ABSTRACT
Background: Across the globe, gender disparities still exist with regard to equitable access to resources, participation in decision-making processes, and gender and sexual-based violence. This is particularly true in fragile and conflict-affected settings, where women and girls are affected by both fragility and conflict in unique ways. While women have been acknowledged as key actors in peace processes and post-conflict reconstruction (e.g., through the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 and the Women, Peace and Security Agenda) evidence on the effectiveness of gender-specific and gender-transformative interventions to improve women's empowerment in fragile and conflict-affected states and situations (FCAS) remains understudied. Objectives: The purpose of this review was to synthesize the body of evidence around gender-specific and gender-transformative interventions aimed at improving women's empowerment in fragile and conflict-affected settings with high levels of gender inequality. We also aimed to identify barriers and facilitators that could affect the effectiveness of these interventions and to provide implications for policy, practice and research designs within the field of transitional aid. Methods: We searched for and screened over 100,000 experimental and quasi-experimental studies focused on FCAS at the individual and community levels. We used standard methodological procedures outlined by the Campbell Collaboration for the data collection and analysis, including quantitative and qualitative analyses, and completed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology to assess the certainty around each body of evidence. Results: We identified 104 impact evaluations (75% randomised controlled trials) assessing the effects of 14 different types of interventions in FCAS. About 28% of included studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias (45% among quasi-experimental designs). Interventions supporting women's empowerment and gender equality in FCAS produced positive effects on the outcomes related to the primary focus of the intervention. There are no significant negative effects of any included interventions. However, we observe smaller effects on behavioural outcomes further along the causal chain of empowerment. Qualitative syntheses indicated that gender norms and practices are potential barriers to intervention effectiveness, while working with local powers and institutions can facilitate the uptake and legitimacy of interventions. Conclusions: We observe gaps of rigorous evidence in certain regions (notably MENA and Latin America) and in interventions specifically targeting women as actors of peacebuilding. Gender norms and practices are important elements to consider in programme design and implementation to maximise potential benefits: focusing on empowerment only might not be enough in the absence of targeting the restrictive gender norms and practices that may undermine intervention effectiveness. Lastly, programme designers and implementation should consider explicitly targeting specific empowerment outcomes, promoting social capital and exchange, and tailoring the intervention components to the desired empowerment-related outcomes.
ABSTRACT
This review builds on 3ie's (international initiative for impact evaluation) evidence gap map (EGM) of the impact evaluation and systematic review (SR) evidence base of interventions aiming to promote peaceful and inclusive societies in fragile contexts. The EGM identified a cluster of studies evaluating gender equality-focused behaviour change communication programmes and raised interest in investigating the evidence base for understanding the role of women more broadly as agents of change in developing peaceful and inclusive societies. Building on the cluster of evidence identified in the EGM, our review will increase generalisability of findings from single studies and focus on interventions across a broad range of geographical locations, settings and populations, types of implementations and outcomes. We will also address (when possible) the identified gaps in literature regarding metaanalysis in conflict-affected contexts. As such, we propose the following objectives: (1) The primary objective of this review is to identify, assess and synthesise evidence on the effect of gender specific and gender transformative interventions within the context of the four pillars of United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 on women's empowerment and gender equality in Fragile and Conflict Affected States/Situations (FCAS). The SR will facilitate the use of evidence in informing policy and practice decisions within the field of transition aid, particularly as it relates to gender focused programming. (2) Our second objective is to assess how these interventions contribute to inclusive and sustainable peace in conflict affected situations. We will compare the effectiveness of these different types of interventions through the lenses of their ecological level, types of impact on women's empowerment, local context of gender inequality and conflict. To achieve these objectives we aim to answer the following questions: (1) What are the impacts of gender transformative and specific interventions on women's empowerment and gender equality in FCAS? (2) What are the effects of these interventions on sustainable peace? (3) To what extent do effects vary by population group, ecological level and types of interventions? (4) What are contextual barriers to and facilitators of intervention effectiveness?
ABSTRACT
Background: How do governance interventions that engage citizens in public service delivery planning, management and oversight impact the quality of and access to services and citizens' quality of life? This systematic review examined high quality evidence from 35 citizen engagement programmes in low- and middle-income countries that promote the engagement of citizens in service delivery through four routes: participation (participatory priority setting); inclusion of marginalised groups; transparency (information on rights and public service performance), and/or citizen efforts to ensure public service accountability (citizen feedback and monitoring); collectively, PITA mechanisms. We collected quantitative and qualitative data from the included studies and used statistical meta-analysis and realist-informed framework synthesis to analyse the findings. Results: The findings suggest that interventions promoting citizen engagement by improving direct engagement between service users and service providers, are often effective in stimulating active citizen engagement in service delivery and realising improvements in access to services and quality of service provision, particularly for services that involve direct interaction between citizens and providers. However, in the absence of complementary interventions to address bottlenecks around service provider supply chains and service use, citizen engagement interventions alone may not improve key wellbeing outcomes for target communities or state-society relations. In addition, interventions promoting citizen engagement by increasing citizen pressures on politicians to hold providers to account, are not usually able to influence service delivery. Conclusions: The citizen engagement interventions studied were more likely to be successful: (1) where the programme targeted a service that citizens access directly from front-line staff, such as healthcare, as opposed to services accessed independently of service provider staff, such as roads; (2) where implementers were able to generate active support and buy-in for the intervention from both citizens and front-line public service staff and officials; and (3) where the implementation approach drew on and/or stimulated local capacity for collective action. From a research perspective, the review found few studies that investigated the impact of these interventions on women or other vulnerable groups within communities, and that rigorous impact evaluations often lack adequately transparent reporting, particularly of information on what interventions actually did and how conditions compared to those in comparison communities.
