The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE: LESSONS IN MAINSTREAMING EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES

THE PROJECT

This report updates and develops work on mainstreaming equal opportunities which was carried out in the Summer of 1998 to inform the thinking of the Consultative Steering Group on the Scottish Parliament. ¹The project, conducted by the Governance of Scotland Forum's sister organisation, the Unit for the Study of Government in Scotland (USGS) surveyed the literature on mainstreaming in Europe and elsewhere; discussed the experiences of different levels of government; and identified the key enabling conditions for successful mainstreaming in the Scottish context. ² The report highlighted that there were substantial shortfalls in knowledge, awareness and techniques which appeared common to the experience of mainstreaming in most countries. We noted that practice was evolving and that future systematic research would be needed. In short, everybody thought that mainstreaming was a good idea, but nobody seemed quite sure how to actually do it in practice!

More recently, an update briefing produced for the Equalities Unit of the Scottish Executive mapped some newly available material and highlighted outstanding gaps and problems. In particular it noted the difficulties in identifying concrete examples and policy case studies which could be used to inform training and mainstreaming development work at different government levels in Scotland.

Despite the fact that many of these countries appear to have been implementing mainstreaming strategies for some time, and the often stated commitment to producing practical results and to monitoring and evaluation, these case studies do not seem to offer any concrete examples of [...] how mainstreaming [is] implemented in a given department for a specific policy and the results. ³

Whilst we endorse the view that mainstreaming cannot be reduced to a recipe or a step-by-step process nevertheless the gathering of concrete examples forms an important resource for governments and other public bodies seeking to 'learn' mainstreaming. Such examples can be used in training to increase understanding of the whole process, and to demonstrate how mainstreaming differs - in reality - from previous strategies.

The main aims of this project are:

• to address the issue of how mainstreaming equal opportunities can be instigated and sustained in the operation of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Executive by drawing upon lessons from elsewhere;

• to consider, analyse and report upon developments in mainstreaming practice and research since the Summer of 1998;
• to seek out concrete examples of innovative practice of mainstreaming at various government levels; and
• to highlight the strategies, structures and tools needed for successful mainstreaming.

This report brings together all the material that was available within the constraints of the time span of the project (15 weeks). Bibliographic and internet searches were conducted and supplementary information was also gathered from selected government web sites in Europe and elsewhere.

Information gathered from a multi-staged email questionnaire survey to equalities machineries at various governmental levels forms a major part of this project. ⁴ Potential examples were identified through existing contacts; contacts listed in published reports and conference proceedings; as well as through web searches. As the number of people working on mainstreaming issues in most countries is relatively small, we were able to identify most key players.

Selected local government case studies in the UK were developed through email and telephone contact and, in some cases interviews were conducted. The local government interviews produced rich data which emphasised many of the points raised elsewhere. While interviews with respondents from other countries may have produced more detailed data, the time and financial resources were not available for this. We have, however, been able to identify key countries where further systematic research would be beneficial. In this sense our current research was also a mapping exercise.

This report is divided into seven main sections:

Section 1 provides background on mainstreaming as a concept and an initiative, and discusses the political contexts within which it is being developed. It defines mainstreaming, describes the main features of mainstreaming and outlines the conditions which enable or inhibit the successful development of the strategy.

A range of tools and techniques have been developed or adapted to mainstream gender equality and other equalities considerations. In Section 2 we provide an overview of mainstreaming structures, tools and techniques and discuss some of the problems raised.

Section 3 provides detail of mainstreaming as an emerging strategy in the UK.

Section 4 reports upon examples of mainstreaming at national, regional/provincial and local government levels in Europe and elsewhere.

Section 5 and Section 6 focus upon two examples of integrated practice: the Nordic countries and Canada.

Section 7 relates to mainstreaming and the work of parliaments.

We conclude by drawing upon the research findings and upon the mainstreaming literature more generally to discuss the main lessons which can be learned from the experience of other governments and public bodies in terms of the advantages and disadvantages of mainstreaming equality as a strategy and the factors which contribute towards successful implementation.

