Women, Power and Decision-Making in CARICOM Countries: Moving Forward from a Post-Beijing Assessment

• Author: Linnette Vassell
• Pages: 1-38

Women, Power and Decision-Making 1

INTRODUCTION: LOOKING AT THE CONTEXT

The 1995 CARICOM review prepared by Mondesire and Dunn towards

the Beijing conference, reflecting the policy shift from the integrationist

approach of ‘women in development’ to the more structural and systemic

‘gender and development’ paradigm, spoke of the need to locate the struggle

for gender equity in the context of the global thrust towards participatory

development. In other words, the pursuit of gender equity had to seek to

affect other experiences of inequity, including the marginalisation of the

citizen from decision-making, and seek to support processes of governance

that are more decentralised, more participatory and hence, more democratic.1

Elaborating on these comments, the authors suggested that existing

patterns and structures of government and administration did not accord

with these principles or objectives. They therefore called for a redefinition

of the ‘concept of power, and to understand how it is managed, used and

shared at all levels’.2

A Regional Perspective on Change

The CARICOM policy framework document, Towards Regional Policy

on Gender Equality and Social Justice, which was published in the post-

Beijing period in 1997, reflected similar thoughts. It outlined core principles

of equality and social justice, which it proposed should be brought together

Women, Power and Decision-Making in

CARICOM Countries: Moving Forward

From a Post-Beijing Assessment

Linnette Vassell

ONE

2 Linnette Vassell

to guide the design and implementation of public policy. This approach,

it was proposed, would be directed towards the long-term goal of ‘building

of new structures of power sharing at the household, community, national

and regional levels, where both men and women can participate fully in

the sustainable development of their societies’.3

The CARICOM Post-Beijing Regional Plan of Action to the Year 2000,

also published in 1997, as was to be expected, clearly reflected the same

vision. It set out some of the main concerns related to the ‘low participation

of women in political leadership’ and made proposals towards promoting

‘equality in political representation and issues of governance’. This called

for the sharing of experiences and the elaboration of a draft agenda of action

among groups working on the theme of political participation at the regional

level and the convening of a ‘multi-partisan gathering of women’s

organisations’ to review the draft regional plan for implementation at the

national level. It was proposed that the process should include wide public

education on the issues and the monitoring of the plan of action. In addition,

the government should take specific actions to increase women’s

representation in decision-making in the public and private sector and

take steps to monitor progress made.4

Five years later, and into a new millennium, the call is even more urgent

for structural reform, for a redefinition of power and power relations and,

for a re-negotiation of our understanding of practice of leadership. This is

so because in the main, the Beijing +5 review process has shown little

evidence of the implementation of the well-defined policy and plan that

was laid out. Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly evident that

discussions about the re-definitions of power and power relations cannot

take place outside of a full consideration of the impact of the political

economy of globalisation. Unfortunately, over the past five years, work by

women’s movements to realise gains around the 12 critical areas of concern

of the Beijing Platform for Action, such as ‘women in power and decision-

making’ (the immediate concern of this paper), has not sufficiently taken

into account the context of globalisation and the effects on states, social

movements and individual women and men in family and community.

The aim of this paper is to examine the Beijing Platform for Action and

the particular goal of advancing woman’s participation in politics and

decision-making. The concern is to evaluate the experience of the past five

years and to put forward proposals which can bring within closer range,

the possibilities for women’s empowerment and sustained people-centred

development. The purpose is to assist in defining possibilities within current

Women, Power and Decision-Making 3

trends and contribute to considerations on a regional agenda for CARICOM

countries.

Globalisation and Political Action

The ideology of globalisation, which is basically that the expansion of

the ‘free’ market would solve the problems of humankind, has promoted

the concentration of power, consumerism and individualism. It has

supported what the Economic Justice Caucus for the Beijing +5 Prepcom

has called, ‘the commodification of people, of women’s bodies and all aspects

of life’.5 The focus of global policy on responding to market forces and not

to people’s needs has severely compromised development goals and

undermined the ability of national governments to pursue commitments

that had been made under the Beijing Platform for Action.

In just about every presentation made by delegates of CARICOM

member states at the Twenty-Third Special Session of the General Assembly

of the United Nations in June 2000, (Beijing +5), some reference was

made to the impact of globalisation on the development agenda and the

advancement of women. The focus was however on the economic impact

as the presentation from the Commonwealth of Dominica demonstrates:

...the negative impacts of globalization and trade liberalization tend to increase

poverty in the society, and among women in particular, seriously hampering our

efforts at narrowing the economic gender gap. For instance, the economic well-being

of women in Dominica is seriously threatened by the WTO ruling on bananas which

has resulted in loss of income to farming and rural households, the sections of society

least able to sustain an income loss. The magnitude of the exacerbation of the problem

becomes apparent only when it is realized that women-owned and operated farms

constitute 21% of the banana production base. Women are further affected as spouses

of male banana farmers.

What of the social and political implications not only in Dominica but

in other countries similarly affected in the Caribbean? We can begin to

appreciate these more fully when we consider that these countries have

been subject to the package of measures of structural adjustment and

globalisation. Cuts in public expenditure, deregulation and privatisation (the

shifting of resources and responsibilities for public services to the private

sector) have had tremendous negative effects and have retarded development

as pointed out in the recently published Jamaica Human Development Report.7

Looking at the micro level of women and the family as in the case of

Dominica, some consequences emerge, among them, the reduction in the