Golden Line Programme Midterm Review Final Report

Overview

Mid-term evaluation of Golden Line, a five-year programme (2016-2020) funded by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Led by Simavi with Solidaridad and Healthy Entrepreneurs, it aims to economically empower women in and around artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASM) communities in Ghana (Western region) and Tanzania (Geita region). Solidaridad guides mines towards Fairtrade/Fairmined certification and sets up EA$E groups for women miners. Simavi partners run EA$E/EMAP and SRHR work in communities, and Healthy Entrepreneurs supports community health entrepreneurs. Reported in September 2019, it assessed effectiveness, synergy and sustainability at mid-point.

Key findings

• Tanzania: most project mines now have women in management positions, and awareness of suitable roles for women changed among both men and women. Still, 59% of women wanted a different position, most often supervision (59%), trading ore (37%) or food and drinks provision (31%).
• Tanzania: 92% of women said that through Golden Line they see more opportunities to earn money or already earn more. 43% said financial security increased a little, but it was still rated low (average 5.4 on a 1-10 scale).
• Tanzania: 53% of women said they have a say in household budget spending, and 64% reported positive changes in household financial decision-making due to the programme.
• Tanzania: 58% of female respondents could name three or more contraceptives (almost 18% none), and 53% of all respondents could name three or more STIs (9% none), but few women said they have a say over their sexual and reproductive health.
• In both countries, awareness of protective equipment was high but use was low. No reliable data showed a fall in mercury use, and no functioning retorts were observed in Tanzania.
• Ghana: a government ban on all ASM activity, lifted in December 2018 after 1.5 years, meant fewer mine activities were carried out than planned.
• Synergy between partners was limited by little geographical overlap. Rising incomes were sometimes accompanied by gender-based violence, physical or financial.

In figures

Recommendations

• Continue and intensify all programme elements; a longer programme duration may improve effectiveness and sustainability.
• Take a more structured approach to PPE use, for example appointing a (female) safety supervisor, providing storage and collection points, and possibly co-financing PPE for mines committed to certification.
• Promote zero-mercury options, such as training women in direct smelting, rather than relying only on PPE, smaller quantities and retorts.
• Set up grievance mechanisms so women can report safety and sexual harassment problems at mines, for example through a trained confidante in each EA$E group.
• Examine whether the Healthy Entrepreneurs model is profitable and consider moving away from product loans, for example by linking to EA$E share-outs.
• Target young women more strategically for SRHR (e.g. EA$E groups for young women, especially in Tanzania), and allow more time for EMAP and gender discussion groups to prevent GBV.
• Strengthen the exit strategy and integrated participant selection, focus on synergy and sustainability before adding new mines, and add women's self-esteem and role models to the Theory of Change.

Lessons learned

• Involving men through EMAP and gender discussion series was highly appreciated, but reaching men beyond those already willing (e.g. young informal miners) is difficult and takes time.
• Role models, such as the first women in mine management, are an effective way to change perceptions of what women can do in mining.
• Synergy in a consortium depends on geographical overlap and integrated selection of participants from the start.
• Mobilising communities takes longer than expected, so targets and geographical scope should be reassessed before expanding.

Methodology

Non-experimental mixed-methods evaluation using contribution analysis. 911 respondents across both countries: 410 community surveys in eight communities, 182 mine surveys in 11 of 23 mines, 264 participants in 27 focus groups and 55 key informant interviews. Data were collected by locally hired teams over nine days of fieldwork.

Limitations

• Non-experimental design with no control group and self-reported changes, so no causal conclusions can be drawn.
• Comparison with the baseline was limited because the baseline used aggregated indexes and different disaggregation, and some comparisons showed unexplained fluctuations.
• Programme documents did not always match reality on the ground, and the evaluation team was sometimes misinformed.
• Implementation differed between Ghana and Tanzania, which made comparison between the countries and sampling difficult.
• A tight fieldwork schedule and limited transport put pressure on the team, and respondents sometimes waited up to two hours.