1 Introduction
The coronavirus pandemic crisis, in all its multifold manifestations, has clearly demonstrated how current structures of power risk perpetuating inequality between men and women.1 As stressed by de Búrca ‘we live in a time of global turbulence’.2 But, despite the uncertainty, this era offers us a unique opportunity to embrace contemporary challenges and engage in progressive change by rethinking the ways in which the realisation of women’s rights could be better consolidated in the struggle for global justice.
Our book seizes the momentum of this time of transformation to offer a novel view of the ways in which women’s invisibility and exclusion in the post-pandemic future can be redressed. The book seeks to explore the potential of the gender–power nexus, drawing on its different dimensions to provide a closer look at how we can accelerate the path towards gender equality and influence the gendered structures that dictate the distribution of socio-economic resources.3 In line with D’Ignazio and Klein, the term ‘power’ is used here to describe the interconnected domains (structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal) that confer advantages and privileges on some groups (in this case, men) and systematic disadvantages on others (i.e. women).4
The second part of the volume introduces some contemporary developments in women’s socio-economic participation. Specific thematic areas (financial equality and gendered division of labour), which require direct action to move forward the parity debate are covered.5 These dimensions have been identified to demonstrate how power is not distributed equally – in terms of access to resources and opportunities – and to trace the interlocking structural factors that embody ‘gender norms and produce systematically unjust relationships’.6 The final part concentrates on the gendered dimensions of institutional cultures and practices.7 The proportion of women currently occupying positions in international institutions, such as United Nations (UN) treaty bodies, among others, is still very low.8 The analysis will provide some insights in terms of the legitimacy and representativeness of institutional environments to identify best practices for moving from de jure to de facto equality through and within gender policy.9
2
In recent years, domestic and international policies in different frameworks have been grappling with gender equality and women’s empowerment. Extremely influential in this regard, is the Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment, which was adopted in 2017.10 This Declaration, for the first time, expressly linked equal participation of women and men to the notions of inclusive economic growth and sustainable development.11
It is significant that the sixty-fifth session of the Commission on the Status of Women (csw) focused on: ‘women’s full and effective participation and decision making in public life’. The aim was to identify persistent barriers as well as opportunities for achieving, as suggested by Norris, cultural, civic, normative, and decision-making empowerment.12 The csw ‘recognizes that progress in achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, and the full enjoyment of their human rights has been held back owing to the persistence of historical and structural unequal power relations between women
Academic interest in women’s empowerment has undergone a significant expansion, in particular, in the fields of human rights, development studies and gender politics. This has resulted in the elaboration of specific concepts that could play a concrete role in shaping meaningful responses.20 The three-volume compilation edited by Otto, Gender Issues and Human Rights, presents evidence of how human rights law has been applied to improve women’s position since 1990.21 The overview of theoretical approaches, legal and institutional developments provides invaluable support to our work from at least two angles: first by paving the way to an emancipatory conception of equality and secondly by guiding a gender-oriented interpretation of international law aimed at stimulating new institutional and normative developments. However, the global covid-19 pandemic has reminded us that, in reality, translating human rights and abstract legal principles is more complex than we would expect. Human rights could be limited and weakened, and women’s voices could be silenced if we do not engage with the complexities associated with the realities of gendered hierarchies of powers
Our edited volume has the aim of ‘seeing the unseen’25 and adding lived experiences to investigate the limits and boundaries of human rights law. To this end, it focuses on ways of shifting from powerless to powerful equality through implementation of the law and emancipatory purposes in redistributing powers and resources.26 After demonstrating how the gender–power nexus helps in unpacking the de facto mechanisms (informal and formal) that matter for women’s inclusion, we outline practical steps towards a larger and historically informed, post-pandemic ‘powerful equality’ framework that engages the world beyond academia. Our book focuses on complementary dimensions (socio-economic, cultural, public, and decision-making) to offer a useful framework that connects human rights, participation and institutionalisation as building blocks for the pursuit of women’s advancement around the world. We will explore these dimensions with the ultimate aim of raising broad awareness of the need to invest in gender equality for the construction of our society (representativeness), human development (economic and social rights), and sustainability (inclusiveness).
The achievement of gender equality and women’s empowerment is crucial to strengthen our ability to face emerging global challenges, especially those that could exacerbate pre-existing disadvantages. Thus, building resilience
3 Non-ideal Theory and Global Gender Justice
We adopt a non-ideal gender theory as the methodological approach to analyse some of the unresolved and less well-explored issues related to gender inequality.28 This approach has been used in various contexts, including more recently in the context of gender studies, to connect with global justice.29 As highlighted by Jaggar, the appeal of non-ideal theory is that it starts from the reality of women’s situation in all its variety, informed by ‘direct experience and by a commitment to action’.30 Instead of the ‘picture of an ideal world’,31 this approach calls for capturing gender concerns and inequality as it emerges from a combination of micro and macro dynamics. In this way, it is possible to shed new light on ways of redressing gender injustice and identifying political responsibilities that can only arise from discussions that are ‘more gender-just’.32 It allows the readers to put themselves in women’s shoes and to understand the impact of gender inequality on different scales in the workplace, politics, and everyday life. Rather than sticking to the traditional method of analysis from the outside, our ambitious exercise allows us to share the real-life stories of women who have been able to step out from the shadows using
Our overall aim is to encourage a rethink of the unequal position of women around the world, broadening the scope of traditional gender studies by applying ‘action guiding non-ideal theory’, which could result in recommendations on ways to move towards a ‘more just world’.35 This could be achieved through calling attention to the most pressing ‘imbalanced sets of life options’ and perspectives for women;36 through our questioning of traditional and ossified institutional structures, and through demonstrating how scholars and practitioners in an ‘expanding set of allied fields’ can contribute in meaningful and practical ways to improving the situation of women most affected by the power bias.
