Understanding Substantive Representation of Women in Consociational Post-Conflict Political Systems

Abstract

Feminist critics of power-sharing argue that consociational structures privilege ethnic groups and that power-sharing is “bad for women.” This article identifies a gap in the relatively new field of research on gender equality and ethno-national power-sharing, as the focus so far has been mainly on women’s political exclusion, with limited attention on the representation of women’s needs and interests through policy. In bringing together power-sharing literature, representation theory and a gendered understanding of institutions and change, this article issues a call for further research. The article proposes an analytical framework, to be applied in empirical research on: Where, why, and how substantive representation of women in post-conflict consociational political systems occurs? An initial examination of a case from Bosnia and Herzegovina is presented, demonstrating how the analytical framework can be applied on violence against women policy research. Even though Bosnia and Herzegovina was a lead in the Istanbul Convention ratification, in the implementation, the consociational conditions in decision-making have led to disparate directions. The article makes a contribution to existing analytical debates at the intersection of consociationalism and women’s representation and has a practical goal: drawing the attention of scholars to the study of substantive representation of women.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to express his appreciation to following scholars for their support and advice in preparation of this paper: Allison McCulloch, Amy Mazur, Anja Vojvodić, Anna Gwiazda, Nedim Hogić, Sarah Childs, Solveig Richter and Tajma Kapić.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Sarah Shair-Rosenfield and Reed M. Wood, “Governing Well After War: How Improving Female Representation Prolongs Post-Conflict Peace,” The Journal of Politics 79, no. 3 (2017): 995–1009; Christine Bell, Accessing Political Power: Women and Political Power-Sharing in Peace Processes. Gender Briefing Series (New York: UN Women, 2018).

2 Christine Bell, “Power-Sharing, Conflict Resolution and Women: A Global Reappraisal,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 24, no. 1 (2018): 13–32.

3 Rupert Taylor (ed.). Consociational Theory: McGarry & O’Leary and the Northern Ireland Conflict (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009); Thorsten Gromes, “Ohne Staat und Nation ist keine Demokratie zu machen,” Bosnien und Herzegowina, Kosovo und Makedonien nach den Bürgerkriegen (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2012); Florian Bieber, “Power Sharing After Yugoslavia. Functionality and Dysfunctionality of Power Sharing Institutions in Post-War Bosnia, Macedonia and Kosovo,” in From Power Sharing to Democracy: Post-Conflict Institutions in Ethnically Divided Societies, edited by Sid Noel (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 2005), 85–103; Florian Bieber (ed.). Political Parties and Minority Participation (Skopje: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2008); Joanne McEvoy, Power-Sharing Executives: Governing in Bosnia, Macedonia and Northern Ireland (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015); Mirjana Kasapović, Bosna i Hercegovina: podijeljeno društvo i nestabilna država (Zagreb: Politička kultura, 2005).

4 Recognizing that consociationalism is only a sub-form of power-sharing but also that power-sharing in practice is widely associated with consociationalism, in this article we use these two terms interchangeably.

5 Claire Pierson and Jennifer Thomson, “Allies or Opponents? Power-Sharing, Civil Society and Gender,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 24, no. 1 (2018): 100–115.

6 Allison McCulloch, “Power Sharing: A Gender Intervention,” International Political Science Review 41, no. 1 (2020): 44–57.

7 Arend Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977).

8 Karen Celis, Sarah Childs, Johanna Kantola, Mona Lena Krook, et al. “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation,” Representation 44, no. 2 (2008): 99–110.

9 Bell, “Power-Sharing, Conflict Resolution and Women.”

10 Fiona Mackay and Cera Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules? A Feminist Institutionalist Lens on Women and Power Sharing,” feminists@law 9, no. 1 (2019): 1–54.

11 McCulloch, “Power Sharing.”

12 Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies.

13 John McGarry, Brendan O’Leary, and Richard Simeon, “Integration or Accommodation: The Enduring Debate in Conflict Regulation,” in Constitutional Design for Divided Societies: Integration or Accommodation?, edited by Sujit Choudhry (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 41–88.

