The Moser Framework, also known as the Levy Framework, aims to initiate 'gender planning' as a type of planning in its own right. It supports an integrated gender-planning perspective in all development work, concentrating on the power relations between men and women. “The goal of gender planning is the emancipation of women from their subordination, and their achievement of equality, equity, and empowerment.” The Moser Framework consists of the following tools:
Gender roles identification / triple role: Maps the gender division of labor by asking—Who does what? with consideration of women’s triple role in lower income countries (reproductive, productive, and community-managing activities).
Needs assessment: Based on the idea that women as a group have particular needs which differ from those of men as a group, identifies two types of needs:
Practical gender needs: Needs which, if they were met, assist women in their current activities.
Strategic gender needs: Needs, which if they are met, enable women to transform existing imbalances of power between women and men.
Disaggregating control of resources and decision-making within the household: Links allocation of resources within the household (intra-household allocation) with the bargaining processes by asking the questions—Who controls what? Who decides what? How?
Planning framework for balancing the triple role: Examines how a planned program/ project will increase a woman's workload in one of her roles, to the detriment of her other roles.
Women in Development (WID)/ GAD Policy Matrix: Primarily an evaluation tool that examines the approach used by an existing project/ program/ policy that distinguishes between different aims in interventions but may also be used to consider suitable approaches for future work.
• Accessible, easily taught and communicated.
• Allows planners to engage with the complexity of inequality.
• Introduces women's subordination into planning discourse, and challenges planners to confront what is familiar.
• Making women's invisible work visible, promoting fairer valuing of tasks through the concept of 'triple work.'
• Reminds planners that productive, reproductive, and community work are interrelated; one sphere cannot be changed without having an impact on other spheres.
• Division of practical and strategic needs is notable as it acknowledges the reality that gender planning is political and technical in nature.
• Does not address other underlying inequalities, such as class and race.
• Does not consider that for many women their main challenge is not balancing their different roles, but in recognizing that their roles are extremely restricted.
• Emphasizes what women and men do and the resources available to them, rather than focusing on the relationship between them, which determines how activities come to be performed by women or men, and the complex dynamics by which decisions are made.
• Tends to assume women are homogenous beings with the same roles/tasks/needs.
• The clear division between practical and strategic needs in many cases is less clear and better placed on a continuum.
• Considers women only even though men have very strong vested interests in any process of change, or in maintaining the status quo.
• The clearly stated goal of 'emancipation of women from their subordination' may be met with strong resistance within low and lower-middle income country contexts where those implementing projects may not view or accept this as a legitimate end goal.
Back to GESI Frameworks
