Does gender inequality fuel violence?
Isolated case studies and cross-national statistical analyses have identified correlations between levels of inequality and propensity to conflict or violence, but they cannot prove causality. A recent review concludes that it remains unclear whether or how gender inequality fuels violence (or whether gender inequality is a proxy for something else that may cause conflict) (Saferworld & Conciliation Resources, 2014). Gender inequality may be part of broader structural inequalities and norms of discrimination and violence that contribute to mobilising groups and legitimizing violence (Caprioli, 2005). Isolated studies provide some evidence of the following:
- Qualitative, cross-country research suggests that patriarchal gender relations intersect with economic and ethno-national power relations, fuelling a tendency toward armed conflict (Cockburn, 2010). Quantitative analysis, comparing data on micro-level gender violence and macro-level state peacefulness, indicates a correlation between higher levels of domestic violence and a greater chance of violent conflict. While it has not been possible to establish a causal link, findings emphasize the importance of the responsibility to prevent violence against women (Hudson, Ballif-Spanvill, Caprioli, & Emmett, 2012). Statistical datasets also suggest that higher levels of gender inequality in a country correlate with increased likelihood of intra- and inter-state conflict (Melander, 2005), although this is contested by some.
- Qualitative, cross-country case studies have also concluded that gender identities (ideal characteristics of men and women) can contribute to the motivations which lead to war and which perpetuate violence once started. (El-Bushra & Sahl, 2005). Qualitative studies in Colombia and Guatemala (and interviews with female combatants in Sri Lanka and Nepal) find that domestic and communal violence perpetrated against young women compelled them to flee and join gangs or insurgencies (Moser, 1997; Winton, 2005, cited in Anderlini, 2011).
- Caprioli’s studies (2003; 2005), based on theoretical inquiry and statistical analysis, argue that while extreme and systematic gender inequality is correlated with political violence, higher levels of gender equality (represented in this study as lower fertility rates and higher percentage of women in the labour force) is associated with lower risks of intra-state conflict onset. A subsequent study by Melander (2005) finds that while female state leadership has no effect on levels of intra-state armed conflict, the percentage of women in parliament and the ratio of female-to-male higher educational attainment are associated with lower levels of intra-state armed conflict. There is no clear established causal link, however. In general, these studies suggest that improvements in gender equality and to women’s security could contribute to stability (Anderlini, 2011).
These findings mirror much of the qualitative and empirical work on gendered early warning indicators. This work claims that increases in gender disparity and deterioration in the physical security of women are among the earliest signs of crisis and violence (Anderlini, 2011).
For further resources, see the GSDRC’s topic guide on Gender and report on Links between gender-based violence and outbreaks of violent conflict.
Gender and social exclusion
Evidence on the intersection between gender, conflict and social exclusion is limited, but rigorous. Most socially excluded groups experience multiple deprivations that reinforce each other (e.g. exclusion from economic and political power). Research shows that while both men and women experience social exclusion, women in many societies suffer disproportionate discrimination, lack of power, and relative poverty, even in economically rich households (Stewart, 2006). Although social exclusion does not necessarily result in violent conflict, economically and political deprived individuals – particularly among young men – may consider violence as a means to gain respect, status, and material advantage. They may, for example, gain financially from employment in rebel armies (Stewart, 2006).
Gender and youth unemployment
The intersection of gender, conflict and unemployment is also under-researched. One recent isolated study from Nigeria illustrates how youth unemployment increases young people’s vulnerability to mobilisation by rebel groups or gangs. The study’s evaluation of youth employment and empowerment interventions finds that lack of gender analysis and responsiveness as well as a lack of conflict sensitivity reduced these programmes’ quality and impact. Moreover, the politicisation of such programmes can actually contribute to conflict (Banfield, 2014).
- Anderlini, S. (2011). World development report gender background paper. Washington DC: World Bank
See full text - Banfield, J. (2014). Winners or losers? Assessing the contribution of youth employment and empowerment programmes to reducing conflict risk in Nigeria. Abuja: Nigeria Stability and Reconciliation Programme. See full text
- Caprioli, M. (2005). Primed for violence: The role of gender inequality in predicting internal conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 49(2), 161-178.
See full text - Caprioli, M. (2003). Gender equality and civil wars (World Bank Conflict Prevention and Reconstruction Unit, Working Paper No. 8). Washington, DC: World Bank.
See full text - Cockburn, C. (2010). Gender relations as causal in militarization and war. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 12(2), 139-157.
See full text - El-Bushra, J. & Sahl, I. (2005). Cycles of violence: Gender relations and armed conflict. Nairobi: ACORD.
See full text - Hudson, V.M., Ballif-Spanvill, B., Caprioli, M., & Emmett, C. F. (2012). Sex and world peace. Columbia University Press.
- Melander, E. (2005). Gender equality and intrastate armed conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 49(4), 695–714.
See full text - Saferworld & Conciliation Resources. (2014). Gender, violence and peace: a post-2015 development agenda. London: Conciliation Resources.
See full text - Stewart, F. (with Barrón, M., Brown, G., & Hartwell, M.). (2006). Social exclusion and conflict: analysis and policy implications (CRISE policy paper). Oxford: University of Oxford.
See full text