Mapping the Road Ahead: Designing Tomorrow at the AllonBoard AI Civic Foresight Lab?

At Traces&Dreams, we have always believed that the future is not a destination we simply arrive at, but a landscape we actively cultivate through our present choices. Today, however, that landscape is changing with unprecedented speed. From the widening digital divides in our urban centres to the complex realities of rural inclusion and the human stories behind migration, the challenges of the 21st century are no longer linear. They are systemic, interconnected, and deeply nuanced.

The question we must ask ourselves is: How do we move from simply reacting to these changes to actually guiding them?</strong >

As the designers and developers behind this initiative, we are thrilled to officially open the doors to the AI Civic Foresight Lab, designed in the frame of the AllonBoard project, funded by the CERV programme of the EU.

Flipping the Script on Participation

The AllonBoard AI Civic Foresight Lab isn’t a webinar, and it isn’t a traditional lecture. We have built this experience as an anticipatory policy laboratory, a participatory space where the abstract world of policy meets the tangible world of human impact. It is a dedicated environment where we can test ideas and visualise outcomes before they unfold in the real world.

In a political culture often obsessed with “quick fixes” and short-term cycles, this lab invites you to slow down and look deeper. We believe that to solve complex problems, we must first understand the “ripples”. Using the methodology of Systems Thinking, participants in the AllonBoard AI Civic Foresight Lab will move beyond the surface of today’s headlines. Together, we will map the hidden connections, identify the feedback loops, and anticipate the unintended consequences of the policies that will govern our tomorrow.

The Human-AI Collaboration

In this journey, we aren’t just discussing technology; we are collaborating with it. In a world increasingly defined by algorithms, we believe it is vital for young citizens to hold the steering wheel of innovation.

Within the AllonBoard AI Civic Foresight Lab, we utilise AI not as an oracle with final answers, but as a “thinking partner”. It is a tool to spark imagination, generate hypotheses, and push the boundaries of what we think is possible. However, the heart of the lab remains human. Participants are guided to critically engage with the AI, questioning its biases, challenging its assumptions, and refining its outputs with their own unique lived experiences and ethical insights.

Focusing on the Fragile Points

To make our exploration concrete, the AllonBoard AI Civic Foresight Lab focuses on three urgent areas of European civic life that require fresh, systemic thinking:

• Digital Access: Ensuring technology serves as a bridge for all citizens, rather than a barrier that deepens inequality.
• Rural Inclusion: Revitalising our heartlands to ensure no community is left behind in the rapid pace of progress.
• Migration Integration: Understanding the systemic nature of human movement to build truly resilient and inclusive societies<l/i>

An Invitation to the Next Generation of Changemakers

We are looking for young adults (ages 18-35) from across Europe—and particularly those with migrant backgrounds—who are ready to step into an active, anticipatory role. You don’t need a degree in political science or a background in coding to join us. You only need a curiosity about how the world works and a desire to see it work better.

The Logistics of Discovery

When: 19 May 2026 | 17:00-19:30 (CEST)
Where: Zoom (online)
This event is free but registration is mandatory and seats are limited. Register now and make sure to secure your spot.

The AllonBoard AI Civic Foresight Lab is more than just an event; it is a contribution to a broader movement of anticipatory governance. By joining us, you aren’t just attending a session; you are providing the insights that will eventually form our Forecasting Starter Kit, a resource we are building to help municipalities and NGOs across Europe replicate this work in their own local contexts.

Are you ready to map the road ahead?

Click HERE to register for the AllonBoard AI Civic Foresight Lab and secure your spot.

What do we know about the five waves of urban activism?

Maryam Tahmasebi, Journalist at Traces&Dreams

If you have walked through historic neighbourhoods or major city centres in recent years, the changes are unmistakable. New developments rapidly replace old houses, and rents have soared beyond the reach of ordinary people.

This situation, which may be termed an ‘urban crisis’, has prompted an important question for citizens worldwide: ‘What kind of city do we want to live in?’.

Anna Domaradzka, a researcher at the University of Warsaw’s Institute for Social Studies, discusses this in her paper for the journal Voluntas, ‘Urban Social Movements and the Right to the City: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Urban Mobilization’.

She notes that scattered protests are actually part of a broader movement to reclaim the ‘Right to the City’. This principle asserts that the city should be a space for collective life rather than a market for relentless, inequitable profit.

