FRAGILITY

STUDY GROUP

POLICY BRIEF

WHY WOMEN MATTER TO 

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY.

Physicians refer to the “golden hour” as the period 

after traumatic injury when successful emergency 

treatment is still possible. The chapeau paper1 for 

this series, U.S. Leadership and the Problem of State 

Fragility, defines fragility as the breakdown or absence of a social contract between people and their 

government. The collapse of social and political order 

in response to natural disasters, population displacements, violence, and/or war, however, can paradoxically provide opportunities for societal change. The 

need to reimagine and rebuild ruptured institutions 

can create openings for renegotiating gender roles 

and establishing the basis of an inclusive and more 

stable society. Unless gender equality receives high 

level and dedicated support during this “golden hour,” 

long-standing patterns of inequality are likely to be 

reestablished.2 As noted by an expert on security 

studies, “Promotion of gender equality goes far 

beyond the issue of social justice and has important 

consequences for international security.”3

The golden hour for gender is not after the peace 

treaties have been signed. The social contract on 

gender equality must be conceived before the crisis 

has ended, and then written into the new constitution, 

implemented in the reconfigured institutions, and 

prioritized in newly developed education textbooks.

Across the board, women as a demographic 

group make up nearly half of the human population. 

They are among the most excluded and unequal 

in fragile societies—economically, politically, and 

socially—this has large repercussions for continued 

fragility.4 According to the World Bank,5 progress on 

gender-related issues in fragile states appears to be 

stagnating or losing ground altogether. 

Gender inequality slows economic growth. A 

recent McKinsey report estimates that narrowing the 

economic gender gap could increase the global GDP 

Gender and Fragility: 

Ensuring a Golden Hour

NO. 8 • NOVEMBER 2016

The Fragility Study Group is an independent, non-partisan, effort of the Carnegie Endowment for International 

Peace, the Center for a New American Security, and the United States Institute of Peace. The chair report of 

the study group, U.S. Leadership and the Challenge of State Fragility, may be accessed here: http://www.usip.org/

fragilityreport. This brief is part of a series authored by scholars from the three institutions that build on the 

chair report to discuss the implications of fragility on existing U.S. tools, strategic interests, and challenges. The 

complete list of policy briefs may be accessed here: http://www.usip.org/fragilitypolicybriefs.

Kathleen Kuehnast

Senior Gender Advisor, U.S. Institute of Peace

Nora Dudwick

Gender and Social Inclusion Specialist
2 • Gender and Fragility: Ensuring a Golden Hour

by $12 trillion.6 There are additional economic payoffs 

for reducing inequality as well—agricultural output 

and food security increase when women gain access 

to productive resources, and improved health and 

reduced economic costs result when sexual and gender-based violence is reduced.7 Gender inequality and 

poverty go together: Of those living in severe poverty, 

43 percent live in fragile states10 and the majority of 

those are women, youth, and children. 

Cross-country comparisons demonstrate a strong 

correspondence between the physical security of 

women and the peacefulness of states.8 Countries 

where women’s civil liberties are restricted tend 

to be less stable politically. By contrast, women’s 

participation in peace processes have been linked to 

more successful rebuilding of institutions and legal 

frameworks.9

A new approach to fragility must take into account that 

gender inequality has far-reaching economic and political 

ramifications. As the next U.S. administration formulates 

its approach to fragility, it must therefore abandon the 

gender-neutral assumptions that since peace benefits 

everyone, gender inequality can wait. 

U.S. GOVERNMENT’S INCREMENTAL 

COMMITMENTS RELATED TO 

GENDER AND FRAGILITY. 

The attention to gender in fragile environments 

responds to increased research on the centrality 

of exclusion, inequality, and injustice to problems 

of fragility and conflict. Over the last five years, the 

U.S. government has steadily deepened its support 

for addressing gender inequality in fragile and conflict-affected societies. In 2000, the United Nations 

Security Council approved Resolution (UNSCR) 1325, 

which asks member states to ensure that women 

count in all decision-making levels of the government 

and to make sure they are counted when it comes to 

protection from gender-based violence. In 2011, an 

executive order launched a new policy across the U.S. 

government, requiring the development of a national 

action plan (NAP) on Women, Peace, and Security. 

Following the lead of 25 other countries at that time, 

the U.S. government sought to improve protections 

for women and girls during violent conflict and to 

promote greater participation of women in all peace 

processes. Now just five years later, there are over 60 

countries with NAPs on Women, Peace, and Security.

