A case study of reform in police governance provides an opportunity to examine how the micro-foundations of institutional change impact gender policy. The literature has established an association between institutional transformation and opportunities for gender policy change. It is clear that new actors and new rules are significant, but less is known about their interaction. Elinor Ostrom's concept of “rules-in-use” captures rules and their enactment in combination. Interviews with a new cadre of directly elected police and crime commissioners in England revealed the ways in which they worked with new institutional rules to prioritize violence against women and girls. Seven sets of rules are identified, arranged along a formal-informal continuum. Most were not specifically “about gender” but, when enacted by motivated, knowledgeable and reflexive actors, they facilitated gender policy change. A focus on micro-foundations enables the identification of institutional building blocks for gender policy change, highlighting the co-constitutive relationship between actors and rules.

The “Debate” section of the Review aims tocontribute to the reflection on current ethical, legal, or operationalcontroversies around humanitarian issues.

In its issue on “Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict” (Vol. 96, No.894, 2014), the Review published an Opinion Note by Chris Dolanentitled “Letting Go of the Gender Binary: Charting New Pathways forHumanitarian Interventions on Gender-Based Violence”. In light of thereview process for the Inter-Agency Standing Committee'sGuidelines for Integrating Gender-Based Violence Interventions inHumanitarian Action (GBV Guidelines), Dolan argues for a shift inthe conceptualization of gender-based violence (GBV) inhumanitarian settings from an emphasis on gender equality to an ethos of genderinclusivity. This, he suggests, is essential to improving the situation ofvictims, furthering social justice and changing agendas.

In this issue, the Review presents the view of Jeanne Ward, oneof the lead authors of the revised GBV Guidelines. For Ward, attempts to shiftaway from a focus on gender equality in GBV programming represent a regressionrather than an advancement for the GBV field, as a dedicated spotlight on therights and needs of women and girls continues to be hard-won in humanitariancontexts. Instead, she suggests retaining a focus on women and girls in GBVwork, while moving forward in partnership with those who wish to accelerateprogramming directed to men and LGBTI communities broadly.