SECTION 1 WHAT IS MAINSTREAMING?

INTRODUCTION

Mainstreaming has developed world wide and is being promoted at the UK and European levels as a relatively new approach to policy in which equal opportunities principles, strategies and practices are integrated into the every day work of government and other public bodies. It usually focuses upon gender equality but can also incorporate other dimensions of discrimination and disadvantage. ⁵It builds upon and complements specific equality policies and institutional structures. As well as addressing equalities issues, mainstreaming is seen as an important element of strategies aimed at improving the quality of public policy and of governance itself. Mainstreaming is also promoted as a strategy to tackle democratic deficit and lack of trust by encouraging the wider participation of citizens in the policy process through effective consultation mechanisms.

Practice is evolving in the UK and other countries at national, regional and local levels. Whilst there is intense interest in the notion of mainstreaming equalities in the work of governments and other policy makers, there is also uncertainty: mainstreaming is a term which is increasingly used, but is less well understood. There is ambiguity about the precise definition of mainstreaming and variation in the level of adoption in different countries and different state organisations. There are emerging policy leaders, particular the Nordic countries and Canada, but nowhere can it be said that mainstreaming is fully implemented.

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.

THE CASE FOR MAINSTREAMING

Mainstreaming equality is essentially concerned with the integration of equal opportunities principles, strategies and practices 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 government organisational cultures and structures accordingly. In other words, it entails rethinking 'mainstream' policy making and service provision to accommodate gender, race, disability and other dimensions of discrimination and disadvantage, including class, sexuality and religion. A number of arguments have been put forward in support of mainstreaming: ⁶

• 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;
• It leads to better government through better informed policy-making and a greater transparency and openness in the policy process;
• It 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;
• Mainstreaming complements lawful positive action designed to address the historic and current impact of discriminating structures and practices.

POLITICAL CONTEXTS

Mainstreaming has gained its current high profile as a concept and a strategy for taking forward equality work as a result of developments at international, European and UK level. At global level, the United Nations explicitly endorsed and promoted the concept of gender mainstreaming in the Platform for Action which was adopted at the end of the 1995 United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women at Beijing. ⁷The Platform for Action calls for the promotion of the policy of gender mainstreaming, stating that:

Governments and other actors should promote an active and visible policy of mainstreaming a gender perspective in all policies and programmes, so that, before decisions are taken, an analysis is made of the effects on women and men, respectively. ⁸

In particular the Platform for Action stresses the need for the generation and dissemination of gender disaggregated statistics for planning and evaluation ⁹ and the application of gender impact analysis in the development, monitoring and evaluation of all 'micro and macro economic and social policies.' ¹⁰ Many countries have adopted a national plan for gender mainstreaming as a result of the Platform for Action, although there were no guidelines as to how to develop and implement this policy. ¹¹ The commitments made in 1995 will be scrutinised at a Special Session of the General Assembly of the UN in June 2000. Women 2000: Gender Equality, Development and Peace for the 21st Century, commonly referred to as Beijing +5, will review and assess the progress of governments towards implementing the Platform for Action. ¹²

The concept has become increasingly topical in Europe in the 1990s, driven by the European Commission which has adopted mainstreaming principles in its policy making and its funding programmes. The Third (1991-95) and Fourth (1996-2000) Community Action programmes on equal opportunities sought to integrate, or mainstream, the objective of gender equality into all policy areas, in the context of the single market in Europe. The Fourth Action Programme focuses on the exchange and development of information and experience of good practice, studies and research and dissemination of information. The EC has funded several transnational research projects to develop mainstreaming strategies and tools and to share good practice. ¹³ Member States are also now required to gender mainstream policies and programmes which receive Structural Funds 2000-2006.

Principles of gender mainstreaming have been expanded to include other dimensions of discrimination as a result of the Treaty of Amsterdam which puts equality between women and men, and amongst different social groups, as a core objective. It commits EU member states to combat discrimination based on gender, racial or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age or sexual orientation.