The concept of the ‘Right to the City’ pursues values such as justice, democracy, and diversity. Movements use this concept to achieve the following goals:

• Reclaiming decision-making power: Citizens should have control over urbanisation processes and the distribution of power resources.
• Shifting focus from ‘exchange value’ to ‘use value’: Public services (such as housing and transport) should be decommodified, focusing on their actual utility for citizens’ lives.

Domaradzka combines the theoretical framework of ‘social movements as networks’ with concepts of ‘diffusion and translation of ideas’ and analyses the history and evolution of these movements. She points out that the first modern wave of these activities began in the 1960s during the ‘Fordism’ crisis, focusing on housing conflicts, tenant strikes, and protests against segregated cities.

The second wave appeared in the 1980s in response to neoliberal policies and cuts in public spending. During this period, the relationship between movements and the state shifted from confrontation to collaboration, marking the beginning of the ‘NGO-ization’ of civil society.

The third wave emerged in the 1990s with the promotion of the ‘creative city’ model, where local authorities adopted movement slogans to attract capital and market the city.

Since the early 2000s, a new wave has been taken place, centred on protests against the commercialisation of public spaces, the rights of the ‘precariat’ (the precarious working class), and transnational activities.

She references the concept of the ‘Right to the City’ proposed by Henri Lefebvre as a shared conceptual ‘frame’ for various groups. Lefebvre viewed this right as a combination of different rights, such as the right to information, services, and the use of the city centre. It encompasses both a ‘cry’ (the protest of marginalized groups) and a ‘demand’ (the aspirations of integrated but dissatisfied groups).

Domaradzka says that today, real estate elites and influential politicians act as the primary ‘incumbents’ of this right, while urban activists, as ‘challengers’, try to reclaim this space.

We can classify various aspects of urban mobilisation and the struggle for the ‘Right to the City’ into categories such as:

Domaradzka refers to the ‘norm life cycle’, where urban activists act as ‘norm entrepreneurs’ who trigger the emergence of a norm in the first stage. This is followed by a ‘norm cascade’, during which international organisations like UNESCO and the UN adopt these concepts. Finally, the ‘internalisation’ stage arrives, where the norm becomes part of laws and administrative procedures.

However, this path is not without obstacles. Today, even politicians and developers use the term ‘Right to the City’ to make their projects appear democratic without actually changing the distribution of power.

Although Lefebvre’s radical concepts have been accepted by international bodies like the UN, this acceptance has sometimes led to the ‘domestication’ and dilution of the transformative power of these slogans.

Modern urban movements now work pragmatically to improve the quality of life. The fight against air and noise pollution and the creation of alternative cultural centres are signs of citizens reclaiming their identity and their city.

The Right to the City is a moral ideal for building cities where human diversity prevails over the logic of capital and every citizen feels a sense of belonging and agency.

Source: Domaradzka A. Urban Social Movements and the Right to the City: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Urban Mobilization. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 2018;29(4):607-620. doi:10.1007/s11266-018-0030-y

Global Freedom Retreats for the 20th Consecutive Year

Maryam Tahmasebi, Journalist at Traces&Dreams

In the past year, 54 out of 195 countries experienced a decline in freedom, while only 35 showed improvement. Freedom House in its 2026 annual report “The Growing Shadow of Autocracy”, states that this marks the 20th consecutive year the world has moved toward the erosion of political rights and civil liberties.

But what is the freedom index? Global freedom is defined based on two main areas: political rights and civil liberties. In political rights, elections, pluralism, political participation, and government functioning are the determining factors. Civil liberties include freedom of expression and belief, the right to organize and assemble, the rule of law, judicial independence, and individual freedoms.

According to Freedom House, this 20-year global descent into authoritarianism is rooted in military coups, armed conflicts, and attacks by elected leaders on democratic institutions. Also, the sudden shift of democratic powers like the United States away from their traditional roles as defenders of freedom has created a dangerous vacuum now being filled by autocrats.

The Largest Declines of 2025

Guinea-Bissau took the top spot in the decline. The November 2025 elections were accompanied by a coup in which an armed attack disrupted the entire electoral process. Following Guinea-Bissau, the situation in Tanzania is reported as dire due to the disqualification of opposition candidates, media suppression, forced disappearances of dissidents, and the deaths of 1,000 protesters. Burkina Faso, El Salvador, and Madagascar follow in the rankings.

