This paper attempts to test whether women systematically get less health care than their male siblings in Mumbai. The data are drawn from a survey of 200 women and their male siblings. The regression models used explicitly take account of health care factors. The results show that there is no significant difference between the health expenditures made between men and women in a family.
Numerous tools for addressing gender inequality in governmental policies, programs, and research have emerged across the globe. Unfortunately, such tools have largely failed to account for the impacts of colonialism on Indigenous Peoples' lives and lands. In Canada, Indigenous organizations have advanced gender-based analysis frameworks that are culturally-grounded and situate the understanding of gender identities, roles, and responsibilities within and across diverse Indigenous contexts. However, there is limited guidance on how to integrate Indigenous gender-based frameworks in the context of research. The authors of this paper are participants of a multi-site research program investigating intersectoral spaces of Indigenous-led renewable energy development within Canada. Through introspective methods, we reflected on the implementation of gender considerations into our research team's governance and research activities. We found three critical lessons: (1) embracing Two-Eyed Seeing or Etuaptmumk while making space for Indigenous leadership ; (2) trusting the expertise that stems from the lived experiences and relationships of researchers and team members ; and (3) shifting the emphasis from 'gender-based analysis' to 'gender-based relationality' in the implementation of gender-related research considerations. Our research findings provide a novel empirical example of the day-to-day principles and practices that may arise when implementing Indigenous gender-based analysis frameworks in the context of research.
International debate is ongoing regarding the innovation of gender mainstreaming (GM), its efficacy, and future utility. Likewise, in Canada, there is a push to learn from early GM efforts and a renewed focus on creating more responsive mainstreaming strategies. Although Canada's gender-based analysis (GBA) has been researched and evaluated, this study uses the feminist theory of intersectionality to examine the newer GBA+ model, which builds on its predecessor. Drawing on thematic analysis of 32 stakeholder interviews from three different sectors and content analysis of key policy reports, we investigate how the shift to this new model is perceived, whether inclusion of the "+" results in greater responsiveness, and how to better operationalize intersectionality in policy contexts.
This paper critically interrogates the increasingly popular framework of Gender-based Analysis (GBA) in Canada, as it relates to psychiatry more broadly, and forensic psychiatry more specifically. Through a critical feminist and Mad Studies analysis, we argue that if GBA is to be anything more than rhetoric, it is necessary to ground policies and practices in the knowledge generated by women and service-users themselves. We further point to Mad Studies as an important field for research and an opportunity to look deeper into the 'margins within the margins.'
In the last 15 years, much debate has ensued at the international level regarding gender mainstreaming (GM), its efficacy and future utility. In Canada, similar discussions have taken place where GM has largely been operationalized in the form of gender-based analysis (GBA). However, there has been a lack of clarity regarding the ways in which GBA as a conceptual framework compares to other approaches available for working towards equality in public policy, namely gender and diversity analysis (GDA) and intersectionality-based analysis (IBA). As a result, the potential of these models to respond to diversity and inequality, especially GBA and GDA, are often overstated and/or conflated. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the similarities and differences between GBA, GDA, and IBA. This analysis illuminates the strengths and limitations of these types of approaches, especially in terms of how each conceptualizes and is able to address a wide variety of diversities among the Canadian population. This paper argues that only IBA is flexible enough to capture the multidimensional nature of oppression and discrimination because it disrupts the systematic prioritization of gender as a starting place for assessing experiences of inequality.
Numerous tools for addressing gender inequality in governmental policies, programs, and research have emerged across the globe. Unfortunately, such tools have largely failed to account for the impacts of colonialism on Indigenous Peoples' lives and lands. In Canada, Indigenous organizations have advanced gender-based analysis frameworks that are culturally-grounded and situate the understanding of gender identities, roles, and responsibilities within and across diverse Indigenous contexts. However, there is limited guidance on how to integrate Indigenous gender-based frameworks in the context of research. The authors of this paper are participants of a multi-site research program investigating intersectoral spaces of Indigenous-led renewable energy development within Canada. Through introspective methods, we reflected on the implementation of gender considerations into our research team's governance and research activities. We found three critical lessons: (1) embracing Two-Eyed Seeing or Etuaptmumk while making space for Indigenous leadership; (2) trusting the expertise that stems from the lived experiences and relationships of researchers and team members; and (3) shifting the emphasis from 'gender-based analysis' to 'gender-based relationality' in the implementation of gender-related research considerations. Our research findings provide a novel empirical example of the day-to-day principles and practices that may arise when implementing Indigenous gender-based analysis frameworks in the context of research.
In this article, we address protracted, often recurring violent conflict, arguing that the failure to solve entrenched conflicts and build sustainable peace is due in part to the absence of women from peace‐building processes. To change this negative status quo, we put forward three essential instruments: gender mainstreaming to make gender relations the foundation of any analysis and decision making, the three‐pillar framework of conflict mapping, and the New European Peace and Security System model of conflict intervention. When these tools are employed together, they can establish conceptual and operational coherence and positive systemic change by empowering women to work with men as equal partners to build and maintain sustainable peace in fragile, postconflict environments.
Numerous tools for addressing gender inequality in governmental policies, programs, and research have emerged across the globe. Unfortunately, such tools have largely failed to account for the impacts of colonialism on Indigenous Peoples' lives and lands. In Canada, Indigenous organizations have advanced gender-based analysis frameworks that are culturally-grounded and situate the understanding of gender identities, roles, and responsibilities within and across diverse Indigenous contexts. However, there is limited guidance on how to integrate Indigenous gender-based frameworks in the context of research. The authors of this paper are participants of a multi-site research program investigating intersectoral spaces of Indigenous-led renewable energy development within Canada. Through introspective methods, we reflected on the implementation of gender considerations into our research team's governance and research activities. We found three critical lessons: (1) embracing Two-Eyed Seeing or Etuaptmumk while making space for Indigenous leadership; (2) trusting the expertise that stems from the lived experiences and relationships of researchers and team members; and (3) shifting the emphasis from 'gender-based analysis' to 'gender-based relationality' in the implementation of gender-related research considerations. Our research findings provide a novel empirical example of the day-to-day principles and practices that may arise when implementing Indigenous gender-based analysis frameworks in the context of research.
