Empowerment of Women –Conceptual Framework

B R SIWAL
DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
W D DIVISION , NIPCCD , NEW DELHI-16
E-MAIL:brsiwal@gmail.com

Empowerment - What Is It?

When policymakers and practitioners decide that “empowerment” – usually of
women or the poor – is a development goal what do they mean? And how do they
determine the extent to which it has been achieved? Despite empowerment having
become a widely used term in this context there is no accepted method for measuring
and tracking changes. Presumably if we want to see people empowered we consider
them to be currently dis-empowered i.e. disadvantaged by the way power relations
presently shape their choices, opportunities and well-being. If this is what we mean
then we would benefit from being better informed about the debates which have
shaped and refined the concept of power and its operation.

‘Empowering women’ has become a frequently cited goal of development

interventions. However, while there is now a significant body of literature discussing
how women’s empowerment has been or might be evaluated, there are still major
difficulties in so doing. Furthermore many projects and programmes which espouse
the empowerment of women show little if any evidence of attempts even to define
what this means in their own context let alone to assess whether and to what extent
they have succeeded.

Different people use empowerment to mean different things. However there are
four aspects which seem to be generally accepted in the literature on women’s
empowerment. Firstly to be empowered one must have been disempowered. It is
relevant to speak of empowering women, for example, because, as a group, they are
disempowered relative to men.

Secondly empowerment cannot be bestowed by a third party. Rather those who

would become empowered must claim it. Development agencies cannot therefore
empower women – the most they can achieve is to facilitate women empowering
themselves. They may be able to create conditions favourable to empowerment but
they cannot make it happen.

Thirdly, definitions of empowerment usually include a sense of people making

decisions on matters which are important in their lives and being able to carry them
out. Reflection, analysis and action are involved in this process which may happen
on an individual or a collective level. There is some evidence that while women’s
own struggles for empowerment have tended to be collective efforts, empowerment-
orientated development interventions often focus more on the level of the individual.

Finally empowerment is an ongoing process rather than a product. There is no

final goal. One does not arrive at a stage of being empowered in some absolute
sense. People are empowered, or disempowered, relative to others or, importantly,
relative to themselves at a previous time.
 How Should Empowerment Be Operationally Defined?

“Empowerment” has been used to represent a wide range of concepts and to

describe a proliferation of outcomes. The term has been used more often to advocate
for certain types of policies and intervention strategies than to analyze them, as
demonstrated by a number of documents from the United Nations (UNDAW 2001;
UNICEF 1999), the Association for Women in Development (Everett 1991), the
Declaration made at the Microcredit Summit (RESULTS 1997), DFID (2000), and
other organizations. Feminist activist writings often promote empowerment of
individuals and organizations of women (Sen and Grown 1987; Jahan 1995; Kumar
1993) but vary in the extent to which they conceptualize or discuss how to identify it.

Another line of thought in development promotes social inclusion in institutions

as the key pathway to empowerment of individuals and has at times tended to
conflate empowerment and participation. Capitalism, top-down approaches to
development, and/or poverty itself are seen as sources of disempowerment that must
be challenged by bringing “lowers”—the poor and disenfranchised—(Chambers
1997) into the management of community and development processes. The growth
of civil society and participatory development methods at both macro and meso
levels of society are usually proposed as the mechanisms by which empowerment
takes place (Friedmann 1992; Chambers 1997). For example, Narayan et al. (2000a)
focus on state and civil society institutions at both national and local levels,
including informal institutions such as kinship and neighborhood networks.
Institutions at the micro level, such as those of marriage and the household, are not
considered part of the state or of civil society, but interpersonal gender dynamics
within the household are considered part of the equation of social exclusion and in
need of directed efforts at change.

Bennett (2002) has developed a framework in which “empowerment” and

“social inclusion” are closely related but separate concepts. Drawing on Narayan
(2002), Bennett describes empowerment as “the enhancement of assets and
capabilities of diverse individuals and groups to engage, influence and hold
accountable the institutions which affect them.” Social inclusion is defined as “the
removal of institutional barriers and the enhancement of incentives to increase the
access of diverse individuals and groups to assets and development opportunities.”
Bennett notes that both of these definitions are intended to be operational, and
describe processes rather than end points. The empowerment process, as she
characterizes it, operates “from below” and involves agency, as exercised by
individuals and groups. Social inclusion, in contrast, requires systemic change which
may be initiated “from above.”

Women and empowerment

While the reasons for any particular woman’s powerlessness (or power) are
many and varied, considering women per se necessarily involves questioning what
we/they have in common in this respect. The common factor is that, as women, they
are all constrained by “the norms, beliefs, customs and values through which
societies differentiate between women and men” (Kabeer 2000, 22). The specific
ways in which this operates vary culturally and over time. In one situation it might
reveal itself in women’s lower incomes relative to men, in another it might be seen in
the relative survival rates of girl and boy children and in a third by severe restrictions
on women’s mobility. Virtually everywhere it can be seen in domestic violence,
male-dominated decision fora and women’s inferior access to assets of many kinds.

A woman’s level of empowerment will vary, sometimes enormously, according

to other criteria such as her class or caste, ethnicity, relative wealth, age, family
position etc and any analysis of women’s power or lack of it must appreciate these
other contributory dimensions. Nevertheless, focusing on the empowerment of
women as a group requires an analysis of gender relations i.e. the ways in which
power relations between the sexes are constructed and maintained.

Since gender relations vary both geographically and over time they always have
to be investigated in context. It also follows that they are not immutable. At the same
time particular manifestations of gender relations are often fiercely defended and
regarded as “natural” or God-given. While many development interventions involve
challenges to existing power relations it tends to be those which challenge power
relations between men and women which are most strongly contested.

Three faces of power

Within the social sciences power was first typified as power over. As Robert
Dahl defined it “A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something
that B would not otherwise do” (Dahl, 1957, 202-203). “In this approach, power is
understood as a product of conflicts between actors to determine who wins and who
loses on key, clearly recognised issues, in a relatively open system in which there are
established decision-making arenas”.

Subsequently a second dimension or face of power was recognised - the ability

to prevent certain people or issues from getting to the decision-making arena in the
first place. Bachrach and Baratz argued that political scientists must focus “both on
who gets what, when and how and who gets left out and how” (Bachrach and Baratz
1970, 105). This dimension of power is concerned with the rules and methods of
legitimising some voices and discrediting others.

Stephen Lukes then suggested that perhaps “the most effective and insidious use
of power is to prevent such conflict arising in the first place” (Lukes 1974, 24). From
this perspective the powerful may win conflicts not only by doing so in open conflict
or by preventing opposing voices from being heard. They may also get their own
way by so manipulating the consciousnesses of the less powerful as to make them
incapable of seeing that a conflict exists. As Sen observes “There is much evidence
in history that acute inequalities often survive precisely by making allies out of the
deprived. The underdog comes to accept the legitimacy of the unequal order and
becomes an implicit accomplice” (Sen 1990, 26).
 These three dimensions (or faces) of power over therefore consist of one party
getting their own way against the interests of another party either by winning in open
conflict, preventing their opponent being heard or preventing their potential
opponent from even realising that there is a conflict of interests. These are all
examples of a zero sum game i.e. by definition one person’s gain is another’s loss
(even if, as in the third dimension above, the loser may not even be aware of her
loss).

