Good Governance Practices:
What is good governance practices as far as enhancing women’s political participation? There are no blueprints and universal good practices since each situation has its own specificity, but there are some practices, which have been repeated and agree upon by most. These have been peppered throughout this paper already, but the following is a brief overview thereof, keeping in mind that these can apply at various levels (national - by governments, regional and international - through organisations and networks which can lobby, distribute information, and press for implementation):

Already taking place in some areas:

• gender-balanced representation within political parties and all other public institutions;
• setting up of specialised national machinery geared towards monitoring, implementing and, when necessary, creating gender-equality policies;
• setting up a woman’s budget targeted to provide funds to secure gender-equality measures and assist women in their political careers (e.g. campaign financing), with powers of implementation as well as remuneration;
• mainstreaming gender concerns at all levels of society starting with poverty -alleviation and moving to each activity being carried out;
• The adoption and implementation of affirmative action measures - not just gender-specific, but whenever there is a perceived need[36] .
• adjusting the discourse so that the motto employed should be to share responsibilities and not just come to, or take over, power.
• Comparing, comparing and even more comparing of experiences, strategies and mechanisms from around the world.

• the need to see impacting in terms of means and ends, where the criteria for impacting need to be clearly defined, before assessments can be carried out;
• introducing (or developing) training for women and men politicians simultaneously and encouraging the sharing of experiences and lessons learned (“how did I do it?” - successes and failures) among men and women politicians;
• ensuring that all policies for women’s empowerment, from inception (point-0) onwards, include and target men’s needs, fears, experiences, and lessons learned. The era of women for women and by women should itself be enhanced and adapted to emerging needs. Working together with men, as IPU’s slogan on “partnership between men and women in politics” clearly outlines, is the key to moving forward;
• ensuring that the women who make it to positions of power and responsibility are provided with the tools necessary to enhance their political impact, and are committed to the principles of gender-equality as well as those of making a difference;

An international women and media day
This can be used as a first step towards raising awareness both within and without the international media community as to mutual needs and constraints for women politicians and media personnel. The communication between the two sectors remains an important challenge.

The sponsoring of this event should be carried out by an international body and could include cyber sessions and video conferences with prominent and lay people from around the world. It could also encompass as an outcome, a series of regional and/or local workshops to bring the two networks together and to discuss common training in both concepts and actual practice, as well as sharing of experiences.

Furthermore, what needs to be kept in mind is the current overemphasis on numbers and a critical mass of women politicians, although important, is one foot of a body, so to speak. It is now timely to bring attention to and put forward the other foot. There is a need not just for more women, but for those who can make an impact: the idea being that a few with strength and determination, can achieve what many with neither attributes would contemplate.

Developing criteria for impacting
The issue of impacting is often seen as a feature of women politicians being able to make a difference. ‘Difference’ is debatable and more often than not, also subjective. The basic idea behind why women can contribute differently, is that women share men’s lives anywhere in the world, yet they have their own experiences, specificity’s, attitudes, and life-styles, which are reflected in different approaches, needs, insights, and goals from politics and decision-making. As the other half which shares life and planetary interests, women are also a different half with different life-experiences.

Virginia Willis affirms that having women in power does lead to a different behaviour from their male colleagues. An example in her report, on Public Life: Women Make a Difference, indicates that “the new political movement, the Greens, where women have from the beginning played a leading role, has tried new forms of politics and collaborative, non hierarchical systems which also better reflect women’s ways of working”[37] . A further example is studies in local councils in Norway which indicate one third of situations in which there was a difference in leadership styles between men and women[38] . Similarly, in Sweden, Boman reports on a local council of a suburb which shows how an increase in women’s representation to 40-48% led to changes in the political climate with male officials acknowledging and prioritising family obligations to broaden the context of decision- making, and debates being more concise, focused, and the language more accessible[39] .

There is thus a need to look at comparative impacting techniques and methodologies of impacting. But what is needed beforehand, is to develop criteria for impacting. What does impacting mean in practice? What constitutes making a difference? In this regard, a useful tool would be an attempt to assess what the lessons learned from different countries around the world, and to disseminate this information in an accessible and reader-friendly manner[40] .

