I am Sonia Baron, a recent MA graduate of Research and Evaluation Methods at Boston College and an incoming Ph.D. student in Evaluation and Applied research methods at Claremont Graduate University. Regional evaluations are resource-intensive endeavors with the task of balancing the interests of each individual sector, all while creating a deliverable that is true and unifying of the entire sector — whether that be Latin America, or the northeast in the U.S.
The UN Women for the Americas and the Caribbean commissions evaluations from The Independent Evaluation Service. While the United Nations is internationally regarded as one of the main agents of international development, whose evaluations can help determine some national indicators for most countries in a region, there are also independent networks based and operating in Latin America specialized in conducting evaluations in the region.
It is with this reflection that I fell into the question of the types of gender-responsive evaluations that occur in Latin America. Below are some reflections on how different actors can play a role in gender-responsive evaluations within this region:
Fundamentals informing an evaluation: systems of accountability vs. systems of advocacy.
- UN Women for the Americas & The Caribbean: Evaluations commissioned by the UN operate under three code mandates: normative work, pragmatic work, and coordination work. Normative work is meant to support all and any international organizations outside of nation-states that may be interested in the understanding and implementing the results of the evaluation. Second, pragmatic work helps ensure that these standards bridge the necessary relationships in each of the countries that are part of the regional evaluation. Coordination work helps monitor the commitments from each of the UN officers of each country as well as that of the stakeholders involved.
- RedWIM: Aimed at the promotion of the development of the managerial activities from Latin American and Caribbean Women in Organizational management. The mission of this network is to provide a space for reflection, generation of ideas, knowledge, and suggestions to improve the role that women have played in organizational management in Latin America.
UN Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG) as a unified framework of gender-responsive evaluations
- UN Women for the America’s and the Caribbean: One of the main goals of Evaluations commissioned by this chapter of the UN is the reporting on its progress towards meeting the sustainable development goals by 2030.
- RedWIM: Evaluations are conducted with the justification that the tools evaluated are based on the UN Sustainable Development Goals. For example, consider their evaluation looking at four small businesses across Latin America focused on the implementation of a gender equity certification, whose implementation would be a direct indicator of the implementation of the UNSDG through 2030.
The UN Women for the Americas and the Caribbean works within an entire international ecosystem, engaging actors and stakeholders with differing points of interest for the region and understanding of gender-responsive evaluations. A network located in the region, such as RedWIM is at the forefront of the gender-equity issues and development in each of the countries of the region. Those commissioning, funding, and writing the appropriate terms of references have a direct relation to how gender-responsive evaluations can be shaped for the betterment of the region.
Where does an evaluation network in the U.S. fit into all of this?
The northeast region of the United States attracts evaluators from both of these groups summarized thus far. Whether for a permanent stay or contractual work, including both evaluators ~from~ Latin America and NGO evaluators working ~in~ Latin America can ultimately serve as a foundation to switch from the genre of gender-responsive evaluations to gender-responsive practices in mainstream evaluations.
Rad Resources:
- About the Evaluation Independent Service’s for the UN Women of the Americas and the Caribbean:
- UN Women. Terms of Reference Regional Evaluation on Women’s Economic Empowerment in the Americas and the Caribbean Region
- Earn more about RedWIM
- Evaluation of Gender Equality Good Practices in Women-LED Small and Medium Enterprises
Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.
Dear Sonia:
Thank you and congratulations for reflecting in this post on the double role that we have as evaluators with a gender focus and feminist evaluators: 1) that of ensuring accountability and 2) that of advocacy; both with the intention of finding evaluative evidence that supports the transformations towards social equity and gender equality.
As an independent evaluator and as a feminist activist, I have been in this double role in the LAC region: I was coordinator of the RedWIM (LAC Women’s Network in Organizational Management) for several years and I am still a member of this network, and I have also been linked to the ReLAC (Latin American & Caribbean Monitoring and Evaluation Network) and the AEA (Feminist Evaluation TIG), so I can attest and am a promoter of the need to address these two fronts in all development evaluations, especially those of the UNSDG.
I recognize in your article an advance in the reflection on the topic of gender-responsive and feminist evaluations. I agree with the switch that you propose from gender-sensitive evaluations to gender practices in mainstream evaluations. This would also reinforce the practice of feminist evaluations and may release the tension of the “Advocacy vs. Objectivity” research paradigm that Yuan (Linda) Zhou analyzed in her post on AEA365 on October 16, 2019.
Best,
Fabiola Amariles Erazo
Learning for Impact, Corp.