A house divided: Feminist and conservative NGOs’ legitimacy beliefs about the United Nations

Jelena Cupać and Tobias Heidenreich

EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, 2025, issue FirstView, 25 pages

Abstract: Within the UN, there is a divide between NGO networks with differing stances on gender equality and women’s rights. Feminist and feminist-informed NGOs push for extensive women’s rights, including reproductive rights and protection against discrimination. In contrast, conservative NGOs uphold traditional gender roles and family structures, strongly opposing reproductive rights like abortion. Studies have examined these NGOs’ stances and advocacy tactics, but a detailed comparative analysis of their views of the UN – their key battleground – is missing. The paper addresses this gap by assessing how each group evaluates the UN’s legitimacy and identifying the underlying sources of legitimacy beliefs. By combining computational and qualitative text analysis, it reveals several trends: the UN is central in the discourse of both groups of NGOs, although it appears more in feminist NGOs’ communications, and feminist groups generally evaluate the UN’s legitimacy more positively. This positivity peaks when the UN actively supports feminist objectives and collaborates with these NGOs. Conservative NGOs, on the other hand, positively evaluate the UN when they can align the UN’s foundational texts with their views and when they garner support from conservative states. Their most negative evaluations occur when they believe the UN uses deception to promote progressive policies.

Keywords: backlash; conservative; feminist; legitimacy; NGO; UN (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/330709/1/F ... -A-house-divided.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:zbw:espost:330709

DOI: 10.1017/S026021052510137X

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters from ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics ().