6. CONCLUSION The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare gender differences and structural inequalities that often go unnoticed during “ordinary” times. It has also brought to the fore the multiple situations of vulnerability in which women find themselves that only become apparent when tested during a crisis. The pandemic itself, and the emergency responses to it, have magnified pre-existing disparities and created new ones. The experiences of each of the OSCE participating States in dealing with the coronavirus pandemic and striving for the maximum protection of public health present a number of key lessons. When emergency measures are far-reaching and extensive, they interact with and compound each other in important ways. Thus, while this publication analyses each emergency measure in isolation, it should be kept in mind that some of the more serious violations of women’s human rights occurred because of multiple and intersecting restrictions being applied at the same time. The pandemic moved swiftly and required a rapid response. At the same time, serious restrictions, such as lockdown measures, have been implemented (as well as later lifted and, sometimes, reinstituted) with little advance warning, which has compromised women’s abilities to make arrangements that would mitigate against the negative consequences of the measures. The absence of women – and of women’s perspectives – from emergency planning has been evident in virtually every country, despite the fact that more than two decades have passed since the landmark UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security gave the world a blueprint for securing women’s meaningful participation in and contributions to crisis planning, response and recovery. Finally, the complex interactions of the emergency measures and the human rights and fundamental freedoms of women point to the need for comprehensive analysis of the multi-dimensional risks and vulnerabilities faced by women in general, as well as specific groups of women, when reacting to emergencies. The findings of this publication about the impacts of emergency measures on the rights of women and girls, based on observations about the COVID-19 pandemic, should not be limited to the risks associated with health crises. Rather, the lessons learned should be applied by policymakers to planning and preparedness, responding to emergencies and developing post-emergency recovery plans, regardless of the situation. In general, ensuring women’s participation in and the diversity of response teams, increasing consultations and engagement with civil society, conducting gender analysis and impact assessments, collecting sex-disaggregated data and including a gender perspective in all exercises on emergency preparedness would help to ensure that women and girls are not doubly harmed by crises and the measures put in place to respond to them. Lastly, the coronavirus pandemic has been a lesson for all about the fragility in progress that has been made toward gender equality. While COVID-19 is an entirely new global threat, the issues that women are facing, such as job insecurity, the burden of unpaid domestic and care work, and violence perpetrated by partners in the home, are in no way new or emerging. Rather, the pandemic has merely pointed out the long road that remains to achieving equality between women and men in practice. 71