Management Response

Management regards the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) evaluation of the World Bank's support for gender and development as a serious effort to assess the implementation of the Bank's gender and development work. The evaluation findings reflect work conducted through a mix of desk reviews, a few field reviews, and a project portfolio review in 93 countries, with a special focus on results in a sample of 12 countries.

Emphasis on strengthening the Bank's gender support. The emphasis of the report in strengthening the Bank's gender and development work is especially welcome. We note the evaluation's finding that the Bank made progress in integrating gender issues during the 2002–08 period as compared to the 1990–99 period, but, in agreement with IEG, Bank management recognizes that gender issues are not yet adequately mainstreamed across sectors and Regions, and that new measures need to be adopted to speed up progress. This recognition led to the launch in 2007 of a four-year World Bank Group Gender Action Plan (GAP), which IEG notes has revitalized the gender agenda in the Bank and helped increase gender coverage in economic sectors such as agriculture, rural development, finance, economic policy and infrastructure.

Policy relevance and recommendations for new measures. Bank management agrees with the report's finding that the current policy framework for gender and development is adequate and with IEG's recommendations to strengthen monitoring, the results framework, and management accountability. Management also agrees with the importance of ensuring sufficient budget resources to implement the Gender Strategy and with the recommendation to continue the use of incentive funding to strengthen gender and development work. Although progress has been made on some of these crucial elements, IEG's observations will assist future actions. In addition, drawing on the lessons from the GAP, which uses innovative mechanisms to increase gender coverage in operations in key sectors that are not easily mainstreamed, we propose both to tackle gender capacity building using nontraditional training vehicles and to continue making the "business-case" forcefully for gender equality as smart economics, to help increase client country interest.

Analysis of IEG data. Management is grateful to IEG for granting access to its data, which allowed further unpacking of IEG's ratings and results. This enabled two new and useful findings. First, it revealed encouraging performance in the economic sectors during the last two years of the review period, which saw gender coverage increase in these traditionally less-receptive sectors; for instance, from 58 to 71 percent of projects in agriculture, and from 15 to 18 percent in infrastructure. This finding corroborates the Bank's Annual Monitoring Reports, which show that the overall fall in gender coverage in Bank operations leveled out in fiscal 2006 and has since trended upward—an improvement coinciding with the GAP, which targets these sectors. This trend is encouraging, and although levels are still too low, it may indicate that innovative mechanisms, such as the ones put in place by the GAP, can bring about change in sectors that traditionally have been less receptive to gender mainstreaming. Second, it showed that criteria to measure gender integration need to be adjusted, given the growing complexity of the Bank's portfolio. The aggregate decline found by IEG since fiscal 2006 is largely explained by IEG rating sector-wide institutional reform loans in education low, mainly because they lack individual-level indicators and therefore do not monitor gender-disaggregated impact. Yet these "second-generation" projects, which address sector-wide issues such as curriculum development, teacher training, and education sector salary scales, make up an increasing share of the Bank's education portfolio and target what in many countries may be the largest constraint for girls' education today: schooling quality. Going forward, the analysis of trends in gender mainstreaming needs to take into account both project objectives and portfolio composition.

II. General Comments

Management has comments on the overall policy framework, the results focus of Bank work, and the role of the GAP.

Overall policy framework

Relevance of Operational Policy. Management agrees with IEG on the relevance of the Bank's Operational Policy (OP/BP4.20) on gender to address strategic, country-level gender issues. The policy calls for gender assessment to be discussed in Country Assistance Strategies (CASs). In sectors and thematic areas where the CAS has identified the need for gender-responsive interventions, the Bank's assistance incorporates measures to address this need. Management notes that the policy is flexible on how the gender assessment is to be done. Management agrees with IEG that it is not the case that a specific piece of economic and sector work (ESW) called a Country Gender Assessment (CGA) is required. The gender assessment may be a stand-alone assessment or it may be carried out as part of other Bank economic and sector work, such as poverty assessments, country economic memoranda, public expenditure reviews, development policy reviews, poverty and social impact assessments, or institutional analyses. Alternatively, it may be an assessment that has been carried out by the country or an organization other than the Bank. Going forward, it is important to ensure that CASs are more consistently informed by gender assessment.