The increasing evidence on the correlation of state 

stability and the relative safety and security of its 

women has resulted in a greater funding commitment 

toward improving the status of women in war and in 

peace. The U.S. Department of State’s Fiscal Year 2017 

budget request of $1.3 billion for interventions related 

to gender more explicitly links gender equality and 

women’s status to national security and foreign policy 

goals, and earmarks $133.5 million “for the empowerment and protection of women and girls in crisis and 

conflict-affected environments.”11

FAILING GRADES, HOWEVER, WHEN 

INTEGRATING GENDER EQUALITY 

INTO INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE.

In spite of improved research and funding commitments over the last five years, the women, peace, 

and security agenda is still characterized by its 

The golden hour for gender is not 

after the peace treaties have been 

signed. The social contract on 

gender equality must be conceived 

before the crisis has ended, and then 

written into the new constitution, 

implemented in the reconfigured 

institutions, and prioritized in newly 

developed education textbooks.

Nora Dudwick is a cultural anthropologist who 

consults as a gender and social inclusion specialist for 

bilateral and international development agencies. 

Kathleen Kuehnast is a socio-cultural anthropologist 

and the Senior Gender Advisor at the United States 

Institute of Peace.
FRAGILITY STUDY GROUP • POLICY BRIEF • 3

fragmentation. Despite intentions to integrate women 

into peace building and state building processes and 

the reconstruction of institutions, gender efforts 

remain in sector silos and highly marginalized. A case 

in point is the 2015 White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism in which “women” are nestled 

into a sub category on par with religious actors and 

youth. Several global attempts to better integrate the 

countering violent extremism agenda with the women, 

peace, and security agenda have simply stalled. Not 

only is it important for women to be a part of the 

solution, mounting evidence now points to the fact 

that in addition to young men, a growing number of 

women are choosing to become terrorists. This 

shift in demographics should be on the security 

sector’s radar.12

An underlying but pervasive reason for the lack 

of stronger commitment is that the U.S. government and other donors are often loath to directly 

address “cultural traditions,” a category they apply 

to gender relations. Gender inequality is more than 

cultural, however; it reflects sharp power imbalances 

embedded in formal and informal laws and in the 

institutions of fragile and non-fragile states. In these 

environments, women’s relationship to the state 

tends to be mediated through their families and 

the customary institutions that regulate family law, 

inheritance, access to property, freedom of movement, and physical security. In emergency situations, 

girls and women are especially vulnerable to harmful 

traditional practices as with the case of female genital mutilation, which often goes hand in hand with 

forced early marriage.13 Because of this ambivalence 

about interfering with “cultural traditions,” U.S. policy 

has not been strong enough in fighting antiquated, 

dangerous, and criminal practices that are especially 

aimed at girl children.

NEW POLITICAL PEACE SETTLEMENTS 

IGNORE GENDER INEQUALITY.

During conflicts, gender relations are often upended 

as women and men take on unaccustomed roles 

to cope with crisis. Peace settlements offer a rare 

opportunity to take advantage of this moment and 

to renegotiate power and resources between groups 

in society, not the least—between men and women. 

However, the male elites who generally draft peace 

agreements tend to resist women’s inclusion, particularly in the back-stage informal negotiations. Despite 

the newest data that women’s active participation in 

a peace process results in a more inclusive, legitimate, 

and sustainable peace, equalizing power relationships 

is often “presented as threatening ‘tradition’ and 

peace prospects, when in fact it threatens certain 

power interests,” including control over important 

resources such as land.14 Rather, “women’s status 

and use of public spaces is traded between male elite 

interests groups, as a values statement and as a way 

of demonstrating control when social boundaries 

are changing.”15 However, when women’s rights are 

not explicitly part of peace settlements (for example, 

when settlements fail to guarantee their property 

rights) and are “traded away,” their ability to financially 

support their households and contribute to the 

country’s economic recovery is sharply reduced. 

Donors argue that there is a trade-off between 

achieving short-term stability and longer-term goals of 

gender equality. Although doing so requires patience, 

skill, and a good understanding of local power relations, if donors fail to push for gender equality to be 

included in peace settlements and constitutions, it is 

likely that endemic patterns of inequality will be institutionalized, making it all the more difficult to affect 

change down the road. Although the importance of 

addressing gender equality early on was articulated 

in UNSCR 1325, a 2012 United Nations review of 

major peace processes conducted since 1992 found 

that women made up only 4 percent of signatories of 

peace agreements, 2.4 percent of chief mediators, 3.7 

percent of witnesses or observers to peace negotiations, and 9 percent of negotiation team members.16

There is room for significant improvement here, and 

the United States should lead the way.

