Promoting gender equality : our shareholders' views

51352 Transo'ipt No. BB-05 PROMOTING GENDER EQUALIIT: Our Shareholders) Views Acting on Commitments to the World's Women  Welcome to "Beyond Beijing" For two weeks in November, 1995, the issues and inspiration of the UN Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing (September 4-15) were revived at the World Bank. "Beyond Beijing: Acting on Commitments to the World's Women" (November 6-17) was organized by the Office of the Senior Adviser onWomen's Issues and the Gender Analysis and Policy Group, to highlight gender issues in development and in organizations. The program provided a forum to reflect on conference outcomes, their implications for the Bank and the Bank's commitment for future action. Through exchange of words­ and through art and music-colleagues from inside and outside the Bank explored the themes of Beijing: Equality, Development and Peace. Here are some highlights: • Translating Concept into Action: A Marketplace of Gender Resources brought together representatives of the Bank, international agencies and NGOs, to share information about their work to address gender issues. • Messages from Belling and their Implications for the World Bank-the formal opening gave World Bank staff a chance to hear from president James D.Wolfensohn and a panel of Vice Presidents about what the Bank is doing, and will do, to promote gender equality. • First Lady of the United States Hillary Rodham Clinton raised an eloquent voice on behalf of the world's women, captivating her audience with the keynote address followed by a lively question-and-answer session. • Panels and speakers-Wornen's World Banking President Nancy Barry, UNIFEM Director Noeleen Heyzer and African economist Germina Ssemogerere explored the role of women in economic life. A group of artists, writers and curators examined women's role in the world of art. Anthony Comper shared his experience on breaking glass ceilings as president of Bank of Montreal. Staff had a rare chance to enter into a dialogue with the Bank's Executive Directors. • Looking to the Future.·A Celebration of Women in Song-Elaine R. Wolfensohn introduced Musikanten, a choir which marked the program's finale with music by and about women. Printed words cannot capture the sights, sounds and energy which animated the program. But they can provide guidance and inspiration long after memories and excitement have faded. The sponsors of "Beyond Beijing" are pleased to share the transcripts of selected sessions, in the hope that they will provide food for thought and fuel for the work ahead of all of us, to realize the goals and dreams of Beijing. ______~----------------------~-----------.-~~--.------~---~~-~-~~--I~_'-"--------"""""""""""-  Transcript No. BE-05 A World Bank Program on Gender, November 6-17,1995 Wednesday, November 15,1995 PROMOTING GENDER EQUALITY: Our Shareholders' Views Rachel Lomax, Vice President & Chief of Staff, Chair Panelists, World Bank Executive Directors: Ali Bourhane, Benin et. al. Jan Piercy, United States Shengman Zhang, China Ruth Jacoby, Scandinavian & Baltic Countries Sponsored by: The Office of the Senior Adviser on Women's Issues and The Gender Analysis and Policy Group © The World Bank (text reproductions must include this copyright statement)  BEYOND BEIJING PROMOTING GENDER EQUALITY: OUR SHAREHOLDERS' VIEWS The following transcript has been edited for clarity; no substance has been cut. MS. LOMAX: I am glad to see such a good turnout: I welcome everybody. This is part of the Beyond Beijing program, which Anette Pederson and Minh Chau Nguyen have organized to look at how the Bank is going to meet its commitments on gender, and looking at it from different angles. This particular panel has been organized to give us a chance to discuss the role the Board can, and indeed does, play to spread the Beijing message, and encourage the Bank to be more genuinely gender-responsive in its work. The Board has been saying things on gender issues for twenty-five years, I would say -- well, since 1973 -- not quite twenty-five years. It has been a force for putting issues on the map as far as the Bank is concerned. So it is appropriate, I think, that we have some representatives of the Board with us today. They are going to be talking as representatives of specific shareholders rather than the Board as a great corporate body. And they are going to look at the outcomes of Beijing in terms of two themes -- the implications for the Bank as an organization, and the implications for the Bank's operations around the world. It is very much a matter of choice between you and the people on the panel here where the focus of this session is. I am not going to say much more now. And I don't think they are going to say very much by way of introduction, because we'd like to organize this session very much as a question and answer one, and to see where it takes us. I will just start by reminding you who we have got here. Ali Bourhane, who is ED for a large number of countries in West Africa; Jan Piercy, from the U.S., as you know; Shengman Zhang from China; and Ruth Jacoby, Sweden and also a great raft of countries. They will tell you a bit more about themselves, because I am going to invite them to kick off by introducing themselves and telling you a bit more about what else they are doing on the Board -- because they all have multiple roles -- and perhaps just say a few words about what they think the implications of Beijing are from their own particular perspective. The order in which we have just agreed that we will take them is Jan first, Ali second, Shengman third, and we will wind up with Ruth. Is that the order we agreed? No. It is the order we will take anyhow. Beyond Beijing 1 EDs' Panel (11115195)  [Laughter. ] MS. LOMAX: Jan. MS. PIERCY: I must say that we actually found the couple of sessions that we held in preparing for this discussion to be quite fruitful in themselves. I think the time leading up to the session has been valuable for us. We very much want to hear not just questions but some of your comments. I have been very impressed, from the opening session [of Beyond Beijing] in which Jim Wolfensohn talked with members of the staff, through the talk by the First Lady Hillary Clinton and other sessions, by the caliber of the comments, the reflections, as well as the questions which have been raised by all of the participants. So we are eager to move into that form of presentation as quickly as possible. We agreed that I would perhaps say the least because, I think, since the Bank is situated in Washington, D.C., you all have more of a first-hand opportunity to follow directly what the United States is doing with respect to its follow-up to Beijing. And, of course, in the presentation by the First Lady, I think you heard very directly the nature of our commitment to following through. For those of you who may not have been there, the speech was circulated on All-in­ One. From my standpoint, even more interesting than the talk itself was the dialogue that ensued with the audience. So I would recommend that when you have the opportunity to do so, you look at it. The President has created in the United States an inter-agency council on women. I am a member of that council of about fifteen representatives of different agencies in the U.S. Government. We will be looking at the ways in which we should be taking our own commitments to the action program from Beijing into the agenda of each government agency and then across agencies, and where we could synergistically be more effective if we were working together. The President has also created a President' s Award to recognize best practices in micro-credit and micro-enterprise, believing that micro-finance and women's access to credit is a key element of what came out of Beijing. If women do not have access to the direct means of participating economically, they do not have economic mobility. So along with the many other themes, that is one that has been featured in our follow-up in the United States. In terms of saying a bit more about myself, I am on the PPIC, the Board Personnel Committee. I raise that in this context because I think it is an instrument in which we look at how our own composition as a Bank -- management and staff -- will affect our sensitivity and our effectiveness in dealing with gender issues in our programs. Beyond Beijing 2 EDs' Panel (11/15/95)  In my own career, I have had the opportunity to take part in creating management teams largely for financial institutions, for a bank holding company. And I have found -­ though this sounds very simplistic to say -- that you only get it when you have it. By that I mean that we only see real progress with respect to gender when we have teams at the top level of organizations which include women as well as men. Here I would say that I am encouraged by the progress I have seen in my slightly over one year in the Bank, with respect to women in the Baille. But at the Board we have an all-time