The Policy's selective and flexible approach. Management and IEG have discussed and agreed on the appropriateness of the policy's selective approach and the flexible means for undertaking country-level gender diagnostics. This approach goes hand in hand with the movement by all development partners from a fragmented project focus to a more effective and efficient country focus—the aid effectiveness agenda. The Bank's business model calls for a comprehensive assessment of a country's poverty reduction and growth agenda but a selective, prioritized set of activities to support the achievement of the goals of CASs. The gender policy follows that model—calling for periodic analytical work assessing gender issues at the country level that feeds into CASs and selective country programs. It takes into account a long history of IEG findings on the importance of country ownership and working together with other donors based on comparative advantage.

Results focus of Bank's work

Projects and gender—A focus on results. IEG suggests that the gender policy restricts the entry point for gender integration only to sectors mentioned in the CAS. Management notes that the Bank's gender policy framework is wider. Under the current policy framework, project-level entry points are triggered by several factors, which are determined separately for Development Policy Operations, and investment lending operations, notably projects involving safeguards where women's special needs are relevant. This policy framework is consistent with the current strategy. [1]  However and more importantly, the Bank follows a results focus in all operations. Projects outside sectors highlighted in the CAS often mainstream gender concerns when it is a matter of development effectiveness; Bank policy does not require that a gender-informed operation be in a sector highlighted as priority in a CAS.

Gender diagnostics and policy dialogue. IEG's assessment of weak implementation is based on trends in gender integration in investment lending and decreased gender integration into CASs, which it in turn largely attributes to a significant decline in the number of CGAs undertaken. Management concurs with IEG on the need for country-level gender diagnostics and the importance of integrating gender issues into CASs. We recognize that the treatment of gender in CASs is an area that needs improvement and is a focus of management attention (see World Bank 2009c). We consider stand-alone CGAs as just one of many ways to undertake the required country-level gender diagnosis. As noted above, other options, specified in the gender policy, include integrating gender analysis into key ESW or using analysis produced by the country or an organization other than the Bank. Management's self-evaluation shows that the number of ESW with highly satisfactory or satisfactory integration of gender issues has more than doubled in the latter part of the evaluation period, starting in fiscal 2005 (see World Bank 2009d). Seventy-two of 108 active countries had a satisfactory or better gender diagnostics in the 2002–08 period, when counting ESW that according to the policy qualify as full country-level gender diagnostics. Management strongly favors embedding gender assessment in key country diagnostic work and will work with staff to ensure that all gender-informed ESW is properly recognized.

Implementation of the Gender Policy: Analysis of gender integration in investment lending. Management welcomes IEG's efforts to evaluate the progress in policy implementation and acknowledges that measuring progress in gender mainstreaming, by its very definition, is a complex exercise. Management is encouraged by IEG's finding that, as compared to the previous evaluation period (1990–99), there is a significant improvement in the quality, scope, and extent of gender integration in the lending portfolio. We also agree with IEG's assessment based on the current evaluation period (fiscal2002–08) that there is much room for improving gender integration in the Bank's investment lending portfolio.

Specific actions proposed by management

Strengthen the results framework and monitoring system. Management welcomes this recommendation and notes that the Bank has a gender monitoring framework and reports regularly to senior management on progress in the gender strategy. In addition, the GAP has a results framework and reports regularly to the Board. Nevertheless, the monitoring system can and should be strengthened. As part of the GAP transition plan, management will present to the Board during the second quarter of 2010 a strengthened results framework with quantitative targets and accompanying indicators for key sectors and Regions. These targets will be set in a process involving relevant sector boards and Region departments, based on an exercise carried out in 2008 to quantify senior management's commitment to increase gender mainstreaming in the Agriculture and Rural Development portfolio. [2] 

Work under way on strengthening the existing monitoring system for the Gender Policy. Information on the number of project beneficiaries, disaggregated by gender, is now required for all International Development Association–supported investment projects that have an approval date of July 1, 2009, or later. We plan, through the GAP transition plan, to assist Bank task teams in fulfilling this new requirement. In addition, management is reviewing current and proposed Core Sector Indicators to see which ones could be meaningfully disaggregated by gender.

