Civil society and gender mainstreaming: empirical evidence and theory-building from twelve post-conflict countries 2005-15

Using critical discourse analysis, this twelve-country study addresses a key lacuna by examining civil society perspectives on the implementation of the Participative Democratic Model (PDM) of gender mainstreaming in post-conflict states. The findings reveal specific data, transitional justice, and governance challenges in war-affected states as policy actors press for heightened attention to issues such as the effects on women of war-induced poverty, human rights violations, and women’s empowerment in state reconstruction and peace-building. The analysis shows the aftermath of war accentuates frame misalignment between civil society and governing elites. In order to address this a Transformative Model (TM) of Participative Mainstreaming in Post-conflict States is proposed. Building on conflict theory it argues for the engendering of “transitional justice” in order to secure equality in public policy and law-making. In particular, it details how future attempts to apply the PDM need to be adapted across four Transformational Domains: actors, issues, rules, and structures. Each is populated by “post-conflict issues/actions”. When CSOs successfully advance claims for modifying policy and practice “frame-alignment” occurs and the implementation of PDM may be adapted to the specificities of war-affected states

Gendered political space: civil society, contingency theory and the substantive representation of women

Whilst existing civil society studies generally fail to systematically examine the way that contextual factors shape women’s representation in the civil sphere, political science has predominantly focused on legislative settings. This article responds to the resultant knowledge-gap by examining the hitherto underexplored role of civil society as a political space integral to the substantive representation of women (SRW)—or, the process by which women’s concerns are advanced in policy and politics. The article uses grounded theory in order propose a systematic analytical model showing how the SRW is a contingent process whereby the motives of civil society organizations are translated into action repertoires shaped by three (non-discrete) spheres: political, socioeconomic, and organizational. Its wider contribution to civil society scholarship is in highlighting how civil society is a complex, heterogeneous political space wherein SRW claims-making requires cognizance of the co-presence of contingent factors that offer immanent explanatory powe

Civil society, human rights and religious freedom in the People's Republic of China: analysis of CSOs' Universal Periodic Review discourse

This article examines religious freedom in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) using critical frame analysis of state and civil society organisations’ (CSOs) policy discourse associated with the United Nations (UN) Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The findings show how indigenous Chinese CSOs’ input to the UPR is limited. Their voice is muted, some merely mirror the rhetoric of the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP). In contrast, international CSOs are highly critical of what they see as state failure to uphold religious freedom. The analysis reveals a significant disjuncture between the policy discourse of international CSOs and the CCP. The former’s discourse is framed in terms of: denial of rights, imprisonment, legal failings, (re-)education, torture, and persecution. In the absence of enforcement mechanisms, CCP input to the UPR can be seen as part of a process of legitimation and performativity; allowing the ruling elite to afford primacy to what it dubs ‘a framework of socialism with Chinese characteristics’ at the expense of religious freedoms

Participatory governance or deliberative disjuncture? Exploring the state-civil society policy nexus in the gender mainstreaming programmes of seven Middle Eastern states 2005-15

To better understand why Middle Eastern states continue to languish at the bottom of world rankings on gender equality, this study presents critical discourse analysis of state and civil society organizations’ implementation of the Participative Democratic Model of gender mainstreaming. A requirement of the 1995 United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, the Participative Democratic Model entails state–civil society engagement to embed gender equality concerns in every stage of the policy process. It is in this context that the original contribution of the article is twofold. In methodological terms, it is argued that contemporary analysis of mainstreaming needs to examine the formative phase of policy implementation and the discourse between state elites and civil society organizations. This is integral to effective agenda-setting and coordinated action—and thus to securing successful gender-equality outcomes. In empirical terms, the study findings show how presently, across the Middle East, there are marked contrasts in state and civil society policy framing and issue prioritization. The resulting disjuncture is a hitherto under-examined pathology preventing the realization of the normative vision of gender equality in the region

Comparative analysis of state and civil society discourse on the implementation of the United Nations' convention on the rights of the child in North Africa

