Gender and Peacebuilding

  • Tarja Väyrynen
Part of the Palgrave Advances book series (PAD)


Peacebuilding has become one of the mantras of conflict resolution theory and practice. It is often treated uncritically, and its disciplinary and institutional roots are neglected. An early academic usage of the word ‘peacebuilding’ can be found in the Scandinavian tradition of Peace Research, where the structural theory of violence held a prominent position for decades. At the institutional level, on the other hand, the term gained prominence in the 1990s, when UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali launched ‘An Agenda for Peace’ (1992) that defined the UN agenda for conflict resolution and peacebuilding. Very recently, a corpus of critical literature has emerged that criticises the non-reflexive use of the term ‘peacebuilding’. Despite the emerging critical research agenda on the topic, the connection between gender and peacebuilding remains a little-studied subject.


Instrumental Rationality Instrumental Reason Global Order Security Council Resolution Local Woman 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. Galtung, Peace, War and Defense, Essays in Peace Research, Vol II, Copenhagen: Christian Ejlers’ Forlag a-s, 1976, pp. 286–304.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Lederach, Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies, Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    H.W. Jeong, ‘Peacebuilding: Conceptual and Policy Issues’, in Ho-Won Jeong (ed.) Approaches to Peacebuilding, Houndsmill, Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave, 2002, p. 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Paris, At War’s End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Boutros-Ghali, An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping, A/47/277-S/24111, 17 June 1992, para. 21.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    K. Annan, ‘Opening First Session of Peacebuilding Commission’,, accessed 30 May 2008.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    For a critical study of international monetary institutions and peacebuilding see P. Williams, ‘Peace Operations and the International Financial Institutions: Insights from Rwanda and Sierra Leone’, in A. Bellamy and P. Williams (eds) Peace Operations and Global Order, London and New York: Routledge, 2005, pp. 103–23.Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    J. Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action, Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Vol I, Oxford: Polity Press, 1991, p. 10.Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    For a summary see A. Bellamy, ‘The ‘Next Stage’ in Peace Operations Theory?’, in A. Bellamy and P. Williams (eds) Peace Operations and Global Order, p. 19. See also M. Duffield, Global Governance and New Wars: The Merging of Development and Security, London: Zed Books, 2001;Google Scholar
  10. R. Paris, ‘Mission Civilisatrice’, Review of International Studies, vol. 28, no. 4, 2002, pp. 637–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 12.
    R. Cox, ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, 1981, pp. 126–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 14.
    O. Richmond, ‘UN Peacebuilding Operations and the Dilemma of the Peacebuilding Consensus’, in A. Bellamy and P. Williams (eds), Peace Operations and Global Order, p. 92; O. Richmond, ‘The Dilemmas of Subcontracting Liberal Peace’, in O. Richmond and H. Carey (eds) Subcontracting Peace, The Challenges of NGO Peacebuilding, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005, pp. 28–31. See also R. Paris, At War’s End, pp. 5–8.Google Scholar
  13. 15.
    B. Brock-Utne, ‘Feminism, Peace and Peace Education’, Bulletin of Peace Proposals, Vol. 15, no. 2, 1984, p. 149.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    S. Ruddick, Maternal Thinking: Towards a Politics of Peace, London: The Women’s Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    B. Reardon, Women and Peace, Feminist Visions of Global Security, New York: State University of New York Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. 18.
    J.B. Elshtain, Women and War, Brighton: Harvester Press, 1987, p. 4.Google Scholar
  17. 19.
    J. Goldstein, War and Gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, p. 331;Google Scholar
  18. A. Tickner. War and Gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, p. 331;Google Scholar
  19. A. Tickner, ‘Why Women Can’t Run the World’, International Studies Review, Vol. 1, no. 3, 1991, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    E. Rehn and E.J. Sirleaf, Women, War, Peace: The Independent Experts’ Assessment on the Impact of Armed Conflict on Women and Women’s Role in Peace-Building, UNIFEM, 2002, p. viii.Google Scholar
  21. 27.
    E. Ringmar, Identity, Interest and Action. A Cultural Explanation of Sweden’s Intervention in the Thirty Years War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp. 83–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 28.
    K. Daya, ‘“Honourable Resolutions”: Gendered Violence, Ethnicity and the Nation’, Alternatives, Vol. 27, no. 2, 2002, p. 235.Google Scholar
  23. 29.
    See N. Yuval-Davis, Gender and Nation, London: Sage, 1997.Google Scholar
  24. 30.
    I. Skjelsbaek, ‘Is femininity Inherently Peaceful? The Construction of Femininity in the War’, in I. Skjelsbaek and D. Smith (eds) Gender, Peace & Conflict, London: Sage, 2001, pp. 47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 35.
    G. Spivak, ‘Can the Subaltern Speak?’, in C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds) Marxism and the Interpretation, Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1988, p. 287.Google Scholar
  26. 37.
    J. Butler, Precarious Life, The Powers of Mourning and Violence, London and New York: Verso, 2004.Google Scholar
  27. 39.
    On Spivak and translation see J. Maggio, ‘“Can the Subaltern Be Heard?”: Political Theory, Translation, Representation, and Gyatri Chakravorty Spivak’, Alternatives, Vol. 32, no. 4, 2007, pp. 419–44. For a Gadamerian-inspired view on conflict resolution and translation seeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tarja Väyrynen, ‘A Shared Understanding: Gadamer and International Conflict Resolution’, Journal of Peace Research, vol. 42, no. 3, 2005, pp. 349–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Tarja Väyrynen 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tarja Väyrynen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations