This article deals with empirical research on poverty in Czechoslovakia from the interwar period to the present in terms of three distinct phases. First, between 1918 and 1948, considerable attention was devoted to poverty, but research possibilities modest, so that a complex mapping of the problem was not feasible. Second, during the 1948 to 1989 period, the communist regime allowed “examinations” of poverty for the purpose of depicting pre-war capitalist Czechoslovakia as an impoverished, class-divided society. A similar approach was applied to studies of Western countries during the Cold War period. Research on poverty within the socialist regime was not allowed, even after the rehabilitation of sociology as a social science. Detailed analysis of household surveys was either forbidden or the results were embargoed; only simple cross-tabulations were ever published. Third, after 1989, the opportunities for undertaking research on poverty increased dramatically due to stimulus in both the national and international arenas. Important projects were fielded leading to many studies and published articles. Statistical surveys were used to map poverty primarily in terms of income; while sociological, ethnographic and anthropological approaches were used to examine key groups affected by poverty in Czech society. Within the literature there has been to date no synthesis of the study of the nature and origins of poverty in the Czech Republic.
This discussion paper deals with equal opportunities for women and men policy in the Czech Republic financed by the European Social Fund. It presents findings of a case study focused on the position of the “gender expert” which was introduced as obligatory within call no. 76 OP HRE, area of support 3.4 “Equal Opportunities of Women and Men on the Labour Market and Reconciliation of Family and Working Life,” in order to increase the quality of equal opportunities projects. The evaluative case study concludes that the position was not defined sufficiently which lowered the potential quality improvement of the projects. Further policy steps are suggested and a broader context is discussed where the position of the “gender expert” may surprisingly be seen as a contribution to the financial stability of some NGOs focused on equal opportunities. The paper also aims to provide those who work as gender experts with an opportunity for a much needed self-reflection.