Journal articles  |  Journal special issues  | Edited books  |  Book chapters  |  Conference papers  |  Technical reports  |  Reviews  |  In press |  Forthcoming

 

Journal articles

Jenkins, Fiona (2017). Discriminating well: On excellence in philosophy and ways of seeing disciplinary space. Rivista di Estetica, 64, 103-117.

Abstract: The current discourse on gender equity in universities most often situates itself in relation to eliminating bias and ensuring objectivity in rankings of excellence. With a focus on the discipline of philosophy, the article asks whether we thereby miss what is both important to contest but also cultivate in social worlds that are organized by their ever-partial and imperfect forms of discrimination in judgment. An approach based in efforts to engage in socio-political regulation of discrimination is proposed as advantageous. Full text of article.

Sawer, Marian & Curtin, Jennifer (2016). Organising for a more diverse political science: Australian and New Zealand. European Political Science, 15(4), 441-456.

Abstract: Until the 1970s neither Australian nor New Zealand political studies gave much attention to issues of diversity. This reflected both the makeup of the profession and the majoritarian nature of the political systems that were the major object of its attention. We argue that feminist organising on both sides of the Tasman had led to greater pluralism within the discipline. Using a comparative institutional approach, we trace the relationship between organising within the professional associations and the acceptance of greater diversity of approach and standpoint. We find, however, that while both countries’ Associations have become somewhat more inclusive, a hierarchy of knowledge still exists that may prove an obstacle to feminist and Indigenous political scientists joining discipline-based departments and programmes. Full text of article

Back to top of page

 

Journal special issues

Gendered innovations in the social sciences [Special issue] Women’s Studies International Forum, vol 72, Jan-Feb, 2019

Jenkins, Fiona, Keane, Helen, & Donovan, Claire (Eds).

Read the journal.

• Jenkins, Fiona, Keane, Helen, & Donovan, Clair (2019). Work (still) in progress: Establishing the value of gendered innovations in the social sciences. Women’s Studies International Forum, vol 72, Jan-Feb, 104-108.

Abstract:  Feminist economics belongs to a class of approaches stigmatized by the mainstream neoclassical discipline as ‘heterodox’. Feminist philosophy, like feminist economics, is largely published outside the discipline's most prestigious journals, and is produced almost exclusively by women. Political science and international relations, likewise, are disciplines that in their mainstream incarnation, seem barely to have begun to engage with gender as a fundamental aspect of all political relations. Although in these disciplines, as across the social sciences, we see vibrant sub-fields, where feminist approaches and gendered analysis are the norm, the degree of gender segregation that often marks such scholarship in terms of practice, impact and citation, is cause for concern. In present institutional contexts, where perceptions of the ‘excellence’ of research shape funding decisions and career paths, and where many disciplinary fields continue to construct images of the social, economic and political world that are at best indifferent to questions of gender and at worst perpetuate ways of thinking intimately bound up with the preservation of gender inequality and subordination, it may be timely to reflect upon and construct accounts precisely of why gender matters in these fields. Read online

• Dalziel, Paul, & Saunders, Caroline (2018). Gendered innovations in economics: Marilyn Waring’s approach to social science research. Women’s Studies International Forum, vol 72, Jan-Feb, 137-143.

Abstract: Gendered innovations explore how researchers can harness the creative power of gender analysis to make new discoveries. This essay addresses that question in the discipline of economics, where women are under-represented in research leadership roles. It draws on the research achievements of a New Zealand economist, Marilyn Waring, to explore how gender analysis in economics can be used to make new discoveries and drive innovation. This draws attention to the way in which Waring performed the research published in her influential 1988 book If Women Counted: A New Feminist Economics. Her approach is contrasted with the standard Popper-Kuhn-Lakatos model of scientific progress. It demonstrates how a social scientist can break new ground by being embedded in a community of activists grappling with burning issues of the day. Waring's approach has ongoing lessons for gendered innovations in economics. Read online

• Pearse, Rebecca, Hitchcock, James N., & Keane, Helen (2018). Gender, inter/disciplinarity and marginality in the social sciences and humanities: A comparison across six disciplines. Women’s Studies International Forum, vol 72, Jan-Feb, 109-126.

