A range of factors, including ethnicity, age, and occupational group, may affect how people experience conflict, more so than differences between men and women. Nevertheless, there is consistent evidence that women, men, girls, and boys experience conflict differently and that conflict has differential impacts on men and women.
Gender-based violence (GBV) and violence against women and girls (VAWG)
Gender-based violence (GBV) is violence targeted at individuals or groups on the basis of their gender. Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG) is directed specifically at females. While VAWG is considered to be a useful proxy indicator of rising tensions and incipient conflict, ensuing violence and armed conflict themselves can exacerbate gender-based violence. Isolated case studies have documented how women experience multiple types of violence as a result of war. Qualitative interviews with young women who returned from abduction into the Lord’s Resistance Army in northern Uganda, many of whom were forcibly given as ‘wives’ to commanders, indicate linkages between different forms of violence and discrimination. These women experienced physical and sexual violence in an armed group, verbal and physical abuse from extended family members, and from intimate partners (Annana & Brierb, 2010).
It has been increasingly emphasised that sexual violence cannot be seen merely as an inevitable ‘by-product’ of war and insecurity, but deserves specific attention as a strategy of war and as a form of insecurity in itself. In addition, Wood (2009, cited in Sudhakar & Kuehnast, 2011) finds that whether sexual violence occurs during conflict depends partly on the dynamics of armed groups (their policies and strength of command structure), which may either tolerate sexual violence or forbid and punish such acts.
Evidence also suggests that while women and girls are more likely to be victims of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV), SGBV against men and boys is also widespread during conflict (Sivakumaran, 2010). A review of UN responses to sexual violence against men and boys finds that while there have been positive developments – in understanding the problem, measures of prevention and protection, and consequences for accused perpetrators – much more remains to be done (Sivakumaran, 2010).
Stereotypes surrounding masculinity and a culturally permissive approach towards violence against men may lead to under-reporting and reduced health-seeking behaviour (Linos, 2009). A study of the experience of civilian males during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina finds an extra level of stigma associated with violence against men when heterosexual men are sexually violated (Linos, 2009). Sexual and gender minorities, i.e. lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons (LGBTI) may also be targeted, yet this has received minimal attention. During and after conflict, armed groups may engage in policing conservative, heterosexual gender norms, violently targeting LGBTI communities. LGBTI persons are also vulnerable to sexual violence and abuse by security forces, informal violent groups and individuals, particularly in barracks, police stations, prisons and detention centres, refugee and IDP camps, and at border facilities (Myrttinen et al., 2014).
Anderlini (2011) finds that the long-term impact of SGBV committed in conflict is rarely addressed. Such impacts include undermining reconciliation efforts and rehabilitation (particularly of victims), fuelling retributive violence, and higher rates of sexual disease, including HIV/AIDS, among rape victims. In Rwanda, for example, HIV prevalence in rural areas rose from 1 percent prior to the genocide in 1994 to 11 percent in 1997 (UNAIDS, WHO, cited in Anderlini, 2011, p. 11). A study based on female and male combatants who experienced sexual violence in Liberia found that they had worse mental health outcomes than non-combatants and former combatants who had not suffered from SGBV (Johnson et al., 2008, cited in Buvinic, Das Gupta, Casabonne, & Verwimp, 2013). It is important to track these longer term impacts in order to assess the full consequences of violent conflict and to design appropriate interventions (Johnson et al., 2008, cited in Buvinic et al., 2013): more data and research are needed.
Much of the literature emphasises that the end of armed conflict may not necessarily end SGBV. People’s experiences of violence may lead them to view violence as normal (Harders, 2011). Rather than representing an isolated event, such violence can more appropriately be seen as a point along a continuum (Sudhakar & Kuehnast, 2011). Many post-conflict societies experience high levels of sexual and domestic violence (Schäfer, 2013).
This is closely tied to the issue of masculinities and identity. Male ex-combatants who return, traumatised, to few economic opportunities and to changed gender roles (stemming from the conflict) may see SGBV as a way to re-establish male domination (Schäfer, 2013; Sudhakar & Kuehnast, 2011).
Reducing gender-based violence in post-conflict situations requires action to: increase educational and economic opportunities and the accountability of the criminal justice system, minimise substance abuse, and improve the coping mechanisms of families and individuals exposed to extreme violence (Annana & Brierb, 2010). Women and girls are not the sole targets of such violence; there are also reports of assaults on other men and armed robbery (Schäfer, 2013). These issues are exacerbated by the lack of outlets for men to openly express their social, emotional and psychological needs – and for them to be addressed (Myrttinen et al., 2014).