Non zero-sum models of power

Other forms of power also appear in the literature where one person’s gain is not
necessarily another’s loss. These tend to be referred to as power within, power to and
power with.

Power within, for example, refers to assets such as self-esteem and self-
confidence. In a sense all power starts from here – such assets are necessary before
anything else can be achieved. “[A] woman who is subjected to violent abuse when
she expresses her own opinions may start to withhold her opinions and eventually
come to believe she has no opinions of her own. When control becomes internalised
in this way, overt use of power over is no longer necessary” (Rowlands 1998; 12).
The internalisation of such feelings of worthlessness is a well-recognised feature of
women’s oppression and therefore many development interventions seek to bring
about changes at this level.

Joke Schrijvers uses the term “autonomy” and defines it to mean, “a

fundamental criticism of the existing social, economic and political order…an anti-
hierarchical concept, which stimulates critical and creative thinking and action…
transformation which comes from within, which springs from inner resources of
one’s own as an individual or a collectivity” (Scrijvers, 1991, 5-6 quoted in
Stromquist, 1995, 15-16)

Power to is defined as “generative or productive power (sometimes

incorporating or manifesting as forms of resistance or manipulation) which creates
new possibilities and actions without domination” (Rowlands 1997; 13). In other
words this is power which increases the boundaries of what is achievable for one
person without necessarily tightening the boundaries of what is achievable for
another party. For example if you learn to read it makes many more things possible
for you. It does not restrict me (except, I suppose, from using your illiteracy to
benefit myself).

Power with refers to collective action, recognising that more can be achieved by
a group acting together than by individuals alone. Many interventions aiming to
empower women note the importance of creating opportunities for women to spend
time with other women reflecting on their situation, recognising the strengths they do
posses and devising strategies to achieve positive change.

To develop critical minds women need a place where new ideas can be
discussed and new demands arise. For Sara Evans, the prerequisites for developing
an “insurgent collective identity” are:
 • Social spaces where people can develop an independent sense of worth as
opposed to their usual status as second-class or inferior citizens
• Role models – seeing people breaking out of patterns of passivity
• An ideology that explains the sources of oppression, justifies revolt, and
imagines a qualitatively different future
• A threat to the newfound sense of self which forces the individual to confront
inherited cultural definitions
• A network through which a new interpretation can spread, activating a social
movement

Empowerment in development literature

As already noted there is no single, widely accepted definition of empowerment.

On the one hand it is argued that “it is only by a focus on change to existing patterns
of power and its use that any meaningful change can be brought about” (Oakley
2001; 14). On the other hand it can be said to involve “recognising the capacities of
such groups [the marginalized and oppressed] to take action and to play an active
role in development initiatives” (Oakley 2001; 14).

Oakley identifies five key uses of the term empowerment in development

studies. These are: empowerment as participation, empowerment as democratisation,
empowerment as capacity building, empowerment through economic improvement
and empowerment and the individual (Oakley 2001; 43). He considers the link
between empowerment and participation as the strongest in practice, The World
Bank, for example, “began to recognise several stages of participation: information
sharing, consultation, collaboration and finally, empowerment” (World Bank 1998;
19).

In this primarily project-based view of empowerment the term is depoliticised,

divorced from power structures and inequalities. Oakley cites Oxfam as an example
of the more radical view which identifies empowerment as “essentially concerned
with analysing and addressing the dynamics of oppression” and “explicitly rejects
the notion that ‘participation’ in development in donor-funded projects is a sign of
‘empowerment’” (Oakley 2001; 43).

Empowerment as democratisation is concerned with macro-level political

activity. Empowerment is seen as the basis on which democratic structures and
practices can be built. This approach leads to strategies of support for civil society
structures and grassroots organisations. Capacity-building in general is often
regarded as empowering, although there are many approaches, some of which seem
little more than training.

Empowerment through economic improvement is an approach which

(unsurprisingly given women’s well-documented relative lack of economic power)
has been extensively used with women. Based on the assumption that women’s
relative powerlessness is primarily a function of their poverty, such interventions
often focus on microfinance and small business development activities, targeted at
women.
 Empowerment at the individual level is strongly influenced by Freire’s work and
includes consciousness raising and the development of a critical faculty (Freire
1974).

However, despite its having “identified empowerment as a… primary

development assistance goal… neither the World Bank nor any other major
development agency has developed a rigorous method for measuring and tracking
changes in levels of empowerment” (Malhotra, A. et al 2002, 3).

UNIFEM (the United Nations Development Fund for Women) considers that
women’s economic empowerment is essential for any strategy of poverty alleviation
and defines this as “having access to and control over the means to make a living on
a sustainable and long term basis, and receiving the material benefits of this access
and control. Such a definition goes beyond short-term goals of increasing women’s
access to income and looks for longer term sustainable benefits, not only in terms of
changes to laws and policies that constrain women’s participation in and benefits
from development, but also in terms of power relationships at the household,
community and market levels.

Here empowerment is linked specifically to women and this too is now common
in development discourse. The Platform for Action and the Beijing Declaration
declares the United Nation’s determination to “intensify efforts to ensure equal
enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all women and girls
who face multiple barriers to their empowerment and advancement because of such
factors as their race, age, language, culture, religion or disability or because they are
indigenous people” (United Nations, 1985; para 32).

Kabeer, in an influential paper, suggests that “empowerment…refers to the

process by which those who have been denied the ability to make strategic life
choices acquire such an ability” (Kabeer 1999; 437). This definition makes clear that
only those previously denied such abilities can be considered to be empowered and
also that the choices in question are strategic. Kabeer defines strategic choices as
ones “which are critical for people to live the lives they want (such as choice of
livelihood, whether and who to marry, whether to have children etc)” as opposed to
“less consequential choices which may be important for the quality of one’s life but
do not constitute its defining parameters” (Kabeer 1999, 437). It is worth noting that
this use of the term “strategic” is different from that popularised by Moser where
women’s “strategic” interests are those which challenge their subordination as
women while their “practical” interests are those which help them to carry out their
gender-assigned roles more easily.

Empowerment is, first and foremost, about power; changing power relations in
favour of those who previously exercised little power over their own lives. Batliwala
(1993) defines power as having two central aspects -- control over resources
(physical, human, intellectual, financial, and the self), and control over ideology
(beliefs, values and attitudes). If power means control, then empowerment therefore
is the process of gaining control. An intrinsic feminist mistrust of and discomfort
with hierarchy has led to some discussion about the meaning of power itself, a
questioning of the ethics of power over others (people, Nature), and its substitution
by a notion of power as the ability to be, to express oneself. In the latter sense, the
concept of power is quite close to the notion of human capability.

One might argue that power in any one sense, extrinsic control or intrinsic
capability, can lead to the other. Control over the external world of resources also
gives one the capacity for self-expression in a variety of ways. On the other hand,
greater self-confidence and a process of inner transformation of one’s consciousness,
can enable one to overcome external barriers to accessing resources. In neither case
can there be a guarantee that power in one sense will inevitably lead to power in the
other sense, but the history of development practice on the ground has plenty of
examples of both. Many socialist transformations have started with major shifts in
control over material resources between classes in a society, and expanding there
from the capabilities and self-confidence of those who previously had been at the
bottom of the social ladder. On the other side, many development programmes which
did not attempt to challenge the larger status quo, have started by strengthening the
consciousness of people about the causes of their situation, and built on this to
transform their control over external resources.

In whichever order change occurs, genuine empowerment typically includes

both elements, and is rarely sustainable without either. A change in access to external
resources without a change in consciousness can leave people without the resilience,
motivation and awareness to retain and/or build on that control, leaving space open
for others to wrest control. Many (especially but not exclusively) government-run
development programmes which start with good intentions, degenerate in this way.
However, the reverse is also problematic. Programmes which start by raising
people’s consciousness but are unable to deliver greater control over material
resources, can lead to frustration and high dropout rates. Non-governmental
organizations in particular have considerable experience of this pitfall. To be
sustainable the empowerment process must alter both people's self-perception and
their control over their lives and their material environments.
It should be clear from this that empowerment is not something that can be done
to someone by someone else. Changes in consciousness and self-perception are one's
own, and when they occur, can be the most explosively creative, energy releasing
transformations, from which there is often no looking back. They can tap powerful
reservoirs of hope and enthusiasm among people who have been used to viewing
themselves and their worlds in purely negative terms. External change agents may be
needed as the essential catalysts who start it off, but the momentum of the
empowerment process is set by the extent and the rapidity with which people change
themselves. What this means is that governments do not empower people; people
empower themselves. What governments' policies and actions can do is to create a
supportive environment or act as a barrier to the empowerment process.

. Empowerment is often about both groups and individuals. Because the poor
and powerless in today's world lead such fragmented and marginalized lives, group
solidarity can be a powerful fostering force. It can make people realize the wisdom
of the old fable about the bundle of sticks that is much harder to break than the single
stick. However, developing group processes through sharing visions and supporting
each other can sometimes be quite difficult especially where the pressures of intra-
group competition and rivalry are strong. Nonetheless, some of the best examples of
empowerment from many countries all have used group processes effectively to
break isolation and build strength. In some cases, such as that of the Grameen Bank,
group processes have also been used to ensure individual accountability. Individuals
tend to be more accountable to groups of their peers with whom they have to
continue to live and work, than to external agents with whom they do not have to
share their daily lives.

Although empowerment through group processes can be highly effective,

ultimately empowerment must lead to change at the individual level not only in
terms of control over extrinsic resources, but also greater autonomy and authority in
decision making, assertiveness etc. Some theories of empowerment in the past have
ignored or even denied the individual element, believing that a focus on individual
autonomy is tantamount to an acceptance of atomisation and a negation of group
interests and interactions. In recent times, it is women's movements that have
asserted the importance of individual autonomy through the struggle to make the
personal political. In order to be truly empowered, poor people must be able to go
beyond their consciousness of themselves as eternal victims, to transcend their “ self-
perception towards greater control over their lives and environments. This internal
change in awareness, while catalyzed by group processes, is profoundly and
intensely personal and individual.

A final issue for this section on empowerment is its relationship to participation,

decentralization, or bottom-up approaches to development. While these concepts
have often been used synonymously, they have distinct meanings which are far from
identical. Empowerment (of those who have previously been powerless in the social
order) is an end in itself, while decentralization, bottom-up approaches, and to a
certain extent, participation, may be viewed as means to an end. That end may or
may not be the empowerment of the poor. Decentralization of central governmental
authority may pave the way for greater control over decision making at the local
level, and for development programmes that are more responsive to people’s needs.
But decentralization may also imply devolution of resources and power from central
to local governments, without any empowerment of the poor..

Participation is a weaker concept than empowerment, in that it is compatible

with a multiplicity of conflicting ends. Where its aim is to genuinely involve people,
and particularly the powerless, in formulating development strategies and policies,
making decisions about programmes, and monitoring and evaluating them, it can
create an environment that is conducive to empowerment. On the other hand, spaces
may be opened up for groups, communities or localities to participate in government
development programmes simply because governments or agencies wish to pass on
some of the costs to them, or primarily in the interests of programme efficiency.
Indeed, if the intent is not to empower people to have a voice in making decisions,
then the leash can be held quite tightly by authorities who will circumscribe and limit
the nature of participation. Indonesia's family planning programme is an example.
Participation may also be entirely superficial, intended to satisfy donor agencies or to
dampen pressures for greater democracy, but consisting in fact of nothing more than
cursory “consultation”. Calls for participation can therefore be sidestepped or
subverted unless objectives are clearly specified, and the methods to be used are
transparent and genuine.

Empowerment Consensus on Conceptualization

Given the diversity in the emphases and agendas in discussions on women’s

empowerment, we found greater consensus in the literature on its conceptualization
than expected. There is a nexus of a few key, overlapping terms that are most often
included in defining empowerment: options, choice, control, and power. Most often
these are referring to women’s ability to make decisions and affect outcomes of
importance to themselves and their families. Control over one’s own life and over
resources is often stressed. Thus, there is frequent reference to some variant of the
ability to “affect one’s own well being,” and “make strategic life choices.” For
example, G. Sen (1993) defines empowerment as “altering relations of
power…which constrain women’s options and autonomy and adversely affect health
and well-being.” Batliwala’s (1994) definition is in terms of “how much influence
people have over external actions that matter to their welfare.” Keller and Mbwewe
(1991, as cited in Rowlands 1995) describe it as “a process whereby women become
able to organize themselves to increase their own self-reliance, to assert their
independent right to make choices and to control resources which will assist in
challenging and eliminating their own subordination.”

Also appearing frequently in definitions of empowerment is an element related

to the concept of human agency— self-efficacy. Drawing mainly from the human
rights and feminist perspectives, many definitions contain the idea that a
fundamental shift in perceptions, or “inner transformation,” is essential to the
formulation of choices. That is, women should be able to define self-interest and
choice, and consider themselves as not only able but also entitled to make choices
(A. Sen 1999; G. Sen 1993; Kabeer 2001; Rowlands 1995; Nussbaum 2000; Chen
1992). Kabeer (2001) goes a step further and describes this process in terms of
“thinking outside the system” and challenging the status quo.
Gender equality discourse in empowerment
Similarly, “women’s empowerment,” “gender equality” and “gender equity” are
separate but closely related concepts. The recent policy research report by the World
Bank (2001a) employs the term “gender equality,” which it defines in terms of
equality under the law, equality of opportunity (including equality of rewards for
work and equality in access to human capital and other productive resources that
enable opportunity), and equality of voice (the ability to influence and contribute to
the development process). Gender equality implies “equivalence in life outcomes for
women and men, recognizing their different needs and interests, and requiring a
redistribution of power and resources.” Gender equity “recognizes that women and
men have different needs, preferences, and interests and that equality of outcomes
may necessitate different treatment of men and women” (Reeves and Baden
2000:10).

The current popularity of the term empowerment in development coincides with

recent questioning of the efficacy of central planning and the role of ‘the state’, and
moves by donor governments and multilateral funding agencies to embrace NGOs as
partners in development. Political and institutional problems have gained
prominence on the development agenda with a focus on human rights, good
governance and participation. (Razavi and Miller, 1995).

Recent UN conferences have advocated that women’s empowerment is central

to development. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED) Agenda 21 mentions women’s advancement and empowerment in
decision-making, including women’s participation in ‘national and international
ecosystem management and control of environment degradation’ as a key area for
sustainable development (quoted in Wee and Heyzer, 1995: 7). The International
Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo, discussed the
population issue not just as a technical, demographic problem, but as a choice that
women should be empowered to take within the context of their health and
reproductive rights. The Copenhagen Declaration of the World Summit on Social
Development (WSSD), called for the recognition that empowering people,
particularly women, to strengthen their own capacities is a main objective of
development, and that empowerment requires the full participation of people in the
formulation, implementation and evaluation of decisions determining the functioning
and well-being of societies. The Report of the UN Fourth World Conference on
Women called its Platform for Action ‘an agenda for women’s empowerment’
meaning that ‘the principle of shared power and responsibility should be established
between women and men at home, in the workplace and in the wider national and
international communities’ (UN, 1995a, no. 1).

