The article explores government compliance with international pressures measured as policy adoption and institutional reform. The findings reveal that government compliance is determined by the domestic political system and depends on the configuration of political actors mobilized in support of reform. Legislative reform is facilitated by a strong women’s movement and mobilized female parliamentarians. Institutional reform depends on the strength of the women’s movement and its ability to form coalitions with political actors within government elites, most importantly governing parties. Finally, the effect of women’s movements’ actors on the institutional reform is moderated by the ideology of political parties in power.
Avdeyeva, Olga.2007. When do states comply with international treaties? Policies on violence against women in post-communist countries. International Studies Quarterly51 (4): 877-900.
2.
Banaszak, Lee Ann.1996. Why movements succeed or fail. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
Bashevkin, Sylvia.1998. Women on the defensive: Living through conservative times . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Beck, Nathaniel, and Jonathan N. Katz .1995. What to do (not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review89:634-50.
5.
Beckwith, Karen.2000. Beyond compare? Women’s movements in comparative perspective. European Journal of Political Research37:431-68.
6.
Berkovitch, Ninza.1999. From motherhood to citizenship: Women’s rights and international organizations. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
7.
Berry, Frances S., and William D. Berry .1990. State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis. American Political Science Review84:395-415.
8.
Bochel, Catherine, and Jacqui Briggs.2000. Do women make difference? Politics20 (2): 63-68.
9.
Boyle, Elizabeth H., and Sharon E. Preves .2000. National politics as international process: The case of anti-female-genital-cutting laws. Law and Society Review34:401-35.
10.
Bratton, Kathleen A., and Leonard P. Ray .2002. Descriptive representation, policy outcomes, and municipal day-care coverage in Norway. American Journal of Political Science46 (2): 428-37.
11.
Bugajski, Janusz.2002. Political parties of Eastern Europe: A Guide to politics in the post-communist era. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
12.
Bull, Anna, Hanna Diamond , and Rosalind March, eds. 2000. Feminism and women’s movements in contemporary Europe . New York: St. Martin’s.
13.
Bystydzienski, J.M.1992. Women transforming politics: Worldwide strategies for empowerment. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
14.
Christensen, Ann-Dorte.1999. Women in political parties. In Equal democracies? Gender and politics in the Nordic countries, ed. Christina Bergqvist.Oslo, Norway: Scandinavian University Press.
15.
Clark, Ann Marie.2001. Diplomacy of conscience: Amnesty International and changing human rights norms. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
Commission of the European Communities.2003 . Comprehensive monitoring report of the European Commission on the state of preparedness for EU membership of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
17.
Costain, Ann.1992. Inviting women’s rebellion: A political process interpretation of the women’s movement. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press.
18.
Cowles, Martha G.,James Caporaso, and Thomas Risse, eds. 2001. Transforming Europe: Europeanization and domestic change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press
19.
Dahlerup, Drude, ed. 1986. The new women’s movement. Bristol, UK: Sage.
20.
Diani, Mario, and Doug McAdam .2003. Social movements and networks: Relational approaches to collective action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
Downs, George, David M. Rocke, and Peter Barsoom.1996. Is the good news about compliance good news for cooperation?International Organization50:379-406.
22.
Dryzek, John S.1990. Discursive democracy: Politics, policy, and political science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Esaiasson, Peter, and Sören Holmberg .1996. Representation from above. Members of Parliament and representative democracy in Sweden. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth.
24.
Esping-Andersen, G.1993. Changing classes: Stratification and mobility in post-industrial societies. London: Sage.
25.
Ferree, Myra Marx, and Beth B. Hess .1994. Controversy and coalition: The new feminist movement across three decades of change. Rev. ed. New York: Twayne.
26.
Ferree, Myra Marx, and Yancey Martin, eds. 1995. Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new women’s movement. Philadelphia : Temple University Press.
27.
Fuszara, Małgorzata.2003. History of women’s organizations. In Civil society in Poland, ed. Jasek Kurczewski , 31-44. Warsaw, Poland: Center for Social Research.
28.
Goodman, Ryan, and Derek Jinks.2004. How to influence states: Socialization and international human rights law. Duke Law Journal54:621.
29.
Government Plenipotentiary for Equal Status for Women and Men and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Poland.2004 . Questionnaire on implementation of the Beijing Platform of Action (1995) and the outcome of the Twenty-Third Special Session of the General Assembly (2000). Warsaw, Poland: Government Plenipotentiary for Equal Status for Women and Men and Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
30.
Gray, Virginia.1973. Innovation in the states: A diffusion study. American Political Science Review67:1174-85.
31.
Hafner-Burton, Emilie, and Kiyoteru Tsutsui .2005. Human rights in a globalizing world: The paradox of empty promises. American Journal of Sociology110 (5): 1373-1411.
32.