Also, the Middle East is a region where 91% of the population lives in a “Not Free” status. In 2025, Syria saw the largest global score improvement following the collapse of the Assad regime and a relative opening of media space and civic activities. Conversely, the state of freedom in Iran worsened due to widespread crackdowns following conflicts with Israel and the mass expulsion of Afghan refugees. In Kuwait, democratic standards also regressed with the dissolution of parliament and extensive revocation of citizens’ nationalities, while the war in Gaza led to a humanitarian catastrophe.

The United States recorded a 3-point drop in 2025, reaching a final score of 81 on the freedom index. Reasons for this decline include intensified partisan deadlocks in Congress and the longest government shutdown in the country’s history, the expansion of unilateral executive power, and the weakening of anti-corruption standards by the new administration. Also, pressure on the free speech of non-citizens and the creation of an atmosphere of intimidation for political activities contributed to the country’s lower score. All together, these factors have caused the U.S. to lose 12 points over the last 20 years, the third-largest drop among “Free” countries after Nauru and Bulgaria.

Which Countries Improved?

While global freedom is generally deteriorating, countries like Syria, Sri Lanka, Bolivia, and Gabon saw a more open political climate than before. Notably, Bolivia moved from “Partly Free” to “Free” due to a peaceful transfer of power.

Why is the World Falling Away from Freedom?

Freedom House has identified four key drivers that have undermined democracy over the past twenty years:

1. Violence and Armed Conflict

Beneath the rubble of war lies another destruction concerning democratic infrastructure; war has the power to push back even weak democracies. In 2025, countries like Sudan and Yemen experienced a freefall for this reason. Sudan suffered due to massacres, sexual violence, and forced displacement, while Yemen reached this state because of war and foreign interventions.

2. Military Coups

Coups begin with the rapid destruction of democratic institutions and often lead to long-term societal suppression. For instance, in Mali, the experience of three coups since 2012 has strengthened the roots of a military dictatorship, resulting in the elimination of all political parties. Thailand, with its coup-prone history (over 20 coups), has also been unable to fully experience democracy.

3. Gradual Erosion of Institutions

Unlike coups, this process of destroying democracy is slow and carried out from within by elected leaders. In Hungary, Viktor Orbán has marginalized democracy using methods like “gerrymandering” and media control. In Mexico, the abolition of transparency institutions and changing the judicial appointment system to partisan direct elections severely threaten judicial independence.

4. Authoritarian Repression

Autocratic regimes also use state institutions as weapons against critics. In Azerbaijan, the Aliyev family suppressed any opposition by removing presidential term limits and turning oil resources into a patronage network. In Belarus, following the 2020 election fraud, Alexander Lukashenko crushed protests with deadly violence and detained more than 32,000 people.

Over the past 20 years, three types of freedom have suffered the most:

• Media Freedom: In China, the media freedom score has reached zero due to ultra-advanced censorship and Communist Party control over the internet. In Rwanda, the government eliminated independent media by arresting journalists on charges of insulting the president.
• Individual Freedom of Expression and Speech: The use of spyware in countries like Serbia against civil society has caused widespread self-censorship among citizens. In Iran, following the June 2025 conflict with Israel, more than 21,000 people were detained in a new wave of crackdowns.
• Right to Due Process: In Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan completely politicized the judiciary by purging thousands of police officers, judges, and prosecutors. The 2025 arrest of Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu is a prime example of these unfair proceedings.

2025 was a dark turning point in foreign policy, witnessing a global shift and a widespread retreat of democracies from their traditional roles. The U.S. government, through an executive order in January 2025, closed the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and canceled approximately $80.5 billion in foreign aid. The State Department also abandoned its long-standing practice of commenting on the integrity of foreign elections. Simultaneously in Europe, Germany reduced its humanitarian budgets by $4.1 billion, and the UK, under Keir Starmer’s government, brought international aid to its lowest level in 25 years. This vacuum allowed international organizations like the UN to be captured by the “Like-Minded Group,” including China, Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, to coordinate and block human rights resolutions.

2025 was a dark turning point in foreign policy, witnessing a global shift and a widespread retreat of democracies from their traditional roles. The U.S. government, through an executive order in January 2025, closed the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and canceled approximately $80.5 billion in foreign aid. The State Department also abandoned its long-standing practice of commenting on the integrity of foreign elections. Simultaneously in Europe, Germany reduced its humanitarian budgets by $4.1 billion, and the UK, under Keir Starmer’s government, brought international aid to its lowest level in 25 years. This vacuum allowed international organizations like the UN to be captured by the “Like-Minded Group,” including China, Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, to coordinate and block human rights resolutions.

