Ever since the endorsement of the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997, the European Union (EU) has committed itself to implementing the concept of “gender mainstreaming” into all its policies and institutions. At the time, the term was considered “potentially revolutionary” [1] since it aimed to transform the meaning of including a gendered dimension in the EU by challenging the status quo of gender relations. However, since the treaty entered into force 21 years ago, feminist scholars have argued that the EU has failed to incorporate gender mainstreaming. [2] This article is aimed to introduce the reader to the concept of gender mainstream and its application to the EU´s external relations. It details the ways in which gender mainstreaming has been implemented and, in turn, influenced the capacity of the EU to bring theory to practice.
Introducing Gender Mainstreaming in the European Union
To this day, there exists a conceptual confusion globally among the actors working in the area of gender equality. This can be seen particularly in the case of gender mainstreaming, within its meaning and application. [3] Hence, we can never overstress definitions.
Gender mainstreaming has been defined as “the (re)organisation, improvement, development and evaluation of policy processes, so that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at all stages, by the actors normally involved in policy-making”. [4] The confusion with this term appears when it is used interchangeably with other practices whose aim is also to promote gender equality. Gender mainstreaming goes beyond concepts such as gender balance or gender equity (which focus on increasing the number of women in an organisation). It recognises that gender equality is not possible without “transforming gender relations” [5] and consequently questions the institutional norms and values existent in the international arena. [6] This means that any policy or action aiming to include effective gender mainstreaming should go beyond positive actions and ultimately tackle the root of inequalities between men and women.
Adding to this conceptual confusion is the fact that, despite the popularity of the term, the distinct ways of putting it into practice are rarely discussed outside of academia. It is fundamental to remind ourselves that how the actors decide to approach and apply it is what determines if gender mainstreaming fulfils its transformative power. In this regard, unfortunately, the EU has not been an exception to the norm. Indeed, it has been argued that gender mainstreaming was presented to the EU as “a single concept, with no accompanying analysis of gender, gender relations, gender impact assessments and other related concepts and instruments”. [7] The EU´s most recent framework to include a gender mainstreaming strategy in its external relations, named Gender Action Plan 2016-2020, unintentionally supports this message.
In this document, the EU presents a way of assessing gender mainstreaming that underestimates the importance of a focus on how to include it’s practices, placing all the attention instead on whether it is or is not included. This is reflected in the main goal of the document which is to ensure that 85 % of all EU´s new programmes are marked as ‘G1’ or ‘G2’ by 2020. The gendered dimension of each project is measured following the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development gender equality policy markers, where ‘G1’ corresponds to projects where gender equality is the main goal and ‘G2’ to those that include gender equality as a significant aim of it. [8] While this allows us to recognize which projects are related to the promotion of gender equality, it does not assess how gender equality is promoted. Rather, it promotes the idea that the inclusion of a gendered dimension is a “tick box exercise” in the EU’s documentation. [9]
On top of this, it is fundamental to understand that gender mainstreaming in the EU is implemented through “soft law” such as guidelines for the member states and non-binding communications. [10] This limits the capacity of the EU to effectively enforce and incorporate gender mainstreaming. In the end, the inclusion of gender mainstreaming in EU external relations relies largely on the goodwill of the member states and other actors involved. This sparks a debate on the need for the EU to take a stronger stance if it wishes to fully implement gender mainstreaming at all levels of decision-making.
The EU and its Comprehensive approach towards the UNWPS
The United Nations Women, Peace and Security (UNWPS) agenda is the central instrument employed by the EU to bring a gendered perspective into its external actions. Hence, if one aims to understand how the EU applies gender mainstreaming, it is important to acknowledge the main aspects of the UNWPS agenda.
Although the UNWPS Resolutions are a major victory for the organisations and activists around the globe fighting for the recognition of women in security, they (re)produce a specific understanding of men’s and, especially, women's role in security. [11] While masculinity is usually associated with strength, militarism, rationality, and protection, femininity is connected with peace, weakness, relational character, and protected subjects. [12] Therefore, although it recognises that women experience conflict and peace differently than men and claims that women should play an active role in peacebuilding, UNWPS Resolutions still provide a very limited understanding of gender relations. [13] In line with this, several studies have demonstrated that the UNWPS agenda is indeed about bringing women, and not gender, into the peace process. [14] Hence, the transformative power that is characteristic of gender mainstreaming is not per se promoted through these Resolutions.
Nevertheless, it must be noted that the UNWPS agenda does not provide a clear guideline to follow, but rather has a “confused and confusing” character. [15] In other words, it can and has indeed during the years been understood, applied, and translated in different ways. [16] Thus, while it may not originally represent gender mainstreaming, it leaves an open space for actors to include it.
For the time being, the EU has followed uncritically the initial application of the agenda. [17] This remains clear in the EU´s documentation, in particular the well-known “Comprehensive approach to the EU implementation of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820 on Women, Peace and Security”. Adopted in 2008, this document aims to introduce a gendered element to all of the EU´s external actions, from conflict-related actions to development cooperation. In particular, it highlights the necessity of incorporating both men’s and women’s concerns into policies. Despite the intention of including both sexes, a detailed analysis of the document has highlighted the underrepresentation of men “with 193 references to women or girls, compared to just 26 to men or boys”. [18] This approach, known as “adding women and stirring”, does not correspond with gender mainstreaming.
