Motivation behind the research
The research initiative began when Reiners was contacted by Kahn-Nisser, a fellow researcher intrigued by the biographical data compiled in Reiners’ book “Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions for Human Rights”. Kahn-Nisser is herself an expert on the inner workings of the human rights treaty bodies, and her inquiry set the stage for a collaboration on the behaviour of treaty body experts.
Reiners expressed being both honoured and a bit scared back then, knowing she had plenty of interesting data, but that it needed to be made sense of. Joining forces with Sara Kahn-Nisser promised to expand her methodological portfolio and thereby arrive at more comparative findings on human rights experts.
– I was really interested in what makes an expert an expert. My research is very connected to the research program in international relations on the politics of knowledge and the construction of expertise, Reiners explains.
Data-driven approach
The newly established team embarked on a comprehensive analysis, utilizing biographical data and questioning patterns during state report evaluations. They identified notable trends linking expert attributes with participation levels, leading to surprising conclusions about gender dynamics.
Key findings
One of the most intriguing findings is that women, contrary to expectations, engage more frequently in questioning during treaty body meetings. This is particularly striking given the minority status of women within these bodies.
Institutional housekeeping
The concept of "institutional housekeeping" offers a potential explanation. The term was formulated to explain work dynamics in academia, where research shows that women often assume critical yet unpaid and unrewarded service roles. Sitting on an UN treaty body expert-panel is a voluntary effort, and “institutional housekeeping” can perhaps explain why women are more active than men.
– Institutional housekeeping in a nutshell is that women often end up with more service roles than men. This might explain the participation rate of women, given that the work on the treaty is also unpaid and depends on these dynamics of voluntary commitment, Reiners notes.
Educational and regional backgrounds
The research also highlights the role of educational and regional backgrounds, noting that women from dominant geo-cultural or professional groups tend to be more active participants. Legal education was identified as a significant factor in women's engagement levels.
– We see that most experts have a very homogeneous
background when it comes to education, often from universities in the global North.
Reiners also notes that this influences gender policy recommendations:
– The solution is therefore not to simply just add more women and stir the pot. We still see barriers that prevent the participation of women who do not come from Western states and who do not belong to the legal profession.
Additionally, experts affiliated with NGOs were observed to be more proactive. This could be attributed to the valuable on-the-ground information that NGOs provide, or it may reflect the dedication of these experts, who actively contribute their knowledge in both UN meetings and NGO activities.
Future directions
The findings suggest a need to reconsider how international institutions approach gender diversity. Reiners recommends a nuanced diversification strategy that includes regional, educational, and professional diversity alongside gender.
– I would always encourage diversifying knowledge and expertise in global governance institutions, Reiners stresses.
She further notes how formal education is only one factor that can explain why someone is considered an expert and highlights lived experiences and practices as other important factors.
Reiners encourages further research on understanding the mechanisms encouraging participation among non-Western and non-legal professionals. She emphasizes the need for inclusive practices that empower all experts to contribute effectively.
– More research is needed to understand how these internal dynamics encourage or prevent certain members from speaking up.
The research is published in the journal Global Governance and is available open access, encouraging further exploration of these critical issues.