Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Similar to Women's empowerment in agriculture index (WEAI): incorporating gender and mixed methods into nutrition research(20)

Advertisement

More from CGIAR(20)

Advertisement

Women's empowerment in agriculture index (WEAI): incorporating gender and mixed methods into nutrition research

  1. Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI): Incorporating gender and mixed methods into nutrition research Hazel Malapit and Elena Martinez CGIAR Collaborative Platform for Gender Research Annual Scientific Conference and Capacity Development Workshop Amsterdam, The Netherlands December 8, 2017 – 9:15 to 11:00 AM
  2. Today’s Agenda  Agriculture-nutrition pathways and gendered pathways  Introduction to the project-level WEAI  Integrating quantitative and qualitative research  Pro-WEAI nutrition and health module https://pixabay.com/en/leader-tomato-food-vegetable-green- 1969801/
  3. Photo credit: Flickr/Farha Khan, IFPRI
  4. Health environment Natural resources Food market environment Nutrition and health knowledge Food access Food expenditure Non-food expenditure Diet Child nutrition outcomes Householdassetsandlivelihoods Health status Mother’s nutrition outcomes Health care Women’s empowerment National nutrition profile Agricultural income Caring capacity & practices Female energy expenditure Food production & gathering National economic growth Individual Household Enabling environment Processing & storage AgriculturalProduction Source: Herforth and Harris 2013 Individual nutrition outcomes* *individual nutrition outcomes refer to the general population, including women, men, and adolescents (not just mothers and children) Conceptual pathways between agriculture and nutrition
  5. Photo credit: Flickr/ Ollivier Girard, CIFOR
  6. Gender along ag-nutrition pathways IFPRI Images 1. Agriculture as a source of food for own consumption 2. Agriculture as a source of income 3. Agricultural policies affect prices of food and non-food crops 4. Women’s participation in agriculture and the effect on her social status and empowerment & in particular her access to and control over resources 5. The impact of women’s participation in agriculture on their time allocation 6. The impact of women’s participation in agriculture on their own health and nutritional status (and also child nutrition) (Ruel and Alderman 2013)
  7. All pathways are gendered, some focus on women IFPRI Images 1. Agriculture as a source of food for own consumption 2. Agriculture as a source of income 3. Agricultural policies affect prices of food and non-food crops 4. Women’s participation in agriculture and the effect on her social status and empowerment & in particular her access to and control over resources 5. The impact of women’s participation in agriculture on their time allocation 6. The impact of women’s participation in agriculture on their own health and nutritional status (and also child nutrition) (Ruel and Alderman 2013) Men and Women Special focus on Women
  8. Photo credit: Flickr / Finn Thilsted, WorldFish
  9. What is the WEAI?  Developed by IFPRI, USAID, and OPHI  Designed to measure inclusion of women in the agricultural sector for Feed the Future (FTF) Initiative  Similar to multi-dimensional poverty indices (Alkire and Foster 2011, J of Public Econ) and the Foster-Greere- Thorbeck (FGT) indices  Details on index construction in Alkire et al. (2013), World Development http://www.ifpri.org/weai-training- materials
  10.  WEAI is an aggregate index in two parts:  Five Domains of Empowerment (5DE)  Gender Parity Index (GPI)  Constructed using interviews of the primary male and primary female adults in the same household How is the Index constructed?
