveness of these interventions and to provide implications for policy, practice and research designs within the field of transitional aid.
We searched for and screened over 100,000 experimental and quasi-experimental studies focused on FCAS at the individual and community levels. We used standard methodological procedures outlined by the Campbell Collaboration for the data collection and analysis, including quantitative and qualitative analyses, and completed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology to assess the certainty around each body of evidence.
We identified 104 impact evaluations (75% randomised controlled trials) assessing the effects of 14 different types of interventions in FCAS. About 28% of included studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias (45% among quasi-experimental designs). Interventions supporting women's empowerment and gender equality in FCAS produced positive effects on the outcomes related to the primary focus of the intervention. There are no significant negative effects of any included interventions. However, we observe smaller effects on behavioural outcomes further along the causal chain of empowerment. Qualitative syntheses indicated that gender norms and practices are potential barriers to intervention effectiveness, while working with local powers and institutions can facilitate the uptake and legitimacy of interventions.
We observe gaps of rigorous evidence in certain regions (notably MENA and Latin America) and in interventions specifically targeting women as actors of peacebuilding. Gender norms and practices are important elements to consider in programme design and implementation to maximise potential benefits: focusing on empowerment only might not be enough in the absence of targeting the restrictive gender norms and practices that may undermine intervention effectiveness. Lastly, programme designers and implementation should consider explicitly targeting specific empowerment outcomes, promoting social capital and exchange, and tailoring the intervention components to the desired empowerment-related outcomes.
在全球范围内,在公平获取资源、参与决策过程以及基于性别的暴力方面,性别差距依然存在。在脆弱和受冲突影响的环境中尤其如此,在这些环境中,妇女和女孩以独特的方式受到脆弱性和冲突的影响。虽然妇女已被公认为和平进程和冲突后重建的关键行为体(例如通过联合国安理会第1325号决议以及《妇女、和平与安全议程》),但关于针对性别和变革性别的干预措施在脆弱和受冲突影响的国家及局势(FCAS)中提高妇女赋权效果的证据仍未得到充分研究。
本综述的目的是综合围绕针对性别和变革性别的干预措施的证据,这些干预措施旨在在性别不平等程度高的脆弱和受冲突影响的环境中提高妇女赋权。我们还旨在确定可能影响这些干预措施有效性的障碍和促进因素,并为过渡援助领域的政策、实践和研究设计提供启示。
我们搜索并筛选了超过100,000项专注于FCAS中个人和社区层面的实验性和准实验性研究。我们使用了坎贝尔合作组织概述的标准方法程序进行数据收集和分析,包括定量和定性分析,并完成了推荐分级、评估、制定和评价(GRADE)方法,以评估每组证据的确定性。
我们确定了104项影响评估(75%为随机对照试验),评估了FCAS中14种不同类型干预措施的效果。约28%的纳入研究被评估为存在高偏倚风险(准实验设计中为45%)。支持FCAS中妇女赋权和性别平等的干预措施对与干预主要重点相关的结果产生了积极影响。没有任何纳入干预措施产生显著负面影响。然而,我们观察到在赋权因果链中更靠后的行为结果上效果较小。定性综合分析表明,性别规范和做法是干预效果的潜在障碍,而与地方权力机构和机构合作可以促进干预措施的采用和合法性。
我们观察到在某些地区(特别是中东和北非以及拉丁美洲)以及专门针对妇女作为建设和平行为体的干预措施方面,严格证据存在差距。性别规范和做法是方案设计和实施中需要考虑的重要因素,以最大限度地发挥潜在效益:在没有针对可能破坏干预效果的限制性性别规范和做法的情况下,仅关注赋权可能是不够的。最后,方案设计者和实施者应明确考虑针对特定的赋权成果,促进社会资本和交流,并根据期望的与赋权相关的成果调整干预组成部分。