Understanding Gender and Women’s Empowerment in conflict situations: Barbara Kühhas  Women’s Empowerment CARE Austria & Norway  Good practice, Difficulties/dilemmas

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Women’s Empowerment in CARE SII – CARE WE Empowerment framework Key elements:  Agency individual  Structure society  Relationship: power relations

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Women’s Empowerment & conflict in CARE Women in conflict CARE´s work  Examine crisis  Human rights & human security - EMERGENCY and DEVELOPMENT  poverty reduction & gender equality  Women affected differently  gender sterotypes  Right to participate (CEDAW, WPS UNSCRs 1325, 1820, 188 & 1889,…)

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Key Lesson of the SII on Gender and Conflict  Confidence  Gender & conflict sensitive  Challenge status quo: GE&WE  Prioritize communities  Support psycho-social well-being  Strengthen relationships and reconciliation  Advocate for broader change

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved.  Program with holistic approach; builds on SII  Integrated in countries Program approach CÖ WE hypothesis (TOC): Women‘s Empowerment in Practise: The CÖ Framework Agreement Economic Security + psychosocial wellbeing + participation in decision making (1325) = leads to Women´s Empowerment in post conflict Program : Claiming Rights – Promoting Peace. Women´s Empowerment in conflict affected areas. (Burundi, Uganda, Nepal) Phase 1: (3 million Euro) Phase 2: (3 milllion Euro)

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved.  Economic Empowerment – VSLA/Reflect Methodology strengthening of (family) economy Women gain acess to resources & household decision-making Women‘s Empowerment in Practise: The CÖ Framework Agreement  Psychosocial Support case management, group activities, active integration of marginalized. healing and reconciliation  Training on Women‘s rights get organized against VAW Take part in peace + reconciliation Defend their rights in reconstruction + nation building  Learning, national and international networking & Advocacy

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Leads to change Solidarity Groups GBV significantly reduced Men changed Women public Political positions Impact – TOC validated SG approach Inclusion PS conflict Policy changes reached Cultural norms long term

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. Possible Challenges PB and WE /GE  Komplex  Gender concepts  Staff – corporate identity  Political will  Programatic coherence  CIM coordination 1) Familiar with terminology, trainings? 2) CI Gender Policy – work? 3) Political will existing? 4) Time for knowledge sharing and learning between PB and WE staff? 5) how to harmonize?

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. MYTHS & EXCUSES PREVENTING WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN PEACE AND SECURITY Myth #1: We are trying to stop the war - what is the evidence that including women can make a difference? Myth #2: We have to be culturally sensitive - this is a “Western” Agenda. Myth #3: It is hard enough getting an agreement - adding women will just rock the boat. Myth #4: We are already working with women.

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. MYTHS & EXCUSES PREVENTING WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN PEACE AND SECURITY Myth #5: We do not have the budget to do more training, add more staff, etc. Myth #6: “The Women” need to organize them-selves and speak with one voice. Myth #7: We cannot find any qualified women. We need to focus on girls’ education first. Myth #8: Not all women are peaceful. Myth #9: Sexual violence is an inevitable conse-quence of irregular warfare and the changed nature of conflicts.

© 2005, CARE USA. All rights reserved. MYTHS & EXCUSES PREVENTING WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN PEACE AND SECURITY Myth #10: We are implementing UNSCR 1325 – we have a NAP. Thanks for your interest!