  11. Fivedomainsofempowerment A woman’s empowerment score reflects her achievements in the five domains
  12. Fivedomainsofempowerment A woman’s empowerment score reflects her achievements in the five domains
  13. Fivedomainsofempowerment Abbreviated WEAI (A-WEAI) 1/5 2/15 1/5 1/5
  14. Cross-country baseline findings: Credit, workload, and group membership are most important constraints across countries 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 DisempowermentIndex(1-5DE) Leisure Workload Speaking in public Group member Control over use of income Access to and decisions on credit Purchase, sale, or transfer of assets Ownership of assets Autonomy in production Input in productive decisions Source: Malapit et al. (2014)
  15. Photo credit: Flickr/Neil Palmer, CIAT
  16. What is GAAP2?  Learning what works  Learning what doesn’t work  Particular gender strategies  Gender-blind approaches?  “What’s measured, matters” A learning and capacity-development initiative working with a portfolio of 13 development projects in the Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project Phase 2 (GAAP2) Why GAAP2? Supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, USAID, and A4NH
  17. Developing a “Project-level” WEAI (pro-WEAI) Core set of pro-WEAI empowerment modules  Quantitative survey  Qualitative protocols Standardized add-ons depending on project needs:  Nutrition and health  Livestock-enhanced Comparable metrics for empowerment: +
  18. GAAP2 Project Portfolio by Cluster Project Objective → Intervention area ↓ Nutrition Income and Nutrition Crops ANGeL (Bangladesh) WorldVeg (Mali) AVC (Bangladesh) TRAIN (Bangladesh) iDE (Ghana) Livestock Heifer (Nepal) Trias (Tanzania) MoreMilk (Kenya) SE LEVER (Burkina Faso) Crops and Livestock FAARM (Bangladesh) JP-RWEE (Ethiopia) WINGS (India) Grameen Foundation (Burkina Faso)
  19. All projects have experimental or quasi-experimental designs Project Objective → Intervention area ↓ Nutrition Income and Nutrition Crops ANGeL (Bangladesh) WorldVeg (Mali) AVC (Bangladesh) TRAIN (Bangladesh) iDE (Ghana) Livestock Heifer (Nepal) Trias (Tanzania) MoreMilk (Kenya) SE LEVER (Burkina Faso) Crops and Livestock FAARM (Bangladesh) JP-RWEE (Ethiopia) WINGS (India) Grameen Foundation (Burkina Faso) Panel, RCT Panel, PSM Panel, DID Random encouragement design
  20. Choosing respondents Original WEAI 1. Population-based indicator 2. Self-identified primary male and primary female decision- makers in the household  Not necessarily husband and wife Project WEAI 1. Project-level indicator (not nationally or regionally representative) 2. Who is your project trying to empower? • E.g., farmers growing/raising specific crops/animals; mothers with young children; members of specific types of groups, etc. • Pro-WEAI respondent can be target beneficiary and spouse or other decision-maker in household Sampling design and respondent choice are key differences between original WEAI and project WEAI Does this compromise comparability across different projects?  Maybe, but not as problematic within clusters  BUT: projects have to be able to define their respondents based on project objectives
  21. Production (1/5) Input in productive decisions (1/5) Resources (1/5) Ownership of assets (2/15) Access to and decision making on credit (1/15) Income (1/5) Control over use of income (1/5) Leadership (1/5) Group membership (1/5) Time (1/5) Workload (1/5) A-WEAI 5 Domains 6 Indicators
  22. Production (1/7) Input in productive decisions (1/21) Access to information (1/21) Autonomy in production (1/21) Resources (1/7) Ownership of assets (1/28) Decision making over land (1/28) Access to and decision making on credit (1/28) Access to a financial account (1/28) Income (1/7) Control over use of income (1/14) Autonomy over income (1/14) Leadership (1/7) Group membership (1/7) Time (1/7) Workload (1/7) Mobility (1/7) Ability to visit important locations (1/7) Intrahousehold (1/7) Respect among household members (1/14) Attitudes about domestic violence (1/14) Pro-WEAI 7 Domains 14 Indicators 2 Add-ons Nutrition and health Enhanced livestock
  23. Pro-WEAI
  24. A-WEAI Pro-WEAI
  25. Pro-WEAI Pro-WEAI Mini-WEAI Pro-WEAI Testing and validation across sites and project types Testing and validation over time Use qualitative data and implementation lessons for testing and validation We are here
  26. Photo credit: IFPRI Images / Milo Mitchell, IFPRI Questions? https://pixabay.com/en/question-mark-question-response- 1019935/