GENDER EQUALITY HAS NOT BEEN 

EMBEDDED IN CONSTITUTIONS.

As the highest law of the land, constitutions define 

the principles according to which executive, legislative, 

and judicial power should function, and the rights 

and responsibilities of public and private persons and 

entities. As emphasized by the UN Women’s Global 

Gender Equality Constitutional Database, “gender 
4 • Gender and Fragility: Ensuring a Golden Hour

responsive constitutions are those that meet internationally agreed upon standards on gender equality. 

Having women’s rights constitutionally entrenched in 

a national constitution is an important step towards 

ensuring eliminating gender-based discrimination and 

advancing women’s rights.”17

Constitutions that do not explicitly address gender 

equality may institutionalize inequality and hence, 

poverty and instability. Women’s economic productivity, for example, depends considerably on the 

extent to which they enjoy economic and civil rights. 

However, these rights can be undermined in countries18 where gender equality is not mainstreamed 

into the constitution or where constitutions recognize the authority of customary laws governing 

property, marriage and inheritance, and exempt 

these domains from principles of non-discrimination 

in the national constitution.19

GENDER INEQUALITY CORRELATES 

WITH HIGHER NUMBERS OF WOMEN 

AND CHILDREN BECOMING VICTIMS OF 

STATELESSNESS AND TRAFFICKING.

Massive population displacement is one of the many 

consequences of fragility. As of 2016, over 65 million 

people had been displaced by conflict and persecution, with women and children making up the majority 

of this number.20 Displacement also exposes the 

gaps in nationality laws. Many countries, including 

Syria, now the largest source of refugees, do not allow 

women to pass nationality to their children. If children 

are born outside the country, they may become stateless if that country does not allow citizenship based 

on birth alone. This is particularly likely if the father is 

unknown, dead, or missing. These stateless women 

and children become invisible. They lose access to 

all government services—from education to health 

and preventive health care. The invisibility of women 

for U.S. diplomacy also means that criminal human 

trafficking and sex slavery have become pervasive 

byproducts of this passive policy. The cycle of fragility is only made visible when more inclusive policy 

questions are asked about women. 

Fragility is also made visible through the extraordinary rate of violence against women. One in three 

women experience sexual and/or gender-based 

violence during their lifetimes.21

While the awareness of conflict-related sexual and 

gender-based violence against women has improved 

with UNSCR 1820, the structural issues associated 

with such violence have not been addressed. Heightened levels of sexual and gender-based violence in 

fragile and conflict-affected societies restrict women’s 

mobility and lessen their capacity to cope. Failure 

to protect women’s rights can perpetuate a culture 

of violence, which in turn contributes to a broader 

insecurity.22 Another endemic problem is that sexual 

and gender-based violence continues to be one of the 

major tools used by violent extremists and continues 

to wreak havoc in militaries and peacekeeping troops 

as rank and file commit these violent crimes against 

each other and civilian populations. 

THE GENDER DATA GAP IS 

STILL TOO LARGE.

Timely and reliable data are a prerequisite for designing effective policies and measuring progress in 

achieving gender equality. Gender bias is often embedded in the choice of indicators. For example, labor 

force surveys that only ask about the respondent’s 

“primary economic activity” greatly underestimate the 

unpaid economic activity of women, for whom paid 

work may be a secondary activity, with unpaid care 

work being primary. 

Fragile states especially tend to lack the systems, 

capacity, and resources to collect and analyze data, 

and large parts of the population may be hard to 

access because of poor infrastructure or security 

challenges. In such environments, there is not even 

basic sex or age disaggregated information on deaths, 

which makes it impossible to assess infant, maternal, 

or HIV/AIDS deaths. 

Often, donor reporting and the kinds of financial 

incentives they offer encourage lip service to gender 

equality but don’t affect underlying attitudes and perceptions. As a donor, the U.S. government should ask 

that evaluations include not only quantitative information about women’s participation but also qualitative 

evidence, which is based on interviews about the 

quality of their participation and their perceptions on 

the impact of the interventions. 
FRAGILITY STUDY GROUP • POLICY BRIEF • 5

ONGOING FUNDING GAPS 

PERPETUATE INEQUALITY.

