Criteria for diversity-sensitive gender planning

Despite the fact that the feminization of poverty continues to grow and women in general remain subordinated to men, the notion of gender as a specific lens for planning practice has not yet affected a transformative change in development planning practice. Furthermore, there remains a failure to recognize that women are not a homogenous group and that even when planning is gendered, it must also recognize the diversity of women and the contexts in which they live (Javed, 1993). All too slowly, development proponents are realizing the advantages and necessity of supporting women's strategic gender need to be agents of their own change in the development process. This thesis synthesizes current gender and development theory by drawing on the literature, professional experience, and information gained through a feminist participatory research process. The ultimate aim is to examine and contribute to current criteria used for gender planning, particularly as it pertains to planning with women in contexts of diversity. The approach taken in doing this research has been qualitative and participatory in nature, and is based on a feminist analysis. The chosen methods for this research consist of: a) a literature review of gender and planning theory; b) a participatory workshop with women involved in development or community planning work; c) several informal interviews with women involved in development or community planning work who specifically work with women; and d) participation in several conferences relating to women or gender. Results from the study indicate that there are nine elements which are important to gender planning which is diversity-sensitive and works towards the kind of people-centred development envisioned by the research participants. These are: contextual, complex, gender-active, mutual accountability, critical participation, consciousness-raising for action, personal capacity building, support for fundamental change, and dynamic process modeling. These nine elements, while equally weighted, can be organized into three thematic groupings: 1) structural dimensions, 2) means of participation and 3) potential for change. These conclusions have important implications for planning policy and process, for the roles of planners in the process, and for the education of planners.Applied Science, Faculty ofCommunity and Regional Planning (SCARP), School ofGraduat