Over the past decade, gender provisions have emerged as a new frontier in the design of trade agreements. Yet their presence and substance remain highly uneven. This dissertation investigates the political drivers behind the inclusion and depth of gender provisions in trade agreements, shifting attention from structural or economic explanations to political agency—particularly executive leadership and gendered power dynamics. Using a mixed-methods approach that combines semi-structured interviews, a descriptive case study, and large-N statistical analysis, I argue that political leaders are more likely to prioritize gender issues in trade negotiations when pro-gender equality norms gain influence within the executive. The dissertation introduces a two-stage theoretical framework: first, explaining how gender provisions enter the negotiation agenda and second, how their depth is shaped by the political costs and reputational incentives faced by negotiating states. Empirical analysis of trade agreements from 1990 to 2021, using original measures of gender provision depth, shows that women’s presence in powerful executive roles is a significant predictor of the inclusion of gender provisions. Furthermore, deeper provisions are more likely when negotiating states face credibility risks or have reputational incentives to signal commitment to gender norms. The findings advance our understanding of how trade agreements serve as instruments of norm diffusion, demonstrate the importance of gendered leadership in international negotiations, and highlight the ways trade policy has become an arena for institutionalizing social norms beyond market liberalization.
Read