Explicit links are also made between mainstreaming and wider issues of participation and consultation - current concerns of EU member states. Gender balance in political, social and economic decision making is seen as both a central plank of the promotion of mainstreaming, and also an important goal. For example, the Charter of Rome adopted by the women ministers of the EU member states in May 1996 states that:

The equal participation of women at all decision-making levels in economic, social and cultural structures is ... necessary to guarantee that the needs of women and men are taken into account in all policies, programmes and actions.

The under representation of women in political decision making is now well documented at national level, for example, comprehensive data on the women's representation in national assemblies has been collected and published by the Interparliamentary Union since 1985; ¹⁴ and a fuller picture is emerging with respect to women at local government level. ¹⁵ In the field of politics, the average female participation in the EU member states amounts to around 15% for the national parliaments and 16% for governments; at local government level women's representation ranges from 4% in Greece to over 40% representation in Sweden. Around 30% of the present Members of the European Parliament are women as are 25% of the European Commissioners. Although there is a great deal of variation between different states and different levels, the relative exclusion of women from power is a standard feature of most liberal democracies. In other spheres of social and economic decision making, information is more uneven, but it is clear that female representation is even lower. ¹⁶ The arguments for gender balance have been well rehearsed. Traditionally they have involved issues of justice, equality and the contribution of women's talents. More recently they have been reinforced by ideas which link women's representation with democratic renewal.

A renewal of politics and society will be realized with the joint contribution and balanced participation of women and men. This contribution and participation bridge the gap between citizens and politicians, revitalize democracy, and increase citizen confidence in the institutions of democracy. ¹⁷

Mainstreaming also requires the close involvement of ordinary women and men, and communities of interest in the policy making process and is underpinned by a recognition that ordinary people are 'qualified' to participate in policy making. Consultation and participation are crucial elements of successful mainstreaming both in terms of quality ('ordinary' people can often assess their own needs more effectively than policy makers) and democracy. Consultation and participation are areas of growing innovation. ¹⁸ Both gender balance and increased citizen participation are seen to bring benefits to government and to counter the democratic deficit.

In the UK, the Equal Opportunities Commission (the statutory agency for the promotion of sex equality) has championed the concept in Britain and Northern Ireland. Post 1997, the Labour government stated its commitment to equality mainstreaming. New co-ordinating government machinery has been developed including a number of Ministers for Women at central, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish levels. A cabinet sub committee involving ministers from all major government departments aims to co-ordinate 'women's agenda' across government. ¹⁹A Women's Unit was established in 1997 (now located within the Cabinet Office). In addition, a Race Equality Unit has been established in the Home Office and a Sex and Race Equality Division within the Department for Education and Employment.

The government's modernisation agenda with its emphasis upon innovative and forward- looking governance, 'joined-up' and strategic policy-making, and responsive quality public services is seen as an important enabling context for the development of cross-cutting strategies such as mainstreaming. ²⁰

Devolution has provided a further motor for change: the new Scottish parliament and the assemblies in Northern Ireland and Wales have all endorsed a mainstreaming approach. In each case, a wider range of equalities dimensions - including gender, race/ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, age and religious belief, is being addressed. UK developments post - devolution are discussed later in this report.

At local government level, mainstreaming is being promoted by the statutory equalities agencies, the EOC and the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE). Explicit links are increasingly being made between mainstreaming and the modernisation agenda of local government including community planning, partnership working, 'Best Value' regimes in service delivery, councils as employers, civic governance, democratic renewal and social inclusion.

