A literature review on mapping gender
Last updated
Was this helpful?
Last updated
Was this helpful?
Globally natural disasters kill more women than men and often at a younger age (WHO 2014). Gender and age both matter in terms of who dies, are injured and whose lives are impacted in what ways during and after the crisis (Mazurana and Proctor 2015). UN Women (2022) report that global research has shown that women and children are much more likely than men to be injured or die as a result of a disaster. It is important to understand who was most impacted by a crisis in terms of age and gender and the long-term impact that this may have on a society.
Even in natural disasters impacts are not even between men and women (Mazurana et al 2013; Hoare et al 2012). At the sudden onset of a disaster, impacts may differ due to the geographic distribution of the population at the time the disaster hits (Mazurana et al 2013). Beyond the immediate onset of the disaster, impacts also differ. Men, boys, women and girls may all experience the same phenomena during conflict or natural disaster, however, how they experience it differs as they have different physiology, are targeted and experience harm differently, they suffer different social, economic and livelihood impacts, have different roles in family and community, different livelihoods and access to cash, assets etc all of which impact their survival and recovery. In war for example, men are more likely to be killed in direct combat, but women more likely to be impacted and die from the wider impacts on limited food, water, hygiene etc. Men are more likely to be prioritised for food within household when it is scarce, but physiologically women are more susceptible to mineral and vitamin deficiency. Due to reproductive and caring roles they are also more vulnerable to lack of health care services (Mazurana and Proctor 2015). Mazurana et al (2011) report overwhelming evidence that a person’s sex and age lead to significant differences in accessing essential lifesaving services when experiencing natural disasters or armed conflict. Humanitarian situations also potentially expose people to different gender or age specific risks such as sexual and gender-based violence, forced recruitment and sexual exploitation and abuse, which need to be addressed (Streets, J et al 2013). Women also face increased risk of sexual and gender-based violence, as well as unequal assistance to needs such as shelter and food, increased workloads and a loss of economic opportunities (UN Women 2022). Existing power inequalities between men and women are also often exacerbated during a crisis (SIDA 2015).
It is important to avoid viewing gender as just about women as this creates its own bias (Hoare et al 2012). Due to historic and current marginalisation of women in many societies, gender analysis can sometimes be skewed towards privileging women and girls in the application of theory and analysis. This, however, limits the understanding of the relationship between men and women, which is a key component of understanding gender relations (Doss and Kieran 2013). Men and boys also have their own gender specific needs and failing to consider these has negative consequences (DARA 2011). While it is women and girls whose gender roles most commonly lead to constraints, men and boys are also influenced by expectations of masculinity (Sphere 2018). We therefore need to take care to ensure we consider, women, men, boys and girls (Mazurana and Proctor 2015).
Gender is socially constructed as a result of cultural, political and social practices that define different roles for women, men, girls and boys. (IASC 2018) Because gender relations are socially constructed, rather than natural they are not the same in every society, but taught, learned and absorbed, varying between and within cultures (Hoare et al 2012, IASC 2018). Understanding the cultural context, you are working in is therefore vital to properly collecting and interpreting sex-age disaggregated data (SADD) for programming decisions (Mazurana et al 2013). Care needs to be taken to ensure that programmes avoid stereotypes about gender division of labour, which may promote inequality. Done right, proper consideration of gender in programming should lead to reductions in equality (Hoare et al 2012). Age is also important to consider as gender roles change throughout the life cycle (Eklund and Tellier 2012). Unequal societal expectations and social norms can prevent women’s and girls’ voices from being heard and their needs being deprioritised as a result (FCDO 2018).
Examples from the response to the large earthquake in Pakistan in 2005 highlight the importance of understanding this cultural context. Understanding that most of the communities actively practices purdah meant that from the start facilities like separated toilet and bathing blocks were rapidly designed. However, during the same emergency response, a lack of understanding of the fear of honour killings meant that when rescue teams arrived in the Northern Rocky Highlands in Pakistan, even critically injured women refused to board the helicopters. While mostly Pakistani nationals, the all-male rescue teams did not realise that some communities practiced honour killings and that women risked being killed if they boarded a male staffed helicopter on their own. (Streets et al 2013).
The following section highlights some of the key questions ((taken from Street et al (2013) Gender-Age Marker toolkit) which should be considered when considering gender and age in humanitarian action. These acknowledge the need to understand the underlying cultural context and capacities of the population affected.