  27. Why add qualitative to good quantitative?  Not just to illustrate quantitative findings, but illuminates different aspects of topics and themes  Research questions framed differently  Identify how and why a behavior occurs (mechanisms)  Differences rooted in different philosophies of how knowledge is produced  Useful for reframing existing research questions  May help better identify target populations  For intervention and research questions https://www.flickr.com/photos/hikingartist/3554539705
  28. Research questions related to dairy production 1. Increasing production among rural dairy- producing households 2. Improving nutritional status and quality of life Question 1? Question 2? Question 3? Question 1? Question 2? Question 3? Quantitative Qualitative
  29. Linking quantitative and qualitative Qualitative Explore a phenomenon or context Develop an instrument Design an intervention Cross-validate or corroborate results Account for the strengths and weaknesses of each method Explain quantitative results Explore quantitative findings Quantitative Quantitative Qualitative Qualitative Quantitative
  30. Photo credit: Nesbitt/UNICEF Ethiopia
  31. Draft pro-WEAI quantitative modules  Module G1: Individual identification  Module G2: Role in household decision-making around production and income  Module G3(a): Access to productive capital  Module G3(b): Access to financial services  Module G4: Time allocation  Module G5: Group membership  Module G6: Physical mobility  Module G7: Intrahousehold relationships  Module G8(a): Autonomy in decision-making  Module G8(b): New general self-efficacy scale  Module G8(c): Life satisfaction  MODULE G9: Attitudes about domestic violence *optional* *some elements are optional*
  32. Draft Qualitative Protocols for GAAP2 1. Review of project documents 2. Community profile 3. Seasonality patterns 4. Focus groups 5. Semi-structured interviews 6. Key informant interviews  Relevant materials and background on the project area  Social, economic, and agricultural background  Production calendar with responsibilities by gender  Local understandings of empowerment  Life histories of women of different empowerment statuses  Market traders (gender barriers in the value chain) Project staff (factors affecting whether the project influences empowerment)
  33. QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE Pro-WEAI
  34. Pro-WEAI Nutrition and Health Module  Types of nutrition targeting in the GAAP2 portfolio  Women’s health and nutrition (e.g., dietary diversity or quality)  Children aged 2 years and younger, including intervention during pregnancy  General household nutrition and expected spillover to children (broad age range) https://pixabay.com/en/family-man-woman-boy-girl-312018/
  35. Sub-indicators of empowerment in nutrition and health  Participation and input in decisions about women’s health  Participating and input in decisions about child’s health Some questions are only for women who have been pregnant recently or have young children  Participation in decisions about purchasing food and medicine  Ability to acquire food and medicine https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chicken_cartoon_04.svg Respondents are women only
  36. Photo credit: Cassie Chandler/Freedom from Hunger
  37. Pro-WEAI Nutrition and Health: Preliminary Data Project Abbreviation Country N Food and Agricultural Approaches to Reducing Malnutrition FAARM Bangladesh 287 Building resilience of vulnerable communities Grameen Burkina Faso 380 Targeting and Realigning Agriculture to Improve Nutrition TRAIN Bangladesh 5,040 Impact evaluation of an integrated poultry value chain and nutrition intervention SE LEVER Burkina Faso 1,777 Deploying improved vegetable technologies to overcome malnutrition and poverty WorldVeg Mali 714 TOTAL 8,198
  38. Pro-WEAI Nutrition and Health: Preliminary Data Sub-indicator TOTAL TRAIN SE LEVER World Veg Grameen FAARM Participates in decision about how much to work during breastfeeding 0.85 0.93 0.67 0.78 0.73 0.98 Participates in decision about whether to eat eggs during breastfeeding 0.83 0.94 0.57 0.78 0.84 - Sole decision-maker or medium/high participating in decisions about how much to work during breastfeeding 0.80 0.88 0.62 0.69 0.68 0.96 Sole decision-maker or medium/high participation in decisions about whether to eat eggs during breastfeeding 0.77 0.89 0.51 0.69 0.80 -
