Rethinking gender sensitivity in governance for equality in Uganda

"Women of Uganda…you are at the centre of production but at the periphery of benefit”. Hon. Miria Matembe[1].

Last year on 29 August, the Independent magazine ran a cover story about top guns per region in Uganda. This was a mini survey of 425 top government appointments. The survey was to determine the level of ethnic balance in government institutions in Uganda. One of the key findings was that there is high level of sectarianism in Uganda. The other finding raises questions about gender equality in governance, whereas the other issue was a regional disparity in terms of numbers and positions of influence. Out of the 25 influential positions in Uganda, northern Uganda occupied five (20 per cent), eastern Uganda six (24 per cent), central Uganda and western Uganda seven positions each (28 per cent each). Disaggregating these top positions by gender indicates that women are barely represented at only 36 per cent. Technically, politically as well as economically the survey positions central and western Uganda at a better height of influence on decision making and the management of Uganda. From a conflict lens, imbalanced economic growth and disparities in the distribution of benefits can increase tensions, and this has the potential of disturbing established patterns of production, peace and security. This is why it becomes imperative to establish gender sensitive governance in Uganda in order to address inequalities.

HISTORICAL NARRATIONS OF REGIONAL INEQUALITY IN UGANDA

For decades, socio-political and economic comparisons in Uganda have taken historical and regional dynamics indicating a wide gap of divide between the north and the south. Recent cabinet positions indicate that western Uganda takes a lion’s share of the 77 ministerial positions, western region takes 32, eastern 21, central 14 and northern 10 ministerial positions [2]. The north – south fault line is a product of deliberate division of Uganda with a long historical grounding in British colonialism[3] and the divide continues to date. History indicates that Uganda was divided into productive (south) and non-productive (northern) zones by the British engineering a historical conflict fault line in Uganda[4]. To date the north –south divide remains a strong basis for argument when explaining the gaps in positions of influence in Uganda and can be used to explain why northern Uganda is poor as well! It’s a hard question to tell. But herein, I share with you some basic facts about northern Uganda from a report prepared in November, 2014 by Oxford, Economics for the UK Department for International Development and the office of the prime minister (Uganda). The report highlights that 44 per cent of people in northern Uganda currently live below the poverty line, as compared to 20 per cent nationally. Although the north accounts for almost a quarter of Uganda’s population and 42 per cent of its land mass, its share of national economic output (GDP) is estimated to be between only 8 per cent and 9 per cent. There is a widening poverty gap, upward pressure on underemployment and unemployment. Though these are general statistics, when disaggregated according to gender, it indicates that women are more affected than men, making gender a number one poverty and governance issue[5].

QUESTIONING GENDER AND GOVERNANCE

The above narrations and statistics point to matters of concern, but of particular interest to me is the question of gender and governance. Very often defining governance is associated with processes and systems that dictate how decisions are made and implemented; and the relationship between the ruler and the ruled. Also, when talking about governance, a lot of references are made on accountability, transparency, participation, responsiveness and inclusiveness as means of social and economic transformation. According to the World Bank, good governance is the manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s economic and social resources for development. The World Bank further points to three distinct aspects of governance: the form of political regime; the process by which authority is exercised in the management of a country’s economic and social resources for development and the capacity of the government to design, formulate and implement policies and discharge functions[6]. However, these facets of governance have barely translated and contributed to sustainable gender equality in most African societies, and post conflict states due to poor decision making and mismanagement of resources for development. A case in point being the mismanagement and the corruption scandals that affected the recovery of post war northern Uganda[7].

On the other hand, there is a strong nuance that governance cannot be effective unless it is gender sensitive in decision making and policy implementation. This thinking is based on the ideals that all gender play a strong role in the development of their communities. To date there are a million more women than men in Uganda. The Uganda’s population census report of 2014 indicates that there are 17.9 million women and 16.9 million men. Looking, at this statistic and figures, one might suggest that women are equal or almost equal to men in Uganda. However, this does not translate to gender equality or equal representation due to a number of reasons, to mention but a few: poverty, illiteracy and limited spaces for expression. It was quite easy in northern Uganda for the voices of women to be heard during the encampment days, simply because civil society organizations and other agencies created structures that ensured that women were represented. Most internally displaced people’s (IDPs) camps had welfare and various committees represented by women; some women took positions of leadership in these structures[8]. Others became head of families because they lost their spouses. Today, the managerial and structural arrangement that provided spaces for women leadership are barely functional or non- existent and have been replaced by groups, so called women groups exclusive of young girls and at times men.