There are many points of view on what constitutes an ‘impact’. Some would claim that being a critical mass, influencing issues, debates and perceptions, is a definite means of making an impact. Others would add that bringing about change is an essential element of making that impact. Further examples of this change and/or impact women have on different kinds of policies are:

• In the USA - a surge in day-care facilities battered women’s refuges, displaced homemakers etc. Also several of the USA’s private sector companies have developed diversity programmes which include building women’s leadership skills, mentoring, and family-friendly policies to facilitate the juggling of many roles that women occupy;
• in Australia - help pages in any telephone book include sections on domestic violence referral services, abortion counselling, and rape crisis centres;
• in Norway: changes in the “politics of motherhood” where care and career policies concerned with child-care institutions, working hours, as well as maternity leave, have generated an interest among political parties to adopt these as some of the main issues with which votes can be gained[41].

Once again however, with the exception of the South African case, there is a serious paucity of information on more methods of impacting, as well as similar examples from elsewhere in the world.

What follows therefore are some seeds in the direction of developing criteria for making and eventually assessing impacting through different changes. The question that should be kept in mind constantly, is to what extent has this kind of change taken place if at all? This is important since, as mentioned earlier, it is too often the case that difficulties and obstacles gain a great deal of attention - much more so than consistent attempts to realise changes, which in many cases, can be subtle, but no less important.

- change in perception of women and men politicians as well as in the expected division of labour between men and women in any society. How politicians are perceived can often make or break political careers. To transform capable women public figures from an exception to the norm is a thus a worthy goal.

- change in discourse: Discourse refers to the language, actions, means of reference, and spheres of influence, among other things. Women who participate politically and lead public lives have, in some countries, managed to impact on the way that women in general can and should be referred to. This, in part by becoming involved in areas which were traditionally seen as ‘men’s affairs’, or ‘hard politics’ (e.g. defence, finance, foreign policy), as well as insisting on redefining and prioritising ‘soft’ issues such as welfare, maternity leave, and education.

- Change in coverage: This refers in particular to how history is written and taught how textbooks and stories are written and read, and how media handles women in public life. In many school and children’s textbooks, mother is always the one at home while father is “out working”. This is the seed of many of the stereotypes which women then are confronted with once they have decided to enter into public life. Moreover, as referred to earlier, it is important that the media’s own coverage be dependent on impact (which may well be considered “an important story”) as opposed to simply covering women as by-products of a political process.

- change in policies: This includes, among other aspects, times and /or locations of meetings, speaking priorities, training measures and themes, and availability of family-friendly services. As far as the latter are concerned, it is very often assumed that day-care centres for example, are a woman’s concern, whereas children and their upbringing are a matter of importance to both parents. The Swedish Speaker of Parliament for example, was instrumental in persuading Parliamentarians to convene at times more appropriate for the needs of women MPs with family responsibilities.

- change in legislation: The South African context, where a new constitution was drafted with gender in mind, is an excellent example of changes in legislation. But other situations where amendments to existing laws (e.g. on citizenship rights, inheritance rights, divorce rights, equal pay labour rights, and so on) or the introduction of new ones take place, are also important milestones. In that regard, the changes which took place in Tunisian legislation with regard to Family Laws, as well as changes within legislation covering maternity (and paternity) leave for in many of the Nordic countries, are other examples.

- change of institutions: The creation of specialised institutions, or setting up departments or groups within institutions which develop, monitor and implement gender-equality within and without, are further examples. Here, what come to mind as examples are, once again, South Africa and Uganda which created specialised women’s government departments, and in the former case, also set aside a specific budget, derived from the national budget, with monitoring mechanisms in order to review and ensure adherence. Also, good examples of this kind of approach and these criteria can be found within the auspices of the United Nations itself, in institutions such as The Commission on the Status of Women of the United Nations, as well as the United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women, to name but a few.