The empowerment approach to women in development offers a number of

attractions for development agencies over the other approaches. Because its origins
are often stated as being from the South, it may appeal to Northern development
institutions who wish to avoid charges of cultural imperialism, especially in relation
to gender policies.3 The bottom-up characterisation of the empowerment approach
can be regarded as more in tune with the growing interest in participatory forms of
development4. Current enthusiasm for NGOs, for ‘bottom up development’ and for
empowerment, from both advocates within development organisations and from
outside activists, can also be understood as a reaction to the frustrating experience of
attempts to institutionalise gender in mainstream development policies and
programmes (Razavi and Miller, 1995).

Empowerment as a process

Empowerment is essentially a bottom-up process rather than something that can

be formulated as a top-down strategy. Understanding empowerment in this way
means that development agencies cannot claim to ‘empower women’. Women must
empower themselves. Devising coherent policies and programmes for women’s
empowerment requires careful attention, because external agencies/bodies tend to be
positioned with ‘power-over’ target populations. The training of development
professionals, in government, NGOs or donor agencies does not always equip them
to consult and involve others, which supporting empowerment requires.
 Appropriate external support and intervention, however, can be important to
foster and support the process of empowerment. Development organisations can,
under some circumstances, play an enabling or facilitating role. They can ensure that
their programmes work to support women’s individual empowerment by
encouraging women’s participation, acquisition of skills, decision-making capacity,
and control over resources. Agencies can support women’s collective empowerment
by funding women’s organisations which work to address the causes of gender
subordination, by promoting women’s participation in political systems, and by
fostering dialogue between those in positions of power and organisations with
women’s empowerment goals.

However, caution should be exercised against assuming that promoting a certain

type of activity will necessary lead to ‘empowerment’, as will be illustrated in
section 2. Empowerment cannot be defined in terms of specific activities or end
results because it involves a process whereby women can freely analyse, develop and
voice their needs and interests, without them being pre-defined, or imposed from
above, by planners or other social actors.

The assumption that planners can identify women’s needs runs against
empowerment objectives which imply that women themselves formulate and decide
what these interests are. Planning suggests a top-down approach, and yet women
may define their interests differently from planners (Wierenga, 1994).

Planners working towards an empowerment approach must therefore develop

ways of enabling women themselves to critically assess their own situation and
create and shape a transformation in society. To some extent this may run against the
logic of ‘planning’, because the content of such a transformation cannot be
determined by planners in advance, if it is to be truly empowering to women.
Wierenga (ibid.) argues that this transformation should be seen as part of an ongoing
process rather than as a fixed goal in the distant future.
Current approaches to women’s empowerment

A number of areas of activity in development have become closely associated

with the promotion of women’s empowerment, such as microcredit, political
participation and reproductive health and much innovative work has been done in
these areas.

However, there are clearly limits on the extent to which such activities in and of
themselves can be said to be genuinely empowering. There is a tendency to assume
that increasing access to resources, or decision-making power in one area, will
necessarily carry through into other areas. It is not the delivery of credit per se, but
the context in which credit is delivered is which is vital in ensuring that women’s
control over resources and bargaining power is increased. Similarly, increased
decision-making power at individual level and greater access to economic resources
of women do not necessarily translate into greater representation or power of women
within political institutions, an area which has proved remarkably resistant to change.
Conversely, empowerment in one area cannot be sustained without attention to other
facets. Reproductive and sexual rights, for example, cannot be fully exercised where
women’s lack of independent economic resources undermines their freedom to make
choices and bargaining power.

Implementation of an empowerment approach in the context of hierarchically

organised development organisations may prove difficult, where organisational
cultures are biased against the participation and autonomy in decision-making of
beneficiaries. This suggests that not just activities and policy frameworks but also
organisational structures and processes need to be examined in promoting
‘empowerment’ and that personnel may need to alter their style of working. The
emphasis on participation adopted by many development agencies is significant for
empowerment, as projects and programmes should seek to be accountable to those
they claim to be empowering. Such issues of accountability may present a challenge
to donor agencies, whose ultimate responsibilities lie elsewhere than with target
groups or beneficiaries.

Empowerment is demonstrated by the quality of people’s participation in the

decisions and processes affecting their lives. In theory, empowerment and
participation should be different sides of the same coin. In practice, much of what
passes for popular participation in development and relief work is not in any way
empowering to the poorest and most disadvantaged people in society (Oxfam
1995:14).

For participation to promote empowerment it needs to be more than a process of

consultation over decisions already made elsewhere. Strategies to support women’s
empowerment should encourage women’s participation at all stages of projects,
including evaluation. Attention to location and timing of meetings are also important
to ensure women’s participation. In this way, the process of participation should
itself be empowering. More research is needed to bring a gender perspective into the
current debates on participation. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and other
approaches such as action research, and community research by women (e.g. on
health issues) can be explored as methods which increase female participation and
control over knowledge. However, such methods should not be adopted uncritically,
since they can silence dissenting perspectives, including those of women (Mosse,
1994).

Participation may arouse conflict between different groups in a community

especially when the basic principles of an aid agency differ from views within a
particular community (e.g. on gender equality). Participation should not involve
ignoring these conflicting interests in order to reach consensus (Oxfam, 1995).

Supporting women’s organisations is one broad approach to promoting women’s

empowerment, which takes account of the collective aspects of empowerment.
However, this can prove difficult, or backfire, if the availability of external funding
and organisational changes which this brings about, undermine accountability to
membership or creates internal tensions. Women’s organisations are very varied and
may not always serve the interests of poor women, or work in ways which support
empowerment. Women’s organisations which are empowering to women should by
definition be accountable to their membership rather than an external agency. When
organisations accept funding from an external source, they become accountable to
the donor, as well as their members, sometimes leading to changes in structures and
procedures, or tensions over how to allocate newly generated resources. Women’s
movements or networks may be loosely constituted and may be reluctant to accept
funding either for ideological reasons or because of the level of formal organisation
it can entail.

Feminist notions of Empowerment

The feminist notions of empowerment see women as acting agents and not as
beneficiaries, clients, participants, etc. and they deal with the question of power. In
analysing the literature on empowerment Jo Rowlands has made following
classifcations of power (1998):

• power over: controlling power over some one and something. Response to it
can be compliance, resistance or manipulation
• power to: generative or productive power that creates new possibilities and
actions without domination
• power with: power generating a feeling that the whole is greater than the sum
of individuals and action as a group is more effective
• power from within: a sense that there is strength that is in each and every
individual. The recognition of one´s own self-acceptance and self-respect enables the
acceptance of others as equals

Most of the definitions on empowerment imply the dimension of „power over“,

i.e. access to decision-making, etc. In contrast, „power with“ relates to a notion of
collective power. Medel-Anonuevo has suggested that many women´s NGOs in the
South relate to this kind of understanding where changes are brought about by a
sense of „together with others“ (Medel-Anonuevo 1996).

