Presentation on

Nepal Gender and Social Exclusion Assessment (GSEA)

Getting Social Exclusion on the Policy Radar Screen

Macro Social Analysis Conference

May 16-19

Today’s Presentation on the Today’s Presentation on the Gender and Social Exclusion Gender and Social Exclusion Assessment:Assessment:

• Less on the “what” of the GSEA – which is summarized in handout.

• More on the “how” – 9 elements of the GSEA policy process.

• But first a few quick slides on the context.

Corporate Context of GSEA Corporate Context of GSEA ProcessProcess::• Collaborative effort between DFID

and World Bank – corporate support for collaboration.

• CAP and CAS developed in tandem – inclusion agenda embedded in both.

• Strong commitment from WB Country Director who had already forged small but strong group of champions in government for home grown economic reform.

Politicial Context of GSEA ProcessPoliticial Context of GSEA Process::

• Small Country – donor dependent.

• Fledgling democracy – heavy overhang of feudal institutions.

• Maoist insurgency – recruiting the excluded.

• Political uncertainty as king uses insurgency as an excuse to take more and more power and sideline democracy.

Current Political Context: April Current Political Context: April 2006 People’s Movement2006 People’s Movement

• More sophisticated understanding of “democracy”

• Democracy now qualified as:– “TOTAL

DEMOCRACY”– “INCLUSIVE

DEMOCRACY”

Elements of the GSEA Policy Elements of the GSEA Policy ProcessProcess

1. Framing the issue: “rules of the game”2. Influencing the PRSP3. Establishing the link between poverty &

exclusion: “Data Stories”4. What you measure is what you get:

focus on M&E5. Combining policy research and

operations --Using a range of instruments

6. Building alliances7. Understanding the “implementation

gap”8. Opportunism, flexibility and patience.

1.1 Framing the Issue1.1 Framing the Issue– GSEA focuses on institutions as the

“rules of the game”.

– Caste, ethnic identity and gender presented as three interlocking social institutions that bias the rules against certain social groups and therefore need to be “reformed”.

– Special focus on informal institutions which covers the cultural norms, behaviors and values usually left out of the analysis.

1.2 Social Exclusion as an 1.2 Social Exclusion as an outcome of the prevailing “rules outcome of the prevailing “rules

of the game”.of the game”. – Hindu caste system and concepts of

ritual impurity used to justify low status of women, Dalits and IPs or Janajatis.

– No integrated analysis of impact of Nepal’s institutional framework and its past public policy choices on excluded groups.

– Almost no analysis of links between links between social exclusion and poverty.social exclusion and poverty.

2. Influencing the PRSP2. Influencing the PRSP

• Despite lack of good data, in late 2002, we put together a short 20 page background note on Social Exclusion for the National Planning Commission as we were just beginning the research.

• Eurekha! NPC adopted the note and made Social Inclusion the 4th Pillar of the PRSP!

3.3. Establishing the link between Establishing the link between exclusion and poverty: “Data exclusion and poverty: “Data Stories”Stories”• Based on re-analysis of Census, and

other national level household surveys.

• Also Primary Data collection and Analysis on exclusion – the “3rd dimension of poverty:

• “Measuring Empowerment and Social Inclusion” Study

Data Story # 3.1Data Story # 3.1:: Caste/Ethnic Caste/Ethnic Disparities in Poverty IncidenceDisparities in Poverty Incidence

• Nepal Average: 31%

• Hill Dalits: 48%• Tarai Dalits:46%• Hill Janajati: 43% • Muslim: 41% • The incidence of

poverty among Dalits as a whole is nearly 50% higher than the Nepal average.

Figure 4.4: Incidence of poverty by caste/ethnicity and

Nepal poverty line (31%), 2004Source: NLSS II, 2004

19.0

11.7

26.5

47.6

45.7

14.2

42.8

33.0

41.4

0 10 20 30 40 50

Hill B/C+

Tarai B/C+

Tarai Middle Castes

Hill Dalit

Tarai Dalit

New ar

Hill Janajatis

Tarai Janajatis

Muslims

Percent

Data Story # 3.2Data Story # 3.2: The : The “Caste “Caste Penalty”Penalty”

• Average per capita consumption for Brahman/Chhetri households is 46% higher than that of Dalit households.

• Even when background variables are controlled, Brahman/Chhetri household per capita consumption is still 15% higher.still 15% higher.

• This unexplained difference (Rs. 4,853 less annual per capita income), we call the “caste penalty”.

Data Story # 3.3: The traditional caste Data Story # 3.3: The traditional caste hierarchy is alive and well in village hierarchy is alive and well in village

NepalNepal

Total Mean CEI Index by Caste/Ethnicity

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

BCN Middle Janajati Dalit All

CE

I In

de

x

Data story # 3.4:Data story # 3.4: Caste is more Caste is more powerful than Gender in powerful than Gender in

determining determining Empowerment/Inclusion levelsEmpowerment/Inclusion levels• Regression analysis showed that

Caste and Gender explain 33% of variation in Composite Empowerment & Inclusion Index– Gender explained 7%– Caste/ethnicity alone explained

26%

Data Story # 3.5Data Story # 3.5: The Good : The Good newsnews

• Caste and gender-based disparities at the local level can be reduced by development interventions that deliver:– Livelihood

empowerment through access to education, income earning and asset accumulation opportunities

– Mobilization empowerment through media exposure and membership in groupsgroups

For example:For example:A Dalit who…

– has three years of schooling (which raises the CEI by +5.7 %) and;

– Is a member of a group (+5.9%)

…would have the same level of empowerment and inclusion as an uneducated Brahman, Chhetri or Newar who is not a member of a group.