Hantrais, Linda, ed. 2000. Gendered policies in Europe. London: MacMillan .
33.
Hašková, Hana.2005. Implementing the equality acquis: Czech Republic. Enlargement, gender and governance (EGG). EU Framework 5, Project no. HPSE-CT-2002-00115 . Belfast, Northern Ireland: Queens University, Belfast.
34.
Hellman, Judith Adler.1987. Journeys among women: Feminism in five Italian cities . New York: Oxford University Press .
35.
Hoskyns, Catherine.1996. Integrating gender: Women, law and politics in theEuropean Union. London: Verso .
36.
Kaplan, Gisela.1992. Contemporary Western feminism. London : UCL Press and Allen & Unwin.
37.
Katzenstein, Mary Fansoid.1987. Comparing the feminist movements of the United States and Western Europe: An overview. In The women’s movements of the United States and Western Europe, ed. Mary Fansoid Katzenstein and Carol Mueller , 3-20. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
38.
Katzenstein, Mary Fansoid, and Carol Mueller, eds. 1987. The women’s movements of the United States and Western Europe. Philadelphia : Temple University Press.
39.
Keck, Margaret E., and Kathryn Sikkink, eds. 1998. Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press.
40.
Kelley, Judith Green.2004. International actors on the domestic scene: Membership conditionality and socialization by international institutions. International Organization58:425-57.
41.
Keohane, Robert O.1984. After hegemony. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
42.
Lewis, Jane, ed. 1997. Lone mothers in European welfare regimes: Shifting policy logics. London : Jessica Kingsley.
43.
Linková, Marcela.2003. The institutional framework for equal opportunities enforcement . In Women’s civic and political participation in the Czech Republic and the role of European Union gender equality and accession policies, ed. Hana Hašková and Alena Křižková, 31-41. Sociological Papers. Prague: Institute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
44.
Linos, Katerina.2003. Are socialists a woman’s best friends? Equality policies in the Spanish regions. Journal of European Public Policy10 (3): 438-62.
45.
Lockard, Duane.1968. Toward equal opportunity: A study of state and local anti-discrimination laws. New York: Macmillan.
46.
Lohmann, Kinga, and Anita Seibert, eds. 2003. Gender assessment of the impact of European Union accession on the status of women in the labour market in Central and Eastern Europe. National Study: Poland. Warsaw, Poland: Karat Coalition.
47.
Lovenduski, Joni, and Pippa Norris.1994. Gender and party politics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48.
Lovenduski, Joni, and Vicky Randall.1993. Contemporary feminist politics: Women and power in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
Mackie, Jack, and David Marsh.1997. The comparative method. In Theory and methods in political science, ed. David Marsh and Gerry Stoker.New York: St. Martin’s.
50.
Maksová-Tominová, Michaela, ed. 2003. Gender assessment of the impact of European Union Accession on the status of women in the labour market in Central and Eastern Europe. National Study: Czech Republic. Prague, Czech Republic: Gender Studies, o.p.s.
51.
Matland, Richard E.2004. The representation of women in political parties in Central and Eastern Europe. Presented at the European Consortium for Political Research, Joint Sessions of Workshops, Uppsala, Sweden, April 13-14.
52.
Matland, Richard E., and Kathleen E. Montgomery .2003. Women’s access to political power in post-communist Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53.
Matynia, Elzbieta.2003. Provincializing global feminism: The Polish case. Social Research70 (2): 499-530.
54.
Mazur, Amy G.2002. Theorizing feminist policy. London : Oxford University Press.
55.
---. 2007. Gender and public policy in Europe: Current research trends . European Politics and Society6 (1): 1-5.
56.
McAllister, Ian, and David Studler.1992. Gender and representation among legislative candidates in Australia. Comparative Political Studies3:388-411.
57.
Meehan, Elizabeth, and Selma Sevenhuijsen, eds. 1991. Equality politics and gender. London: Sage.
58.
Meyer, John W., John Boli, George M. Thomas, and Francisco O. Ramirez .1997. World society and the nation-state . American Journal of Sociology103:144-81.
59.
Meyer, John W., and Brian Rowan.1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology83:340-63.
60.
Meyer, John W., and W. Richard Scott .1992. Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality. 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
61.
Mintrom, Michael.1997. Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American Journal of Political Science41 (3): 738-70.
62.
Morgan, Kimberly J., and Kathrin Zippel.2003. Paid to care: The origins and effects of care leave policies in Western Europe. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State, and Society10 (1): 49-85.
63.
Norris, Pippa, E. Vallance, and Joni Lovenduski .1992. Do candidates make a difference? Gender, race, ideology and incumbency. Parliamentary Affairs4:496-517.
64.
Nowakowska, Ursula.2000. Government mechanisms for the advancement of women. In Polish women in the 90s, ed. Ursula Nowakowska.Warsaw, Poland: Women’s Rights Center. http://free.ngo.pl/temida/family/htm (accessed December 13, 2003).
