IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/defpea/v35y2024i1p86-108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Civil War Peace Agreements and Gender Inclusion

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Olson Lounsbery
  • Nicole Gerring
  • Kaitlyn Rose

Abstract

In 2000, The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 actively promoted the inclusion of women and their perspectives in peace processes, as well as promoted a gender perspective in post-conflict recovery and institution building. The number of gender provisions in civil war peace agreements has increased since 2001 as a result, but not all such provisions serve the same purpose. In this study, we present a provision typology that divides gender provisions into those that seek to empower women and compare them to those that address conflict victimization. We suggest that the context under which the peace agreement takes place, and conditions of the conflict itself, should influence where empowerment and victimization provisions are employed if they are to have the type of impact sought by the UNSC and improve post-conflict outcomes. We test our propositions on all civil war peace agreements occurring between 1990-2018. Findings indicate that gender provisions designed to empower women are unlikely to emerge in societies where they are perhaps most needed. Comparatively, it appears there is less resistance to gender provisions aimed at addressing conflict-related victimization.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Olson Lounsbery & Nicole Gerring & Kaitlyn Rose, 2024. "Civil War Peace Agreements and Gender Inclusion," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 86-108, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:defpea:v:35:y:2024:i:1:p:86-108
    DOI: 10.1080/10242694.2022.2114058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10242694.2022.2114058
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10242694.2022.2114058?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:defpea:v:35:y:2024:i:1:p:86-108. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GDPE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.