Is targeting enough to gender equity and social

inclusion issues? Evidence from Independent

Evaluation of Micro-enterprise Development

Programme in Nepal

Dr Birendra Bir Basnyat

Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist

NARMA/Nepal

29 October 2015

International Development

Evaluation Association (IDEAS)

Global Conference: “Evaluating Sustainable

Development”, 28-30 October 2015, Bangkok

1

Organization of Presentation

A. Brief Introduction to

(a) Gender and Social Inclusion Issues in Nepal

(b) Micro-Enterprise Development Programme

(MEDEP)

B. Evaluation Rationality

C. Methodology

D. Targeting Process and Selection of Target Groups

E. Key Findings

F. Lessons Learnt

2

A. Nepal’s Gender and Social Inclusion Issue

Nepal : A small hilly country with about 31 Million

Population

Multi-ethnic and multi-lingual country

2013 UN Human Development Index (HDI),-145th

out of 187 countries

Gender Inequality Index-8th rank,

Gender Development Index-102th rank

Social groups: 125 based on caste, ethnicity and

religion

Ethnicity : Brahmin & Chhetri -28.8%, Janajati and

others-53%, Dalit, 12-13%, Muslims

4.4%

Religion: Hindus-81.3%, Buddhists- 9.0%,

Christians-1.4% , Islams-4.4%,

Mother tongue- 123

3

Caste-Poverty Structure

Brahman Chhetri(29%)

Indigenous

people/Janajati/

Buddhists

(53%%)

Muslims, Christians, Others

etc (6%)

Dalits (12%)

Incidence of

Poverty

Intensity of

poverty

Socio-

cultural

Disparities

High

( 38 to 40%)

Low

Access to and

control over

development

opportunities

High Low

(10-12%)

4

Overall Poverty Incidence- 25.4% below

$1.25 a day poverty line

Gender and Social Inclusion Issues in Nepal

• Social exclusion and disparities including gender

discrimination high in Nepal due to social, cultural and

religious factors

• Poverty incidence- high among women headed HHs, Dalits

and Janajatis compared to Brahmins/Chhetris

• Gender inequality in education in terms of access,

achievement and completion high

• Increased realization for the needs to address poverty and

gender inequality (general) issues for sustainable

development

• Problems and challenges are evident but solutions are elusive

5

Micro-enterprise Development Project

(MEDEP)

• A multi-million US Dollar Programme implemented since

1998 by the Ministry of Industry / GoN, in partnership with

UNDP (Now in 4th Phase- 2013-18),

• Nepal's oldest, first (poor/ultra poor targeted), highly

publicized and active

• MEDEP Objective- contribute to poverty reduction and

employment generation through micro-enterprise among the

poor, women, marginalized, and socially excluded households

living below the national poverty line

• Investment commitment reached as of 4th Phase- Above 125

M US$ (UNDP, GoN, AusAID, CIDA, DFID, NZAID)

• Coverage- 38 districts

• Micro- entrepreneurs (MErs) developed as of 2015: +66000

6

Micro-enterprises in Nepal

7

MEDEP Modality

8

Micro-entrepreneur

ship DevelopmentMarketing Linkages and

Business Counseling

Appropriate Technology

Testing and TransferAccess to Finance

Skills Training

Entrepreneurship

Development Training

Micro-enterprise

Upgrading

Social Mobilization

(Group Formation)

MEDEP Modality Steps

9

Approx 3 year

Pre-Start up

Start

Upgrading

Sustainability

[[[

Approx 3 months

Approx 1 year

Approx 1 year

Selection of Target

Group

Group Formation

Saving and Credit

Mobilization

Group management

training/dynamics

Enterprise

Awareness

Training

Skill Training

Access to

Credit

Technology

Common

Facility Centre

Marketing sup

Enterprise

Establishment

Business

Improvement

Training

(TOEE/TOGE)

Refresher

Training

Branding,

Packaging

Market

Coordination

Sustainable

Enterprise

Linkage with

Commodity

Association

Marketing

Relation and

Expansion

Commodity

Development

and

Diversification

Quality Control

Investment

Partnership for

Service

Acquisition

B. Rationality MEDEP

One of the oldest nationally important development

project

Targets HHs living below the national poverty line

Prioritizes women, unemployed youth and individuals

from socially excluded groups like Dalits, disadvantaged

Janajatis and Madhesis

Highly visible development intervention at grassroots

Engagement of multiple donors/development partners

Government committed to expand it across Nepal (all

75 districts), already reached to 64 districts in 2015,

Internalization of the programme by GoN – initiated

through Micro-enterprise Development Project for

Poverty Reduction (MEDPA ) (spending more than Rs

200 M (Approx. 2 M US$) annually through regular

budget/source (Government funding)

10

Evaluation Rationality/Importance Contd.