To date, progress toward gender equality has been 

concentrated in health and education, demonstrating 

that success follows sufficient investment. But chronic 

underfunding has limited the kind of broad impacts 

that could significantly increase women’s participation 

in the economy and decrease poverty. While the 

United States spends 0.008 percent ($1.5 billion) of 

its GDP on programs focused on gender equality, the 

other Organization for Economic Co-operation and 

Development (OECD) countries average 0.013 of their 

GDP on such programs. If the United States spent at 

the level of other OECD countries, it would need to 

add a billion dollars to the U.S. aid budget for gender 

equality.23 Vogelstein warns that given the trend toward pooled financing mechanisms, if gender equality 

is not supported by a dedicated funding entity, it may 

be left behind as development financing is diverted to 

more traditional sectors.24

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE 

NEXT U.S. ADMINISTRATION

The following recommendations reflect the conviction 

that the moment for the administration to address 

gender equality in fragile environments and post-conflict settlements is now. Treating gender equality as a 

right that needs to wait until stability and peace have 

been re-established squanders a critical but very brief 

opportunity for inclusive social and institutional change.

1. Set the global standard for women’s active 

involvement in peace settlements and development of new constitutions.

Ample international examples show the range of 

activities donor governments can use to increase 

women’s involvement in post-conflict settlements. 

These include capacity building for both women 

and men on human rights, with a focus on economic and political rights; supporting organizations 

that work with men to begin questioning patriarchal and aggressive forms of masculinity; and 

working with women’s organizations to approach 

negotiations strategically and to develop concrete 

proposals for monitoring implementation.

When the U.S. government acts as a third party 

in peace negotiations, it can offer financial and/

or technical assistance contingent on including 

women not only in formal peace processes but also 

as part of the behind-the-scenes talks where real 

negotiations take place.25 The practical difficulties 

women may encounter if they have to travel or 

remain away from home during prolonged periods 

can be addressed by earmarking resources to 

cover their travel and lodging, childcare, training 

in leadership and negotiating skills, and physical 

protection. Men need to be involved in the capacity 

building as well, and efforts need to be taken to 

increase their understanding of and buy-in for 

women’s active engagement.26

2. Mandate gender equality by advocating and 

creating incentives for reform of discriminatory 

nationality laws.

Changing nationality laws is a straightforward step 

to help end gender inequality. Such discriminatory 

nationality laws are in violation of the Convention 

on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination 

against Women (CEDAW), which most countries 

have signed, as well as of other international 

treaties such as the International Covenant on 

Civil and Political Rights.27 The next administration should raise the issue of compliance in 

international fora such as the United Nations, the 

However, when women’s rights 

are not explicitly part of peace 

settlements (for example, when 

settlements fail to guarantee 

their property rights) and are 

“traded away,” their ability 

to financially support their 

households and contribute to the 

country’s economic recovery is 

sharply reduced.
6 • Gender and Fragility: Ensuring a Golden Hour

relevant supervisory bodies that exist to address 

treaty compliance, and where it has a role as party 

to post-conflict settlements. 

3. Increase technical and financial assistance 

to women’s civil society organizations in 

conflict-affected and fragile states.

Women’s success in influencing governments’ 

adoption of policies against gender-based violence 

and in gaining access to peace processes can be 

credited to their civil society activism.28 Recent 

research also has identified the potential of local 

women’s groups in countering violent extremism. 

The international community has provided important funding during conflict, when many women’s 

organizations had no other sources of financing. 

Yet despite consensus about their important role 

in advancing gender equality, funding for these 

groups has been shrinking rather than expanding. 

Instead of withdrawing support, greater support 

should be offered, and on a longer-term basis, to 

help build organizational and leadership capacity 

among women and women’s advocates for negotiating gender equality in different arenas. Funding 

must, of course, be supported by clear requirements for transparency and accountability.29 Note 

that countries with the best policies toward sexual 

and gender-based violence are those with activist, 

autonomous feminist movements, which can be 

supported by strong pressure on countries to sign 

and comply with international treaties on violence 

and abide by international norms.

4. Demand data about gender-related impacts in 

conflict-affected and fragile states.

