Gender and Post-Conflict Development: Experiences of female-headed households
An increase in female-headed households is one of the most significant features of post-conflict realities in Asia and Africa. It is, therefore, imperative that we foster a better understanding of the implications for post-war development and, in particular, the experiences of women who are the economic and social bulwarks of such families.
The gendered dimensions of post-conflict development are sometimes lost in the shuffle as there is a tendency to try to fashion one-size-fits-all policies. Unfortunately, such approaches seldom succeed in empowering female-headed households to deal with the multiple challenges they face. To be relevant to the lived realities of female-headed households, post-conflict development initiatives must keep questions of gender and how it intersects with other vectors of marginality – class, ethnicity, caste, disability, etc. – at its very core.
According to the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE)’s “A Socio-Legal Study on the Head-of-the-Household Concept in Sri Lanka”, the ‘head-of-the-household’ concept has no basis in law, let alone being synonymous with men. However, while not legally grounded, a patriarchal view of the concept has been perpetuated by social norms and traditional usage in administrative practices, leading to the discrimination against women when it comes to land rights, ownership, inheritance, etc. These practices can also adversely affect women’s rights in matrilineal settings, where women traditionally enjoy customary rights to property.
Underlying these social norms are the stereotypical views of women as subservient to men or ill equipped to take on the mantle of a head-of-household because they are only suited for roles as caregivers. The consequences of these stereotypes are multi-fold: they undermine the importance and difficulty of women’s work within the private sphere, ignore the participation of women in income-generating activities alongside men in the public sphere, and impede the functioning of female-headed households.
A 2014 report by the Women and Media Collective points out that female-headed households should not be understood as a homogenous category. There are many types of female-headed households and the experiences of women in these positions are not similar either. A male-centered and narrow view of the head-of-the-household concept creates multiple problems for women in the context of post-conflict reconstruction and development. Women whose husbands have disappeared or have been killed are disadvantaged if, for instance, transfer of land ownership or other land dealings, or access to loans and resources are centered around patriarchal ideas and procedures. Conversely, the presence of men can undermine the decision-making power of women if the former is viewed as the formal ‘head’ even when they do not play any significant role in supporting the household.
Though women’s experiences as heads of households may differ significantly, one aspect that many of them share is the double burden of being primary caregivers in the home and breadwinners outside. Often, a triple burden emerges when one considers the operation of current development strategies. For instance, CEPA’s 2014 study on the implementation of Owner Driven Housing Assistance (ODHA) in Sri Lanka’s Northern Province found that beneficiaries had to balance livelihoods and employment with managing housing construction and this either resulted in lesser income or inefficient management of construction. For female-headed households involved in the ODHA scheme, it becomes even more problematic given that they are also primary caregivers.
Additionally, the consequences of conflict, such as displacement, lack of access to justice, lack of economic resources, and psychological traumas render such burdens even more difficult to navigate for female-headed households. Added to this is the reality that in post-conflict communities where gender roles have shifted but patriarchal attitudes remain or are strengthened, women heading households may be stigmatized and marginalized. In addition to widowed or single women being viewed negatively, the stereotyping of women as suited for care-giving can result in their exclusion, not only from redistribution but also from participation in community politics and access to services. Moreover, as the Women and Media Collective report notes, residual militarisation and the absence of men can affect women’s security through exposing them to higher levels of gender-based violence.
In such a context, there are many issues that must be considered for post-conflict development policies to be meaningful and inclusive. Firstly, they must not essentialise or make generalised assumptions about the experiences of women in female-headed households. This is especially important given the manner in which gender intersects with class, ethnicity, disability, age, religious identities and cultural context in shaping such experiences. Furthermore, in structuring development initiatives, policymakers must consider the multiple roles these women take on in serving as heads-of-households and how these roles are affected by the unique consequences of conflict. Advocating for a substantively gender-sensitive, robust and accommodating conception of head-of-the-household in its usage is a crucial first step towards ensuring that women are not excluded from post-conflict development projects and resource redistribution.
This discussion is not meant to portray women heading households in these situations as unavoidably powerless. In which way forward in post war Sri Lanka? Lessons from the so called powerless women of the North (groundviews, 11/03/12), Raksha Vasudevan describes the various ways that women in post-war Northern Sri Lanka have uniquely navigated the obstacles presented to them to create new livelihood opportunities. From this reading, over-emphasising vulnerability is not only a misrepresentation but can also end up undermining their agency by perpetuating the idea that these women do not possess the abilities to act as heads of households. Thus, post-conflict development initiatives must not blindly propagate the idea of women’s vulnerability but rather draw attention to and account for the contexts within which women act and use their agency, and introduce policies and practices that enable and support women to make their own choices and draw up their own strategies.