Most women’s groups in northern Uganda have become financial associations that do not to a larger extent advance the needs and concerns of women and girls; rather they are exploited for political gains. On the other side, there are a number of civil society organizations working on gender related issues in post conflict northern Uganda that have tried to push for “women agenda”. A number of these organizations largely focus on livelihood support, and girl child education or welfare. For that reason, the categorization of responses on gender issues has made it intricate to holistically respond and address gender challenges. This, to a certain extent makes the push for actions and institutionalization of gender sensitive governance and advocacy for social justice difficult not only in northern Uganda, but in Uganda as a whole.

THE CRITICAL SHIFT IN GENDER RELATIONS IN NORTHERN UGANDA

It should be noted that gender relations in northern Uganda have dramatically changed during and after the violent Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) war. This has come with a change in gender roles, which doesn’t translate to gender equality in that it is a force of circumstance where some women/men have become either politically or financially empowered. Implying that, it is not about a well-established governance structure but rather individuals struggling to attain certain status. Notable is that women now occupy some prominent positions at various levels of government and are represented in many civil society organizations in Uganda, while in some communities men are struggling to redefine their roles in the society after the conflict. In some communities, there is growing tension between men and women within families over access and control of land and other resources. Whereas in some communities in northern Uganda, it was reported that the rise of women’s prominence in the public sphere has generated tensions amongst families and communities, it is warned that if these tensions are not managed, they are likely to translate into domestic violence[9]. This indicates that gender relations are never static and that the redefinition of roles is unavoidable. It is also worth noting that gender relations are characterized by unequal access to distribution of power[10]. Meaning that, this kind of structuring reinforces inequality and prevents the redistribution of power and authority between men and women. This systematic conditioning justifies and confirms that it is rather difficult to reach gender equality if good governance is not treated as central in the management of state affairs.

ENGENDERING DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS

For a period of time, many development interventions and conflict analysis carried out have been gender blind. In northern Uganda, the LRA war was a gendered phenomenon that affected men and women differently. As such, this calls for the need to be gender sensitive in the implementation of activities in order to address the different needs of men and women affected by conflict[11]. Therefore, the new line of thinking today is to pay attention to the gendered differences so that relevant problems and opportunities can be identified. Many attempts have been made by the Government of Uganda to promote women inclusion and participation, though this is less of an affirmative action, the thinking behind it is that it can translate into and contribute towards gender equality. According to the Peace Recovery Development Plan (PRDP 2) grant guidelines for local governments (2012), local governments are required to exercise conflict – sensitive planning by conducting and updating their conflict analysis to inform all their planning decisions and interventions. The grants guideline approach by far embraces gender mainstreaming as a means to realize gender equality. Importantly, the ultimate goal of the guideline is to ensure that gender equality is realized. This was done through directives and it pointed out that women should at least form 30 per cent of beneficiaries in PRDP[12].

Therefore, it is imperative to appreciate and understand the importance of gender sensitivity in governance in post conflict societies such as northern Uganda. For women not to be socially, politically, and economically excluded, gender dynamics must also be treated with appropriateness in any recovery and development programme. In some cases women have been excluded from decision making, yet their involvement makes success more likely in the implementation of policies in a gender sensitive manner and in advocacy for the needs of women and girls, thus translating to gender equality.

Conclusively, in todays post-conflict northern Uganda many women and elderly persons are being excluded politically due to a number of known reasons. Their voices cannot be heard at many forums. It is therefore important, to encourage the promotion of gender equity as a guiding and practicing principle in order to ensure that women and men have equal access not only to resources but also to positions of authority where decisions are made. This, if treated as a broader socio-economic and political goal, will enable women and men to have the same life choices and rights as well as opportunities in Uganda. It is also necessary to analyze governance and processes of resource allocations, decision making and participation in a gender sensitive perspective. The critical thinking here is that this will contribute towards addressing persistent gender inequality. Also, to reach a recognizable target for gender equality, the government of Uganda and other stakeholders must reframe governance goals through a gender lens and draw close attention to inclusiveness, that is to say, gendering inclusiveness by avoiding the risk of exclusion.

* Otim Denis Barnabas holds an MA in Peace and Governance with special interest in Gender Sensitive Governance, Transitional Justice, Conflict Analysis and Early Warnings, Research and Advocacy.

END NOTES

[1] C. Mark Blackden (2004); Out of Control: Gender and Poverty in Uganda, A Strategic Country Gender Assessment, Discussion Paper – Draft.
[2] How regions shared Cabinet positions, Daily Monitor, March 3rd 2015. Pg.1.
[3] Solomon Bareebe Rukuuka; Uganda’s Ethnic Revolution. Available from: http://tinyurl.com/ou8zv7w , accessed on 3rd March, 2015.
[4] Refugee Law Project National Reconciliation and Transitional Justice Audit, focus group discussion in Arua district, Uganda, 2nd – 8th October, 2011.
[5] C. Mark Blackden, (2004). Out of Control: Gender and Poverty in Uganda, A Strategic Country Gender Assessment, Discussion Paper – Draft.
[6] International Fund for Agricultural Development, (1999). Good Governance: An Overview.
[7] Advisory Consortium on Conflict Sensitivity, (2014). Are we there yet? Brainstorming the successor programme to Peace Recovery Development Plan (PRDP2) for post conflict northern Uganda.
[8] Department of Women and Gender Studies and Faculty of Arts, Peace and Conflict program, Makerere University, (2005). Gender Dimensions of Conflict: Strategies for Sustainable Peace.
[9] Advisory Consortium on Conflict Sensitivity (2013), Northern Uganda Conflict Analysis.
[10] El.Jack, Amani, (2003). Gender and Armed Conflict, Cutting Edge Pack, overview report, BRIDGE – Institute of Development Studies.
[11] SIDA, (2004). How to conduct a Conflict Analysis, Department for Cooperation with NGO’s, Humanitarian Assistance and Conflict Management.
[12] Peace Recovery Development Plan, (2012). Grant Guidelines for Local Governments, Office of the Prime Minister – Uganda.

REFERENCES

Advisory Consortium on Conflict Sensitivity (2013), Northern Uganda Conflict Analysis.

Advisory Consortium on Conflict Sensitivity, (2014). Are we there yet? Brainstorming the successor programme to Peace Recovery Development Plan (PRDP2) for post conflict northern Uganda.

C. Mark Blackden (2004); Out of Control: Gender and Poverty in Uganda, A Strategic Country Gender Assessment, Discussion Paper – Draft.

Department of Women and Gender Studies and Faculty of Arts, Peace and Conflict program, Makerere University, (2005). Gender Dimensions of Conflict: Strategies for Sustainable Peace.
El.Jack, Amani, (2003). Gender and Armed Conflict. Cutting Edge Pack, overview report, BRIDGE – Institute of Development Studies.

How regions shared Cabinet positions, Daily Monitor, March 3rd 2015. Pg.1.

International Fund for Agricultural Development, (1999). Good Governance: An Overview.

Peace Recovery Development Plan, (2012). Grant Guidelines for Local Governments, Office of the Prime Minister – Uganda.

Refugee Law Project National Reconciliation and Transitional Justice Audit, focus group discussion in Arua district, Uganda, 2nd – 8th October, 2011.

SIDA, (2004). How to conduct a Conflict Analysis: Department for Cooperation with NGO’s, Humanitarian Assistance and Conflict Management.

Solomon Bareebe Rukuuka; Uganda’s Ethnic Revolution. Available from: http://tinyurl.com/ou8zv7w, accessed on 3rd March, 2015.

* THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR/S AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM
* BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS
* Please do not take Pambazuka for granted! Become a Friend of Pambazuka and make a donation NOW to help keep Pambazuka FREE and INDEPENDENT!
* Please send comments to editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org or comment online at Pambazuka News.