In the graph above, the average performance of each country in all main categories for the period between 2010 and 2015 is reflected.
What are the key gaps?
Failure to internalise the WPS agenda into the Council’s daily work on country and thematic issues;
Failure to ensure that women and civil society organisations participate meaningfully in efforts to combat and counter terrorist threats in local, national, and regional efforts;
Failure to ensure that every individual they deploy to UN peacekeeping missions is thoroughly trained and is held accountable for his/her actions;
Lack of references to small arms in its 1325 National Action Plan;
Lack of an estimated/allocated budget in its 1325 National Action Plan’s budget;
Increased military spendings;
Lack of efforts to meaningfully engage women, including women from minority groups, at all levels of the political arena.
Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Scorecard: Methodology
The WPS Scorecard intends to assess and evaluate actions by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Permanent Member States’ (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America) to implement the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Agenda.
To do so, the WPS Scorecard assesses the actions of the Permanent Five at both the international and national levels over a period from 2010 and onwards.
First, it evaluates international actions of Member States: 1) WPS-related statements and commitments, 2) gender-sensitive rankings and legal obligations, 3) international financial priorities, and 4) gender-sensitive commitments and policies in peacekeeping.
Second, it also evaluates national actions of Member States as they relate to the implementation of the WPS Agenda: 1) prevention, 2) participation, 3) protection, and 4) recovery support.
Each UNSC Permanent Member State is graded with consistent qualitative or quantitative evaluation methods specific to the nature of each type of category. States may earn a maximum of 100 points for its full compliance with the relevant standards. Deviation from the standard defines a state’s final grade. (Example: a state has to sign and ratify all international human rights documents related to gender to receive 100 points. If a state has failed to sign and/or ratify a number of the existing treaties, the deviation from the standard determines the State's final grade). Criteria for each indicator were developed based on principles embedded in internationally relevant and widely accepted conventions, protocols, and reports. A grade for each indicator, as well as a total grade, is provided for each year based on the average number of points received.
The analysis conducted for this project is used to inform recommendations to the states based on their progress in specific areas of focus, with the goal of emphasising key areas in which the states should increase their efforts to close gender-sensitive gaps and influence impactful progress through the Women, Peace and Security Agenda.
***The current methodology was developed by Marina Kumskova and Katie Krueger.
PeaceWomen.org is a project of the Women's International League of Peace and Freedom, United Nations Office.
Fair Use Notice: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
PeaceWomen.org distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.