Quotas for peace? Gender inclusion in post-conflict and stable democracies. A comparative case study of Sweden and Bosnia and Herzegovina

Abstract

This thesis explores the role of gender quotas in enhancing women’s political participation and promoting peacebuilding, through a comparative case study of Sweden and Bosnia and Herzegovina. It questions how the application and efficacy of gender quotas are influenced by various political circumstances, such as stable and post-conflict democracies. Drawing on feminist political theory and the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) Agenda, the study applies a Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) within the Most Different Systems Design (MDSD). Sweden, a stable democracy, serves as an example of how party norms and internal political culture may promote inclusive governance with voluntary quotas. On the other hand, Bosnia and Herzegovina serves an example of how legally mandated, externally enforced quotas might boost descriptive representation without necessarily changing institutional norms or promoting peace. The research demonstrates that quotas alone are insufficient; rather, their effectiveness relies on more extensive structural, cultural, and institutional elements, such as party dynamics, political will, and enforcement strategies. Finally, the thesis argues that gender quotas can help peace and democratic resilience, but only if they are included into sociopolitical frameworks that support them. International actors are encouraged to use intersectional methods and capacity-building to reinforce quota rules in both contexts.