high of women on the Board, and that is only three out of twenty-four. I would hope that as shareholders consider the ways in which we can all pursue greater equity, it is going to be with some due consideration to women on the Board. And perhaps with that provocative comment, I will leave it open to go further in our dialogue. Thank you. MS. LOMAX: Ali. MR. BOURHANE: Thank you. My name is Ali Bourhane. I am from Comoros. Maybe not many people know where it is situated. These are tiny islands in the Indian Ocean between Madagascar and Africa. I represent 23 countries, mainly the Francophone countries, but also three Portuguese­ speaking countries -- Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau and Sao Tome -- and other countries. We used to represent Somalia but, as you know, they are not represented for the time being. I worked in France a few years back because I had some political problems in my country and had to leave. Then I came to the IMF where I used to be a senior economist in the Africa Department. I came to the Board of the Bank in 1990 as Alternate and since 1994 I have been an Executive Director. I am also a member of a number of committees [including] the CODAM Committee, which deals with Board matters. I was a member of an interesting committee, which has put out a report on how to improve the annual meetings and the report may be sent to the Board shortly. I am very proud to be in a committee called CODE [Committee on Development Effectiveness], which is a new committee headed by Mrs. Ruth Jacoby. I think that this is one of the committees which will really make some difference in the way the Board looks at how the policies we are adopting are really being implemented by the staff in the regions and in our countries. I should also say that I come from a Moslem country and this maybe is an interesting feature. I come from a country where, for instance, when I am at home, if I try to grab a broomstick, my mother and my grandmother and my sisters will shout and say, "What are you doing? Your sisters should do that. " Beyond Beijing 3 EDs' Panel (11/15/95)  This is a way to introduce this issue of culture and women in development. These are the same women that we are trying to help, but very often in a number of our countries we may have a lot of explaining and understanding [to create] first. So I leave it there and hopefully we can exchange different views on this issue. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. Shengman, do you want to go next? MR. ZHANG: I have to start by disagreeing with Ms. Piercy right away when she said because the Bank is located in Washington she should speak least. Because by implication, China is farthest from the Bank, I should speak the most. [Laughter. ] MR. ZHANG: But, indeed, I thought that by my criteria I should speak the least because China, more than any other country, got more than its share [of attention] when the meeting was being held in Beijing. But that said, I do want to thank Anette and her group for giving us this opportunity because often, probably in the minds of our troops, we are so far away up there, and as for us we really feel lonely and isolated. So I think this is a welcome opportunity that can bring us closer. And you can tell that we are just like you, just as interested in the issues that the Bank deals with. Probably it is not too much for me to say that, due to my background, I have been able to know first-hand the importance of women to development, as well as the importance of development to women, and the linkages between the two. As required, I should say just a word in my capacity as ED for China rather than in my capacity as a Board member. In the view of my country as host, we believe that the Fourth Women's Conference was important, and overall very successful in terms of substance. Related to China itself, the meeting clearly imposed some special obligations. And it is only fair to say that since China counts for one out of every five women in the world, if we do well and if we meet our obligations, it will be a good contribution to the global goal we all are trying to achieve. On the other hand, it is also fair to say that the meeting was an impetus not only to the world at large but, in my view, to China in particular. Notwithstanding the progress made over the past decade, there still exist large gaps between what I call adopted policies and existing practices: passed laws, established laws and continuing traditions. Beyond Beijing 4 EDs' Panel (11115195)  And indeed there is just as big a gap in expectations -- not just of the world at large but also of China's own people and the realities. Clearly, to move in the direction of narrowing the gaps will be a subject which the meeting clearly has sent a strong signal for the country to strive for. Now that the meeting is over, the key will be the implementation of the commitments. China is moving on all fronts. We believe that it will be important that we not only move domestically but also by increasing exchanges with the outside world, so that you can learn from the others as well. Of particular note in this regard was the adoption of what was called the outline for women's development in China to the year 2000. I managed to look at it prior to the meeting, and it was quite a document, covering specific goals and also having policy measures, [recommendations for] organizations and implementation. And probably consistent with trends in the development field, they now have a large section about monitoring and evaluation because I think that is probably more important in the long run than the others. And also, like in the U. S., an inter-ministerial steering committee has been set up, charged with the job of overseeing the follow-up to the commitments made in Beijing. These are, in our view, only initial steps and there has to be a lot more work. In this a-Iot-more-work, I think the Bank is an institution clearly which has a role to play and we have high hopes for that. But I will stop there because this obviously will lead me to the issue that I probably would react to just as a member of the Board. Thank you. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. Ruth, do you want to wind this up? MRS. JACOBY: Thank you. My name is Ruth Jacoby and, like my colleagues, I am a member of the Board. I am Executive Director for eight countries, Rachel. And that is not a great number, not compared with Ali. It is the five Nordic countries -- Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Iceland -- and three Baltic countries -- Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. And the combination is, in fact, very, very rewarding and very fruitful and I learn from it every day, particularly in respect to the subject of our discussion today. The five Nordic countries are generally considered to be the most advanced on gender equality in the world. Anette Pedersen who is the advisor on women's issues is Danish. Her predecessor was Norwegian. Maybe it can be a Swede someday. [Laughter. ] MRS. JACOBY: But it is generally considered that these are, from a gender perspective, very equitable societies. Beyond Beijing 5 EDs' Panel (11/15/95)  The three Baltic countries formed part of the former Soviet Union. There, there was also actually quite a lot of gender equality at least as to jobs, education, health. But the countries are now in the process of economic transition and what does that imply for the women and their possibilities? Obviously, they are having serious economic problems and, as always, economic problems tend to affect women more. So it's a living issue for them. One could say that in the Board I represent, on the policy input side, five donor countries with very strong views on gender issues; and three recipient or borrowing countries who experience the result of these policies in their daily cooperation with the Bank. I am also Chairman of CODE, the committee which Ali so kindly said was important, and I agree with him. I think we are both partisan in this respect. It is a committee with the responsibility of pursuing the realization of Bank policies on the ground to see what the results are, to see whether the policies and the wishes which management and the Board have actually do lead to anything of the kind that we are hoping for; and, if not, what can we do about it. I have the feeling that if the kind of monitoring which is done by CODE is successful, we are arriving at the essence of what some say our work is all about, and I mean the Board and the staff of the Bank. I have been here, like Jan, a bit over one year. I am not an expert on gender nor am I an expert on agriculture, health or anything of the sort. But hopefully, I am expert on well representing the views of the eight countries in my constituency, and then effectively trying to make them heard in this institution, in the Board and in our daily work. As Rachel was saying, the Board has for the last quarter of a century been underlining the importance of gender issues. And