Conclusion

Thinking globally, acting locally? The women’s sector, international human rights mechanisms and politics in Northern Ireland

“…If neither regional nor national politics appear to be overly interested in addressing women’s issues, international mechanisms offer a different vehicle which women’s groups and activists can use to encourage change (Keck and Sikkink, 1998). International human rights bodies provide not only different locations in which groups can ‘venue-shop’ (Vickers, 2010: 237) concerns regarding women’s rights, but also new ideas, norms and discourse which might help to reinvigorate discussion (Vickers, Haussman and Sawer, 2010: 237). This article considers how women’s rights groups in Northern Ireland have used CEDAW and UNSCR 1325 in a bid to further women’s issues in the province, and why they have had such limited impact.…”

Lost in the Process? The impact of devolution on abortion law in the United Kingdom

“…Indeed, MLG systems such as the contemporary post-devolution UK have been lauded by feminist scholars as being useful for women’s rights lobbyists and political parties due to multiple institutions, meaning more sites for instituting change (Celis et al, 2012). The possibility of so-called ‘venue-shopping’ (Vickers et al, 2010: 237) means that women’s activists and political parties can move between different arenas of government to encourage change at the institution they think likely to be most receptive (Chappell, 2002: 97, 152; Vickers et al, 2010: 229). Bashevkin (1998), for example, found that the long period of Conservative rule from 1979 to 1997 made feminist lobbying at Westminster difficult, with successes only possible largely due to the ability to lobby and involve certain aspects of the European structure.…”