4 Structure of the Book
The structure of our book mirrors the inequality of this present and unique moment to provide an original reflection around three major lines of enquiry. Each of these is presented in a separate part of the book as described in detail in the following sections.
4.1 Women and Resilient Inequalities
The book starts with a historical account of gender (in)equalities in the area of women’s rights by focusing on the conceptual limits for women’s empowerment
Patricia Schulz’s chapter ‘Progress in and Challenges to the Rights of Women to Non-Discrimination and Gender Equality’ introduces the edited volume by reviewing the international legal framework on women’s human rights and linking it to the political objectives contained in the UN Sustainable Development Goals adopted in 2015. Schulz describes the progress made at national level with the adoption of laws conforming to international human rights standards, mainly the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (cedaw) and its double requirement for formal and substantive equality. She illustrates challenges to the implementation of the principles of non-discrimination and gender equality including insufficient resources, regressive policies, lack of political will, and attacks against women human rights defenders, which states need to overcome when moving towards powerful equality.
In the second chapter ‘A Quantum Leap for Gender Equality: For a Better Future of Work for All’ Beghini, Cattaneo, and Pozzan offer a timely contribution on the role of the International Labour Organization (ilo) in challenging inequality through the protection of women’s socio-economic rights.38 In 1919, the ilo adopted the first conventions on women and work. A century later, women are a force in the labour market, breaking down boundaries that at one time would have been considered unbreakable.39 Despite the significant advances made for women at work over the past century, ‘there is no room for complacency’.40 Beghini, Pozzan, and Cattaneo base their analysis on the insights from the ilo’s report that is the culmination of the extensive and often ground-breaking work undertaken in the context of the ilo’s Women at Work Centenary Initiative.41 The findings and recommendations of the Initiative resonate with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2015.42 The realisation of the 2030 Agenda depends on the achievement of gender equality in the world of work.
A broad understanding of how human rights law can be used to support change is based on an examination of the intersection of key concepts such as non-discrimination and gender mainstreaming to reveal the tensions between emancipatory change and institutional commitments on further organisational efforts.43 Bustreo et al.’s chapter ‘Gender Mainstreaming at the World Health Organization: Experiences, Challenges and Pitfalls in Global Health’ presents a more precise ‘conceptual vocabulary’ by reviewing the history of gender mainstreaming in one of the United Nations (UN) specialised agencies, the World Health Organization (who).44 The authors rigorously investigate how the concept of gender mainstreaming has been recognised as a critical and strategic approach for achieving gender equality commitments within the UN.45 who began initiatives to operationalise gender and human rights after the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action, largely focusing on women and reproductive health.46 In 2000, who created the Department of Gender and Women’s Health and subsequently, in 2007, the World Health Assembly endorsed the ‘Strategy for integrating gender analysis and actions into the work of who’. Bustreo et al. discuss the pioneering experience of who in its attempt to mainstream gender as a relational concept across the organisation
4.2 Women and Socio-economic Equality
The second part of the volume introduces some contemporary developments in women’s socio-economic participation. It covers specific thematic areas (financial equality and gendered division of labour) that require direct action to move forward the parity debate.48 To this end the chapters in Part 2 explore how current frameworks fail to capture the importance to the economic sphere of women’s power and active agency.49 The authors examine the relevance of addressing status bias (citizenship – chapters 4 and 5) and economic disadvantages (e.g. gendered division of labour – chapters 6 and 7 and financial literacy – chapter 8) to address women’s unequal roles in decision-making.
The chapter by Mantu ‘(En)gendering EU Citizenship’ addresses the role of European Union (EU) citizenship for mobile women. Mantu argues that within the EU, citizenship is considered to be the fundamental status of the nationals of the Member States, allowing them to enjoy a privileged legal position
Two chapters in this section analyse a specific set of challenges posed by the covid-19 pandemic for progress of women’s rights: the threat that existing inequalities will be exacerbated and that new difficulties will be created. Blasko’s chapter ‘Unpaid Work during the covid-19 Pandemic: Amount, Allocation and the Aftermath: A European Perspective’ offers a timely review of the consequences of covid-19 stressing the socio-economic implications.51 Gender
Martucci, Minello, and Manzo’s chapter ‘The Unequal Ivory Tower: The Effects of covid-19 on Academic Mothers’ complements Blasko’s chapter by zooming in on how the covid-19 lockdown exacerbated gender inequality in heterosexual families, as well as in women’s workplaces. With the shift to remote work for professionals in spring 2020, mothers took on more of the burdens of childcare and other domestic tasks, compared with their male partners. Within academia, gender inequality in the home and in the workplace interacted to create a significant impact on mothers’ careers.52 The closure of childcare services and universities led to a conflict between domestic duties and extremely demanding careers, and many mothers had to delay less time-sensitive work tasks like research and writing. Martucci, Minello, and Manzo show how academic mothers feared that the interruption caused by covid-19 would affect their career trajectories in the long term. The only women in their sample who consistently felt successful as academics and mothers during the lockdown were the ones who had access to childcare from family, partners, babysitters, or nannies – the ones for whom a more ‘sustainable’ version of life persisted. Based on their findings, Martucci, Minello, and Manzo propose policy recommendations that take into account the ‘motherhood gap’ and alternative ways to evaluate academic careers.