even though I haven't gone through the notes year by year, I am convinced that five of my countries, the Nordic ones, have probably been among those which have been pushing this issue the most. Because as I said initially, the Nordic countries have very strong views on gender and they have it in their international cooperation work, in their bilateral development cooperation, and also in their daily political life of building their own societies. I think we have come a far way there. But we are still not there. I think one should be very, very aware of the fact that the struggle for an equitable society in all kinds of ways, but including gender, is not something which you arrive at and then you are there. It is a struggle which you have to keep at everyday, and you have to reconquer it, you have to defend it, you have to secure it, and you have to retackle it basically day by day. And you should never take it for granted. To be a bit more personal, I think I probably have had an easier time as a woman in my country than many of my sisters around the world have. I have had no problem in getting a good education, in getting a job in my government's service and having a good career. But it still doesn't mean that it is to be taken for granted or that it is particularly easy, neither for me nor for many other women in my own country. Beyond Beijing 6 EDs' Panel (11115/95)  I am getting very personal, but having a family, having children, trying to make life work, being tough and strong and effective -- and at the same time, loving, caring and considerate -- is not something which always is so very easy to combine. The cliches, the expectations, the demands on you -- they are still all there. And there is nothing wrong with them. I am not saying they shouldn't be there. But they at least should be shared equally between men and women. What I am trying to say is that equality works both ways. Gender equality implies that women should be given access to all that men traditionally have, be it jobs, health, education, influence, careers, et cetera. But the roles of men -- and I was interested in hearing what Ali was saying about what happens when he goes home to his mother and grandmother -- the role of men must also change. It is a double issue. Men must also be given the opportunity to be part of the traditionally feminine sphere of being loving, considerate, participatory, listening, having patience, understanding, learning, caring. It works both ways. We haven't reached that yet, not even in my country. And I think this is a struggle which has to be kept on. I will stop there. MS. LOMAX: Thanks very much, Ruth. And thanks very much for reminding us of two things which struck me when you were talking. One is what a huge diversity of country experience we have sitting on this panel, from people who have really nearly made it in terms of equity, to countries where there is really an enormously long way to go. And the second point, which is one I personally feel very strongly about, is that promoting gender equality is about men as well. You know, this isn't women's issues. You cannot change the position of women, and power and social structures, without having very profound effects on men. And I am extremely pleased to see that we have got at least a small sample of men scattered through the audience. I feel quite sure they will not be backward in flinging up their hands to tell us their views, and I encourage them to do so. What I would like to do now -- because one other thing I have learned in eight months in the Bank is that Bank audiences are not very backward in putting forward their views and asking questions -- is to get straight on. Either ask questions directly to anyone on the panel or just stand up and say what you think about either the issues that are raised in some of the countries that these people represent, or the role the Board is playing in getting the Bank to address these issues, both as an organization and in its operations. If people could say who they are, it would be helpful. Who wants to start off? Yes, down here. Beyond Beijing 7 EDs' Panel (11/15/95)  QUESTION: My name is Cecilia Kennedy and I work in the Loan Department with Comoros, Rwanda, Djibouti, Madagascar. I'm the disbursement analyst. And I want to make a little comment in defense of Comoros and Comorian women. [Laughter. ] When I was there, all the women I met tried to convince me to stay because they told me that Comoros was a very feminist country, and I would be very happy there because there are certain matriarchal elements to the country. When a girl is born, the family is expected to build a house for her. If the husband leaves, she keeps the house, she keeps the possessions. Women told me there were women's associations, formal and informal. If a man comes in to disturb them, he is ordered out. So you might not see so many women in ministerial positions and such, but there is a lot of women's activity, and strong and thinking women in Comoros. Perhaps they just need to be tapped and their opinions made a bit more visible. Secondly -- just curious -- how were the panel members selected or volunteered? [Laughter. ] MS. LOMAX: In the interest of transparency, Anette, do you want to answer that question? MS. PEDERSEN: We knew from the beginning when we put together this program that we wanted a gender mix. That was one of our criteria. We have three women at the Board. Ruth and Jan accepted to join this panel and we were very happy that they would do it. And then we needed two men. We asked three men, and one of them is ill. So he is not here today; it is Bimal Jalan from India. We wanted a diversity in our panel, and this was the best we could do. [Laughter. ] MS. LOMAX: Jan, yes. MS. PIERCY: I just wanted to add that some of our colleagues, once this was announced, have been saying to us, well, how did you get on this panel? I was delighted to see that there was, in fact, broader interest. Then, as we were planning for it, we all agreed that we wanted a lot of discussion with the audience and one of our members, Mr. Gerber, volunteered to step off the panel because he thought that if we Beyond Beijing 8 EDs' Panel (11115/95) had a panel of five, there would be too much talking and not enough listening. But there is a great interest on the Board more broadly than simply those of us up here. MS. LOMAX: Okay. Who else wants to say something? Yes, over there, the fourth row back. QUESTION: Hello. I am Jackie Coolidge from the Eastern Africa Department. I have been very excited about a lot of the initiatives in recent years on a participatory approach to development. And I think this is our chance to make a much stronger impact, especially in getting results in the field. I am a little bit concerned, though, about what kind of changes this would require in the corporate culture of the Bank, because we certainly have had some very, very bright people throughout management with strong analytical skills, very confident that they know what to do. I am just wondering how we can get the message of a truly participatory approach to development -- which involves lots of listening, of encouraging partnership, of encouraging beneficiaries and stakeholders to speak out and say what they need and say what they think would be appropriate -- how are we going to make this transition when we have so many people in management who are really quite sure that they know the answers? MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. It's actually a bit more than that, isn't it? I mean, participation isn't fast; it isn't cheap in staff time, and it also involves a mentality of letting go, which on my initial take on the Bank is not a pronounced feature of the Bank culture. Shall we collect up a few more comments and perhaps come back to members of the Board already, because they have had quite a lot of air time? Does anybody else want to table anything for consideration? Yes, down here. QUESTION: My name is Imam. I work on Southern Africa, in a couple of countries. And while working on this, we have come to the reluctant conclusion that the issue of rural poverty and lagging farm productivity is intimately connected with the legal system in which women function in Southern Africa. And it may be true in other parts of Africa. Maybe Mr. Bourhane could comment on it. The reason farm productivity is lagging -- and women are an integral of the farm productivity -- is because they are the farmers, and at the same time, legally they cannot hold any assets. And because they cannot hold any assets, they do not have access to the means of production. Beyond Beijing 9 EDs' Panel (1l/15195)  We have concluded that unless the legal system is changed (the implication of the continuation of the Dutch/Roman legal system, which seems to be in operation in this part of the world), we are not going to make very good progress in world productivity and in the alleviation of rural poverty. And that is a governance issue. To put a challenge to the political leaders of the country is a bit beyond the capacity of people at my level who work on the analytical front. I think the Board and the Bank's senior management ought to be aware of this and take it up at their level. A distinct amount of pressure has to be brought to bear to change the legal system, without which not much progress can be anticipated. Thank you. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. Yes, down here; down here in the front. QUESTION: I am Ayse Akin-Karasapan from the LAC Region. Thank you for this opportunity to see the Board members outside the Board Room, which usually happens only maybe twice, three times in the lifetime of a Task Manager. And we never get to discuss issues there. We just answer questions. So this is really great. In Latin America, as you know, there is a great movement towards decentralization and democratization, which actually also opens opportunities for a greater participation of women, especially in rural areas. Our approach so far has been addressing gender issues project by project. If it is an education project, you focus on girls' education; if it is a health project, you focus on bringing better health services for mothers and children. But maybe it is now time to take it to a higher platform of more dialogue with governments on integrating gender issues in every aspect of their activities, like we are trying to do ourselves. Like environment has become an aspect of everything that we do, but gender is not yet at that level. We are trying, in a couple of countries, IDF [Institutional Development Fund] grants to establish or strengthen gender entities in the government. But the desire has to come from the governments. The same with the legal system; we cannot impose it. It has to come from the countries. Then we can help. What do you think? What would be the best approach to bring it to a higher platform? MS. LOMAX: That is a very interesting question and one on which I would quite like to ask the panel to comment before we go on. Can you tell me if there are any countries in Latin America where you have been able to put gender issues on the table, for example, as an important element in the country dialogue? Beyond Beijing 10 EDs' Panel (11/15/95)  MS. AKIN-KARASAPAN: In Chile, there is an entity that is called SERNAM. We provided a IDF grant for strengthening [it]. We thought that could be a role model for the rest of the region if it works. And it is working very nicely. We hope that they can organize a post-Beijing kind of program for the rest of the region. Another one is EI Salvador. We did a gender strategy paper. It was a very good paper and it was discussed with the government. And now every project for that country is picking up on some aspects of it. There is interest among the Task Managers. Also for Honduras we have one [gender strategy], and it was discussed at Congress. Those are three examples. There is still so much more. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. I thought I might ask Ali first to comment, to react to that as a suggestion. MR. BOURHANE: I think that again the interesting thing with this meeting is to just see exactly how EDs could influence the policies of this institution and not try and be specialists in a number of things. For instance, I come back to that in regard to productivity of women in rural areas, et cetera. I think that as Board members coming from a developing country, we can do a number of things to enhance the dialogue with our countries. Something important which I have pointed out when we meet among EDs, is that now the pendulum should not go from one side, of no participation in our countries, to the other side, where we just try to reach the civil society and not talk to governments. I think this is something that the Task Managers should bear in mind. Very often when we feel frustrated because nothing is happening when dealing with governments, we tend to try and reach out to civil society, to NGOs, et cetera, which is good. But we have to know that this institution deals with governments and that, if nothing happens with them, nothing will happen. So we think that as far as the Board is concerned, we should really try to see that the discussion of Country Assistance Strategies be made fruitful. And maybe I am one of the most vocal on this because I think that in a number of our countries this is not being done by the Bank and by the staff. This instrument, the Country Assistance Strategy, from my point of view is -- if we don't really pay attention -- becoming a routine instrument whereby it is edited too much in the institution, and the Board doesn't even know exactly what the country needs on these kind of issues. So we cannot react and say that maybe the government is willing to do this or the country is willing to do this. I will give you an example. Recently, we discussed the Country Assistance Strategy for Bangladesh. In the end, one of the Executive Directors pointed out that the important Beyond Beijing 11 EDs' Panel (11115/95) thing in that country is that they need quick-disbursing money, but they don't have balance of payments needed to do a number of things, for instance, to fix the financial system. But this was not in the CAS, which means that maybe the Bangladeshi Government didn't notice that this was an important thing. I am sure that it is not the case. It is just that the Bank, that is the staff, decided that this was not an idea which will fly in the Board. So they just take it out and nobody discusses it. And it takes an ED from another country to just bring it up. The exercise is such that even the ED who is representing Bangladesh will make a nice speech at the beginning, saying that this is a wonderful CAS, the staff has done a wonderful job, et cetera. And when we discuss it, we notice that a number of these issues, including those that you are raising, are not there. So we really have to push this instrument to be effective and see that the staff really discusses all these issues. And if these issues are not written in the CAS, we should just reject it or just tell them that this is not enough. We have to come up with ideas on these issues in order for us to be able to interact with them [the staff]. I will stop there, but several of us are going on trips in these countries. And I think that this is a way of getting in touch with governments, with NGOs, et cetera, to bring back to the Board a number of ideas and try to see that these issues are enhanced in our dialogue with those countries. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. Before I ask anybody else to comment on this, just let me clarify what your point actually was. You were talking about a gender strategy which you might be discussing with governments, which would pick up the sort of issue that we are talking about on the judicial front. Is that correct? So it is a slightly different approach from just getting in touch with civil society. Part of the issue is: is the door even a tiny bit ajar for that sort of approach in other countries that we have got some experience of? Do you want to say something, Ruth? Do you want to comment on that? MRS. JACOBY: I can very briefly say that in Bank lingo I think it is called mainstreaming. It is an awful word. But I agree completely. Ten years ago, fifteen years ago, I think most countries got themselves a minister for women's affairs, or somebody responsible for taking care of this, which all of a sudden people thought was important, which was I think good. It was a first step; it was absolutely necessary. But I think it is very, very important and you have put your finger exactly on it -- we must go beyond that. Women's issues or gender issues is not something sectorized or separate. Beyond Beijing 12 EDs' Panel (11115195)  I think also in the history of the way the World Bank has been dealing with it, there were WID units. Also in my ministry in my own country, in every speech that was written for a minister, in the last paragraph you had to say, !loh, and yes, we also believe women's issues are very important, or something like that. It was a typical add-on, which was an It improvement but it is not enough. What is important today is that everything -- opening a shoe shop, organizing a committee in government dealing with electricity, whatever -- is a gender issue, because at some stage it involves women in the decision-making, in the implementation, as the ultimate recipients and stakeholders. So everything is gender. It is all over the place. And to get that understanding into every system is something which in my country we have been struggling with or fighting for very much in these, last years. In other words, every time the government sets up some kind of little board or committee, the first question that has to be asked is: Are there women on it? Even though it may deal with anything which is very far away from health, babies or typical women's issues. I think you are completely right. But how to get to that step? To really mainstream gender