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?
Disregard for women’s participation in the design and implementation of specific strategies on the protection of civilians;
Failure to adopt a 1325 National Action Plan;
Inadequate integration of women and women’s civil society organisations into local, national, and regional efforts on countering terrorism and violent extremism;
Disproportionate use of the veto power;
Lack of predictable, accessible, and flexible financial support for the issues of women, peace and security;
Increased annual military expenditure;
Lack of specific commitments to advance gender justice locally, as well as worldwide;
Failure to ratify the Arms Trade Treaty and establish enforceable national and regional regulations on small arms;
Shrinkage of the space for women's organisations, including those that focus on and address LGBTQI issues.
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.