Evidence Hub

Strengthening women's empowerment and gender equality in fragile contexts towards peaceful and inclusive societies: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Etienne Lwamba, Shannon Shisler, Will Ridlehoover, M. Kupfer, Nkululeko Tshabalala, Promise M. Nduku, Laurenz Langer, S. Grant et al.

Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2021

1,325 participants · 210 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Across the globe, gender disparities still exist with regard to equitable access to resources, participation in decision‐making processes, and gender and sexual‐based violence. This is particularly true in fragile and conflict‐affected settings, where women and girls are affected by both fragility and conflict in unique ways. While women have been acknowledged as key actors in peace processes and post‐conflict reconstruction (e.g., through the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 and the Women, Peace and Security Agenda) evidence on the effectiveness of gender‐specific and gender‐transformative interventions to improve women's empowerment in fragile and conflict‐affected states and situations (FCAS) remains understudied. Objectives The purpose of this review was to synthesize the body of evidence around gender‐specific and gender‐transformative interventions aimed at improving women's empowerment in fragile and conflict‐affected settings with high levels of gender inequality. We also aimed to identify barriers and facilitators that could affect the effectiveness of these interventions and to provide implications for policy, practice and research designs within the field of transitional aid. Methods We searched for and screened over 100,000 experimental and quasi‐experimental studies focused on FCAS at the individual and community levels. We used standard methodological procedures outlined by the Campbell Collaboration for the data collection…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,325 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free