There is universal acceptance that humanitarian assistance must meet the distinct needs of women, girls, boys and men to generate equitable, positive and sustainable outcomes. These are highlighted in the evaluations of humanitarian effectiveness,recent reports[1] of the UN Secretary‐General and the Security Council resolutions. Gender analysis and disaggregation of data by sex and age are critical elements of strategic planning informing humanitarian appealsprocesses (including flash appeals and strategic response plans)[2]. The IASC Gender Marker was launched by the Sub‐working Groups on Gender to make visible the gender analysis work of a cluster at the design stage of a project to identify the gaps and address the needs and realities of women, girls, men and boys. The gender marker[3] is a tool that codes humanitarian projects on a 0‐2 scale and has been designed to do much more than measure gender‐related funding. The real impact of the marker is in improving the quality of humanitarian work.

Gender Task Force in Pakistan

In Pakistan Gender Task Force (GTF) co led by UNIFEM and UNFPA, isreporting to the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) and functions as an overarching institutional mechanism that has a policy and advocacy (interagency and multi-sectoral) role for gender mainstreaming into the clusters. It identifies specific gender equality issues related to humanitarian action, and response.

The IASC Gender Marker was piloted in 2009 in four countries that included Pakistan and presently considered as an entry point and a driver by the GTF for drawing attention to principles of participation and sustainability and integrate gender specific perspective into the humanitarian response.

The effort was not possible without the remote assistance and the mentoring support extended by the International Gender CapacityAdvisors.Moreover, the readiness of GTF members (and their agencies) to committime and support from UNIFEM proramme team cannot go unacknowledged. The process from approval to the actual review of projects led to creation of gender related synergies and alliances and not only that but outlined some pointers for future gender mainstreaming efforts.

GTF and Floods Emergency

Marker Scores / # of Projects / % of Projects
2b / 96 / 20%
2a / 99 / 21%
1 / 219 / 46%
0 / 65 / 14%

The GTF was very active in the revision of the Pakistan Floods Emergency Response Plan (FERP). The GTF participated actively in cluster coordination meetings, advised clusters on integrating specific gender issues in cluster response plans and projects, and shared a gender marker toolkit. Guidelines for the gender marker focal points were prepared in addition to outlining the level of effort required from them. The GTF reviewed all cluster vetted projects and applied a gender score to each of these projects based on the following criteria: 1) reflection of sex, age and vulnerability disaggregated data; 2) connectivity between gender issues in outlined needs, planned activities and anticipated outcomes; 3) projects nurturing better relationships, greater participation of women in decision making or reflecting more two way communication between women and men.

Gender Scan

Over 488 FERP projects were reviewed and assigned a gender code:[4]

The projects with a significant potential to contribute to gender equality has increased i.e. from 31% (Pakistan Humanitarian Response Plan 2010) to 41% in FERP reflecting progress and showing mainstreaming gender equality in the appeals process has reaped gains. However, nearly 60% of FERP projects still fall under Code 0 (65 projects) or Code 1 (219 projects), making no or limited contribution to equality.

21% of FERP projects (99) now address gender equality issues in a significant way (“mainstream gender”), and an additional 20% (96 projects) are specifically focused on gender equality by addressing the needs of a particular group suffering discrimination or target actions to promote their well being.

Clusters Progress

Overall, 41% of all project proposals scored 2a or 2b which indicates that they aim to advance or contribute significantly to gender equality[5]. The percentage of projects in each cluster which falls under these two categories ranges from 25% (shelter and NFI) to 89% (Nutrition). Food, WASH, and Education mainstream gender in less than 40% of their project proposals, while Community Restoration, Health, Protection, CCCM and Agriculture all mainstream gender in 40 to 60% of their project proposals.

Key Lessons

OCHA Pakistan's experience withGender Markers has yielded some important lessonsand results for GTF’s future response to emergencies in Pakistan. The GTF members reported that presence of focal person and availability of tip sheets contributed in not only improving the project design but also have the potential to support addressing of gender issues in implementation.

