Can Opening Up Government Accelerate Gender Equality?

videoType

dynamic-media

videoDmUrl

keyFrameImage

timestamp

00:00 Thank you everyone for connecting.

00:02 Please,

00:02 uh,

00:03 feel free to turn on your cameras if you want,

00:05 so we get a sense of a real meeting,

00:08 uh,

00:08 even though we are connecting through the screen.

00:11 Uh,

00:11 thank you very much for your participation.

00:13 Sorry,

00:14 we are starting a bit late,

00:16 uh,

00:16 today,

00:17 but,

00:17 uh,

00:18 it's a great session.

00:19 We have a great session ahead of us.

00:21 The title

00:22 of today's,

00:23 uh,

00:24 knowledge sharing session is

00:27 Can Opening Up Government Accelerate Gender

00:30 Equality.

00:31 So if you did not mean to be in this meeting,

00:34 you are still

00:35 welcome to stay with us because the,

00:37 I promise the conversation.

00:39 It's going to be

00:40 uh fantastic.

00:41 We have

00:42 one main speaker today,

00:44 one main discussant,

00:46 and then all of you are discussants for this topic as well.

00:50 Let me do a brief introduction of the session and the participants,

00:54 and then we go

00:55 into the content.

00:56 I'm Robbie Senderovic.

00:58 I manage

00:59 um the governance,

01:00 global practice in the ECA region

01:03 um

01:04 together with uh some of the communities of Practice that we have

01:08 in the bank.

01:09 This session today is organized by the Community of Practice

01:14 on citizen engagement,

01:14 the Community of Practice on open government and transparency,

01:18 the social sustainability and inclusion,

01:21 uh,

01:21 global practice of the World Bank,

01:23 and the governance global practice of the World Bank as well.

01:27 Special thanks for,

01:28 to Steve Davenport,

01:29 who is connected,

01:30 and Gladys,

01:31 Gladys Sendere,

01:32 co-chairs of the community,

01:34 um,

01:35 And Saki for organizing this.

01:37 This session is going to be recorded,

01:40 so just remember that anything you say uh may be there for

01:45 uh history.

01:47 Now,

01:48 let me say a couple of things about our speakers today

01:51 and then uh give a quick intro to the session.

01:54 First of all,

01:55 we have Caroline Anstey with us,

01:58 who is the president and chief executive officer

02:01 at PACT.

02:03 Carolyn has more than 25 years of

02:05 leadership experience in social and economic development

02:09 in both the public and private sectors.

02:11 After an 18-year career at the World Bank,

02:14 where she worked as managing director in charge of operational policy,

02:18 Chief of Staff,

02:19 and vice president for External Affairs,

02:21 she joined UBS.

02:23 AG as a group managing director working across wealth management,

02:27 asset management,

02:28 and the UBS investment plan

02:30 to still help the firm's sustainability policy and investment products.

02:35 She subsequently served as senior advisor

02:37 to both the Inter-American Development Bank

02:40 and the World Economic Forum,

02:41 focusing on the future

02:43 of development policy

02:45 and the creation of sustainable markets.

02:47 For 5 years,

02:49 she served as a shelter to

02:50 the heads of government meetings of the G7 and G20.

02:55 She joined PAC in 2020.

02:58 It is really a pleasure to have

03:00 Caroline back uh with us here at the World Bank.

03:03 We have the main discussion for today's uh session.

03:07 Uh,

03:07 this is Louis Cole,

03:09 who is,

03:10 uh,

03:10 the global director for Social sustainability and inclusion in the World Bank,

03:14 uh Sustainable Development Practice Group.

03:17 Previously,

03:18 Uh,

03:19 Louis was the country director for Senegal,

03:22 Cabo Verde,

03:23 The Gambia,

03:23 Guinea-Bissau,

03:25 and,

03:25 um,

03:26 Mauritania based in Dakar,

03:28 Senegal.

03:29 Prior to her appointment as country director,

03:32 she was practice manager in the poverty Global Practice.

03:34 She is responsible for Latin America and the Caribbean,

03:37 where she also covered gender equality.

03:39 A US national,

03:41 she joined the bank in 1991 as a young professional.

03:45 She has since held various positions in the

03:47 World Bank's poverty reduction and sustainability development.

03:50 Uh,

03:50 departments working specifically on inclusive growth,

03:54 poverty reduction,

03:55 and rural development.

03:56 She has worked in Africa,

03:58 Latin America,

03:58 and

03:59 Eastern and Central Europe.

04:01 Ms.

04:01 Corr holds a PhD in Development Economics from

04:03 the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts

04:07 University.

04:08 So this is the formal introductions.

04:10 Uh,

04:10 we have one speaker,

04:11 one main commentator to discuss and then we're gonna open up to,

04:15 uh,

04:15 the rest of us in the room as well.

04:18 Today's session is extremely important.

04:20 Uh,

04:21 you know,

04:21 those of us who believe in open government and transparency

04:24 don't need to be reminded about the importance of this agenda.

04:27 Those of us who work on inclusive institutions

04:30 and gender equality don't need to be reminded about the importance of this agenda.

04:35 There is No real sustainable development

04:38 without gender equality in society.

04:40 That's something that is very important for all of us

04:43 to remember and all of this was

04:45 always important,

04:47 even today becomes urgent.

04:50 They need to focus on building

04:53 more inclusive,

04:54 accountable,

04:55 and effective institutions

04:57 in a context where citizens have lower trust in public institutions,

05:02 where they've been affected.

05:03 By the

05:04 perception many times reality of widening inequality in countries,

05:08 even before COVID started,

05:11 uh,

05:11 has,

05:12 you know,

05:13 resulted in this sense that the system is not providing for them,

05:16 that opportunities are not there for all to be

05:19 included in society.

05:20 Just to conclude the intro,

05:23 uh,

05:23 these two agendas,

05:24 the one on

05:25 openness and transparency,

05:27 and the one on gender equality,

05:29 both very good.

05:30 An important agendas foundational to the work that we do in development,

05:34 but many times not speaking to each other.

05:36 So today's session is an interesting one because we are

05:39 trying to bring these two parts of the development agenda

05:42 to the same room

05:43 and see whether the actors working on these two agendas

05:46 can also coalesce in bringing about change on the ground.

05:51 So

05:51 I

05:52 come here and I'll pass the word now to Caroline.

05:54 It's such a pleasure to see you again.

05:57 Thank you.

05:57 Thank you,

05:58 Robbie.

05:59 I really apologize for being

06:02 so late and so incompetent on the technology.

06:05 You'd never think I used to be in charge of IT at the World Bank.

06:09 I'm,

06:09 I'm clearly very rusty and I apologize.

06:13 So,

06:13 um,

06:14 it's a great subject.

06:15 I'm delighted,

06:16 um,

06:17 Uh,

06:18 to have this opportunity.

06:19 Thank you for inviting me.

06:21 Um,

06:22 I wanted to say a little bit about open government and gender equality,

06:26 uh,

06:27 the pros,

06:28 and then some of the caveats,

06:29 and I think there are some caveats,

06:31 um.

06:33 I was asked really to show how open government.

06:37 Can

06:38 boost gender equality and I think um if I

06:41 take myself back to the beginnings of the open government

06:45 movement and at the bank it kind of started

06:48 open data

06:50 and then we opened all our own

06:52 kind of memory banks and uh

06:54 uh number banks and then let's move on

06:58 disclosure and let's move on

07:01 opening those of governments

07:03 because

07:04 um.

07:05 It will help uh with better development outcomes.

07:09 And

07:09 I think we focused a lot on the government role

07:13 and we didn't focus as much

07:15 on the,

07:16 the,

07:17 the other side of the coin which has to be there,

07:20 which is the um

07:22 social accountability role.

07:24 It's no good opening

07:26 government essentially

07:27 if you don't also put in place all those structures

07:30 to have social accountability,

07:32 to have

07:33 um

07:34 feedback loops.

07:35 Um,

07:36 etc.

07:36 to have citizen,

07:38 uh,

07:38 participation,

07:39 a very strong social contract.

07:42 And,

07:42 um,

07:43 where I work now at PACT,

07:45 we work less on the government side

07:47 and more on the,

07:49 uh,

07:50 citizen,

07:50 local community

07:52 social contract

07:54 from that social accountability side and I'll say a little bit more about that.

07:59 So I think the first point is,

08:02 uh,

08:02 for open government to work,

08:03 you need very strong civic participation and social accountability.

08:09 Secondly,

08:10 we know that gender equality matters for development.

08:14 Uh,

08:15 we know it matters for better health outcomes,

08:17 better

08:18 educational outcomes,

08:20 uh,

08:21 better,

08:21 more efficient social,

08:23 uh,

08:24 spending,

08:24 social services,

08:26 um,

08:27 better civic

08:29 cohesion,

08:29 better democracy,

08:31 a whole,

08:32 a whole lot of things we know

08:34 that social,

08:35 uh,

08:35 that gender equality

08:37 matters and in some cases,

08:39 uh,

08:40 one study,

08:40 the latest I saw,

08:41 I think says that.

08:43 Um,

08:44 equality would boost

08:46 global GDP by about

08:48 25%.

08:52 So we put these things

08:54 together.

08:55 Open government matters,

08:57 better government,

08:58 better public policy.

09:00 Uh,

09:01 gender equality matters,

09:03 go.

09:04 Open government must be good for gender equality.

09:07 And here I think

09:09 my answer is going to be a yes.

09:12 But

09:13 as I say with the caveats that I'm gonna talk about later.

09:17 So,

09:17 um,

09:18 where is the yes?

09:19 I think um we at PCT

09:21 have done um some work in,

09:24 in a couple of areas which underscore,

09:26 I think why open government

09:28 uh is good

09:29 for gender equality.

09:31 One is

09:32 we know the link

09:34 uh between open government and fighting corruption.

09:37 We did some very interesting work in Zimbabwe

09:40 on illicit um

09:43 financial flows

09:44 in a number of sectors,

09:45 uh,

09:46 transport,

09:47 mining,

09:48 um,

09:49 health,

09:50 uh,

09:50 agriculture,

09:52 and you really look at the um impact of um

09:56 illicit financial flows on productivity,

09:59 on,

10:00 um.

10:01 Development outcomes.

10:03 Uh,

10:03 somebody is estimating,

10:04 I think,

10:05 a,

10:06 a,

10:06 the amount of money that's now spent on corruption

10:10 is close to

10:11 $1 trillion globally

10:13 spent on bribes.

10:14 That's all money that could go elsewhere.

10:16 How does that feed into

10:18 fighting corruption,

10:19 opening government,

10:21 uh,

10:21 supporting women?

10:22 I think it's very clear and in Zimbabwe,

10:25 we saw in the health sector.

10:27 Uh,

10:27 where poverty is very,

10:29 uh,

10:30 feminized,

10:31 uh,

10:32 where there are no,

10:33 uh,

10:33 civil society structures,

10:36 where,

10:36 um,

10:37 illicit finance will cream off,

10:40 uh,

10:40 availability of funds or goods services,

10:43 it impacts women

10:45 directly.

10:46 In Zimbabwe,

10:46 some interesting work done

10:48 about the lack of availability

10:50 of,

10:51 um,

10:51 healthcare,

10:52 of medicines,

10:53 of treatments.

10:55 Uh,

10:55 for maternal and,

10:57 uh,

10:57 child health

10:58 because of,

10:59 uh,

10:59 illicit financial flows

11:01 and corruption.

11:03 So,

11:03 uh,

11:04 that's one example.

11:05 Another example I would say is work that we're doing.

11:09 In um

11:11 Colombia,

11:12 where we've done some really interesting work

11:14 with,

11:15 um,

11:15 in the industry,

11:16 the flour,

11:18 the flour producing and cut flour

11:20 industry

11:21 and the panela,

11:22 the,

11:23 uh,

11:23 raw sugar industry.

11:25 I think,

11:25 uh,

11:25 cut flowers now accounts for something like

11:28 200,000 jobs in Colombia.

11:31 Very largely women are in those positions.

11:34 Um.

11:35 And the Penela,

11:36 uh,

11:37 Colombia produces about 15,000,

11:40 uh,

11:40 15%

11:41 of the global production.

11:43 Uh,

11:43 what we've seen in,

11:45 uh,

11:45 Colombia

11:46 is through working,

11:48 empowering local women's

11:51 groups,

11:52 women employees,

11:54 uh,

11:54 can go a long way

11:57 to,

11:57 uh,

11:57 restoring some faith.

11:59 In,

12:00 uh,

12:00 local justice,

12:01 local security,

12:03 uh,

12:04 that social contract,

12:06 but it's had to be focused very much,

12:08 um,

12:09 on women

12:10 and,

12:11 uh,

12:11 on women's civic participation

12:13 and economic participation.

12:16 And,

12:17 and that's been key.

12:18 And um

12:20 a third example

12:21 I want to use

12:23 is some work that we've done

12:25 uh in Nepal,

12:27 uh,

12:28 Nepal,

12:28 uh,

12:29 both prior to the move towards

12:31 federalism

12:32 and then

12:33 post

12:34 the decision by the government to move towards a federal structure.

12:38 And I think in the health sector in Nepal.

12:41 Uh,

12:42 where we've worked very much on a project

12:45 to,

12:45 uh,

12:46 make sure frontline

12:48 female

12:49 health providers

12:50 are very much,

12:52 um,

12:52 being organized,

12:53 being listened to through social accountability mechanisms.

12:57 Um,

12:58 that I think has,

13:00 uh,

13:00 paid off in much better,

13:02 um.

13:03 Provision of services

13:05 and uh

13:06 much more gender equality.

13:09 There are also cases,

13:10 I think

13:11 Kenya

13:12 where um

13:14 there are statistics showing

13:15 the boost to women in administrative roles in the civil service,

13:19 even in mid-level positions

13:22 has led to

13:23 better social spending,

13:25 better um

13:26 outcomes in terms of

13:28 uh service delivery

13:30 and

13:31 in

13:32 Open government,

13:33 I think,

13:34 when it comes to service delivery as a measure

13:37 of the effectiveness

13:39 of openness

13:40 and civic participation,

13:42 really

13:43 needs a strong gender role because it's by and large

13:48 women in households

13:50 who are.

13:50 are in the position

13:52 to both utilize and give feedback

13:55 on social

13:57 delivery.

13:57 So I think those three

14:01 examples Zimbabwe,

14:02 the cost for women

14:05 of illicit financial flows and closed government.

14:09 Uh,

14:09 Colombia,

14:10 the,

14:11 uh,

14:12 potential for women

14:13 in,

14:14 uh,

14:14 in deeply unequal

14:16 industries where women's um

14:19 participation

14:20 has been,

14:21 um,

14:22 high,

14:23 but in terms of influence

14:25 has been low

14:26 and in Nepal,

14:28 where uh there were very strong civil society,

14:32 women dominated civil society,

14:35 uh,

14:35 loops put in place,

14:37 um.

14:38 And then we see it,

14:39 we work a lot with um

14:41 orphans and vulnerable children and young girls,

14:45 uh,

14:45 adolescent girls and young women

14:47 uh for HIV AIDS delivery.

14:50 An an area where civic trust

14:53 in local

14:55 institutions

14:55 is absolutely key

14:57 and we're talking first and foremost about

15:00 children's and young women's participation.

15:03 Unless there is trust in those local

15:06 er institutions,

15:07 unless there is openness,

15:09 unless there are feedback loops

15:11 where women are represented,

15:13 you're not going to get

15:14 the level

15:15 uh of participation you need.

15:18 So,

15:19 what is the moral of this story?

15:21 The moral of this story is that

15:24 I think

15:25 open government,

15:26 effective government,

15:28 transparency,

15:29 organized civil society

15:32 has clear benefits

15:33 for women,

15:35 for gender

15:36 equality.

15:38 Where

15:38 women's voice is heard

15:41 and integrated into the process,

15:43 or where women are managing the process as

15:46 in the administrative roles in the civil service.

15:50 Or,

15:51 and here I come to my caveats,

15:53 because I think it would be an absolute mistake

15:57 uh

15:57 to just believe that all open government transparency

16:02 is good

16:03 for uh gender equality

16:05 unless there are

16:06 interventions

16:08 which specifically

16:10 target

16:11 women's women's voice,

16:12 women's participation.

16:14 And let me now just turn

16:17 to the caveats.

16:18 Caveat number one

16:20 is

16:21 I don't think we're really in a position

16:24 to draw on a huge body of evidence of

16:27 the link between open government and gender equality.

16:31 For two reasons.

16:32 One,

16:32 the research hasn't been done,

16:34 and I think this is a great role

16:36 for the World Bank.

16:38 Secondly,

16:38 we just don't have enough

16:41 disaggregated.

16:43 Data

16:44 by gender.

16:46 And I know that uh the World Bank,

16:48 I think,

16:49 has a partnership with the

16:51 uh with national statistical offices all around the world

16:55 to push that agenda and it's great and I

16:58 look forward to hearing,

16:59 maybe there's someone on the call who can emphasize that.

17:02 But

17:03 in many of these areas,

17:04 in talking about impact.

17:07 Um,

17:08 because we don't have,

17:09 uh,

17:09 gender disaggregated data,

17:12 we're not really in a position

17:14 to make compelling arguments about that,

17:17 and we absolutely need that.

17:19 We need disaggregated data on women's employment in sectors,

17:23 on asset ownership,

17:25 on education,

17:27 entrepreneurship,

17:28 land tenure,

17:29 land rights,

17:30 land ownership.

17:32 Um,

17:33 and,

17:33 uh,

17:34 without that,

17:34 I think,

17:35 uh,

17:35 we're not really in a position to see the impact.

17:39 My second point would be,

17:41 we need a focused spending within budgets.

17:45 Gender,

17:47 gender-focused

17:48 budgeting.

17:49 We talked a lot about the importance of

17:52 open budgets,

17:53 open finance,

17:55 but

17:56 Uh,

17:57 what we really need,

17:58 uh,

17:58 is

17:59 to have gender-specific budgeting

18:03 that will make sure,

18:05 uh,

18:05 that resources are going

18:07 to support gender equality in these various areas.

