The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE: LESSONS IN MAINSTREAMING EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This study addresses the issue of how mainstreaming equal opportunities can be instigated and sustained in the work of government and public bodies by drawing upon lessons from elsewhere. It considers, analyses and reports upon developments in mainstreaming practice and research in the 1990s and draws out concrete examples of innovative practice of mainstreaming at various government levels in Europe and beyond. This review develops understanding of mainstreaming, identifies gaps in knowledge and highlights the strategies, structures and tools needed for successful mainstreaming.

MAIN FINDINGS

Mainstreaming is a social justice-led approach to policy making in which equal opportunities principles, strategies and practices are integrated into the every day work of government and other public bodies.

• Mainstreaming aims to transform the organisational cultures of governments and public bodies and to improve the quality of public policy and of governance itself.
• Mainstreaming complements lawful positive action designed to address the historic and current impact of discriminating structures and practices.
• Specialist equality units play a crucial role in driving, co-ordinating and supporting mainstreaming.
• Mainstreaming is a term which is increasingly used, but is less well understood. There are substantial shortfalls in knowledge, awareness and techniques which appear common to the experience of mainstreaming in most countries.
• Mainstreaming is a strategy that can, without care, degenerate into tokenism where public commitment is given in principle but where in practice little is achieved.
• Gender equality has been the primary focus of mainstreaming in theory and practice. Further work is needed to develop generic equality tools. It must also be recognised that different equality groups may require different sorts of analyses and specific tools.
• Prerequisites or enabling conditions for successful mainstreaming include: specific equality legislation, structures and policy; statistics disaggregated by gender, race, disability and the like; comprehensive knowledge of gender relations and patterns of social division; knowledge of government organisations and administration; necessary funds and human resources; and the equal participation of women and men (and the fair participation of equality groups) in political and public life and in decision-making processes.
• Mainstreaming in the UK is at an early stage. Constitutional change and the government's modernisation agenda are seen as important enabling contexts within which equalities work can develop both collaboratively and distinctively at different levels.
• Concrete examples are crucial for governments and other public bodies seeking to 'learn' mainstreaming.
• Experience of mainstreaming has been seen to bring tangible benefits for governments and public bodies.
• Whilst there has been much innovation, progress has been uneven and mainstreaming remains vulnerable to political and organisational change and loss of momentum.
• Policy leaders such as Canada and the Nordic countries underline the importance of integrated strategies and systems for the development and implementation of mainstreaming.
• Strong and sustained political will is probably the single most important factor for successful implementation.
• Further systematic research is needed to draw lessons from the experiences of policy leaders and from UK local government.

WHAT IS MAINSTREAMING?

Mainstreaming is a relatively new approach to policy making in which equal opportunities principles, strategies and practices are integrated into the every day work of government and other public bodies from the outset, involving 'every day' policy actors in addition to equality specialists. It is a long-term strategy to frame policies in terms of the realities of people's daily lives, and to change organisational cultures and structures accordingly. The ultimate goal of mainstreaming is to create a fairer society. The strategy is supported by the United Nations, the Commonwealth governments, the European Union, the Council of Europe and many governments world-wide. A number of arguments have been put forward in support of mainstreaming:

• It is a primary tool for the delivery of public policy objectives on the promotion of equality and the effective distribution and delivery of public services;
• It puts people, and their diverse needs and experiences, at the heart of policy-making and service delivery;
• It leads to better government through better informed policy-making and a greater transparency and openness in the policy process and helps to tackle democratic deficit by encouraging wider participation in the policy process through effective consultation mechanisms;
• As a process it tackles the structures in society which contribute to, or sustain, discrimination and disadvantage;
• It makes equality issues visible, demonstrating that equality is a mainstream concern with implications for all, and that it is not just a 'cost' or a 'luxury';
• Mainstreaming involves an acknowledgement that the task for removing imbalances and inequalities in society is a shared responsibility involving both women and men. It therefore makes fuller use of human resources by involving men as well as women in equality work;
• The application of a mainstreaming approach can avoid the adoption of policies and programmes which replicate discrimination and exacerbate existing inequalities;

STRATEGIES, SYSTEMS, TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES

There is widespread misunderstanding and confusion over the meaning of mainstreaming and related concepts. This confusion arises from the lack of a clear definition of mainstreaming, the lack of practical examples of 'what mainstreaming is', and from the fact that concepts of equality and analyses of different equality groups are very complex. Mainstreaming is sometimes referred to as a tool, sometimes a process or method, and sometimes as a strategy.