14 Arend Lijphart, “Constitutional Design for Divided Societies,” Journal of Democracy 15, no. 2 (2004): 96–109; Taylor (ed.). Consociational Theory; Pierson and Thomson, “Allies or Opponents?”

15 Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies, 238.

16 McCulloch, “Power Sharing,” 44.

17 Siobhan Byrne and Allison McCulloch, “Gender Representation and Power Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions,” International Peacekeeping 19, no. 5 (2012): 565–580.

18 Bell, “Power-Sharing, Conflict Resolution and Women.”

19 Bell, “Power-Sharing, Conflict Resolution and Women”; Taylor (ed.). Consociational Theory; Gromes, “Ohne Staat und Nation ist keine Demokratie zu machen”; Bieber, “Power Sharing After Yugoslavia”; Bieber (ed.). Political Parties and Minority Participation; McEvoy, Power-Sharing Executives; Kasapović, Bosna i Hercegovina.

20 Pierson and Thomson, “Allies or Opponents?”

21 Timofey Agarin, Allison McCulloch, and Cera Murtagh, “Others in Deeply Divided Societies: A Research Agenda,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 24, no. 3 (2018): 299–310.

22 Ronan Kennedy, Claire Pierson, and Jenifer Thomson, “Challenging Identity Hierarchies: Gender and Consociational Power Sharing,” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 2016 (2016): 1–16.

23 Kennedy et al., “Challenging Identity Hierarchies,” 8.

24 Kennedy et al., “Challenging Identity Hierarchies”; Maria-Adriana Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace? Spaces for Feminist Grassroots Mobilization in Northern Ireland and Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Citizenship Studies 20, no. 1 (2016): 99–114; Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender Representation and Power Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions..

25 Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace?”

26 Pierson and Thomson, “Allies or Opponents?”; Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace?”

27 Kennedy et al., “Challenging Identity Hierarchies,” 8.

28 Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender Representation and Power Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions”; Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”; Siobhan Byrne and Allison McCulloch, “Is Power-Sharing Bad for Women,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 24, no. 1 (2018): 1–12.

29 Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender Representation and Power Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions.”

30 Siobhan Byrne and Allison McCulloch, Power-Sharing Pacts and the Women, Peace and Security Agenda (London and New York: Routledge, 2022).

31 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”

32 Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender Representation and Power Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions,” 565.

33 Anja Vojvodić, “Lingering Legacies and Emerging Progress: Explaining Gender Quota Adoption in Central and Eastern Europe” (PhD dissertation, Rutgers University, 2020); Tajma Kapić, “The Gendered Implications of Consociational Peace Agreements: A Subnational Level Analysis of Bosnia And Herzegovina,” International Journal on Rule of Law, Transitional Justice and Human Rights 12 (2021): 123–138.

34 Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender Representation and Power Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions,” 566.

35 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”

36 Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, “The Feminist Institutional Dimensions of Power-Sharing and Political Settlements,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 24, no. 1 (2018): 116–132; Cera Murtagh, “A Transient Transition: The Cultural and Institutional Obstacles Impeding the Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition in Its Progression from Informal to Formal Politics,” Irish Political Studies 23, no. 1 (2008): 21–40.

37 Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender Representation and Power Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions.”

38 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”; Aoláin, “The Feminist Institutional Dimensions of Power-Sharing and Political Settlements.”

39 Bell, “Power-Sharing, Conflict Resolution and Women”; Christine Bell and Kevin McNicholl, “Principled Pragmatism and the ‘Inclusion Project’: Implementing a Gender Perspective in Peace Agreements,” feminists@law 9, no. 1 (2019): 1–51; Kristian Brown and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, “Through the Looking Glass: Transitional Justice Futures Through the Lens of Nationalism, Feminism and Transformative Change,” International Journal of Transitional Justice 9, no. 1 (2015): 127–149.

40 Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace?”; Pierson and Thomson, “Allies or Opponents?”

41 Kapić, “The Gendered Implications of Consociational Peace Agreements”; Sheetal Sheena Sookrajowa, Jason Narsoo, and Linganaden Murday, “The Impact of Consociationalism on Female Political Representation: The Case Study of Mauritius,” Representation (2022): 1–20.