Naila Kabeer (1994) subscribes not so much to „power over“ but to „power
within“ yourself that needs to be strengthened. She undertakes a deconstruction of
the notions of power and unfolds the theoretical and practical potential of
empowerment. „Power within“ needs recognition by experience and analysis of the
subordination of women. According to Kabeer, such power cannot be given, it has to
be self-generated and taken. Empowerment is a process where women are able to
change from a state of powerlessness („I cannot“) to a state of collective self-
confidence („we can“).

Besides the notion of power any attempt to theorise empowerment would

involve in framing the concept in cognitive, psychological, economical and political
aspects (Stromquist 1993). The cognitive aspect refers the ability of women to
understand the situation of subordination in society at the micro- as well as macro-
level and also to take decisions that are against the cultural and social norms. It
involves learning other notions of gender relations and the dismissal of beliefs that
structure the powerful traditional gender ideologies. Cognitive dimension includes
knowing about one´s sexuality and demystifying old taboos, knowing one´s
fundamental rights, unpaid work and also elements that constitute life in marriage,
with children and in the household.
 The psychological aspect refers to the developing of the feeling that women can
make a contribution to improve their situation and that their action will be
successful. It includes developing self-esteem. However, self-respect and self-esteem
cannot be taught rather a situation must be created where these can develop. There
needs to be space where women can assert themselves.

Though the psychological aspect is important it needs to be strengthened by

economical aspects. Reducing economic dependency can be a basis for
empowerment. Women need to be engaged in a productive activity that gives them
some financial autonomy.

The political aspect involves the capacity to analyse a situation in a political and
social context. It includes the ability to organise and mobilise for social change. The
process of empowerment covers not only awareness at the individual level but also at
the collective level. This results in collective action which again is the precondition
for collective change.

Empowerment as a relational category

Processes that were supposedly to bring empowerment have in fact meant

disempowerment to women. In historical terms, modernisation processes were also
legitimised by arguments of empowerment of women. However, modernisation has
resulted in more disempowerment of women in some parts of the Third World
(Boserup 1970, Mies/Shiva 1993). The introduction of the cash economy can
disempower women (Afshar 1989).

Also, empowerment does not effect everyone in the same way. It is necessary to
study empowerment in relation to disempowerment. Empowerment of some can
mean disempowerment of others. Nira Yuval Davis has pointed out the problem of
conflicting interests that needs to be handled. Hence empowerment must be seen as a
relational category.

Individual vs. collective

In the prevailing literature empowerment is located to a large extent at the

individual level. The individual notion must be contrasted to the notion of
„entrepreunal selfreliance“ that is prevalent in mainstream development. Developing
self-esteem is an important prerequisite. However, in order to enhance changes in
women´s power within society the individualistic notion does not suffice. Personal
empowerment is one of the factors of a holistic understanding of empowerment.
Also, it does not automatically lead to empowerment between relationships. It is the
collective ways of learning and collective ways of acting and resisting that brings
about change.

Empowerment is achieved if and when women set the agenda, organise mutual
selfhelp in the neighbourhood, group or network, demand accountability by the state
and society for change. It is the women´s needs and visions that are at the centre
point (Young 1993).

Since the beginning of the 90s with the World Conference on Environment and
Development the global perspective has become increasingly important in the
political arena. This found its reflection in the slogan „Think globally - act locally“
that initiated processes of environmental protection all over the world, but especially
in Northern countries. The accelerating process of globalisation has necessitated
local as well as global action. However, how global is „global“ though? And how
local is „local“? „Local“ could be associated with things happening in the
neighbourhood, municipality community, city or a region. But increasingly groups at
the grass-roots level in the South articulate issues that are primariliy global.
Enviromental action or activisim in free trade zones are examples of local action
with a global perspective.

On the other hand, there are groups and governments predominantly in the
North (but also in the South) that claim to have a global perspective but actually turn
out be very parochial. The Rio-Conference 1992 was supposed to be on global
environement aiming to save the planet and solve problems considered to be a
concern of the humankind as a whole. But at the same time the US President Bush
insisted that the American lifestyle is not at the disposition. In the name of global
thinking and action there was assertion of the resource consuming lifesyle affordable
to very few and at the cost of the majority of the people on earth.

Similar interpretations of the „local“ and „global“ can be found even in action of
the international women´s movement. At the Cairo-Conference, the major issue of
development was sidelined, abortion turned out to be the major issue which lead to
unholy coalitions of women from the North and the conservative forces. Women
from the South raised many issues from development, health, education to human
rights. It could be said that the Southern women were more global whereas the
Northern women were „monolithising abortion“ (Spivak 1996)

Empowerment's Potential - Typology and Examples

The examples in this section are drawn from recent Indian experiences, but
similar cases exist elsewhere, and the typology is more generally applicable. There
are three main types of empowerment, when cases are classified by the nature and
role of the change agent: (i) those that are catalyzed by NGOs, (ii) those that develop
as people's movements in which the change agents may be external or internal, and
(iii) joint government-NGO initiatives. Each type has specific strengths and
weaknesses. NGO based experiments have the plus of being innovative, flexible, and
responsive in both their substantive content and their methods. One reason is that,
with a few exceptions, they tend to start small and remain small. Thus, while they
can generate interesting new experiments, their results are not easily replicable or
expandable. This problem is often compounded by the fact that key personnel are
few in number, and the leadership structure of many organizations is quite thin.
Although many NGO tend to guard their autonomy quite fiercely, the kind of work
they generally do - providing different services, or supporting functions - can mean
that they have to work within the larger political if not social status quo without
challenging it directly. This constraint is probably less strict for advocacy NGOs than
for those providing services.

People's social movements, unlike NGO, are not constrained in this manner, and
many quite consciously set out to alter the social and political status quo. By the very
nature of their work, if successful, they tend to be large and may extend beyond
specific locales. Their strength is that they are able to go directly to the heart of the
causes of poor people's lack of power and work to transform them. But this can also
mean that they may face opposition (sometimes violent) from those who control
resources, a violence from which they may not be able to insulate their weakest and
most powerless members.

Interestingly, some of the most exciting of recent empowerment experiences in

India are the result of joint actions by government and the non-governmental sector.
As we will see in some of the examples below, these are able to avoid the NGO
problem of small size and weak replicability, as well as to use the power of the state
(to some extent at least) to tackle the vested interests of the powerful. But their
strength can also be their weakness, in that they are constantly under pressure to
adapt to the needs and methods of government; the danger of cooption or of
succumbing to bureaucratic or political pressures from within government are ever
present.

Programme-related indicators of empowerment

Hashemi et al (1996) undertook ethnographic research in six villages for four

years to measure the effects of programmes on the empowerment of women. Two
villages were Grameen Bank villages, two were BRAC villages, and the other two
had no credit programmes. They used a model based on eight indicators of
empowerment which were:

• mobility; economic security;

• ability to make small purchases;
• ability to make larger purchases;
• involvement in major household decisions;
• relative freedom from domination within the family;
• political and legal awareness;and involvement in political campaigning
and protests

CIDA argue that because of the complex nature of measuring empowerment,

qualitative and quantitative indicators need to be underpinned by qualitative analysis.
Some key questions for the qualitative analysis suggested are:

• How have changes in national/ local legislation empowered or

disempowered women or men (e.g. concerning control over resources such as land)?

• What is the role of local institutions in empowering/disempowering

women/men?
 • Is the part women as compared to men, are playing in major decisions in
their locality/household increasing or decreasing?