It is useful to think of mainstreaming in terms of principles, systems, framework tools and discrete tools and techniques. Mainstreaming is supported by principles which set out commitment to, and conceptions of, equality, and systems consisting of strategies, policies, structures, mechanisms and tools through which these principles can be put into practice. Tools are diverse and can be used separately or as part of a framework or package. Mainstreaming is an active process combining these elements. Therefore the use of mainstreaming tools alone does not constitute mainstreaming but must be part of a broader mainstreaming system.

The Commonwealth Gender Management System (GMS) is a good example of a mainstreaming system. GMS has three main components; structures, mechanisms and processes, which need to be developed within an enabling environment. Structures to drive, co-ordinate and scrutinise include: a lead agency, usually the national women's policy machinery; a gender management team; gender focal points comprising designated senior staff members in each ministry or department; an inter-ministerial steering committee; a parliamentary gender caucus; and a gender equality commission or council made up of representatives of civil society. Within these systematic structures various tools or mechanisms are employed to implement mainstreaming. Examples of other systems which combine strong co-ordinating structures, inter departmental working and collaboration at different levels of government, include the Nordic Council, Sweden, Norway, Canada and the Canadian Province of British Columbia.

There are three broad categories of tools: analytical, educational and consultative and participatory. In reality, most tools have multiple uses, for example, disaggregated statistics are useful as educational tools or in forming the basis of consultation, as well as for their analytical uses.

Analytical tools are designed to 'expose' the problem. Tools include: disaggregated statistics; surveys and forecasts; research; check lists; guidelines and terms of reference; gender impact assessment and differential impact analysis models; indicators; and monitoring tools.

Educational tools are designed to raise awareness, to transfer knowledge, and to support training. Tools include: awareness-raising and training courses; follow-up action; mobile or flying experts; manuals and handbooks; booklets and leaflets; educational material for use in schools.

Consultative and participatory tools are designed to improve the quality of policy-making and deepen democracy. For example, working or steering groups and think tanks; directories; databases and organisational charts; participation of both sexes - and all social groups - in decision-making; conferences and seminars; hearings and consultative fora.

MAINSTREAMING AND SPECIALIST EQUALITY UNITS

There are debates and disagreements about what a mainstreaming strategy might entail, and its relative merits and drawbacks. In particular, it has been identified as a strategy that can, without care, degenerate into tokenism where public commitment is given in principle but where in practice little concrete or specific is achieved. This is particularly the experience in those places where 'mainstreaming' has been interpreted as a strategy which supersedes rather than complements specialist equality policy machinery and positive action projects. Whilst a mainstream approach is essential if equality issues are to be embedded within policy making structures, it operates most effectively when coupled with a powerful specialist co-ordinating body. Without co-ordinating structures, specialist expertise and lines of accountability, mainstreaming can become 'everyone's responsibility and no-one's job'. The following roles have been identified for specialist units in complementing and supporting mainstreaming:

• Tackling specific issues of inequality with specialist policies and initiatives;
• Acting as a think tank for developing analyses of inequality;
• Developing techniques and tools for mainstreaming;
• Providing expertise and specialist knowledge;
• Disseminating knowledge;
• Publicising government commitment to equality and its achievements;
• Training and awareness raising;
• Acting as an internal lobby;
• Acting as co-ordinator for mainstreaming initiatives and point of contact; and
• Monitoring overall government performance in achieving equality goals and targets.

EXPERIENCE OF MAINSTREAMING

The study reviewed mainstreaming developments in a number of countries: Australia (including New South Wales), Austria, Belgium (Flanders), Canada (including British Columbia), Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United States (San Francisco). The study also drew upon a small number of examples of mainstreaming in UK local government.

Mainstreaming in practice is at a relatively early stage of development and, in most of the countries reviewed, work on mainstreaming is at a preliminary stage involving awareness-raising, establishing the need for mainstreaming, building support and alliances, and sharing ideas and good practice. There has also been the need to establish baseline data, such as gender disaggregated statistics; or carry out auditing of services, policies and departments. In some instances, positive action has been used in creating enabling conditions for successful mainstreaming. Experiments in mainstreaming have produced tangible benefits including new and innovative ways of thinking and working, new or reinforced collaborative arrangements and cross-cutting working, and the development of new tools. Mainstreaming has provided the impetus for partnership working, amongst different levels of government and amongst public, private and voluntary sectors. There has been an emphasis upon lesson learning and lesson sharing.

For policy leaders such as the Nordic countries and Canada, government experience of mainstreaming has been seen to increase problem-solving capacity and to enhance sound evidence-based policy-making. In some instances, policy proposals with unintended and discriminatory implications have been exposed and modified before implementation. For citizens, including women, it has resulted in more transparent government and an enhanced voice and greater participation in the policy-making process.

The research found that while there has been much innovation in developing mainstreaming strategies, progress has been uneven. Common difficulties include lack or loss of political will, resistance from public officials, poor understanding, inadequate resources including expertise, and a lack of systematic and strategic planning and implementation. Mainstreaming was particularly vulnerable to political and organisational change. Embedding mainstreaming in organisational practices has proved problematic due to a lack of ownership by middle managers and staff. A 'blame culture' existed in some cases, where staff felt they were more likely to be penalised if they attempted equalities work and got it wrong, than if they did nothing at all.

EXPERIMENTS IN MAINSTREAMING

The examples reviewed demonstrate much imagination and innovation at all levels, with the development of collaborative working, the establishment of networks, the development of new tools and an emphasis upon lesson learning and lesson sharing. The following strengths can be drawn from the case studies:

• Political will is crucial to progress in most of the examples. Slovenia provides an instructive case of a country which has no track record in equalities work and which lacks most of the commonly accepted prerequisites to mainstreaming. The Slovenian government has started from scratch but, with high level political will, a committed 'driver' as co-ordinator and the proactive support of the UN, has already effected some change. In rural Spain and France local government provides political leadership which has driven collaborative working.
• Collaborative working. There are examples of collaborative working across public, private and voluntary sector in Spain, France and Italy bringing equality debates to the heart of sometimes small rural communities. These include networks of regional institutions, including government departments, regional councils, trade unions, politicians, voluntary organisations, professions and training bodies which are committed to integrating equal opportunities into their daily practices.
• Awareness raising and training. Much innovative work has taken place to establish the need for mainstreaming. The Fundacio Maria Aurelia Capmany, in Barcelona demonstrates the effectiveness of a small NGO in working as a catalyst to mainstream discussion and debate on reconciliation of work and family life. International training modules have been adapted for use by Sicilian municipalities along with other 'recipes' for mainstreaming.
• Tools. Examples include, the New Zealand guidelines for gender-based policy appraisal which are seen internationally as a model, although they have rarely been used by policy makers at home. The CERES -Transfaire project has produced a manual for local and regional government. The New South Wales equity scorecard works as an important 'eye opener'. Work is on-going in Ireland to develop gender and generic equality-proofing tools.
• Participatory approach. Participation and consultation are, of course, regarded as important mainstreaming tools. A range of internal and external actors have been involved in case study initiatives. For example, women's groups have played a key role in promoting mainstreaming in Ireland. In San Francisco a CEDAW Task Force comprises of elected officials, trade unions, government employees, and community advocates with expertise in economic justice, human rights, violence against women, and health. Ownership of initiatives is promoted by involvement, for example the Italian principle of partire da se (starting from oneself) informs all training work in Sicily; in San Francisco, departments carried out their own self-analysis as part of an audit process.
• UN and European contexts. We see the importance of UN and European contexts in a number of the case studies. For example, San Francisco has built its mainstreaming programme around the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW); the UN has played a proactive role in supporting mainstreaming in Slovenia. All the European case studies are informed by work carried out by the Council of Europe (see Sections 1 and 2) and many of the projects have been funded or otherwise supported by the European Commission.

A number of common difficulties have been experienced in most or all of the case studies. These relate to: shortfalls in political will and bureaucratic support; lack of gender balance in decision making; lack of gender data, specialist knowledge and tools; lack of resources; ineffective structures; and vulnerability to change. These weaknesses make it difficult, in some cases, to move beyond mainstreaming as a mere 'tick and dash' paper exercise.