The experience of Gender Marker’s Focal Points (GM FPs) for promoting gender equality in cluster in the appeal process was not similarand depended upon the gender related capacities and awareness levels of its members.Some comments for each cluster are presented recognizing that actions for improvements will require greater assessment. In the case of agriculture a good number of proposals scored well.The GM FP shared that bifurcation of the number of beneficiary households seemed impossible because of the non-availability of authentic data. The suggestion from the GM FP to include, ‘analysis of the gender roles in agriculture” in needs assessment created a better understanding that how design of project can be improved by simply knowing who does what and who will benefit more?

In relation to health it was shared that “the Maternal Newborn and Child Health projects included focus on women and children but gender perspective in projects related to other diseases and health strengthening systems was missing”. Comments on shelter and telecommunication projects refer to the “need of including more discussion on gender dimensions”. Identifying how benefits from these services are linked to safety or health needs of all and especially of women and girls.

There was no gender analysis of needs nor any plans reflected in nearly two thirds of the WASH proposals. Almost half of the proposal in protection mentioned the distinct needs or a targeted group; activities were designed accordingly with links to outcomes. While projects in community restoration reflect ‘focus on needs of women and women headed households’ there is more need to indicate greater gender related connectivity between all three elements (needs, activities and outcomes) of the projects. In somequantitative indicators disaggregated by sex were missing and in many cases women and girls were only mentioned in the beneficiary column andnot in the activities and outcomes.

Proposals related to food security did not prominently reflect discussion on links between food security and distinct needs and life situations of women, men, girls and boys. In education projects some projects presented disaggregated beneficiary information and discussion on needs of the targeted group but not all followed the pattern.

Some of the lessons drawn on the basis of involvement of GTF in the appeal process are:

  • Presence of more than one gender marker focal point made a difference.
  • The proactive and shared engagement of GTF in different stages (not limited to selection of projects) of the appeal process was effective.
  • Availability of gender marker tip sheets for each sector served as a ready reference for focal points to work in clusters.
  • The agreement on criteria (given above) by the GTF members allowed working from the same page.
  • Presentations made in HCT and ICCM on gender markers mustered support for GTF and communicated importance of its role and seriousness attached by HCT to gender equality considerations.
  • A gender session for the strategic advisory group (responsible for vetting) is critical.
  • Gender equality related advocacy require links with significant processes like appeals and response plans.

Conclusion and Way Forward

Although good progress appears to have been made in integrating and mainstreaming gender equality into FERP projects, cluster partners still need to make gender relevant to cluster actvitiess and the GTF must deepen its engagement with non-traditional clusters where more projects reflect no visible or limited potential to contribute to gender equality (for details see annex I). By demonstrating the differential impact of assistance and support on women, boys, girls and men and the vulnerable, these objectives are possible to achieve.

The GM tool kit was widely disseminated across clusters along with the short briefings and participation of GTF members in cluster meetings. However, the need for continuing gender related sessions forimproving gender awareness (knowledge) at various levels remains.Therefore, pointing out the need to exploremeans of improving capacities for gender specific planning, implementation,monitoring and evaluation of programs and related projects as well as influencingthe policy making processes. To this end a capacity building approach will be useful. Gender related capacity development is possible by promoting the use and adaption of gender marker tool. These efforts will have a broader scope not limited to conceptual clarity but gender skills that are relevant to the work of GTF focal points/members in respective agencies.

Recommendations for Project Revisions

When revising projects scored 0 or 1 it may be useful to include in addition to age and sex disaggregated data, the discussion about how the needs of men differ from women (girls from boys) and if so, how or why? Also highlight responsibilities of men, women, girls and boys and their different roles. The activities can be planned acknowledging these differences and potential risks for showing a clear link between needs and actions in a project. In outcomes reflection of in what different ways men compared to women (or boys compared to girls) will benefit from this project intervention is important.

There is recognition that organizations (agencies, INGOs, NGOs) do not have similar capacities for advancing gender equality as a goal and implementation of specific interventions. For promoting the methodology of the gender markers it is critical to build alliances anddevelop a constructive engagement strategy within agencies and partners.Importantly gender marker (tip sheets) is a relevant knowledge product for integrating gender dimensions in humanitarian operations. Adaptation to the context and translation of it in Urdu will enhance its use and relevance.