Despite this grim atmosphere, there are still reasons for hope; democracies have proven to be resilient systems capable of reform. Statistics show that 76 out of the 87 countries that were “Free” in 2005 remain in that category. Successful models like Bhutan, which transitioned from an absolute monarchy to a democracy, recorded the world’s largest 20-year improvement. Liberia also managed to largely rebuild the rule of law and civic rights after two decades of civil war. Also, popular resistance is still alive; in China, despite severe repression, the number of recorded protests in late 2025 increased by 45% compared to the same period the previous year.

Freedom House also proposes solutions for the retreat of freedom. The report suggests that to reclaim democratic momentum and stop the twenty-year decline of democracy, we must rethink international macro-strategies. Democracies should defend the rule of law and electoral integrity by diplomatic coordination and creating a united front in international organizations, while reducing strategic dependencies on autocratic regimes. Given the reduction in government budgets, the democratic aid system must be redesigned through public-private partnerships and structures like a “Global Freedom Fund” to provide sustainable support for independent media and human rights defenders. Finally, by prioritizing engagement with younger generations in digital spaces, empowering media literacy, and countering influence campaigns and fake content, we can design a new path to rebuild civic identity and help the survival of democratic values for future generations.

How Large is the Gender Gap in Global Politics?

New UN data shows women hold just 27.5% of parliamentary seats and only 1 in 7 countries is led by a woman
Maryam Tahmasebi – Traces&Dreams Journalist
March 17, 2026

When considering ways to reduce the gender gap, we often assume politicians should take the lead and that politics is the primary field for pursuing justice. This is true to some extent. However, statistics show that even in the political world, the proportion of women is significantly lower than that of men and remains far below where it should be.

A new map by UN Women and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), published in March 2026, shows that political power is still mostly under the control of men, and the pace of women’s progress in political participation has not only slowed down but in some cases has even regressed.

Let us take a look at the statistics published by the United Nations from 2025 to the beginning of 2026.

During this period, women around the world held only 22.4 percent of cabinet positions and 27.5 percent of parliamentary seats, and the majority of high-level decision-making remains male-dominated.

For example, women’s presence in cabinets is one area that has experienced regression. In 2024, this share was 23.3 percent, which decreased to 22.4 percent in 2025. Across the world, there are only 14 countries where women have equal or greater representation than men in cabinets. Namibia ranks first with 64.3 percent, followed by Finland (61.1 percent), Nicaragua (60 percent), Colombia (55.6 percent), Australia (54.5 percent), and Sweden (52.2 percent). Canada, Ecuador, Germany, Guatemala, Iceland, Seychelles, Spain, and the United Kingdom have also reached the 50 percent threshold, placing them among the global frontrunners.

However, in countries such as Yemen, Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia, Hungary, and Azerbaijan, women’s share in government is zero. In other words, there is not a single woman in their cabinets.

Regarding legislative institutions, the situation is not particularly encouraging either, even though women’s representation in parliaments has increased by 0.3 percent compared to last year, reaching 27.5 percent. Rwanda, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Mexico, Andorra, and the United Arab Emirates stand at the top with at least 50 percent representation. At the bottom of this list, we see Yemen, Tuvalu, and Oman, with zero percent.

From a regional perspective, the Americas have the highest level of parliamentary equality, followed by Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and the Pacific, while the Middle East and North Africa rank last.

Another point is that in 2026, only 28 countries in the world have a woman serving as head of state or government. This means that only 1 out of every 7 countries is led by a woman. This statistic should also be viewed from another angle: 101 countries throughout their entire political history have never had a woman in the highest executive position.

However, despite parity in some regions, analyzing the types of responsibilities assigned to women reveals another layer of systemic inequality and persistent gender stereotypes. Women lead 90 percent of ministries related to “gender equality” and 73 percent of those dealing with “family and children.” In contrast, the strategic domains of power controlling the pulse of global security and the economy are still treated as restricted zones. Only 12 percent of ministries of defense, as well as energy and natural resources, are led by women. This unequal distribution means that critical decisions about war, peace, and economic infrastructure are made without the effective participation of half of the world’s population and their experiences.