• MEDEP’s modality /framework for micro-enterprise

development: popular and often claimed as a useful and

appropriate ME model for developing countries like Nepal

which is characterized as a country with high domination of

gender and caste based discrimination

• Apart from targeting poor (below NPL) , women and socially

excluded people in quantitative terms, the study intended to

identify other activities/elements that the MEDEP modality

contributed to redress gender and social inclusion issues?

• Identify best practices and draw lessons for Nepal and

similar developing countries with respect to addressing

gender and social inclusion issues for sustainable

development .11

C. Evaluation Methodology

Evaluation undertaken in 9 districts of which 5 districts (Parbat,

Nawalparasi, and Dhanusa, Pyuthan and Dang) were from first phase

(1998-2003) and 4 districts (Sindhupalchowk, Udayapur, Kavre Planchowk

and Kailali) from 2nd Phase (2003-2007)

Represented Mountains, Hills and Terai, 5 development regions (East,

Central, West, Mid-west and Far-west)

MErs- First and 2nd Phase

12

Evaluation Methodology Contd..

Used mix method approach combining quantitative and

qualitative methods

Quantitative Method

Followed a difference of difference method which comprised a survey of both

randomly selected participants and non-participants following the before and

after method (Treatment Group – 832 samples, Control-183 samples)

t0 t1

Y0

Y1

Y2 Treatment group

(MEDEP Participants)

Control group

(Non- participants)

Net impact of MEDEP or MEDEP Contribution = Y2- Y1

Where, t0 and t1 are time lapses between project y0, y1 and y2 are impact at different time intervals

13

Respondents Characteristics

Respondent categoriesParticipants Non-participants

Number Percent No %

Overall 832 100.0 183 100.0

A. Gender

Women 586 70.4 142 77.6

Men 246 29.6 41 22.4

B. Caste/Ethnicity

Brahmin/Chhetri 246 29.6 44 24.0

Dalit 198 23.8 50 27.3

Janajati 329 39.5 62 33.9

Others 59 7.1 27 14.8

C. Age group

Adult (15-29) 177 21.3 63 34.4

Youth (30-59) 606 72.8 116 63.4

Elderly (Above 60 years) 49 5.9 4 2.2

14

Respondents by Enterprise Types

15

MEDEP

ParticipantsResp.

Enterprise type (Percent)- catagorization

Agri. ForestsFood

productsService

Non-

farm

Drop

out

Overall 832 33.4 13.8 9.3 13.9 9.6 20.0

A. Sex

Women 586 35.8 15.2 10.1 11.3 8.7 18.9

Men 246 27.6 10.6 7.3 20.3 11.8 22.4

B. Caste/Ethnicity

Brahmin/

Chhteris246 43.1 8.5 15.4 10.2 0.4 22.4

Dalit 198 11.1 19.2 2.5 17.2 25.3 24.7

Janajati 329 40.4 16.1 10.0 11.2 6.4 15.8

Others 59 28.8 5.1 1.7 33.9 13.6 16.9

Evaluation Methodology Contd..

Qualitative method included intensive participatory

interactions with a large number of actors, stakeholders and

communities or beneficiaries households, key informant

surveys, oral history, focus group discussions, time line

preparation, preparation of impact diagram, observation, flow

chart etc.

16

Data Collection

Primary Sources- MErs Survey, Policy Makers, Programme

Managers/Administrators , Enterprise Development

Facilitators

Secondary Sources

(Literature Review, Review of Reports and Studies

accomplished)

Data Analysis: MERs- Stratified by gender and caste group,

Programme- CS-Pro

17

D. Assessment of the MEDEP Model- Targeting

18

Practical and country specific targeting process (well

designed, targeted, no ambiguities

Target Group Selection (Step wise) by an experienced and

independent firm coordinated by District Enterprise

Development Committee of the District Dev. Committee

First step: Selection of target /cluster/market areas

(potentialities/products, local resources, market demand

analysis, proportion of target group (poor, hard-core

poor, socially excluded, unemployed youths etc.)

Second step- Selection of the Village Development

Committee (VDCs)- based on the proportion of target

group (poor, hard-core poor, socially excluded,

unemployed youths etc. ) (A market centre/cluster

comprises 6 to 8 VDCs)

Targeting contd..