What roles do women, girls, boys, men and older people traditionally play and who controls resources in the household and the society? Do any gender or age groups in the society face discrimination – including in their ability to access humanitarian assistance – and are particularly vulnerable?
How does the crisis or emergency affect different gender and age groups and their roles in different ways?
What capacities do different population groups have for coping with, responding to, recovering from and preparing for future crises?
What specific needs do women, girls, boys and men of different ages have for assistance and protection?
Are there any specifically vulnerable groups or groups with particular needs that should be targeted for certain types of assistance? If the action intends to target only one or a few specific gender and age groups, what other groups might need to be involved as well and what would be the consequences of not involving them (e.g. tensions, stigmatisation, failure of objectives, etc.)?
Having already identified that men, women, boys and girls have different needs both before and during a crisis, that disasters impact groups differently and that inequalities exist pre-crisis the figure above stresses the importance of integrating gender equality into humanitarian response. Effectively humanitarian action cannot, however, be achieved without understanding the specific needs, priorities and capacities of all gender and age groups (IASC 2018). Integrating gender and age into humanitarian programming makes assistance more effective because it: better addresses specific needs of different groups of people; ensures equitable access to goods and services provided; improves targeting of assistance to the most vulnerable; better protects different individuals from negative consequences created by the crisis and reduces harm; empowers a representative range of people to be involved in the design and implementation of humanitarian action, making assistance more effective (Streets et al 2013).
Gender mainstreaming during a response is central to impartial humanitarian action. It means that the impact of policies and programmes on both genders should be considered at all stages of the programme cycle including planning, implementation and evaluation (FCDO 2018, ISAC 2018).
Having a gender programme from the start:
Considers how the crisis, policies and programmes may impact people differently according to their age and gender (FCDO 2018);
Provides a more accurate understanding of the situation;
Enables needs and priorities of the population to be met in a more targeted way, based on how women, girls, boys and men have been affected by the crisis;
Ensures that all people affected by a crisis are recognised and that all their varied needs and vulnerabilities are accounted for; and
Facilitates design of a more appropriate and effective responses. (IASC 2018).
The following section below provides a selection of case studies which highlight why consideration of age and gender matter for humanitarian programming.
During the cholera outbreak in Haiti in 2011 SADD revealed that more men were dying and fewer men were attending clinics than women. This led to the discovery that men needed more education on the symptoms and highlighted where men had been hiding their symptoms because they confused them with HIV, which had associated stigma. (Streets et al 2013).
There have been cases recorded (e.g. Eritrea) where a disproportionate number of male adolescents were acutely affected by undernutrition. These were demobilised fighters, separated from their families, and who were affected because they did not know how to prepare food (Streets et al 2013, Mazurana et al 2011). Understanding malnutrition by age and gender helps to highlight this group and understanding of the context helps to understand the reasons for the problem, thus enabling solutions to be developed.
In Pakistan 2009 a review of WFP food ration recipients identified 95% of registered men were collecting rations, but only 55% of women. This triggered further investigation that led to understanding the access constraints affecting women (Mazurana et al 2011).
In the Darfur region of Sudan it emerged that there was a clear link between collection of firewood and risk of rape. Earlier identification of the need for IDPs to collect firewood combined with the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war against civilian populations by the belligerents, should have led to earlier responses from humanitarians to put measure in place to reduce the requirement for firewood collection or put in place safer means for its collection (Mazurana et al 2011).
WASH service provision in Niger women were trained in good hygiene as it was understood that they were responsible for this within the home, however, the programme was initially unsuccessful as men were excluded from this education process, yet they controlled the resources and were not willing to invest in the water storage containers and soap needed. Only when hygiene promotion was extended to the men was there is a change in practices that reduced diarrhoea significantly. (Streets et al 2013)
It is not just after a disaster occurs that gender analysis matters, it is also important in anticipatory action. Integrating protection, gender and inclusion considerations into anticipatory action interventions is a crucial step in tackling the intersecting vulnerabilities that affect the delivery of humanitarian assistance. It also helps to ensure that any assistance provided does not exacerbate these vulnerabilities. These three factors should be considered at all the stages of the anticipatory action process, as they not only affect the type of assistance provided and where it happens, but also the target beneficiaries and modalities of early warning and delivery mechanisms (Karki 2022).
