This report looks at the people’s development priorities from a gendered perspective using the UN’s MY World survey and examines what it is that women prioritise in development. It finds that although there is considerable variation across countries, there are few gender-based differences in the most important development priorities, particularly in poorer countries. However, the report recognises that perception data – though important – must be treated with caution as it can conceal different underlying motivations where gendered barriers prevent equal access to opportunities.
The report also explores how men and women perceive gender equality, comparing its prioritisation in MY World with other perceptions data. There is a recommendation for further study to understand women’s perceived gender inequality, emphasised by the paradox found whereby women in gender-unequal countries express relatively higher demand for gender equality in MY World despite other perceptions data suggesting that they are more accepting of entrenched gender inequalities.
Key findings:
- There are very few gender-based differences in the most important development priorities expressed by people in the MY World, particularly in poorer countries, despite considerable variations across countries.
- Perceptions data are important but do not necessarily contain all the information needed for making effective policy choices, and in particular expressed priorities may have different underlying motivations in different contexts where gendered barriers prevent equal access to opportunities.
- There is an apparent paradox whereby women in most gender-unequal countries express relatively higher demand for gender equality in the MY World survey than other perceptions data would suggest, which attests to the need for further study of women’s perceptions of gender inequality.
Implications for research and policy:
- There are few gender-based differences in respondents’ opinions of the most important development priorities, particularly in poorer countries. It is clear that men and women share key aspirations and a truly global, universal agenda that reflects the needs and priorities ofall people is possible and achievable. However, men and women face different constraints in achieving their goals.
- In particular, although there are only minor gender based differences in most priorities expressed in MY World, further probing in selected countries reveals that gendered barriers including childcare and unpaid domestic work prevent access to education and job opportunities. Such barriers need to be better understood and addressed through development efforts.
- Similarly, in the case of infrastructure, perceptions data (which are often similar for men and women) often do not reveal distinct gendered patterns of use and constraints. For instance, in the case of transport, women generally make more trips than men, often outside rush hours, with a greater variety of routes (for household shopping or accompanying children to health centres), and usually within a more restricted geographical area. Developing gender sensitive infrastructure would then entail factoring in how women’s economic and domestic activities are affected by infrastructure.
- In implementing a new agenda, these related issues need to be addressed in an integrated manner to make efforts aimed to promote gender equality more effective. For instance, achieving gender parity in access to education and jobs will improve women’s bargaining power within and outside the home, help secure gender equality in other aspects of life, and potentially improve health and education outcomes for the next generation. In this context, it is notable that a larger share of female respondents from the lowest income quintile of countries selected a good education and better job opportunities among their top priorities compared to their male counterparts.
- Finally, though women in gender-unequal countries prioritise gender equality above women in more equal societies, they appear more reconciled to the entrenched unequal distribution of opportunities in certain respects. This apparent paradox needs to be further studied, understood and addressed.