Abstract: Within different social science and humanities disciplines, there has been debate about the impact of feminist knowledges and scholarship by women in general. This study systematically investigates the differential impact of feminist thought on disciplinary domains in the social sciences and humanities. Using quantitative citation data from the Web of Science, we investigate the extent to which gender-related research is produced and circulated in the ‘centres’ of six disciplines: economics, history; international relations; political science; philosophy and sociology. We then analyse the production and circulation of knowledge produced in feminist disciplinary sub-fields. The study findings show gender inequality persists, evidenced by gender representation in editorial positions and authorship. The proportion of gender-related research articles published in sociology is significantly greater than in economics, history, international relations, philosophy and political science. Interdisciplinarity appears to mediate the status of feminist knowledge within disciplines. The marginalisation of feminist discipline subfields appears to be constituted through practices of strong disciplinarity. Read online

• Mackenzie, Catriona (2019). Feminist innovation in philosophy: Relational autonomy and social justice. Women’s Studies International Forum, vol 72, Jan-Feb, 144-151.

Abstract: Feminist philosophy has opened up new areas of investigation across a wide range of sub-fields in mainstream Anglophone philosophy, Continental philosophy and applied ethics. Yet, despite the fact that over the last three decades feminist philosophy has challenged and transformed many sub-fields of the discipline, its impact within the discipline is often patchy, and feminist philosophy is regarded by some philosophers as “not real philosophy”. Several factors might account for this phenomenon, including the under-representation of women in the discipline, the chilly climate for women in some quarters of the discipline, a gender-stereotyped culture within the discipline of rewarding those perceived to be “smart”, and the devaluation of the knowledge claims made by feminist philosophers. This article focuses primarily on the final factor, using relational autonomy theory as an illustrative example. This feminist conceptual innovation has challenged and transformed mainstream conceptions of autonomy. However, its impact within the discipline has been less significant than its impact in other fields. Read online

Gendered excellence in the social sciences [Special issue] Australian Feminist Studies, vol 29, issue 80, 2014

Jenkins, Fiona, & Keane, Helen (Eds.).

Abstract: Feminist scholarship has been central to the success and prominence of the Australian social sciences. The impact and significance of the work of sociologists such as Raewyn Connell and Rosemary Pringle, historians Barbara Caine and Marilyn Lake, philosophers Genevieve Lloyd and Moira Gatens and political scientists Carol Bacchi and Louise Chappell are recognised internationally. But how effective has feminist critique been in reshaping what counts as authoritative knowledge and research excellence in the disciplines? And what is the relationship between the disciplines' varying incorporation of feminist perspectives and their progress towards organisational gender equity goals?

Read the journal.

• Broom, Dorothy H. (2014). Feminism in the social sciences of health and illness. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 171-179.

Abstract: When feminism informs and shapes social scientific thinking, it often yields strongly applied perspectives. The business of engaging in the application, however, presents challenges to both feminist practice and the academic disciplines. These issues are further complicated when they are played out in an interdisciplinary setting. I offer a personal reflection on the highly ambiguous situation in a part of what has been called the ‘diaspora’ of social sciences practiced not within any particular ‘home’ discipline, but in a particular sub-field or inter-discipline such as urban studies, criminology or—in this case—population health. The emphasis in this discussion is on the mutual influences of the academic and the applied. Full text of article

• Code, Lorraine (2014). Ignorance, injustice and the politics of knowledge: Feminist epistemology now. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 148-160.

Abstract: Since the early 1980s, feminist epistemology has developed into a vibrant area of inquiry which challenges many of the taken-for-granted assumptions of traditional, mainstream theories of knowledge to work towards developing theories and practices that close a persistent gap between theories of knowledge and knowledge that matters to people in real situations. Here I will examine some of the more startling recent developments in feminist epistemology, where—perhaps improbably—epistemologies of ignorance and questions about epistemic injustice have made significant contributions to feminist knowledge projects. Together and separately, they expose the extent to which knowing is a political activity, while maintaining that it can avow its political involvement without dissolving into facile assertions that ‘might is right’. Full text of article

• Connell, Raewyn (2014). Feminist scholarship and the public realm in postcolonial Australia. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 215-230.

Abstract: This paper explores the connections of feminist scholarship in the social sciences with political struggles and institutions. The creation of bases for a feminist knowledge project is outlined and its uses in challenging sexist culture and in developing agendas of reform are explored. The impact of neoliberalism and the significance of Australia's location in the global periphery for the shape of the public realm and the character of feminist research are discussed. The resource represented by feminist scholarship across the global South for understanding contemporary forms of patriarchy is emphasised. Full text of article

• Curthoys, Ann (2014). Gender in the social sciences: Field of study or form or inequity? Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 115-120.