• Is there more acknowledgement of the importance of tasks customarily

carried out by women, e.g. child care?

• How are women organising to increase their empowerment, for example

against violence?

• If employment and education for women are increasing, is this leading to

greater empowerment?

Measuring Empowerment from a Universalist Perspective

As we move from a discussion of conceptualizing empowerment to measuring

it, it is important to note that measures of empowerment must involve standards that
lie outside localized gender systems and a recognition of universal elements of
gender subordination (Sen and Grown 1987; Bisnath and Elson 1999; Nussbaum
2000). It is clear from the literature on gender and empowerment that the role of
gender in development cannot be understood without understanding the socio-
cultural (as well as political and economic) contexts in which development takes
place. The concept of empowerment has meaning only within these specific contexts.
At the same time, operational definitions (e.g., definitions embodied in indicators to
be applied in the context of development assistance policies, programs, and projects)
should be consistent with the spirit of international conventions to which countries
providing international development assistance have been signatories. The approach
based in universal human rights offers the best operational framework for this task.

Local structures of gender inequality are typically experienced as “natural,” and

therefore may seem unalterable to actors in a particular social setting. Kabeer (2001)
elaborates on this point drawing on Bourdieu’s 1977 idea of “doxa”—the “aspects of
tradition and culture which are so taken-for-granted that they have become
naturalized.” When women internalize their subordinate status and view themselves
as persons of lesser value, their sense of their own rights and entitlements is
diminished. They may acquiesce to violence against them, and make “choices” that
reinforce their subordinate status. For example, in her life cycle, a South Asian
woman may “graduate” from the comparatively subservient position of daughter-in-
law to that of mother-in-law, and in this role she may dominate her son’s wife. Based
on the “agency” criterion for describing something as empowerment, one might call
this behavior empowered. As a mother-in-law, the woman gained the ability to
exercise agency (in the form of power over another person), in a way that she could
not when she was a young woman herself. But, we would argue against such a use of
the term empowerment. The mother-in-law is acting within an inequitable gender
system that severely constrains her ability to make strategic life choices. The system
lets her exercise power, but only in ways that reinforce the system. This sort of
agency is similar to what Kabeer (2001) describes as choices that reflect women’s
consent and complicity in their own subordination. When they lack agency in a
broader sense, women should not be considered to be making empowered choices.
 Internalized subordination receives particular attention among writers on
international education, informed by a Freirian perspective on raising the critical
consciousness of the poor (Freire 1994[1973]). For example, Stromquist writes that
empowerment includes cognitive and psychological elements: It involves “women’s
understanding of their conditions of subordination and the causes of such conditions
at both micro and macro levels of society…. It involves understanding the self and
the need to make choices that may go against cultural and social expectations”
(1993:14). Thus, universal standards are necessary to identify empowerment.

Multidimensionality and Existing Frameworks

As early as 1981, Acharya and Bennett noted that status is a function of the
power attached to a given role, and because women fill a number of roles, it may be
misleading to speak of “the status of women” (p. 3). Another early writer on the
topic, Mason (1986), pointed out that the phenomenon of gender inequality is
inherently complex, that men and women are typically unequal in various ways, and
that the nature or extent of their inequality in different settings can vary across these
different dimensions (as well by social setting and stage in the life cycle). Since that
time, a number of studies have shown that women may be empowered in one area of
life while not in others (Malhotra and Mather 1997; Kishor 1995 and 2000b;
Hashemi et al. 1996; Beegle et al. 1998). Thus it should not be assumed that if a
development intervention promotes women’s empowerment along a particular
dimension that empowerment in other areas will necessarily follow. It may or may
not.

Several different efforts have been made in recent years to develop

comprehensive frameworks delineating the various dimensions along which women
can be empowered. In Appendix A, we present the essential elements of the
empowerment frameworks developed by selected authors. These frameworks
employ different levels of specificity. For example, the CIDA (1996) framework
includes four broad dimensions of empowerment, while Kishor’s (2000a) framework
includes broad (e.g., valuation of women, equality in marriage) as well specific (e.g.,
lifetime exposure to employment) elements.

In Table 1, we synthesize and list the most commonly used dimensions of

women’s empowerment, drawing from the frameworks developed by these various
authors. Allowing for overlap, these frameworks suggest that women’s
empowerment needs to occur along the following dimensions: economic, socio-
cultural, familial/interpersonal, legal, political, and psychological. However, these
dimensions are very broad in scope, and within each dimension, there is a range of
sub-domains within which women may be empowered. So, for example, the “socio-
cultural” dimension covers a range of empowerment sub-domains, from marriage
systems to norms regarding women’s physical mobility, to non-familial social
support systems and networks available to women. Moreover, in order to
operationalize these dimensions, one should consider indicators at various levels of
social aggregation -- the household and the community, as well as regional, national,
and even global levels. In the table we group commonly used and potentially useful
indicators within various “arenas” or spheres of life. Some of these indicators have
been suggested within the frameworks referenced above, while others are a first
effort on our part to “flesh out” this schematic for application in development
assistance contexts.

Table 1. Individual/household-level indicators of empowerment used in

empirical studies.

Most-Frequently-Used Indicators

Domestic decision-making
Finances, resource allocation, spending, expenditures
Social and domestic matters (e.g., cooking)
Child-related issues (e.g., well-being, schooling, health)

Access to or control over resources

Access to, control of cash, household income, assets, unearned income,
welfare receipts, household budget, participation in paid employment

Mobility/freedom of movement

Less-Frequently-Used Indicators

Economic contribution to household

Time use/division of domestic labor

Freedom from violence

Management/knowledge
Farm management
Accounting knowledge
Managerial control of loan

Public space
Political participation (e.g., public protests, political campaigning)
Confidence in community actions
Development of social and economic collective

Marriage/kin/social support
Traditional support networks
Social status of family of origin
Assets brought to marriage
Control over choosing a spouse

Couple interaction
Couple communication
 Negotiation and discussion of sex

Appreciation in household

Sense of self worth

Table -2 Dimensions of empowerment

in the household, community, and broader arenas.
Dimensi Broader
Household Community
on Arenas
Economic Women’s Women’s Women’s
control over access to representation in
income; relative employment; high paying jobs;
contribution to ownership of assets women CEOs;
family support; and land; access to representation of
access to and credit; involvement women’s
control of family and/or economic interests
resources representation in in macroeconomic
local trade policies, state and
associations; access federal budgets
to markets
Socio- Women’s Women’s Women’s
Cultural freedom of visibility in and literacy and access
movement; lack access to social to a broad range of
of discrimination spaces; access to educational
against daughters; modern options; Positive
commitment to transportation; media images of
educating participation in women, their roles
daughters extra-familial and contributions
groups and social
networks; shift in
patriarchal norms
(such as son
preference);
symbolic
representation of
the female in myth
and ritual

Familial/ Participation Shifts in Regional/natio

Interpersonal in domestic marriage and nal trends in
decision-making; kinship systems timing of marriage,
control over indicating greater options for
sexual relations; value and divorce; political,
ability to make autonomy for legal, religious
childbearing women (e.g., later support for (or lack
decisions, use marriages, self of active
contraception, selection of opposition to) such
access abortion; spouses, reduction shifts; systems
 control over in the practice of providing easy
spouse selection dowry; access to
and marriage acceptability of contraception, safe
timing; freedom divorce); local abortion,
from domestic campaigns against reproductive health
violence domestic violence services