18:12 Uh,

18:12 we,

18:13 we need the focused

18:15 participation,

18:16 the feedback loops,

18:18 and in all these cases,

18:20 we need

18:21 conscious effort to bring women to the table.

18:24 Um,

18:25 I mentioned Nepal before.

18:27 Uh,

18:27 Nepal is an interesting case because prior to

18:31 Uh,

18:31 the push for federalism,

18:33 there was an effort to bring in some local groups.

18:36 Federalism happens.

18:38 It's a big task.

18:40 We tend to see,

18:41 and I think we've seen,

18:43 um,

18:44 a more kind of one-stop shop

18:46 approach

18:47 where the women's voices have actually got lost

18:50 because of

18:51 different organization around

18:53 federal structures,

18:55 and that has to be something,

18:57 um.

18:58 Much more,

18:59 uh,

18:59 that much more attention is paid to.

19:02 Secondly,

19:03 I want to talk

19:04 about

19:05 transparency,

19:06 accountability,

19:08 The role of vulnerable groups,

19:10 the voice of women,

19:11 the voice of vulnerable groups

19:13 at times of crisis.

19:16 I think

19:18 one would hope

19:19 that some of these issues are now sufficiently embedded.

19:25 Uh,

19:25 that at times of crisis,

19:27 they don't get rolled back.

19:29 I would love to say

19:30 that's the case,

19:32 uh,

19:32 with transparency and accountability,

19:34 with open government,

19:36 with civic discourse,

19:38 and remember,

19:38 I started by saying,

19:40 Open government is only effective if there are two sides to the coin,

19:44 the open government

19:45 and the social accountability.

19:47 You need two to tango.

19:50 What have we seen happen in times of crisis?

19:53 Let's take the pandemic.

19:55 The pandemic is a great example

19:58 of how the social accountability

20:00 of that

20:01 in that marriage

20:03 between open government,

20:04 social accountability

20:06 has really got lost.

20:07 There's been a trade-off

20:09 between speed of government response.

20:12 And

20:13 accountability,

20:15 transparency,

20:16 and feedback loops.

20:18 And what have we seen as a result of that?

20:21 We've seen,

20:21 I think,

20:22 that women's voices have got pushed back,

20:26 one.

20:27 And secondly,

20:28 we've seen

20:30 that

20:30 in many cases public policy has been much less effective

20:36 because

20:37 uh

20:37 you haven't had that civic

20:39 trust and that civic participation.

20:42 So if you look at the pandemic.

20:45 We went for speed in almost every country.

20:48 This is the public policy,

20:51 accept it.

20:53 Do your social distancing,

20:55 wear your mask,

20:56 get your immunization,

20:58 and all the effectiveness of that

21:01 has depended on the levels of trust in government.

21:04 But without the civic participation,

21:07 without that civic

21:09 space.

21:10 Um,

21:11 I think what we've seen

21:13 is that already,

21:14 already fractured trust

21:16 has become even more fractured,

21:19 and I think the voice

21:21 of vulnerable and marginalized groups,

21:24 the voice of women,

21:25 has got lost even more.

21:27 If you think about.

21:29 Um,

21:30 the care crisis.

21:33 Women are the ones who had to step in largely

21:36 and help with children's education.

21:39 Women are the ones who've perhaps

21:41 lost their jobs.

21:43 Women are the ones who have been

21:45 frontline workers in many of this,

21:47 whether it's retail,

21:49 whether it's healthcare workers,

21:51 um.

21:52 And

21:53 are we seeing

21:54 budgeting

21:55 that is now responsive to that?

21:57 Are we seeing public policy that is responsive to that?

22:00 No,

22:01 it's just an additional cost to the pandemic.

22:04 So,

22:05 um,

22:05 transparency,

22:06 accountability.

22:09 Has taken a backseat

22:11 to speed of the pandemic and,

22:14 and with it,

22:15 I believe,

22:16 has um

22:17 gender

22:19 equality,

22:20 gender rights,

22:21 and even gender voice.

22:23 Um,

22:24 so that's the pandemic.

22:26 Other forms of crisis,

22:28 let's take Ukraine.

22:30 Um,

22:31 Ukraine is an interesting one,

22:34 I think,

22:35 because in the rush

22:36 to get everybody

22:38 to the border.

22:40 And to get women and children to the border

22:43 and often to get children by themselves

22:46 to the border.

22:48 Um,

22:49 child safeguarding,

22:50 I think,

22:51 has taken a second.

22:54 A backseat.

22:55 What do I mean by that?

22:56 An awful lot of children have gone

22:58 to the border and been met

23:00 by groups.

23:01 We don't know who they are.

23:02 We don't necessarily know where they're going.

23:05 They're not registered.

23:06 There haven't been any processes.

23:08 There hasn't been any open government around it.

23:11 There hasn't been any transparency,

23:13 any accountability,

23:15 and

23:16 some of it

23:17 is natural.

23:18 Again,

23:18 the rush to speed.

23:21 But the result is

23:23 that vulnerable groups

23:25 um

23:26 are paying the price

23:28 because their voice,

23:29 their special interest,

23:30 whether it's child safeguarding,

23:32 whether it's women,

23:34 uh,

23:34 have tended to take

23:36 a backseat.

23:37 So my point here is

23:39 When we talk about

23:41 um

23:42 transparency,

23:43 accountability,

23:44 open government,

23:45 we have to think

23:47 how robust is it

23:49 in the face of crises,

23:51 be it pandemics,

23:53 be it

23:54 war,

23:55 be it invasion,

23:57 and

23:58 when.

23:59 In that bargain between speed

24:02 and uh development effectiveness

24:05 or rights

24:06 or voice

24:07 or social accountability,

24:09 those things have got swept to the side.

24:12 So um

24:14 that's.

24:15 I'm going to come full circle.

24:17 I,

24:17 I want to

24:18 sort of throw it open to others now,

24:21 but

24:21 I guess my question to you,

24:23 you're in this community,

24:25 are

24:26 two and threefold.

24:28 Um,

24:29 one

24:30 is

24:31 in the open government movement,

24:33 have we sufficiently accepted

24:35 that twin

24:36 relationship between open government on the one hand

24:39 and social accountability on the other,

24:42 that they have to go together,

24:43 they both have to be built.

24:45 Secondly,

24:46 are we satisfied with the robustness

24:49 of how that's been integrated?

24:52 Into social norms

24:54 because at times of crisis,

24:56 we see it roll back.

24:57 Thirdly,

24:59 we cannot assume any automaticity.

25:03 In the fact that

25:04 because open government

25:06 is good

25:07 and because gender equality is good,

25:09 the two are good for each other.

25:11 It needs dedicated

25:13 data disaggregation,

25:15 dedicated budget disaggregation,

25:19 um,

25:19 bolstering of the voice of marginalized groups and women,

25:24 dedicated,

25:25 um,

25:26 analysis

25:27 of women's feedback loops and empowerment.

25:30 After all,

25:30 I think it's

25:31 estimated.

25:33 52% more men

25:36 are online in social media

25:38 in,

25:39 in developing countries

25:41 than men are.

25:42 If you move

25:43 with a pandemic

25:45 to a,

25:46 a place where you can't do

25:48 physical contact,

25:49 physical consultation,

25:50 it all has to be done

25:52 online.

25:53 Where is,

25:54 where is the women's voice?

25:56 Where is the gender equality?

25:58 So,

25:59 um,

26:00 and last but not least,

26:02 um.

26:03 I know there was a movement with the open government movement

26:07 to um

26:09 To make sure that when countries do national action plans,

26:13 they are integrating

26:15 uh gender,

26:16 women's voice into those national action plans.

26:20 I think this was um

26:22 This was pushed under the presidency of Canada.

26:25 I don't know where it is now.

26:27 I don't know if even in our own open government work,

26:31 we're acknowledging that

26:33 special resources has to go in

26:35 to empowering

26:36 the voice of women,

26:38 the needs,

26:38 the data,

26:40 because left to their own devices,

26:42 this will always

26:43 uh be a marginalized group.

26:46 So maybe um I end

26:48 with that and Robbie with a real demand

26:51 that.

26:52 If we're trying to persuade finance ministers at the end of the day

26:56 to open up,

26:57 if we're trying to build civic trust,

26:59 rebuild it.

27:01 Um,

27:02 after,

27:03 uh,

27:04 years of neglect and now neglect through,

27:07 through COVID,

27:08 um,

27:09 we need more research

27:11 to show the direct linkage.

27:14 Between

27:15 these two goods,

27:17 gender equality,

27:18 open government,

27:20 and why it's in

27:22 finance ministers and others'

27:25 interests to pursue that agenda,

27:26 so thank you very much.

27:31 Thank you so much,

27:32 uh,

27:33 Caroline,

27:33 for this,

27:33 uh,

27:34 introduction,

27:35 introductory remarks to the conversation we are going to have,

27:38 uh,

27:38 now.

27:39 Just

27:40 before going to,

27:41 to Luis as our main discussion,

27:43 just to

27:45 make sure that we focus on some of the caveats that you put there,

27:48 some more needs for evidence,

27:50 disaggregation of data,

27:51 maybe later on,

27:52 Salman,

27:53 you can come in on this because of your experience with,

27:55 with,

27:56 uh,

27:57 Uh,

27:58 data and,

27:58 and national statistical offices.

28:01 They focus on gender-specific budgeting and,

28:04 you know,

28:04 maybe Zora,

28:05 who is connected and she works on PFM and,

28:07 and budgets,

28:08 uh,

28:09 maybe she can come in later on.

28:11 V,

28:11 uh,

28:12 transparency and account.

28:14 and participation during crisis.

28:16 Can we afford it during a crisis?

28:18 Juan Pablo Guerrero,

28:20 who is the head of

28:21 Gift,

28:22 uh,

28:22 is connected and he just concluded some work in the Western Balkans about

28:26 specifically this,

28:27 these issues,

28:28 so maybe he can come in.

28:30 And

28:30 then,

28:31 you know,

28:32 the more I listen to you,

28:33 Caroline,

28:33 I am wondering whether the title of this session should be the opposite on,

28:37 on whether

28:38 gender equality can accelerate open government

28:41 and not the other way around.

28:43 Maybe having some,

28:44 some thoughts on this from Karen Rom,

28:47 uh,

28:47 who's in the meeting as well would be great.

28:49 And then you put

28:50 4 questions.

28:51 Questions to all of us,

28:52 and I expect all of us to come into the discussion.

28:54 But first,

28:55 let's go to Luis Scott with the initial set of,

28:58 of,

28:58 uh,

28:59 comments on the presentation.

29:00 Thank you,

29:00 Luis.

29:01 Well,

29:01 thank you.

29:02 Um,

29:02 thank you very much,

29:03 and I'll be brief since you just outlined,

29:05 uh,

29:06 a large group,

29:06 and I think you should also get Karen to comment on gender-based

29:09 budgeting because she's doing a lot of interesting work on that.

29:13 And since I

29:14 didn't have a copy of the presentation,

29:15 these are,

29:16 our thoughts really off the cuff of,

29:19 of what Caroline said.

29:20 So first of all,

29:21 there's a lot that I would say we agree upon.

29:23 Um,

29:24 clearly,

29:24 the need for open government and the need for two sides of it,

29:28 from the bottom up and the citizen engagement and social accountability work.

29:32 And then the work from the supply side and the open government,

29:37 the institutions for better governance,

29:40 um,

29:41 audit offices,

29:42 asset declarations,

29:44 and so forth,

29:45 anti-corruption agencies.

29:47 So,

29:47 clearly,

29:47 those two parts need to work together,

29:50 and I would say sometimes they do and sometimes they don't,

29:52 um,

29:53 and that they could be stronger.

29:55 And in the bank,

29:55 we have the governance team working on one part,

29:58 and we have now social sustainability and inclusion

30:01 working on the bottom-up in the citizen engagement.

30:03 But I think Roby and I and others are trying to strengthen the links,

30:07 recognizing that both are needed.

30:10 They don't necessarily have to be integrated

30:12 because they're taken at different levels,

30:14 but they need to be

30:15 coordinated.

30:17 I also clearly agree.

30:18 I went on to your website in advance of this,

30:20 you know,

30:20 and all the focus that PACT has and that you mentioned

30:24 on local level,

30:25 you know,

30:26 particularly if you're looking at social accountability,

30:28 it happens at the community.

30:31 There are things like you mentioned,

30:32 gender-based budgeting,

30:34 which is perhaps a broader,

30:36 but,

30:37 and also employment constraints and discrimination.

30:40 I mean,

30:40 there's a whole slew of things that can be done outside the community,

30:43 but if we're talking with an accountability lens,

30:46 a lot of it happens at the community.

30:47 And as you know,

30:49 the bank has a lot of work on community-driven development,

30:52 where you put resources in the hands of the community and you

30:56 Um,

30:56 ensure that there are women participating in making

30:59 the decisions about how those resources are allocated,

31:02 and work has been done to show that

31:04 you select infrastructure depending on who,

31:07 who's on the committee,

31:08 and women will select different infrastructure for the community

31:11 than men.

31:12 And I agree with you,

31:13 during the pandemic,

31:14 the role of local communities and in any crisis,

31:17 climate change,

31:18 uh fragility that we're seeing,

31:20 with the community and the ability of the community

31:23 to act and to adjust and to respond is,

31:26 is

31:27 more critical than ever before.

31:29 And I think that's going to,

31:31 to the forefront.

31:33 Specific efforts to strengthen social accountability,

31:36 I think,

31:37 uh,

31:38 where I would also agree with you is that we need more research,

31:41 but where I particularly feel we also need

31:44 is more tools.

31:46 I think it's not so obvious how to do citizen engagement

31:50 um at the community level and to involve vulnerable populations,

31:53 not only women,

31:54 but the LGBTI community,

31:56 disabled,

31:57 the elderly,

31:58 ethnic minorities,

31:59 all of those groups

32:01 need to be involved if you're trying to strengthen our resilience.

32:06 So,

32:06 from,

32:07 I just,

32:08 so a lot,

32:08 I agree.

32:09 We do have a lot more data.

32:11 I think there is,

32:12 uh,

32:12 you can always use more gender disaggregated data,

32:15 but we have made a lot of progress in that area.

32:17 I mean,

32:18 it'll be good to hear if Salman agrees with that,

32:20 but where I think we need to expand further is on other vulnerable groups

32:24 where we

32:25 have less access to data on indigenous populations,

32:27 ethnic minorities,

32:28 migrants now,

32:30 um.

32:31 And so in refugees and so forth.

32:35 I would like,

32:36 um,

32:37 just,

32:37 I'm not,

32:38 as I said,

32:38 I did want

32:40 to be brief,

32:41 um.

32:43 I did want to say,

32:44 take a step back though and just say

32:46 some work that we're doing on social sustainability,

32:50 because I think it is very relevant.

32:52 A piece of this is social accountability and open government.

32:57 So for us,

32:58 social sustainability is when people feel part of the development process

33:02 and believe that they and their descendants will benefit from it.

33:06 And

33:06 what this means is that you are able to come together as

33:09 a group and effectively take action to deal with crises like climate,

33:14 allocate scarce resources and pandemics,

33:18 and to do so in a way that is deemed

33:19 as legitimate and fair and where everyone thrives over time.

33:25 Now clearly,

33:26 women

33:27 need to play a critical role in this,

33:29 and this part of social inclusion,

33:31 social sustainability can be broken down into inclusion,

33:34 resilience,

33:34 and cohesion

33:35 and process legitimacy.

33:38 And huge challenges for women around inclusion,

33:41 access to markets and services,

33:43 but also voice,

33:45 and that is something I know you're working on as well in PACT,

33:48 and that you,

33:49 you didn't really,

33:50 you only briefly mentioned,

33:51 but

33:52 interventions

33:53 for women to participate in,

33:55 in citizen engagement require looking at norms,

33:59 values,

33:59 cultural practices,

34:01 and working with traditional authorities.

34:04 To,

34:04 not to impose new norms,

34:06 but to work with those to change those and to use those to be pers otherwise,

34:10 the changes will not be sustainable and perceived as legitimate.

34:14 On resilience,

34:15 it's building up the role of women.

34:19 To cope with pandemics and crises,

34:21 and there's so much that can be done on women and climate,

34:24 women in the pandemics and with the bank's projects,

34:26 we've done a lot

34:27 at community development working with women

34:30 to strengthen um community-level responses to pandemic,

34:34 soup kitchens,

34:35 selling masks,

34:35 making masks,

34:36 disseminating information,

34:37 hand washing stations,

34:39 just to name a few.

34:41 And then on cohesion,

34:43 it's the ability of a group to come together

34:46 and so often there are cleavages within a community,

34:49 across communities,

34:50 and you mentioned the Ukraine crisis

34:52 and the huge migrant challenges between hosting

34:55 um refugee communities,

34:57 challenges of human trafficking

34:59 that you were brought up or child trafficking.

35:02 And so,

35:03 work and interventions to drive cohesion are,

35:06 are possible,

35:07 but a little bit like citizen engagement,

35:09 difficult,

35:09 and I think where we need more research is understanding

35:13 how institutions like the bank and how CSOs

35:15 and other agencies can drive better cohesion.

35:19 And then finally,

35:19 this very challenging part around process legitimacy.

35:22 How do you do this in a way that's

35:24 deemed acceptable and in line with traditional authorities?

35:28 And how,

35:29 and citizen engagement can't be something tacked on or,

35:32 or better open government.

35:34 When I was country director,

35:35 I saw a lot of great interventions

35:37 for open government and better

35:39 supply-side initiatives,

35:40 but they didn't last past our DPO.

35:43 And so how do we do this in a way that's sustained,

35:46 and same with citizen engagement,

35:48 we do it in our projects.

35:49 We have grievance redress mechanisms,

35:51 we have citizen engagement requirements,

35:52 but how do we do this in a way that becomes institutionalized

35:56 and working with traditional authority mechanisms to do that?

35:59 So,

36:00 I don't want to go on further because I,

36:01 I think you,

36:02 we,

36:03 we have a rich uh group of discussions you laid out.

