Challenging identity hierarchies: Gender and consociational power-sharing

Abstract

Consociational democracy has become the most influential paradigm in the field of powersharing institutional design and post-conflict peacebuilding. Consociation institutes representation for certain formerly excluded groups. However, it simultaneously inhibits effective political representation for groups that do not align with the societal divisions that consociation seeks to accommodate, specifically the 'additional' cleavage of gender. Given the extensive use of the consociational model as a peacebuilding tool in divided states and the growing awareness of the disproportionate negative effect of conflict on women, there is a surprising lack of consideration of the effect that consociational power-sharing has on women's representation. This article considers the specific impact that the consociational model has on women's representation. We argue that because gender is an integral factor in conflict, it should therefore be integral to postconflict governance. With empirical reference to contemporary Northern Ireland, it is illustrated that consociationalism is a 'gender-blind' theory.

Religious Differences in Electoral Turnout among Women in Northern Ireland

“…As Byrne and McCullock (2012: 566) point out: 'there is nothing inherent in power-sharing that cannot be made more democratic and inclusive of women.' However, the willingness and ability of political parties and their leaders to address this female representation issue and mobilise the electorate around such cross-cutting allegiances, including gender equality, will not be an easy task (Kennedy et al, 2016). Given the current dominance of ethno-nationalism as the singular mark of division within the formal political structures and the use of the ballot box as the sole measure of political legitimacy, both a major revision of the underlying political arrangements and the introduction of mechanisms to actively promote the inclusion and participation of women are needed.…”

“…However, as Byrne and McCullough (2012) also point out, such revisions and mechanisms to both accommodate and increase female political representation and participation will not be enough. As a number of commentators have also noted, what is further required is much greater attention to the gendered nature of the conflict, including the reproduction of patriarchal privilege in consociational post-conflict political institutions and their power-sharing practices (Galligan, 2006(Galligan, , 2013Byrne and McCullock, 2013;Kennedy et al, 2016). any statutory powers (Hoewer, 2013).…”

Gendering peace in Northern Ireland: The role of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security

“…In addition, forms of governance based on ethno-national power-sharing, although holding no obvious barriers for women, tend to marginalise gender issues and exclude women (Byrne & McCulloch 2012;Kennedy et al 2016). This exclusion extends to a variety of identities, as observed by one participant:…”

Nonelectoral Participation in Deeply Divided Societies: Transforming Consociations from the Ground Up?

“…The focus on NEP-rather than specific instances of protest mobilization or organizational activity-pinpoints that political behavior does not need to align with group identity, or with "openings" of the formal political process. I am aware that NEP in the two cases might be perceived as incompatible: The Yugoslav citizens' assemblies ("plenums") are said to have offered one of the options on the "repertoire of contention" (Kurtović and Hromadžić 2017), while political success of Northern Ireland Women's Coalition continues to inspire cross-ethnic cooperation (Kennedy, Pierson, and Thomson 2016).…”