• Lack of, or faltering, political will. For example, mainstreaming tools may be developed but seldom or never used (e.g. New Zealand and Flanders). In Ireland progress is viewed as being undermined by lack of political will to commit resources to support mainstreaming and policy proofing work.
• Bureaucratic resistance was encountered to some degree in most of the case studies. For example, in Flanders, it was hard to persuade staff of the relevance of gender to their work and many officials were happy with a policy as 'window dressing'. In Slovenia resistance resulted in the replacement of the Ministry of Finance by that of Education and Sports in the project.
• Lack of gender balance in decision-making is seen to constrain the development and promotion of mainstreaming in many of the country examples. In Slovenia a national strategy to promote the participation of women in politics is being developed.
• Lack of expertise, information and tools. The need for improved gender disaggregated statistics and other data was identified in many cases. Tools for monitoring and evaluation were seen as a common weakness.
• Lack of resources.
• Lack of effective structures. The need to embed mainstreaming strategies in effective structures was identified. The preliminary stage - and temporary nature - of many of the projects made it difficult to establish such structures.
• Vulnerability to political and organisational change. In several cases, political changes or organisational restructuring have resulted in the dilution or stalling of mainstreaming.

There are few examples of holistic or strategic mainstreaming, much of the experience is of piecemeal developments and one-off or pilot projects. The development of training and tools has sometimes taken place in the absence of more systematic structures and therefore should be seen as preliminary initiatives rather than as evidence of mainstreaming in action. The conceptual confusion about mainstreaming - is it a strategy? is it a method? is it just a buzz word we use to relabel what we are already doing? - is also evident in some cases. The examples here also reinforce the findings of other research that show whilst advances have been made in developing tools, there has been less progress in developing overall strategies and in deepening understanding of the conceptual issues underpinning mainstreaming.

POLICY LEADERS

The Nordic countries and Canada have emerged as policy leaders, there is also much to be learned from local government experience in the UK.

The Nordic countries: The Nordic Council of Ministers provides a striking example of an intergovernmental institution promoting mainstreaming through its Programme for Nordic Co-operation on Gender Equality 1995-2000. A three-year pilot project was launched in 1997, to develop and test methods and tools for mainstreaming. The 'umbrella' design of the project allows the sharing of experiences between the countries involved, and the co-ordination of activities through the Council of Ministers who commissions projects and reports to ensure that different sub-projects cover different areas and approaches. The strengths of the Nordic approach include:

Top level political support of mainstreaming. For example, in Sweden and Norway commitment to mainstreaming is regularly restated in prime ministerial statements; in Norway equality goals have been built into government Action Plans. The importance of specific resources for equality work is also recognised.

• Integrated mainstreaming systems. For example, a strong co-ordinating structure exists at Nordic Council level including a Nordic Project Manager responsible for implementation and monitoring. Within individual countries, Sweden and Norway have particularly well developed systems with specialist co-ordinating structures, inter departmental working and collaboration at different levels of government.
• Development of innovative tools and methodologies. There has been considerable investment in developing and testing tools and methodologies. For example, the use of 'flying experts' has been piloted in Sweden. Swedish local government has developed the '3Rs method' of awareness raising and analysis which has been adopted elsewhere. In Norway, Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines have been developed; and packages of mainstreaming methodologies and tools compiled in a number of participating countries including Finland. All countries are contributing to a Nordic Mainstreaming Manual.
• Gender disaggregated statistics are recognised to form a central plank of mainstreaming work. Sweden is well advanced in the collection and production of gender disaggregated statistics (see annual Men and Women in Sweden). Iceland's Statistical Bureau is also committed to produce gender disaggregated statistics.
• Sharing experiences and good practice. Collaboration between the Nordic countries has provided a supportive environment through which progress can be made in all countries. The Nordic Mainstreaming Newsletter provides a forum for dissemination of ideas and lessons as do common activities including seminars, working groups, and study visits. For example, mainstreaming training in Iceland has been facilitated through the assistance of Swedish expertise.

Canada (and British Columbia): Canada provides a case of a well established and integrated strategy for mainstreaming gender equality based upon: high level political will, regularly restated; strong legislation concerning gender equality; and co-operation and collaboration between Federal, Provincial and Territorial levels. The Federal Government is committed to implementing gender based analysis in the development of policies, programmes and legislation; and to developing analytic tools, training approaches and data for undertaking gender based analysis. Canadians use the term gender based analysis to describe gender mainstreaming activity, analysis and research. Most Provincial governments and Territories are likewise committed to some degree of gender based analysis, most notably British Columbia. At both Canadian and British Columbian level, there is visible political commitment and integrated mainstreaming systems are in place including: specialist structures and gender experts within departments; strong co-ordinating mechanisms and lines of accountability and responsibility; policy appraisal frameworks; extensive training; and support in terms of gender disaggregated statistics and gender research.