  39. Pro-WEAI Nutrition and Health: Preliminary Data Sub-indicator TOTAL TRAIN SE LEVER World Veg Grameen FAARM Participates in decision to purchase eggs 0.65 0.72 0.29 0.77 0.56 0.93 Participates in decision to purchase milk/milk products 0.65 0.71 0.35 0.76 0.73 - Participates in decision to purchase meat/poultry/fish 0.61 0.69 0.27 0.73 0.59 0.84 Able to acquire eggs by some means 0.88 0.90 0.82 0.88 0.85 0.95 Able to acquire milk/milk products by some means 0.87 0.89 0.82 0.86 0.88 - Able to acquire meat/poultry/fish by some means 0.84 0.85 0.80 0.83 0.91 0.79
  40. Keep in touch! Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project, Phase II (GAAP2) Website: gaap.ifpri.info WEAI Resource Center: ifpri.org/topic/weai-resource-center Gender-Nutrition Idea Exchange (GNIE) Blog: a4nh.cgiar.org/category/gender-2/gender-nutrition-idea- exchange/ Pro-WEAI Resource Center: Stay tuned…! For more information, contact Hazel Malapit: h.malapit@cgiar.org GAAP2 is supported by: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  41. Pro-WEAI 1.0: A Deeper Look at the Index Hazel Malapit and Elena Martinez CGIAR Collaborative Platform for Gender Research Annual Scientific Conference and Capacity Development Workshop Amsterdam, The Netherlands December 8, 2017 – 2:30 to 3:30 PM
  42. Developing a “Project-level” WEAI https://pixabay.com/en/males-team-teamwork-craftsmen-2929797/
  43. Production (1/5) Input in productive decisions (1/5) Resources (1/5) Ownership of assets (2/15) Access to and decision making on credit (1/15) Income (1/5) Control over use of income (1/5) Leadership (1/5) Group membership (1/5) Time (1/5) Workload (1/5) A-WEAI 5 Domains 6 Indicators
  44. Production (1/7) Input in productive decisions (1/21) Access to information (1/21) Autonomy in production (1/21) Resources (1/7) Ownership of assets (1/28) Decision making over land (1/28) Access to and decision making on credit (1/28) Access to a financial account (1/28) Income (1/7) Control over use of income (1/14) Autonomy over income (1/14) Leadership (1/7) Group membership (1/7) Time (1/7) Workload (1/7) Mobility (1/7) Ability to visit important locations (1/7) Intrahousehold (1/7) Respect among household members (1/14) Attitudes about domestic violence (1/14) Pro-WEAI 7 Domains 14 Indicators 2 Add-ons Nutrition and health Enhanced livestock
  45. Pro-WEAI
  46. A-WEAI Pro-WEAI
  47. Production (1/7) Input in productive decisions (1/21) Access to information (1/21) Autonomy in production (1/21) Resources (1/7) Ownership of assets (1/28) Decision making over land (1/28) Access to and decision making on credit (1/28) Access to a financial account (1/28) Income (1/7) Control over use of income (1/14) Autonomy over income (1/14) Leadership (1/7) Group membership (1/7) Time (1/7) Workload (1/7) Mobility (1/7) Ability to visit important locations (1/7) Intrahousehold (1/7) Respect among household members (1/14) Attitudes about domestic violence (1/14) Pro-WEAI 7 Domains 14 Indicators Equal weights 80% empowerment cutoff
  48. Contribution of each indicator to disempowerment 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 Women Men Women Men Attitudes about domestic violence Respect between household members Ability to visit important locations Workload Group membership Autonomy in income Control over use of income Access to a financial account Access to and decisions on credit Decision-making over land Asset ownership Autonomy in production Access to information Input in productive decisions A-WEAI Pro-WEAI
  49. A-WEAI: Contribution of each domain to disempowermentSouth Asia: Women Production Resources Income Leadership Time South Asia: Men Africa: Women Africa: Men
  50. Pro-WEAI: Contribution of each domain to disempowermentSouth Asia: Women Production Resources Income Leadership South Asia: Men Africa: Women Time Mobility Intrahousehold relationships Africa: Men
  51. Collaboration with Emory University  Psychometric assessment of pro-WEAI  Focus on measurement invariance across geographic setting, program type, and time  Led by Dr. Kathryn Yount and team
  52. Validation of the health and nutrition modules  Sub-indicators  Participation and input in decisions about women’s and child’s health  Participation in decisions about purchasing health products  Ability to acquire health products  Cognitive testing  GOAL: Health and nutrition add-on
  53. QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE Pro-WEAI
  54. How many assets are needed to be “empowered”?  Ownership of assets: Owns at least 2 small assets or 1 large asset  93.3% of women, 99.6% of men  Quantitative approach  Use baseline data to test different thresholds for the indicator.  Qualitative approach  Investigate the context and local definitions of empowerment. Is owning a chicken and a radio empowering? Should a cell phone be considered a large asset?