This final chapter of Part 2, by Harvey and Cristani ‘Women and Financial Equality: Rewriting the Rules’ investigates financial equality and financial literacy to identify a new narrative that can empower girls and women to participate in the financial economy. Harvey and Cristani argue that without a new narrative, it will be hard to expedite the path towards economic gender
They go on to suggest a gender-reinterpretation of social and economic structures to facilitate women’s full enjoyment of equal access to material resources and opportunities.54 This chapter provides a fresh articulation that directly connects the interdependence of persons and the power relations they face, or generate, with central aspects of contemporary economic and social practice.55
4.3 Women’s Participation at the International Level and Institutional Encounters
The last part of the volume concentrates on the gendered dimensions of participation at international level.56 The limited participation of women is becoming an increasing concern with respect to international representation.57 According to the gqual campaign ‘women are underrepresented in virtually every international body responsible for adjudicating, monitoring, and developing international law’.58 To address this situation, this part of the book takes up the very challenging task of understanding how to improve
Kessedjian’s chapter ‘Gender Equality in the Judiciary – with an Emphasis on International Judiciary’ offers fresh insights into the historical and current participation of women in the international judiciary to advance the existing literature on this topic.70 In recent years, this research area has attracted increasing interest,71 especially in the context of international law,72 and it
The final chapter by Germano and Fornalé reflects on the whole process of institutionalisation during the lockdown that has seen only a very small proportion of women occupying positions in international and domestic institutions, such as the ‘technoscientific’ ones, created by Member States to respond to the pandemic.73 Germano and Fornalé offer a historical overview of the role of participatory rights guaranteed by the cedaw Convention (article 7 and article 8). The cedaw was the first international instrument to clearly address (in article 8) the issue of equal participation and representation at the international level, calling upon states to ensure women’s presence ‘as delegates and representatives of their own countries at international level and to participate in the work of international organizations’.74 While substantial scholarship has focused on gender parity and quota mechanisms at domestic level,75 much less attention has been paid to the international domain and how the dynamics of women’s representation in international institutions mirrors the weaknesses of the domestic domain.76
The point made is that we ‘should not assume too early’ that participation at the international level will sort itself out as a direct outcome of the domestic struggle; instead, we need to engage critically with the informal and discretionary mechanisms that may increase the inclusion of women at the international level.77 The chapter’s major aim is to conduct an in-depth investigation of the creation of these institutional mechanisms at international level (e.g. who) and at domestic level (e.g. Italy) to understand how they interfere
5 Background Information
This book originates from the Gender Lecture Series ‘Know the gap! Talking Gender, Equality and Diversity’, which took place from September 2019 to May 2022.79 This is the first English-language series open to the full university and to the general public, featuring prominent individuals in academia, private sector and international organisations and focused on both research and actual experience with gender balance and policy. Inaugurated in 2019, this lecture series has so far involved twenty-five leading speakers from around the world to address pressing gender issues, including: gender equality and human rights; gender equality and women’s empowerment; power and representation during the pandemic.80 Our authors are women who have successfully broken through the ‘glass ceiling’ and their personal accounts provide insights about the meaning given to gender based on choices, roles, social interactions and experiences in real life. With this publication, we aim to transform their original contributions into a new format that will contribute to the advancement of
Hilary Charlesworth and Christine Chinkin, The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis (Manchester University Press 2000); United Nations (UN), ‘Policy Brief: The Impact of COVID-19 on Women’ (2020); United Nations Experts, ‘COVID-19: States Should Not Abuse Emergency Measures to Suppress Human Rights’ (2020); Bram Büscher et al., ‘Planning for a World beyond COVID-19: Five Pillars for Post-Neoliberal Development’ (2021) 140 World Development 1.
Gráinne de Búrca, Reframing Human Rights in a Turbulent Era (oup 2021) 1.
As highlighted by Chinkin ‘a comprehensive approach to gender analysis is sought with a view to transformation of prevailing social structures – the workplace, the family, the global economy’, Christine Chinkin, ‘Gender and Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights’ in Eibe Riedel et al. (eds), Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in International Law (oup 2014) 159.
In their work, D’Ignazio and Klein describe ‘the structural domain’ as the laws and policies that contribute to ‘organize oppression’; the ‘disciplinary domain’ which includes those who implement normative measures that ‘encode inequality’; the ‘hegemonic domain’ which refers to the cultural ideas that are circulated including by the media; and, finally, the ‘interpersonal domain’ which includes the personal experience of individuals who are part of the less powerful group. These four domains configure what the authors identify as the ‘matrix of domination’, building on the work of Collins: Patricia Hill Collins, Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (Routledge 2008). D’Ignazio and Lauren Klein, Data Feminism (The mit Press 2020) 24–26.
Rebecca Adami, ‘International Welfare Feminism csw Navigating Cold War Tensions 1949’ in Rebecca Adami and Dan Plesch (eds), Women and the UN. A New History of Women’s International Human Rights (Routledge 2021) 55.
Alison M Jaggar ‘Global Gender Justice’ in Thom Brooks (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Global Justice (oup 2020); Nico Krisch ‘International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order’ (2005) 16 European Journal of International Law 369.