Abstract: This paper considers the three main ways in which social scientists are concerned with gender—as a field of study, as an analytical tool and as a social phenomenon structuring the social sciences themselves. It begins with a reconsideration of a report I wrote for the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia in 1998 on gender in the social sciences, and moves on to consider what has changed since then, emphasising the substantial internationalisation of Australian scholarship in thinking, method, focus, collaboration and communication. With the growing alliance of gender studies with cultural studies and the transformation of the latter from an interdisciplinary project into a new discipline, I suggest, feminist scholarship has become much more disciplinary in focus. For this reason, it has become important to understand why it is that women have found it much harder to achieve parity with men in some disciplines than others, and why it is that within disciplines, there remain strong gender differences. It concludes by observing that the vitality of gender scholarship depends significantly on its continuing engagement with public concerns and issues. Full text of article

• Damousi, Joy (2014). Does Feminist History have a future? Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 189-203.

Abstract: Contemporary shifts in scholarship and institutional agendas, I argue, have created new sets of challenges for feminist history. While these do not undermine the paradigms of this scholarly endeavour, there has been an inevitable shift in how feminist history is now written, conceptualised and undertaken. A hallmark of dynamic and innovative scholarship is a capacity to evolve and respond to intellectual challenges and developments. There is much to be positive about in the future, as I believe feminist history at its best has not remained a passive or static body of knowledge, but continues to be reformulated and reconceptualised, but with this dynamism comes uncertainties which institutional change can bring. While I do not believe these are systemic enough to pose a challenge to the enterprise, I suggest they do create cause for wider discussion, especially about the place of the humanities more generally in the corporate university of the twenty-first century. Full text of article

• Jenkins, Fiona (2014). Epistemic credibility and women in philosophy. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 161-170.

Abstract: Women in philosophy are disproportionately under-represented at elite institutions, and publishing patterns can be analysed to show that the ‘top’ journals publish articles by women at rates significantly lower than even the levels of women who have made it into tenure at these elite universities. In such journals, the type of epistemology that Lorraine Code describes as ‘immune to feminist critique’ is dominant, assuming that neutrality is the benchmark for knowledge, and that knowers float free of the encumbrances of situation. It is right to worry, as Code does, that feminist and critical race theory hold an increasingly fragile place in disciplinary philosophy and that disciplinary philosophy itself is thereby the loser. The question of how to reinvigorate radical projects of contestation is both urgent and vexing. To align this issue with the under-representation of women in philosophy poses its own problems, as this article explores: for women need not be feminist philosophers, and feminist philosophy can be a project of assimilation into the mainstream as much as it can be a project of radical transformation of disciplinary norms. There may be something to learn, however, both about equity in the academy and the fate of critique by considering the relation between prevailing institutional conditions, disciplinary trajectories and the gendering of prestige in the academic sector. Full text of article

• Jenkins, Fiona, & Keane, Helen (2014). Gender and feminism in the social sciences: Equity, excellent and knowledge in the disciplines. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 107-114.

Abstract: Feminist scholarship has been central to the success and prominence of the Australian social sciences. The impact and significance of the work of sociologists such as Raewyn Connell and Rosemary Pringle, historians Barbara Caine and Marilyn Lake, philosophers Genevieve Lloyd and Moira Gatens and political scientists Carol Bacchi and Louise Chappell are recognised internationally. But how effective has feminist critique been in reshaping what counts as authoritative knowledge and research excellence in the disciplines? And what is the relationship between the disciplines' varying incorporation of feminist perspectives and their progress towards organisational gender equity goals? Full text of article

• Johnson, Carol (2014). Hard heads and soft hearts: The gendering of Australian political science. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 121-136.

Abstract: Various Australian politicians have argued for the need to combine ‘hard heads and soft hearts’ in politics. Unfortunately, this article argues that that recognition is not yet fully accepted in Australian political science. While there has been a significant progress, both in terms of the number of senior women in the discipline and the gender content of Australian political science, problems still remain. Unfortunately, some of the issues are still those identified by Carole Pateman in her famous 1981 address as President of the Australian Political Studies Association when she noted both the underrepresentation of women in political science and that there was a tendency to define ‘the political’ in narrow ways that excluded the study of women and issues that were of concern to them. This article will explore why political science has been less open to incorporating feminist insights than some other related disciplines. It will analyse a number of issues regarding the gendering of Australian political science. These include narrow definitions of the ‘political’; a continuing implicit (gendered) prioritising of various fields and approaches as ‘hard’ political science and the denigration of other fields as ‘soft’; and the impact of neo-liberalism and the importance of the ‘political’ as a site for constructions of gender identity. It argues that the continuing resistance to ‘reinventing’ political science to take account of gender is particularly concerning given the potential impact on definitions of research ‘excellence’. The article also identifies some areas where more research needs to be done. Full text of article

• Keane, Helen (2014). Feminism and the complexities of gender and health. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 180-188.