Sex- and age-disaggregated data (SADD) are an valuable part of gender and age analysis. They move analysis on to an in-depth understanding of the affected community’s sex and age profile and of the people accessing humanitarian services, leading to a more effective response and making individual gender and age related need more visible (Streets et al 2013). SADD also highlights how people are affected differently depending on their age and gender (UNDRR 2021). Disaggregated data is key for example when modelling differences in development, mortality and disease risk, allowing for more targeting of specific at risk groups (Eklund and Tellier 2012, Tatem et al 2013). Disaggregated data is vital for understanding vulnerabilities, needs and barriers to access during a humanitarian response (FCDO 2018).
Disaggregated data needs collecting at all stages of a crisis, before being analysed and interpreted accounting for context, then being used to effectively inform programming (Mazurana and Proctor 2015). Collecting SADD is important right from the start of Phase I of a response when baselines, tools and indicators are agreed. Early adoption of SADD is not only important for making data and findings stronger and more useful in early planning of programmes, but also increases the likelihood that SADD will be considered properly in later stages of the response (Mazurana et al 2011). While collection of SADD is improving there is still a lot of improvement to be seen.
While much guidance promotes use of SADD and gender analysis, its adoption is limited
While guidance tends to require collection of SADD and most people agree it is useful, in reality it is not collected or not collected well (Mazurana et al 2013; Benelli et al 2012). It is sometimes the case that SADD is collected at a local level, but when not available for all areas fails to be aggregated and reported (Eklund and Tellier 2012). Eklund and Tellier (2012) found that most articles mentioning male and female affected differently did not actual have any quantitative SADD behind them and instead were relying on qualitative data. While much of the literature debating the use of SADD was written around 2012, more recent articles and reports imply that the same challenges largely remain and that SADD is extremely limited and largely missing, especially in phase 1 of an emergency (ACAPS 2022, ACAPS 2016, data2x 2022, UNDRR 2021, WHO 2021).
Mazurana et al (2011) criticise the humanitarian system for not being evidence driven, suggesting that cluster leads (at least in 2011) did not show a strong interest in SADD and therefore it was not collected in the field. Because gender is not seen as a priority gender data are often lacking or of poor quality (WHO 2021). Governments often fail to prioritise SADD due to missing or inadequate policies (UNDRR 2021). Pezzulo et al (2017) identify that even basic demographic data often fails to be disaggregated below admin 1, despite the fact that there are large subnational heterogeneities within countries. There needs to be a better understanding of why gender and age matters and how it contributes to programming (Mazurana et al 2011). Other reasons cited for lack of collection of SADD included SADD being missing from disaster management templates (UNDRR 2021) and a lack of trained female enumerators within communities (ACAPS 2022).
There is a reported lack of understanding and expertise with regard to analysing, interpreting and using SADD (UN Women 2016, Mazurana et al 2013) and there is little point in collecting the data if it is not then used and analysed (Mazurana et al 2011). SADD can be complex to interpret and better formatting and presentation are needed to improve take up for programming decisions (Mazurana et al 2011). Where SADD is collected there are reports of inconsistent collection (FCDO 2018, Mazurana et al 2011), inconsistent data management (UNDRR 2021), and inconsistent analysis and use (ACAPS 2022, Mazurana et al 2011). There are also challenges associated with data sharing, with a lack of coordination and data quality concerns (UNDRR 2021). Data collected locally are also sometimes not shared or aggregated at a national level in a way that looses the SADD which was collected (UNDRR 2021)
It is commonly argued that “paying attention to gender issues may not be timely or practical on the ground”, i.e. the so called “tyranny of the urgent”. Evidence shows though, that considering the differences in needs according to sex and age is crucial for effective relief and lifesaving assistance. It will inform needs assessments and engage and empower beneficiaries.”
SIDA 2015
There is little dispute that there is value in accounting for gender and age during data collection, analysis and subsequent programming, yet still much potential to be expanded on in terms of putting regular collection, analysis and use of SADD and gender analysis into practice in a way that positively impacts programming.
Demonstrating and training on the benefits of SADD look to be key to ensuring effective adoption and use into the future.
CAGIR (2013) summarise some of the key considerations for gender analysis as:
collect info about men and women
collect info from men and women
make data collection context specific
budget for additional cost of collecting SADD
work with a gender expert early in the process to refine questions and methods
ensure confidentiality especially around sensitive topics