36:07 I agree

36:07 with,

36:08 you know,

36:08 I think you're,

36:09 I,

36:09 we're aligned on the role and the importance,

36:11 and in fact,

36:12 I would think

36:14 it's a bit

36:15 the overlooked agenda

36:16 and in part for the bank because

36:19 it doesn't cost a lot of money.

36:21 And you can't really borrow,

36:23 lend for it.

36:24 And yet it is so important focusing on

36:27 citizen engagement,

36:28 social accountability,

36:30 process,

36:30 legitimacy,

36:31 cohesion,

36:31 all of those things,

36:32 voice,

36:33 are,

36:34 are non-tangibles,

36:35 which in a bank project cycle of 5 years and or even 7 years,

36:41 And with the emphasis on disbursements,

36:43 it's a challenge.

36:45 But yet,

36:45 I think for us to be sustainable to meet the

36:48 challenges of climate and pandemics and conflict that we're seeing,

36:52 like Caroline noted how,

36:53 how

36:54 huge those challenges that are and

36:56 are becoming even more,

36:58 we need to really turn our attention as an institution to these issues more.

37:03 So I'll stop here,

37:03 Robbie,

37:04 and,

37:04 and hand it back to you.

37:07 Luis,

37:08 thank you for the wonderful comments and uh those of you who want to come in,

37:12 just raise your hand,

37:13 you know,

37:14 I will see you,

37:15 I will call you or just jump in.

37:17 I think this is an excellent conversation.

37:20 Luis,

37:20 I have a question for you

37:21 at some point in the conversation as well because you mentioned

37:24 all these things that we believe in,

37:26 inclusion,

37:27 resilience,

37:27 cohesion,

37:28 legitimacy.

37:30 So,

37:30 I wanted to ask about your own experience also within the World Bank when

37:34 you need to interact with uh other parts of the bank that tell you,

37:38 give me growth,

37:39 forget about inclusive growth,

37:41 give me any type of growth,

37:43 and then we'll deal with,

37:44 you know,

37:44 the distribution of that growth.

37:47 So,

37:47 maybe for later in the conversation,

37:49 let's see who wants to come in

37:50 at this point.

37:51 I don't see any hands,

37:53 but uh hopefully you guys are OK,

37:55 so that's Karen.

37:58 Um,

37:59 thanks,

37:59 and it was very interesting to hear you,

38:01 Caroline,

38:01 and thanks,

38:02 Luis,

38:02 for your comments.

38:04 Maybe to

38:04 jump in on the conversation

38:06 and maybe to be also a little bit um provocative,

38:10 uh,

38:10 from where I sit.

38:11 First of all,

38:11 there's much,

38:12 let me just say I really agree with a lot of what has been said and I,

38:15 um,

38:15 but from both you,

38:16 Caroline,

38:17 and,

38:17 and you,

38:18 Luis,

38:18 um,

38:19 I,

38:19 in terms of the interaction

38:21 between the inside,

38:23 outside,

38:23 I think that's really,

38:25 really important.

38:26 Um,

38:26 I,

38:26 I think the bank and needs,

38:29 one of the things we can do is to try to keep open spaces for civil society,

38:33 particularly in,

38:34 in

38:34 areas where it is very,

38:36 very closed,

38:37 and I,

38:37 I just,

38:38 but I,

38:38 that's an important mechanism of accountability and I,

38:41 I couldn't agree

38:42 more with Luise about the local level.

38:44 I think that's really,

38:45 really critical.

38:46 Um.

38:48 One thing I would say,

38:49 Louise,

38:49 that I,

38:50 I think we have to distinguish a little better is

38:53 the difference between a coping strategy and resilience.

38:56 A coping strategy is,

38:58 uh,

38:59 often um

39:01 is where women

39:02 don't really have the enabling support.

39:04 but they find a lot of

39:06 ways to cope.

39:07 Um,

39:08 and it's not always clear that

39:11 the kinds of responses that women

39:13 found during the pandemic

39:15 is a long-term resilience strategy.

39:17 Making masks was a coping strategy,

39:19 but I'm not sure

39:20 that it is about resilience.

39:22 I think women

39:23 need really to be resilient,

39:25 the kind of

39:27 access to finance and markets and other kinds of

39:29 things that will give them the longer-term ability to

39:34 Um,

39:35 to adapt,

39:36 uh,

39:36 but,

39:36 uh,

39:37 uh,

39:38 but not to be depleted as,

39:40 uh,

39:41 uh,

39:41 in that adaptation.

39:43 Uh,

39:43 Caroline,

39:44 something you said really hit me that I think

39:45 is really important that we always keep in mind,

39:48 and this is,

39:48 you know,

39:49 as a student of social movements and so forth

39:52 and in the,

39:53 the,

39:53 a student of

39:55 the attempts to look at gender equality over 30 years,

39:58 there's always the risk of backlash.

40:01 I think this,

40:02 the trajectory to gender equality

40:04 is 2 steps forward,

40:06 1 step sideways,

40:07 3 steps backward,

40:09 1 step sideways again,

40:11 and often the issues that are so important,

40:14 whether it's about women's bodies

40:16 or about women's roles

40:18 outside of motherhood,

40:19 are always part of that political.

40:22 Uh,

40:22 football,

40:23 and often they just don't have the public resources

40:28 that enables them then to be resilient actors.

40:31 And,

40:32 and of course,

40:32 we see this over and over again and it's not an issue

40:36 in low-income countries,

40:37 it's an issue in richer countries

40:39 as well.

40:40 Um,

40:40 the fact,

40:41 you know,

40:42 that we can't even get paid parental leave in the US is a travesty.

40:47 Uh,

40:47 even though everybody knows how hard it is

40:50 for the last two years in terms of coping,

40:53 and,

40:54 uh,

40:54 I think there is a norms issue.

40:56 It has to go with value,

40:57 valuation of the kinds of things that,

40:59 uh,

41:00 women,

41:01 the kinds of roles that women have historically played among other things.

41:05 Let me,

41:05 that leads me into budgeting.

41:07 And while I want to agree with you

41:09 about quote-unquote gender-specific budgeting,

41:12 I'm not sure what that means because there's a lot of terminology.

41:14 You can,

41:15 uh,

41:16 you can think about a budget,

41:17 uh,

41:18 who,

41:18 which has equivalent impacts on male and female.

41:21 You can think about a budget,

41:23 uh,

41:24 where

41:25 there are specific,

41:26 uh,

41:26 um,

41:27 resources that are allocated to reduce

41:29 discrimination or enable women to participate.

41:32 Uh,

41:33 you can think about,

41:34 uh,

41:34 a,

41:35 a range of budgeting.

41:37 My closest friends are the originators of gender responsive budgets,

41:41 and I don't agree with them on this.

41:43 Uh,

41:43 I think if you look at the research evidence,

41:46 gender responsive budgeting or Gender-sensitive budgeting or gender budgeting

41:50 has really

41:52 been a wonderful process exercise but where results and outcomes

41:56 have been very limited.

41:57 This may

41:58 differ a little bit at the local level

42:01 because of the greater scope for participation.

42:03 and accountability,

42:05 but certainly when you look at national budgets,

42:07 uh,

42:08 it's been much more limited.

42:09 And I think partly this is because

42:12 um the tools that have been developed are process

42:16 tools not linked to actual outcomes and results.

42:19 It doesn't have a performance focus,

42:21 a performance-based budgeting focus

42:24 and also because,

42:25 um,

42:26 uh,

42:28 People just,

42:29 uh,

42:29 uh,

42:29 I think that

42:31 people just get mired in the process and the indicators

42:34 of accountability

42:36 in gender-based budgets

42:38 are about process as opposed to result and outcome.

42:41 So I have a lot of skepticism

42:43 about,

42:44 about

42:45 that.

42:45 Um,

42:46 that said,

42:47 I do think it does,

42:48 it's a starting point for conversation and it opens up,

42:52 you know,

42:52 some greater,

42:53 uh,

42:54 space for voice,

42:55 for women's voices.

42:56 Um,

42:57 let's see if some of the newer budgeting efforts,

42:59 for instance,

43:00 in Canada,

43:01 um,

43:01 are gonna actually have a greater payoff.

43:04 And I think the other thing that's missing on the GRB,

43:07 the gender responsive budgeting conversation,

43:09 it goes back to the point that both of you made.

43:11 You need a good,

43:12 healthy inside-outside relationship.

43:15 If you don't have the social movements outside

43:18 for the budgeting,

43:19 you're not gonna get the accountability and

43:22 people like Debbie Budleer and Rhonda Sharp have consistently made that point.

43:26 Um,

43:27 for many years because otherwise,

43:28 it's really a technocratic exercise without the account,

43:31 accountability.

43:32 The last thing I just want to say is I fully agree with you,

43:35 Caroline,

43:36 and uh also,

43:37 Louise,

43:37 I think we do need a lot more data and I think the part of the data

43:41 piece that's missing

43:43 is the use of administrative data

43:45 and getting that.

43:46 Administrative data out and usable.

43:48 We have a lot more through household surveys and through firm surveys

43:52 and the bank has done great work there,

43:55 but we still don't have

43:57 as much on the administrative data side that we need,

43:59 whether it's on the quality and reach of service delivery,

44:03 whether it's on

44:06 um other parts of

44:08 um public finance management.

44:10 So I think that is still

44:12 a big agenda ahead of us and let me just stop there.

44:15 Back to you.

44:17 Karen,

44:17 thank you so much for your comments.

44:19 I see

44:20 two other hands at this point,

44:22 Salman,

44:23 uh,

44:23 you know,

44:24 Karen just spoke about data

44:25 and Roxandra after Salman.

44:27 So,

44:27 let's go to you,

44:28 Salman.

44:30 Uh,

44:30 thank you,

44:30 Robbie,

44:31 and uh thank you,

44:32 Carolyn for a really stimulating opening.

44:35 I wanted to stay on the theme of uh evidence and the importance of the evidence

44:39 base and bring in a bit of what the bank is doing and in my view,

44:42 what the bank should do more.

44:44 In fact,

44:44 so,

44:45 on the evidence base,

44:47 I think

44:48 we have made quite a bit of progress on

44:50 disaggregation.

44:51 So there's much more attention on gender disaggregation in surveys,

44:55 getting separate statistics for men and women.

44:57 So,

44:57 good.

44:58 That's it,

44:59 there are some areas where we still don't do so well,

45:01 which is about shared goods and

45:05 access to those goods within the household.

45:06 The household tends to be a black box,

45:08 and

45:10 it's understandable

45:11 because it's very hard to get at this,

45:13 but that remains a challenge.

45:16 Two areas,

45:16 two other areas to I think get a little bit less attention.

45:19 I mean,

45:20 one,

45:20 in our statistics projects,

45:21 we're doing much more to make sure that

45:23 there's gender equality and employment opportunities within

45:26 the institutions in the data collection,

45:29 and that's great.

45:29 It's great from an intrinsic point of view,

45:31 equal opportunities.

45:32 But what gets overlooked is,

45:34 in my view,

45:35 uh,

45:36 perhaps an even more important reason is

45:38 the instrumental value because what we collect,

45:40 depending upon who's collecting it,

45:42 makes a huge difference,

45:43 particularly in societies where

45:45 Uh,

45:45 people don't have access to within the household or you have a male respondent

45:50 talking about priorities for the household.

45:52 When you have,

45:53 um,

45:54 more female interviewers,

45:55 for instance,

45:56 there's much more,

45:57 there's a qualitative difference in what's collected and

46:00 the responses about priorities to public spending,

46:03 for instance,

46:03 that come out.

46:05 Um,

46:05 so I think that some of the best statistics institutes I've had a

46:09 chance to work with are those which have a very good gender balance.

46:13 So in some cases,

46:13 many more women.

46:14 I mean,

46:14 Iran comes to mind,

46:15 I think in that region has probably one of the best statistical agencies around

46:20 in South in South Asia and the Middle East.

46:23 And that is primarily staffed.

46:25 There are a very large number of women.

46:26 And the third point is what gets measured,

46:29 because I think this focus on market activity,

46:32 uh,

46:32 there's a lot of this issue of unpaid homework,

46:37 childcare not getting covered

46:39 in our formal GDP account.

46:41 Which is just so important for welfare,

46:43 and there's a lot of effort ongoing in trying to make better alignment between

46:47 our GDP statistics,

46:49 income-based statistics,

46:50 and welfare.

46:51 And the concept here,

46:52 I think of better treatment of

46:55 a lot of work that women do that doesn't get.

46:58 The limelight because it's not measured the same way,

47:01 uh,

47:02 I think is an area that we should be doing more on and unfortunately,

47:05 in some cases,

47:05 we're actually regressing by,

47:07 by putting more emphasis on market activity.

47:10 It has lots of knock-on effects like things like,

47:12 uh,

47:13 uh,

47:13 you know,

47:13 tax credits that are given,

47:15 but if somebody is at home,

47:17 you don't get a tax credit if you're paying for childcare.

47:20 Um,

47:21 and you're providing that service yourself.

47:23 So there's a lot more that needs to be done

47:25 over here.

47:26 Robbie,

47:26 I have to say I really like the way you phrased it,

47:28 which was to say,

47:29 what if we reverse this and talk about gender equality first,

47:32 and that as a means of

47:34 greater accountability and agency,

47:36 and I think there's a lot

47:37 to be said

47:38 for that.

47:39 This point about who's collecting information,

47:41 you know,

47:41 we've had lots of evidence within the household on who controls resources and what

47:46 that gets spent on and how many better outcomes you get when women are deciding

47:50 what they spend on.

47:52 And I would hold that the same is true.

47:54 For information as well.

47:55 If you were to ask people about priorities for public spending,

47:59 uh,

47:59 what actions should be taken,

48:00 who you collect that information for will matter a lot

48:03 and you'll get different outcomes or and different priorities,

48:07 uh,

48:07 for,

48:08 for action,

48:08 so.

48:10 Let me stop here.

48:11 Thank you.

48:12 Thank you so much,

48:13 Salma.

48:13 Let's move to Roxandra.

48:16 Thank you,

48:17 Robbie.

48:17 Um,

48:18 and thank you to you and the organizers for a fascinating and timely discussion,

48:22 and,

48:23 uh,

48:23 welcome back to the bank,

48:24 Caroline.

48:25 Uh,

48:26 your remarks on COVID and the effects of crisis,

48:29 uh,

48:29 resonated,

48:30 uh,

48:31 with me,

48:31 and I think,

48:32 uh,

48:32 everybody in the audience.

48:34 Um,

48:35 and I have a comment and a question related,

48:37 related to,

48:38 uh,

48:39 FCV context,

48:40 uh,

48:40 for you,

48:41 please.

48:41 Um,

48:42 FCVs are our most vulnerable clients,

48:44 uh,

48:45 who live in constant crisis,

48:46 only exacerbated by COVID or climate change or other such crises.

48:52 I also want to mention in particular,

48:54 uh,

48:55 the good collaboration and consultations we have recently had with PCT

49:00 in the context of our work in the DRC,

49:04 uh,

49:04 where the governance GP is doing analytical work on scaling up citizen engagement,

49:09 uh,

49:10 following the recently approved CPF,

49:13 uh,

49:13 which puts citizen engagement at the heart of the World Bank engagement

49:18 in ways in which this has not been done before.

49:21 Coming from a recent mission to Kinshasa

49:26 where we consulted with 2 dozen CSOs on how the bank can

49:31 better support citizen engagement,

49:35 for me it was very striking and very surprising,

49:38 and for me it was very important what

49:41 was not being said in these consultations as much as what was being said.

49:47 Uh,

49:47 budget transparency and data availability in the DRC

49:52 is an agenda and work in progress,

49:54 of course,

49:55 but the country has also made significant progress lately.

49:59 Uh,

49:59 however,

50:00 gen gender was largely absent across all our

50:04 conversations that we have had on subjects related to

50:08 transparency,

50:09 uh,

50:09 participatory budgeting,

50:11 uh,

50:12 uh,

50:12 accountability,

50:13 social accountability.

50:15 So I was wondering if you could please share with us any

50:18 thoughts about what can the bank do more in FCVs and especially

50:23 the good work that Pact is doing in resource rich countries such as DRC

50:29 facing the resource curse and the role of gender equality.

50:33 Thank you.

50:38 Thanks,

50:38 Roxandra for the comment and the,

50:40 and

50:40 the connection to the reality on the ground.

50:43 So let's go back to Caroline and

50:45 uh at this point and maybe Luis,

50:47 you want to come in as well and,

50:48 uh,

50:48 and then maybe we have time for another round.

50:50 OK,

50:51 Caroline?

50:52 So I would say,

50:53 um,

50:54 uh,

50:55 it's a great question,

50:56 Roxandra,

50:57 of course,

50:58 um,

50:58 and,

50:59 um,

50:59 I'm so glad you've been doing this work in DRC,

51:02 um.

51:04 I think uh the resource rich

51:06 issue,

51:06 we focus quite specifically on Pact

51:10 on the artisanal mining

51:12 community.

51:13 And as you know,

51:14 mining employs about

51:16 30 million women actually,

51:18 I think around the world.

51:20 In artisanal mining,

51:21 the numbers are very high,

51:22 and many of those mining

51:24 communities

51:26 where there are artisanal miners

51:28 have women playing a dominant role.

51:31 And uh in several countries,

51:33 we have worked with local

51:35 women's groups

51:38 um

51:39 to discuss community needs

51:42 and also to be doing a lot of work

51:45 on

51:46 alternatives,

51:47 uh,

51:48 employment alternatives

51:49 as a means of

51:51 uh mitigating child labor,

51:54 uh,

51:54 because child labor is a problem in the artisanal mining sector.

51:58 So,

51:59 um,

51:59 I think that's an area

52:01 where,

52:02 where,

52:03 um,

52:05 Specifying meetings with

52:08 women's representatives of community groups

52:11 is,

52:12 is very important.

52:14 And uh I'm,

52:15 I'm,

52:15 I'm sort of disappointed

52:17 uh you didn't have

52:19 some of those

52:20 discussions.

52:21 Um,

52:22 in,

52:22 in,

52:23 in another country,

52:24 in,

52:25 in Tanzania where we do,

52:27 we have a project on gems.

