Global fragmentation is impacting women’s meaningful participation in peace processes. Peacemaking now takes place across multiple mediation spaces, which reinforces the hierarchy of talks, with limited inclusion of women at the most influential level, and broad consultations rarely feeding into Track 1 processes. Multi-mediation also enables the side-lining of diverse women’s groups and gender perspectives (Wise et. al, 2025), whilst shrinking civic constrains women’s abilities to securely participate in peace processes if they do not have adequate support for safety protocols (Wise, 2023).

Local and relational peacemaking processes that centre women in leadership for structural transformation, de-escalation, and community trust-building can offer models for sustainable, transformative peace that challenge the prevailing dynamic of quick, transactional elite wins (Wise et. Al, 2025).

Constitutional reform in a conflict situation is aimed at stopping the violence, so initial negotiations are usually limited to representatives of armed groups, who are predominately men. The functional exclusion of women from early negotiations impacts their influence in subsequent phases. Male dominance in structural reform processes should not be assumed as either ‘natural’ or ‘necessary’. Instead, it is important to question processes that are exclusively or predominately led by men, as these are often inherently deficient and contrary to democratic principles (Houlihan and Hickey 2023).

PeaceRep’s PA-X Gender Database hosts all 494 peace agreements reached between 1990 and 2025 that include provisions on women, girls, gender, and/or sexual violence. Whilst some peace processes have developed comprehensive, intersectional approaches to peace that attempt to mainstream gender, many continue to be exclusive negotiations that produce gender-blind peace agreements (Wise and Campbell 2025), or agreements that only include references to a few priority WPS topics, rather than holistically addressing multiple gendered issues (Popoff 2025).

PA-X shows that the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 objective that “all actors involved, when negotiating and implementing peace agreements, […] adopt a gender perspective” is still not being reached in the majority of peace processes, and that gender mainstreaming in peace agreements is experiencing a decline across global peacemaking practice (Wise, 2026). As a share of all peace agreements, agreements not signed by the UN reference women, girls, and gender more often than UN-signatory agreements; however, UN involvement correlates with higher proportions of references to different gender issues (Popoff 2025).

Some aspects of gender-related issues in peacemaking practice are exceedingly rare: for instance, just 3% of agreements in the PA-X database address Conflict-Related Sexual Violence Against Men. This should be understood as part of a broader gendered understanding of violence in armed conflict, and the gendered nature of attempts for this violence to be prevented and addressed (MacLeod 2026).

Shifts away from sustained, multilateral approaches to mediation could impact gender perspectives in peace agreements, as gender references are more commonly included in comprehensive agreements than at any other agreement stage. Similarly, an increase in pre-negotiation agreements in recent years is a concern for gender equality advocates due to the often-closed nature of this process stage, with conversations held between predominantly male political and military elites (Wise and Campbell 2025).

Brideprice practices in South Sudan impact gender dynamics between men and women, by reinforcing cultural norms of women’s subservience to men. This sense of entitlement is a contributing factor to violence against women within marriages and families. Brideprice also reinforces masculine ideals and expectations, increasing societal pressures on men to acquire wealth for payments, which exacerbates armed violence, cattle raiding, and intercommunal violence (Pospisil et al. 2025).

Gender equality will not be achieved by the state imposing top-down progressive change in contexts where customary law contributes to women’s marginalisation. Due to the deep-rooted social functions of brideprice, any legal reforms will need to be holistic and socially sustainable, with pragmatic regulations working towards longer-term cultural shifts where marriage is perceived as an individual union rather than a family arrangement (Pospisil et al. 2025). Successful legal reforms to reduce gender inequality will also depend on the collective efforts and engagement of policymakers, civil society, and local communities (Tai 2025).

Lasting change can only happen when women are empowered within their communities to initiate shifts in culture and are able to rely on a broader constitutional and legal framework for support (Ainsworth and Hickey 2022). For example, in Sudan, structural, cultural, and epistemic hierarchies enabled the marginalisation of popular civic feminist initiatives and prevented the empowerment women experienced in the 2019 revolution from transforming into long-term institutional representation and affirmation of their political struggle (Makawi 2026).

