| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
116353
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
An emerging tension characterizes conflict resolution practice: promoting power-sharing between ethnic groups while simultaneously mandating women's inclusion in peace processes and in post-conflict institutions. Scholars of ethnic conflict have not adequately theorized the gender implications of power-sharing, and practitioners have failed to implement mechanisms that would make power-sharing representative of constituencies beyond ethno-national cleavages. There is no substantive reason why the representation of women and ethnic groups should be in tension. Nevertheless, gender is often ignored in the power-sharing literature and gender-mainstreaming practices appear irreconcilable with power-sharing practice. Drawing on three cases of post-conflict power-sharing - Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, and Northern Ireland - this article identifies reasons why this tension remains in practice, especially the overriding emphasis in power-sharing on ethno-nationalist elites and conflict protagonists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
158285
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Is ethnic power-sharing gender-blind? If so, what are the consequences? And, what, if anything, can be done about it? This line of inquiry informed a 2-day workshop at Queen's University Belfast (QUB) in November 2015, which explored the intersections of ethnonationalism and gender in comprehensive peace processes, with a specific focus on the extent to which power-sharing theory and practice can address new challenges emanating from the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, as embodied in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSCR 1325) and other subsequent resolutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|