52:29 Uh,

52:30 uh,

52:30 we've,

52:31 we've worked to provide,

52:33 uh,

52:33 to cut out the middleman,

52:35 if you like,

52:36 uh,

52:36 who stood between

52:38 the women,

52:39 uh,

52:39 gem miners

52:40 and the,

52:41 uh,

52:42 uh,

52:42 the eventual jewelry store

52:44 in terms of the purchase price of the gems from the miners.

52:48 And as a result,

52:49 incomes have,

52:50 have gone up,

52:51 uh,

52:51 threefold

52:52 by,

52:53 by having open market days as opposed to,

52:56 uh,

52:56 middlemen.

52:58 But um I think on the voice.

53:00 Um,

53:01 I think,

53:02 uh,

53:02 and it's true,

53:03 I go back to,

53:04 you know,

53:04 the work we've done on HIV AIDS,

53:08 uh,

53:08 for PEPFAR and USAID

53:10 is all about orphans and vulnerable children and

53:13 adolescent girls and young women.

53:15 By virtue of that fact,

53:17 it is targeting representatives

53:20 of that community

53:21 and where trust is absolutely critical for people to take

53:25 preventative services.

53:27 If they don't have trust.

53:29 In the local authority

53:31 or um the local

53:33 community

53:34 or the um

53:35 frontline health worker,

53:37 uh they're not going to move forward on those programs.

53:40 So,

53:40 in other words,

53:41 special efforts

53:43 have to be

53:43 taken.

53:44 Um,

53:45 lastly,

53:46 it,

53:46 it's not enough just to say let's have representatives of the local community.

53:50 I think um it has to be,

53:52 uh,

53:53 engendered

53:54 in that way.

53:55 Um,

53:56 secondly,

53:56 Roxandra,

53:57 I'm really glad you're doing this in DRC

54:00 and,

54:00 uh,

54:00 it sounds like I worked a lot on the

54:03 beneficiary feedback,

54:05 which I guess was the first step

54:07 of some of this

54:09 importance of citizen voice.

54:11 Slightly,

54:12 now I'm gonna be provocative

54:14 and you can all tell me I'm wrong,

54:16 but depressed

54:17 to discover,

54:18 I think a lot of the beneficiary work for IA countries

54:22 that became then a prerequisite.

54:24 Became just a box ticking

54:27 exercise.

54:28 So when you ask me what can the bank do,

54:31 I think the bank

54:33 has always been,

54:34 has always self-censor censored

54:37 around these issues

54:39 because it feels it only works with governments

54:41 and we saw with GPSA there was some pushback

54:44 of the role of civil society.

54:47 You know,

54:47 I really think when you look at these agendas,

54:50 they're so intertwined,

54:52 you can't just say we only do this bit of it.

54:55 And the bank has to get more involved,

54:57 whether directly or through partnerships with organizations like mine,

55:03 uh,

55:03 I think is very critical.

55:05 I think,

55:06 I take Louise,

55:07 your point also that at the bank,

55:09 you have the kind of

55:10 the budget

55:12 stuff

55:12 and then you have the social development stuff and

55:15 they sit in different departments or different boxes.

55:19 Great,

55:20 but if they're not really closely joined at the hip,

55:23 that would worry me.

55:24 So those,

55:25 that was a number of

55:26 answers to questions

55:28 you didn't necessarily ask Roxandra,

55:30 but I did want to say,

55:32 if the bank is doing this,

55:34 please do it seriously.

55:35 Don't make it,

55:36 box checking.

55:40 Robbie,

55:41 let me come in here on a couple

55:43 of points.

55:44 Let me just start on the last one of Caroline.

55:47 Um,

55:49 It's a mix,

55:49 huh?

55:51 I wouldn't say it's perfection.

55:53 Um,

55:53 and,

55:54 and we're clearly not there.

55:56 Um,

55:57 in citizen engagement,

55:58 you know,

55:58 we've reached 100% of beneficiary feedback at project design,

56:03 which,

56:04 what does that mean?

56:05 Maybe it's box-ticking,

56:06 I would think in some cases

56:08 and not in others.

56:09 We're now really focusing much more on

56:12 tracking beneficiary feedback,

56:14 which is a step forward,

56:15 and we're about 60% of the projects report on beneficiary feedback indicators

56:20 in year 3 of implementation.

56:23 Which in a way makes me feel more comfortable than the 100%,

56:25 because anything that's 100%,

56:26 you kind of wonder about.

56:29 The IAG report that came out in 2018 on

56:32 citizen engagement called for it to be thicker,

56:34 and we're struggling with what that means and,

56:37 and how to do that,

56:37 and I'll come,

56:38 come back to that.

56:40 Um,

56:42 But,

56:43 and we also now,

56:44 as you know,

56:45 under ESF have the stakeholder engagement plan,

56:48 which

56:49 can be box,

56:50 I don't want to say can be box-ticking,

56:52 but can be,

56:53 you know,

56:53 reaching out to beneficiaries at project design and

56:55 that that is something that's publicly disclosed,

56:58 and where we have lots of scope to,

57:01 to deepen

57:02 the

57:02 collaboration

57:04 at the project level,

57:05 although that's really in the context of a project and where

57:08 I am trying to push the agenda and I'll give my

57:11 favorite example because I think it's really important to show what,

57:14 where we need to take it,

57:15 is this project in Indonesia

57:17 that gives its education projects where

57:22 teachers have to take a picture when they come into

57:24 the classroom that's sent to parents on their mobile phone,

57:27 and the parents can give their kids,

57:29 kids a progress test on a mobile phone to see how well they're learning.

57:33 And at the end of the year,

57:35 The parents vote on whether the teachers get

57:38 a

57:39 distance sub bonus because they're in remote areas.

57:43 This is also part of a pact that's signed between the teachers,

57:46 the parents,

57:47 and the community to improve educational outcomes.

57:50 And when I spoke to women in this project,

57:53 they were,

57:54 many of them illiterate or near illiterate,

57:56 but saying because they got this picture on their cell phone,

57:59 because they saw their teacher come in late,

58:01 because they saw their kids couldn't do better on the test,

58:04 they felt empowered to say,

58:05 no,

58:05 you don't get your subsidy at the end of the year,

58:07 where otherwise without data,

58:09 they,

58:09 they had no voice,

58:10 you know,

58:10 they,

58:11 how could they stand up to

58:13 To a teacher,

58:14 you know,

58:14 and say no,

58:15 or to an administration,

58:16 no,

58:16 they don't deserve.

58:17 And so what I would like to see in that light is more

58:20 work

58:21 that analyzes the impact of citizen engagement and

58:24 different types of citizen engagement on project outcomes and

58:29 data that comes in from projects like that or

58:32 data that we have from other citizen engagement initiatives,

58:35 particularly in Indonesia where as you probably remember,

58:37 there's a very strong tradition of community-driven development

58:41 and within that citizen engagement.

58:43 To really analyze how that does impact um

58:46 project engagement.

58:48 In Sahel now,

58:49 we're doing

58:50 also collecting data on mobile phones,

58:52 tracking funds that go down to the community level

58:56 and tracking the requests that go up to government on how to spend it,

58:59 so to enhance accountability,

59:01 but

59:01 of course,

59:01 your point is well taken of Women don't have access to cellphones in the cell,

59:06 which they may or may not,

59:06 then they don't access this information,

59:08 nor do other vulnerable groups.

59:10 But at least it is certainly a start in the right direction and I totally agree

59:15 with Karen that resilience is more than making masks,

59:18 but I just want,

59:19 um,

59:19 and needs access to digital access to finance,

59:23 and I should say communities need water and electricity because

59:26 otherwise women spend all their time collecting the wood and,

59:29 and,

59:29 um,

59:30 collecting the water.

59:31 Um,

59:32 just quickly though,

59:33 to answer your question,

59:35 Roby,

59:36 um,

59:37 I,

59:38 well,

59:38 21 last 0.22 quick points.

59:40 One,

59:40 gender,

59:41 I totally agree.

59:41 I really like the idea of gender equality is a driver for more accountability

59:46 because it's in cohesion,

59:47 inclusion.

59:48 If groups are excluded.

59:50 It's very hard to have accountable government because then government is only

59:54 talking to a certain few and accountable to a certain few.

59:57 So I think

59:58 not only gender equal and gender equality

1:00:00 can be indicative of broader inclusion in the society,

1:00:04 uh to

1:00:06 So,

1:00:07 interesting point for all of us who work in this area to,

1:00:10 to ponder and to see how we can take it forward.

1:00:12 On your question to me,

1:00:13 you know,

1:00:14 which is something ever since I worked on Propo Growth,

1:00:16 a long time ago,

1:00:17 I've been fighting the um the EFI and the,

1:00:20 the Prem growers,

1:00:21 and I think

1:00:23 now we're in a better position than ever before

1:00:26 to say yes,

1:00:27 growth is really good.

1:00:29 But look at inequality,

1:00:30 and we're reaching levels of inequality through growth

1:00:34 that have become unsustainable socially and politically,

1:00:38 and that unless,

1:00:39 and I think even the IMF now is beginning

1:00:42 to recognize that inequality has long-term economic costs,

1:00:46 inequality can create social unrest.

1:00:48 Now,

1:00:48 we don't have data to show if you don't make societies more

1:00:52 socially sustainable,

1:00:53 they're gonna blow up and,

1:00:54 you know,

1:00:55 have more conflict and more

1:00:57 We don't have that data,

1:00:58 you know,

1:00:59 people keep asking me for that data.

1:01:00 Can you show that less sustainable,

1:01:02 socially sustainable societies have more conflict,

1:01:04 more violence?

1:01:05 No.

1:01:06 But we,

1:01:07 We are seeing that

1:01:09 societies

1:01:11 where groups are excluded and don't feel part of

1:01:14 development are more vulnerable to populism and more vulnerable

1:01:19 to radicalization,

1:01:20 populism in our world here and radicalization in,

1:01:24 in other parts of the world

1:01:26 and to

1:01:28 So I think we,

1:01:29 we're beginning to compile,

1:01:30 you know,

1:01:31 it's not maybe cause and effect direct evidence,

1:01:34 but enough to know

1:01:36 that growth alone,

1:01:37 you know,

1:01:38 that does not yield more

1:01:41 income equality

1:01:43 will not be socially sustainable overall.

1:01:47 That's my answer

1:01:48 to,

1:01:49 to those guys now,

1:01:50 which we didn't quite have when I worked on this

1:01:53 8 years ago,

1:01:54 to the same extent,

1:01:56 or 10 years ago.

1:02:01 I get anybody else to come in or Caroline,

1:02:03 any reaction to Luis's point,

1:02:05 and otherwise,

1:02:06 I have a couple of questions for you.

1:02:13 No,

1:02:13 I thought Louise made um

1:02:15 very good points and I'm.

1:02:18 I'm delighted to hear that kind of both the bank is a little bit more joined up on that

1:02:23 and maybe the bank is,

1:02:25 is,

1:02:26 you know,

1:02:26 coming back um

1:02:28 on the issue of growth and

1:02:30 inequality.

1:02:31 It seems to me that throughout it's,

1:02:33 however long,

1:02:34 70 years,

1:02:35 it's gone sort of like this on that,

1:02:37 you know,

1:02:37 fad and fashion

1:02:39 in development is,

1:02:40 is alive and well.

1:02:42 Um,

1:02:43 but good news,

1:02:44 I think,

1:02:44 if,

1:02:45 if,

1:02:46 if

1:02:46 you're seeing progress on that.

1:02:48 So nothing more to add,

1:02:50 Robbie.

1:02:51 Thank you,

1:02:52 Caroline.

1:02:52 So,

1:02:53 so,

1:02:53 we discussed today that this

1:02:55 uh whole proposition of open government is not

1:02:58 just opening the government but also having the

1:03:00 capacity for participation and,

1:03:02 and

1:03:03 usage of that information that becomes more

1:03:06 open.

1:03:07 But we know that participation is costly,

1:03:10 that those who we want to participate the most,

1:03:14 those who are living under

1:03:15 poverty conditions,

1:03:17 have less agency in society,

1:03:19 and

1:03:20 they,

1:03:20 if they don't work,

1:03:21 don't go to work that day because they needed to attend an assembly,

1:03:26 they don't get paid.

1:03:27 If they go to participate,

1:03:29 nobody takes care of their kids.

1:03:31 So participation is costly and then we have these

1:03:34 You know,

1:03:35 situation where

1:03:37 collective action is needed,

1:03:38 but those who participate,

1:03:40 uh,

1:03:41 those who should participate cannot participate,

1:03:43 and those who

1:03:44 can't participate,

1:03:45 the middle class,

1:03:46 typically,

1:03:47 people like us,

1:03:48 don't have the incentives because in many of the

1:03:50 countries they already checked out from the system.

1:03:53 Instead of having

1:03:54 public education

1:03:55 become better,

1:03:56 they just pay private education.

1:03:58 Instead of having

1:03:59 public security to become better,

1:04:01 they just pay for private security

1:04:03 and so forth and so,

1:04:04 so on.

1:04:05 So,

1:04:05 so the question uh here then becomes

1:04:09 about that

1:04:10 and the work that you do,

1:04:11 Caroline.

1:04:12 Because I think that what you do and the organization does for so many years now

1:04:16 is not just investing in empowerment of women so they can have more voice.

1:04:22 is also empowering women and their communities so they can have more money

1:04:26 and economic opportunities.

1:04:28 Therefore,

1:04:29 they can participate more as well.

1:04:32 So,

1:04:32 one question for you is,

1:04:34 how do you balance these two different agendas

1:04:37 within PAC?

1:04:37 How much efforts that of,

1:04:39 of the work of PACK,

1:04:41 the mission of PACC

1:04:42 goes into empowering voice,

1:04:44 accountability,

1:04:45 participation,

1:04:46 and how much goes into empowering through economic development?

1:04:51 And the second question is that because of the expertise that you have,

1:04:56 you've been asked

1:04:57 as an organization.

1:04:59 Work in very difficult environments,

1:05:01 FCV environments where in the front line,

1:05:05 public institutions sometimes don't get to be effective.

1:05:08 So in a way,

1:05:10 organizations like yours

1:05:11 end up replacing or taking over

1:05:14 the mandate that public institutions should have.

1:05:19 I would say you do it very well.

1:05:21 You can provide services that nobody else can provide,

1:05:23 but it may have an impact on

1:05:26 levels of trust in public institutions because what citizens see

1:05:32 is that it's a pack organization or affiliate who provides the service

1:05:34 and not the public institution.

1:05:36 So these two questions to you.

1:05:38 Um,

1:05:39 OK,

1:05:40 nicely provocative questions too.

1:05:43 Um,

1:05:44 so,

1:05:44 are organizations like PAC

1:05:47 actually undermining

1:05:50 Trust in government and

1:05:52 skewing the,

1:05:53 the social space.

1:05:55 You know,

1:05:55 I worked,

1:05:56 um,

1:05:56 I worked,

1:05:57 as did Roxandra,

1:05:59 um,

1:05:59 on Haiti,

1:06:01 uh,

1:06:01 for many years,

1:06:02 and no country in the world,

1:06:04 uh,

1:06:05 had

1:06:05 such,

1:06:06 if you like,

1:06:07 weak government

1:06:08 and

1:06:09 multiplicity

1:06:11 of CSOs,

1:06:13 uh,

1:06:14 than Haiti,

1:06:14 with the result that you've got

1:06:16 islands of,

1:06:17 um,

1:06:18 Uh,

1:06:18 very effective development because you had a good project and a good CSO

1:06:23 in the midst of a,

1:06:24 of a ocean

1:06:26 of deprivation

1:06:27 and lack of resources.

1:06:30 And the government spent

1:06:31 a lot of time saying we can't,

1:06:33 we can't operate like this,

1:06:34 we're being undermined.

1:06:36 We need to make sure everyone comes through government.

1:06:39 There's a central register,

1:06:40 Minister of Planning

1:06:42 has oversight over everything.

1:06:44 And you do see that

1:06:45 uh in more countries have managed to get a handle

1:06:49 on,

1:06:49 if you like,

1:06:50 the CSO

1:06:51 sector.

1:06:52 Um,

1:06:53 I think,

1:06:54 uh,

1:06:54 it's a bit of a,

1:06:56 um,

1:06:57 misnomer

1:06:58 and it's,

1:06:59 it's a bit of an old fashioned,

1:07:01 um,

1:07:02 response,

1:07:03 Roby,

1:07:03 uh,

1:07:04 because I think now

1:07:06 when I look at all the work we do

1:07:09 with local communities,

1:07:10 I would answer in two ways.

1:07:12 First of all,

1:07:13 most of the work we're doing

1:07:15 is,

1:07:15 is in coordination

1:07:17 with local government.

1:07:18 If it's,

1:07:19 if it's on.

1:07:20 Um,

1:07:21 HIV AIDS treatment,

1:07:23 prevention,

1:07:24 uh,

1:07:25 distribution of drugs,

1:07:27 it's,

1:07:27 uh,

1:07:28 vaccines

1:07:29 for COVID.

1:07:30 It's in

1:07:31 coordination with local authorities,

1:07:33 even if they're very decentralized at the,

1:07:36 at the local level.

1:07:38 That's the first thing.

1:07:39 Um,

1:07:40 I think the second thing

1:07:42 is that,

1:07:43 um,

1:07:44 all these organizations

1:07:47 are,

1:07:47 um,

1:07:48 In essence,

1:07:50 contributing

1:07:51 to that second,

1:07:52 uh,

1:07:53 that 2 pillar of you've got that open governance and you've got the effectiveness.

1:07:58 And uh in most cases,

1:08:00 they're not independent

1:08:03 of government.

1:08:04 Um,

1:08:05 I think that

1:08:06 one of the,

1:08:07 uh,

1:08:08 one of the real issues is

1:08:10 Uh,

1:08:10 that an organization

1:08:12 like ACT

1:08:13 actually grew up in our fifty-year history

1:08:16 of

1:08:16 creating,

1:08:17 of building capacity of local organizations.

1:08:20 What I thought,

1:08:21 I thought you were gonna go

1:08:22 to the place which says,

1:08:24 you know,

1:08:25 uh.