65.
Pateman, Carol.1988. The sexual contract. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
66.
Phillips, Anne.1995. The politics of presence. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
67.
Pitkin, Hannah.1967. The concept of representation. Berkeley : University of California Press.
68.
Purdy, E.1992. The representation of women and women’s issues: Differences in voting patterns of male and female members of the House of Representatives. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
69.
Ray, Raka.1999. Fields of protest: Women’s movements in India. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Minnesota University Press .
70.
Reingold, Beth.1996. Conflict and cooperation: Legislative strategies and concepts of power among female and male state legislators. Journal of Politics58:464-85.
71.
Renc-Roe, Joanna.2003. The representation of women in the political decision-making process in Poland: Existing problems and advocated solutions. Presented at the ECPR Joint Session "Changing Constitutions, Building Institutions and (Re)defining Gender Relations," Edinburgh, UK, March 28 to April 2.
72.
Research Network on Gender Politics and the State (RNGS). ( 2005). RNGS project description/May 2005. Unpublished manuscript.
73.
Risse, Thomas, and Kathryn Sikkink .1999. The socialization of international human rights norms into domestic practices: Introduction. In The power of human rights: International human rights and domestic change , ed. Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink, 1-38. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
74.
Rochon, Thomas R.1998. Culture moves: Ideas, activism, and changing values. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
75.
Rochon, Thomas R., and David A. Mazmanian .1993. Social movements and the policy process. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science528:75-87.
76.
Ross, Karen.2002. Women’s place in male space: Gender effect in parliamentary contexts. Parliamentary Affairs55:189-202.
77.
Saxonberg, Steven.2000. Women in EastEuropean parliaments. Journal of Democracy11 (2): 145-58.
78.
Sclozman, K., N. Burns, S. Verba, and J. Donahue.1995. Gender and citizen participation: Is there a different voice? American Journal of Political Science2:267-93.
79.
Siemenska, Renata.2004. The implementation of quotas: European experience. Paper presented at the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance/CEE Network for Gender Issues Conference, Budapest, Hungary, October 22-23.
80.
Šilović, Daša Š.2004. Lobbying for quotas: The experience of the CEE Network for gender issues. Paper presented at the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance/ CEE Network for Gender Issues Conference, Budapest, Hungary, October 22-23.
81.
Singh, Rina.1998. Gender autonomy in Western Europe: An imprecise revolution . London: Macmillan.
82.
Skocpol, Theda, Marjorie Abend-Wein, Christopher Howard, and Susan G. Lehmann. 1993. Women’s associations and the enactment of mothers’ pensions in the United States. American Political Science Review87 (3): 686-701.
83.
Stetson, Dorothy McBride, and Amy G. Mazur, eds. 1995. Comparative state feminism. London: Sage.
84.
---. 2003. Reconceptualizing the women’s movement: Discourses, actors, and states. Paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Convention, Portland, Oregon , February 25-28, 2003.
85.
Swers, Michele L.2002. The difference women make: The policy impact of women in Congress. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
86.
Tilly, Charles.1997. Parliamentarization of popular contention in Great Britain, 1758-1834. American Journal of Sociology100:1594-610.
87.
True, Jacqui, and Michael Mintrom .2001. Transnational networks and policy diffusion: The case of gender mainstreaming. International Studies Quarterly45:27-57.
88.
Vega, A., and J. Firestone.1995. The effects of gender on congressional behavior and the substantive representation of women. Legislative Studies Quarterly2:213-22.
89.
Walker, Jack L.1969. The diffusion of innovations among American states. American Political Science Review63: 880-99.
90.
Waltz, Kenneth.1979. Theory of international politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
91.
Wängnerud, Lena.2000. Testing the politics of presence: Women’s representation in the Swedish Riksdag. Scandinavian Political Studies23 (1): 67-91.
92.
Watson, Nicole, and Ursula Lindenberg, eds. 2002. Monitoring the EU accession process: Equal opportunities for women and men. Budapest , Hungary: Open Society Institute.
93.
Watson, Peggy.2000. Politics, policy and identity: EU eastern enlargement and East-West differences. Journal of European Public Policy7 (3): 369-84.
94.
Weldon, S. Laurel.2002. Protest, policy, and the problem of violence against women: A cross-national comparison. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
95.
Wilkowska, Anna.2003. Gender equality standards in Poland: The results of the enlargement process. NEWW-Polska. http://www.eonet.ro (accessed April 14, 2005).
96.
Zielinska, Eleonora.2002. Monitoring the EU accession process: Equal opportunities for women and men in Poland. Budapest, Hungary: The Network Women’s Program and the Open Society Foundation Romania .
97.
Zippel, Kathrin.2006. The politics of sexual harassment: A comparative study of the United States, the European Union, and Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