One of the key documents shaping the present political climate in which mainstreaming equal opportunities is being advocated in the UK is the report of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry chaired by Sir William Macpherson. The inquiry was commissioned in response to allegations of racism within the Metropolitan Police Force in the investigation of the racist murder of teenager Stephen Lawrence in 1993. ²¹ While the inquiry therefore had a specific focus, its findings and report, known as the 'Macpherson report' have a much wider significance. The Macpherson report introduces the concept of institutional racism where an institution is seen as collectively responsible for the failures arising out of direct and indirect discrimination, including prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping. It highlights the need for a corporate approach to be taken to effect organisational change and recommends that public bodies be under a duty to demonstrate fairness. Many of its recommendations are applicable to all institutions and public organisations throughout Britain. This concept has been further developed to cover gender, disability and sexual orientation under the umbrella term, institutional discrimination. ²²

DEFINITIONS

A number of organisations have been working to establish definitions and to draw upon developing practice and experience to outline frameworks or guidelines for mainstreaming. The most influential definitions follow. They are all primarily concerned with gender mainstreaming.

Council of Europe

This definition of gender mainstreaming was adopted recently by a Council of Europe expert group.

Gender 'mainstreaming' is the (re)organisation, improvement, development and evaluation of policy processes, so that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at all stages, by the actors normally involved in policy-making. ²³

European Commission

The Commission of the European Union defined mainstreaming in the following way in its communication on the strategy.

Mainstreaming involves 'mobilising all general policies and measures specifically for the purpose of achieving equality by actively and openly taking into account at the planning stage their possible effects on the respective situations of men and women (the gender perspective).' ²⁴

Equal Opportunities Commission (Great Britain)

The EOC framework document on 'mainstreaming' gender equality in local government notes that:

Mainstreaming is the integration of equal opportunities into all policy development, implementation, evaluation and review processes ... mainstreaming involves making equal opportunities the responsibility of a wide range of actors including politicians and external partners. ²⁵.

The work which has most influenced the debate around mainstreaming has been that of the Council of Europe Group of Specialists, which reported in 1998. It noted that there was little consensus in the definition of mainstreaming when it was first developed by various governments and public bodies. However they make five general points:

• Definitions focus on the broad goal of achieving equality but are not always explicit about what is to be brought into the 'mainstream';
• Many definitions merely describe a strategy, often reducing the definition to partial aspects of gender mainstreaming. The definition and the goal become one and the same, gender mainstreaming becomes the goal and is seen as an end in itself;
• Some definitions focus upon gender mainstreaming a transformative strategy;
• Many definitions implicitly assume mainstreaming involves a shift from specialist actors to ordinary policy makers;
• Mainstreaming is often not defined at all.

A number of commentators have noted that there is conceptual confusion and that mainstreaming, as a term, is used loosely and vaguely; sometimes referring to a strategy or approach; sometimes referring to a method. ²⁶ The authors of a forthcoming report on mainstreaming in a number of EU countries argue that mainstreaming is hindered by this misunderstanding in the use of terms and uncertainty at the level of implementation, the authors locate these problems in the poor ideological underpinnings of the policy. There is also confusion at the level of descriptions of mainstreaming, it is seen as a tool, method, and strategy. Sue Yeandle, Christine Booth and Cinnamon Bennett argue that these confusions can be overcome if mainstreaming is understood, as it has been promoted by the European Commission, as a dual strategy, and further that: 'If mainstreaming is to effect transformational change, it will simultaneously provide both the strategy and methods for achieving equality.' ²⁷

FACILITATING CONDITIONS

Whereas mainstreaming can sometimes be characterised as a managerial or organisational strategy, experience makes clear that politics is at the heart of mainstreaming, and that political will is necessary for it to succeed. The Council of Europe expert group identified the following factors as necessary conditions or facilitating factors.

• Political will
• Specific gender equality policy

1) Equal opportunities legislation and anti-discrimination laws: equality legislation serves as a safeguard against discrimination, not least in the labour market. This legislation is a necessary basis for the promotion of equality.

2) The existence of mechanisms such as equality ombuds or equality commissions or councils for protection against discrimination.

3) A strong national equality machinery (administrative organisation) with sufficient tools and resources (both human and financial) to exert influence on policy at all levels.

4) Specific equality policies and actions to address specific women's - or men's - interests.