1:08:26 International NGOs crowding out local NGOs,

1:08:30 and aren't you in essence,

1:08:33 Sort of big footing

1:08:34 some of the local voice and the local representation

1:08:38 by bringing in this sort of um

1:08:41 more global

1:08:42 role and global organization and USAID is committed to what it calls localization,

1:08:48 which is building up

1:08:50 um the power of the independence

1:08:52 to directly

1:08:54 uh give money

1:08:55 to local NGOs.

1:08:57 So,

1:08:57 I think we see a lot of our work

1:09:00 of empowering those communities.

1:09:03 Uh,

1:09:03 to organize themselves

1:09:06 or to be represented by local,

1:09:08 local groups.

1:09:09 So I think,

1:09:10 I,

1:09:11 I think these

1:09:12 areas now work hand in hand.

1:09:14 But you're right,

1:09:15 it's,

1:09:15 it has to be,

1:09:16 um,

1:09:17 It has to be a very close,

1:09:20 uh,

1:09:20 you have to,

1:09:21 you have to monitor it very carefully.

1:09:23 So,

1:09:23 uh,

1:09:23 in order to ensure sustainability.

1:09:26 Um,

1:09:27 I do think,

1:09:28 uh,

1:09:28 I just want to say

1:09:30 it's a funny world,

1:09:32 this world of international organizations like,

1:09:35 now I'm not talking about PAC,

1:09:37 uh,

1:09:37 I'm talking about multilateral organizations like the World Bank

1:09:41 and then implementers

1:09:43 like PAC on the ground.

1:09:46 Uh,

1:09:46 you know,

1:09:47 we all,

1:09:47 we all

1:09:48 are based in Washington.

1:09:50 The left hand rarely knows what the right hand is doing,

1:09:53 and I think that's a great tragedy

1:09:55 that as the bank is focusing so much on,

1:09:59 um,

1:10:00 on,

1:10:01 on

1:10:02 macro policy in a sense or working with government,

1:10:06 there is then a divorce

1:10:08 between

1:10:09 the implementation,

1:10:10 the voice.

1:10:11 Uh,

1:10:12 the representation at the ground and other people are doing that.

1:10:15 And I think whether it's partnerships,

1:10:17 I know

1:10:18 the articles of agreement and all that

1:10:21 and lending through governments,

1:10:22 but I do think

1:10:24 there's a need

1:10:25 for much better,

1:10:26 um,

1:10:27 synergy.

1:10:28 These shouldn't be two worlds that we're talking about,

1:10:31 um,

1:10:32 and,

1:10:32 and all based in Washington DC and worlds that rarely talk to each other.

1:10:40 Thank you,

1:10:40 Caroline.

1:10:41 All right.

1:10:42 Anybody else to come in?

1:10:44 Just,

1:10:44 I'll,

1:10:44 I'll say something just briefly to what Caroline just said because I totally agree,

1:10:48 and

1:10:49 Caroline,

1:10:49 we're in the process of,

1:10:50 you know,

1:10:50 I see Sophie's on the call and so is Jeff,

1:10:53 um,

1:10:54 who lead our global partnership for social accountability,

1:10:57 and we're in the process of,

1:10:59 and Roby is,

1:11:01 is a former leader of that trust fund.

1:11:04 And we're really in the process of rethinking how we can work,

1:11:08 you know,

1:11:09 with civil society and how we can enhance that.

1:11:12 As part of IA2,

1:11:14 there was a request that we expand as an institution,

1:11:18 our financial flows to CSOs.

1:11:20 Now,

1:11:21 of course,

1:11:21 how that's done can be,

1:11:22 you know,

1:11:23 an eye to window,

1:11:23 as you can imagine,

1:11:24 presents for the reasons you were just saying,

1:11:26 a ton of complications.

1:11:29 But how can we scale up more,

1:11:31 you know,

1:11:31 and

1:11:32 Robbie and I have this discussion all the time,

1:11:33 but the delivery model we had,

1:11:35 you know,

1:11:35 maybe this is something to take offline,

1:11:37 but just to let you know,

1:11:38 we're,

1:11:38 we're deep in discussion on this and thought,

1:11:41 is how do you scale up

1:11:42 the ability of the bank

1:11:44 to work

1:11:45 with CSOs and build a better partnership.

1:11:48 And do it in a way

1:11:49 that the transaction costs are not phenomenal and that

1:11:53 and that governments,

1:11:54 our clients,

1:11:56 you know,

1:11:56 who we're monitoring and building social accountability for who have a

1:12:00 mixed view as you know,

1:12:01 of this agenda

1:12:03 are are open and and find it helpful to do and that's where we

1:12:06 also need the evidence that this kind

1:12:08 of intervention leads to better development outcomes.

1:12:12 Well,

1:12:12 um,

1:12:13 I,

1:12:13 I'm excited by that,

1:12:14 Louise,

1:12:15 and I think,

1:12:16 um,

1:12:16 you know,

1:12:17 maybe this is,

1:12:17 uh,

1:12:18 and we can take it offline,

1:12:19 but I'd love,

1:12:20 uh,

1:12:21 for us,

1:12:22 uh,

1:12:22 my team to be able to sit down,

1:12:25 uh,

1:12:25 with you and bat around some ideas around that,

1:12:27 and in any way we can be helpful,

1:12:29 we'd love to be.

1:12:32 Thank you,

1:12:33 Carolyn,

1:12:33 and we do consider you the mother of GPSA anyway,

1:12:37 so you have a responsibility there for parenting.

1:12:40 I see Zora and Jeff wanted to come in.

1:12:43 I must say,

1:12:44 Zora for me is very important,

1:12:45 not just because she works with me in the same team.

1:12:48 But she is the first,

1:12:49 she was the first woman

1:12:51 in Afghanistan to become a certified accountant in the history of the country.

1:12:56 So

1:12:57 we're talking about inclusion,

1:12:59 we're talking about accountability,

1:13:00 so who better than Zoa to come in at this point?

1:13:03 Thank you very much,

1:13:04 Robbie.

1:13:05 Thanks for that introduction.

1:13:06 Uh,

1:13:07 I seem to forget that,

1:13:08 uh,

1:13:09 once in a while,

1:13:10 so it's good that you reminded me.

1:13:12 So,

1:13:12 Karina,

1:13:13 uh,

1:13:13 Caroline,

1:13:13 Louise,

1:13:14 uh,

1:13:14 and Karen also,

1:13:15 I really,

1:13:16 uh,

1:13:16 enjoyed this conversation,

1:13:18 uh,

1:13:18 great thoughts,

1:13:19 great insights,

1:13:21 and,

1:13:21 um,

1:13:22 Uh,

1:13:22 Karen,

1:13:23 I would like to go to your point,

1:13:24 uh,

1:13:25 uh,

1:13:25 about the PFM,

1:13:27 uh,

1:13:27 the tools,

1:13:28 the GRM tools.

1:13:29 I somewhat agree that

1:13:31 the tools might not be that much useful as long as you're just using them

1:13:35 merely for,

1:13:37 uh,

1:13:38 like.

1:13:39 Like ticking the boxes or creating systems if

1:13:41 the tools are not embedded in policies,

1:13:44 and those policies are not properly implemented and

1:13:48 uh monitored or you don't have sufficient reports that you're not

1:13:52 looking back into whether your policies are responsive enough or not.

1:13:56 Uh,

1:13:56 so I kind of agree with you.

1:13:58 And then,

1:13:59 uh,

1:14:00 so Robbie mentioned that I am from Afghanistan.

1:14:02 I also had the fortune of working in Afghanistan.

1:14:05 For

1:14:06 7 years with the World Bank.

1:14:08 And,

1:14:08 uh,

1:14:09 Caroline,

1:14:09 to your point about being able to work with

1:14:12 local NGOs rather than engaging directly with governments,

1:14:17 uh,

1:14:17 we have seen a few issues,

1:14:19 so

1:14:19 I didn't hear the word corruption in the last 1.5 hour.

1:14:23 So the level of corruption that you see in these FCB countries,

1:14:27 especially at NGO level,

1:14:29 is quite high,

1:14:30 and we have evidence that and Afghanistan,

1:14:32 I,

1:14:32 being a local resident there,

1:14:34 living there,

1:14:35 I've actually witnessed it firsthand and seen it

1:14:37 and the role that it plays in how the resources are misused,

1:14:42 especially,

1:14:43 especially by local NGOs.

1:14:45 I mean,

1:14:45 of course,

1:14:45 corruption at government level is there,

1:14:48 but then also at the NGO level.

1:14:50 How do we take care of that?

1:14:51 And then the biggest issue

1:14:53 is sustainability or institutional strengthening.

1:14:57 We I saw that,

1:14:58 I mean,

1:14:58 Afghanistan is a classic example,

1:15:00 bank coming in there for like

1:15:02 20 years,

1:15:03 all the donors,

1:15:04 international community,

1:15:06 putting in all that money,

1:15:07 and today we see

1:15:08 nothing worked,

1:15:09 uh,

1:15:10 not the institutions,

1:15:11 uh,

1:15:12 all the work that was done for equality,

1:15:16 for,

1:15:16 uh,

1:15:17 gender-based budgeting,

1:15:18 all of that has

1:15:20 vaporized,

1:15:20 I must say.

1:15:22 So I would say,

1:15:23 how do you Kind of

1:15:25 mitigate those risks or what could have worked better

1:15:29 if we go back to Afghanistan 20,

1:15:31 we go back 20 years,

1:15:33 what would we do differently?

1:15:35 I mean,

1:15:35 of course the political environment is there,

1:15:39 the security,

1:15:39 the risks are there,

1:15:40 but

1:15:41 could we have done something different that at least we would have something

1:15:45 much more sustainable on the ground than where we are today.

1:15:48 So I'll stop there,

1:15:49 Robbie.

1:15:50 Thank you.

1:15:51 Very easy question,

1:15:52 simple question to answer.

1:15:53 Thank you,

1:15:54 Zora.

1:15:54 So we have Jeff Timgu to come in and then

1:15:57 Caroline will respond,

1:15:59 and then

1:16:00 uh Steve Davenport will give uh closing remarks

1:16:03 unless somebody else wants to come in.

1:16:05 All of this in 5 minutes,

1:16:06 all right?

1:16:07 So Jeff,

1:16:09 Thank you very much,

1:16:10 um,

1:16:10 Robbie,

1:16:11 and

1:16:12 thank you,

1:16:12 uh,

1:16:13 Caroline.

1:16:13 It's good to see you again.

1:16:15 Uh,

1:16:15 thank you,

1:16:15 Louise,

1:16:16 and everyone for their comments on this really,

1:16:19 uh,

1:16:19 timely

1:16:21 conversation.

1:16:22 Um,

1:16:23 as we always do,

1:16:24 when we

1:16:25 come to talk about

1:16:27 open government and social accountability,

1:16:30 We always have this risk of

1:16:33 bifurcating,

1:16:35 uh,

1:16:35 supply and demand.

1:16:37 Um,

1:16:38 we've all,

1:16:38 I think,

1:16:39 experienced working at the country level.

1:16:42 That

1:16:43 In many contexts.

1:16:46 Uh,

1:16:46 the divide between

1:16:49 Government and society

1:16:51 has become softer.

1:16:53 And

1:16:54 more porous.

1:16:55 And that should affect

1:16:57 how we view,

1:16:59 uh,

1:16:59 what we are calling supply and,

1:17:01 and

1:17:03 demand side of governance

1:17:04 and should affect our strategies for,

1:17:07 for how we influence governments,

1:17:09 uh,

1:17:10 and to be smarter in,

1:17:12 in mapping uh government actors,

1:17:14 uh,

1:17:14 for more strategic engagement.

1:17:16 Obviously,

1:17:17 there's detail to that,

1:17:18 but I wanted to flag that as a very important

1:17:20 focus.

1:17:22 Uh,

1:17:22 the second,

1:17:23 uh,

1:17:23 Caroline,

1:17:24 you mentioned GPSA and Robbie,

1:17:25 you're right.

1:17:26 You know,

1:17:26 Caroline

1:17:27 was a great,

1:17:28 uh,

1:17:28 champion and one of the real movers,

1:17:30 uh,

1:17:30 uh,

1:17:31 for the GPSA.

1:17:33 Um,

1:17:33 the,

1:17:34 the concept

1:17:35 was really about

1:17:36 the space in between.

1:17:38 Uh,

1:17:39 neither

1:17:40 government nor civil society,

1:17:42 but both and that space in between,

1:17:45 and how governments interact with

1:17:47 civil society.

1:17:48 Um,

1:17:49 and for the bank,

1:17:50 uh,

1:17:50 this really means the,

1:17:52 the,

1:17:52 the,

1:17:53 this big focus on the

1:17:56 mediating and facilitatory role of,

1:17:59 of CSOs being

1:18:01 really critical.

1:18:03 Uh,

1:18:03 it's becoming even more important when we,

1:18:06 when we talk about these,

1:18:07 uh,

1:18:07 challenged,

1:18:08 uh,

1:18:08 contexts,

1:18:09 uh,

1:18:10 especially FCVs,

1:18:12 uh,

1:18:12 the,

1:18:12 I think of the important,

1:18:14 uh,

1:18:14 study

1:18:15 of the,

1:18:15 uh,

1:18:16 uh,

1:18:16 Sustainable Livelihoods and Research Consortium,

1:18:19 uh,

1:18:19 housed in ODI,

1:18:21 uh,

1:18:21 and the,

1:18:22 how they came to the issue of process and,

1:18:25 and Caroline,

1:18:25 I heard you talk about the

1:18:27 danger of emphasizing,

1:18:29 uh,

1:18:30 process over outcomes.

1:18:31 I think we need to do both.

1:18:33 But in some of these uh contexts,

1:18:35 process really becomes all important.

1:18:37 And there,

1:18:38 they came out

1:18:39 concluding that

1:18:41 the experience,

1:18:42 the lived experience of people

1:18:45 in the,

1:18:45 in the processes of

1:18:47 service provision

1:18:49 are what contributes to more legitimacy of,

1:18:52 of the state,

1:18:53 uh of state institutions.

1:18:55 And so for the bank and government putting a premium on process

1:18:59 really means getting CSOs on board.

1:19:02 And helping to strengthen their hand

1:19:05 in how they can support processes of,

1:19:07 uh,

1:19:08 of service delivery.

1:19:09 Of course,

1:19:10 with an eye on outcome,

1:19:11 especially when it comes to

1:19:12 gender and all of those issues.

1:19:14 There's a lot here to discuss and I see uh we have 33 minutes,

1:19:18 I think,

1:19:18 Robbie,

1:19:18 and you've signaled you want to wrap this up.

1:19:21 But I wanted to make those uh 2 or 3

1:19:24 important points.

1:19:25 Thanks a lot.

1:19:26 Thank you,

1:19:27 Jeff.

1:19:27 Thank you so much,

1:19:28 Caroline,

1:19:29 back to you.

1:19:29 So all,

1:19:30 all really good points,

1:19:31 Jeff,

1:19:32 and I'd love to discuss

1:19:34 more.

1:19:34 So maybe we need a follow up to this meeting,

1:19:36 but just to say super quickly

1:19:38 on Afghanistan.

1:19:41 I think it's fair to say,

1:19:42 and I'm in the

1:19:43 NGO sector now,

1:19:45 that NGOs have been

1:19:47 slow

1:19:48 to hold themselves accountable to the same transparency,

1:19:52 disclosure,

1:19:54 open data.

1:19:55 Uh,

1:19:57 that we've held international institutions to,

1:19:59 and so there is a real need

1:20:01 for more transparency around NGOs.

1:20:04 Secondly,

1:20:04 why did it all go wrong?

1:20:06 Speed,

1:20:07 speed,

1:20:07 speed,

1:20:07 politics,

1:20:08 politics,

1:20:08 politics.

1:20:09 Also,

1:20:10 uh,

1:20:11 there's a known adage that once you become a darling of development.

1:20:15 And everybody's citing how great the work is there

1:20:19 or a new trust fund or a new

1:20:21 way of doing delivery or

1:20:24 empowering CSOs,

1:20:25 you can be sure that within 20 years,

1:20:28 it's going to not be a success story after all.

1:20:30 That sadly has been the,

1:20:32 the story,

1:20:33 and I think

1:20:35 Too much speed,

1:20:36 too much politics,

1:20:37 and perhaps not enough of what Jeff talked about,

1:20:40 uh,

1:20:40 of process,

1:20:41 really sustainable processes

1:20:44 that would be embedded.

1:20:45 But this issue of embedding,

1:20:47 how embedded are any of these changes is really interesting to me.

1:20:51 I look at open procurement

1:20:53 and suddenly with the pandemic,

1:20:55 we're back to sole sourcing,

1:20:56 we're back to friends and family getting all the contracts.

1:21:00 In advanced

1:21:01 economies

1:21:03 as well as elsewhere

1:21:04 and uh we have to see what the,

1:21:06 you know,

1:21:07 how we can embed these things so speed

1:21:10 and politics

1:21:11 don't become an excuse for rollback.

1:21:18 Very good.

1:21:19 Thank you so much,

1:21:19 Caroline and uh finally,

1:21:21 Steve.

1:21:23 Sure,

1:21:23 I'll be super fast.

1:21:25 I mean,

1:21:25 usually my indicator of a good BBL is if we agree we're going to

1:21:29 talk again

1:21:31 on something practical.

1:21:32 So I really do appreciate the fact that

1:21:34 there will be some follow up in particular on GPSA.

1:21:37 Just,

1:21:38 um,

1:21:38 you know,

1:21:38 as you can imagine,

1:21:39 Carolyn and others,

1:21:40 um,

1:21:41 you know,

1:21:41 me being a TTL working in country offices,

1:21:44 evidence and data

1:21:45 is what,

1:21:46 what we need to make the case that this stuff is more than a checkbox.

1:21:49 So I think.

1:21:50 Um,

1:21:50 that point is well taken with the WDR and all

1:21:52 the work we've been doing on data and gender desegregation.

1:21:55 I think we're getting there.

1:21:56 It's kind of where citizen engagement was a while ago,

1:22:00 now maturing,

1:22:01 and then

1:22:02 if we want it to be metier,

1:22:03 more substantive reforms in our operations and

1:22:06 to make it ossify within the institution,

1:22:08 we really do need to get it into our operations.