19

Third step- Selection of target group/households (HHs)-

HHs whose average annual income is below national

poverty line (NPL)

Undertake Participatory Rural Appraisal (settlement

area) and categories HHs into 5 classes- well-off,

middle level, lower middle, poor and very poor)

Carryout HH Survey to triangulate PRA results,

assess demands/needs, willingness, potentialities

Final selection of target HHs/potential MErs

Group Formation based on ME type

Assessment of the MEDEP Model- Targeting

20

Relevancy- High (consistent with country’s existing

situation, needs and development plan/policies)

More than 85% respondents satisfied with the target group

selection process adopted by MEDEP and satisfied with the

outcome (Effectiveness- high)

Micro- Entrepreneurs: Women- 70%+ , Dalits- 2 5% +,

Janajatis- Approx. 40%

Likewise, non-participants (+ 75%) demanded to expand

programme coverage so as to include their areas as well

E. Key Findings

21

Nearly 73% participants moved out of poverty

Nearly 9 out of 10 of enterprises succeeded to improve

labor productivity, increase production capacity and reduce

the cost of production through adoption of modern and

improved technologies in MEs.

Income - 512% increase among participants compared to

192% among non-participants

Higher proportion of Dalit using of modern technologies

and that of BCTS for improved technologies.

E. Key Findings contd..

22

Despite substantial contribution of MEs to increase assets

among women MErs, higher proportion of men (41%)

making high income (Rs. 50,000 per annum) from MEs than

women (28.2%) who reported to have increased income

Proportion of other Terai caste people (61.7%) receiving

high income (Rs. 50,000 per year) than Dalits (37.4%) than

E. Key Findings Contd..

23

Compared to Dalits and ethnic groups, proportion of

Brahmins/Chhetris moving to high income group is high

(14% vs 5.2% (Dalits and Janajatis (10.8%).

Performance of MERs who failed to receive

complementary assistance/services timely or weak to

demand and utilize such support/services could not

continue their enterprises despite they were

encouraged with the initial outcome (income increase,

employment opportunity and increase in social prestige

etc.)

E. Key Findings Contd..

24

All ethnic groups showed net increase in number of food

sufficient months (from 3.8 months to 5.8 months)

significant at 1% level of confidence) with relatively high

increase among other Terai caste people followed by

Janjatis, Dalits and Brahmin/Chhetris.

ME drop out rate is high (23 to 25%)

Performance of MERs who failed to receive

complementary assistance/services timely or weak to

demand and utilize such support/services could not

continue their enterprises despite they were encouraged

with the initial outcome (income increase, employment

opportunity and increase in social prestige etc.)

Conclusion

25

MEDEP's efforts towards assisting a large number of women

and other disadvantaged groups to identify their latent

entrepreneur skills, to provide them with the necessary

entrepreneurial skills and to create and develop micro-

enterprises is commendable.

Targeting is necessary, must be carefully planned and

executed. It should be participatory and appropriate to the

local situation.

But targeting is not sufficient.

Proactive gender responsive service delivery and

institutional arrangement is crucial for the goals of gender

equity and inclusive development.

F Best Practices- Policy Reform

26

Mainstreaming GESI (Gender and Social Inclusion Issue at all

levels- from policy to grassroots via implementation level)

Social Mobilization through Trained Enterprise Development

Facilitators (EDFs)

At least 2/3 rd decision making positions in MEGA (Micro-

enterprise development associations) and District Micro-

group Associations are occupied by women and deprived

groups (Dalits and ethnic minorities)

F. Best Practices (Implementation level) Contd

27

High priority to social mobilization and group formation and

ensure continuity through activities such as saving and credit

Formation and mobilization of Micro-enterprise groups at

different levels from grassroots to policy support- Micro-

enterprise group (MEG), Micro-enterprise group association

(MEGA), District Microenterprise Group Association

(DMEGA) and National Microenterprise Group Association

(NMEGA)

Training- women friendly environment and support to at

least one care taker when women entrepreneurs have small

babies

F. Best Practices (Implementation level)

Contd…

28

Provision of Common Facility Centres to work in groups

and learn from each others

Ensure opportunities for aforementioned groups to

participate in trade fairs to share marketing experiences

observe and learn from others’ products and so forth

Intensive monitoring and technical backstopping (Area

Support Office and Enterprise Development Facilitators)

Recommendations

29

Design differential gender responsive service delivery

approach for different target groups.

Level of support and incentives need to be adjusted

accordingly for achieving sustainable development goals.

Enhancing the responsive and capacity of the different

actors and stakeholders at different levels with responsible

monitoring and evaluation is crucial.

When ME development project targets only hardcore poor

and disadvantaged groups, prospect of MEs sustainability

could be low. Therefore, MEs should specifically include

HHs above the poverty line as well.

30

Thank You Very Much and

Welcome for Your Comments and Suggestions