Abstract: Feminist research and activism have made a distinctive contribution to social studies of health and have also had a significant impact on public health policy. Gender is widely recognised as a key driver in the social determination of health and is a well-established category of analysis in fields such as the sociology of health. As a response to Broom, this article focuses on two ways in which feminist social science has complicated the understandings of gender and health which underlie much health policy and research. The first is the framework of intersectionality, which emphasises the interactions between different aspects of social identity and reveals the limitations of a singular or primary focus on gender in analysing experiences of health and ill-health. The second is the critical analysis of health as a regulatory ideal, prompted by the rise of the ‘new public health’ and its emphasis on individual responsibility for risk reduction. Together these critical insights reveal some of the tensions embedded in feminist goals such as improving women's well-being. Full text of article

• McGrath, Ann (2014. The loneliness of the feminist historian. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 204-214.

Abstract:  Feminist historians in Australia have achieved the critical mass that means that they no longer need to be the sole woman's voice pleading to get women into the history corridors and inside the books. By looking back at recent history reflexively, this article celebrates the achievement of feminist historians over the past four decades in making profound impacts on mainstream historical writing and understanding. Engaging in particular with the work of feminist historians Joan Scott and Joy Damousi, ‘The Loneliness of the Feminist Historian’ considers whether feminist history has a future. It also reflects upon the author's memories of the feminist history movement from the 1970s and 1980s—its aims, its achievements and its significant successes, especially compared with other social science disciplines. It explains how certain ‘great (female) historians’ made courageous efforts to internationalise and pluralise feminist history. It also probes the meaning and relevance of ‘professional masculinities’, pointing out that feminist historians were supported by key male historians, who backed them in gaining career and publishing opportunities. Additionally, the challenges of Indigenous scholars led to a sharpening of critical approaches to colonialism. This article argues, however, that feminist historians cannot afford to cling to the excitement of the early conferences of the 1970s and 1980s, for if they expect their practice to thrive, they must constantly critique it, using the most innovative and best tools of our era, including the empirical, the reflexive, the whimsical and the theoretical. Full text of article

• Sawer, Marian (2014). Feminist political science and feminist politics. Australian Feminist Studies, 29(80), 137-147.

Abstract: This article moves away from issues of the impact of women and feminist scholarship on political science to examine the relationship of feminist political science to a political constituency. It traces the trajectory of feminist political science from its close relationship with women's movement activism in the 1970s to the highly professionalised disciplinary subfield of today. It highlights some of the dilemmas resulting both from professional imperatives and from the norms of research excellence stemming from new forms of research governance. It finds that feminist political science has been pushed towards addressing an international community of scholars in a language inaccessible to local publics. But it finds that despite such pressures, feminist political science has still sought to produce work that is of direct relevance to achieving women's movement goals, whether within public policy or within political institutions broadly conceived. While it may no longer be speaking the same language, it is still seeking to identify the obstacles to change and the possibilities for transformation. This can be seen particularly clearly in the area of research on the intersection of electoral systems, quotas and party structures. Yet even here tensions can emerge, as with the concept of ‘critical mass’, perceived by activists as a crucial discursive tool but problematised by feminist scholars. Full text of article

Back to top of page

 

Edited books

Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge

Sawer, Marian & Baker, Kerryn (Eds). (2019). Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

In this book, leading gender scholars survey the contribution of feminist scholarship to new norms and knowledge in diverse areas of political science and related political practice. They provide new evidence of the breadth of this contribution and its policy impact. Rather than offering another account of the problem of gender inequality in the discipline, the book focuses on the positive contribution of gender innovation. It highlights in a systematic and in-depth way how gender innovation has contributed to sharpening the conceptual tools available in different subfields, including international relations and public policy. At the same time, the authors show the limits of impact in core areas of an increasingly pluralised discipline. This volume will appeal to scholars and students of political science and international relations.