‘Institutional practices may not directly discriminate against women, but they can effectively inhibit women’s participation by reflecting male life patterns as benchmarks of eligibility and success’. Hilary Charlesworth ‘Transforming the United Men’s Club: Feminist Futures for the United Nations’ (1994) 4 (2) Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems 421, 440.
Dianne Otto, ‘The Exile of Inclusion: Reflections on Gender Issues in International Law Over the Last Decade’ (2009) Legal Studies Research Paper n. 431.
Anne-Marie Slaughter and Hilary Charlesworth, ‘The Gender of International Institutions’ Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), April 5–8, (1998) Structure of World Order 79.
The ‘Buenos Aires Declaration on Trade and Women’s Economic Empowerment’ (hereinafter the ‘Declaration’) was presented at the Eleventh World Trade Organization (wto) Ministerial Conference, on 12 December 2017, and 118 wto Members agreed to support it. The wto appointed a ‘Trade and Gender Focal Point’ in 2017. In 2020, an ‘Informal Working Group on Trade and Gender’ was established by wto Members, and Botswana, El Salvador and Iceland are chairing this initiative.
At the wto’s 12th Ministerial Conference an outcome document, drafted by the ‘Friends of Gender’ group, which includes 19 wto Members, four international organizations, and the wto Secretariat, presented draft recommendations for wto Members. In 2021, a wto technical assistance programme on trade and gender dedicated to government officials was created together with the launch of the ‘Gender Research Hub’ to improve the understanding of the trade and gender nexus.
Women’s empowerment is highly prominent as a priority theme for strengthening women’s participation in public life worldwide. See: Pippa Norris, ‘The State of Women’s Participation and Empowerment: New Challenges to Gender Equality’ Background Paper in UN Women Expert Group Meeting; csw, e/cn.6/2021/3, ‘Women’s Full and Effective Participation and Decision-Making in Public Life, as Well as the Elimination of Violence, for Achieving Gender Equality and the Empowerment of all Women and Girls’ (21 December 2020) Report of the Secretary-General; Jill Steans and Daniela Tepe-Belfrage (eds), Handbook on Gender in World Politics (Edward Elgar 2013); Michelle Bachelet, ‘Statement on Strengthening the Treaty Bodies, Guardians of the World’s Human Rights Covenants and Treaties’ (2020) United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; Knop Karen (ed), Gender and Human Rights (oup 2004).
Commission on the Status of Women (csw), e/cn.6/2021/l.3, ‘Women’s Full and Effective Participation and Decision-Making in Public Life, as Well as the Elimination of Violence, for Achieving Gender Equality and the Empowerment of all Women and Girls. Agreed Conclusions’ (30 March 2021) para 33.
Expert Group Meeting, egm/csw/2022/cn, ‘Achieving Gender Equality and the Empowerment of all Women and Girls in the Context of Climate Change, Environmental and Disaster Risk Reduction Policies and Programmes’ (11–14 October 2021) Concept Note; Bernadette P Resurreccion, ‘Gender, Climate Change and Disasters: Vulnerabilities, Responses, and Imagining a More Caring and Better World’ (September 2021) egm/env/bp.2, Background Paper, in Expert Group Meeting, ‘Achieving Gender Equality and the Empowerment of all Women and Girls in the Context of Climate Change, Environmental and Disaster Risk Reduction Policies and Programmes’ (11–14 October 2021).
Their framework is illustrated by Mary Picard, ‘Empowering Women in Climate, Environment and Disaster Risk Governance: from National Policy to Local Action’ egm/env/bp.1, and it builds on the work of Kaaber. Anouka van Eerdewijk et al. ‘White Paper: A Conceptual Model of Women and Girls’ Empowerment’ kit Gender, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (March 2017).
Van Erdewijk et al. describe empowerment as ‘contingent on the interaction between three elements: agency, institutional structure and resources’. Interesting in their model is the conceptualisation of power that they place at the heart of women and girls’ ability to act as part of the empowerment process. Expressions of power include ‘power-to’ (the individual ability to have a positive influence), ‘power-within’ (refers to the sense of self-confidence and self-awareness to be able to have influence) and ‘power-with’ (collaborative power that could derive from collaborative action). In line with their conceptualisation ‘empowerment of women and girls occurs when women and girls exercise agency and have more control over resources and when institutional structures are more enabling to their choice and voice, and ultimately their lives and future. Transformation of power relations is not by definition a harmonious process’. Van Eerdewijk et al. (n 15) 13–14, 23–24.
See the analysis conducted by Adami of ‘international welfare feminism’, which she describes as the ‘advancement of women’s rights with the understanding of women’s equality and political freedom is linked with and dependent upon their economic liberation from unpaid or forced labour under capitalist, colonial, and patriarchal power structures’, Adami (n 5) 65.
‘The Commission also recognizes that women’s full and effective participation in public life depends on enabling factors such as economic independence and full and equal access to quality education, training, decent work and equal value, universal health coverage […]’ csw (n 13) para 40.
ibid.
Wendy Harcourt (ed), The Palgrave Handbook of Gender and Development. Critical Engagements in Feminist Theory and Practice (Palgrave Macmillan 2016); Susan Franceschet et al. (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Women’s Political Rights (Palgrave Macmillan 2019); Ilona cmd Cairns ‘The Costs of (Partial) Inclusion: The Evolution, Limits and Biases of Principal Feminist Challenges to International Law’, in Maarit Jänterä-Jareborg and Hélène Tigroudja (eds.) Women’s Human Rights and the Elimination of Discrimination (Hague Academy of International Law, Brill 2015) 153; Rebecca Adami, Women and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Routledge 2019).
