The inclusion of gender perspectives into conflict analysis can provide a more nuanced and effective understanding of conflict factors, actors and dynamics. Such analysis can highlight the gendered nature of the causes and impact of conflict, providing a deeper understanding of the structural issues that need to be addressed through peacebuilding (Anderlini, 2006). Gender variables are, however, often missing from conflict analysis and conflict assessment frameworks. Many conflict analysis frameworks mention gender issues – for example, the need for women’s participation in consultative processes, or for understanding of the role of gender in social exclusion – in only a cursory sense (Anderlini, 2006). Resistance to undertaking gender-sensitive conflict analyses is partly fuelled by the lack of rigorous evidence that gendered approaches make a significant difference to the quality of interventions in FCAS (Anderlini, 2006).
Guidance for carrying out gender-sensitive conflict analysis is not well developed. The term ‘gender’ is still often used synonymously for ‘women’, resulting in the failure of gender analysis to acknowledge that gender is relational and that men also possess gender identities (Sudhakar & Kuehnast, 2011). Masculinities and femininities can be defined in relation to one another. For example, women tend to gain economic responsibility in conflict contexts while men lose it (El Bushra & Sahl, 2005). Acknowledging men as gendered subjects makes it possible to ask men and women similar questions in gender analysis, and to understand what conflict and peace mean to men and to different sorts of men, and what men mean to conflict or peace (Myrttinen et al., 2014).
A gender-relational approach to gender and conflict analysis should include how gender difference intersects with other identities (age, social class, sexuality, disability, ethnic or religious background, marital status or urban/rural setting) in shaping and being shaped by violent conflict – and in providing opportunities for transformative change (Myrttinen et al., 2014; El Bushra & Sahl, 2005). Most power is often held by older men, for example, excluding younger men and women (Harris, 2011). A gender-relational approach could identify and target vulnerable groups more precisely (instead of automatically focusing on women and children generally). Myrttinen et al. (2014) find in their case studies that particular men and sexual and gender minorities also experience vulnerabilities. Men and women are not homogenous groups, but play and experience different roles during conflict. Male victims of sexual violence and men who have witnessed sexual violence against female relatives are rarely considered. In addition, female combatants are often overlooked in disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) programming, due to a focus on combatants as male (Sudhakar & Kuehnast, 2011).
For further resources, see the section on gender and conflict analysis in the GSDRC’s conflict topic guide.
Gender-sensitive political economy analysis
Some experts recommend that donors adopt a political economy approach to gender analysis (Castillejo, 2011), as well as integrating gender issues into any conflict, security, and economic analyses. There is growing acknowledgement that gender inequalities are linked to the nature of the political settlement (Castillejo, 2011) and that inequalities and marginalisation are drivers of conflict and crisis (Browne, 2014). Gender has not, however, been widely incorporated into political economy analysis (PEA) (Browne, 2014). Incorporating gender into PEA means understanding how gender inequality relates to power relations and resource allocation (Browne, 2014).
- Anderlini, S. N. (2006). Mainstreaming gender in conflict analysis: Issues and recommendations (Social Development Papers No. 33). Washington DC: World Bank.
See full text - Browne, E. (2014). Gender in Political Economy Analysis (GSDRC Helpdesk Research Report 1071). Birmingham: GSDRC.
See full text - Castillejo, C. (2011). Building a state that works for women: Integrating gender into post-conflict state building. Madrid: FRIDE.
See full text - El-Bushra, J. & Sahl, I. (2005). Cycles of violence: Gender relations and armed conflict. Nairobi: ACCORD.
See full text - Harris, C. (2011). What can applying a gender lens contribute to conflict studies?: A review of selected MICROCON working papers (MICROCON Research Working Paper 41). Brighton: MICROCON.
See full text - Myrttinen, H., Naujoks, J., & El-Bushra, J. (2014). Rethinking gender in peacebuilding. London: International Alert
See full text - Sudhakar, N., & Kuehnast, K. (2011). The other side of gender: Including masculinity concerns in conflict and peacebuilding. Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace.
See full text
