IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cgd/ppaper/77.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do the Results Match the Rhetoric? An Examination of World Bank Gender Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Kenny
  • Megan O’Donnell

Abstract

This paper seeks to determine the degree to which a gender lens has been incorporated into World Bank projects and the success of individual projects according to gender equality-related indicators. We first examine the World Bank’s internal scoring of projects based on whether they encompass gender analysis, action, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) components, as well as project development objective indicators and outcomes according to these indicators. We conclude that when indicators are defined, targets are specified, and outcomes are published, gender equality-related results appear largely positive. However, many projects (even those possessing a gender “theme” and perfect scores for the inclusion of gender analysis, action, and M&E components) lack gender-related indicators, and when such indicators are present, they often lack specified target goals. The paper concludes with a recommendation for increased transparency in gender-related project data (including data on the funding of gender equality-related components of projects) from donor institutions and a call for an increased number of gender-related indicators and targets in donor projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Kenny & Megan O’Donnell, 2016. "Do the Results Match the Rhetoric? An Examination of World Bank Gender Projects," Policy Papers 77, Center for Global Development.
    • Handle: RePEc:cgd:ppaper:77
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cgdev.org/publication/do-results-match-rhetoric-examination-world-bank-gender-projects?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cgd:ppaper:77. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Publications Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgdevus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.