Diane Otto (ed), Gender Issues and Human Rights (Edward Elgar 2013).
Mary Picard, ‘Empowering Women in Climate, Environment and Disaster Risk Governance: from National Policy to Local Action’ egm/env/bp.1, Background Paper; De Búrca (n 2).
Pippa Norris, ‘The State of Women’s Participation and Empowerment: New Challenges to Gender Equality’ Background Paper in UN Women Expert Group Meeting.
Rebecca Adami et al., ‘Commentary – The Restorative Archeology of Knowledge about the Role of Women in the History of the UN – Theoretical Implications for International Relations’ in Rebecca Adami and Dan Plesch (eds), Women and the UN: A New History of Women’s International Human Rights (Routledge 2021) 161.
Fareda Banda, ‘The Limits of Law’ in Bardo Fassbender and Knut Traisbach (eds), The Limits of Human Rights (oup 2019) 268.
Hanna Beate Schöpp-Schilling and Cees Flinterman (eds), The Circle of Empowerment: Twenty-Five Years of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (The Feminist Press at the City University of New York 2007).
As highlighted by the UN Secretary-General ‘64. Transforming the balance of power is essential for promoting and protecting women’s human rights and solving the urgent challenges of the current age, from deepening inequalities and polarization, to the climate crisis and the covid-19 pandemic’ (csw n (13)). Several developments will help to face these specific challenges posed to women’s rights in this turbulent and rapidly changing era, where the risk of rising inequality and invisibility is high. For instance, the cedaw Committee opted not to keep silent on these issues by adopting Recommendation No. 37, which specifically urges states to promote participation and empowerment in disaster risk reduction. cedaw, General Recommendation No. 37 (2018) on Gender-related Dimensions of Disaster Risk Reduction in the Context of Climate Change, 7 February 2018, UN Doc cedaw/c/gr/37.
Alison M Jaggar ‘Global Gender Justice’ in Thom Brooks (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Global Justice (oup 2020).
Clare Heyward and Dominic Roser (eds), Climate Justice in a Non-Ideal World (oup 2016).
Jaggar (n 28); Elisabeth Anderson, The Imperative of Integration (Princeton University Press 2013); D’Ignazio and Klein (n 4).
Anderson (n 30).
Jaggar (n 28).
D’Ignazio and Klein (n 4) 29. D’Ignazio and Klein refer to the keynote lecture given by Anita Gurumurthy (it for Change, India) at the Data Justice Conference, 2018, Cardiff University (the recordings are available at
ibid 29.
Clare Heyward and Dominic Roser ‘Introduction’, in Clare Heyward and Dominic Roser (eds), Climate Justice in a Non-Ideal World (oup 2016) 8–9.
Jaggar (n 28).
Otto (n 8); Martha C Nussbaum, ‘Women’s Progress and Women’s Human Rights’ in Fassbender and Traisbach (eds) (n 25).
ilo, ‘A Quantum Leap for Gender Equality: For a Better Future of Work for All’ (2019).
Eileen Boris et al., Women’s ILO: Transnational Networks, Global Labour Standards, and Gender Equity, 1919 to Present (Brill 2018).
ilo (n 38) ; See also Adami (n 5).
ilo (n 38).
United Nations, ‘Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, The Fourth World Conference on Women’ (1995); Pascale Allotey et al., ‘Doing Gender Better: Can the UN Step Up?’ (2019) 393 (10189) The Lancet 2371.
As described by Caglar et al. ‘from an institutional perspective, gm is intended to create the conditions for institutional learning, for instance by building up gender expertise within organizations. The idea is to enable bureaucrats to reorganize institutional procedures and to redefine policy values in ways to achieve gender equality’, Gulay Caglar et al., ‘Gender in International Governance’ in Steans and Tepe-Belfrage (n 12) 409.
Veronica Magar et al., ‘Gender Mainstreaming within WHO: Not without Equity and Human Rights’ (2019) 393 (10182) The Lancet 1678; C Nivedita and Madhumati Deshpande, ‘Role of Feminist Movements in Gender Mainstreaming Policies: The Case of UN’ (2019) 6(1) International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (ijrar) 289.
As recalled by Otto ‘after many years of marginalization in institutions devoted specifically to issues of concern to women, there are now many signs that “women’s issues” are in the process of becoming institutionally “mainstreamed” in the UN, at least in the sense of integrating them into existing systems’, Otto (n 8) 5; Sari Kuovo ‘The United Nations and Gender Mainstreaming: Limits and Possibilities’ in Doris Buss and Ambreena Manji (eds), International Law: Modern Feminist Approaches (Hart 2005) 237, 252.
Sundari Ravindran and A Kelkar-Khambete, ‘Gender Mainstreaming in Health: Looking Back, Looking Forward’ (2008) 3 Global Public Health 121.
Flavia Bustreo, Anna Giulia Ponchia, Cecilia Rocco, Rachael Hinton, ‘Strengthening the Transformative Potential of Gender Mainstreaming in Global Health’ (14 April 2021) 34 (100858) EClinicalMedicine.
Larking, in her analysis, focuses for instance on the role of trade and investment regimes in institutionalising ‘gendered economic and social inequalities’, Emma Larking ‘Challenging Gendered Economic and Social Inequalities: An Analysis of the Role of Trade and Financial Liberalisation in Deepening Inequalities, and of the Capacity of Economic and Social Rights to Redress Them’ in Rimmer H and Ogg K (eds), Research Handbook on Feminist Engagement with International Law (Edward Elgar 2019) 306; Anne-Catherine Fortas, ‘Droit International Economique et Genre’ in Jänterä-Jareborg and Tigroudja (eds.) (n 20); D’Ignazio and Klein (n 4); Kathryn Sikkink, Evidence for Hope: Making Human Rights Work in the 21st Century (Princeton University Press 2017).
Erturk adopts a political economy approach to reveal how ‘power operated not only through coercion but also through the structured relations of production and reproduction that govern the distribution and use of resources, benefits, privileges and authority within the home and society at large. Political economy interacts with, alters and reconfigures the institutional and ideological formations of society where gender identities and statuses are shaped and the boundaries of rights and freedoms demarcated’, Human Rights Council (hrc), a/hrc/11/6, ‘Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including the Right to Development’ (18 May 2019) Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, Its Causes and Consequences, Yakin Erturk, ‘Political Economy of Women’s Human Rights’ para 27.
Sylvia Walby, ‘The European Union and Gender Equality: Emergent Varieties of Gender Regimes’ (2004) 11 (1) Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society 4; Jo Shaw, ‘The European Union and Gender Mainstreaming: Constitutionally Embedded or Comprehensively Marginalised?’ (2002) 10 Feminist Legal Studies 213.
Clare Wenham et al., ‘COVID-19: The Gendered Impacts of the Outbreak’ (2020) The Lancet 846; World Bank (wb), ‘Gender Dimensions of the COVID-19 Pandemic’ (2020) Policy Note; World Economic Forum (wef), ‘Why We Need Women’s Leadership in the COVID-19 Response’ (2020).
Alessandra Minello, ‘The Pandemic and the Female Academic’ (2020) Nature.
The review by Larking confirms that ‘women are frequently excluded from access on equal terms to financial markets and services’ Larking (n 48) 308.
Guimei Bai, ‘Women’s Rights are Human Rights. A Response to Hilary Charlesworth and Christine Chinkin from a Chinese Perspective’ in Fassbender and Traisbach (eds) (n 25).
As suggested by Larking ‘given the structural power imbalances and deepening material inequalities within the marketplace, incorporating more women within it will not miraculously ensure an improvement in their economic and social status. Moreover, it will undermine women’s capacity to structure their lives according to alternative social understanding and political economies’ Larking (n 48) 322.
Steans and Tepe-Belfrage (n 12).
UN Human Rights Council, a/hrc/47/51, ‘Current Levels of Representation of Women in Human Rights Organs and Mechanisms: Ensuring Gender Balance’ (21 May 2021) Report of the Human Rights Advisory Committee; Freya Baetens (ed), Identity and Diversity on the International Bench, Who is the Judge? (oup 2020).
Claudia Martin, ‘Article 8 of the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination against Women (cedaw): A Stepping Stone in Ensuring Gender Parity in International Organs and Tribunals’ (2016) intlawgrrls.
Gulay Caglar et al., ‘Gender in International Governance’ in Steans and Tepe-Belfrage (n 12); Anne-Marie Slaughter and Hilary Charlesworth, ‘The Gender of International Institutions. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting’ (5–8 April 1995) American Society of International Law, 89 Structures of World Order 79.
UN Human Rights Council (n 49).
UN General Assembly Resolution 174 (11) (21 November 1947).
Miguel de Serpa Soares, ‘Seven Women in Seventy Years: A Roundtable Discussion on Achieving Gender Parity at the International Law Commission’ (2018) Statement, United Nations Office of Legal Affairs; Oral Nilufer, ‘Gender Equality in the United Nations System: A Closer Look at the International Law Commission’ in Gender Lecture Series ‘Talking Gender, Equality and Diversity’ organized by Fornalé, World Trade Institute, 29 May 2019.
Monica Pinto, ‘The Authority and the Membership of the Commission in the Future’ in The United Nations, Seventy Years of the International Law Commission. Drawing Balance for the Future (Brill 2021).
See the website of the International Law Commission <
See outcome of the elections 2021. Women elected include: Ms Okowa Phoebe (Kenya), Ms Mangklatanakul Vilawan (Thailand), Ms Galvao Teles Patricia (Portugal), Ms Oral Nilufer (Turkey), Ms Ridings Penelope (New Zealand) <
In the list of candidates out of 42 candidates, only 8 were women.
