Social rules for managing attempted interpersonal domination in the workplace: Influence of status and gender.

The present study utilized a social rules approach to investigate the relative influence of gender and status on managers' self-evaluations of their effectiveness in handling a dominating subordinate. In the first study 84 White middle-class participants identified the prescriptive and proscriptive rules for socially appropriate responding to a stimulus situation involving a pushy subordinate. Four rule sets were identified for female and male managers and subordinates, respectively. Rule-sets shared a number of common rules and showed some variation according to gender roles. In the second study, 91 White middle-class participants rated the individual rules for importance and also rated their personal and managerial effectiveness when responding to the stimulus situation using gender- and status-consistent and gender-and status-inconsistent response strategies. Both men and women rated the female gender and status- consistent strategy as most effective, and rated the status-inconsistent strategy as less effective than a gender-inconsistent response. Results were interpreted as providing more support for a situational gender-related theory of workplace behavior, rather than a traditional gender role perspective.

Rehabilitation and reintegration needs of female inmates and promotion mental health in Georgian prison

RESUMO: As mulheres presas encontram-se num sistema essencialmente dirigido por e concebido para homens. As mulheres que entram na prisão geralmente vêm de ambientes marginalizados e desfavorecidos e muitas vezes têm histórias de violência e abuso físico e sexual. As mulheres presas são um grupo particularmente vulnerável, uma vez que dentro do sistema prisional as suas necessidades de saúde e higiene são muitas vezes negligenciadas. O primeiro passo para o desenvolvimento de programas e práticas sensíveis ao género é compreender as características das mulheres delinquentes e definir fatores de vida específicos que contribuem para a formação do comportamento criminoso de mulheres. Em junho de 2012 foi realizada uma investigação na única prisão feminina da Geórgia, para estudar as necessidades mentais e psicossociais das mulheres presas. O objetivo da pesquisa foi o desenvolvimento de programas de apoio pertinentes para a reabilitação, ressocialização e reintegração, e a elaboração de recomendações práticas para a gestão das prisões. Foi desenvolvido um instrumento de pesquisa (inquérito) com uma fundamentação conceptual baseada em quatro principais teorias: Teoria dos Caminhos (Pathways Theory), teoria do desenvolvimento psicológico da mulher (Theory of Women’s Psychological Development), Trauma e Teorias da Dependência (Trauma and Addiction Theories). Foram inquiridas 120 mulheres presas. Os resultados deste estudo mostram que muitas das necessidades das mulheres presas são diferentes das dos homens e requerem estratégias adaptadas às suas características e situações psicossociais específicas. A maioria das mulheres encarceradas é jovem, enérgica, pode trabalhar, tem profissão e família. As presas sofrem de problemas psicológicos e muitas vezes são rejeitadas pelas suas famílias. Uma parte substancial das mulheres presas tem múltiplos problemas de saúde física e mental. A maioria delas tem filhos e sofre com o facto das crianças estarem a crescer longe da mãe. Com base nos resultados desta investigação é possível elaborar um contexto promotor do planeamento e desenvolvimento de serviços com um enfoque de género na prisão. Na perspetiva de longo prazo, o conhecimento das necessidades básicas e a introdução de programas e serviços com necessidades específicas pertinentes irá beneficiar as presas e as suas famílias, e melhorar a eficácia do sistema de justiça criminal.----------ABSTRACT: Female inmates find themselves in a system essentially run by men for men. Women who enter prison usually come from marginalized and disadvantaged backgrounds and are often characterized by histories of violence, physical and sexual abuse. Female prisoners constitute an especially vulnerable group given their specific health and hygienic needs within the system are often neglected. The first step in developing gender-sensitive program and practice is to understand female offenders’ characteristics and the specific life factors that shape women’s patterns of offending. In June 2012 a research was carried out in the Georgian only female prison facility to assess the mental and psychosocial needs of women prisoners, aiming to develop effective support programs for their rehabilitation, re-socialization and reintegration, as well as to elaborate new recommendations concerning prison management. A survey instrument (questionnaire) was developed within a theoretical framework based on four fundamental theories: Pathways Theory, Theory of Women’s Psychological Development and Trauma and Addiction Theories. Sample size was defined to be 120 surveyed persons. The study showed that needs of incarcerated women were different from those of men, thus requiring approaches tailored to their specific psychosocial characteristics and situations. The basic population of imprisoned women consisted of young, energetic, working-age females, most often with a professional qualification. Female prisoners suffered from psychological problems and are were more likely to be rejected by their families. Most of them had children and suffered that the children were growing without mothers. A substantial proportion of women offenders had multiple physical and mental health problems. Based on the study findings a conceptual framework can be elaborated towards planning and developing gender-sensitive services in prison. In the long-term perspective, acknowledgement of baseline needs and introduction of the relevant needs-specific programs and services may benefit women prisoners as well as their families, improving the effectiveness of the criminal justice system.

‘Ethical’, but Gender-Biased?

The migration of healthcare professionals from developing to developed countries, often aided by recruitment agencies, is a phenomenon of great international concern, as reflected in the construction of numerous ethical recruitment codes, which aim to govern the process. In an attempt to provide an overview of the situation, dealing specifically with the migration of nurses, as well as a critical and gender sensitive analysis of the codes, this paper follows three broad steps: first, it reviews the literature dedicated to the migration of nurses from developing to developed countries, adding a gendered account to more conventional push-pull explanations; second, it delineates the positive and negative effects that nurse migration has at the stakeholders levels of the individual, institutional, national and international level, paying particular attention to the role of gender; and third, it reviews and compares numerous codes for the ethical recruitment of nurses, highlighting the gendered rationale and consequences they may have. In showing that nurse migration is a gendered phenomenon, the paper questions whether the codes, written in gender neutral language, will come to bear unintended consequences that will effectively work to uphold gender stereotypes and inequalities.

CGIAR research program on grain legumes

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources:  review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings  review of previous assessments and evaluations  sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1  more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member.  meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups  online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives  bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results  quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2.  There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised.  There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties.  There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources.  The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified.  Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented.  Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience:  There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction.  Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes.  The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities.  A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.)  PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts.  More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this.  If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend:  A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach.  Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use.  Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species.  Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement.  Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance.  Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP).  Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped.  Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed.  The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding.  Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment.  It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded.  Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.”  The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component.  In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users.  Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress.  Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes.  Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes.  In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy.  The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which  Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP  Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology  Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes  In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.

Gender, tourism, and participatory appraisals at the Corumbau Marine Extractive Reserve, Brazil

The Corumbau Marine Extractive Reserve was created in a region of rich biodiversity, located in the South of Bahia State, Brazil, to meet the revindications of artisanal fishermen in a context of increasing predatory industrial fisheries. The aim of the Marine Extractive Reserve is to improve the sustainability of fisheries stocks and the economy of artisanal fishermen's families, protecting the local biodiversity for the locals' collective use. However, at Corumbau the natives are facing social problems that have increased due to tourism growth. The present research contributes to the Management Plan in sectors that are crucial to assess the aspirations and subjective aspects related to the natives' daily life at individual, familiar and communitary levels. The Participatory Appraisal with a Gender Equity Perspective (PAGP) was applied to five communities at RESEX Corumbau, showing, by gender, the greatest problems artisanal fisheries' families are facing. Tourism is growing in the area, reflecting the residents different and contradictory interests. It can develop commerce and jobs, but also intensify some social and environmental problems in this area. © Society for Human Ecology.

Educational Systems and Gender Segregation in Education: A Three-Country Comparison of Germany, Norway and Canada

How do institutional settings and their embedded policy principles affect gender-typed enrolment in educational programmes? Based on gender-sensitive theories on career choice, we hypothesised that gender segregation in education is higher with a wider range of offers of vocational programmes. By analysing youth survey and panel data, we tested this assumption for Germany, Norway and Canada, three countries whose educational systems represent a different mix of academic, vocational and universalistic education principles. We found that vocational programmes are considerably more gender-segregated than are academic (e.g. university) programmes. Men, more so than women, can avoid gender-typed programmes by passing on to a university education. This in turn means that as long as their secondary school achievement does not allow for a higher education career, they have a higher likelihood of being allocated to male-typed programmes in the vocational education and training (VET) system. In addition, social background and the age at which students have to choose educational offers impact on the transition to gendered educational programmes. Overall, gender segregation in education is highest in Germany and the lowest in Canada. We interpret the differences between these countries with respect to the constellations of educational principles and policies in the respective countries.