For further resources, see the sections on gender-based violence and gender and fragile and conflict-affected states in the GSDRC’s Gender topic guide, the section on women in conflict-affected areas in the GSDRC’s Conflict topic guide, as well as the Violence against women and girl’s helpdesk and Virtual Knowledge Centre to End Violence against Women and Girls. See also the sub-section on social norms in this topic guide and the GSDRC report, Links between women’s empowerment (or lack of) and outbreaks of violent conflict.
Gendered health impacts
The health impacts of conflict can be direct (battle-related deaths) or indirect (e.g. increased risk of disease transmission) (Murray et al., 2002). A recent secondary review concluded men have a higher risk of death during conflict, whereas women and children constitute a majority of refugees and the displaced (Buvinic et al., 2013). Isolated quantitative studies provide contradictory evidence of the effects of conflict and fragility on the life expectancy ratio of men and women. One study found that conflict reduces women’s life expectancy disproportionately to men’s, because women are more affected by the indirect effects of economic change (e.g. increases in food prices), displacement and sexual violence – and consequently the risk of HIV/AIDS (Buvinic et al., 2013; Plümper & Neumayer, 2005). Another, more recent statistical analysis found conflict does not have a significant impact on gender parity in life expectancy; rather internal conflicts seem to harm males and females equally (Gates, Hegre, Nygård, & Strand, 2010). There is evidence that conflict affects maternal mortality: in 2008, the eight countries with the highest maternal mortality rates were either experiencing or emerging from conflict (Saferworld & Conciliation Resources, 2014). In addition, a meta-analysis on sex differences in trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder finds that females are at greater risk than men of experiencing these conditions after traumatic events (Tolin & Foa 2006, cited in Buvinic et al., 2013).
Gendered economic impacts
It is widely posited that conflict alters women’s economic role in the household and broader society. While rigorous evidence is limited, some recent comparative, cross-country case studies (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Kosovo, Nepal, Tajikistan and Timor-Leste) illustrate that armed conflict can increase women’s economic activity, primarily through participation in labour markets. In some cases, this is associated with increases in overall household and community welfare (Justino et al., 2012). In general, however, female employment often involves low-paid, low-skilled jobs, self-employment in the informal sector, or unpaid family labour (Justino et al., 2012).
The effects of conflict on women’s economic activity differ by age and life status. Statistical data from Rwanda document how conflict economically empowered widows, probably by necessity. In contrast, married women continued to conform to traditional notions of women’s role, engaging in domestic tasks and subsistence farming (Schindler, 2011). In general, the economic opportunities open to women are shaped mostly by culture and tradition, education, and access to land and resources (O’Connell, 2011).
There is some country-specific evidence (Colombia, East Timor and more weakly, Nepal) that supports the argument that greater economic participation of women contributes to women’s empowerment within households (measured by the share of women’s contribution to household income) (Justino et al., 2012). Based on various case studies (Sudan, Uganda, Angola, Mali, and Somalia), El Bushra & Sahl (2005) find that women in some instances gain decision making power within the family once they become the main breadwinner. In general, however, they find that while the practices of social institutions may change in conflict contexts, it is usually to a limited degree.
Overall, there is insufficient longitudinal research to ascertain whether temporary adjustments to gender roles through periods of conflict have had lasting impacts. Justino et al. (2012) argue that social, economic and political gains that women may have achieved during the conflict tend to disappear in the post-conflict period. Although there is little empirical evidence on the economic status of war widows, existing evidence suggests that these female-headed households are particularly vulnerable and have a higher incidence of poverty when compared to male-headed households (Myrttinen et al., 2014; Buvinic et al., 2013). Such vulnerability to poverty can persist across generations. It is thus important to target widows and their families with assistance in order to halt this inter-generational transmission (Buvinic et al., 2013). To date, there has also been little or no research conducted on the reintegration of same-sex couples (whether ex-combatants, IDPs, refugees or abductees) after armed conflict (Myrttinen et al., 2014).
Gendered impacts on political and civic activity
Conflict can create opportunities for women to play an increased role in political decision-making (Domingo et al., 2013). Hughes (2009) finds that longer, larger scale wars that contest the political system and/or change the composition of government have produced the best outcomes for women to gain parliamentary representation. A third of the countries that have 30 per cent or more women in parliament experienced recent conflict, fragility or a transition to democracy (UN Security Council, 2012, p. 10). Evidence from Rwanda, Mozambique, Uganda, and Tajikistan suggests that structural and cultural mechanisms combined with political openings have resulted in post-conflict gains in women’s parliamentary representation (Hughes, 2009). In addition, more women in Africa have tended to run for presidential office in FCAS (DRC, Liberia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone) than in countries that have not recently experienced conflict (Tripp, 2012, cited in Domingo et al., 2013).