So far, various legislation and numerous national, regional and international bodies and instruments have been created. They have served, at different times, in different capacities and for various reasons, a vital need. Many of them have also acted (or been used) alternately as carrots, sticks, manifestos, weapons, and numerous other means of empowerment. It is unlikely that this process will come to a halt. And contrary to the arguments usually put forward that ‘there are too many institutions’, one must also realise that the world is full of different people and no-one institution can be expected to serve all adequately.

One of the most important lessons however, is the need to stop mythologizing women’s political capacities. It is true that those leading the world today are mostly men, and that there are many wars, much violence, and so on. However, to assume that by handing women the mantle of power, they will treat it with an alternative form of grace and sacredness, and actually make a tremendous difference simply because they are women, is to engage in the rhetoric of fairy tales. We cannot go on urging for women’s rights to be part of human rights, and then maintain in the same breath that women will not be tainted by the same politics of power as men - are we not all human after all? Certainly women are less privileged in terms of access to information, resources and consequently power, than men. But they also share the same weaknesses, needs, and strengths - in terms of knowing how to handle power, making a positive impact and providing an alternative. It is time to address the needs and mechanisms of impacting of both women and men in matters of getting along and doing politics - both have a great deal to learn from each other.

Moreover, what is now becoming increasingly timely, is the need for the following:

• Taking stock: This concerns a comprehensive evaluation of the work carried out thus far by international bodies: what are their relative weaknesses and strengths? What do they need in order to face the challenges of the next century? This evaluation needs to take place simultaneously from within and without the organisations themselves. It is important that this evaluation not be seen as a judgement of work carried out, but rather attempts to strengthen and refine the tools and mechanisms, which are currently in use.
• Filling in the information vacuum: From the review carried out here, a recurrent theme has been the lack of information on certain regions of the world. Hence there is a need to fill in areas of paucity of knowledge about women’s success stories in developing countries in general, and particularly on practical aspects such as research on electoral systems impact in different countries, as well as the ways and means through which women already in power have actually impacted and on what aspects or issues.
• Monitoring mechanisms: This refers specifically to the development of regular and comprehensive monitoring devices for policies emerging from concerned bodies. This is not to deny that these mechanisms are already in place, but to urge that there be some form of co-ordination and consistency in the methodology and standards applied to monitor.
• Remuneration/Rewarding mechanisms: The development of remuneration mechanisms should also be a matter of serious consideration and action. It is too easily assumed that some form of ‘punishment’ can or should be imposed on areas or countries where policies are not being implemented. The danger in this is that in some parts of the world, there is already an over-sensitivity vis-à-vis what is perceived as “interference” in internal affairs. Where that is the case, policies concerned with accountability for the implementation of gender concerns have tended to backfire or simply to be ignored. Hence the need to explore possibilities of providing ‘rewards’ to certain countries or organisations, which need not necessarily be seen as conditions for development aid, as much as they are aspects of merit for performance.

  One of the important considerations that should be to keep in mind is to change attitudes and policies to adopt rewards for efforts towards mainstreaming gender equality and enhancing women’s political impact. This can be done, either through financial rewards - e.g. relieving part of debt burdens for a country, or increasing the chances that countries can be put on the most-favoured nation trading status list, or where countries which have increased the number of women in positions of power, and who rank highly on the impact scale, could be considered for special prestige nominations. The latter would require that international bodies lobby significant financial institutions in the developed world itself, such as World Bank, IMF, and the like, rather than always concentrating on the carrot-and-stick approach with the leaders of the developing world. Countries, which attain certain goals and perform particularly well, could be promoted internationally through various fora - with media coverage - and could be, granted additional development co-operation funds. Although this innovative idea may be considered radical in the current global political economy, it is not different from a Noble Prize or nomination for peace or human rights.

• Introspection and credibility: Are international organisations actually practising what they are preaching? The answer to this question has been a major chink in the armour of international organisations. Whereas ignoring the internal weaknesses in favour of preaching to the rest of the world may work for a short while, it is not viable in the long-term.