Gender mainstreaming and policy coherence for development: Unintended gender consequences and EU policy Gill Allwood Nottingham Trent University, UK article info synopsis Available online 14 February 2013 This article argues that the unintended gender consequences of EU development policy are caused not (or not only) by the failure to gender mainstream, but by the way in which gender slips off the agenda once other policies intersect with development. Policy coherence for development (PCD) is an attempt to prevent policies in other areas having a negative impact on development, but although it claims that gender is a crosscutting issue, there is little evidence that gender features at the intersections between development and other related areas. Therefore, gender must be kept at the forefront of policy analysis if unintended gender consequences are to be avoided. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Introduction Despite the relatively positive assessment of EU develop- ment policy in terms of its formal commitment to gender equality and gender mainstreaming (Kantola, 2010), EU policy can nevertheless have unintended consequences in developing countries, and some of these are gendered. For example, the demand for biofuels in an attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the EU leads to land use changes in developing countries. Since land use is highly gendered, with women providing the majority of food consumed by the household and men producing the majority of cash crops, this has implications for women's lives and gender relations (Concord, 2011a). Feminist scholars have mapped the gendered conse- quences of policies in all kinds of areas, and their work has revealed that even the most apparently gender-neutral policies such as agriculture, trade and energy, have gendered impact and rest on gendered assumptions. Since the EU is committed to gender equality as a fundamental value of the Union and to gender mainstreaming combined with gender specific actions as a means of achieving it, it could be expected that these gendered consequences will be challenged. This has not yet happened, partly for reasons associated with gender mainstreaming itself, but also as a result of the interference of policies in other areas, which undermine development policy. The EU has recognised the impact on development of policies in other areas, and has responded with the introduction of policy coherence for development (PCD). PCD is intended to ensure that policies in one area (notably development) are not undermined by policies in another (for example, agriculture, trade, defence, transport). At the same time, PCD claims to integrate cross-cutting issues, including environmental sustainability and gender. However, there is little evidence that gender features at the intersections between policies on development and other related areas. This article contributes to our understanding of what happens to gender, gender mainstreaming and gender equality policy when policy areas interact. It asks how gender mainstreaming can be retained as a policy priority in the face of competition from a growing number of crosscutting issues. It argues that the unintended gender consequences of EU development policy are caused not (or not only) by the failure to gender mainstream, but by the way in which gender slips off the agenda once other policies intersect with development. Therefore, gender must be kept at the forefront of policy analysis if unintended gender consequences are to be avoided. Gender mainstreaming implementation theory, gender theory and feminist institutionalism can provide crucial Women's Studies International Forum 39 (2013) 42–52 0277-5395/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2013.01.008 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Women's Studies International Forum journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wsif