Moving from the generics of these types of documents, we find that the main place for the UNWPS agenda implementation has been the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) of the EU. Specialists in gender studies and international politics, such as Annica Kronsell (2016), have analyzed CSDP´s official documents and conclude that the CSDP does not provide women with an active role in security. Instead, women are mainly seen as the subject of protection, following the same pitfalls as the UNWPS agenda. As a result of CSDP´s undervaluation of women as security agents, the mediation has turned out to be a less developed element of the UNWPS agenda in EU security practices. [19] Beyond this, the intergovernmental character of the CSDP and the prevalence of men in its organizational infrastructure pose a threat to the inclusion of gender mainstreaming, a strategy that challenges traditional conceptions of security. [20]
Conclusion
Gender mainstreaming pushes us to think further on how to transform the constructed inequality embedded in gender relations. Thus, unlike other actions and policies inside the field of gender equality, gender mainstreaming demands change. It is precisely for this reason that it is fundamental for the EU to adopt gender mainstreaming uniformly, differentiating it from other positive actions towards gender equality. This article has shown the need for the EU to focus on how to approach gender mainstreaming, rather than simply its inclusion in official documentation. This could entail a reconsideration of its current soft approach in order to implement practices at all levels of policy-making, as well as the introduction of new instruments of gender analysis in the EU´s structure. Regarding the promotion of gender mainstreaming beyond EU borders, the EU should clarify, reshape, or introduce new elements in the UNWPS agenda to integrate gender mainstreaming more effectively. The EU has the capabilities to fulfil its full potential as an advocate of gender mainstreaming. It is a matter of thinking critically about certain practices that could be unintentionally causing poor outcomes.
Sources
[1] Hafner-Burton, E.M. & Pollack, M.A. (2009) "Mainstreaming Gender in the European Union: Getting the Incentives Right", Comparative European Politics, 7(1): 114-138, 134.
[2] Guerrina, R & Wright, K.A.M. (2016) "Gendering normative power europe: Lessons of the women, peace and security agenda". International Affairs, 92(2): 293-312.
Lombardo, E. & Meier, P (2006) "Gender Mainstreaming in the EU: Incorporating a Feminist Reading?", European Journal of Women's Studies, 13(2):151-166.
Mergaert, L. (2012). The Reality of Gender Mainstreaming Implementation: The Case of the EU Research Policy. PhD diss., Nimegen: Radboud Universiteit. Available at: http://bit.ly/Mergaert (Accessed: 15 Sep 2020)
Minto, R. & Mergaert, L. (2018) "Gender mainstreaming and evaluation in the EU: comparative perspectives from feminist institutionalism", International Feminist Journal of Politics, 20 (2): 204-220.
[3] AWID (2004). "Gender Mainstream, Can it Work for Women´s rights?" Spotlight, 3. Available at: http://bit.ly/GenderMainstream (Accessed: 15 Sep 2020)
[4] Council of Europe (1998). Gender Mainstreaming: Conceptual Framework, Methodology and Presentation of Good Practice, EG-S-MS (98) 2. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 13.
[5] Ibid., 14.
[6] Kronsell, A. (2012) “Gender, Sexuality, and Institutions of Hegemonic Masculinity”. In Gender, Sex, and the Potsnational Defense: Militarism and Peacekeeping. Oxford Scholarship Online.
[7] Stratigaki M. (2005) "Gender Mainstreaming vs Positive Action: An Ongoing Conflict in EU Gender Equality Policy". European Journal of Women’s Studies,12(2):165-186, 175.
[8] OECD (n.d). “DAC gender equality policy marker” Available at: https://www.oecd.org/dac/gender-development/dac-gender-equality-marker.htm (Accessed: 11 March 2020)
[9] Chappell, L. and Guerrina, R. (2020) "Understanding the gender regime in the European External Action Service", Cooperation and Conflict, 55(2):261-280.
[10] Debusscher, P. (2012) "Gender Mainstreaming in European Union Development Policy toward Latin America: Transforming Gender Relations or Confirming Hierarchies? ", Latin American Perspectives, 39 (6): 181-197.
[11] Ellerby, Kara L. (2011). Engendered security: norms, peace and gender agreements. Arizona: The University of Arizona.
[12] Kennedy, C., & Dingli, S. (2016) “Gender and Security”. In Collins, A. (Ed.) Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 155-167.
[13] Ellerby, 2011.
[14] Cockburn, Cynthia (2007) From Where We Stand: war, women‟s activism and feminist anlysis. London: Zed Books
Peterson, V. Spike and OECD (n.d). “DAC gender equality policy marker” Available at: https://www.oecd.org/dac/gender-development/dac-gender-equality-marker.htm (Accessed: 11 March 2020) Anne K. Runyan (2010). Global Gender Issues in the New Millennium. 3rd Ed. Westview: Pennsylvania.
Willett, S. (2010) "Introduction: Security Council Resolution 1325: Assessing the Impact on Women, Peace and Security", International Peacekeeping, 17(2):142-158.
Ellerby, 2011.
[15] Anderlini, Sanam Naraghi (2010) "What the women say: Participation and UNSCR 1325:A Case Study Assessment". International Civil Society Action Network and the MIT Center for International Studies, 15.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Haastrup, T. (2018) "Creating Cinderella? The Unintended Consequences of the Women Peace and Security Agenda for EU's Mediation Architecture", International Negotiation, 23(2): 218-237. Kennedy, C., & Dingli, S. (2016) “Gender and Security”. In Collins, A. (Ed.) Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 155-167.
[18] Guerrina & Wright, 2016, 308.
[19] Haastrup, 2018.
[20] Guerrina, R., Chappell, L. & Wright, K.A.M (2018) "Transforming CSDP? Feminist Triangles and Gender Regimes", JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 56 (5): 1036-1052.