A comment on a recent webinar inspired this post since it sparked an interesting thread on the differences between gender and feminism as well.

So, how are feminist approaches and gender-transformative approaches related, and how are they different? How do they complement each other?

It’s essential to grasp the nuances between these two approaches. While both are committed to addressing systemic inequities, they diverge in philosophy, methods, and their ultimate goals. Organisations and PMEL practitioners need to understand the differences and which methods to use in which context since they will shed light on different issues in a programme evaluation.

Feminist Evaluation

This is grounded in different feminist theories that critique traditional power structures marginalising women and other disadvantaged groups. If done interesctionally, this will examine structures affecting all marginalised groups.

It’s important to consider which feminism is being applied, since there are dozens, each with their own preferences and approaches. Some for example, adopt a binary approach to gender, therefore see feminism as solely targeting women and girls.  

This varies massively depending on how each person defines feminism. [In a future post, I’ll discuss some different types of ‘feminisms’ I’ve observed].

This approach integrates the principles of gender equality and women’s empowerment into the evaluation process, making these elements both the means and the ends of the evaluation. When done well, feminist evaluation challenges the traditional power dynamics inherent in evaluative practices, prioritises women’s voices, prioritises the voices of marginalised groups including LGBTQIA+ people, and seeks to address their experiences and needs in the evaluation content.

Another key characteristic is its emphasis on participatory methods. It actively involves different people, centring those who are the focus of the project, throughout the evaluative process. This grounds the evaluation in their perspective and thereby promotes empowerment at the community level.

The data is primarily qualitative, again in an effort to step away from traditional patriarchal preference for quantitative data. The data gathered can also look outside the scope of the current programme to capture the complex realities of participants’ lives, and typically also involves collecting and then writing stories of change.

Gender-Transformative Evaluation

Gender-transformative evaluation, on the other hand, explicitly aims to transform the gender norms, behaviours, and systems that perpetuate gender inequality, inequity, and discrimination. This approach does not just assess power imbalances or how well our work addresses them. It actively seeks to encourage positive change in the gender relations central to the problem being addressed.

It also takes a very broad definition of gender, and in some cases can be more inclusive than a feminist approach. A gender-based approach by default looks at gender-marginalised groups and their relationships with and access to power. It also examines gender within power holders, and can help to unpack class dynamics within marginalised gender groups.

Its emphasis on transformation also opens it up to suggesting new pathways and transforming existing processes. Sometimes, a feminist evaluation can point to the gaps and take actions to fill them without necessarily taking the next step towards suggesting alternatives or advocating for change.

Gender-transformative approaches are also designed to question and alter the root causes of disparities. This involves looking at societal norms, legal and economic structures, and cultural expectations that define and constrain different genders’ roles and rights. By promoting changes that enhance equity, such approaches aim for systemic change.

How they’re Related

While feminist evaluation can certainly be transformative, its primary aim is to ensure that projects are carried out through a feminist lens that highlights issues of power and inequity. It’s about integrating an awareness of gender dynamics throughout the evaluation process to better understand and highlight diverse women and their diverse experiences and perspectives.

In contrast, gender-transformative evaluations have a more focused goal: to catalyse change in gender norms and inequities as a direct outcome of the project or evaluation. This type of approach is more prescriptive about the need for change in the specific aspects of gender relations it scrutinises.

How they’re Different

Methodologically, feminist evaluation may employ various tools and frameworks that emphasise qualitative over quantitative methods, reflecting its roots in feminist theory, which values experiential knowledge and subjective realities.

Gender-transformative evaluation, while also potentially utilising a range of methodologies, strongly emphasises interventions specifically designed to alter gender relations and norms. It therefore often incorporates qualitative and quantitative measures to track changes over time in these specific areas.

How they Complement Each Other

Choosing between these two approaches—or cherry-picking elements of both—depends on your programme’s specific objectives and the changes you’re looking for.

While feminist evaluation empowers participants and brings marginalised voices to the forefront, gender-transformative evaluation challenges existing norms to instigate broader societal and cultural change. Each approach has its unique strengths and can be instrumental in driving the agenda for gender equality forward.

Both offer useful frameworks for addressing gender inequities, each with a distinct focus that can guide evaluators in creating more effective, equitable, and transformative change initiatives.