Similar to the case of gendered economic impacts, however, women in most (but not all) post-conflict contexts have been unable to formalise and translate political gains made during conflict into post-conflict political representation (Hughes, 2009). Although there are examples of women having taken political roles at community and national levels (Sudan, Uganda), the evidence is inconsistent. In many other examples women have not made inroads into power structures at the community level (El Bushra & Sahl, 2005) or at higher political levels.
Violence against ‘political’ women is common in FCAS and is a key factor deterring women from participating in public life (True, 2013). In El Salvador, for example, reasons given for women’s lower engagement in civic issues and politics than men included increased public insecurity (NDI Survey, cited in Anderlini, 2011, p. 38). Women human rights defenders may be vulnerable to abuse and exploitation as a result of the presence of international actors and peacekeeping troops (APWLD, 2007). Extremists can also gain power in conflict situations and violate human rights where traditional, religious and customary norms are rigidly imposed (APWLD, 2007). In post-conflict situations, the dangers facing women human rights defenders can actually increase during periods of impunity when the rule of law is interrupted (APWLD, 2007).
For further discussion, see ‘Enhancing women’s political and civic participation’ in the section on Addressing gender equality.
- Anderlini, S. (2011). World development report gender background paper. Washington DC: World Bank
See full text - Annana, J., & Brierb, M. (2010). The risk of return: Intimate partner violence in Northern Uganda’s armed conflict. Social Science & Medicine, 70(1), 152–159.
See full text - Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD). (2007). Claiming rights, claiming justice: A guidebook on women human rights defenders. Bangkok: APWLD.
See full text - Buvinic, M., Das Gupta, M., Casabonne, U., & Verwimp, P. (2013). Violent conflict and gender inequality: An overview (Policy research working paper 6371). Washington, DC: World Bank.
See full text - Domingo, P., Holmes, R., Rocha Menocal, A. & Jones, N. (with Bhuvanendra, D., & Wood, J). (2013). Assessment of the evidence of links between gender equality, peacebuilding and statebuilding: Literature review. London: ODI.
See full text - El-Bushra, J. & Sahl, I. (2005). Cycles of violence: Gender relations and armed conflict. Nairobi: ACCORD.
See full text - Gates, S., Hegre, H., Nygård, H. M., & Strand, H. (2010). Consequences of civil conflict (World Development Report 2011 Background Paper). Washington, DC: World Bank.
See full text - Hughes, M. M. (2009). Armed conflict, international linkages, and women’s parliamentary representation in developing nations. Social Problems, 56(1), 174-204.
See full text - Justino, P., Cardona, I., Mitchell, R., & Müller, C. (2012). Quantifying the impact of women’s participation in post-conflict economic recovery (HiCN Working Paper 131). Brighton: IDS.
See full text - Linos, N. (2009). Rethinking gender-based violence during war: Is violence against civilian men a problem worth addressing? Social Science & Medicine, 68(8), 1548–1551.
See full text - Murray, C. J. L., King, G., Lopez, A. D., Tomijima, N., & Krug, E. G. (2002). Armed conflict as a public health problem. British Medical Journal, 324, 346-349.
See full text - Myrttinen, H., Naujoks, J., & El-Bushra, J. (2014). Rethinking gender in peacebuilding. London: International Alert
See full text - O’Connell, H. (2011). What are the opportunities to promote gender equity and equality in conflict-affected and fragile states? Insights from a review of evidence. Gender and Development, 19(3), 455-466.
See full text - Plümper, T., & Neumayer, E. (2005). The unequal burden of war: The effect of armed conflict on the gender gap in life expectancy. International Organization, 60, 723-54.
See full text - Saferworld & Conciliation Resources. (2014). Gender, violence and peace: a post-2015 development agenda. London: Conciliation Resources.
See full text - Schäfer, R. (2013). Men as perpetrators and victims of armed conflicts: Innovative projects aimed at overcoming male violence. Vienna: Vienna Institute for International Dialogue and Cooperation.
See full text - Schindler, K. (2011). Do new opportunities arise for women in post-war countries? The case of Rwanda. Berlin: DIW.
See full text - Sivakumaran, S. (2010). Lost in translation: UN responses to sexual violence against men and boys in situations of armed conflict. International Review of the Red Cross, 92(877).
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 - True. J. (2013). Women, peace and security in post-conflict and peacebuilding contexts (Policy Brief). Oslo: Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre.
See full text - UN Security Council. (2012). Report of the secretary general on women, peace and security (S/2012/732). New York: UN Security Council.
See full text
