Anandita Ghosh introduces G&D’s special issue on Beijing +30.
The year 2025 marked 30 years since the historic Fourth World Conference of Women, held in Beijing. The Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA) remains as significant, if not more, in the current times marked by ongoing conflicts, forced displacement, the growing effects of climate change and environmental damage, alongside the increasing influence of right-wing political movements, including anti-gender movements and backlash.
This special issue, titled ‘Beijing +30’, examines the strides made since the Declaration on some fronts. There has been a progressive shift in international laws and policies as a result of commitments such as CEDAW and BPfA. Some discriminatory laws have been repealed, and new legislations to address violence against women and girls have been introduced in many countries across the globe. Simultaneously, the Issue draws attention to gaps in the BPfA. Matters related to disability rights, LGBTQ rights, climate change, to name a few, that were under-represented in the Declaration warrant careful consideration and centring in policy and legal discussions moving forward. Overall, the issue reinforces the point that the core ideas and principles of the BPfA remain relevant and continue to guide efforts towards achieving gender equality and women’s empowerment.
Co-guest edited by Lina Abou-Habib, Deniz Alca, and Hashem Hashem, this issue includes contributions from multiple regions and countries including Bangladesh, Brazil, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, India, Jordan, Lebanon, Nigeria, Pakistan, Rwanda, Syria, Uganda, as well as regional perspectives from Latin America and North Africa. Authors include academics, practitioners, and early career researchers who centre the experiences and perspectives of communities that have largely remained on the margins of the BPfA. They draw attention to issues such as unpaid care work, migration, Queer and Transgender rights, digital surveillance, and ecological collapse. Authors assert that a deeper reflection and engagement with the issues within the BPfA is necessary and emphasise the critical need for trans-regional solidarities in the context of growing anti-gender movements.
Some of the themes that emerge from the contributions include:
Feminist responses to the growing global right and backlash
Authors in this issue examine the ways in which anti-gender movements attack gender-based rights and the ways in which feminist movements are resisting. Julia Hartviksen examines how the BPfA has contributed to advances for LGBTQIA+ communities in postwar Guatemala, while showing how human rights frameworks can also be used or manipulated by states amid conservative backlash. Across Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan, feminists use collective memory, archives, art, and digital museums to resist erasure and build solidarity (Lina Abou-Habib). Mercy Erhi Makpor discusses how digital platforms and algorithmic systems shape women’s participation, creating both opportunities for empowerment and new forms of control. Tiwari et al. highlight feminist resistance to technology-facilitated gender-based violence against Queer communities in South Asia.
The need for feminist economic policies towards achieving the goals of the BPfA
Achieving the goals of the BPfA requires the implementation of feminist economic policies that centre care, prioritise adequate and equitable funding, and engage with the structural inequalities built into existing economic systems. Austerity measures and neoliberal economic policies often lead to greater burden of unpaid care being pushed onto women due to insufficient public investment. Verónica Serafini Geoghegan et al. study austerity and fiscal policies in Latin America and the Caribbean, arguing that achieving the BPfA’s goals requires a fundamental change in economic models. They call for feminist fiscal policies that recognise unpaid care work and prioritise public investment and social protection. In the context of India, Suneeta Dhar and Anuradha Kapoor discuss the need for better investments to address violence against women, including investments in prevention, survivor support, and effective implementation of laws. Pratima Gurung and Suzette Mitchell reveal how women and girls with disabilities have been historically excluded from diverse spaces due to inadequate funding. They highlight that dedicated resources to ensure accessibility and representation of persons with disabilities are crucial to ensure meaningful access and participation. Bolis et al. examine the importance of involving men in care work and argue that insufficient public investment in care disproportionately burdens women. They argue that policies that enable public funding for childcare, paid parental leave, and universal social protection are necessary for a more balanced distribution of care work.
The need to strengthen institutions and accountability and challenge depoliticisation
Although the BPfA led to the establishment of many institutions, laws, and accountability mechanisms, these have not always led to meaningful change. Depoliticisation, poor accountability, regressive socio-cultural norms and exclusion of marginalised groups have hindered progress. Abou-Habib analyses how national gender equality institutions have become increasingly disconnected from women’s movements. In some cases, they have become depoliticised or been absorbed into state agendas. Rippy Das examines refugee policy in Greece. Her study demonstrates how refugee women are left vulnerable due to fragmented institutional responses and culturally insensitive, patriarchal approaches. In the absence of adequate accountability, Dhar and Kapoor highlight shortcomings in the institutional response to violence against women in India. They reiterate the need for stronger accountability and better coordination between government departments. Gurung and Mitchell highlight how women with disabilities remain excluded from institutional processes because of inadequate funding, inaccessible infrastructure, and limited meaningful consultation. Their contribution emphasises that meaningful inclusion requires more than formal representation. Isadora Harvey and Janja Araujo draw attention to gender- and race-based political violence against Black women in Brazil. They argue that this aspect remains insufficiently addressed and needs greater priority in the implementation and review of the BPfA.
Renewing, expanding, and recommitting to the philosophy of the BPfA
While the BPfA remains relevant 30 years after its adoption, its vision of gender equality must be defended, renewed, and expanded to respond to contemporary challenges. Gurung and Mitchell call for meaningful representation and greater recognition of the intersecting disadvantages experienced by women with disabilities, including gender-diverse people and those with marginalised sexual identities. Hartviksen highlights how LGBTQIA+ activists use the BPfA, feminist solidarity, and engagement with institutions to challenge heteronormative power structures and hold the state accountable. Tiwari et al. shed light on how digital policies often fail to address caste-based inequalities and the experiences of LGBTQIA+ communities. They address how these can be integrated in the context of the BPfA. They recommend digital safety and governance approaches rooted in feminist and intersectional principles. Makpor brings attention to the need for digital governance and inclusive technology policies that would enable women to shape digital technologies, not just use them. Das emphasises the importance of gender-sensitive and intersectional policies that recognise the specific vulnerabilities faced by refugee women. Ultimately, renewing the BPfA requires moving beyond symbolic commitments and inclusion and addressing the structural issues that sustain inequality.
Conclusion
The contributions in the issue remind us that the Beijing +30 moment is a moment of renewed political commitment rather than just an occasion to commemorate past achievements. On the one hand, the BPfA has helped advance women’s rights and led to the establishment of gender equitable legal and institutional frameworks. However, persistent inequalities and the growing resistance to gender justice movements demonstrate that its promises are yet to be fulfilled. The BPfA’s relevance lies not only in its original commitments, but also in its potential to guide new forms of feminist action that challenge structural injustice and create inclusive and equitable futures.
This blog is based on the introduction to the special issue co-authored by Lina Abou-Habib, Deniz Alca, Hashem Hashem, Shivani Satija & Anandita Ghosh.