  55. Are sensitive modules administered effectively?  Some questions are hard to ask: credit, respect/trust of partner, domestic violence  Quantitative approach  Were participants willing to answer? Are there any unexpected trends in the baseline data?  Qualitative approach  Do the qualitative findings reflect the quantitative results?  Enumerator training  Train enumerators carefully, pilot test, and request feedback.  Cognitive testing  What are the local connotations of the terms “trust” and “respect”? Did the translations capture the intended meaning? “A prepared and empathetic field team would take note and ‘soften’ the situation if participants feel uncomfortable answering questions.” “It is a wife’s ‘duty’ to respect her husband, so it would be surprising for a person to say they do not respect their spouse.”
  56. How should we define “overworked”?  Workload: Worked < 10.5 hours in the last day 𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑘 = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘 + 1 2 (𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦)  Quantitative approach  Use baseline data to test different thresholds and ways to incorporate childcare in the indicator.  Qualitative approach  Investigate local perceptions of work and leisure. When do respondents feel overworked? Are certain work or childcare activities more taxing? “In our qualitative data, women with too much work could not be empowered no matter what else happened in their lives. The empowered women were all older because younger women all had excessive workloads.”
  57. How many assets are needed to be “empowered”? Are sensitive modules administered effectively? How should we define “overworked”?
  58. Keep in touch! Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project, Phase II (GAAP2) Website: gaap.ifpri.info WEAI Resource Center: ifpri.org/topic/weai-resource-center Gender-Nutrition Idea Exchange (GNIE) Blog: a4nh.cgiar.org/category/gender-2/gender-nutrition-idea- exchange/ Pro-WEAI Resource Center: Stay tuned…! For more information, contact Hazel Malapit: h.malapit@cgiar.org GAAP2 is supported by: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Editor's Notes

  1. So, if not primarily through general economic growth, how does agriculture affect nutrition? Lets look at the household level… Child nutrition is the outcome we are interested in affecting Here is agricultural production, all the way upstream- so how are they linked? There are three important levels at which processes occur- at the individual level, the household level, and in the environment within which these exist At the individual level, the direct determinants of nutritional status are a child’s diet and health status Underlying these at household level are the food, health and care determinants of nutritional status Food may be produced directly by the household, which along with post-harvest handling will be a determinant of food access Or agricultural income may allow for the purchase of foods for the household And that same agricultural income may also be spent on non-food items- most importantly for nutrition, on health care For nutrition, the empowerment of women to make decisions about household expenditures on food and health, caring and feeding practices, and time and energy use is paramount- this directly affects many of the previous pathways, and in addition a woman’s health and nutritional status directly affects the health and nutrition of her child Affecting each of these major pathways between agriculture and nutrition are several broader environmental factors. Nutrition knowledge mediates many of the decisions made within the household and for individuals within the household Knowledge of nutrition and health may affect the choice of crops planted or foods purchased for family consumption; the way animals are kept in relation to household space; the treatment of water through agricultural practices; and what goods and services are prioritized for purchase with income from agricultural production, to name but a few. The food market environment shapes what food is produced, as well as the prices it may be bought and sold at, and what is available to buy The food environment in the market affects the kinds of foods that are possible and likely to be purchased for a household. Purchase decisions are further affected by the relative prices and convenience of various foods, available information about them, and how they are marketed to different groups. All market-oriented production affects the food market environment in some way, and all food purchase decisions are influenced by it. The natural resources available within the environment affect many aspects of agricultural production, as well as being affected by agriculture Including water, soil, climate, biodiversity, and air quality, natural resources can be managed in ways that affect