42 Yvonne Galligan, “Gender and Politics in Northern Ireland: The Representation Gap Revisited,” Irish Political Studies 28, no. 3 (2013): 413–433; Kennedy et al., “Challenging Identity Hierarchies”; Jennifer Thomson, “Resisting Gendered Change: Feminist Institutionalism and Critical Actors,” International Political Science Review 39, no. 2 (2018): 178–191.

43 Vojvodić, “Lingering Legacies and Emerging Progress”; Arend Lijphart, Patterns of Democracy, 2nd ed. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012).

44 McCulloch, “Power Sharing.”

45 McCulloch, “Power Sharing,” 55.

46 Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies, 238

47 Pitkins, Hanna, The Concept of Representation (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967).

48 Karen Celis, “Substantive Representation of Women (and Improving It): What It Is and Should Be About,” Comparative European Politics 7, no. 1 (2009): 95–113.

49 Sarah Childs and Joni Lovenduski, “Political Representation,” in The Oxford Handbook of Gender and Politics, edited by Georgina Waylen et al. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 489–513.

50 Celis, “Substantive Representation of Women (and Improving It),” 105; Sylvia Erzeel and Ekaterina Rashkova, “The Substantive Representation of Social Groups: Towards a New Comparative Research Agenda,” European Journal of Politics and Gender 6, no. 3 (2023): 433–451.

51 Erzeel and Rashkova, “The Substantive Representation of Social Groups”; Anna Gwiazda, “The Substantive Representation of Women in Poland,” Politics & Gender 15, no. 02 (2019): 262–284.

52 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation.”

53 Phillips, Anne, The Politics of Presence. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).

54 Karen Celis, “Gendering Representation,” in Politics, Gender, and Concepts: Theory and Methodology, edited by Gary Goertz and Amy G. Mazur (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 71–93.

55 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation.”

56 Celis, “Gendering Representation”; Karen Celis, and Sarah Childs, “The Descriptive and Substantive Representation of Women: New Directions,” Parliamentary Affairs 61, no. 3 (2008): 419–425; Celis, “Substantive Representation of Women (and Improving It)”; Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation”; Sarah Childs, and Mona Lena Krook, “Analyzing Women’s Substantive Representation: From Critical Mass to Critical Actors,” Government and Opposition 44, no. 2 (2009): 125–145; Marian Sawer, The Representative Claim (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).

57 Karen Celis and Silvia Erzeel, “Beyond the Usual Suspects: Non-Left, Male and Non- Feminist MPs and the Substantive Representation of Women,” Government and Opposition 50, no. 1 (2015): 45–64; Childs and Krook, “Analyzing Women’s Substantive Representation.”

58 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation,” 102.

59 S. Laurel Weldon, When Protest Makes Policy: How Social Movements Represent Disadvantaged Groups (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2011).

60 Judith Squires, “The Constitutive Representation of Gender: Extra-Parliamentary Re-presentations of Gender Relations,” Representation 44, no. 2 (2008): 187–204.

61 Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle Taylor-Robinson, “Dilemmas in the Meaning and Measurement of Representation,” in Representation: The Case of Women, edited by Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle Taylor-Robinson (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 1–18.

62 Jane Mansbridge, “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent “Yes,” The Journal of Politics 61, no. 3 (1999): 628–657; Young, Inclusion and Democracy; Jane Mansbridge, “Quota Problems: Combating the Dangers of Essentialism,” Politics & Gender 1, no. 04 (2005): 622–638.

63 Drude Dahlerup, “Representing Women. Defining Substantive Representation of Women,” in Representation: The Case of Women, edited by Maria Escobar-Lemmon Michelle Taylor-Robinson (Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 58–79.

64 Gwiazda, “The Substantive Representation of Women in Poland.”

65 Wängnerud, Lena, “Women in Parliaments: Descriptive and Substantive Representation,” Annual Review of Political Science 12 (2009): 51–69.

