Hilda Rømer Christensen, FEMCIT WP 7 researcher,  met with end users in Copenhagen, January 11th 2010, with an NGO group and the Danish minister for Equality, and January 25th 2010 with a range of end users from institutions and  equality units.

The goal of the meetings was twofold: To present the scope and preliminary outcomes of  FEMCIT and to discuss the applications and implications of gender-mainstreaming in advancing gender equality 

What kind of gender notions are implicated in Gender Mainstreaming?  And how is gender mainstreaming defined: as a concept, methodology, strategy etc?
Can gender mainstreaming be made more inclusive and contain other categories than gender? What are the gains and losses in the idea of equality mainstreaming versus gender mainstreaming?

How do the NGOs/Women’s movements and other agents in Danish and European Equality politics assess gender mainstreaming?

Hilda Rømer Christensen started by giving a brief presentation of FEMCIT, pointing to the broad scope of the project: The connecting of broad and complicated fields of empirical research in topical dimensions of citizenship as well as the transversal aspirations and the addressing of women’s movements in the framework of the multicultural turn. She also presented some of the challenges in current gender mainstreaming related to prevailing models and questions of gender and diversity. 

A goal of the meeting was to receive input related to current experiences and practices of gender mainstreaming in Denmark. The participants shared their own experiences and discussed their view on the current use and stage of gender mainstreaming.

In general gender mainstreaming is seen as highly relevant notably in the Danish context, where the implementation of mainstreaming happened together with the introduction of a new institutional structure for gender equality at the governmental level in 1999.  Hence the principle of gender mainstreaming was explicitly implemented in the new equality law in 1999 and the principle of gender mainstreaming has been an important guiding principle for the subsequent introduction of the issue as a transversal matter at the governmental level. In Denmark a cross-cutting governmental body for gender mainstreaming has been established in order to advance comprehensive knowledge and commitments   Gender mainstreaming has been a continuous priority mentioned in the annual plans of action from the minister for gender equality.
In relation to global developments, The Beijing Platform of Action and the associated idea of gender mainstreaming is still held as a major accomplishment in the recent history of gender equality. The participants, however, revealed different approaches and ideas of gender mainstreaming related to the practical implementation of the strategy where NGOs both agreed with and differed from governmental practices.
Both NGOs, not least the national umbrella association, Council of Women and the governmental  Gender Equality Unit agree on the continued importance of the Beijing Platform of Action, of which the gender mainstreaming strategy is a part. The Beijing Platform of Action has proved to be a useful tool for advancing cooperation and for the formation of alliances and for keeping up a joint vision for global gender equality. Yet the Danish key actors do not see any reason why the Beijing Platform should be substituted by a new common vision. Rather the Beijing Platform today acts as a ground towards which progress can be developed worldwide.

Opinions were more divided on the actual implementation of gender mainstreaming. Here the governmental actors argued along the lines of a strict methodological and practice orientated idea of gender mainstreaming, translated into institutional and organisational procedures, which requires    a general expertise of gender equality distributed to all civil servants. 
Some of the NGOs related to gender research, stressed the need for new knowledge production in the field  especially in areas where gender is still not considered in governmental priority  and law making processes e.g. in classical areas as tax, salary, domestic infrastructure/local councils and decision-making etc.  While the achievements of the government in the field of gender mainstreaming were recognized, the need for a new step forward was also argued, for instance related to advancing the knowledge basis of gender mainstreaming in  governmental resorts,  such as transport, climate, tax/revenues and research, which so far have been conducted in a gender blind manner. Such priority areas could also provide a solid list of policy recommendations aimed at future political interventions.

The upcoming new institutional model of diversity mainstreaming which is underway in Denmark at the current moment was also seen as promising for opening up new avenues and for new thinking of gender equality.  It is seen as important to look to the other Nordic countries for experiences.

It seems as if the governmental framework matters and that diversity mainstreaming might be more promising in the framework of a well financed social democratic governmental approach to gender equality (e.g. Norway) compared to Sweden which has established the new equality unit during recession and in the spirit of a liberal government emphasising individual rights (as demonstrated by Lenita Freidenvall in WP1 of FEMCIT).

The issue of how to define women’s movements was also touched upon. Do for instance the old women’s organisations such as the Council of Women in Denmark represent the women’s movement? Or is it rather the new networks, such as the gender mainstreaming network, consisting of experts, movements/activists and politicians that expose current feminist goals, or both?

From a global perspective it is important that gender mainstreaming has developed a common language and a somehow common horizon, and that global dialogues are now possible within the context of the Beijing Platform and gender mainstreaming. African experiences – notably from Ghana – here points to a different architecture, marked by a high level of mobilisation which is divided or independent from state machineries, where women’s movements tend to be critical towards the state institutions, rather than co-operating as in the Nordic case.

Finally the need for new horizons in the Gender Mainstreaming work was urged for, along with a more dynamic relation with knowledge production. E.g. in the launching of a strategic research programme focused on gender mainstreaming of new areas in relation to governmental resorts/ fields of responsibility.

The participants found the scope of FEMCIT interesting and relevant, and would like to receive the end results. It was appreciated that the FEMCIT project is one of the first major accounts of the effects of women’s movements in a vertical perspective and the effects on “high politics” in a vital range of areas.

• Presentation of FEMCIT and the implications of gender mainstreaming at the NGO network associated with the Danish Ministerial Unit for Gender Equality. Copenhagen. January 11th, 2010. 16.30-18.00. Present: Governmental Unit of Gender Equality, Danish Women’s Council, Kvinfo, Association for Gender Research in Denmark, Society for Gender Equality, The Danish Women’s Society, the Network of Crisis Centres in Denmark/krisecentre i Danmark.

• FEMCIT end user meeting, University of Copenhagen, January 25th, 2010 15.30-17.00. Present: Jytte Larsen, special adviser, Kvinfo, Rebekka  Mahler, Research Librarian, Kvinfo, Karen Sjørup, Ass. Prof., Member of the government commission on Salary, RUC, Dinana Madsen, Ph.d. student, ( Project: Gender Mainstreaming in Ghana), Anette Steen Petersen, Special adviser for the Danish Government / Gender Equality Unit on Gender Mainstreamin.