In the face of continuing children’s rights abuses across North Africa, the need for governments to engage non-state actors in human rights implementation is explicit in the United Nations’ convention on the rights of the child (UNCRC). Hitherto, this has largely escaped scholarly attention. It is a lacuna addressed in this paper, which presents a theoretically informed analysis of the role of civil society as a political space for promoting children’s rights in six countries with particular reference to Egyptian and Sudanese policy and practice. Critical discourse analysis of state and civil society submissions to the second-cycle United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review provides insight into UNCRC implementation. The findings show key contrasts in the salience and framing of a range of issues including: violence against children, education, health, forced marriage and discrimination. The wider significance of this is manifold: it offers an original transferable methodology, highlights the formative role of discourse and underlines a pronounced asymmetry in the power of government and civil society. Furthermore, the Egyptian and Sudanese case studies reveal key implementation pathologies applying to authoritarian and (post-)conflict states

Comparative analysis of civil society and state discourse on disabled people’s rights and welfare in South East Asia 2010-16

Over the next quarter century it is likely that South East Asian countries will experience high levels of growth in the number of disabled people. It is therefore significant that over the past decade, the region’s governments have at last ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Disabled Persons (CRPD). At this critical juncture, and in the face of ongoing human rights issues in several territories, this study presents comparative analysis of state and civil society organisations’ (CSOs) discourse on CRDP implementation. The findings show that whilst governments have espoused a participatory approach to fulfilling their CRPD obligations, contemporary practice falls short. Disabled people currently experience barriers to shaping policy and accessing social welfare. There is a ‘disconnect’ between state and civil spheres that hampers effective implementation based on partnership working and knowledge exchange. In turn, this raises issues of legitimation, performativity and the endurance of the Medical Model of Disability across the region

Limited gains, enduring violations: civil society perspectives on the implementation of the United Nations' convention on the Rights of the Child in Bangladesh

Against the backdrop of continuing rights violations in Bangladesh, this article analyses issue-salience and framing in the policy discourse of civil society organizations (CSOs) and state elites on the implementation of the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Data from the reports submitted to the second-cycle United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review (UPR), the official monitoring mechanism associated with UN rights treaties, show how state discourse is framed in instrumental, administrative terms. In contrast, civil society discourse is critically framed and highlights poor implementation and enforcement of the CRC, poverty and corruption. This helps to explain on-going rights violations in an increasingly hostile political context wherein government is unresponsive to civil society claims, mobilization is suppressed and CSOs are forced to focus on service delivery and advocacy functions

Comparative analysis of state and civil society discourse on human rights implementation and the position of Roma in the former Yugoslav space

This study analyses the position of Roma people in the former Yugoslavia using state and civil society discourse on human rights implementation. It reveals that states are failing to give sufficient prioritisation to tackling longstanding discrimination and oppression. Instead of positive the effects predicted by complementarity theory, the findings reveal ‘frame dis-alignment’ between political elites and NGOs. This raises questions of legitimation and performativity in human rights practice. States’ failure to fully engage with NGOs’ policy claims effectively renders Roma people ‘semi-citizens’. Systemic reform by government is required in order to promote equal citizenship through civil society engagement in right

Human rights and social welfare pathologies: civil society perspectives on contemporary practice across UK jurisdictions - critical analysis of third cycle UPR data

This study uses discourse analysis of the critical views expressed in the corpus of United Nations’ Universal Periodic Review (UPR) submissions by civil society organisations (CSOs), in order to explore how the UK, Welsh, Scottish and Northern Ireland governments are responding to their international human rights treaty obligations in the formulation and delivery of social policy. Developed from Hogwood and Peters’ work on the pathology of public policy, the analytical framework investigates CSOs’ critical framings of the disorders, progress and challenges related to social policy-making in the UK. The findings show a raft of shortcomings including a poor monitoring and enforcement, gaps in social protection and discrimination. The original contribution this study is threefold: 1. revealing the nature of prevailing rights violations in the UK; 2. outlining the territorial narratives and contrasts between jurisdictions in the wake of devolution; and 3. showing how the systemic nature of rights violations can be conceptualised using Hogwood and Peters’ theory of public policy making pathologies