Legal Knowledge Community Laws

of legal rights; mobilization for supporting
domestic support rights; campaigns women’s rights,
for exercising for rights access to resources
rights awareness; and options;
effective local Advocacy for
enforcement of rights and
legal rights legislation; use of
judicial system to
redress rights
violations

Political Knowledge Women’s Women’s

of political involvement or representation in
system and means mobilization in the regional and
of access to it; local political national bodies of
domestic support system/campaigns; government;
for political support for specific strength as a
engagement; candidates or voting bloc;
exercising the legislation; representation of
right to vote representation in women’s interests
local bodies of in effective lobbies
government and interest groups

Psychological Self-esteem; Collective Women’s

self-efficacy; awareness of sense of inclusion
psychological injustice, potential and entitlement;
well-being of mobilization systemic
acceptance of
women’s
entitlement and
inclusion

Dimensions of Empowerment
Proposed by Selected Authors
 CIDA 1996 Legal empowerment
Political empowerment
Economic empowerment
Social empowerment

Jejeebhoy 1995 Knowledge autonomy

Decision-making autonomy
Physical autonomy
Emotional autonomy
Economic and social autonomy and self-reliance

Kishor 2000a Financial autonomy

Participation in the modern sector
Lifetime exposure to employment
Sharing of roles and decision-making
Family structure amenable to empowerment
Equality in marriage
(lack of) Devaluation of women
Women’s emancipation
Marital advantage
Traditional marriage

Schuler and Hashemi Mobility and visibility

1993 Economic security
Status and decision-making power within the
household
Ability to interact effectively in the public sphere
Participation in nonfamily groups

Stromquist 1995 Cognitive

Psychological
Economic
Political

A. Sen 1999 Absence of gender inequality in:

Mortality rates
Natality rates
Access to basic facilities such as schooling
Access to professional training and higher
education
Employment
Property ownership
Household work and decision-making

Difficulties in Measuring a “Process”

 Many writers describe empowerment as a “process,” as opposed to a condition
or state of being, a distinction that we have emphasized as a key defining feature of
empowerment. However, as “moving targets,” processes are difficult to measure,
especially with the standard empirical tools available to social scientists. In this
section we discuss the major methodological challenges in measuring the process of
women’s empowerment, including: the use of direct measures as opposed to proxy
indicators, the lack of availability and use of data across time, the subjectivity
inherent in assessing processes, and the shifts in relevance of indicators over time.

Some authors who have made efforts at empirically measuring empowerment

have argued that as a process, it cannot be measured directly, but only through
proxies such as health, education level, knowledge (Ackerly 1995). For example,
Kishor (2000a) has argued that while the end product of empowerment can be
measured through direct indicators, the process can be measured only through
proxies such as education and employment. Several large-scale studies of
relationships between gender and economic or demographic change have used proxy
variables. However, an increasing body of research indicates that commonly used
proxy variables such as education or employment are conceptually distant from the
dimensions of gender stratification that are hypothesized to effect the outcomes of
interest in these studies, and may in some cases be irrelevant or misleading (Mason
1995, p.8-11; Govindasamy and Malhotra 1996). Studies have found that the
relevance of a proxy measurement of women’s empowerment may depend on the
geographic region (Jejeebhoy 2000), the outcome being examined (Kishor 2000a), or
the dimension(s) of empowerment that is of interest (Malhotra and Mather 1997).

Mainstreaming gender in UNICEF: the Women’s Empowerment Framework

UNICEF has adopted the Women’s Empowerment Framework, developed by
Sara Longwe, as an appropriate approach to be used in mainstreaming gender. The
framework states that Women’s development can be viewed in terms of five levels of
equality, of which empowerment is an essential element at each level. The levels are:

1. Welfare: this addresses only the basic needs of women, without recognising
or attempting to solve the underlying structural causes which necessitate provision of
welfare services. Women are merely passive beneficiaries of welfare benefits.

2. Access: equality of access to resources such as educational opportunities, land

and credit is essential for women to make meaningful progress. The path of
empowerment is initiated when women recognise lack of access to resources as a
barrier to their growth and overall well-being and take action to redress this.

3. Awareness-raising: for women to take appropriate action to close gender gaps

or gender inequalities, there must be recognition that their problems stem from
inherent structural and institutional discrimination. They must also recognise the role
that women themselves often play in reinforcing the system that restricts their
growth.

4. Participation: this is the point where women take decisions equally alongside
men. Mobilisation is necessary in order to reach this level. Women will be
empowered to gain increased representation, by organising themselves and working
collectively, which will lead to increased empowerment and ultimately greater
control.

5. Control: The ultimate level of equality and empowerment, where there is a

balance of power between women and men and neither has dominance. Women are
able to make decisions regarding their lives and the lives of their children and play
an active role in the development process. The contributions of women are fully
recognised and rewarded.

Legal empowerment Indicators include:

• the enforcement of legislation related to the protection of human rights;
• number of cases related to women’s rights heard in local courts, and their
results;
• number of cases related to the legal rights of divorced and widowed
women heard
in local courts, and results;
• the effect of the enforcement of legislation in terms of treatment of
offenders;
• increase/decrease in violence against women;
• rate at which the number of local justices/ prosecutors/ lawyers who are
women/men is increasing/decreasing;
• rate at which the number of women/men in the local police force, by rank
is increasing or decreasing.
Political empowerment indicators include:
• percentage of seats held by women in local councils/ decision-making
bodies;
• percentage of women in decision-making positions in local government;
• percentage of women in the local civil service;
• percentage of women/men registered as voters/ percentage of eligible
women/men who vote;
• percentage of women in senior/junior decision-making positions within
unions;
• percentage of union members who are women/men;
• number of women who participate in public progress and political
campaigning as
compared to the number of men.
For economic empowerment, changes should be noted over time:
• changes in employment/unemployment rates of women and men;
• changes in time use in selected activities, particularly greater sharing by
household members of unpaid housework and child-care;
• salary/wage differentials between women and men;
• changes in percentage of property owned and controlled by women and
men (land,
houses, livestock), across socio-economic and ethnic groups;
• average household expenditure of female/male households on education/
health;
ability to make small or large purchases independently;
 • percentage of available credit, financial and technical support services
going to
women/men from government/ non-government sources.
Social empowerment, changes over time of:
• numbers of women in local institutions (e.g. women’s associations, income
generating groups etc.) to project are population, and numbers of women in positions
of power in local institutions;
• extent of training or networking among local women, as compared to men;
control
of women over fertility decisions (e.g. number of children, number of
abortions);
• mobility of women within and outside their residential locality, as
compared to
men.

In addition to these quantitative indicators are a series of suggested qualitative

indicators comprised of indicator questions to assess empowerment:

• To what degree are women aware of local politics, and their legal rights?
Are women more or less aware than men? Does this differ by socio-economic
grouping, age or ethnicity? Is this changing over time?

• Do women and men perceive that they are becoming more empowered?
Why?
• Do women perceive that they now have greater economic autonomy?
Why?
• Are changes taking place in the way in which decisions are made in the
household, and what is the perceived impact of this?
• Do women make decisions independently of men in their household? What
sort of decisions are made independently?

References

Abadian, S. 1996. “Women’s Autonomy and Its Impact on Fertility.” World

Development 24(12):1793-1809.