1:22:12 We need to make the case and when you make that case,

1:22:14 then the country economist or the

1:22:17 or the program lead will agree to.

1:22:19 Putting in media reforms around this topic,

1:22:21 but

1:22:22 I think um one thing we also need that we,

1:22:24 we don't often talk about is external pressure

1:22:27 as the bank having the OGP,

1:22:30 the ITI,

1:22:30 other multi-stakeholder forms that are global

1:22:33 to apply pressure to the institution

1:22:35 to change,

1:22:37 you know,

1:22:37 to,

1:22:37 to make modifications in our behavior or and take things

1:22:41 beyond the checkbox.

1:22:42 I think some of that is necessary just to be very frank.

1:22:45 But anyway,

1:22:46 great conversation.

1:22:47 Thanks,

1:22:47 Robbie for sharing.

1:22:49 Um,

1:22:49 I learned a lot

1:22:50 and

1:22:51 I'm glad that I get to see Carolyn again.

1:22:57 Robbie,

1:22:58 thank you everybody for connecting today.

1:23:00 We are,

1:23:01 we are one minute late,

1:23:02 uh,

1:23:03 in concluding this,

1:23:03 but it has been a fascinating discussion,

1:23:06 as,

1:23:06 uh,

1:23:07 you said,

1:23:07 Steve,

1:23:08 it's great.

1:23:09 To know that we are going to continue this,

1:23:11 not just with more discussion but hopefully with actions.

1:23:13 And thank you,

1:23:14 Caroline so much for coming back uh to the bank for this session and thank you,

1:23:18 Luis,

1:23:19 so much for

1:23:19 not just connecting today but leading this agenda as well on a daily basis.

1:23:23 It's not easy,

1:23:25 uh,

1:23:25 and it's great to,

1:23:26 to be working with you on this.

1:23:27 Thank you everyone.

1:23:28 Thank you.

1:23:29 Thank you to all.

1:23:30 Bye.

1:23:31 Thank you.

1:23:32 Thank you,

1:23:32 Caroline.

1:23:33 Thanks.

1:23:33 Good to see you again.