Canada and British Columbia are regarded as pioneers of mainstreaming tools in much of the emerging literature. The Canadian Gender-based Analysis and the British Columbian Gender Lens provide general frameworks which can be adapted by departments. Several sector-specific manuals have been produced in areas such as human resources and employment; the justice system; international development and Aboriginal affairs. The schemas have also been widely used elsewhere. In both cases, successful mainstreaming depends upon:

• Commitment to the principles and goals of mainstreaming (a social justice strategy to create a fairer society; respect for diversity). For example, the Canadian Government has endorsed mainstreaming in the Federal Plan for Gender Equality;
• High level support within government to implement and hold line ministries accountable. For example, in British Columbia each new policy, programme and legislative proposal for Cabinet consideration must include an Equity impact assessment, this refers to an analysis of implications not only in the area of gender but also sustainable development, social, regional and community issues, other equity groups, and health;
• Building capacity to do gender-based analysis (ongoing training; development of tools; support for departments to develop their own sectoral tools; collection of gender disaggregated data; timely policy relevant research; expert support). For example, the Canadian Justice Department has established a network of 55 gender equality specialists to assist their colleagues in mainstreaming. Canada has also established Centres of Excellence for Women's Health to meet policy research needs;
• Realistic resources. For example, the Status of Women Canada currently has 100 staff;
• Managing the process (ongoing liaison and co-ordination between relevant departments and at different levels of government; sharing of resources and good practice). For example, a Director of Gender Based Analysis has been appointed by the Federal Government to co-ordinate the strategy and maintain momentum;
• Communication and consultation with women's groups and equity groups; for example, women's organisations are consulted on the annual federal budget;
• Systems of reporting, monitoring and evaluating outcomes. For example, a joint federal-provincial/ territorial initiative resulted in the 1997 publication of Economic Gender Equality Indicators (EGEI's), a set of benchmarks to assess the relative status of women and men, and to measure change over time. Indices included compare women and men in such areas as earnings, income from all sources, paid and unpaid work, education and training;
• Management of emerging issues. This has included adapting to changing political and economic circumstances. For example, greater devolution to provincial/ territorial government level has meant that several key policy areas are no longer within the jurisdiction of the federal government;

Significant progress has been made towards mainstreaming gender equality into the work of governments in the above examples in Canada and the Nordic countries, however they share very similar difficulties and challenges with experience elsewhere. Although there is commitment across the board, implementation has been uneven, resistance has been encountered, relevance of mainstreaming is not always understood by public officials, and issues of resources (time, budgets), shortage of data and lack of expertise are all cited as reasons to do nothing.

LESSONS LEARNED

Shortfalls in knowledge, awareness and techniques are common to the experience of mainstreaming in most countries. In many of the examples much of the innovative practice is dependent on the commitment and experience of a surprisingly small number of politicians and specialist officers, who understand equality issues very well. Despite increasing public statements of commitment to mainstreaming equalities principles by governments, public bodies and councils, there is little evidence that the majority of politicians or public officials understand how this might be applied to specific issues. This suggests that mainstreaming is a long term strategy requiring substantial investment in training and specialist support, the production of gender disaggregated statistics and other 'mapping' data, the employment of multiple strategies and tools, and the involvement of a wide range of internal and external actors including specialist practitioners, statutory equality agencies, academics, social partners and 'ordinary' women and men. The need for awareness raising and equalities policy appraisal training cannot be over emphasised and must be seen as an on going process rather than a 'one-off'.

Finally, but perhaps most importantly, mainstreaming is dependent upon consistent and high profile political commitment. There is consensus in the literature, reinforced in this current review, that explicit, high profile and sustained political support is perhaps the single most important variable in the success or failure of mainstreaming. Equality policies both mainstream and specific depend upon clear political commitment and the recognition that the state can act as a site of social justice. We see this demonstrated most clearly in the Nordic countries and in Canada, where it has contributed to an integrated approach to mainstreaming. In Slovenia, political will has allowed mainstreaming to 'start from scratch.' Conversely, the case of New Zealand underscores the fact that well devised strategies will not get off the starting block without political and organisational will. The case of New South Wales demonstrates that a change of political leadership can lead to the stalling of equalities work.

To summarise, this review of developments in mainstreaming underlines the following needs for successful implementation:

• The need for political will and leadership which is unambiguous, consistent and regularly restated in public.
• • public commitment to the principles and goals of mainstreaming
    
• The need for managerial drive and commitment at top level.

