Guidance

Gender and Conflict: Making Elite Bargaining Processes More Inclusive

This paper provides a gender-sensitive analysis of the Elite Bargains and Political Deals (EBPD) project.

• From: Stabilisation Unit
• Published: 23 January 2020
• Last updated: 23 January 2020 — See all updates

Documents

Gender and Conflict: Making Elite Bargaining Processes More Inclusive

PDF, 563 KB, 29 pages

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

Request an accessible format.

If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email [email protected]. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Gender and Conflict: Making Elite Bargaining Processes More Inclusive - Summary

PDF, 197 KB, 1 page

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

Request an accessible format.

If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email [email protected]. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Gender and Conflict: Making Elite Bargaining Processes More Inclusive - Policy Brief

PDF, 404 KB, 14 pages

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

Request an accessible format.

If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email [email protected]. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Details

The Stabilisation Unit (SU) is a cross-government unit providing expertise to build stability, prevent conflict and meet security challenges internationally.

This paper was commisioned by the SU to bring a gender-sensitive analysis to the Elite Bargains and Political Deals (EBPD) project based on the broad literature on gender, peace processes and post-conflict transitions. It addresses four key research questions:

1. Would applying a gender-sensitive analysis lead to more, altered or entirely different conclusions or recommended approaches to reducing violence and enabling sustainable transitions in conflict-affected countries, than those set out in the EBPD analysis?

2. How does the literature on gender, peace processes and post-conflict transitions and transitional justice challenge, support, or augment the EBPD analysis and conclusions?

3. What are the implications for HMG gender equality policy and legal commitments, and the UK’s aim to support women’s meaningful participation in peace processes and post-conflict transitions?

4. Does the gender analysis of EBPD work highlight any additional/ alternative HMG policy responses or ways of working in such contexts, or suggest additional considerations?

Published 23 January 2020
Last updated 23 January 2020 + show all updates

1. 23 January 2020

   Policy paper and summary document added.

2. 23 January 2020

   First published.