Management agreement on the need to establish clearer accountability for implementing the Gender Policy, particularly at the level of country director and above. Management proposes to strengthen accountability at the senior level through Managing Director–chaired reviews of the Bank's annual monitoring reports on implementing the gender policy by the operational vice presidents. In contrast with past practice, this reporting will include progress in implementing the quantitative targets defined above, giving the exercise teeth. As part of the GAP transition plan, it is likely that funding incentives will play a role, notably with regard to country gender diagnostics in key ESW in targeted countries.

Role of the GAP: "Gender equality as smart economics"

The GAP's fit with the Bank's policy framework. Management is encouraged by the evaluation's finding that the GAP, launched in 2007, has revitalized the gender and development agenda at the Bank. Both IEG and management agree that the GAP is an attempt to address weaknesses in gender mainstreaming that have been identified in the Bank's annual monitoring of the Gender Strategy. Management notes that the GAP focuses on those sectors identified in the 2001 IEG review as being poor performers in gender mainstreaming, precisely in order to improve their performance. Thus, the GAP was a response to reinvigorate gender mainstreaming and does not represent a return to the project-level approach or diminished links to gender assessment and CASs. As noted in the IEG evaluation, the extent of gender analysis in project appraisal documents improved between fiscal 2006 and 2008. Given the additional insights from the analysis of IEG data, management would like to add that this increase in gender integration in the last two years (fiscal 2006–08) has occurred in a portfolio in which infrastructure and other economic sector operations traditionally characterized by low gender integration make up an increasing share. [3] The GAP is an instrument to improve performance of the Bank's country-led approach, based on the CAS and delivered through tools that include ESW and operations. A total of $4.2 million in GAP funds has supported 56 pieces of analytical work, many directly linked to key country policy dialogue; country-specific programs in Afghanistan, Ghana, Kenya, Lao PDR, Liberia, and Sudan, among others; and policy research to build the business case for gender equality. Sharing this research and analysis with partner countries increases country demand for gender support.

Furthering the GAP. The GAP is a time-bound effort launched to address weak implementation of the gender mainstreaming strategy in a subset of lagging sectors. As such, a transitional mechanism is needed that, though firmly anchored in the Bank's existing gender policy, builds on the momentum and lessons of the GAP to strengthen gender coverage in mainstream Bank operations. To this end, as requested by the Board, management is developing a GAP transition plan, to be presented to the Bank's Board of Directors in the spring of 2010. It will be informed by the independent midterm review of the GAP completed in June 2009.

III. Recommendations

Management's responses to IEG recommendations are included in the attached draft Management Action Record matrix. However, management would go further and note other actions we see as potentially equally or more important in preserving the positive momentum in gender mainstreaming generated by GAP beyond its closing date. These steps include the consideration of a World Development Report on gender equality to demonstrate the importance of gender in poverty reduction and growth and provide concrete assessments of what works and why, to increase client demand for gender equality work. Management will identify additional options in the transition plan scheduled for presentation at the Board in 2010.

[1] As a thematic issue, gender falls under several Bank policies, which should be read together for a comprehensive picture of the Bank's policy framework for gender. The gender policy (OP/BP 4.20), in conjunction with other policies (notably OP/BPs 8.60; 4.10, 4.12, 2.30, and 4.30) is also highly relevant to address gender equality and women's empowerment in operations.

[2] These Agriculture and Rurual Development targets are, by the end of 2010, to raise above 50 percent: the share of rural projects in the Sub-Saharan Africa Region with gender-responsive design (at 43 percent in 2005); the share of rural projects in all Regions with gender-informed monitoring and evaluation (17 percent in 2005); and the share of land policy and administration projects in all Regions guided by gender analysis in design and in the support of regulatory reform (37 percent in 2005).

[3] The share of loans in "economic sectors" (Agriculture and Rural Development, Economic Policy, Energy and Mining, Financial Management, Financial and Private Sector, Public Sector Governance, Transport, Urban Development, and Water) rose from 62.7 percent in 2006 to 64.6 percent in 2008.