The experience of gender marker focal points in getting clusters on board for the gender markers application has been varied despite the factthat these were presented to the HCT in detail in April 2010. The flood emergency was considered as an opportunity and the discussions and feedback from the gender marker focal points establishedthe need for organizing more training.

There will be an opportunity for clustersto strengthen proposals, especially in needs assessment,and aconscious attention to improve provisions forcollecting data and information disaggregated by sex and agein the projects is required.Such an analysis can guide activities and revealwhich population groups will benefit most. Also for building commitment and understanding of issues, presence of sex-disaggregated data is a form of hard evidencethat caninfluence and capture the attention of decision makers and policy makers on the differential needs of groups, particularly women and girls. Additionally, it providesa set of alternatives on implementation. In this regard the IASC handbook on gender is an available resource guiding how to capture the gender dimension of needs and response.

Transforming the mainstream is a process that takes time and is context-specific. Humanitarian crises such as the 2005 earthquake, the IDP crisis 2008 or the current floods create windows of opportunities for innovation and paradigm shifts. These shifts however, must occur not only at the institutional or organizational level, but also at the individual level. The introduction and application of gender maker for FERP generated interest externally it prompted involvement and engagement with management of various agencies/organizations represented in GTF. Inwardly the feedback and reflection on the last day allowed exchange between the GTF members. It was an opportunity to individually uncover and rethink one’s own outlook to minimize the possibility of reproducing behaviors prevalent in the dominant global culture.

The Gender Marking Exercise has added to GTF’s strategic visibility, influence and technical value addition. It is clear that mainstreaming gender equality into appeals processescan reap the greatest gains and has the potential for a catalytic influence on other humanitarian appeals and funding mechanisms.

Annex - I

Cluster Wise

Gender Scores

Score / Description
2b / Gender equality is the principal purpose of project (targeted actions, improved gender relations)
2a / Project has the potential to contribute significantly to gender equality
1 / Project has the potential to contribute in some limited way to gender equality
0 / No visible potential to contribute to gender equality

Annex - II

Gender Marker Focal Points September 29, 2010

Name / Organization / Email / Phone
Rubina Khilji / CIDA / / 03005852193
Nayab Azizi / UNFPA / / 03009877365
Samia Hashim / UNAIDS / / 03008526675
Zahid Khattak / UN HABITAT / / 03455900156
Saba Hanif / UN HABITAT / / 03425449750
Abia Akram / HI / / 03018503533
Rubina Ali / NCA / / 03458551287
Salma Khalid / NRSP / / 03215578182
Abida Begum / FAO / / 03458544126
Sana Khan / Internews / / 03325583426
Azra Husain / WASFD / / 03149896439
Masooma Butt / WHO / / 03008561935
Salman Asif / UNRC / / 03335610912
Alya Nguyen / UNICEF / / 03455577090
Muqdasa Mehreen / UNICEF / / 03548421972
Saghir Bukhari / UNIFEM / / 03008565674
Dr Farhat Sheikh / ERRA /
Shmyalla Jawad / Plan International / 03325103122
Fahmida Iqbal / UNIFEM / / 03008561278
Uzma Quaraish / UNIFEM / / 0300-8551242
Elisbith Kocken / UNIFEM / / 03055187959

1

[1]Call for tracking of gender‐related allocations

[2] Consolidated Appeal Guidelines, 2009,

[3]The piloting, followed by field consultations in five countries in early 2010, has resulted in the content of the Gender Marker Tool Kit1: a family of cluster‐specific ‘how to’ tools for implementing the marker.

[4] Code 0: Project does not address or contribute to gender equality

Code 1: Project will likely make insignificant contributions gender equality

Code 2a: Project is designed to contribute significantly to gender equality

Code 2b: Principle purpose of project is to advance gender equality

[5] Excludes coordination and logistics and emergency telecommunications