The highly gendered, undervalued and unsupported nature of unpaid care work is a key – yet overlooked – factor in the continued underrepresentation of women in peacebuilding. Lack of organisational attentiveness to care is, subsequently, a driver of gender inequality, peacebuilding failures and harmful workplace cultures.
The underrepresentation of women at the recent NATO Summit in Washington and the organising committee for the forthcoming COP29 Climate Change Conference in Azerbaijan has highlighted the persistent barriers to women’s meaningful participation in public and political life, especially in leadership positions. The persistence of these barriers calls into question rhetorical and policy commitment to gender parity and gender equality.
So too in the peacebuilding sector. Women continue to be underrepresented, especially at the senior levels, in field sites, in security-related roles and – critically – from the mid-35-40 age range. This is the age at which many people have children.
It is typically women rather than men who leave the sector when they have children. This is due to the highly gendered nature of unpaid care work, with women and girls taking on a disproportionate share of unpaid care work globally. It is also due to gendered assumptions about care work, women with children are often regarded as not possessing the requisite skills, capacity or commitment to work in the sector, especially field sites – even regarded as being ‘unfit to work in the field’. Assumptions about men’s capabilities rarely shift after having children. The gender pay gap may also have a role to play in women rather than men leaving the peacebuilding sector due to childcare responsibilities.
In fact, having caring responsibilities is one of the key – yet overlooked – causes of women’s underrepresentation in the peacebuilding sector. Little has been done to address this, even though it is broadly accepted that the participation of women is critical to peacebuilding success.
Instead, many people regard the decision to leave the sector as a personal or private matter rather than a political one. It is, of course, a political issue when the drivers of this departure are gendered inequalities and biases and there are things peacebuilding organisations can do to better support people with caring responsibilities to prevent their departure.
Organisations could improve human resource policies to provide adequate maternity leave, increase paternity leave, support the re-engagement of returning staff, enable the transfer of spouses to the same mission, and support flexible work practices. Organisations could also provide crèches and safe spaces for nursing mothers, and introduce training and awareness raising programmes to inform staff of support mechanisms in place for carers and to guard against bias and discrimination.
While there have been recent sectoral shifts in acknowledging the importance of supporting carers, more needs to be done. Otherwise, it is not simply the carer who is ‘forced to leave’ or manage the ‘incredible juggle’ who suffers. There are negative consequences for peacebuilding.
The adverse impact from the lack of women representation on organisational diversity is likely to undermine peacebuilding success. This is because there is not a diversity of skills, experiences and knowledge in the sector without women. It is also because peacebuilding is less likely to be responsive to a diversity of needs, or enjoy broad-based public confidence and trust, when the sector does not reflect that diversity. The underrepresentation of women is also likely to hinder efforts to advance and advocate (with credibility) gender equality in places emerging from conflict. This matters because of the known links between gender inequality and armed conflict.
Gendered assumptions about roles and responsibilities – that women are carers, and mothers are out of place in the field – compounded with lack of organisational support for carers, leads to the underrepresentation of women and subsequent harmful impacts on peacebuilding. However, it is also men and LGBTIQ+ carers who suffer assumptions that they do not have caring responsibilities that need attending to.
While women may be forced to leave the sector when they have caring responsibilities, men may be forced to separate from their families for long periods of time while they continue working in the sector, with little organisational support or recognition. This has consequences for their well-being, which can also harm workplace cultures and the work they are doing. Lack of organisational support for carers can therefore have further negative consequences for peacebuilding.
Assumptions that women are carers first and lose the professional skills, capabilities and commitment they had pre-care roles, are matched by assumptions that men’s caring responsibilities do not supersede or impact their professional roles. An example of these prevailing assumptions is evident in the outrage that greeted the new British Prime Minister’s, Keir Starmer, intention to continue protecting Friday evenings for his family. Another example is the low take-up rate of paternity leave for fear that it harms professional reputation and career progression.
Recent research has suggested that creative approaches to paternity leave – extending or incorporating it into a gender-neutral parental leave – increases the take-up rate, breaking the ‘social stigma around father’s taking time off to care for their children’. Further consequences may include shifting gendered assumptions about care work. In the peacebuilding sector, it may also help to shift gendered assumptions about the place and capabilities of the mother as well as gendered assumptions about peace work – it being predominantly a male domain, particularly in insecure environments, security-related roles and leadership positions.
More broadly, greater attention to the caring responsibilities and care needs of peacebuilders can help advance an ethics of care in peacebuilding. As well as benefiting carers, this would benefit the broader sector and potentially increase the success-rate of peacebuilding. It would do so by acknowledging people’s connectedness and the importance of care, including care for others and self-care. This can help both peacebuilders and peacebuilding practice: improving the well-being of peacebuilders, potentially helping to address high levels of stress, trauma and safeguarding issues in the sector; and promoting peacebuilding practice that is more attentive and responsive to the needs of others.
Eleanor Gordon
Dr. Eleanor Gordon is the Director of the Global Peace and Security Centre at Monash University (Monash GPS) and a Senior Lecturer in International Relations. She has spent over 25 years working in the field of conflict, security, justice and human rights. This includes 10 years working in UN peace operations in management and advisory roles, and a further 15+ years as a scholar and consultant for various governments and international organisations. Her research focusses on building security and justice after conflict, inclusive and gender-responsive peacebuilding and peacekeeping, and advancing an ethics of care in peace work.