In addition to these structural barriers, the political environment for women has become highly unsafe. Seventy-six percent of women members of parliament indicated encountering intimidation and violence in surveys. These pressures, which exist both online and offline, work as a deterrent tool to discourage women from running for office and engaging in political activities.

In this regard, Sima Bahous, Executive Director of UN Women, said:
“At a time of growing global instability, escalating conflicts, and a visible backlash against women’s rights, shutting women out of political leadership weakens societies’ ability to respond to the challenges they face. Women bring perspectives and experience that are essential for making better decisions, preventing conflict, and building lasting peace. When women are fully involved in political leadership, countries are more stable, policies work better for people, and societies are better prepared to face the crises shaping our world today.”

These days, the 70th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW70) is taking place, and we hope that by adopting new global standards, we will gradually witness a narrowing of these gaps.

How Korean Activists Are Countering the Gender Backlash

The Resistance Hub
Maryam Tahmasebi, Journalist at Traces&Dreams

It is hardly a secret that South Korea is one of the most advanced countries in the world in terms of industry, technology, and economy. The country ranked fourth among 139 countries in the 2025 Global Innovation Index (GII) and holds the top position globally in “human capital and research.” However, when it comes to gender equality, the situation is quite different. While South Korea ranks among the top 12 countries in the world in terms of UN human development indicators such as health, literacy rates, and reproductive health, it stands at a less impressive 101st place in the World Economic Forum’s indices for economic participation and political empowerment.

South Korea still struggles with the largest gender wage gap among developed countries, and women’s representation in senior management and parliament is below global standards. For example, in 2024 and 2025, only 17.5% of managerial positions in South Korea were filled by women, while the average in developed countries ranges between 30 and 40 percent. In fact, the country’s remarkable technological progress has not yet been able to fully remove traditional and structural barriers related to job opportunities and equal rights.

But where does this gender gap originate?

Significant legislative changes to promote gender equality, fight employment discrimination, and lessen gender-based violence were implemented in South Korea during the 1990s and 2000s. However, the country’s prospects for equality have become more complex in recent years due to political polarisation and the paralysis of legislative attempts.

One of the main drivers of this shift is a perceived sense of threat among young men (especially those in their 20s and 30s) regarding their position in a highly competitive society. They view gender equality efforts as undermining their own status. This divide reached its peak during the 2022 presidential election. Yoon Suk Yeol denied the existence of structural gender inequality and, by promising to abolish the “Ministry of Gender Equality and Family,” gained the support of 58% of young men and won the election. Since he took office, gender-focused programs have faced budget cuts, renaming, or cancellation.

Also, since 2007, South Korea has failed to pass a comprehensive law that would outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, race, age, and religion. Conservative religious groups and right-wing political figures have resisted such legislation, claiming it promotes “LGBTIQ+ propaganda.” Even liberal lawmakers, fearing electoral consequences, have refrained from firmly supporting the bill.

In 2019, South Korea’s Constitutional Court ruled to decriminalize abortion, which was a major victory for feminist movements. However, the failure to pass follow-up legislation has created a procedural gap. Applicants now face high costs, uneven access to services, and a lack of insurance coverage.
On the other hand, sex education programs in schools are heavily criticized for focusing on abstinence and excluding content related to sexual diversity and gender identities. Religious groups and some parents label any modernization of these programs as the promotion of “liberal” agendas.

There was also a strong #MeToo movement in South Korea, prompted by a female prosecutor’s public disclosure of workplace sexual harassment in the late 2010s. Shocking incidents like the “Nth Room” affair, in which sexually exploitative footage of women was sold on digital platforms for profit, also came to light during this time. Although public support for feminism increased as a result of these events, right-wing media responded by misrepresenting feminism as a “divisive” movement.

What have been the feminists’ strategies of resistance and resilience?

However, in response to these systematic setbacks, feminist movements in South Korea have pursued various strategies:

Direct resistance

This approach is all about actively confronting discriminatory policies and using legal mechanisms. Rather than retreating in the face of anti-feminist backlash, Korean activists engage in strategic litigation (targeted legal actions) to reclaim violated rights. For example, coalitions such as “Marriage for All Korea” (MAK) have filed legal cases seeking recognition of same-sex unions. Also, following the historic victory in decriminalizing abortion, direct resistance now continues through pressure on parliament to pass complementary laws ensuring universal access to healthcare services and insurance coverage.