issues working both ways, in other words, [bringing] men and women into everyday decision-making, everyday planning, is something which I think is probably at the top of our agenda today, both for this institution and for governments. And that is, I think, a message which we have to get across, once again not on a particular agenda point, but in every discussion. So in every policy dialogue which any Task Manager has with any government on whatever project or program, bring it up. Don't wait for the gender analysis unit of the World Bank to go and have a discussion with the government -- the Task Manager dealing with an electrification program, [should] raise it. MS. LOMAX: Let me stop you right there and see whether everybody agrees with that approach? Because that is quite controversial, and one of the things I have discerned since I have come to the Bank is profound cynicism about the need to put a little paragraph about gender issues somewhere into your latest project on hydroelectric, this, that or the other. I don't perceive that the Bank goes to the absolute crux of the thing, as you say. How do you effectively mainstream without making the thing just pure political correctness? If I may make a biased comment from the Chair just to annoy everybody and try to get someone off their feet, I feel the Bank is a long way from having internalized these [issues]. There is an awful lot of political correctness and a lot of paragraphs in Board papers which, if you look at the country departments and you hear the Task Managers on the ground, is so much impressing the Board. MRS. JACOBY: The paragraph, the add-on I don't want. Beyond Beijing 13 EDs' Panel (11115/95)  MS. LOMAX: No, I know you don't. But, the issue is how do you do it so it is meaningful? Not just politically correct, but which actually is going to make a difference in what we do and what happens? I do think that that is the most difficult question that you must see every day and wonder whether these folks really believe it or not. Does anybody want to comment on that? QUESTION: Michael Sharpston. I used to be concerned with technological change in the Bank and the behavioral implications of that. I am now more interested in behavioral change generally. I think there are two slightly different things going on here. One is if you have a particular context women do farming are they actually given the means in terms of, say, governance, as this gentleman said down here, to do it? Do we consider their needs when we are doing whatever kind of project it is? That is one thing. But I think there is something else which Ruth Jacoby mentioned and also Rachel Lomax. Rachel Lomax said, I think, "this is about men. n And I rather believe that it is not just enough to tell men, "these are all the things you ought to be doing." I think that Hillary Clinton was nearer the mark in her speech and in her questions and answers when she said there is a lot of uncomfortableness and uncertainty about change. And I think that women and men both -- and in this case men -- need to be given an acceptable place to go. They need to have a vision for themselves of where on earth they would be at the end of this process or during this process, which would be acceptable to them. Thank you. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. QUESTION: I am Katherine Marshall, Southern Africa. I have two comments and a question. I got a letter this morning, which is still reverberating in my mind ... somebody from outside saying basically, "your evil institution" ... and it was from a feminist group. One of the important issues that I think you all need to focus on is the way that the Bank is perceived. And clearly, the gender issue -- both in the composition of who speaks for the Bank and how they speak, in what language and with what voice -- is very important. Ruth's comments I thought were wonderful, because that is exactly the kind of tone and face that might help us in changing the image of the "evil institution. " The issue [in the letter] was whether or not we dealt with women in structural adjustment accurately, and it is one where we are not communicating well. So, I think the first issue is the one of image. Beyond Beijing 14 EDs' Panel (11115/95)  The second issue, I think, relates to what Rachel was saying, a very critical point which I call the "motherhood trap," that by generalizing issues and by making them too bland, we create enormous cynicism about what this issue is about and get very few results. What the Board can encourage, and managers need to encourage is essentially to be very provocative about these issues and to present them in very concrete terms. One of my objectives would be to see a gender issue emerge, naturally if possible, but forced if necessary, in virtually every briefing, and that the President or the Vice President or the Director, as they travel or whatever, have an issue to raise which somebody could actually do something about. I think that speaking about the issues does help, but we need to put things into doable propositions of some kind, which brings me to my question, which is: How is CODE planning to monitor results in this area? I am interested in how you would approach it. MRS. JACOBY: A very brief answer, Katherine, to the last part of your question: I don't know yet but it is on our agenda for our meeting next Monday. After that meeting, I will be glad to come back to you with what exactly we are planning to do, because we will be informed then by management on what steps have been taken. We will discuss those and we will see what we feel has to be done further. So, it is on Monday, December 4th. It is before the end of the year, and we will be then getting a briefing from Minh Chau. MS. NGUYEN: And the regions. MRS. JACOBY: And the regions. And then, hopefully we will have a very good discussion. Then we could maybe come back to parts of this audience, informing them of what, in fact, we will be looking at. MS. LOMAX: There is a question over here. Do you want to comment on this? QUESTION: Hi. I am Varsha Malholtra. I work in OED, and we are generally involved in the post mortem of all the Bank. [Laughter. ] QUESTION: I worked on the gender study in OED, and I am quite aware of a lot of good work, very innovative and inspired work in very small pockets being done in the Bank. But in general, for the Bank as a whole, there are only about 25 percent or less of projects which actually have a specific objective which includes gender issues or tries to mainstream gender. When it comes to supervision and implementation, the percentages are even lower. I was wondering what the Board and CODE, in particular, are trying to do about rectifying the situation? Beyond Beijing 15 EDs' Panel (11/15195)  MS. LOMAX: Ruth, one more time? MRS. JACOBY: Yes, very briefly. I thank you for your question. You made very good points, and I am sure that those results will be given to us also for the meeting on the 4th of December. We will definitely look at that and come up with suggestions. That is exactly what the committee is supposed to be doing. So let us by all means keep up the dialogue. MS. LOMAX: There is somebody there at the back, and then Jan wants to add. QUESTION: My name is Elizabeth Crayford. I am in the International Economics Department. I, too, welcome the opportunity to see Board members out of the Board Room. In fact, I don't think I have even seen them in the Board Room, for that matter. But it is great to have an opportunity to hear what you have to say, especially about this really important issue. And I wondc:!red, not to ask you to put your money where your mouth is, but do you have an initiative in mind for having more women represent countries on the Board? Is there something that you have planned that you could tell us about? MS. LOMAX: Jan, do you want to say something? MS. PIERCY: Well, I should perhaps say something here, because it is a bit of a Catch-22, even in talking about this issue with Jim Wolfensohn. The Board is composed of Executive Directors who are sent, through various processes in different constituencies, by shareholders. Therefore, even for Jim, technically the only kind of authority he has here is a kind of moral authority. He could, and will, I believe, in talking to shareholders, mention the issue of the incongruity between the impetus in the Bank to stress the importance of women in development, and the paucity of women at and on the Board. But I think it is a bit of a difficulty. I must say I frankly was surprised, when President Clinton nominated me, to discover that it was the first time the United States, regarded as one of those advanced countries in this regard, had ever been represented by a woman. At the same time, the United States is represented by a woman at the International Monetary Fund, the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, but in all those cases it is the first time. This suggests to me that, when you come to positions which are representational, particularly