4.1 M&E: What you measure is what 4.1 M&E: What you measure is what you get.you get.

HMG/N Poverty Monitoring & Analysis HMG/N Poverty Monitoring & Analysis System (PMAS) set up to monitor the PRSP:System (PMAS) set up to monitor the PRSP:• We pushed for gender, caste and ethnic

disaggregation – to measure progress on the PRSP inclusion pillar.

• We introduced a simplified classification of 103 social groupings used in 2001 Census.

• Now 10 major social groups used by Central Bureau of Statistics in all up-coming national surveys.

4.2 M&E: DFID uses GSEA framework 4.2 M&E: DFID uses GSEA framework to develop Livelihood and Social to develop Livelihood and Social Inclusion (LSI) monitoring in all Inclusion (LSI) monitoring in all projects it supports. projects it supports. Three domains of

change:

1. Improving access to assets and services for the poor and excluded.

2. Increasing the voice and influence of the poor and excluded.

3. Supporting changes in the “rules of the game” that have always favored the elite.

Outcomes: improved livelihood status of poor and excluded men and women.

GSEA Domains of Change

Assets & services

Voice, influence and agency

Outcomes: the extent to which poor and excluded people – as part of representative groups and coalitions - successfully engage, influence and hold accountable the institutions that aff ect them.

Rules of the Game Outcomes: policies and institutions that actively remove barriers and enhance incentives to increase the access of diverse groups to development opportunities.

5. The 5. The processprocess of getting inclusion of getting inclusion into the country program is more into the country program is more important than the ESW “product”.important than the ESW “product”.• The PRSC – affirmative action in civil service

in policy matrix • The Country Assistance Strategies of the

Bank, DFID and other donors such as ADB• SWAps in Health and Education• Projects in WB and DFID• Poverty Assessment• Development Policy Review

Parallel policy research and Parallel policy research and operational work on exclusion over operational work on exclusion over

extended period.extended period.

WB CAS :Insturments in supportof Inclusion Pillar• PRSC – affirmative action

• Community School Support Project• Poverty Alleviation Fund

• Education SWAp• Higher Education• Health SWAp• RWSS II • Development Policy Review• Poverty Assessment• Country Dialogue

DFID CAPInstruments in support of PRSP Inclusion Pillar:• Rural Growth

LFP, all LSI monitoring

• Basic Services Health sector SWAp; Primary Education SWAp; WATSAN

• GoodGovernance ESP, Affirmative Action

• Social InclusionSocial Exclusion Action

Programme (SEAP)

GSEA ESWChapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Conceptual Framework Chapter 3: Socio-cultural and Historical

Foundations of Exclusion in Nepal

Chapter 4: Macro Statistics Chapter 5: Primary data from Rural

NepalChapter 6: An Overview of Public

Discourse and Action on Discrimination

Chapter 7: Discriminatory Laws Chapter 8: Gender DiscriminationChapter 9: Caste DiscriminationChapter 10: Ethnic DiscriminationChapter 11: Access to Health Care Chapter 12: Inclusive EducationChapter 13: Group-based Approaches Chapter 14: Affirmative Action Chapter 15: What we have Learned and

Priorities for Action

• Responding to needs of technocrats/ reformers in government

• Interaction with NGOs, academics, activists and stakeholder groups

• Other donors• Internally in the World Bank and DFID• Importance of a credible team – not

the “usual suspects”

6. Building Alliances6. Building Alliances

7. Understanding the “Implementation 7. Understanding the “Implementation Gap” Gap”

• Not just “weak institutional capacity”• But also a form of elite resistanceelite resistance to

changes in the rules of the game that would reduce their power and challenge their self-identity.

• Requires long term commitment from development partners and taping the comparative advantage of different actors in the process.

8.Opportunism, flexibility and 8.Opportunism, flexibility and patiencepatience!!

• The ninja replaces the planner: “April Revolution” a great opportunity, but who can be sure of the outcome?

• DFID/WB partnership to continue.• New DFID Social Exclusion Action

Program to follow up on GSEA and the inclusion agenda for the next three years

Conclusion:Conclusion:• Successful policy reform requires

institutional change not only in the formal rules, regulations and laws -- but also in informal procedures, norms and practices.

• And for some reforms – like social social inclusion inclusion - successful implementation requires shifts in the taken-for-granted cognitive structures and values ...

• …in other words, cultural cultural change.change.

Conclusion:Conclusion:

•Like any reform, reforms Like any reform, reforms involving these deep involving these deep structural changes cannot be structural changes cannot be “done” by outsiders.“done” by outsiders.

•But it does not hurt for But it does not hurt for outsiders to try to understand outsiders to try to understand the dynamics of the process the dynamics of the process and offer support to local and offer support to local champions!champions!