In cases of decentralisation and constitutional redesign, women and gendered considerations are often left out of dialogues, yet these processes offer opportunities for increased involvement of a gender perspective and women’s engagement. Decentralisation processes may bolster the role of local and lower levels of governance, which tend to be the most relevant and effective avenues for addressing day-to-day issues faced by women and gender minorities (Houlihan and Hickey 2023).

PeaceRep’s key findings series presents a top-line overview of findings from the breadth and depth of the consortium’s data-driven and in-country research between 2021 – 2027. The findings presented here represent our main contributions to the field, but are not necessarily exhaustive of all PeaceRep work on each thematic and geographic area. To cite these findings, use the suggested citation below. 

Researchers involved

Laura Wise (key findings lead author), Rhys Ainsworth, Adut Alaak Garang, Fiona Campbell, Christine Chinkin, Sharon P. Hickey, Kasia Houghton, Erin C. Houlihan, Melissa Johnston, Ella MacLeod, Raga Makawi, Celeste Popoff, Jan Pospisil, Oksana Potapova, Nyachangkuoth Rambang Tai, Gaisu Yari, Salma Yusuf

Suggested citation

Wise, L. (2026). PeaceRep Key Findings: Gender, Peace, and Security. PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

References

Ainsworth, R., and Hickey, S. P. (2022). Constitutions, Customary and Religious Law, and Gender Equality: Reconciling Rights in Constitutional Design Negotiations. PeaceRep, Edinburgh Centre for Constitutional Law, International IDEA.

Chinkin, C., and Potapova, O. (2023). Women, Peace and Security: National Action Plans in the UK and Ukraine (PeaceRep Policy Brief). Conflict and Civicness Research Group, London School of Economics.

Houlihan, E. C., & Hickey, S. P. (2023). Constitutional Approaches to Decentralization: Elements, Challenges and Implications (Report on the 4th annual Women Constitution-Makers’ Dialogue, 2022). PeaceRep, Edinburgh Centre for Constitutional Law, International IDEA.

Makawi, R. (2026). The Pitfalls of Women and Peacemaking in Sudan — Shifting Feminist Narratives in Revolution and War (PeaceRep Policy Brief). PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

MacLeod, E. (2026). Conflict-Related Sexual Violence Against Men and Boys: Survivors Sidelined in Peace Agreements [The Future Voices Series]. PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Mehran, M. (2023). Recognition of Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan Justified (Afghanistan Research Network Reflection). PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Popoff, C. (2025). Women, Peace and the United Nations: The UN’s Role in Advancing Gender Provisions in Peace Agreements [The Future Voices Series]. PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Pospisil, J., Johnston, M., Alaak Garang, A., and Rambang Tai, N. (2024). Bring Enough Cows to Marry: Brideprice, Conflict, and Gender Relations in South Sudan (PeaceRep Report). PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Tai, N. (2025). Gender, Brideprice, and Conflict in South Sudan: a Path to Progress through Legal Reform. (PeaceRep Blog). PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Wise, L. (2026). Gender References in Peace Agreements in 2025: Insights from the PA-X Peace Agreements Database [PA-X Data Series]. PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Wise, L. and Campbell, F. (2025). Women, Peace and Security at 25: Assessing Implementation through Gender Perspectives in Peace Agreements. (PeaceRep Blog). PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Wise, L., Yusuf, S., Houghton, K., & Campbell, F. (2025). Women, Peace and Security in the Age of Fragmentation (SCGA Insight Report). The Scottish Council on Global Affairs, University of Glasgow.

Wise, L. (28 Aug 2024). Supporting Women in Peace Processes as Civic Space Shrinks. (PeaceRep Blog). PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.

Yari, G. (2025). Is the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda Still Relevant for Afghanistan? (Afghanistan Research Network Reflection). PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.