Explaining Backlash: Social Hierarchy and Men’s Rejection of Women’s Rights Reforms

Governments promote gender-sensitive policies, yet little is known about why reform campaigns evoke backlash. Drawing on social position theory, we test whether marginalized (women’s organizations) or intrusive (Western donors) messengers cause resistance across public rights (quotas) and private rights (land reform). Using a framing experiment implemented among 1,704 Malawians, we find that females’ attitudes are unaffected by campaigns, while backlash occurs among patrilineal and matrilineal males. Backlash among men is more common for sensitive private rights (land reform) than public rights (quotas) and Western donors than women’s organizations, suggesting complex effects generally more consistent with the intrusiveness hypothesis

'Two Bulls in a Kraal' - Recognising cultural difference in post-Apartheid South Africa

This thesis addresses the dilemmas that might occur when one introduces liberal strategies for accommodating difference in a society with deep cultural cleavages. In the last few decades there have been an exhaustive debate in the western democracies on multiculturalism. The questions addressed are whether liberal democracy not only should recognise people because they are, but also for who they are. Four normative theoretical thinkers are presented, who all seek to provide strategies for how it is possible to make the right to cultural protection compatible with the right to equality.The empirical analysis is an in depth study research of the South African process of accommodating difference. How and why did African traditional authorities become recognised in the new South African constitution of 1996, and to what extent was this recognition followed by the political action aimed at both reforming these institutions and clarifying their position in the democratic future?There were three dilemmas from a liberal point of view, connected with the recognition of traditional authorities.1) Traditional authorities were not compatible with the right to equality. 2) Recognition of traditional customs and practices might force an identity upon members of rural traditional communities. 3) Traditional authorities were not compatible with democratic structures and principles. There were however three aspects that influenced the traditional leaders position in the negotiations prior to the signing of the constitution. These were the centre-periphery aspect, the ethical aspect and the strategic aspect.The conditioned recognition seemed difficult to implement, and the government promised to address the questions through official statements and initiated legislations, but few bills have been enacted. The prerequisites founded by the liberal perspectives applied were not present to a sufficient degree. The consequence of this inability to deliver on promises has caused the problem of ‘Two Bulls in a Kraal’, which implies that in rural traditional communities double structures of both political and judicial authorities are functioning without any clear rules for how both democracy and traditional institutions are to coexist

Candidate selection and informal soft quotas for women: Insights from Zambia

What does it take for a female politician to win a party nomination? We still know little about women’s entry into politics in countries without formal gender quotas. Using data from Zambia, we argue that both in emerging and established democracies, centralized nomination processes both enable and disable women in contexts where gender quotas are not adopted. Informal institutions rarely benefit women more than men. Informal soft quotas may even act as glass ceilings that prevent women from being nominated, because party leaders rarely go beyond the informal quota threshold. This CMI Brief is based on the article “Candidate selection and informal soft quotas for women: Gender imbalance in political recruitment in Zambia” Politics, Groups, and Identities 7 (2): 401–411

Counter-mobilization against child marriage reform in Africa

Legislating a minimum age of marriage at 18 has stirred counter-mobilization in some, but not all, countries where religious or traditional institutions enjoy constitutional authority. To explore differences between states regarding likelihood of counter-mobilization, we investigate two cases in Africa. In Sudan, a government-led child marriage reform initiative has sparked counter-mobilization by conservative religious actors, while a similar initiative in Zambia has not caused visible counter-mobilization among traditional groups and has gained the support of many chiefs. With the literature on doctrinal gender status issues as theoretical background, we argue that the nature of law-codified versus living-is a factor in these distinct trajectories. We further identify variations in two mechanisms, legal power structure (centralized vs decentralized) and type of political battle (interpretation vs administration), that link nature of law to variation in the likelihood of counter-mobilization

Why the Gender of Traditional Authorities Matters: Intersectionality and Women’s Rights Advocacy in Malawi

Traditional leadership often coexists with modern political institutions, yet we know little about how traditional and state authority cues—or those from male or female sources—affect public opinion. Using an original survey experiment of 1,381 Malawians embedded in the 2016 Local Governance Performance Index (LGPI), we randomly assign respondents into one of four treatment groups or a control group to hear messages about a child marriage reform from a female or male traditional authority (TA) or parliamentarian. In the sample as a whole, the female TA is as effective as the control (i.e., no endorsement), while other messengers elicit lower support (i.e., backfire effects). Endorsements produce heterogeneous effects across respondent sex and patrilineal/matrilineal customs, suggesting the need for tailored programs. Our analysis adds an intersectional approach to the governance literature, suggesting a theoretical framework that enables us to explain the impact of state and traditional endorsements across policy domains