Acharya, Meena, and Lynn Bennett. 1983. Women and the Subsistence Sector:
Economic Participation and Household Decision-making in Nepal. Working Paper
Number 526. Washington: World Bank.

Ackerly, Brooke A. 1995. “Testing the Tools of Development: Credit

Programmes, Loan Involvement, and Women’s Empowerment.” IDS Bulletin
26(3):56-68.

Agarwal, Bina. 1997. “Bargaining and Gender Relations: Within and Beyond
the Household.” Food Consumption and Nutrition Division Discussion Paper No. 27.
International Food Policy Research Institute.
 Bardham, Kalpana, and Stephan Klasen. 1999. “UNDP’s Gender-Related
Indices: A Critical Review.” World Development 27(6):985-986.

Basu, Alaka Malwade and Kaushik Basu. 1991. “Women’s Economic Roles and
Child Survival: the Case of India.” Health Transition Review 1(1): ???.

Batliwala, Srilatha. 1994. “The meaning of Women’s Empowerment: New

Concepts from Action.” Pp. 127-138 in Population Policies Reconsidered: Health,
Empowerment and Rights. G. Sen, A. Germain, and L.C. Chen, eds. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.

Beegle, Kathleen, Elizabeth Frankenberg and Duncan Thomas. 1998.

“Bargaining power Within Couples and Use of Prenatal and Delivery Care in
Indonesia.” Studies in Family Planning 32(2):130.

Bennett, Lynn. 2002. Using Empowerment and Social Inclusion for Pro-poor
Growth: A Theory of Social Change. Working Draft of Background Paper for the
Social Development Strategy Paper. Washington: World Bank.

Bhatt, Ela. 1989. “Toward Empowerment.” World Development 17(7):1059-

1065.

Bisnath, Savitri and Diane Elson. 1999. Women’s Empowerment Revisited.

Background paper, Progress of the World’s Women. UNIFEM.

Boone, Peter. 1996. Political and Gender Oppression as a Cause of Poverty.

CEPR Discussion Paper 294. London: London School of Economics, Center for
Economic Performance.

Aithal, Vathsala (ed.) (1996): Vielfalt als Stärke: Beijing 1995 (Diversity seen
as strength), epd-Materialien, II / 1996

Aithal, Vathsala et al (eds.) (1999): Wissen, Macht, Transformation -

Interkulturelle und internationale Perspektiven (knowledge, power, transformation -
intercultural and international perspectives), Frankfurt am Main

Kabeer, Naila (1994): Reversed Realities. Gender Hierarchies in Development

Thought, London

Medel-Anonuevo: Beijing als Prozeß von Empowerment (Beijing as process of

empowerment), in: Aithal (1996)

Mies, Maria; Shiva, Vandana (1993): Ecofeminism, New Delhi

Molyneux, M. (1985): Mobilisation without Emancipation. Women´s Interests,
State and Revolution in Nicaragua, in: Vol. 11 No. 2, p. 227-254

Shetty, Salil (1991): Development Project in Assessing Empowerment,

Occasional Paper Series No. 3, New Delhi, Society for Participatory Research in
Asia

Singh, Naresh; Titi, Vangile (eds.) (1995): Empowerment towards Sustainable

Development, Halifax

Athreya, V.B. and Chunkath, S.R. 1996 Literacy and Empowerment, New
Delhi, Sage Publications
Batliwala, S. 1993 “Empowerment of women in South Asia: concepts and
practices”, (second draft), Asian-South Pacific Bureau of Adult Education
Bachrach, P. and Baratz, M. S. (1970) Power and Poverty: Theory and
Practice. New York: Oxford University Press

Sen, G. 1995 “National development and local environmental action: the case of
the river The North, the South and the Environment: Ecological Constraints and the
Global Economy (eds) V. Bhaskar and A. Glyn

Collins. P. H. (1991) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and

the Politics of Empowerment. London: Routledge
Dahl. R. (1957) The Concept of Power Behavioral Science, Vol. 2, pp201-215

Deveaux, M. (1996) Feminism and Empowerment: A Critical Reading of

Foucault In Hekman, S. J. (Ed.) Feminist Interpretations of Michel Foucault.
Pennsylvania University Press

Evans, S. (1980) Personal Politics: The Roots of Women’s Liberation in the

Civil Rights Movement and the New Left. New York: Alfred Knopf

Freire, A. and Macedo, D. (Eds) (1998) The Paulo Freire Reader. New York:
Continuum

Hartsock, N. (1990) Foucault on Power: A Theory for Women In Nicholson, L.

(Ed.) Feminism/Postmodernism

Kabeer, N. (1999) Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections on the

Measurement of Women’s Empowerment. Development and Change Vol. 30 pp
435-464

Kabeer, N. (2000) The Power to Choose: Bangladeshi Women and Labour

Market Decisions in London and Dhaka. London: Verso

Malhotra, A. et al (2002) Measuring Women’s Empowerment as a Variable in

International Development. Gender and Development Group, The World Bank

Jejeebhoy, Shireen J. and Zeba A. Sathar. 2001. “Women’s Autonomy in India

and Pakistan: The Influence of Religion and Region.” Population and Development
Review 27(4):687-712.

Kabeer, Naila. 1997. “Women, Wages and Intra-household Power Relations in

Urban Bangladesh.” Development and Change 28:261-302.

Kabeer, Naila. 1998. ‘Money Can’t Buy Me Love?’ Re-evaluating Gender,

Credit and Empowerment in Rural Bangladesh. IDS Discussion Paper 363.

Kabeer, Naila. 2001. “Reflections on the Measurement of Women’s

Empowerment.” In Discussing Women’s Empowerment-Theory and Practice. Sida
Studies No. 3. Novum Grafiska AB: Stockholm.

Khandker, Shahidur R. 1998. Fighting Poverty with Microcredit: Experience in

Bangladesh. Washington: World Bank.

Mehra, Rekha. “Women, Empowerment, and Economic Development.” The

Annals of the Academy 554:136-149.

Meinzen-Dick, Ruth, Lynn R. Brown, Hilary Sims Feldstein, and Agnes R.

Quisumbing. 1997. Gender, Property Rights, and Natural Resources. Food
Consumption and Nutrition Division Discussion Paper No. 29. Washington:
International Food Policy Research Institute.

Narayan, Deepa (ed). 2002. Empowerment and Poverty Reduction: A

Sourcebook. Washington: World Bank.

Rowlands, Jo. 1995. “Empowerment Examined.” Development in Practice

5(2):101-107.

Sen, Amartya. 1999. Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Sen, Gita. 1993. Women’s Empowerment and Human Rights: The Challenge to
Policy. Paper presented at the Population Summit of the World’s Scientific
Academies.

Sen, Gita and Caren Grown. 1987. Development, Crises, and Alternative
Visions: Third World Women’s Perspectives. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Stromquist, Nelly P. 1995. “The Theoretical and Practical Bases for

Empowerment.” Women, Education and Empowerment: Pathways Towards
Autonomy. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). 1994. The Women's Equality
and Empowerment Framework.

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). 1999. Human Rights for Children
and Women: How UNICEF Helps Make Them a Reality. Available on-line at
www.unicef.org/pubsgen/humanrights-children/index.html.
 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 1995. Human Development
Report 1995: Gender and Development. New York and Oxford: Oxford University
Press.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 1998. Human Development

Report 1998: Consumption for Human Development. New York and Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

UN Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW), Department of

Economic and