5) The existence of equality divisions or focal points within each ministry.

6) Research and training on gender equality issues.

7) Awareness-raising about gender equality.

• Gender Statistics
• Comprehensive knowledge of gender relations
• Knowledge of the administration
• Necessary funds and human resources
• Participation of women in political and public life and in decision-making processes

The Council of Europe Expert Group stresses that gender mainstreaming is unlikely to succeed in societies where there is little or no history of 'traditional' equality policy and where there is little knowledge base; or where the expertise of equality specialists and agencies is not recognised or used. This expertise is seen a necessary condition for starting gender mainstreaming.

Recent European transnational research conducted by a team from Sheffield Hallam University ²⁸ suggests that facilitating conditions for mainstreaming can be grouped into three categories:

1. Appropriate structures and systems, together with the values and commitments which underpin them;

2. Aspects of human relations and interpersonal relationships without which gender mainstreaming is unlikely to work; and

3. The availability of suitable tools and methods which can enable gender mainstreaming to be professionally and successfully enacted.

The researchers note that it is a moot point as to whether all three types of conditions need to be in place before gender mainstreaming can be successfully implemented. Within each category are further factors which relate to:

• Sensitivity to socio-political context;
• Raising awareness;
• 'Champions';
• Alliances and Networks;
• Gender 'know-how' and Competence;
• Commitment (committed individuals at all levels);
• 'Bending agendas' - adapting strategies successfully used to pursue other objectives to secure gender equality ends;
• Positive Action;
• Organisational Cultures and Structures - project based, team approaches, networks;
• Relative Autonomy - of organisations from the wider organisational structures;
• Tools for gender mainstreaming;
• Everyday Life - placing everyday needs of women at centre of objectives.

MAINSTREAMING AND EQUALITY

Policies on gender equality over the past two decades have focused on legal rights and equal treatment, measures to promote changes in attitudes and initiatives to empower women. They have resulted in considerable progress. However inequality and discrimination still exist and women remain at a disadvantage in many areas of economic, social and public life.

Teresa Rees has argued that concepts of equal opportunities have evolved from the liberal notion of equal treatment, described as tinkering, via positive action (and occasionally positive discrimination), described as tailoring, to 'mainstreaming' or transforming. ²⁹ These three approaches can also be characterised as: the equal treatment perspective, the women's perspective and the gender perspective. ³⁰

Liberal approaches to equal treatment rest on the assumption that treating men and women the same guarantees equal opportunities. The perspective has its roots in liberal notions of abstract individual rights and has developed into anti discrimination policies and legislation. Evidence demonstrates that the liberal approach to equal treatment has typically characterised most provision, and continues to characterise much policy-making. The resulting 'gender neutral' approach to policy and practice produces at best slow change in the disadvantaged position of many women. There is increasing recognition that equal treatment may not necessarily produce equitable results because women and men have different life experiences to consider. Denying difference, particularly the gendered realities of women's lives, their reproductive work and their unequal burden of care for men, children, the sick and the elderly, can lead to 'equality in form, not equality in fact.' ³¹

Positive action or the women's perspective recognises difference. It views women as a disadvantaged social group and aims to redress some of the historical and structural inequalities which result from the differences between men and women. For example, special training may be offered to women re-entering the work force in recognition that women are far more likely than men to take time out of paid work for child rearing and other domestic responsibilities. Positive action seeks to ensure a 'level playing field.'

The equal treatment perspective and the women's perspective can be seen as mutually supportive. Many women's initiatives depend upon legal precedent, for example the use of quotas or affirmative action to rectify under-representation in decision-making bodies. The persistence of inequalities has, however, resulted in growing awareness of the complexity of the issues and the need for new approaches, new strategies and new methods which tackle inequality at a structural level and which include a wider range of actors. Mainstreaming is one of these strategies. The attraction of mainstreaming is its potential ability to get below the surface to a deeper level of understanding and awareness of the 'hidden, unrecognised and unremarked ways in which systems and structures are biased in favour of men' and redress the balance. 'It involves lateral thinking to see how apparently gender-neutral practices, which appear to offer equal access to all, in fact act as exclusionary mechanisms for women.' ³²

The mainstreaming approach works to balance the individualisation of the equal treatment perspective and the one-sided focus which characterises positive action or the women's perspective. It does so by shifting the focus to gender relations - a gender perspective - and by also emphasising the diversity of experiences amongst women as a group and amongst men as a group.