showAllTimestamps

no

transcript

Thank you everyone for connecting. Please, uh, feel free to turn on your cameras if you want, so we get a sense of a real meeting, uh, even though we are connecting through the screen. Uh, thank you very much for your participation. Sorry, we are starting a bit late, uh, today, but, uh, it's a great session. We have a great session ahead of us. The title of today's, uh, knowledge sharing session is Can Opening Up Government Accelerate Gender Equality. So if you did not mean to be in this meeting, you are still welcome to stay with us because the, I promise the conversation. It's going to be uh fantastic. We have one main speaker today, one main discussant, and then all of you are discussants for this topic as well. Let me do a brief introduction of the session and the participants, and then we go into the content. I'm Robbie Senderovic. I manage um the governance, global practice in the ECA region um together with uh some of the communities of Practice that we have in the bank. This session today is organized by the Community of Practice on citizen engagement, the Community of Practice on open government and transparency, the social sustainability and inclusion, uh, global practice of the World Bank, and the governance global practice of the World Bank as well. Special thanks for, to Steve Davenport, who is connected, and Gladys, Gladys Sendere, co-chairs of the community, um, And Saki for organizing this. This session is going to be recorded, so just remember that anything you say uh may be there for uh history. Now, let me say a couple of things about our speakers today and then uh give a quick intro to the session. First of all, we have Caroline Anstey with us, who is the president and chief executive officer at PACT. Carolyn has more than 25 years of leadership experience in social and economic development in both the public and private sectors. After an 18-year career at the World Bank, where she worked as managing director in charge of operational policy, Chief of Staff, and vice president for External Affairs, she joined UBS. AG as a group managing director working across wealth management, asset management, and the UBS investment plan to still help the firm's sustainability policy and investment products. She subsequently served as senior advisor to both the Inter-American Development Bank and the World Economic Forum, focusing on the future of development policy and the creation of sustainable markets. For 5 years, she served as a shelter to the heads of government meetings of the G7 and G20. She joined PAC in 2020. It is really a pleasure to have Caroline back uh with us here at the World Bank. We have the main discussion for today's uh session. Uh, this is Louis Cole, who is, uh, the global director for Social sustainability and inclusion in the World Bank, uh Sustainable Development Practice Group. Previously, Uh, Louis was the country director for Senegal, Cabo Verde, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, and, um, Mauritania based in Dakar, Senegal. Prior to her appointment as country director, she was practice manager in the poverty Global Practice. She is responsible for Latin America and the Caribbean, where she also covered gender equality. A US national, she joined the bank in 1991 as a young professional. She has since held various positions in the World Bank's poverty reduction and sustainability development. Uh, departments working specifically on inclusive growth, poverty reduction, and rural development. She has worked in Africa, Latin America, and Eastern and Central Europe. Ms. Corr holds a PhD in Development Economics from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. So this is the formal introductions. Uh, we have one speaker, one main commentator to discuss and then we're gonna open up to, uh, the rest of us in the room as well. Today's session is extremely important. Uh, you know, those of us who believe in open government and transparency don't need to be reminded about the importance of this agenda. Those of us who work on inclusive institutions and gender equality don't need to be reminded about the importance of this agenda. There is No real sustainable development without gender equality in society. That's something that is very important for all of us to remember and all of this was always important, even today becomes urgent. They need to focus on building more inclusive, accountable, and effective institutions in a context where citizens have lower trust in public institutions, where they've been affected. By the perception many times reality of widening inequality in countries, even before COVID started, uh, has, you know, resulted in this sense that the system is not providing for them, that opportunities are not there for all to be included in society. Just to conclude the intro, uh, these two agendas, the one on openness and transparency, and the one on gender equality, both very good. An important agendas foundational to the work that we do in development, but many times not speaking to each other. So today's session is an interesting one because we are trying to bring these two parts of the development agenda to the same room and see whether the actors working on these two agendas can also coalesce in bringing about change on the ground. So I come here and I'll pass the word now to Caroline. It's such a pleasure to see you again. Thank you. Thank you, Robbie. I really apologize for being so late and so incompetent on the technology. You'd never think I used to be in charge of IT at the World Bank. I'm, I'm clearly very rusty and I apologize. So, um, it's a great subject. I'm delighted, um, Uh, to have this opportunity. Thank you for inviting me. Um, I wanted to say a little bit about open government and gender equality, uh, the pros, and then some of the caveats, and I think there are some caveats, um. I was asked really to show how open government. Can boost gender equality and I think um if I take myself back to the beginnings of the open government movement and at the bank it kind of started open data and then we opened all our own kind of memory banks and uh uh number banks and then let's move on disclosure and let's move on opening those of governments because um. It will help uh with better development outcomes. And I think we focused a lot on the government role and we didn't focus as much on the, the, the other side of the coin which has to be there, which is the um social accountability role. It's no good opening government essentially if you don't also put in place all those structures to have social accountability, to have um feedback loops. Um, etc. to have citizen, uh, participation, a very strong social contract. And, um, where I work now at PACT, we work less on the government side and more on the, uh, citizen, local community social contract from that social accountability side and I'll say a little bit more about that. So I think the first point is, uh, for open government to work, you need very strong civic participation and social accountability. Secondly, we know that gender equality matters for development. Uh, we know it matters for better health outcomes, better educational outcomes, uh, better, more efficient social, uh, spending, social services, um, better civic cohesion, better democracy, a whole, a whole lot of things we know that social, uh, that gender equality matters and in some cases, uh, one study, the latest I saw, I think says that. Um, equality would boost global GDP by about 25%. So we put these things together. Open government matters, better government, better public policy. Uh, gender equality matters, go. Open government must be good for gender equality. And here I think my answer is going to be a yes. But as I say with the caveats that I'm gonna talk about later. So, um, where is the yes? I think um we at PCT have done um some work in, in a couple of areas which underscore, I think why open government uh is good for gender equality. One is we know the link uh between open government and fighting corruption. We did some very interesting work in Zimbabwe on illicit um financial flows in a number of sectors, uh, transport, mining, um, health, uh, agriculture, and you really look at the um impact of um illicit financial flows on productivity, on, um. Development outcomes. Uh, somebody is estimating, I think, a, a, the amount of money that's now spent on corruption is close to $1 trillion globally spent on bribes. That's all money that could go elsewhere. How does that feed into fighting corruption, opening government, uh, supporting women? I think it's very clear and in Zimbabwe, we saw in the health sector. Uh, where poverty is very, uh, feminized, uh, where there are no, uh, civil society structures, where, um, illicit finance will cream off, uh, availability of funds or goods services, it impacts women directly. In Zimbabwe, some interesting work done about the lack of availability of, um, healthcare, of medicines, of treatments. Uh, for maternal and, uh, child health because of, uh, illicit financial flows and corruption. So, uh, that's one example. Another example I would say is work that we're doing. In um Colombia, where we've done some really interesting work with, um, in the industry, the flour, the flour producing and cut flour industry and the panela, the, uh, raw sugar industry. I think, uh, cut flowers now accounts for something like 200,000 jobs in Colombia. Very largely women are in those positions. Um. And the Penela, uh, Colombia produces about 15,000, uh, 15% of the global production. Uh, what we've seen in, uh, Colombia is through working, empowering local women's groups, women employees, uh, can go a long way to, uh, restoring some faith. In, uh, local justice, local security, uh, that social contract, but it's had to be focused very much, um, on women and, uh, on women's civic participation and economic participation. And, and that's been key. And um a third example I want to use is some work that we've done uh in Nepal, uh, Nepal, uh, both prior to the move towards federalism and then post the decision by the government to move towards a federal structure. And I think in the health sector in Nepal. Uh, where we've worked very much on a project to, uh, make sure frontline female health providers are very much, um, being organized, being listened to through social accountability mechanisms. Um, that I think has, uh, paid off in much better, um. Provision of services and uh much more gender equality. There are also cases, I think Kenya where um there are statistics showing the boost to women in administrative roles in the civil service, even in mid-level positions has led to better social spending, better um outcomes in terms of uh service delivery and in Open government, I think, when it comes to service delivery as a measure of the effectiveness of openness and civic participation, really needs a strong gender role because it's by and large women in households who are. are in the position to both utilize and give feedback on social delivery. So I think those three examples Zimbabwe, the cost for women of illicit financial flows and closed government. Uh, Colombia, the, uh, potential for women in, uh, in deeply unequal industries where women's um participation has been, um, high, but in terms of influence has been low and in Nepal, where uh there were very strong civil society, women dominated civil society, uh, loops put in place, um. And then we see it, we work a lot with um orphans and vulnerable children and young girls, uh, adolescent girls and young women uh for HIV AIDS delivery. An an area where civic trust in local institutions is absolutely key and we're talking first and foremost about children's and young women's participation. Unless there is trust in those local er institutions, unless there is openness, unless there are feedback loops where women are represented, you're not going to get the level uh of participation you need. So, what is the moral of this story? The moral of this story is that I think open government, effective government, transparency, organized civil society has clear benefits for women, for gender equality. Where women's voice is heard and integrated into the process, or where women are managing the process as in the administrative roles in the civil service. Or, and here I come to my caveats, because I think it would be an absolute mistake uh to just believe that all open government transparency is good for uh gender equality unless there are interventions which specifically target women's women's voice, women's participation. And let me now just turn to the caveats. Caveat number one is I don't think we're really in a position to draw on a huge body of evidence of the link between open government and gender equality. For two reasons. One, the research hasn't been done, and I think this is a great role for the World Bank. Secondly, we just don't have enough disaggregated. Data by gender. And I know that uh the World Bank, I think, has a partnership with the uh with national statistical offices all around the world to push that agenda and it's great and I look forward to hearing, maybe there's someone on the call who can emphasize that. But in many of these areas, in talking about impact. Um, because we don't have, uh, gender disaggregated data, we're not really in a position to make compelling arguments about that, and we absolutely need that. We need disaggregated data on women's employment in sectors, on asset ownership, on education, entrepreneurship, land tenure, land rights, land ownership. Um, and, uh, without that, I think, uh, we're not really in a position to see the impact. My second point would be, we need a focused spending within budgets. Gender, gender-focused budgeting. We talked a lot about the importance of open budgets, open finance, but Uh, what we really need, uh, is to have gender-specific budgeting that will make sure, uh, that resources are going to support gender equality in these various areas. Uh, we, we need the focused participation, the feedback loops, and in all these cases, we need conscious effort to bring women to the table. Um, I mentioned Nepal before. Uh, Nepal is an interesting case because prior to Uh, the push for federalism, there was an effort to bring in some local groups. Federalism happens. It's a big task. We tend to see, and I think we've seen, um, a more kind of one-stop shop approach where the women's voices have actually got lost because of different organization around federal structures, and that has to be something, um. Much more, uh, that much more attention is paid to. Secondly, I want to talk about transparency, accountability, The role of vulnerable groups, the voice of women, the voice of vulnerable groups at times of crisis. I think one would hope that some of these issues are now sufficiently embedded. Uh, that at times of crisis, they don't get rolled back. I would love to say that's the case, uh, with transparency and accountability, with open government, with civic discourse, and remember, I started by saying, Open government is only effective if there are two sides to the coin, the open government and the social accountability. You need two to tango. What have we seen happen in times of crisis? Let's take the pandemic. The pandemic is a great example of how the social accountability of that in that marriage between open government, social accountability has really got lost. There's been a trade-off between speed of government response. And accountability, transparency, and feedback loops. And what have we seen as a result of that? We've seen, I think, that women's voices have got pushed back, one. And secondly, we've seen that in many cases public policy has been much less effective because uh you haven't had that civic trust and that civic participation. So if you look at the pandemic. We went for speed in almost every country. This is the public policy, accept it. Do your social distancing, wear your mask, get your immunization, and all the effectiveness of that has depended on the levels of trust in government. But without the civic participation, without that civic space. Um, I think what we've seen is that already, already fractured trust has become even more fractured, and I think the voice of vulnerable and marginalized groups, the voice of women, has got lost even more. If you think about. Um, the care crisis. Women are the ones who had to step in largely and help with children's education. Women are the ones who've perhaps lost their jobs. Women are the ones who have been frontline workers in many of this, whether it's retail, whether it's healthcare workers, um. And are we seeing budgeting that is now responsive to that? Are we seeing public policy that is responsive to that? No, it's just an additional cost to the pandemic. So, um, transparency, accountability. Has taken a backseat to speed of the pandemic and, and with it, I believe, has um gender equality, gender rights, and even gender voice. Um, so that's the pandemic. Other forms of crisis, let's take Ukraine. Um, Ukraine is an interesting one, I think, because in the rush to get everybody to the border. And to get women and children to the border and often to get children by themselves to the border. Um, child safeguarding, I think, has taken a second. A backseat. What do I mean by that? An awful lot of children have gone to the border and been met by groups. We don't know who they are. We don't necessarily know where they're going. They're not registered. There haven't been any processes. There hasn't been any open government around it. There hasn't been any transparency, any accountability, and some of it is natural. Again, the rush to speed. But the result is that vulnerable groups um are paying the price because their voice, their special interest, whether it's child safeguarding, whether it's women, uh, have tended to take a backseat. So my point here is When we talk about um transparency, accountability, open government, we have to think how robust is it in the face of crises, be it pandemics, be it war, be it invasion, and when. In that bargain between speed and uh development effectiveness or rights or voice or social accountability, those things have got swept to the side. So um that's. I'm going to come full circle. I, I want to sort of throw it open to others now, but I guess my question to you, you're in this community, are two and threefold. Um, one is in the open government movement, have we sufficiently accepted that twin relationship between open government on the one hand and social accountability on the other, that they have to go together, they both have to be built. Secondly, are we satisfied with the robustness of how that's been integrated? Into social norms because at times of crisis, we see it roll back. Thirdly, we cannot assume any automaticity. In the fact that because open government is good and because gender equality is good, the two are good for each other. It needs dedicated data disaggregation, dedicated budget disaggregation, um, bolstering of the voice of marginalized groups and women, dedicated, um, analysis of women's feedback loops and empowerment. After all, I think it's estimated. 52% more men are online in social media in, in developing countries than men are. If you move with a pandemic to a, a place where you can't do physical contact, physical consultation, it all has to be done online. Where is, where is the women's voice? Where is the gender equality? So, um, and last but not least, um. I know there was a movement with the open government movement to um To make sure that when countries do national action plans, they are integrating uh gender, women's voice into those national action plans. I think this was um This was pushed under the presidency of Canada. I don't know where it is now. I don't know if even in our own open government work, we're acknowledging that special resources has to go in to empowering the voice of women, the needs, the data, because left to their own devices, this will always uh be a marginalized group. So maybe um I end with that and Robbie with a real demand that. If we're trying to persuade finance ministers at the end of the day to open up, if we're trying to build civic trust, rebuild it. Um, after, uh, years of neglect and now neglect through, through COVID, um, we need more research to show the direct linkage. Between these two goods, gender equality, open government, and why it's in finance ministers and others' interests to pursue that agenda, so thank you very much. Thank you so much, uh, Caroline, for this, uh, introduction, introductory remarks to the conversation we are going to have, uh, now. Just before going to, to Luis as our main discussion, just to make sure that we focus on some of the caveats that you put there, some more needs for evidence, disaggregation of data, maybe later on, Salman, you can come in on this because of your experience with, with, uh, Uh, data and, and national statistical offices. They focus on gender-specific budgeting and, you know, maybe Zora, who is connected and she works on PFM and, and budgets, uh, maybe she can come in later on. V, uh, transparency and account. and participation during crisis. Can we afford it during a crisis? Juan Pablo Guerrero, who is the head of Gift, uh, is connected and he just concluded some work in the Western Balkans about specifically this, these issues, so maybe he can come in. And then, you know, the more I listen to you, Caroline, I am wondering whether the title of this session should be the opposite on, on whether gender equality can accelerate open government and not the other way around. Maybe having some, some thoughts on this from Karen Rom, uh, who's in the meeting as well would be great. And then you put 4 questions. Questions to all of us, and I expect all of us to come into the discussion. But first, let's go to Luis Scott with the initial set of, of, uh, comments on the presentation. Thank you, Luis. Well, thank you. Um, thank you very much, and I'll be brief since you just outlined, uh, a large group, and I think you should also get Karen to comment on gender-based budgeting because she's doing a lot of interesting work on that. And since I didn't have a copy of the presentation, these are, our thoughts really off the cuff of, of what Caroline said. So first of all, there's a lot that I would say we agree upon. Um, clearly, the need for open government and the need for two sides of it, from the bottom up and the citizen engagement and social accountability work. And then the work from the supply side and the open government, the institutions for better governance, um, audit offices, asset declarations, and so forth, anti-corruption agencies. So, clearly, those two parts need to work together, and I would say sometimes they do and sometimes they don't, um, and that they could be stronger. And in the bank, we have the governance team working on one part, and we have now social sustainability and inclusion working on the bottom-up in the citizen engagement. But I think Roby and I and others are trying to strengthen the links, recognizing that both are needed. They don't necessarily have to be integrated because they're taken at different levels, but they need to be coordinated. I also clearly agree. I went on to your website in advance of this, you know, and all the focus that PACT has and that you mentioned on local level, you know, particularly if you're looking at social accountability, it happens at the community. There are things like you mentioned, gender-based budgeting, which is perhaps a broader, but, and also employment constraints and discrimination. I mean, there's a whole slew of things that can be done outside the community, but if we're talking with an accountability lens, a lot of it happens at the community. And as you know, the bank has a lot of work on community-driven development, where you put resources in the hands of the community and you Um, ensure that there are women participating in making the decisions about how those resources are allocated, and work has been done to show that you select infrastructure depending on who, who's on the committee, and women will select different infrastructure for the community than men. And I agree with you, during the pandemic, the role of local communities and in any crisis, climate change, uh fragility that we're seeing, with the community and the ability of the community to act and to adjust and to respond is, is more critical than ever before. And I think that's going to, to the forefront. Specific efforts to strengthen social accountability, I think, uh, where I would also agree with you is that we need more research, but where I particularly feel we also need is more tools. I think it's not so obvious how to do citizen engagement um at the community level and to involve vulnerable populations, not only women, but the LGBTI community, disabled, the elderly, ethnic minorities, all of those groups need to be involved if you're trying to strengthen our resilience. So, from, I just, so a lot, I agree. We do have a lot more data. I think there is, uh, you can always use more gender disaggregated data, but we have made a lot of progress in that area. I mean, it'll be good to hear if Salman agrees with that, but where I think we need to expand further is on other vulnerable groups where we have less access to data on indigenous populations, ethnic minorities, migrants now, um. And so in refugees and so forth. I would like, um, just, I'm not, as I said, I did want to be brief, um. I did want to say, take a step back though and just say some work that we're doing on social sustainability, because I think it is very relevant. A piece of this is social accountability and open government. So for us, social sustainability is when people feel part of the development process and believe that they and their descendants will benefit from it. And what this means is that you are able to come together as a group and effectively take action to deal with crises like climate, allocate scarce resources and pandemics, and to do so in a way that is deemed as legitimate and fair and where everyone thrives over time. Now clearly, women need to play a critical role in this, and this part of social inclusion, social sustainability can be broken down into inclusion, resilience, and cohesion and process legitimacy. And huge challenges for women around inclusion, access to markets and services, but also voice, and that is something I know you're working on as well in PACT, and that you, you didn't really, you only briefly mentioned, but interventions for women to participate in, in citizen engagement require looking at norms, values, cultural practices, and working with traditional authorities. To, not to impose new norms, but to work with those to change those and to use those to be pers otherwise, the changes will not be sustainable and perceived as legitimate. On resilience, it's building up the role of women. To cope with pandemics and crises, and there's so much that can be done on women and climate, women in the pandemics and with the bank's projects, we've done a lot at community development working with women to strengthen um community-level responses to pandemic, soup kitchens, selling masks, making masks, disseminating information, hand washing stations, just to name a few. And then on cohesion, it's the ability of a group to come together and so often there are cleavages within a community, across communities, and you mentioned the Ukraine crisis and the huge migrant challenges between hosting um refugee communities, challenges of human trafficking that you were brought up or child trafficking. And so, work and interventions to drive cohesion are, are possible, but a little bit like citizen engagement, difficult, and I think where we need more research is understanding how institutions like the bank and how CSOs and other agencies can drive better cohesion. And then finally, this very challenging part around process legitimacy. How do you do this in a way that's deemed acceptable and in line with traditional authorities? And how, and citizen engagement can't be something tacked on or, or better open government. When I was country director, I saw a lot of great interventions for open government and better supply-side initiatives, but they didn't last past our DPO. And so how do we do this in a way that's sustained, and same with citizen engagement, we do it in our projects. We have grievance redress mechanisms, we have citizen engagement requirements, but how do we do this in a way that becomes institutionalized and working with traditional authority mechanisms to do that? So, I don't want to go on further because I, I think you, we, we have a rich uh group of discussions you laid out. I agree with, you know, I think you're, I, we're aligned on the role and the importance, and in fact, I would think it's a bit the overlooked agenda and in part for the bank because it doesn't cost a lot of money. And you can't really borrow, lend for it. And yet it is so important focusing on citizen engagement, social accountability, process, legitimacy, cohesion, all of those things, voice, are, are non-tangibles, which in a bank project cycle of 5 years and or even 7 years, And with the emphasis on disbursements, it's a challenge. But yet, I think for us to be sustainable to meet the challenges of climate and pandemics and conflict that we're seeing, like Caroline noted how, how huge those challenges that are and are becoming even more, we need to really turn our attention as an institution to these issues more. So I'll stop here, Robbie, and, and hand it back to you. Luis, thank you for the wonderful comments and uh those of you who want to come in, just raise your hand, you know, I will see you, I will call you or just jump in. I think this is an excellent conversation. Luis, I have a question for you at some point in the conversation as well because you mentioned all these things that we believe in, inclusion, resilience, cohesion, legitimacy. So, I wanted to ask about your own experience also within the World Bank when you need to interact with uh other parts of the bank that tell you, give me growth, forget about inclusive growth, give me any type of growth, and then we'll deal with, you know, the distribution of that growth. So, maybe for later in the conversation, let's see who wants to come in at this point. I don't see any hands, but uh hopefully you guys are OK, so that's Karen. Um, thanks, and it was very interesting to hear you, Caroline, and thanks, Luis, for your comments. Maybe to jump in on the conversation and maybe to be also a little bit um provocative, uh, from where I sit. First of all, there's much, let me just say I really agree with a lot of what has been said and I, um, but from both you, Caroline, and, and you, Luis, um, I, in terms of the interaction between the inside, outside, I think that's really, really important. Um, I, I think the bank and needs, one of the things we can do is to try to keep open spaces for civil society, particularly in, in areas where it is very, very closed, and I, I just, but I, that's an important mechanism of accountability and I, I couldn't agree more with Luise about the local level. I think that's really, really critical. Um. One thing I would say, Louise, that I, I think we have to distinguish a little better is the difference between a coping strategy and resilience. A coping strategy is, uh, often um is where women don't really have the enabling support. but they find a lot of ways to cope. Um, and it's not always clear that the kinds of responses that women found during the pandemic is a long-term resilience strategy. Making masks was a coping strategy, but I'm not sure that it is about resilience. I think women need really to be resilient, the kind of access to finance and markets and other kinds of things that will give them the longer-term ability to Um, to adapt, uh, but, uh, uh, but not to be depleted as, uh, uh, in that adaptation. Uh, Caroline, something you said really hit me that I think is really important that we always keep in mind, and this is, you know, as a student of social movements and so forth and in the, the, a student of the attempts to look at gender equality over 30 years, there's always the risk of backlash. I think this, the trajectory to gender equality is 2 steps forward, 1 step sideways, 3 steps backward, 1 step sideways again, and often the issues that are so important, whether it's about women's bodies or about women's roles outside of motherhood, are always part of that political. Uh, football, and often they just don't have the public resources that enables them then to be resilient actors. And, and of course, we see this over and over again and it's not an issue in low-income countries, it's an issue in richer countries as well. Um, the fact, you know, that we can't even get paid parental leave in the US is a travesty. Uh, even though everybody knows how hard it is for the last two years in terms of coping, and, uh, I think there is a norms issue. It has to go with value, valuation of the kinds of things that, uh, women, the kinds of roles that women have historically played among other things. Let me, that leads me into budgeting. And while I want to agree with you about quote-unquote gender-specific budgeting, I'm not sure what that means because there's a lot of terminology. You can, uh, you can think about a budget, uh, who, which has equivalent impacts on male and female. You can think about a budget, uh, where there are specific, uh, um, resources that are allocated to reduce discrimination or enable women to participate. Uh, you can think about, uh, a, a range of budgeting. My closest friends are the originators of gender responsive budgets, and I don't agree with them on this. Uh, I think if you look at the research evidence, gender responsive budgeting or Gender-sensitive budgeting or gender budgeting has really been a wonderful process exercise but where results and outcomes have been very limited. This may differ a little bit at the local level because of the greater scope for participation. and accountability, but certainly when you look at national budgets, uh, it's been much more limited. And I think partly this is because um the tools that have been developed are process tools not linked to actual outcomes and results. It doesn't have a performance focus, a performance-based budgeting focus and also because, um, uh, People just, uh, uh, I think that people just get mired in the process and the indicators of accountability in gender-based budgets are about process as opposed to result and outcome. So I have a lot of skepticism about, about that. Um, that said, I do think it does, it's a starting point for conversation and it opens up, you know, some greater, uh, space for voice, for women's voices. Um, let's see if some of the newer budgeting efforts, for instance, in Canada, um, are gonna actually have a greater payoff. And I think the other thing that's missing on the GRB, the gender responsive budgeting conversation, it goes