It is no coincidence that the greatest achievements 

in narrowing the gender gap have occurred in 

sectors characterized by better data collection, 

including education and sexual and reproductive 

health. Addressing limited data on gender, particularly in fragile environments, requires strong 

political commitment and earmarked funding. The 

U.S. government should continue to support data 

initiatives, such as Data2X, for improving the quality 

and quantity of gender data, and set a high standard 

for all U.S. development institutions and departments (including Departments of State, Defense, 

and Agriculture, as well as USAID, the Millennium 

Challenge Corporation, and the Overseas Private 

Investment Corporation [OPIC], and governmental 

initiatives such as Power Africa) to incorporate rigorous, gender sensitive monitoring and evaluation.

5. Reinforce a zero tolerance for sexual and 

gender-based violence.

Sexual and gender-based violence is pervasive in 

fragile environments and particularly in conflict, 

and it does not disappear after conflict. The 

war may end but the violence does not. Its root 

cause—the social and cultural devaluation of 

women and girls—must be directly addressed. 

The U.S. government can do so by emphasizing 

prevention efforts that focus on gender-transformative programming.30 Women must be involved 

in all consultations to design policing strategies. 

Men should not be marginalized in the analysis 

and prevention efforts. Evidence increasingly 

reveals that men cannot be simply categorized 

as perpetrators, but must also be recognized as 

victims, both directly and indirectly when they are 

forced to witness family members being victimized. Therefore, there must be a great sensitivity 

to gender relational approaches to addressing the 

impact of this most severe and extreme form of 

torture, assault, abuse, and rape.

Hand in hand with zero tolerance for sexual and 

gender-based violence is the need to continue 

the U.S. government’s effort to combat trafficking 

through one of the best data driven summaries, 

the Trafficking in Persons Report ranking, released annually. More can be done to address 

this challenge, though. Human trafficking and 

money laundering go together and to fight more 

effectively human trafficking—a form of modern 

slavery—the U.S. government should require 

Gender equality should be the 

norm of policy expectations and 

not a utopian dream pushed to 

another century.
FRAGILITY STUDY GROUP • POLICY BRIEF • 7

financial institutions to prioritize identification 

of transactions that indicate trafficking and work 

with other governments to make anti-trafficking 

efforts an enforcement priority.31

6. Institutionalize gender equality funding as a 

stand-alone category. 

The U.S. government could catalyze formation of a 

pooled funding mechanism, for example, with other 

OECD members and with international financial institutions such as the World Bank, to address areas 

that have been relatively neglected in fragile states: 

women’s economic and legal rights, leadership, and 

freedom from violence. Pooled funding can be an 

effective mechanism that donors can use to build 

capacity among local organizations to implement 

interventions and monitor outcomes.32 The U.S. 

government should also encourage partners such 

as the OECD to treat funding for gender equality 

as a separate category and not as a cross-cutting 

issue that can be effectively addressed by modest 

contributions to other areas.33 

 

During the golden hour in any situation of crisis and 

fragility, it is critical to include gender analysis in the 

diagnosis. Gender equality should be the norm of 

policy expectations and not a utopian dream pushed 

to another century. The new Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) No. 5 and No. 16 clearly point to 

the fact that the 21st century is the time to tackle the 

subordinate status of women. In other words, the 

golden hour is now. 

NOTES

1 William J. Burns, Michele A. Flournoy, Nancy E. Lindborg, 

“U.S. Leadership and the Problem of State Fragility,” (U.S. 

Institute of Peace, September 2016).

2 Wendy Harcourt, “Literature Review on Gender and 

Fragility,”(European Report on Development, European 

Commission, 2009).

3 Valerie M. Hudson, Donna Lee Bowen, Perpetua Lynne 

Nielsen, “We Are Not Helpless: Addressing Structural 

Gender Inequality in Post-Conflict Societies,” PRISM, 6, no. 1 

(March 2016): 123–139.

4 Karen Barnes Robinson, “Gender Inequality and Fragility in 

the Post-MDG Framework, Policy Paper,” (Cordaid, 2013). 

5 World Bank, “World Development Report 2011 on Conflict, 

Security and Development,” (World Bank, 2011), 62.

6 McKinsey Global Institute, “The Power of Parity: How 

Advancing Women’s Equality can add $12 Trillion to Global 

Growth,” (McKinsey and Co., 2011).

7 Rachel B. Vogelstein, “Closing the Gender Gap in Development Financing,” Policy Innovation Memorandum no.58, 

(Council on Foreign Relations, 2016).

8 Valerie Hudson, “The Heart of the Matter: The Security of 

Women and the Security of States,” International Security 33, 

no.3 (2008): 7–45; M. Caprioli, “Primed For Violence: The 

Role of Gender Inequality in Predicting Internal Conflict,” 

International Studies Quarterly 49 (2005): 161–78; and 

Harcourt op cit.