Gender sensitivity in national health plans in Latin America and the European Union

Objectives: To evaluate the situation regarding gender sensitivity in national health plans in Latin America and the European Union for the decade 2000–2010. Methods: A systematic search and content analysis of national health plans were carried out within 37 countries. Gender sensitivity, defined as the extent to which a health plan considers gender as a central category and develops measures to reduce any gender-related inequalities, was analysed through an ad hoc checklist. Results: The description of health problems by sex was more frequent than intervention proposals aimed at reducing gender health disparities. The greatest number of specific intervention proposals targeted at overcoming gender-based health inequalities were associated with sexual and/or reproductive health, gender based violence, the working environment and human resources training. Compared to the European Union member states, Latin American health plans were found to be generally more gender sensitive. Conclusions: National health plans are still generally lacking in gender sensitivity. Disparities exist in health policy formulation in favour of men, whilst women's health continues to be identified mainly with reproductive health. If gender sensitivity is not taken into account, efforts to improve the quality of clinical care will be insufficient as gender inequalities will persist.

La prima casa editrice femminista per l'infanzia in Italia: gli albi illustrati di "Dalla parte delle bambine" di Adela Turin

La presente tesi di dottorato propone uno studio sulla casa editrice “Dalla parte delle bambine” di Adela Turin. Attiva dal 1975 al 1982 a Milano, si tratta della prima impresa editoriale femminista per l’infanzia in Italia. Nonostante l’originalità e il successo internazionale dei suoi libri, è stata riscontrata una sorprendente scarsità di studi sull’argomento. Questa ricerca interdisciplinare si propone quindi di colmare questa lacuna, inserendosi nel vivace ambito dello studio della letteratura per l’infanzia in prospettiva di genere. La dissertazione è divisa in cinque capitoli, a cui si aggiunge un’appendice iconografica che raccoglie le copertine dell’intero catalogo di DPDB. Nel primo capitolo viene introdotto il quadro teorico della ricerca, dalla complessità della letteratura per il giovane pubblico all’indagine in ottica di genere. Il secondo capitolo si concentra sulle pubblicazioni per bambine e bambini negli anni Settanta, passando in rassegna innovative esperienze editoriali nonché l’opera di scrittori e scrittrici sensibili alle questioni di genere. La terza sezione si occupa di ricostruire il profilo biografico di Turin e il suo decennale impegno contro il sessismo veicolato dai libri per l’infanzia, per poi concentrarsi sulla storia, il catalogo, la diffusione e la ricezione di DPDB. Il quarto capitolo propone un’analisi qualitativa e quantitativa di un corpus di 20 albi illustrati scritti da Turin, oltre a un confronto fra questi libri e diverse ricerche sulla rappresentazione di genere, allo scopo di evidenziare la peculiarità delle proposte di DPDB. La quinta sezione, infine, si occupa del rapporto con la contemporaneità. Dopo aver tracciato un quadro della complessa situazione dell’educazione di genere in Italia e aver proposto una panoramica di esperienze editoriali per il giovane pubblico attente alle questioni di genere, quest’ultima parte indagherà i contesti in cui gli albi di Turin vengono oggi letti e consigliati, offrendosi come narrazione alternativa e tutt’ora attuale.

Architettura urbana, gender mainstreaming e l’impatto del femminismo

Questo lavoro di tesi esplora i possibili sviluppi di un'architettura urbana sensibile alle questioni di genere, sotto un prisma femminista intersezionale. Dalla fine degli anni '90, le sperimentazioni in questa direzione hanno cominciato a farsi sempre più numerose, a cominciare dall'esempio pionieristico di Vienna, divenuta città di riferimento per eccellenza. Questa tesi è particolarmente interessata ai progetti sperimentali di Parigi, pur mantenendo una visione comparativa con progetti in altre città europee. In quanto approcci che influenzano l'architettura urbana, vengono esplorati anche le politiche pubbliche e l'attivismo, a livello francese e italiano. Il loro contributo evidenzia il potenziale di reinvenzione simbolica e materiale dell'architettura urbana, passando dal sistema eteropatriarcale verso una maggiore inclusione e giustizia spaziale. Gli interrogativi principali di questo lavoro si basano sull'influenza delle teorie femministe nella pratica professionale di architette·i e urbaniste·i, sul loro ruolo nella trasformazione degli approcci alla città e alla pianificazione urbana, nonché nella trasformazione dell'estetica architettonica e urbana. Attraverso un approccio metodologico situato, riflessivo e interdisciplinare, derivante dalle discipline dell'architettura e dell'urbanistica, il fieldwork svolto ha avuto l'obiettivo di ricercare tendenze, evoluzioni e costanti nei progetti di architettura urbana di genere. Tenendo conto dell'evoluzione temporale delle mentalità sul genere e della consapevolezza sempre più profonda delle questioni femministe, questa tesi assume un approccio critico al Gender Mainstreaming. In aggiunta al pdf della tesi è presente un documento riassuntivo in lingua italiana.