Further information on the publisher's website.

Chapters

• Baker, Kerryn (2019). Introduction: New norms, new knowledge. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 1-11). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: Feminist research in the field of political science has made many contributions, both to the discipline and to women’s movements. In political science and international relations, research on gender from a feminist perspective has contributed new knowledge to the discipline as well as new ways of thinking. This volume seeks to introduce readers to the positive contribution of gender innovation in the study of politics and power. While contributors to this volume profile the potentially transformative insights provided by feminist political science, we acknowledge too the distance needed to travel before mainstream political science fully accepts the value of gender innovation in the discipline.

• Sawer, Marian (2019). How the absence of women became a democratic deficit: The role of feminist political science. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 13-39). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: For most of the twentieth century, political science was complicit in the absence of women from public office. This started to change in the 1970s as feminists began to reframe the absence of women not as a ‘condition’ but as a problem to be addressed by political science as well as political actors. This chapter examines the original assumptions found in political science concerning women’s political participation and the way these were challenged by feminist critiques. A male-dominated profession had failed to take account of how the gendered distribution of power contributed to exclusion. The chapter then looks at how feminist political scientists contributed to the promotion of new norms and strategies through transnational standard-setting institutions, as well as through engaging with laggard political institutions in the English-speaking democracies.

• Jenkins, Fiona (2019). Gendered innovation in the social sciences. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 41-59). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: There have been significant levels of gendered innovation across the social sciences. This chapter argues that such new norms and new knowledge are important in understanding the gendered realities of the worlds that social sciences seek to explain. In addition, they provide the wide lens we need for assessing progress towards goals of gender equality. Examining the relationship between advances in knowledge and the diversity brought by women to the academy, as well as the specifically critical approaches of feminist work, the chapter also discusses the uneven adoption of gender scholarship into mainstream social science disciplines, identifying factors such as methodological approaches and hegemonic assumptions that affect the rate of uptake.

• Weldon, S. Laurel (2019). Inclusion and exclusion: Contributions of a feminist approach to power. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 61-89). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: This chapter illustrates the insights offered by feminist approaches to power. First, it very briefly compares feminist approaches to traditional approaches to power, emphasising the feminist insight that power is a relationship, not a thing, and that power is ubiquitous. Thinking about power in this way gives us a better understanding of the potential for women’s empowerment as well as the reasons for (and consequences of) women’s exclusion from political leadership. Feminist analysis directs our attention to multiple sites of power, moderating expectations of women who occupy ‘positions of power’. It suggests broader solutions to the problems of exclusion that bedevil advocates for women’s inclusion in democratic politics. The approach offers a richer understanding of relations of inclusion and exclusion that structure contemporary democracies.

• Tremblay. Manon (2019). Uncovering the gendered effects of voting systems: A few thoughts about representation of women and of LGBT people. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 91-114). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

The subject of this chapter is the contribution of gender research to the study of the effects of voting systems on women’s and LGBT representation. It looks at the failure of classic works on voting systems to pay attention to their gender impact. It then highlights the ways in which feminist political science has redressed this failure, contributing research on which voting systems are most women-friendly. However, much of this new research has itself failed to take into account the impact of sexuality on representation. It has largely assumed that women, as electors and politicians, are heterosexuals and that voting systems and sexuality do not interact. To gain a fuller picture, a gendered-inspired approach to the study of electoral systems must take sexualities into account.

• Curtin, Jennifer (2019). Feminist innovations and new institutionalism. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 115-133). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: This chapter traces the development of feminist scholarship on institutions from early discussions of the extent to which institutional design shapes and is shaped by gendered power relations to the present theoretically rich feminist institutionalism. Focusing on new institutionalism, the chapter also draws attention to the innovative feminist insights that reveal the significance of timing, critical actor presence and the links between formal and informal institutions to achieving change that will advance gender equality outcomes.

• True, Jacqui (2019). Gender research and the study of institutional transfer and norm transmission. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 135-152). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: Gender researchers have highlighted the role of transnational feminist networks across the twentieth century in the international diffusion of the suffrage, gender quotas, gender mainstreaming institutions and anti-violence against women norms. By contrast with conventional analysis, they have studied the diffusion of norms and policies as a dynamic and contested process involving the transformation of the networks as well as the norms and policies they promote. Addressing the practical challenges in researching these networks, feminist political scientists have developed innovative methods to conceptualise networks, evaluate their impact and operationalise their influence on institutional outcomes. The UN Women, Peace and Security agenda serves as a contemporary example to illustrate how we study the dynamism of transnational feminist networks and their effects on international norms.

• Tickner, J. Ann (2019). Gender research in international relations. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 153-171). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: This chapter begins by introducing some of the classic works in IR, a field founded around the time of World War I, demonstrating their masculine bias that is evident in their focus on war and security. Next, the chapter overviews some feminist scholarship that has entered the field in the last twenty-five years and some of the very different issues on which it has focused. It suggests that feminists are using very different methodologies from conventional IR to understand world politics. Feminists claim that we cannot fully understand international politics or the workings of the global economy without a gender analysis. In conclusion, the chapter describes some of the ways in which women’s issues have been introduced onto the agenda of the United Nations.

• Palmieri, Sonia (2019). Feminist institutionalism and gender-sensitive parliaments: Relating theory and practice. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 173-194). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: Since the 1990s, feminist institutionalists have argued that women parliamentarians work within the confines of a gendered institution which impacts on their capacity to reform both parliamentary process and policy. In this chapter, I consider the linkages between the theory of feminist institutionalism and the relatively new research on gender-sensitive parliaments, which has led to a new understanding of parliaments as workplaces. Practical implications arise from these theoretical revisions, notably the need to refocus parliamentary development assistance around a ‘theory of change’ that aims to transform parliaments, as institutions, rather than relying on capacity building initiatives for women alone. ‘Feminist institutionalism and gender-sensitive parliaments’ concludes by considering opportunities for ongoing dialogue between theory and practice.

• Johnson, Carol (2019). Gender research and discursive policy framing. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 195-217). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: There is now a significant body of international research that deals with the gendered implications of discursive policy framing. This chapter provides a detailed analysis of that existing literature. It also undertakes new research using Australian and British examples. Johnson argues that analysing discursive framing through a gendered lens can provide new insights into gender biases in policy formulation and the influence of such framing on the success, or otherwise, of policy outcomes. Consequently, such analyses make a particularly useful contribution to the existing public policy research applying discursive and interpretive approaches, as well as providing new insights into governments’ attempts to tackle gender inequality.

• Andrew, Merrindahl (2019). What feminist research has contributed to social movement studies: Questions of time and belonging. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 219-242). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: Feminist studies of women’s movements have enriched the field of social movement studies, challenging assumptions about movements’ life cycles, temporal scale, repertoires, institutionalisation and organisational form. This chapter highlights how feminist scholarship has both sat apart from and contributed to the field, refusing to be subsumed within the field’s established categories but not averse to productive dialogue. Presenting a study of women’s movements against violence in Australia, the chapter argues for an expansive conception of the shared project(s), in which the feminist institutions that have been created are being challenged from both ‘within’ and ‘beyond’ the movement.

• Costa, Monica & Sawer, Marian (2019). The thorny path to a more inclusive discipline. In Marian Sawer & Kerryn Baker (Eds), Gender innovation in political science: New norms, new knowledge (pp. 243-275). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Abstract: This chapter explores the extent of feminist institution-building within national and international political science associations and what it has achieved. We compare the initiation of gender and politics specialist groups and the strategies adopted for promoting recognition of feminist scholarship. We then use bibliometric data to show the limits to the integration of gender perspectives into core areas of the discipline. We examine factors such as the hierarchy of knowledge and its conflict with the approaches and methodological preferences of many gender scholars. We conclude that while gender and politics scholars have consolidated an epistemic community within political science and contributed to normative and policy change outside, the goal of transforming the discipline has proved difficult.

 

How gender can transform the social sciences: Innovation and impact

Sawer, Marian, Fiona Jenkins and Karen Downing (Eds) (2020). How gender can transform the social sciences: Innovation and impact.  London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Table of contents

Back to top of page

 

Book chapters

Sawer, Marian (2020). Feminist Political Science. In Dirk Berg-Schlosser, Bertrand Badie, Leonardo Morlino (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Political Science Vol. 1 (pp. 96–113). London: Sage.

Comprising three volumes of contributions from expert authors from around the world, the handbook aims to frame, assess and synthesize research in the field, helping to define and identify its current and future developments. It does so from a truly global and cross-area perspective. Chapters cover a broad range of aspects, from providing a general introduction to exploring important subfields within the discipline. Each chapter is designed to provide a state-of-the-art and comprehensive overview of the topic by incorporating cross-cutting global, interdisciplinary, and, where this applies, gender perspectives.