66 Karen Celis and Sarah Childs, “Introduction: The ‘Puzzle’ of Gender, Conservatism and Representation,” in Gender, Conservatism and Political Representation, edited by Karen Celis and Sarah Childs (Colchester: ECPR Press, 2014), 33–87.

67 Gwiazda, “The Substantive Representation of Women in Poland.”

68 Karen Beckwith, “Plotting the Path from One to the Other. Women’s Interests and Political Representation,” in Representation: The Case of Women, edited by Maria Escobar-Lemmon and Michelle Taylor-Robinson (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 19–40.

69 Erzeel and Rashkova, “The Substantive Representation of Social Groups.”

70 Bell, “Power-Sharing, Conflict Resolution and Women.”

71 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation”; Joni Lovenduski and Marila Guadagnini, “Political Representation,” in The Politics of State Feminism, edited by Dorothy McBride and Amy G. Mazur (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010), 164–192; Childs and Lovenduski, “Political Representation”; Fiona Mackay, “Thick Conceptions of Substantive Representation: Women, Gender and Political Institutions,” Representation 44, no. 2 (2008): 125–139; Isabelle Engeli and Amy Mazur, “Taking Implementation Seriously in Assessing Success: The Politics of Gender Equality Policy,” European Journal of Politics and Gender 1, no. 1–2 (2018): 111–129.

72 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation,” 104.

73 Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies.

74 Mona Lena Krook and Fiona Mackay (eds.). Gender, Politics and Institutions: Towards a Feminists Institutionalism (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011); Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”

75 Krook and Mackay, Gender, Politics and Institutions.

76 Thomson, “Resisting Gendered Change.”

77 Louise Chappell, “Comparing Political Institutions: Revealing the Gendered ‘Logic of Appropriateness’,” Politics & Gender 2, no. 02 (2006): 223–235.

78 Fiona Mackay, Meryl Kenny, and Louise Chappell, “New Institutionalism Through a Gender Lens: Towards a Feminist Institutionalism?,” International Political Science Review 31, no. 5 (2010): 573–588; Thomson, “Resisting Gendered Change.”

79 Thomson, “Resisting Gendered Change.”

80 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”

81 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation.”

82 Daniel Hohmann, “When Do Men Represent Women’s Interest in Parliament? How the Presence of Women in Parliament Affects the Legislative Behaviour of Male Politicians,” Swiss Political Science Review 26, no. 1 (2020): 31–50.

83 Erzeel and Rashkova, “The Substantive Representation of Social Groups,” 14.

84 Joni Lovenduski, ed. State Feminism and Political Representation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Dorothy McBride and Amy G. Mazur, Comparative State Feminism (London: Sage, 1995); Dorothy McBride and Amy G. Mazur, “Women’s Policy Agencies and State Feminism,” in The Oxford Handbook on Gender and Politics, edited by Georgina Waylen et al. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 654–678.

85 Childs and Lovenduski, “Political Representation.”

86 Childs, Sarah and Mona Lena Krook, “Analyzing Women’s Substantive Representation: From Critical Mass to Critical Actors,” Government and Opposition 44, no. 2 (2006): 125–145.

87 Anne Maria Holli, “Feminist Triangles: A Conceptual Analysis,” Representation 44, no. 2 (2008): 169–185.

88 S. Laurel Weldon, “Beyond Bodies: Institutional Sources of Representation for Women in Democratic Policy Making,” The Journal of Politics 64, no. 4 (2002): 1153–1174.

89 John Husley and Soeren Keil, “Power-Sharing and Party Politics in the Western Balkans,” in Power-Sharing in Europe, edited by Soen Keil and Allison McCulloch (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021), 115–140.

90 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?,” 17.

91 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”; Aoláin, “The Feminist Institutional Dimensions of Power-Sharing and Political Settlements”; Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace?”; Pierson and Thomson, “Allies or Opponents?”

92 Saša Gavrić and Maida Zagorac, ed. 1995–2015: Women and Political Life in Post-Dayton Bosnia And Herzegovina (Sarajevo: Sarajevo Open Centre, 2015).

93 Erzeel and Rashkova, “The Substantive Representation of Social Groups.”

94 Susan Franceschet and Jennifer M. Piscopo, “Gender Quotas and Women’s Substantive Representation: Lessons from Argentina,” Politics & Gender 4, no. 03 (2008): 393–425.

95 Weldon, “Beyond Bodies.”

96 Lovenduski, ed., State Feminism and Political Representation.

97 Chappell, “Comparing Political Institutions.”

98 Lovenduski and Guadagnini, “Political Representation.”

99 Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace?”.

100 Gavrić and Zagorac, eds. 1995–2015: Women and Political Life in Post-Dayton Bosnia And Herzegovina.

101 Franceschet and Piscopo, “Gender Quotas and Women’s Substantive Representation.”

102 Karen Celis and Sarah Childs, Feminist Democratic Representation (New York: Oxford University Press, 2020).

103 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation”.

104 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?,” 18.

105 Engeli and Mazur, “Taking Implementation Seriously in Assessing Success”.

106 Maria-Adriana Deiana, “Navigating Consociationalism’s Afterlives: Women, Peace and Security in Post-Dayton Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 24, no. 1 (2018): 33–49.

107 John Gerring, “What is a Case Study and What is It Good for?,” American Political Science Review 98, no. 2 (2004): 341–354.

108 Karen Celis, Sarah Childs, Johanna Kantola, Mona Lena Krook, et al. “Constituting Women’s Interests Through Representative Claims,” Politics & Gender 10, no. 02 (2014): 149–174.

109 UN Women, “Global Database on Violence Against Women,” https://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/en (accessed 19 February 2023).

110 “Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe: OSCE-led Survey on Violence against Women,” https://www.osce.org/VAWsurvey/publications (accessed 19 February 2023).

111 Andrea Kriszan and Conny Roggeband, eds. Politicizing Gender and Democracy in the Context of the Istanbul Convention (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021).

112 Mackay, “Thick Conceptions of Substantive Representation,” 135.

113 Thomson, “Resisting Gendered Change,” 5.

114 Allison McCulloch, “Consociational Settlements in Deeply Divided Societies: The Liberal-Corporate Distinction,” Democratization 21, no. 3 (2014): 501–518.

115 Damir Banović, Saša Gavrić, and Mariña Barreiro Mariño, The Political System of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Cham: Springer, 2021).

116 Saša Gavrić, “Mehrheits- und Konsensdemokratien nach Arend Lijpharts ‘Patterns of Democracy’: Fallstudie Bosnien und Herzegovina,” (Bachelor thesis, Konstanz, 2007).

117 Florian Bieber, The Rise of Authoritarianism in the Western Balkans (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018); Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”.

118 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”

119 Gavrić and Zagorac, eds. 1995–2015: Women and Political Life in Post-Dayton Bosnia and Herzegovina.

120 Ibid.

121 Mackay and Murtagh, “New Institutions, New Gender Rules?”

122 Allison McCulloch and Siobhan Byrne, “Is Syria like Bosnia? Feminist Lessons for Power-Sharing and Conflict Transformation,” (Joint IPSA Colloquium on Democratization and Constitutional Design in Divided Societies, University of Cyprus, 24–26 June 2017).

123 Kriszan and Roggeband (eds.). Politicizing Gender and Democracy in the Context of the Istanbul Convention.

124 Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace?”

125 Gavrić and Zagorac, eds. 1995–2015: Women and Political Life in Post-Dayton Bosnia and Herzegovina.

126 McCulloch and Byrne, “Is Syria like Bosnia?”

127 Deiana, “To Settle for a Gendered Peace?” 11.

128 GREVIO, GREVIO’s (Baseline) Evaluation Report on Legislative and Other Measures Giving Effect to the Provisions of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention): Bosnia and Herzegovina (Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2022).

129 Celis et al., “Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation.”

130 Childs and Lovenduski, “Political Representation.”

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Saša Gavrić

Saša Gavrić is PhD Researcher at the University of Leipzig, working full time on gender equality in political life for a European inter-governmental organization. Saša studies how descriptive and substantive representation of women take place under consociational political set-ups.