[It] represents a different conceptualisation of gender equality. Mainstreaming essentially depends upon a focus on gender rather than only on women, and fully acknowledges, for the first time, the relevance of men's lives to the equality debate. The gender perspective recognises that adapting the organisation of society to a fairer distribution of human responsibilities must aim to transform men's roles and well as those of women. ³³

All three strands are seen to be complementary and are crucial to successful mainstreaming. Mainstreaming is seen as a 'three-legged stool' with each approach representing a support.

According to Yeandle and her colleagues, development of equalities understanding and approaches has been uneven in EU member states. There are differences amongst countries and differences within individual states in terms of the stage of development of each type of approach. The gender perspective is seen as least developed in all member states.

The mainstreaming strategy advocated in the European Commission's Communication on Mainstreaming can be summarised into three basic demands or goals, which correlate to the three equalities perspectives:

• Resources - to secure more funding for equality projects and redistribute resources to address disadvantage - the women's perspective.
• Voice - to address the democratic deficit and secure a gender balance in decision-making - the equal treatment perspective.
• Vision - secure the reconciliation of home, work and family life - the gender perspective. ³⁴

MAINSTREAMING AND EQUALITY MACHINERY

Equalities work has focused primarily in the past upon specific equalities structures and policy machinery. ³⁵ Mainstreaming has developed as a new strategy to take equalities work forward but must be placed within the context of the history and considerable achievements of specialist structures and policies. Specialist equality policy machinery is seen as both a necessary precondition for mainstreaming and a parallel - and complementary - strategy.

Specific equalities structures have considerable achievements in progressing equality in terms of:

• Specialised knowledge and expertise;
• Detailed analysis of gender relations and other forms of inequality;
• Development of specialist policies; and
• Development of democratic practice.

However specialist structures have experienced the following difficulties:

• They have been located on the 'margins' of government rather than in the 'mainstream' of society;
• Their power has been limited;
• They have had little influence on policy areas which affect women and men in their everyday lives;
• Specific equal opportunities policies cannot counter the inequalities caused by other policies; and
• Specific policies focus on only one side of the problem and involve limited actors, rather than society as a whole.

Commentators argue that the adoption of mainstreaming should not be seen as proof of the failure of specific sex (or indeed, in the context of the UK, race) equality structures but rather an indication of the persistence and complexity of equality issues and the need for multiple strategies which work both horizontally (that is, across the board) as well as vertically (specific). ³⁶

There has been debate about whether 'mainstreaming' as a strategy negates the need for equalities policy machinery. In some instances the adoption of 'mainstreaming' as a policy has been accompanied by the disbanding of equal opportunities units and committees. However all those organisations which have formulated frameworks and guidelines on 'mainstreaming', for example the Council of Europe, the European Commission and the EOC (Britain), have stressed that 'traditional' equality work needs to continue in tandem with 'mainstreaming'.

