Resilience, gender, and conflict: thinking about resilience in a multidimensional way

Abstract

Resilience has become an oft-invoked concept in development and security policy circles and the subject of much debate in the literature. Yet, one aspect that needs to be further theorised is the complex relationship between resilience, conflict and gender. This introduction identifies the gradual congruence between the programmatic agendas of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSCR 1325) and resilience-building approaches in peacebuilding and argues that this convergence needs to be further scrutinised. Our main argument is that it is time for the scholarship to go beyond the simple categorisation of resilience as being either the new paradigmatic solution to international interventions, conflicts and crises or a meaningless and useless governmental buzzword. Instead, the contributions found in this Special Issue see resilience in terms of multiplicity. Resilience, understood in terms of multiplicity and in a multidimensional way, appears a valuable analytical concept to study both the systemic nature of gendered power relations and their prevalence and adaptation over time, as well as the responses of individuals, communities and institutions to the gendered effects of conflict. To add empirical richness to the Special Issue, these conceptual connections are analysed in multiple geographical case studies, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sierra Leone, Cote d’Ivoire, Iraq, Liberia, Palestine and Rwanda.

Resilience processes among Ukrainian youth preparing to build resilience with peers during the Ukraine-Russia war

“…With conscription in force at the time of the ToR training, it was not possible to recruit male participants. Gender differences have been noted in terms of trauma responses due to war (e.g., Portnoy et al, 2018 ) and there have been calls for considerations of conflict-related resilience in terms of gender (e.g., Juncos and Bourbeau, 2022 ). Findings should be interpreted with caution given the potential selection bias and gender differences.…”