A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE TO INCREASING WOMEN’S ACCESS TO ELECTORAL JUSTICE related to EDR processes, and due to the dearth of current research that specifically addresses women’s access to justice in an electoral context, the Findings section below cites research on women’s access to justice more broadly and applies it to the electoral context. While this body of research focuses on women’s access to justice overall, many of the principles are relevant to the electoral context and provide helpful lessons about how to make electoral justice more accessible to women. Some researchers and practitioners have hypothesized that ADR processes could allow women more access to electoral justice mechanisms; a more nuanced understanding of these processes and women’s experiences with them would help ensure they increase equitable access to justice and fair and transparent resolutions to women’s disputes. For example, while ADR processes might increase women’s access – as they are often more local, less expensive, and less public than more formal EDR processes – they also rely on traditional leaders, political parties, and election management institutions (all of which tend to be male-dominated) that might continue to sideline women and their concerns and needs.55 If we are to attempt to ensure ADR processes do not replicate the patriarchal institutional issues of their more formal counterparts, it is critical to analyze which parts of ADR processes present the most challenging barriers for women and which access points will be most effective to target to ensure adequate justice. It is worth noting that, while people of all gender identities experience challenges in accessing fair and transparent electoral justice processes, this review and the associated Practitioner’s Guide focuses on how electoral justice processes can better serve women. It is also worth noting that women are not a homogenous group; women from different backgrounds and with different identities might have different experiences and needs in relation to electoral justice processes. In particular, women who also belong to other marginalized groups – such as women with disabilities; women who are members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex community (LGBTQI+); women from rural areas; Indigenous women; women from ethnic and religious minorities; and young and older women – face compounding discrimination. This results in unique challenges in seeking electoral justice. Where possible, this desk review seeks to apply an intersectional lens to its analysis, endeavoring to explore the challenges and needs of particular groups of women and not only for “women” as a general group with all the same needs and experiences. Anyanwu, U., Roblot, T., and Cox, R. (2024, May 16). Alternative Dispute Resolution in Elections: A Practitioner Brief. IFES – The International Foundation for Electoral Systems. Www.ifes.org. 55 32