Gender mainstreaming cannot replace and render redundant specific equality policy and machineries. When 'mainstreaming' is mentioned as a new strategy to achieve gender equality, it is always stressed that this strategy does not replace 'traditional' gender equality policy, but complements it. They are two different strategies to reach the same goal, i.e. gender equality, and must go hand in hand, at least until there is a real culture and consensus regarding gender equality in the whole of society . ³⁷

Mainstreaming is not a replacement for equality legislation. Nor is it a replacement for specialist equality teams. It provides a framework in which equality legislation and other equality measures, such as positive action, can be placed strategically. Positive action aims to complement legislation on equal treatment by contributing to the elimination of inequalities in practice". ³⁸

A dual and complementary approach is needed: on the one side, the systematic application of gender impact analysis and its continuous monitoring and evaluation of all Community policies and activities; on the other side, the continuation, and when feasible, strengthening of the specific positive measures which are currently being applied. ³⁹

Mainstreaming and specific equality strategies have different starting points, involve different actors, and are concerned with different sorts of policy. The starting point for 'traditional' forms of equality work is a specific problem resulting from inequality. A specific policy solution for that problem is then developed by an equality machinery. The starting point for 'mainstreaming' is the everyday policy process (including existing policies and policies under development). The policy process is then reorganised so that the 'ordinary actors' such as departmental officials and politicians take a gender (and other equality) perspective into account, and equality as a goal is reached. Mainstreaming is a long term social justice-led strategy for social transformation; it may take some time before it is effectively or fully implemented but it has a potential to achieve sustainable change. 'Traditional' forms of equality policy can achieve faster results, but are limited to specific policy areas and do not necessarily effect change to the policy and practices of government and the public sector as a whole.

The following roles have been identified for equality policy machinery in complementing and supporting mainstreaming: ⁴⁰

• 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.

MAINSTREAMING AND OTHER EQUALITIES

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 developments at EU level, particularly the Treaty of Amsterdam, and within the UK, suggests a need to develop mainstreaming as a generic equalities strategy. However, 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. Some commentators, such as Teresa Rees, argue that mainstreaming is amenable to tackling institutional discrimination across a range of equalities dimensions, such as race and ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation and age and that there is a pressing need to develop tools and expertise in these respects. ⁴¹

Others, notably Mieke Verloo, caution against a 'one size fits all' approach, arguing that strategies and tools developed for mainstreaming gender equality are not necessarily appropriate or workable in other areas of discrimination.

One difficulty is that equality work is at different stages for different social groups: in many states women may have de jure equality and have benefited from programmes of positive action which may mean that mainstreaming seems a logical progression; for other social groups the picture may be very different. For example, gay men and lesbians in most European countries have not achieved full legal equality or civil rights and have seldom been the focus of positive action programmes. Therefore strategies may require different 'timing' for different structural inequalities.

Verloo's second concern centres on the different mechanisms and rationales which underpin and perpetuate discrimination. Different forms of inequality work in different ways. Racism does not necessarily work in the same way that sexism does: for example, the sexual division of labour is central to gender inequality but may play a lesser role in the construction of 'race' hierarchy. The issues facing gay men and lesbians - and the strategies they adopt - may differ from those of 'visible' minorities. The adoption of generic mainstreaming may therefore prove unhelpful and ineffective.

My point is: all these inequalities have their own system, and we need to know more about them in order to even think about using mainstreaming as a strategy to address these inequalities. It would be one of my priorities to develop this knowledge, but I think that we are not taking them seriously if we pretend that mainstreaming will make something happen there. ⁴²

Mainstreaming must also be underpinned by an understanding of the complex interaction between different dimensions of difference and discrimination which tend to be undertheorised in equal opportunities programmes and initiatives. For example liberal feminism has adopted the concept of 'double jeopardy' - adding racism to sexism - to describe the experience of black women. However black feminists have argued that experiences cannot be simply 'read off.'

The assertion that black women experience the same 'sexism' as white women plus racism/ethnocentrism which, presumably, is the same as that experienced by black men is also inaccurate. As black feminists have been asserting for over two decades, black women experience a sexism which is racialised and a racism which is gendered (just as black men experience racisms which are gender specific and white women experience sexism through the prism of white privilege). That is, their experiences cannot be deduced from the experiences of either white women or those of black men. This inadequate theorisation leads to the assumption that policies and strategies designed to facilitate access for white women need only the addition of cultural sensitivity to be effective for black women. ⁴³

We return to some of these issues in the Conclusions.

« Previous | Contents | Next »