internationally so, the barriers remain and it is going to take a good deal of dialogue. But I think the first step is to talk openly about it and to say that it is important. Beyond Beijing 16 EDs' Panel (11115/95)  I want to clarify that. With regard to the Bank internally, I believe that those of us who think it is very important -- I hope all of us -- equally feel that at no time should any particular position -- a particular Board or staff position -- be earmarked for a particular gender or (in the case of staff) nationality. I think the strength of the Bank as an institution is the extent to which we have been able to operate in terms of our development mission and avoid being politicized. So that whether it be a matter of particular constituency concerns, or bilateral concerns in a narrow sense or even where the values are with us in areas like gender, I think it [balance] has to be achieved across the board but not through any particular kinds of quotas or earmarking particular openings. Because when we do that, we in a sense implicitly alter the views of the individuals who are then appointed. While I have the floor, I might just mention one other thing. Ali made reference to travel by Executive Directors. I was recently a part of an Executive Directors' trip that went to some countries in Eastern Africa. I think we talked about this in the context of that trip. It has been traditional for quite some time for Executive Directors to visit various regions, to understand the Bank's work in practice in specific countries. Before travelling, our group felt that we could do a great deal more to strengthen the custom of ED travel, to make it a better instrument for achieving our objectives, including the gender equity objective. I was the only woman on the delegation that went this time -- and a woman on the delegation appeared to prompt the inclusion of women ministers or women in the meetings which were organized for us. We noticed it and it was commented on. This was simply the fact of my inclusion, not anything that I said or did. And I think that we need to be sensitive to that. But in addition to that, we are in the process of developing a manual for ED travel, and have been actively discussing whether beyond simply going from region to region we couldn't create trips around certain foci that were substantive, [to] achieve certain objectives. And we could work more collaboratively with the regions when we travel, to say where might we go to reinforce certain things the Bank is now doing. In that vein, as Katherine commented, we could think about how we could support this [gender-equity] objective by the questions we ask, by those with whom we meet, and by our emphasis. MS. LOMAX: That is a wonderful idea. There is someone at the back there who has been trying to say something. QUESTION: Margaret Amaral from Financial Sector Development. I wonder if you could tell us what CODE stands for? And could you sketch out a little bit of the terms of reference and the aims of the committee? Thank you. Beyond Beijing 17 EDs' Panel (11115195)  MS. LOMAX: Ruth. MRS. JACOBY: I haven't brought my tenns of reference with me. I will be happy to send them to you. The committee was founded a year ago as a child of what originally was the Joint Audit Committee. The Joint Audit Committee, which has been a Board committee for many years, was there to look at the auditing and the effectiveness of the Bank. But it was discovered -- this was before my time -- that the issue of aid effectiveness, which also is an audit, was taking up very much time of the committee and that they didn't have the capacity to deal with it all. So the Board decided to found a Committee on Development Effectiveness, which would have as its main task, follow-up on whether the Bank actually was being effective in its results on the ground. The main tool of infonnation for the committee, the main basis for the committee to work on is, in fact, OED, the post mortem of the Bank. All the reports produced by OED, the evaluations produced by OED, are so to say the building blocks for CODE's possibility of trying to monitor this process and discuss it [in committee] and then discuss it with management. Every time we discuss an issue of effectiveness, based, for example, on an OED evaluation, management is present and requested to come with a response, where they usually will say things like, yes, OED is right; we knew this actually, we discovered several years ago that this wasn't going as well as it should. We have taken steps -- and we will take further steps -- to improve it. Then at least it is on paper, which steps are taken and are going to be taken. And the Board through CODE, this Committee on Development Effectiveness, has a possibility of monitoring the progress made in ensuring that things improve. That is one part of the mandate of CODE. The other is, [to conduct] on its own, even without OED, basic evaluation; to take the initiative itself -- to look at Bank documents, for example, on the environment, and discuss with management and among each other, the actual effectiveness of the policy and what is being done. The Committee has only been there since November last year. It has a huge agenda and we only have just started nibbling at it. But potentially I think it can be a very, very powerful, interesting and fruitful instrument for improving the effectiveness of the World Bank's work according to its own policies. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. QUESTION: My name is Minh Chau Nguyen. I am going to have to report to Ruth on December 4, along with the help from colleagues in the regions. Beyond Beijing 18 EDs' Panel (11/15195)  I just want to connect a number of these questions about how do we bring gender issues above the ad hoc and project level to the policy-level discussions? How do we get the governments to engage in this kind of dialogue, on the problems and the actual experience [gained from] working with my colleagues from the regions? One thing I have observed is that, when governments demand and ask, the Bank responds very quickly. I can give you an example. In the Kyrgyz Republic when the Minister of Finance said, "would you please do something about the women's status in my country?" the Vice President reacted very quickly and everybody was involved in this issue. So my request or plea to the Board members is that in addition to asking provocative questions in the Board, raising awareness and making Bank staff think about it, also help us out a little bit in your own constituency by bringing this issue up and making the people in Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Planning ask, discuss, request the Bank to do it. I can guarantee you, if this is being done on a systematic basis, it is going to change the mind-set of a lot of the Bank staff, because I think the talent is there. The solutions are there. The willingness there. I think there is a reluctance in terms of, "well, the government doesn't really want us to do so." I will just give you an example of a woman director who I am not going to name here, who told me "Minh Chau, I go and I talk to the people from the Ministry of Finance and Planning. They think that I fell from Mars." So I think it is important to bring the dialogue to that level. MS. LOMAX: They used to kiss my hand. [Laughter. ] QUESTION: Hi. I am Narendra Sharma. I am from East Asia 3. Let me say also what my colleagues have said, that it is very nice to see the Board members and put faces behind the names. I have heard that we should be looking at women as well as men. But I think we should also not forget the children. One of the things that I would say is that, for instance, in this room I don't think we would be able to see as many women had we not had, all of us, good child care. And I think one of the reasons that women are staying at home in most countries is because there is not good affordable, as well as dependable, child care. What is the Bank going to do about that? Can it be, for instance, built into the lending program that the Bank has more of a program for early childhood or pre-school development? Beyond Beijing 19 EDs' Panel (11115/95)  MS. LOMAX: Thank you. There is someone down there who wants to have a word. And then I will come back because there are some issues that Minh Chau raised which I think people want to comment on. QUESTION: I am Awa Busia from ENVLW, and I am a national of Cote d'Ivoire. I believe, Ms. Piercy, you addressed the issue of representation in terms of quotas, being sensitive about being there as a woman. I really would like to come back to that because in other instances, the issue of quotas is really crucial for some of us to be present even at the Bank. I attended a higher-level orientation session where we were briefed on African issues, for example, and being from the African continent I know that we have a problem of representation here. We cannot brush this away and really [must] look at the sensitive issues. This is a real problem