Scorecards by Country

China

Choose a year scorecard:

Scorecards
 
Security Council Actions
Women, Peace and Security Financing
International Gender and Human Rights Indicators
Peacekeeping Operations
Prevention
Participation
Protection
Recovery Support
2010
20.0
35.0
65.2
53.1
17.5
49.1
57.0
42.1
2011
14.9
35.0
65.3
52.3
17.5
48.6
57.0
42.1
2012
2.9
13.0
63.4
52.9
18.8
48.9
57.0
45.6
2013
27.8
35.0
63.1
52.9
19.5
50.6
49.5
56.9
2014
10.8
85.0
63.3
52.7
20.0
48.3
65.6
56.9
2015
42.6
0.0
59.1
52.8
20.8
46.1
70.6
64.7
2016
25.9
10.0
57.1
54.9
17.5
46.5
70.6
64.7
2017
50.0
50.0
54.0
52.3
16.3
46.3
60.1
43.2
2018
73.8
35.0
52.7
52.6
16.3
46.4
56.0
46.8
2019
57.3
68.0
58.1
53.3
9.8
46.9
51.0
55.1
International Actions
National Actions
In the graph above, the average performance of each country in all main categories for the period between 2010 and 2015 is reflected.

Key Gaps

Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Scorecard: Methodology

The WPS Scorecard intends to assess and evaluate actions by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Permanent Member States’ (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America) to implement the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Agenda.

To do so, the WPS Scorecard assesses the actions of the Permanent Five at both the international and national levels over a period from 2010 and onwards.

  • First, it evaluates international  actions of Member States: 1) WPS-related statements and commitments, 2) gender-sensitive rankings and legal obligations, 3) international financial priorities, and 4) gender-sensitive commitments and policies in peacekeeping.

  • Second, it also evaluates national actions of Member States as they relate to the implementation of the WPS Agenda: 1) prevention, 2) participation, 3) protection, and 4) recovery support.

Each UNSC Permanent Member State is graded with consistent qualitative or quantitative evaluation methods specific to the nature of each type of category. States may earn a maximum of 100 points for its full compliance with the relevant standards. Deviation from the standard defines a state’s final grade. (Example: a state has to sign and ratify all international human rights documents related to gender to receive 100 points. If a state has failed to sign and/or ratify a number of the existing treaties, the deviation from the standard determines the State's final grade). Criteria for each indicator were developed based on principles embedded in internationally relevant and widely accepted conventions, protocols, and reports. A grade for each indicator, as well as a total grade, is provided for each year based on the average number of points received.

The analysis conducted for this project is used to inform recommendations to the states based on their progress in specific areas of focus, with the goal of emphasising key areas in which the states should increase their efforts to close gender-sensitive gaps and influence impactful progress through the Women, Peace and Security Agenda.

 

***The current methodology was developed by Marina Kumskova and Katie Krueger, and updated by Sarah Kenny Werner in 2018.

Overview of indicators

International Actions

Security Council Actions

Women, Peace and Security Financing

International Gender and Human Rights Indicators

Peacekeeping Operations

National Actions

Prevention

Participation

Protection

Recovery Support