See for instance ‘to conclude my remarks, allow me to make a brief but important reflection on the composition of the International Law Commission from a gender perspective. As other delegations have already pointed out, we cannot fail to draw attention to the fact that the ilc includes a small number of women among its members (4 at present) and that the number of women candidates in the current electoral process is also very small (only 8 candidates). It is obvious that the composition of the Commission does not reflect the reality of the group of jurists specialized in international law and we can only express our wish that this inadequacy be progressively reduced’. Agustin Santos Maraver, at the Sixth Committee of the 76th Session of the General Assembly, Agenda Item 82: ‘Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Seventy-Second Session’ Cluster ii, Statement, Spain, 1 November 2021. ‘I would like to close by briefly addressing the upcoming ilc election. Simply put, the ilc historically and currently lacks anything close to gender balance. The statistics are well known – in the 72 years of its existence, the ilc has had just seven female members. In its current composition, the ilc has just four women out of 34 members. Prior to those four, only three women had ever served on the ilc. There is an opportunity this year to move the ilc in the right direction, so that its membership comes a little closer to reflecting the global community. There are eight women running in this year’s election, all well qualified in their own right. This includes the U.S. candidate, Professor Evelyn Aswad, who, if elected, would bring to the commission a valuable combination of government, multilateral, and academic experience. Even if all eight of these candidates are elected, women would still constitute less than a quarter – 8 out of 34 seats – of the membership on the ilc. We can and must do better. In the meantime, the United States expresses its appreciation to the governments nominating or otherwise supporting female candidates for the ilc this year. We also thank and congratulate the seven women who previously served on the ilc, who helped blaze the trail’. Richard Visek, Statement at the 76th Session General Assembly Sixth Committee Agenda Item 82: ‘Report on International Law Commission on the Work of its 72nd Session’ United States Department of State, October 26, 2021.
Kirsten Haack, ‘Breaking Barriers? Women’s Leadership and Representation at the United Nations’ (2014) 20 Global Governance 37.
Gayle Kirshenbaum, ‘Inside the World’s Largest Men’s Club’ (1992) ms 16.
Françoise Tulkens, ‘Parity on the Bench: Why? Why not?’ (2014) 6 ehrlr 587–595.
Stephanie Hennette Vauchez, ‘More Women – But Which Women? The Rule and the Politics of Gender Balance at European Court of Human Rights’ (2015) 26 (1) European Journal of International Law 195.
Françoise Tulkens, ‘More Women – But Which Women? A Reply to Stéphanie Hennette Vauchez’ (2015) 26 (1) European Journal of International Law 223.
Lena Felton, ‘The Consequences of a Coronavirus Task Force Made Almost Entirely of Men’ (2 March 2020) <
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (cedaw Committee), cedaw/c/1994/4, ‘Implementation of Article 21 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Analysis of Articles 7 and 8 of the Convention’ (1993) Report by the Secretariat 22.
Eléonore Lépinard and Ruth Rubio-Marín (eds), Transforming Gender Citizenship. The Irresistible Rise of Gender Quotas in Europe (cup 2018); Drude Dahlerup, ‘Gender Quotas in Politics’ in L Sandy Maisel (ed), Oxford Bibliographies in Political Science (oup 2020); Drude Dahlerup, Has Democracy failed Women? (Polity Press 2017).
Charlesworth and Chinkin (n 1).
Pippa Norris (n 12).
Sarah Wittkopp, ‘Article 7’ in Marsha Freeman et al. (eds), The UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (oup 2012); Sarah Wittkopp, ‘Article 8’ in Marsha Freeman et al., The UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (oup 2012)
; Ruth Rubio-Marín and Will Kymlicka (eds), Gender Parity and Multicultural Feminism: Towards a New Synthesis (oup 2018).
After the adoption of the Gender Action Plan (gap) in 2018, the World Trade Institute created its own Gender Team (Know the gap! Team). Since then, the team has been led by snsf Prof. Elisa Fornalé, acting as gender coordinator. She has been supported by Ms Sophia Thompson (in charge of administrative activities), Mr Francesco De Fino (in charge of communication activities), Mr Pablo Das (in charge of social media tools), Ms Susan Kaplan (coaching) and Dr Aylin Yildiz (in charge of ensuring peer-to-peer engagement).
All podcasts are available online <
References
Adami R, Women and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Routledge 2019).
Adami R and Plesch D (eds), Women and the UN: A New History of Women’s International Human Rights (Routledge 2022).
Allotey P et al., ‘Doing Gender Better: Can the UN Step Up?’ (2019) 393 The Lancet 2371.
Anderson E, The Imperative of Integration (Princeton University Press 2010).
Anderson E, Social Movements, Experiments in Living and Moral Progress: Case Studies from Britain’s Abolition of Slavery (University of Kansas 2014).
Baetens F (ed), Identity and Diversity on the International Bench, Who is the Judge? (oup 2020).
Banda F, ‘The Limits of Law’ in Fassbender B and Traisbach K (eds), The Limits of Human Rights (oup 2019).
Byrnes AC, ‘The “Other” Human rights Treaty Body: The Work of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women’ (1989) 14 (1) Yale Journal of International Law 1–67.
Brooks T (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Global Justice (oup 2020).
Buss D and Manji A (eds), International Law: Modern Feminist Approach (Hart Publishing 2005).
Cairns I, ‘The Costs of (Partial) Inclusion: The Evolution, Limits and Biases of Principal Feminist Challenges to International Law’, in Jänterä-Jareborg M and Tigroudja H (eds), Women’s Human Rights and the Elimination of Discrimination (Hague Academy of International Law, Brill 2015).
Charlesworth H and Chinkin C, The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis (Manchester University Press 2000).
Charlesworth H and Chinkin C, ‘Between the Margins and the Mainstream’ in Fassbender B and Traisbach K (eds), The Limits of Human Rights (oup 2019).
Chinkin C, ‘Gender and Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights’ in Riedel E et al. (eds), Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in International Law (oup 2014).
Collins P, Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (Routledge 2008).
Dahlerup D, ‘Representing Women: Defining Substantive Representation of Women’ in Escobar-Lemmon MC and Taylor-Robinson MM (eds), Representation. The Case of Women (oup 2014).
Dahlerup D, ‘The Critical Mass Theory in Public and Scholarly Debates’ in Campbell R and Childs S (eds), Deeds and Words: Gendering Politics after Joni Lovenduski (ecpr Press 2014).
Dahlerup D, Has Democracy failed Women? (Polity Press 2018).
Dahlerup D, ‘Gender Quotas in Politics’ in Maisel S (ed), Oxford Bibliographies in Political Science (Oxford 2020).
de Burca G, Reframing Human Rights in a Turbulent Era (oup 2021).
D’Ignazio C and Klein L, Data Feminism (mit 2020).
Franceschet S and Krook ML (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Women’s Political Rights (Palgrave Macmillan 2019).
Haack K, ‘Breaking Barriers? Women’s Leadership and Representation at the United Nations’ (2014) 20 Global Governance 37.
Heyward C and Roser D (eds), Climate Justice in a Non-Ideal World (oup 2016).
Herten-Crabb A and Davies S, ‘Why WHO Needs a Feminist Economic Agenda’ (2020) 28 The Lancet 1018–1020.
Hellum A and Aasen HS (eds), Women’s Human Rights, CEDAW in International, Regional and National Law (cup 2013).
Htun M and Weldon SL, The Logics of Gender Justice State Action on Women’s Rights Around the World (cup 2018).
Knop K (ed), Gender and Human Rights (oup 2004).
Krisch N, ‘International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order’ (2005) 16 European Journal of International Law 369.
Kuovo S, ‘The United Nations and Gender Mainstreaming: Limits and Possibilities’ in Buss D and Manji A (eds). International Law: Modern Feminist Approaches (Hart 2005) 237.
Lépinard E and Rubio-Marín R (eds), Transforming Gender Citizenship. The Irresistible Rise of Gender Quotas in Europe (Cambridge 2018).
Luhmann N, Trust and Power (Polity Press 2017).
Magar V et al., ‘Gender Mainstreaming within WHO: Not without Equity and Human Rights’ (2019) 393 (10182) The Lancet 1678.
MacKinnon AC, Feminism Unmodified Discourses on Life and Law (Harvard University Press 1987).
Ni Aolain F, ‘More Women – But Which Women? A Reply to Stéphanie Hennette Vauchez’ (2015) 26 (1) European Journal of International Law 229.
Nivedita C and Deshpande M, ‘Role of Feminist Movements in Gender Mainstreaming Policies: The Case of UN’ (2019) 6 (1) International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (ijrar) 26.
Nussbaum M, ‘Women’s Progress and Women’s Human Rights’ in Fassbender B and Traisbach K (eds), The Limits of Human Rights (oup 2019).
Nussbaum M, Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach (cup 2000).
Otto D, ‘The Exile of Inclusion: Reflections on Gender Issues in International Law Over the Last Decade’ (2009) 10 (1) Melbourne Journal of International Law, 11–26.
Otto D (ed), Gender Issues and Human Rights (Edward Elgar 2013).
Patel G, Women and International Human Rights Law (Routledge 2019).
Peters A, Women, Quotas, and Constitutions: A Comparative Study of Affirmative Action for Women under American, German, EC, and International Law (Kluwer Law International 1999).
Ravindran T and Kelkar-Khambete A, ‘Gender Mainstreaming in Health: Looking Back, Looking Forward’ (2008) 3(Suppl 1) Global Public Health 121–142.
Rimmer H and Ogg K (eds), Research Handbook on Feminist Engagement with International Law (Edward Elgar 2019).
Robertson E et al., ‘Best Practices for Election of Members to International and Regional Treaty Bodies’ (2019) Women at Table https://www.skadden.com/-/media/files/publications/2018/10/womenthetablereportoct2018.pdf.
Rubio-Marín R and Kymlicka W (eds), Gender Parity and Multicultural Feminism: Towards and New Synthesis (oup 2018).
Phillips A, Engendering Democracy (The Pennsylvania State University Press 1991).
Pinto M, ‘The Authority and the Membership of the Commission in the Future’ in The United Nations, Seventy Years of the International Law Commission. Drawing Balance for the Future (Brill 2021).
Pitkin HF, The Concept of Representation (University of California Press 1967).
Schachter O and Joyner CC (eds), United Nations Legal Order (2 vols.) (Cambridge University Press 1995).
Schoop-Schilling HB and Flinterman C (eds), The Circle of Empowerment: Twenty Five Years of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (The Feminist Press at the City University of New York 2007).
Shaw J, ‘The European Union and Gender Mainstreaming: Constitutionally Embedded or Comprehensively Marginalised’ (2002) 10 (3) Feminist Legal Studies 213.
Sikkink K, Evidence for Hope: Making Human Rights Work in the 21st Century (Princeton University Press 2017).
Sluga G and James C (eds), Women, Diplomacy and International Politics since 1500 (Routledge 2015).
Steans J and Tepe-Belfrage D (eds), Handbook on Gender in World Politics (Edward Elgar 2013).
Tulkens F, ‘Parity on the Bench: Why? Why not?’ (2014) 6 ehrlr 587.
Tulkens F, ‘More Women – But Which Women? A Reply to Stéphanie Hennette Vauchez’ (2015) 26 (1) ejil 223.
Vauchez SH, ‘More Women – But Which Women? The Rule and the Politics of Gender Balance at European Court of Human Rights’ (2015) 26 (1) ejil 195.
Walby S, ‘The European Union and Gender Equality: Emergent Varieties of Gender Regimes’ (2004) 11 (1) Social Politics 4.