Structural resilience

Another interesting part of activists’ strategy in South Korea is strengthening the internal capacity of the movement to build infrastructures that do not collapse under political pressure or government funding cuts. The main goal is to ensure that the feminist and queer ecosystem relies on its own collective power rather than unstable external structures. One of the most remarkable aspects of this strategy is the revival of an old cultural tradition called “Pumasi,” rooted in rural mutual aid and the exchange of labor during planting and harvest seasons. In its modern form, feminist organizations and civil society groups exchange resources and capacities instead of relying on expensive external contractors or conditional government funding.

Reframing narratives

Korean activists have realized that to gain public support, gender issues must be removed from partisan polarization and reframed as a fundamental pillar of democracy. For example:

• Linking women’s and LGBTIQ+ rights to universal human rights to avoid labels such as “foreign ideology.”
• Strategically using digital platforms to document violence (such as the Nth Room case) and turn them into public demands for structural change.
• Advocating for the modernization of the education system and replacing outdated sex education with comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) models based on scientific evidence and inclusivity.

Regional solidarity

This strategy is based on the idea that South Korea’s challenges are not isolated but part of a broader pattern in East Asia. Korean activists have built connections with similar movements in Japan to analyze structural similarities. Both countries face issues such as outdated family laws, significant inequality in corporate leadership, and religious resistance to anti-discrimination laws. This solidarity allows activists to share successful experiences, form a united front against regional conservatism, and use international mechanisms more effectively to pressure their governments.
An interesting aspect of South Korea’s resilience lies in its cultural roots of “labor exchange.” Centuries ago, people helped one another during planting and harvest seasons. Today, this legacy has been transferred to civil society organizations. Instead of hiring expensive experts, they exchange resources in areas such as research, advocacy, and the creation of safe spaces. Despite political pressure, the movement’s ecosystem has survived thanks to its community-based strategy.

*This analysis is derived from the “In It Together: Feminist Resilience Toolkit” published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation in December 2025.

Where in history did women rise to struggle, and where are they going?

Maryam Tahmasebi, Journalist at Traces&Dreams
Paris in the late 18th century was a city where discussions about changing social and political structures broke out in every corner. Cafes were filled with slogans of liberty and equality. It was during this time that the first declaration of women’s rights was written by Marie Gouze (Olympe de Gouges). She believed that basic human rights should include all members of society. That same movement continues to struggle today, with the difference that concepts are constantly being redefined and changed based on the complex layers of modern life.

Today, March 8, is International Women’s Day. The World Bank, in its 2024 and 2025 reports, states that women globally enjoy, on average, only 64 percent of the legal rights that men do. This statistic was obtained by examining laws such as mobility, the workplace, pay, marriage, parenthood, entrepreneurship, assets, and pensions. Currently, no country in the world has provided full legal equality, and only 4 percent of women live in countries that are close to legal equality.

On the occasion of International Women’s Day, we decided to travel through the historical evolution of the path of feminism in the world and its contemporary developments. We all know that the goal of feminism is to dismantle and eliminate the boundaries of traditional gender roles and to defend women’s equal rights. However, this demand has had different stages throughout history that we can summarize in four waves. Each of these waves targeted a part of the structures of inequality with the motivation of creating a fair environment.

The first wave of feminism began with the demand for equal legal rights. In the second wave, issues such as education, equality in the workplace, and reproductive rights were raised. The third wave appeared by introducing the concept of intersectionality and distinguishing between different lived experiences. Now that we are in the fourth wave, it is digital feminism that drives this wave more than anything else.
Feminism is nothing but the struggle for equal rights, but the negative connotation of the word and the wrong perception of it have caused many people to disavow this movement and say they are not feminists. Anyhow, this movement continues its path and has had many achievements to date. Achievements such as equal civil rights, equal pay, reproductive rights, the fight against sexual harassment, and global solidarity against gender discrimination throughout the world, especially in societies where the patriarchal system still prevails.

Looking at the history of women’s movements allows us to defend women and their rights more effectively by learning from the past path, trials and errors, victories, and defeats.

1st Wave: Awakening Awakens

The first wave of feminism, which began in the late 19th century, focused on the demand for legal rights. This wave peaked in 1948 with the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at the United Nations. This declaration states in its first and second articles that all human beings are equal and deserve freedom without any distinction. During this period, pioneer women such as Susan B. Anthony in the United States were able to change laws through the suffrage movement and create a space where women could participate in the political destiny of their country. And later, women like Emmeline Pankhurst and Millicent Fawcett became its torchbearers in England.