back to the point that both of you made. You need a good, healthy inside-outside relationship. If you don't have the social movements outside for the budgeting, you're not gonna get the accountability and people like Debbie Budleer and Rhonda Sharp have consistently made that point. Um, for many years because otherwise, it's really a technocratic exercise without the account, accountability. The last thing I just want to say is I fully agree with you, Caroline, and uh also, Louise, I think we do need a lot more data and I think the part of the data piece that's missing is the use of administrative data and getting that. Administrative data out and usable. We have a lot more through household surveys and through firm surveys and the bank has done great work there, but we still don't have as much on the administrative data side that we need, whether it's on the quality and reach of service delivery, whether it's on um other parts of um public finance management. So I think that is still a big agenda ahead of us and let me just stop there. Back to you. Karen, thank you so much for your comments. I see two other hands at this point, Salman, uh, you know, Karen just spoke about data and Roxandra after Salman. So, let's go to you, Salman. Uh, thank you, Robbie, and uh thank you, Carolyn for a really stimulating opening. I wanted to stay on the theme of uh evidence and the importance of the evidence base and bring in a bit of what the bank is doing and in my view, what the bank should do more. In fact, so, on the evidence base, I think we have made quite a bit of progress on disaggregation. So there's much more attention on gender disaggregation in surveys, getting separate statistics for men and women. So, good. That's it, there are some areas where we still don't do so well, which is about shared goods and access to those goods within the household. The household tends to be a black box, and it's understandable because it's very hard to get at this, but that remains a challenge. Two areas, two other areas to I think get a little bit less attention. I mean, one, in our statistics projects, we're doing much more to make sure that there's gender equality and employment opportunities within the institutions in the data collection, and that's great. It's great from an intrinsic point of view, equal opportunities. But what gets overlooked is, in my view, uh, perhaps an even more important reason is the instrumental value because what we collect, depending upon who's collecting it, makes a huge difference, particularly in societies where Uh, people don't have access to within the household or you have a male respondent talking about priorities for the household. When you have, um, more female interviewers, for instance, there's much more, there's a qualitative difference in what's collected and the responses about priorities to public spending, for instance, that come out. Um, so I think that some of the best statistics institutes I've had a chance to work with are those which have a very good gender balance. So in some cases, many more women. I mean, Iran comes to mind, I think in that region has probably one of the best statistical agencies around in South in South Asia and the Middle East. And that is primarily staffed. There are a very large number of women. And the third point is what gets measured, because I think this focus on market activity, uh, there's a lot of this issue of unpaid homework, childcare not getting covered in our formal GDP account. Which is just so important for welfare, and there's a lot of effort ongoing in trying to make better alignment between our GDP statistics, income-based statistics, and welfare. And the concept here, I think of better treatment of a lot of work that women do that doesn't get. The limelight because it's not measured the same way, uh, I think is an area that we should be doing more on and unfortunately, in some cases, we're actually regressing by, by putting more emphasis on market activity. It has lots of knock-on effects like things like, uh, uh, you know, tax credits that are given, but if somebody is at home, you don't get a tax credit if you're paying for childcare. Um, and you're providing that service yourself. So there's a lot more that needs to be done over here. Robbie, I have to say I really like the way you phrased it, which was to say, what if we reverse this and talk about gender equality first, and that as a means of greater accountability and agency, and I think there's a lot to be said for that. This point about who's collecting information, you know, we've had lots of evidence within the household on who controls resources and what that gets spent on and how many better outcomes you get when women are deciding what they spend on. And I would hold that the same is true. For information as well. If you were to ask people about priorities for public spending, uh, what actions should be taken, who you collect that information for will matter a lot and you'll get different outcomes or and different priorities, uh, for, for action, so. Let me stop here. Thank you. Thank you so much, Salma. Let's move to Roxandra. Thank you, Robbie. Um, and thank you to you and the organizers for a fascinating and timely discussion, and, uh, welcome back to the bank, Caroline. Uh, your remarks on COVID and the effects of crisis, uh, resonated, uh, with me, and I think, uh, everybody in the audience. Um, and I have a comment and a question related, related to, uh, FCV context, uh, for you, please. Um, FCVs are our most vulnerable clients, uh, who live in constant crisis, only exacerbated by COVID or climate change or other such crises. I also want to mention in particular, uh, the good collaboration and consultations we have recently had with PCT in the context of our work in the DRC, uh, where the governance GP is doing analytical work on scaling up citizen engagement, uh, following the recently approved CPF, uh, which puts citizen engagement at the heart of the World Bank engagement in ways in which this has not been done before. Coming from a recent mission to Kinshasa where we consulted with 2 dozen CSOs on how the bank can better support citizen engagement, for me it was very striking and very surprising, and for me it was very important what was not being said in these consultations as much as what was being said. Uh, budget transparency and data availability in the DRC is an agenda and work in progress, of course, but the country has also made significant progress lately. Uh, however, gen gender was largely absent across all our conversations that we have had on subjects related to transparency, uh, participatory budgeting, uh, uh, accountability, social accountability. So I was wondering if you could please share with us any thoughts about what can the bank do more in FCVs and especially the good work that Pact is doing in resource rich countries such as DRC facing the resource curse and the role of gender equality. Thank you. Thanks, Roxandra for the comment and the, and the connection to the reality on the ground. So let's go back to Caroline and uh at this point and maybe Luis, you want to come in as well and, uh, and then maybe we have time for another round. OK, Caroline? So I would say, um, uh, it's a great question, Roxandra, of course, um, and, um, I'm so glad you've been doing this work in DRC, um. I think uh the resource rich issue, we focus quite specifically on Pact on the artisanal mining community. And as you know, mining employs about 30 million women actually, I think around the world. In artisanal mining, the numbers are very high, and many of those mining communities where there are artisanal miners have women playing a dominant role. And uh in several countries, we have worked with local women's groups um to discuss community needs and also to be doing a lot of work on alternatives, uh, employment alternatives as a means of uh mitigating child labor, uh, because child labor is a problem in the artisanal mining sector. So, um, I think that's an area where, where, um, Specifying meetings with women's representatives of community groups is, is very important. And uh I'm, I'm, I'm sort of disappointed uh you didn't have some of those discussions. Um, in, in, in another country, in, in Tanzania where we do, we have a project on gems. Uh, uh, we've, we've worked to provide, uh, to cut out the middleman, if you like, uh, who stood between the women, uh, gem miners and the, uh, uh, the eventual jewelry store in terms of the purchase price of the gems from the miners. And as a result, incomes have, have gone up, uh, threefold by, by having open market days as opposed to, uh, middlemen. But um I think on the voice. Um, I think, uh, and it's true, I go back to, you know, the work we've done on HIV AIDS, uh, for PEPFAR and USAID is all about orphans and vulnerable children and adolescent girls and young women. By virtue of that fact, it is targeting representatives of that community and where trust is absolutely critical for people to take preventative services. If they don't have trust. In the local authority or um the local community or the um frontline health worker, uh they're not going to move forward on those programs. So, in other words, special efforts have to be taken. Um, lastly, it, it's not enough just to say let's have representatives of the local community. I think um it has to be, uh, engendered in that way. Um, secondly, Roxandra, I'm really glad you're doing this in DRC and, uh, it sounds like I worked a lot on the beneficiary feedback, which I guess was the first step of some of this importance of citizen voice. Slightly, now I'm gonna be provocative and you can all tell me I'm wrong, but depressed to discover, I think a lot of the beneficiary work for IA countries that became then a prerequisite. Became just a box ticking exercise. So when you ask me what can the bank do, I think the bank has always been, has always self-censor censored around these issues because it feels it only works with governments and we saw with GPSA there was some pushback of the role of civil society. You know, I really think when you look at these agendas, they're so intertwined, you can't just say we only do this bit of it. And the bank has to get more involved, whether directly or through partnerships with organizations like mine, uh, I think is very critical. I think, I take Louise, your point also that at the bank, you have the kind of the budget stuff and then you have the social development stuff and they sit in different departments or different boxes. Great, but if they're not really closely joined at the hip, that would worry me. So those, that was a number of answers to questions you didn't necessarily ask Roxandra, but I did want to say, if the bank is doing this, please do it seriously. Don't make it, box checking. Robbie, let me come in here on a couple of points. Let me just start on the last one of Caroline. Um, It's a mix, huh? I wouldn't say it's perfection. Um, and, and we're clearly not there. Um, in citizen engagement, you know, we've reached 100% of beneficiary feedback at project design, which, what does that mean? Maybe it's box-ticking, I would think in some cases and not in others. We're now really focusing much more on tracking beneficiary feedback, which is a step forward, and we're about 60% of the projects report on beneficiary feedback indicators in year 3 of implementation. Which in a way makes me feel more comfortable than the 100%, because anything that's 100%, you kind of wonder about. The IAG report that came out in 2018 on citizen engagement called for it to be thicker, and we're struggling with what that means and, and how to do that, and I'll come, come back to that. Um, But, and we also now, as you know, under ESF have the stakeholder engagement plan, which can be box, I don't want to say can be box-ticking, but can be, you know, reaching out to beneficiaries at project design and that that is something that's publicly disclosed, and where we have lots of scope to, to deepen the collaboration at the project level, although that's really in the context of a project and where I am trying to push the agenda and I'll give my favorite example because I think it's really important to show what, where we need to take it, is this project in Indonesia that gives its education projects where teachers have to take a picture when they come into the classroom that's sent to parents on their mobile phone, and the parents can give their kids, kids a progress test on a mobile phone to see how well they're learning. And at the end of the year, The parents vote on whether the teachers get a distance sub bonus because they're in remote areas. This is also part of a pact that's signed between the teachers, the parents, and the community to improve educational outcomes. And when I spoke to women in this project, they were, many of them illiterate or near illiterate, but saying because they got this picture on their cell phone, because they saw their teacher come in late, because they saw their kids couldn't do better on the test, they felt empowered to say, no, you don't get your subsidy at the end of the year, where otherwise without data, they, they had no voice, you know, they, how could they stand up to To a teacher, you know, and say no, or to an administration, no, they don't deserve. And so what I would like to see in that light is more work that analyzes the impact of citizen engagement and different types of citizen engagement on project outcomes and data that comes in from projects like that or data that we have from other citizen engagement initiatives, particularly in Indonesia where as you probably remember, there's a very strong tradition of community-driven development and within that citizen engagement. To really analyze how that does impact um project engagement. In Sahel now, we're doing also collecting data on mobile phones, tracking funds that go down to the community level and tracking the requests that go up to government on how to spend it, so to enhance accountability, but of course, your point is well taken of Women don't have access to cellphones in the cell, which they may or may not, then they don't access this information, nor do other vulnerable groups. But at least it is certainly a start in the right direction and I totally agree with Karen that resilience is more than making masks, but I just want, um, and needs access to digital access to finance, and I should say communities need water and electricity because otherwise women spend all their time collecting the wood and, and, um, collecting the water. Um, just quickly though, to answer your question, Roby, um, I, well, 21 last 0.22 quick points. One, gender, I totally agree. I really like the idea of gender equality is a driver for more accountability because it's in cohesion, inclusion. If groups are excluded. It's very hard to have accountable government because then government is only talking to a certain few and accountable to a certain few. So I think not only gender equal and gender equality can be indicative of broader inclusion in the society, uh to So, interesting point for all of us who work in this area to, to ponder and to see how we can take it forward. On your question to me, you know, which is something ever since I worked on Propo Growth, a long time ago, I've been fighting the um the EFI and the, the Prem growers, and I think now we're in a better position than ever before to say yes, growth is really good. But look at inequality, and we're reaching levels of inequality through growth that have become unsustainable socially and politically, and that unless, and I think even the IMF now is beginning to recognize that inequality has long-term economic costs, inequality can create social unrest. Now, we don't have data to show if you don't make societies more socially sustainable, they're gonna blow up and, you know, have more conflict and more We don't have that data, you know, people keep asking me for that data. Can you show that less sustainable, socially sustainable societies have more conflict, more violence? No. But we, We are seeing that societies where groups are excluded and don't feel part of development are more vulnerable to populism and more vulnerable to radicalization, populism in our world here and radicalization in, in other parts of the world and to So I think we, we're beginning to compile, you know, it's not maybe cause and effect direct evidence, but enough to know that growth alone, you know, that does not yield more income equality will not be socially sustainable overall. That's my answer to, to those guys now, which we didn't quite have when I worked on this 8 years ago, to the same extent, or 10 years ago. I get anybody else to come in or Caroline, any reaction to Luis's point, and otherwise, I have a couple of questions for you. No, I thought Louise made um very good points and I'm. I'm delighted to hear that kind of both the bank is a little bit more joined up on that and maybe the bank is, is, you know, coming back um on the issue of growth and inequality. It seems to me that throughout it's, however long, 70 years, it's gone sort of like this on that, you know, fad and fashion in development is, is alive and well. Um, but good news, I think, if, if, if you're seeing progress on that. So nothing more to add, Robbie. Thank you, Caroline. So, so, we discussed today that this uh whole proposition of open government is not just opening the government but also having the capacity for participation and, and usage of that information that becomes more open. But we know that participation is costly, that those who we want to participate the most, those who are living under poverty conditions, have less agency in society, and they, if they don't work, don't go to work that day because they needed to attend an assembly, they don't get paid. If they go to participate, nobody takes care of their kids. So participation is costly and then we have these You know, situation where collective action is needed, but those who participate, uh, those who should participate cannot participate, and those who can't participate, the middle class, typically, people like us, don't have the incentives because in many of the countries they already checked out from the system. Instead of having public education become better, they just pay private education. Instead of having public security to become better, they just pay for private security and so forth and so, so on. So, so the question uh here then becomes about that and the work that you do, Caroline. Because I think that what you do and the organization does for so many years now is not just investing in empowerment of women so they can have more voice. is also empowering women and their communities so they can have more money and economic opportunities. Therefore, they can participate more as well. So, one question for you is, how do you balance these two different agendas within PAC? How much efforts that of, of the work of PACK, the mission of PACC goes into empowering voice, accountability, participation, and how much goes into empowering through economic development? And the second question is that because of the expertise that you have, you've been asked as an organization. Work in very difficult environments, FCV environments where in the front line, public institutions sometimes don't get to be effective. So in a way, organizations like yours end up replacing or taking over the mandate that public institutions should have. I would say you do it very well. You can provide services that nobody else can provide, but it may have an impact on levels of trust in public institutions because what citizens see is that it's a pack organization or affiliate who provides the service and not the public institution. So these two questions to you. Um, OK, nicely provocative questions too. Um, so, are organizations like PAC actually undermining Trust in government and skewing the, the social space. You know, I worked, um, I worked, as did Roxandra, um, on Haiti, uh, for many years, and no country in the world, uh, had such, if you like, weak government and multiplicity of CSOs, uh, than Haiti, with the result that you've got islands of, um, Uh, very effective development because you had a good project and a good CSO in the midst of a, of a ocean of deprivation and lack of resources. And the government spent a lot of time saying we can't, we can't operate like this, we're being undermined. We need to make sure everyone comes through government. There's a central register, Minister of Planning has oversight over everything. And you do see that uh in more countries have managed to get a handle on, if you like, the CSO sector. Um, I think, uh, it's a bit of a, um, misnomer and it's, it's a bit of an old fashioned, um, response, Roby, uh, because I think now when I look at all the work we do with local communities, I would answer in two ways. First of all, most of the work we're doing is, is in coordination with local government. If it's, if it's on. Um, HIV AIDS treatment, prevention, uh, distribution of drugs, it's, uh, vaccines for COVID. It's in coordination with local authorities, even if they're very decentralized at the, at the local level. That's the first thing. Um, I think the second thing is that, um, all these organizations are, um, In essence, contributing to that second, uh, that 2 pillar of you've got that open governance and you've got the effectiveness. And uh in most cases, they're not independent of government. Um, I think that one of the, uh, one of the real issues is Uh, that an organization like ACT actually grew up in our fifty-year history of creating, of building capacity of local organizations. What I thought, I thought you were gonna go to the place which says, you know, uh. International NGOs crowding out local NGOs, and aren't you in essence, Sort of big footing some of the local voice and the local representation by bringing in this sort of um more global role and global organization and USAID is committed to what it calls localization, which is building up um the power of the independence to directly uh give money to local NGOs. So, I think we see a lot of our work of empowering those communities. Uh, to organize themselves or to be represented by local, local groups. So I think, I, I think these areas now work hand in hand. But you're right, it's, it has to be, um, It has to be a very close, uh, you have to, you have to monitor it very carefully. So, uh, in order to ensure sustainability. Um, I do think, uh, I just want to say it's a funny world, this world of international organizations like, now I'm not talking about PAC, uh, I'm talking about multilateral organizations like the World Bank and then implementers like PAC on the ground. Uh, you know, we all, we all are based in Washington. The left hand rarely knows what the right hand is doing, and I think that's a great tragedy that as the bank is focusing so much on, um, on, on macro policy in a sense or working with government, there is then a divorce between the implementation, the voice. Uh, the representation at the ground and other people are doing that. And I think whether it's partnerships, I know the articles of agreement and all that and lending through governments, but I do think there's a need for much better, um, synergy. These shouldn't be two worlds that we're talking about, um, and, and all based in Washington DC and worlds that rarely talk to each other. Thank you, Caroline. All right. Anybody else to come in? Just, I'll, I'll say something just briefly to what Caroline just said because I totally agree, and Caroline, we're in the process of, you know, I see Sophie's on the call and so is Jeff, um, who lead our global partnership for social accountability, and we're in the process of, and Roby is, is a former leader of that trust fund. And we're really in the process of rethinking how we can work, you know, with civil society and how we can enhance that. As part of IA2, there was a request that we expand as an institution, our financial flows to CSOs. Now, of course, how that's done can be, you know, an eye to window, as you can imagine, presents for the reasons you were just saying, a ton of complications. But how can we scale up more, you know, and Robbie and I have this discussion all the time, but the delivery model we had, you know, maybe this is something to take offline, but just to let you know, we're, we're deep in discussion on this and thought, is how do you scale up the ability of the bank to work with CSOs and build a better partnership. And do it in a way that the transaction costs are not phenomenal and that and that governments, our clients, you know, who we're monitoring and building social accountability for who have a mixed view as you know, of this agenda are are open and and find it helpful to do and that's where we also need the evidence that this kind of intervention leads to better development outcomes. Well, um, I, I'm excited by that, Louise, and I think, um, you know, maybe this is, uh, and we can take it offline, but I'd love, uh, for us, uh, my team to be able to sit down, uh, with you and bat around some ideas around that, and in any way we can be helpful, we'd love to be. Thank you, Carolyn, and we do consider you the mother of GPSA anyway, so you have a responsibility there for parenting. I see Zora and Jeff wanted to come in. I must say, Zora for me is very important, not just because she works with me in the same team. But she is the first, she was the first woman in Afghanistan to become a certified accountant in the history of the country. So we're talking about inclusion, we're talking about accountability, so who better than Zoa to come in at this point? Thank you very much, Robbie. Thanks for that introduction. Uh, I seem to forget that, uh, once in a while, so it's good that you reminded me. So, Karina, uh, Caroline, Louise, uh, and Karen also, I really, uh, enjoyed this conversation, uh, great thoughts, great insights, and, um, Uh, Karen, I would like to go to your point, uh, uh, about the PFM, uh, the tools, the GRM tools. I somewhat agree that the tools might not be that much useful as long as you're just using them merely for, uh, like. Like ticking the boxes or creating systems if the tools are not embedded in policies, and those policies are not properly implemented and uh monitored or you don't have sufficient reports that you're not looking back into whether your policies are responsive enough or not. Uh, so I kind of agree with you. And then, uh, so Robbie mentioned that I am from Afghanistan. I also had the fortune of working in Afghanistan. For 7 years with the World Bank. And, uh, Caroline, to your point about being able to work with local NGOs rather than engaging directly with governments, uh, we have seen a few issues, so I didn't hear the word corruption in the last 1.5 hour. So the level of corruption that you see in these FCB countries, especially at NGO level, is quite high, and we have evidence that and Afghanistan, I, being a local resident there, living there, I've actually witnessed it firsthand and seen it and the role that it plays in how the resources are misused, especially, especially by local NGOs. I mean, of course, corruption at government level is there, but then also at the NGO level. How do we take care of that? And then the biggest issue is sustainability or institutional strengthening. We I saw that, I mean, Afghanistan is a classic example, bank coming in there for like 20 years, all the donors, international community, putting in all that money, and today we see nothing worked, uh, not the institutions, uh, all the work that was done for equality, for, uh, gender-based budgeting, all of that has vaporized, I must say. So I would say, how do you Kind of mitigate those risks or what could have worked better if we go back to Afghanistan 20, we go back 20 years, what would we do differently? I mean, of course the political environment is there, the security, the risks are there, but could we have done something different that at least we would have something much more sustainable on the ground than where we are today. So I'll stop there, Robbie. Thank you. Very easy question, simple question to answer. Thank you, Zora. So we have Jeff Timgu to come in and then Caroline will respond, and then uh Steve Davenport will give uh closing remarks unless somebody else wants to come in. All of this in 5 minutes, all right? So Jeff, Thank you very much, um, Robbie, and thank you, uh, Caroline. It's good to see you again. Uh, thank you, Louise, and everyone for their comments on this really, uh, timely conversation. Um, as we always do, when we come to talk about open government and social accountability, We always have this risk of bifurcating, uh, supply and demand. Um, we've all, I think, experienced working at the country level. That In many contexts. Uh, the divide between Government and society has become softer. And more porous. And that should affect how we view, uh, what we are calling supply and, and demand side of governance and should affect our strategies for, for how we influence governments, uh, and to be smarter in, in mapping uh government actors, uh, for more strategic engagement. Obviously, there's detail to that, but I wanted to flag that as a very important focus. Uh, the second, uh, Caroline, you mentioned GPSA and Robbie, you're right. You know, Caroline was a great, uh, champion and one of the real movers, uh, uh, for the GPSA. Um, the, the concept was really about the space in between. Uh, neither government nor civil society, but both and that space in between, and how governments interact with civil society. Um, and for the bank, uh, this really means the, the, the, this big focus on the mediating and facilitatory role of, of CSOs being really critical. Uh, it's becoming even more important when we, when we talk about these, uh, challenged, uh, contexts, uh, especially FCVs, uh, the, I think of the important, uh, study of the, uh, uh, Sustainable Livelihoods and Research Consortium, uh, housed in ODI, uh, and the, how they came to the issue of process and, and Caroline, I heard you talk about the danger of emphasizing, uh, process over outcomes. I think we need to do both. But in some of these uh contexts, process really becomes all important. And there, they came out concluding that the experience, the lived experience of people in the, in the processes of service provision are what contributes to more legitimacy of, of the state, uh of state institutions. And so for the bank and government putting a premium on process really means getting CSOs on board. And helping to strengthen their hand in how they can support processes of, uh, of service delivery. Of course, with an eye on outcome, especially when it comes to gender and all of those issues. There's a lot here to discuss and I see uh we have 33 minutes, I think, Robbie, and you've signaled you want to wrap this up. But I wanted to make those uh 2 or 3 important points. Thanks a lot. Thank you, Jeff. Thank you so much, Caroline, back to you. So all, all really good points, Jeff, and I'd love to discuss more. So maybe we need a follow up to this meeting, but just to say super quickly on Afghanistan. I think it's fair to say, and I'm in the NGO sector now, that NGOs have been slow to hold themselves accountable to the same transparency, disclosure, open data. Uh, that we've held international institutions to, and so there is a real need for more transparency around NGOs. Secondly, why did it all go wrong? Speed, speed, speed, politics, politics, politics. Also, uh, there's a known adage that once you become a darling of development. And everybody's citing how great the work is there or a new trust fund or a new way of doing delivery or empowering CSOs, you can be sure that within 20 years, it's going to not be a success story after all. That sadly has been the, the story, and I think Too much speed, too much politics, and perhaps not enough of what Jeff talked about, uh, of process, really sustainable processes that would be embedded. But this issue of embedding, how embedded are any of these changes is really interesting to me. I look at open procurement and suddenly with the pandemic, we're back to sole sourcing, we're back to friends and family getting all the contracts. In advanced economies as well as elsewhere and uh we have to see what the, you know, how we can embed these things so speed and politics don't become an excuse for rollback. Very good. Thank you so much, Caroline and uh finally, Steve. Sure, I'll be super fast. I mean, usually my indicator of a good BBL is if we agree we're going to talk again on something practical. So I really do appreciate the fact that there will be some follow up in particular on GPSA. Just, um, you know, as you can imagine, Carolyn and others, um, you know, me being a TTL working in country offices, evidence and data is what, what we need to make the case that this stuff is more than a checkbox. So I think. Um, that point is well taken with the WDR and all the work we've been doing on data and gender desegregation. I think we're getting there. It's kind of where citizen engagement was a while ago, now maturing, and then if we want it to be metier, more substantive reforms in our operations and to make it ossify within the institution, we really do need to get it into our operations. We need to make the case and when you make that case, then the country economist or the or the program lead will agree to. Putting in media reforms around this topic, but I think um one thing we also need that we, we don't often talk about is external pressure as the bank having the OGP, the ITI, other multi-stakeholder forms that are global to apply pressure to the institution to change, you know, to, to make modifications in our behavior or and take things beyond the checkbox. I think some of that is necessary just to be very frank. But anyway, great conversation. Thanks, Robbie for sharing. Um, I learned a lot and I'm glad that I get to see Carolyn again. Robbie, thank you everybody for connecting today. We are, we are one minute late, uh, in concluding this, but it has been a fascinating discussion, as, uh, you said, Steve, it's great. To know that we are going to continue this, not just with more discussion but hopefully with actions. And thank you, Caroline so much for coming back uh to the bank for this session and thank you, Luis, so much for not just connecting today but leading this agenda as well on a daily basis. It's not easy, uh, and it's great to, to be working with you on this. Thank you everyone. Thank you. Thank you to all. Bye. Thank you. Thank you, Caroline. Thanks. Good to see you again.

showAllTranscripts

no

duration

PT1H23M39S

scene7File

worldbank/Can Opening Up Government Accelerate Gender Equality_

scene7Domain

scene7FileAvs

worldbank/Can Opening Up Government Accelerate Gender Equality_-AVS

title

Can Opening Up Government Accelerate Gender Equality

description

Can Opening Up Government Accelerate Gender Equality

showTimestampAndTranscript

yes