What the Third Ministerial Conference on Feminist Foreign Policy taught me

In July, IWDA's Senior Research and Policy Advisor Alice Ridge attended the Third Ministerial Conference on Feminist Foreign Policy. Hosted by the government of Mexico, the conference was an opportunity for countries and civil society to share experiences, best practices and challenges related to the implementation of feminist foreign policies. Below are her reflections on the event and what it tells us about the future of feminist foreign policy.

Earlier this month I attended the Third Ministerial Conference on Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP) in Mexico, as part of a month-long trip to Mexico and New York. Much of this trip has involved listening to government representatives sitting around big tables with name cards, microphones, and 3-minute pre-prepared speeches.??

While this format can be a bit stilted, it had the advantage of firmly placing FFP in the realm of serious foreign policy. For a topic that is relatively new - only 10 years old – and, until recently, was not taken seriously as a legitimate approach, this signals a significant shift.??

This format also means that governments who have committed to feminist foreign policy approaches, as well as those who have a substantial focus on gender in foreign policy but are not – or not yet – using the label of FFP (with Australia falling into this second category), have to come to the table with something meaningful to say about what a feminist approach means to them.?

For IWDA and the Australian Feminist Foreign Policy Coalition , a FFP approach is not just about women in diplomacy, or about gender mainstreaming in international development. It’s about transforming the structures of power that shape our world. So yes, that means looking at patriarchy, but it doesn’t stop there – it’s also about the way colonialism and capitalism have made some countries rich and others poor, and are keeping them that way through the global economic and governance structures which are rooted in coloniality.??

However, in Mexico, it was clear to me that when most countries talk about their FFP, they focus on women, they talk about the Women Peace and Security agenda or the 3Rs (rights, representation and resources) which – don’t get me wrong – are important, but not quite the transformative agenda I’m hoping for. They talk about putting more women at the table, rather than trying to redesign the table itself.??

Does that mean FFP is a false promise???

I don’t think so, for a number of reasons. First off, FFP is only a decade old, and I think change of this nature requires a massive and potentially generational shift in mindsets.??

We also need to avoid equating FFP with what governments do. Instead, FFP is an idea that comes from civil society, who are using it as a powerful framework to call attention to the dire need for structural transformation.??

And while I don’t see a lot of evidence that governments are ready to act on that call – FFP is too often siloed to the work of a gender branch or a single ambassador – I do see potential in the way FFP countries are starting to see themselves as a bloc which can take action on shared priorities, without needing to be constantly dragged down to a lowest common denominator position - a challenge often found in UN spaces. It’s a way for countries to opt in to a shared agenda, and then work together to advance it.?

This is affirmed in the findings of IWDA’s forthcoming research on FFP. We first conducted research in 2021 looking at the pathways different governments have taken to adopting FFP, wanting to understand what motivated and enabled them. For that first wave of FFP adopters (Sweden, Canada, France, Mexico), FFP was a way to stand out. In comparison, what we’re increasingly seeing now is governments citing the desire to be part of a club of like-minded countries as their motivation for adopting FFP.??

This is where I see the biggest potential for FFP today – in providing a mechanism for like-minded governments to work together on common agendas. One particular issue that is ripe for this kind of collaboration is the issue of individual level poverty measurement. Despite repeated recognition at the global level that household level measurement of poverty is limiting our ability to see the picture for women and girls (and so many others!), we have seen limited action on this problem – something my colleague Joanne Crawford outlined in detail in a recent AFFPC Issue Paper .??

In facing this challenge, FFP countries could work together to push greater normative recognition of the problem and of solutions like Equality Insights , IWDA’s flagship program for individual level, gender-sensitive, multidimensional poverty data. This could be pursued through a range of global forums like next year’s review of Beijing +30 . It could also be part of a commitment to build individual level data into discussions of the post-2030 sustainable development agenda from the outset – ensuring no one is left behind in these conversations and truly inclusive solutions can be developed.?

Given the magnitude of challenges facing the world today, the hope FFP offers lies in its ability to open up new ways of thinking for transformative solutions to tackle the ways that systems of power are currently acting to marginalise and exclude certain groups of people.?

Transforming global systems of power is something no one government can address alone. Collective action through FFP could be a starting point.??

#FFP #AusFFP #ForeignPolicy #IIICoPEF #FeministForeignPolicy