Further information on publisher’s website.

 

Conferences papers

Donovan, Claire. 2019. ‘Do We Need a Feminist Bibliometrics?’ Centre for Global Higher Education Seminar, Department of Education, University of Oxford, 14 March.

Costa, Monica and Sawer, Marian. 2019. 'Feminist institution-building in the social sciences: Economics and political science compared', 6th European Conference on Politics and Gender, Amsterdam, 4–6 July.

Donovan, Claire. 2019. ‘Do We Need a Feminist Bibliometrics?’ Indian Institute of Management, Kozhikode, Kerela, India, 6 November.

 

Technical reports

Abu-Laban, Yasmeen, Sawer, Marian, & St-Laurent, Mathieu (2018). IPSA gender and diversity monitoring report 2017. Montréal, Canada: The International Political Science Association.

IPSA website description: This survey was conducted by IPSA during late 2017 and early 2018. Of the 55 national political science associations (PSAs), that are affiliated to IPSA, responses were received from 33. Most provided answers to all of the survey questions concerning the breakdown of membership along gender lines and leadership positions taken in relation to initiatives promoting equal opportunity. The results of this third survey will be presented at the 2018 IPSA World Congress in Brisbane.

The 2017 survey asked questions pertaining to gender balance in relation to membership, leadership positions in the PSA, conference participation, and where relevant, in the editorships of journals published through PSAs. 

Information was also sought on whether PSAs had a women’s caucus, a specialist group devoted to the research study of gender and politics, or other working groups pertaining to gender and the profession. Additionally, the 2017 survey sought to uncover practices concerning the promotion of equal opportunities for both women and men. 

The 2017 survey further asked whether information was collected on religion, race/ethnicity, language and where pertinent, Indigeneity (since not all PSAs defined their country as having Indigenous peoples). The survey probed whether PSAs had policies or standing committees dealing with these forms of diversity, and what they viewed as successful practices for promoting equity in relation to these forms of diversity.

Survey responses overall show unevenness, as in some countries issues relating to gender and other forms of diversity have yet to be addressed; moreover, the national collection of information on members of the association/discipline is also uneven. The size of association varies greatly, ranging from 45 (Croatian and Tunisian PSAs) to 10,595 (American PSA). 

Interestingly, we also observe that national PSAs that have undertaken explicit measures in relation to women are more likely to undertake initiatives for other groups, suggesting that attention to gender equity creates a climate in which attention to diversity and equal opportunities expands for political scientists. This finding may serve to stimulate reflection and discussion of what appear to be expanding and reverberating benefits to ensuring that women and other historically marginalized groups are fully included in the profession.

Report at the IPSA website.

 

Reviews

Sawer, Marian (2017). Review of Gendering Poliltics: Feminising Political Science. By Joni Lovenduski. Politics & Gender, 13(1), 174-177.

Full text of article

 

In press

Book chapter: Jenkins, Fiona (2020) Are Equality and Excellence a Happy Marriage of Terms? How Gender Figures in the Business Case for Change, in Kahlert H. (ed.) Inequalities and the Paradigm of Excellence in Academia, forthcoming with Routledge.

Abstract. This chapter offers a critique of the business case for gender equality in the context of academic neo-liberalism. The power of this advocacy narrative is undeniable, but whom does it benefit? What projects does it build and which projects does it neutralise or displace? If gender equality has long implied a levelling process, its proxy, diversity, is now re-imagined as a site of resource-rich differences, and as building, not undermining, excellence. How is this story constructed, what are its presuppositions, and what work does it do in the neo-liberal academy? The chapter examines these questions with particular reference to impacts this narrative may have on certain types of feminist scholarship, arguing that the business case for gender equality promotes ideals of balance, coherence, and social value at odds with more dissonant and critical approaches. This may have particular significance for research in the social sciences, and for feminist approaches that value critical standpoint theory in their methodology. Moreover, the neo-liberal academic conception of excellence as a marketised form of public good is shown to be a problem for certain feminist projects. Marrying excellence to equality, as the business case promises to do, may not be as felicitous as it seems.

 

Forthcoming

Jenkins, Fiona and ?. Special issue of the Journal of Social Philosophy, (details?)

Pearse, Rebecca and Keane, Helen, How feminist knowledge is made in and beyond disciplines. Submitted to Gender & Education May 2021.

Back to top of page