HIV Voluntary Testing among Portuguese Women Attending Family Planning Clinics: Implications for HIV Prevention Education and Testing

Objectives: The aim of this article is to analyze the factors associated with HIV testing among 767 sexually active women. Methods: Participants were administered several self-report questionnaires that assessed behavioral and psychosocial measures. Results: Overall, 59.8% of the participants reported ever having tested for HIV. Results show that higher levels of education, being pregnant or having been pregnant, concern about AIDS, AIDS knowledge, self-efficacy in condom negotiation and perception of no risk in partner significantly predicted the likelihood of testing among women. Attending the mass was negatively associated with HIV testing. Conclusions: These findings provide information that can be used in the development of a focused gender sensitive HIV prevention program to increase HIV testing.

L’incapacité au travail liée aux troubles musculosquelettiques : aspects théoriques et différences de genre

Introduction : Cette thèse est constituée de trois articles liés les uns aux autres. Le premier s’attache à clarifier les perspectives théoriques et problèmes conceptuels entourant la notion de capacité/incapacité au travail, sa définition et son évolution au fil du temps. Les deuxième et troisième articles visent à évaluer les effets différentiels selon le genre de déterminants du retour au travail (RAT) et de la durée d’indemnisation ainsi que les coûts associés, dans une population de travailleurs indemnisés à long terme pour troubles musculosquelettiques (TMS). Méthodes : Dans le premier article, une revue systématique des définitions de l’(in)capacité au travail et une analyse comparative basée sur la théorisation ancrée débouchent sur une carte conceptuelle intégrative. Dans le second article, une cohorte de 455 adultes en incapacité à long terme pour TMS au dos/cou/membres supérieurs est suivie cinq ans au travers d’entretiens structurés et de données d’indemnisation. Des modèles de Cox stratifiés par genre ont été utilisés pour évaluer la durée jusqu’au premier RAT. Dans le troisième article, une cohorte populationnelle de 13,073 hommes et 9032 femmes en incapacité prolongée pour TMS au dos/cou/membres supérieurs a été suivie pendant trois ans à l’aide de données administratives. Des modèles de Cox stratifiés par genre ont été utilisés pour étudier la durée d’indemnisation et détecter les effets dépendants du temps. Les coûts ont également été examinés. Résultats : Les définitions analysées dans la première étude ne reflètent pas une vision intégrée et partagée de l’(in)capacité au travail. Cependant, un consensus relatif semble émerger qu’il s’agit d’un concept relationnel, résultant de l’interaction de multiples dimensions aux niveaux individuel, organisationnel et sociétal. La seconde étude montre que malgré des courbes de survie jusqu’au RAT similaires entre hommes et femmes (p =0.920), plusieurs déterminants diffèrent selon le genre. Les femmes plus âgées (HR=0.734, par tranches de 10 ans), d’un statut économique perçu comme pauvre (HR=0.625), travaillant ≥40 heures/semaine en ayant des personnes à charge (HR=0.508) et ne connaissant pas l’existence d’un programme de santé et sécurité sur leur lieu de travail (HR=0.598) retournent moins vite au travail, tandis qu’un revenu brut annuel plus élevé (par $10,000) est un facteur facilitant (HR=1.225). Les hommes de plus de 55 ans (HR=0.458), au statut économique perçu comme pauvre (HR=0.653), travaillant ≥40 heures/semaine avec une charge de travail physique perçue élevée (HR=0.720) et une plus grande précarité d’emploi (HR=0.825) retournent moins rapidement au travail. La troisième étude a révélé que trois ans après la lésion, 12.3% des hommes et 7.3% des femmes étaient encore indemnisés, avec un ratio de coûts homme-femme pour l’ensemble des réclamations de 2.1 :1. L’effet de certain prédicteurs (e.g. revenu, siège de lésion, industrie) varie selon le genre. De plus, l’effet de l’âge chez les hommes et l’effet de l’historique d’indemnisation chez les femmes varient dans le temps. Conclusion : La façon de définir l’(in)capacité au travail a des implications importantes pour la recherche, l’indemnisation et la réadaptation. Les résultats confirment également la pertinence d’investiguer les déterminants du RAT et de l’indemnisation selon le genre.