both productivity and health- think of water for instance, and the impact on health if it is contaminated by agricultural runoff. And the health environment, including safe water and agricultural contaminants, directly affects the immediate determinants of nutritional status Examples of the effect of agricultural practices on health risks include exposure to zoonotic disease or agrochemicals, which can be particularly risky during pregnancy. Infants and young children also may be at risk of illness if livestock or other production reduces sanitary conditions in homes. Finally, the links between agriculture and nutrition are bi-directional: the nutritional status of children shapes the future nutrition profile of the household and of the nation, with demonstrated impacts on future productivity of individuals and economic growth of countries- and so the cycle continues
  2. The WEAI was developed by IFPRI, USAID, and OPHI in 2012 to measure the greater inclusion of women in the agricultural sector as a result of US Government’s Feed the Future (FTF) Initiative It is a survey-based index constructed using interviews of the primary male and primary female adults in the same household Key aspect of index construction: similar to family of multi-dimensional poverty indices (Alkire and Foster 2011, J of Public Econ) and the Foster-Greere-Thorbeck (FGT) indices Details on index construction in Alkire et al. (2013), World Development
  3. Emphasizing why it’s important to include such metrics for tracking whether women/men are being empowered or disempowered by agricultural interventions
  4. Nutrition and health data from TRAIN, FAARM, WorldVeg, and Grameen. WINGS is planning to collect that module in their midline; iDE may include it in their endline in November 2017; and MoreMilk may also include it in their baseline. Livestock-enhanced data is available for Trias and SE LEVER, and MoreMilk is planning to in their baseline in early 2018. Still waiting to hear back from WINGS.
  5. Sampling design and respondent choice are related, but separate issues Pro-WEAI results shouldn't be interpreted as being representative nationally or regionally--which is often why it gets misinterpreted
  6. A-WEAI = 5 Domains; 6 Indicators; (mostly) equal weights
  7. Testing and validation using qualitative and quantitative data, incorporating implementation lessons from the field
  8. Participants will have a corresponding worksheet to complete for this slide.
  9. Light purple is completely *optional* Dark purple has some questions/elements that are *optional*
  10. Example: MoreMilk Qualitative as formative research to inform how to adapt the pro-WEAI survey for peri-urban milk traders Qualitative between the baseline and endline to understand local definitions of empowerment, explain quantitative indicators of empowerment, verify or challenge quantitative results
  11. All women, women who have been pregnant in the last two years, women who have a child under age 2 Could time frame restrictions based on the project’s objectives Change time frame restrictions for follow-up to ensure the same sampling frame
  12. A-WEAI = 5 Domains; 6 Indicators; (mostly) equal weights
  13. Measurement invariance – how similar items function across settings, program types, and time Image source: http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=168718&picture=measuring-tape
  14. Image source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chicken_cartoon_04.svg
  15. Example: MoreMilk Qualitative as formative research to inform how to adapt the pro-WEAI survey for peri-urban milk traders Qualitative between the baseline and endline to understand local definitions of empowerment, explain quantitative indicators of empowerment, verify or challenge quantitative results
  16. Small: poultry, non-mechanized farm equipment, small consumer durables
  17. 10.5 hours is based on the median workload from the WEAI pilots Want to incorporate childcare to help the indicator assess quality of work/time
  18. Currently have pro-WEAI baseline data from 9 projects More than half of the data is from South Asia (TRAIN is large); will account for this unevenness in validation Remaining four projects (ANGeL, iDE, WINGS, and MoreMilk) will collect pro-WEAI in late 2017 or 2018 Most projects will collect two rounds of pro-WEAI data by 2020
  19. Pro-WEAI harsher on women than A-WEAI Fewer women identified as empowered (leads to lower 5DE) Fewer households identified as achieving gender parity (leads to lower GPI)
  20. Pro-WEAI harsher on women than A-WEAI Fewer women identified as empowered (leads to lower 5DE) Fewer households identified as achieving gender parity (leads to lower GPI)
  21. Pro-WEAI harsher on women than A-WEAI Fewer women identified as empowered (leads to lower 5DE) Fewer households identified as achieving gender parity (leads to lower GPI)
Advertisement