9 Robinson, “Gender Inequality and Fragility”; Harcourt, 

“Literature Review.” 

10 OECD, “States of Fragility 2015: Meeting Post-2015 Ambitions,” (OECD Publishing, 2015),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264227699-en.

11 Department of State, “Congressional Budget Justifications: 

Foreign Operations FY17, Appendix 2,”

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/252733.pdf.

12 Belquis Ahmad and Sadaf Lakhani, “Afghan Women and 

Violent Extremism: Colluding, Perpetrating or Preventing?” 

Special Report, (U.S. Institute of Peace, forthcoming).

13 Marianna Ryan, Alison Glennie, Louise Robertson, and 

Ann-Marie Wilson, “The Impact of Emergency Situations 

on Female Genital Mutilation,” briefing paper, 28 Too Many, 

February 2014.

14 Clare Castillejo,“Gender, fragility and the politics of 

statebuilding,” (Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre, 

2012).

15 Susan Harris-Rimmer, “Are we ‘trading’ women’s rights 

in transitions?” Abstract, Presentation, Griffith University, October 13, 2016, accessed at: https://prezi.com/

labpjx1xd7d_/are-we-trading-womens-rights-in-transitions/.

16 “Promoting Women’s Participation in Peace Negotiations 

and Peace Processes,” Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, 2014. 

17 UNWomen, Global Gender Equality Database, accessed at 

http://constitutions.unwomen.org/en.

18 Countries that have signed onto CEDAW are obligated 

by this commitment to build gender equality into their 

national constitutions.

19 Mary Hallward-Driemeier, Tazeen Hasan, and Anca Bogdana Rusu, “Women’s Legal Rights over 50 Years: What is 

the Impact of Reform?” Policy Research Working Paper no. 

6617, (World Bank, 2013).

20 “Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2015,” (United 

Nations Human Rights Commission, NHRC, 2015).

21 “Facts and Figures: Ending Violence Against Women,” 

UNWomen, http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/

ending-violence-against-women/facts-and-figures.

22 Robinson, “Gender Inequality and Fragility.”

23 Megan O’Donnell, Mayra Buvinic, Cindy Huang, and Charles 

Kenny, “Promoting Women’s Economic Empowerment 

through US Foreign and Development Policy,” (Center for 

Global Development, 2016).

24 Vogelstein, “Closing the Gender Gap.”
25 Pilar Domingo, “Women, conflict and fragility: how to 

support women and girls in ways that have real meaning,” 

blog, Development Progress, August 27, 2014, 

http://www.developmentprogress.org/blog/2014/08/27/

women-conflict-and-fragility-how-support-women-andgirls-ways-have-real-meaning.

26 “The Sudan-South Sudan Agreements through a Gender 

Lens,” (U.S. Institute of Peace, 2013).

27 “Background Note on Gender Equality, Nationality Laws 

and Statelessness,” United Nations Human Rights Committee, March 8, 2016; Patricia Schulz, Interactive Panel 

Discussion on the general recommendations currently being elaborated by the CEDAW Committee: Gender-Related 

Dimensions of Refugee Status, Asylum and Statelessness, 

2014.

28 S. Laurel Weldon and Mala Htun, “Feminist Mobilization 

and Progressive Policy Change: Why Governments Take 

Action to Combat Violence Against Women,” Gender and 

Development 21, no. 2 (2013): 231–247.

29 Rebecca Turkington, “The Underfunded Partner: Women’s 

Civil Society Organizations,” (Georgetown Institute for 

Women, Peace and Security, September 12, 2016). 

30 Amanda H. Blair, Nicole Gerring, and Sabrina Karim, “Ending Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in War and Peace: 

Recommendations for the Next U.S. Administration,” (U.S. 

Institute of Peace, September 26, 2016).

31 Daniela Guzman, “How financial institutions lead way in 

battle against human trafficking,” InSightCrime: Analysis 

and Investigation of Organized Crime, May 6, 2014,

http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/how-financial-institutions-lead-way-in-battle-against-human-trafficking.

32 Anne Street, “Humanitarian pooled funding mechanisms: 

Learning from NGO experiences in accessing pooled 

funds,” (Catholic Agency For Overseas Development, 2010).

33 Vogelstein, “Closing the Gender Gap.”

www.cnas.org

@CNASdc

www.usip.org

@USIP

www.carnegieendowment.org

@CarnegieEndow