The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gender mainstreaming since Beijing: A review of success and limitations in international institutions
Abstract
The Beijing Platform for Action prioritised gender mainstreaming as the mechanism to achieve gender equality. A decade later, policy makers and practitioners are debating whether this has succeeded or failed. This article aims to contribute to this debate by reviewing progress made to date, through a review of gender mainstreaming policies in international development institutions. Categorising progress into three stages - adoption of terminology, putting a policy into place, and implementation - the article argues that while most institutions have put gender mainstreaming policies in place, implementation remains inconsistent. Most important of all, the outcomes and impact of the implementation of gender mainstreaming in terms of gender equality remain largely unknown, with implications for the next decade's strategies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Church, J. A. (2001) · Journal of Government Information · doi:10.1016/s1352-0237(01)00307-0 · Cited by 9,153
Gender Planning and Development: Theory, Practice and Training
Jain, D. (1995) · Feminist Review · doi:10.1057/fr.1995.11 · Cited by 1,432
Whose Voices? Whose Choices? Reflections on Gender and Participatory Development
Cornwall, A. (2003) · World Development · doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(03)00086-x · Cited by 796
Gender Planning and Development: Theory, Practice and Training
Moser, C. (2012) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203411940 · Cited by 761 · cited 1×
“Many NGOs show a bias towards mobilisation of women’s unpaid labour as an example of women’s participation, often yielding negligible benefits for women and using their time (Moser 1993).”
BackgroundSelf-citation(1998) · Practical Action Publishing eBooks · doi:10.3362/9781780440309 · Cited by 570
A Guide to Gender-Analysis Frameworks
Smyth, I. (1999) · Practical Action Publishing eBooks · doi:10.3362/9780855987602 · Cited by 282
A Guide to Gender-Analysis Frameworks
March, C., Smyth, I., & Mukhopadhyay, M. (1999) · OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · Cited by 253
Fitting gender into development institutions
Razavi, S. (1997) · World Development · doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(97)00023-5 · Cited by 154
Institutionalizing gender in UK NGOs
Wallace, T. (1998) · Development in Practice · doi:10.1080/09614529853783 · Cited by 25
Moser, C. O. N. (1995) · New Directions for Evaluation · doi:10.1002/ev.1009 · Cited by 23
Self-citation
Cited by
Mainstreaming politics: Gendering practices and feminist theory
Bacchi, C., & Eveline, J. (2012) · University of Adelaide Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/upo9780980672381 · Cited by 273
Van Bavel, H. (2020) · Gender, Place & Culture · doi:10.1080/0966369x.2019.1615415 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Moser, C., & Moser, A.
- Venue
- Gender & Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-07
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 11-22
- ISSN
- 1355-2074 (ISSN-L)
- 1364-9221
- OpenAlex
- W2069603775
- Cited by
- 414
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 12.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gender mainstreaming since Beijing: A review of success and limitations in international institutions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13552070512331332283
- The paper
- Moser, C., & Moser, A. (2005). Gender mainstreaming since Beijing: A review of success and limitations in international institutions. Gender & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552070512331332283
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