2nd Wave: Equality Should Not Be Limited

With the passage of time, demands went beyond the ballot boxes. In the 1960s to 1980s, the second wave of feminism, led by figures such as Gloria Steinem, brought new topics into public debate. They believed that equality should also be manifested in education, the workplace, and reproductive rights. This period was like a mirror for the awakening of women’s consciousness.
Stories such as Pride and Prejudice and Anne of Green Gables with characters who rebelled against patriarchal systems and sought independence were early inspirations for this wave. The dominant discourse of this period of feminism was that the rational ability of human beings is unrelated to their gender.

3rd Wave: Women’s Suffering is Different

In the 1990s, the concept of intersectionality was born and created the third wave of feminism. Thinkers like Kimberlé Crenshaw raised the concern that women’s experiences are not identical and that the background and lived experience of each person must be viewed differently. They believed that past movements mainly considered the concerns of white middle-class women in the Western world and ignored the issues of women of color or the working class. This stage of the movement tried to make diversity and inclusion the core of its activities.

4th Wave: Every User, a Feminist

Today we are in the middle of the fourth wave. The main characteristic of this period is its inseparable link with technology and social media. Digital tools have allowed women to spread their messages with unprecedented speed. Through social networks and various platforms, they have taken feminist discourses from intellectual spaces into different layers of society.
For example, the “Me Too” movement in 2017 showed the power of these tools in breaking the silence around systematic harassment. Time magazine named the activists who spoke out against sexual abuse as the Person of the Year that year.
Feminism on the internet has provoked mixed reactions. Part of these tensions stems from the belief that because current laws protect the rights of citizens, there is no longer a need for rights-seeking movements. However, it should be noted that this view ignores the structural differences and unequal responsibilities that society places on the shoulders of women.
The root of these disagreements can be found in a misunderstanding of the goals of equality. Feminism does not seek enmity with men and has no goal other than creating fair relationships in work and life. In fact, the freedom of men is also tied to the rights of women, as men also suffer from traditional gender roles and imposed stereotypes. Still, while virtual space fights increase tension, if we look at them positively, they ultimately lead to awareness and finding the roots of gender inequality problems.

What Does the Future Look Like?

“The Future of Feminism” (a report by VICE Media Group in 2023), shows that the feminist movement’s structure is basically transitioning to a direction to make inclusiveness and intersectionality the center of activities. 82 percent of women demand the representation of diverse groups, including women of color and individuals from different economic backgrounds. Also, 51 percent say that feminism should follow equal freedoms for all gender identities, including transgender and non-binary individuals.

What clearly stands out is that the society’s definition of gender is moving from traditional molds toward individual and internal expression. Findings say that 53 percent of young people consider femininity an individual choice and not a fixed biological state. This attitude paves the way for a future where 55 percent of people imagine a society in which no gender leads over another and identities are measured based on human values. Despite the obstacles arising from the politicization of concepts, 81 percent of the new generation say that they are optimistic about the final realization of gender equality in the future.

Meanwhile, in another corner of the world, like the Middle East and North Africa, the movement is advancing differently. We can say it is moving toward a rooted and democratic approach that sees women’s rights not as a separate issue, but as part of the struggle for social justice in general. In past decades in this region, laws have focused on religious structures, and authoritarian rulers used the drip-feeding of rights to women as a tool to gain international legitimacy and suppress political opponents.

A new generation of activists, relying on Democratic Feminism, demands equal citizenship and has bypassed the traditional polarities between secularism and religion. Their movement has turned gender equality into a grassroots and bottom-up demand where the solidarity of women from different backgrounds stands out, as we saw in the 2022 protests in Iran (following the death of Zhina Amini by the morality police). In most parts of the Middle East, feminism is tied to the desire for democracy, and the liberation of women is grouped with the struggle for the whole of society, and not just women.

The path of the evolution of feminism is a winding path of resilience and change. This path represents a collective awakening for all of human society. The future of this movement is intertwined with hope and determination. Feminism is a global ideal that promises a fairer world and strives to ensure that no group is ignored in this struggle. Feminism today looks to recreate a world where equality is a tangible reality in the daily lives of all human beings. This is a journey that all members of society must take together to create a brighter tomorrow.

Happy International Women’s Day!

Sources:
Global History of Feminism (2023), Lucy Delap.
Le Monde Website (2023).
The Second Sex (1949), Simone de Beauvoir.
VICE Media Group (2023).

