Online Appendix: Modelling norm clarification: the intersectional practice of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
<p dir="ltr">This article investigates how United Nations human rights treaty bodies contribute to the clarification of international gender norms, with a particular focus on the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Drawing on discursive institutional...
Сохранить в:
| Главный автор: | |
|---|---|
| Опубликовано: |
2025
|
| Предметы: | |
| Метки: |
Добавить метку
Нет меток, Требуется 1-ая метка записи!
|
| Итог: | <p dir="ltr">This article investigates how United Nations human rights treaty bodies contribute to the clarification of international gender norms, with a particular focus on the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Drawing on discursive institutionalism and practice theory, it conceptualises treaty bodies as <i>norm practitioners</i> and proposes a model of norm clarification comprising three interrelated practices: interpretive pronouncements, strategic framing, and normative reinforcement.</p><p dir="ltr">Using a qualitative content analysis of 185 state-specific recommendations issued by CEDAW between 2018 and 2023, the article examines how the concept of intersectionality is invoked, adapted, and stabilised in practice. The recommendations were drawn from publicly available Concluding Observations published on the website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). The findings demonstrate that intersectionality is increasingly embedded in the Committee’s work through legal elaboration, context-sensitive framing, and consistent reference to treaty provisions and soft law instruments. While regional variation indicates strategic adaptation to different contexts, the proposed model highlights how treaty bodies translate abstract norms into actionable and politically resonant recommendations.</p><p dir="ltr">Supplementary material is provided in the appendix, including a list of reviewed State parties, a methodological note on data collection, the coding scheme used in the analysis, regional and group-based distributions of recommendations, and illustrative examples. The dataset contains no personal or confidential information and is based exclusively on official UN documents available in the public domain; therefore, no ethical approval was required.</p><p><br></p> |
|---|