that needs to be addressed. Going a step further, I would like to know: what is the Bank going to do to look at women consultants within the Bank? I am fairly new here. However, there are a lot of hurdles. I am a mother also, and I realize the added stress of being a long-term consultant is almost like having no home within the Bank. And it is a constant struggle dealing with daily duties within the Bank and also at home. So how are the consultant issues going to be dealt with when we talk about women issues within the Bank? MS. LOMAX: Fine. While Jan is thinking of the answers to those questions, can I ask Shengman? Because I didn't come to you, Shengman, to comment on what Minh Chau said about [what] the EDs might be doing more in their own countries. MR. ZHANG: I, in fact, interpreted it as very favorable. [Laughter. ] MR. ZHANG: I must say, listening to the questions, I detected what I call somewhat of a different approach, that has direct implications for operations. No one would argue governance is important. But if we look at the governance issue from country to country, there is a lot [of variation]. For some, the issue may very well be enactment, whereas for others it may very well be enforcement. Now related to Minh Chau's question, if I may be provocative, it may be appropriate to pose this question: what do you think would be more effective: if you come in with the attitude of trying to be a house designer or trying to be a bricklayer? Beyond Beijing 20 EDs' Panel (11115/95)  I think this has implications for how we approach the issue in our member countries. Should it be an issue-specific or gender-specific approach? Or should it be integrated, what we call the mainstream approach? I think this is a fundamental, important question. And indeed, despite all the wisdom we have, despite all the talents we have, should it be that we adopt the attitude of a bricklayer more or the attitude of a house designer more? Having worked on specific projects myself, my sense is that certainly for a lot of our countries, you probably will be more effective if you come in trying to be a bricklayer rather than trying to be a house designer. I am not saying that the house designer is not important -- but don't you think we should be more humble going in, rather than coming in and saying, look, we have all the best and advanced [ideas], and if you put these laws and policies in place ... In my country, there was a very famous saying by Mao; he said women hold up half the sky. People in China interpret that sort of mechanically. And what happens is you don't have equality through excellence. What you have is something that I call equality through preference. This is the farthest from what you want, in fact, and what we want to achieve. So I think this has implications in terms of our operations. Of course, it is beyond the Bank per se. There I agree. Minh Chau is right, if you could link it right above the project specific [level], that will be fantastic. But in terms of effectiveness, isn't there really a contradiction? Of course, there is none. Should it be more worthwhile that we put the emphasis on bricklayer than on house designer? MS. LOMAX: Minh Chau, do you want to have an opportunity to comment on that? QUESTION: No. MS. LOMAX: No? I was going to comment that bricklayers don't show much intellectual leadership and they change the world in very modest ways. The Bank is positioning itself in a fairly bold way on some issues like gender and environment and so on. If we are bricklayers, aren't we selling false perspectives? What do people on the Board think? Jan. MS. PIERCY: Without answering your cosmic question, that may be the point at which to return to the question of long-term consultants in that, if we are tackling this in a bold way, who we are is absolutely critical, because we can only do it with the appropriate humility and cultural sensitivity if we ourselves are drawn from all over the world. Beyond Beijing 21 EDs' Panel (11/15/95)  And so I take your point very seriously, as does the Board, as does the PPIC, the committee of the Board that deals specifically with personnel issues. Before this panel, there was an invitation for people to send comments on areas that you hoped we might address or questions by E-mail. We didn't get too many back, but we got one very thoughtful response, which in fact, I am going to refer to the PPIC. It made the point that because the Bank is undergoing a redundancy at the moment and is trimming in some respects, and because women have been promoted relatively more recently and women are coming in greater numbers more recently, they could be differentially affected by these cutbacks. Specific reference was made to the fact that, as the Bank shifts to greater use of consultants or fixed-term contracts, women who came in more recently are affected more significantly. And that has got to be looked at -- we ought to pay very close attention to relative composition, not staff as a whole, but [in relation] to categories of staff. I might just say, though this is a bit broader than the subject of this particular session, that as the Bank shifts from an organization where the culture was largely one in which people affiliated for career length -- often coming in as Young Professionals and being here for the length of a career -- to an organization which is at the moment increasingly moving in the direction of fixed-term contracts for everyone, there is a sense that we will benefit by more people coming in, and [by] a greater inflow and turnover within the organization as a whole. That has tremendous implications for what we are as a community. And I want to say at this point that location of work -- possibly putting greater autonomy into our resident missions -- all of this profoundly would alter who we are and how we function as a community, in ways that affect gender but affect other things as well. At this moment, lest there be alarm -- because I think there is some alarm in the staff -- [let me say that] the Board does recognize the interconnectedness and the complexity of these questions. Weare attempting to sharpen our focus and our understanding of the implications of various alternatives that are being discussed. There is no sense on the Board that there could be any quick resolution, whether it is on the issue of location of work or on the issue of let's move everyone to fixed-term contracts tomorrow. But if I might say finally, because I know we are near the conclusion of our session, just listening to the exchange today makes me want very much to suggest to my colleagues that we think about ways that we could do this more often. I am very struck by how many of you have said that there is very little dialogue outside the formality of the Board, which from our standpoint is most frustrating because it is such a one-way street. Beyond Beijing 22 EDs' Panel (11/15/95)  I think we could very readily create forums. Maybe in CODE, just set aside a couple of hours and make it open to those staff who have an interest, to meet with a subset of the Board. I know that all twenty-four of the Board members would be more than willing to make time available from time to time for that kind of exchange. QUESTION: My name is Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. I work in the Africa Region. I wanted to comment on the issue of Task Manager cynicism. But before I do that, since we have just had a wonderful invitation from Jan and Ruth, I think we should take it up. I invite you, first of all, with some of your other colleagues in the Board, to come to a session of the Staff Association Working Group on Women and answer questions and have an exchange with people who tum out to listen to you. I will perhaps send the dates and see if they are convenient, not to miss an opportunity. [Laughter. ] I also sympathize totally with some of the questions you are getting, because they are really addressed to management, and you have to try to answer them since management is not here. But on the issue of Task Manager cynicism that I think Rachel referred to, and which came up a little earlier, I think it is very clear that there are two or three ways that you can make Task Managers more excited about dealing with particular issues. The question I ask myself many times is: Why is it so difficult for us as managers or for management to put these issues into action, so that Task Managers will see that these issues matter, that it is terribly important that gender be approached in everything we do and be integrated systematically in our work? People in the Bank respond to signals, but very often those signals don't come. And the typical issue is, if we are having high-level discussions, not raising that issue means it is not as important with the client. But here at the Bank among ourselves too, I think there are a lot of things we can do. The first one is that Task Managers will respond when they see results. We have had a few projects in the Bank but some or many of them are relatively new, so it is not easy to get results. But there are some that we can look at. We really need a study now of what has actually occurred on the ground, beyond the OED study that was referred to before. We need to look at results, do an evaluation. And I would like to see that happen so that we can learn from experience -- have we been successful, have we not? We can also link this to the concrete results on the ground of some of our partners, the other donors. Beyond Beijing 23 EDs' Panel (11/15195)  Another thing that I think would give a very strong signal is -- and some of us have been arguing for some time -- that we should do a WDR on gender. Why haven't we done that? Every time we put it forward, there is a reason or another. You know, we need a policy paper; we need to do more work; we need more results. If the Bank used one of its powerful intellectual instruments, the WDR, to say: here, we are going to share our knowledge with the world; we are going to show that there are some strong analytical issues here and show ways to tackle them, drawing on what has occurred here and elsewhere -- I think that will send a very powerful signal. The third thing that I would like to suggest is building on what exists in the client countries. Very often, we come, as someone said, as if we are parachuting in with all the good ideas and the best recommendations for what to do. When I talk to groups of African women, they say, "we know what we want. We have identified the projects. Why don't you help us see how we can get some of the financing either at the micro level or mesa level or whatever to do this? You come with your ideas." I think we could do more to identify in the client countries groups of people who are already doing something, who have ideas, plans and try to support them, and that could show concrete results right away to us and to the people there. So there are very concrete things we can get going, but we just don't seem to be able to do it. Thank you. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. Well, we are virtually out of time. Do any of the EDs want to say something, because I think probably we don't have time for any more questions? Ali, yes. And did you say you do, Ruth? Okay. Ali and Jan and then I think we will wind up. MR. BOURHANE: Well, just very quickly, I think it is important to come out of this room knowing that even in the Bank, as far as this issue is concerned, it is good to talk about excellence through equality, but it is good also to talk about excellence through diversity, and this was touched on by Mrs. Busia. In this institution, when you look around, a number of things maybe have been done for women but not, for instance, for Sub-Saharan African women and not even Sub-Saharan Africans per se. So there is a major issue here -- excellence through diversity also and not only through equality. Beyond Beijing 24 EDs' Panel (11/15195)  Very quickly, I think I am being educated on all this. I confess that all these issues were raised during Board meetings since I was there, but I was not thinking that they were priorities. And I say now that I really will take up these issues through my Governors in my constituency when I travel and I will try to raise them with Ministers of Finance, et cetera. I pledge to do that. But we will have to come back to that as EDs, for instance, on the structural adjustment issues. We cannot just forget the models we are raising in the institution and try to do something on women, et cetera, and think that these things are helping each other. There are a number of issues which could be raised as far as structural adjustment is concerned. We all agree that it is important; there is not even a debate now on structural adjustment issues. But it is like in this country on balancing the budget: it is how you balance it, not just that you want to balance it. [Laughter. ] In structural adjustment, you have to talk about it. For instance, we know that in our countries the problem is that expenditures are too high. And if you reduce them, you have an impact on women. And structural adjustments in our countries do just that because it is too complicated to raise revenue. So we have to come back to this kind of model and see that even our programs that you are trying to sell to our governments are counterproductive as far as all these issues that you are talking about are concerned. But this is another debate. MS. LOMAX: A subject for the next meeting. Jan, just one minute because we are virtually out of time. MS. PIERCY: We would be remiss if we held this session on the eve of the IDA-ll replenishment, ongoing discussion which is taking place tomorrow in Luxembourg, without mentioning IDA. Because it does occur to me that there is a certain bitter irony in the fact that, just as the Bank's own research is contributing to a global recognition that it is important to deal with gender in development not simply because it is the right thing to do, but because of how central women are to productivity and the economies of their countries. So that [if we want] to achieve economic prosperity, we must engage women more fully, and that is the leverage that we seek. Just at this time, IDA is in peril as never before. And I say this obviously with a great deal of sadness, because it is the United States, a lead donor, which is unable at this time to commit a specific contribution to IDA-11. I raise IDA because the issue of gender has been a sub-text of the discussions of the IDA deputies. And we talked about means and ways we can raise this in the discussion up to this point and again in Luxembourg, particularly newly-encouraged by this discussion. IDA itself is one way in which we can further gender issues. Beyond Beijing 25 EDs' Pane) (11115195)  Thank you. MS. LOMAX: Thank you very much. It is after two o'clock. So we have run out of time. But I want to thank all the EDs for coming and providing an opportunity for such an excellent discussion. One thing that has been most heartening for me to listen to is the number of specific suggestions there have been as to how we could take this debate between Bank staff and the Board forward. We have got the invitation from the Staff Association, but I hope very much that you will take away the idea that you might provide an opportunity for this sort of dialogue in the future. Also I think.Ruth has managed to raise the profile of CODE quite substantially during the course of this discussion. [Laughter. ] MS. LOMAX: And I think that that is quite a useful vehicle for looking much more specifically at how gender issues are actually being pursued in the Bank. Also, of course, Jan, as a member of the Personnel Committee, will have taken away some rather specific ideas and suggestions. So I think the key thing is just to regard this not as a self-standing event, but as part of a process which I hope is not just in the context of post-Beijing but in the context of how the Bank works internally and we could move forward. Thank you all very much. Beyond Beijing 26 EDs' Panel (11115195)  Transcripts Available from the Beyond Beijing Series BB-O 1 Messages from Beijing and Their Implications for the World Bank [Bank staffonly] World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn, and a panel of Regional Vice Presidents chaired by HCO Vice President Armeane Choksi, discuss operational priorities for promoting gender equality through the Bank's work. B8-02 Keynote Address, P'irst Lady of the United States, Hillary Rodham Clinton Mrs. Clinton speaks and answers questions on a wide range of issues including women's education, economic empowerment and strengthening women's organizations. B8-03 Beyond Beijing: Key Economic Issues for Women Women's World Banking President Nancy Barry, UNIFEM Director Noeleen Heyzer and Makerere University Senior Lecturer in Economics Germina Ssemogerere discuss women's access to economic opportunities, constraints and effective responses. Chaired by Ishrat Husain, Director, Poverty and Social Policy Department. B8-04 Women and Art: Empowering Narratives A panel on strategies to empower women in the arts, organized by the World Bank Staff Art Society (WBSAS), chaired by Alicia Hetzner of the WBSAS. BB-OS Promoting Gender Equality: Our Shareholders' Views World Bank Executive Directors Ali Bourhane, Ruth Jacoby,]an Piercy and Shengman Zhang express their views on key issues related to women in the Bank and in its lending activities. Chaired by Vice President and Chief of Staff Rachel Lomax. BB-06 Breaking Glass Ceilings: The Experience of the Bank ofMontreal Bank of Montreal President Anthony Comper talks about his institution's ground­ breaking work to promote workplace eqUality. Session chaired by S. Shahid Husain, Senior Vice President, Management and Personnel Services (retired). To order transcripts contact: Office of the Senior Adviser on Gender Equality* The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W Room E3-0S7 Washington, D.C. 20433 *Formerly Senior Adviser on Women's Issues