• The need for political and bureaucratic accountability including the duty to demonstrate by, for example:

• • action plans and progress reports
  • equality impact statements
  • performance appraisal systems
    
    
• The need for integrated systems for the co-ordination, monitoring and championing of mainstreaming, for instance:
• • ministerial, organisational and parliamentary champions
  • a mainstreaming director or co-ordinator to progress and maintain momentum
  • mainstreaming management team
  • specialist equality units
  • equality focal points in ministries and departments
  • inter departmental and intergovernmental working groups
  • communication and dissemination strategies
  • management information systems
    
• The need to embed equalities in a permanent and sustainable way, for example, through:
• • ongoing training and awareness raising
  • building understanding of gender and equalities issues
  • developing sector specific policy case studies and analyses
  • robust systems of monitoring and evaluation
  • communication
  • fostering a sense of ownership - by policy makers, service providers, equality groups and citizens
  • a move away from a blame culture
  • effective incentives (and sanctions)
• The need for a statistics and research strategy to support sound evidence-based policy making, including:
• • gender disaggregated statistics - cross tabulated by race, age and disability
  • annual compendium of equality statistics
  • timely research which is gender and diversity sensitive
  • equality indicators
• The need for the adaptation and development of appropriate methodologies, tools and mechanisms for policy appraisal.

• The need for equalities expertise (and the recognition of equalities expertise), for example:

• • recognition of 'gender know how' and skill
  • role of specialist units
  • specialist staff and 'flying experts'
  • input from statutory equality agencies and academics
• The need for gender balance in decision making and the fair representation of members of equality groups; and for a socially representative workforce.

• The need for ordinary voices to be heard through:

• • consultative fora
  • development of innovative tools to involve women and men in general, and members of equality groups in policy development
• The need for secure and realistic resources for change.

• The need for collaborative learning and exchange of good practice.

DEVELOPING A GENERIC EQUALITIES APPROACH

Gender equality has been the primary focus of mainstreaming in theory and practice, although more advanced models tend to incorporate a diversity perspective; in other words they take into account the realities of women's and men's lives in respect of race, disability and other dimensions of discrimination and disadvantage, including class, sexuality and religion. Examples of mainstreaming from other equalities perspectives remain rare but, when they do occur, they tend to be less sensitive to gender.

The logic of mainstreaming equality within the UK - and, increasingly the EU - context suggests that a generic approach should be developed. Easy assumptions cannot be made that concepts, systems and tools developed for gender mainstreaming can be automatically utilised for other equality groups, although it is undoubtedly the case that some are amenable for wider use. Work is needed to develop understanding of the requirements of a generic equalities approach which works with commonalties but also recognises that different dimensions of inequality may require different sorts of analyses and specific solutions. A generic mainstreaming equalities approach needs to combine the following approaches:

• Equal treatment approaches and anti discrimination policies and legislation (there must also be recognition that some equalities groups do not have legal protection).
• Positive action approaches which recognise the historic and current impact of discriminating structures and practices on different social groups, including women.
• Gender/ diversity approaches which recognise the impact of gender, the differences amongst women and amongst men, and the existence of multiple discrimination.

Defining mainstreaming as a strategy which draws upon legislative, social group and diversity analyses has various benefits. It enables the development of policy tools and decisions which are sensitive to the different legislative contexts within the UK; which take into account the significance of gender as it affects all women and all men; acknowledges the impact of social group disadvantage, (based on for example race, ethnicity, age and disability); and exposes the existence of multiple discrimination and the realities for those often made invisible by an approach which does not recognise the existence of gender as a division within equality groups (for example black women). Mainstreaming may result in positive action for certain groups of women and certain groups of men.

FUTURE RESEARCH

This study has addressed the issue of how mainstreaming equal opportunities can be instigated and sustained in the work of government and public bodies by drawing upon lessons from elsewhere. It has considered, analysed and reported upon developments in mainstreaming practice and research in the 1990s and has drawn upon concrete examples of innovative practice of mainstreaming at various government levels in Europe and beyond. This review develops understanding of mainstreaming, identifies gaps in knowledge and highlights the strategies, structures and tools needed for successful mainstreaming.

Practice is evolving, therefore the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive have the opportunity to develop their own models of best practice. Future systematic research is needed to draw lessons from the experiences of policy leaders in the Nordic countries and Canada and from UK local government.

« Previous | Contents | Next »