La influencia del género en los estudiantes de medicina de la universidad del rosario al momento de tomar la decisión de emprender

La Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad del Rosario a nivel nacional e internacional se ha posicionado como una de las más célebres. De esta manera se hace interesante expandir el estudio de la caracterización del perfil emprendedor hacia esta facultad contrastándolo con el resto de la población colombiana emprendedora. Para esta investigación se determinaron los factores comunes presentados entre los estudiantes de la facultad de medicina de la Universidad del Rosario al momento de emprender basados en las teorías de expectativa/valoración, comportamiento planificado y el modelo del evento empresarial. Por esta razón se realizó un estudio a los estudiantes de la facultad de medicina de la Universidad del Rosario tomando como directiva si al momento de tomar la decisión de emprender lo hacen más los hombres o las mujeres. Para lo cual la investigación se fundamenta en las tres teorías principales mencionadas anteriormente; teoría de la expectativa/valoración de Víctor Vroom, teoría de la conducta planificada de Icek Ajzen y el modelo del evento empresarial de Albert Shapero, las cuales hacen posible una aproximación a la explicación de la relación del género con el emprendimiento. Así mismo se utilizó la herramienta conocida como “Características de Comportamiento Emprendedor” (CCE de EMPRETEC) la cual está basada en la teoría de McClelland, reflejando los factores motivacionales asociados al comportamiento emprendedor. Dentro de la metodología se logró determinar las diferencias reflejadas en factores del comportamiento emprendedor entre los hombres y las mujeres en Colombia, usando también como base las encuestas realizadas a los estudiantes de la facultad de medicina y el estudio realizado por la GEM a la población emprendedora.

Förståelse, bedömningar och hjälpinsatser : Socialarbetares arbete med män som våldsoffer

This report outlines the background to, and presents the results from the Crime Victim Compensation and Support Authority funded project "Social Workers' understanding of men as victims of crime". The project aimed at describing and analyzing how social workers understand and work with male victims of violence. More precisely, the research has focused on how social workers describe men's vulnerability and how they understand men's needs for assistance, what assistance that is provided and the way the constellations of perpetrators and victims of different gender and contexts in which the violence occurs in affect the understanding of male victims of violence. The study has also been devoted to the question of whether the Support Centers for young crime victims in Sweden provide different types of and different amount of help to young men and women afflicted of violence. The project was conducted in three substudies. The results from substudy 1 show that more young men than women seek support from the Support centers studied. Men predominate in number of cases and in the different categories of crime. The results also show that young men on average receive less assistance over a shorter average duration than young women. This applies irrespective of the category of offense that the vulnerability applies to. Furthermore, the young men, compared to the women, proportionally receive fewer interventions characterized as support and a greater proportion of interventions in the form of information. The results also show that the young men are referred on for further action to a lesser extent than is the case for women. The results from substudy 2 show that social workers tend to focus on whether, and to what extent, young men who are victims of violence themselves have behaved provocatively before the violence incident and if they have put themselves in a social situation that could be interpreted as having contributed to an escalation of the violence they have been subjected to. The results from substudy 2 also show that social workers talk about the men as active in the violent situations they have been involved in and dwell on the extent to which the young men's own actions have contributed to the violence. The results also show that young men who are victims of violence are described as "reluctant" victims who are trying to cope with their situation on their own without the involvement of professional or other helper. The young men are also described as reluctant to talk about their feelings. The results of substudy 3 show that social workers believe that young men, when they become victims of violence, risks losing their sense of autonomy, initiative and decisiveness, that is, attributes that are often linked to the dominating cultural image of masculinity. Furthermore, the results show that social workers estimate that men's practicing of their masculinity, but also the response that men who are traumatized get from society, creates difficulties for them to get help. The results from substudy 3 also shows that attributes and actions that can be connected to the masculinity of young men's, as well as a lack of such attributes and actions are considered to be adequate explanations for the violence the men has suffered. When it comes to violence in public places it is the masculinity that explains the violence and its escalation. When it comes to domestic violence it is the lack of expected male attributes and actions that are used as explanations for the violence that have occurred. The discussion is devoted to the question of how the results should be understood based on the concepts of self-performance, interpretation, negotiation and categorizations, and the consequences the results obtained should have for gender sensitive social work given to abused men.

Women's contribution to equality in Latin America and the Caribbean

Includes bibliography

Amélia é quem era mulher de verdade?: mulheres pobres e a construção de uma Nova Marília (1980-2004)

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)