Join us for a live webinar on Thursday, 16 October, from 16:30–18:00 CEST on Zoom as part of Erasmus+ Days. The session brings together youth workers, researchers, and activists from Erasmus+ projects across Europe. Drawing on the storytelling focus of the Future Narratives Project and the feminist knowledge creation approach of the WeFrame project, we will explore how ‘gender’ is negotiated in today’s media landscape and how storytelling can be used to reclaim space for inclusion.

The event is free and open to youth workers, gender researchers, activists, educators, students, and all those passionate about diversity and inclusion. The conversation will be moderated by Tatiana Migaesi and Sebastian Mellgren from Traces&Dreams. It will be held in English. Zoom offers language translation with AI for accessibility.

The event will be attended by:

• Tatiana Migaesi, from Traces&Dreams | WeFrame (moderation)
• Sebastian Mellgren, from Traces&Dreams | Future Narratives (moderation)
• Tonya Blowers, Coordinator at Organization for Women in Science for the Developing World (OWSD)
• Erika Ruonakoski, from Háskóli Íslands | Gender and Philosophy Project
• Irene Kamba, from The Serendipitous Black Cloud
• Amalia Ranieri, from Sinergie | Future Chronicles Project
• Ingrid Dyrnes Svendsen, from JM Norway | LOUD! Bandcamp Youth Worker Exchange
• Joschka Köck, from Theater der Unterdrückten Wien
• Aroa Carmona Valero, from Ocean Znanja u Republici Hrvatskoj | SHENARRATOR
• Hara Papadatou, from Interalia | Mothers of Europe

Sign up to receive the webinar invitation: https://forms.gle/jrTWFAKFLdzzmXmy5

More info: https://weframeproject.eu/16-10-2025-online-webinar/

Paris, July 2025 – In June, the European platform MERITA concluded its first three transformative years with a final Transnational Project Meeting in Paris. Organized by ProQuartet in collaboration with Le Dimore del Quartetto, the event was not only a celebration of results but also a testament to what happens when music, heritage, and collaboration meet.

Traces&Dreams was proud to be part of this visionary initiative, bringing its expertise in narration, storytelling, and communication to amplify the project’s impact across Europe.

A Platform for Talent and Heritage

.
MERITA – where chamber Music, cultural hERITage and tAlent meet – was launched in 2022 under the Creative Europe Programme. It brought together 16 partner organizations from 12 countries, all working to support emerging string quartets and reimagine chamber music in dialogue with cultural heritage and diverse audiences.

The platform grew into a vibrant ecosystem:

• 38 string quartets, involving 152 musicians of 28 nationalities
• 192 concerts in 136 venues across 26 countries
• 39 artistic residencies in historic houses
• Engagement with children, vulnerable communities, and audiences new to classical music

Beyond Concert Halls

MERITA proved that chamber music thrives outside traditional concert spaces. From historic houses to inclusive community settings, the quartets’ projects explored themes that resonated with heterogeneous audiences. Alongside concerts and residencies, the platform offered international masterclasses, study visits, and dissemination events, expanding opportunities for professional and artistic growth.

The final Paris event, held at the Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles, embodied MERITA’s inclusive ethos. Following introductions from Francesca Moncada (Le Dimore del Quartetto) and Benoit Bezin (ProQuartet), the Wassily Quartet presented an interactive Concert à la carte, where the audience shaped the program in real time, an innovation that symbolized MERITA’s participatory spirit.

Looking Ahead: MERITAcubed

While this meeting marked the conclusion of MERITA’s first edition, the journey continues. Activities will run until August 2025 with over 25 additional concerts. In October 2025, MERITAcubed will launch, supporting 56 new ensembles including string quartets and piano trios through concerts, residencies, showcases, and tailored career development.

With 19 partners from 16 countries, the new phase will explore innovative economic models, enhance digital tools, and strengthen the resilience of the chamber music sector in a rapidly changing Europe.

Traces&Dreams’ Role

As a partner, Traces&Dreams brought its core mission into MERITA: harnessing the power of storytelling to connect people across disciplines and cultures. By translating the achievements of the platform into compelling narratives, we ensured that the stories of young musicians, historic venues, and European collaboration reached audiences far beyond the project itself.

For Traces&Dreams, MERITA was more than a cultural project, it was a living example of how stories, when shared, can foster understanding, creativity, and sustainability across Europe.