The Foreign Service Journal, June 2006

ural and manmade disasters, they also gain unique oppor- tunities to change their gendered status in society. For instance, after Hurricane Mitch struck Guatemala and Honduras in October of 1998, women proved themselves indispensable by building houses and shelters and digging wells. Though it is often against men’s wishes, women can take on “male” tasks in such crises, which can permanent- ly change that society’s conceptions of women’s capabilities. There have also been effective media campaigns to help change men’s attitudes towards violence against women. The Other Side of the Coin There are also many changes that can take place in gen- der relations following a crisis or disaster, including a change in demographics as fewer men survive than women (Rwanda currently reports a 7-3 female to male ratio); a change in expectations for marriage and children; changes in labor division and increased political mobilization as women experience the benefits of working with other women. Children and women account for 75 to 80 percent of the world’s refugees. Still, it should be understood that their vulnerability is primarily cultural and organizational, not biological or physiological. Paradoxically, relief agen- cies have tended to treat women as ill-fated victims — incapacitated by vulnerability — rather than concentrating on building upon women’s strengths and opportunities in post-disaster scenarios. According to Refugees Interna- tional, women play “a vital role in the alleviation of pov- erty, prevention of conflict and in sustaining peace, and are also the majority of the displaced in conflict settings. Yet women, particularly displaced women, are largely exclud- ed from decisions that ensure their very survival.” In the 1980s, it was not uncommon to have all aid go only to every able-bodied male head of household. Due to U.N. mandates like the 1991 Guidelines on the Protection for Refugee Women, this global scenario has changed — and women are now included or even singled out as the sole household recipients of distributed goods. Back in 1995, an assessment by the World Food Program showed that “gender-neutral” language in aid dis- tribution was taken by the organization as a mark of suc- cess in reaching women. Unfortunately, like many other studies, the WFP findings overlooked the complexities of culture, gender and crisis, consigning women to the catchall relief classification of “women and children” — a term that some gender researchers argue carries the con- notation that it is through their maternal relationship to children that women are rightfully “deserving” of help. Still, the WFP does attempt to distribute some 80 percent of relief directly into the hands of women and 50 percent of its educational resources to girls. When men are the only registered aid recipients, according to the University of Sussex’s Institute of Development, drawbacks can include: food being sold on the market or used to supply armed forces; adverse nutri- tional effects on children whose mother’s status as a polyg- amous wife is low (as in Tajikistan and Gaza); men using food aid as a tool to reinforce their control over female kin; and women losing their influence over food management (a singular area of female control). For example, in writ- ten correspondence after the massive 2004 tsunami, a South Asian judge told relief workers, “As usual, the women and the children have suffered most. Even the lit- tle relief aid that is sent is grabbed by the stronger men.” Yet there is growing evidence that women are more effective recipients of aid than men. According to a November 2005 Newsweek article, “Around the world, if you give cash to a mother, she tends to use it to invest in her children’s health and education. A man, on the other hand, will often take it and head to the local watering hole.” Studies from Brazil show that the survival possibilities of a child increase by 20 percent if the income is in the hands of the mother rather than the father. Gender-Based Policies that Work According to InterAction , a publication of the American Council for Voluntary International Action, a basic “to do” checklist for integrating gender into relief efforts would include the following elements: • Incorporate input from displaced females into assis- tance efforts; • Use gender-sensitive rapid assessment checklists from the onset of crises; • Design relief efforts to strengthen sustainable devel- opment; • Announce all distributions of food, supplies and ser- vices as widely as possible; and • Train field staff in gender analysis, gender and culture assessments. There have been many examples of successful women- led initiatives. For instance, according to Marion Pratt, social science adviser to USAID’s Office of Foreign Dis- aster Assistance, displaced women in southern Sudan are F O C U S 46 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J U N E 2 0 0 6