Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T08:32:10.812Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparing Political Institutions: Revealing the Gendered “Logic of Appropriateness”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2006

Louise Chappell
Louise Chappell
Affiliation:
University of Sydney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Why develop a comparative politics of gender? As the critical perspectives in this section demonstrate, there are many answers to this question. I would like to focus here on two reasons: first, for gaining a deeper understanding of the operations of political institutions, and second, for explaining the relationship between these institutions and social actors, including those pursuing a gender equality agenda. To be specific, this essay argues not just for a comparative politics of gender but for a comparative politics of gender and institutions. The discussion focuses on the possibility of using neo-institutionalist theory, especially in relation to its normative and dynamic understanding of institutions, to gain a deeper understanding of the way that gender shapes political institutions and also, through interaction with social actors, including feminists, the way gender norms can be disrupted to open new spaces for these actors.

Type
CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON GENDER AND POLITICS
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , June 2006 , pp. 223 - 235
Copyright
© 2006 The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acker, Joan. 1992. “From Sex Roles to Gendered Institutions.” Contemporary Sociology 21 (5): 565–69.Google Scholar
Banaszak, Lee Ann. 1996. Why Movements Succeed or Fail: Opportunities, Culture and the Struggle for Woman Suffrage. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Banaszak, Lee Ann, Karen Beckwith, and Dieter Rucht, eds. 2003. Women's Movements Facing the Reconfigured State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beckwith, Karen. 2000. “Beyond Compare? Women's Movements in Comparative Perspective.” European Journal of Political Research 37 (4): 31–68.Google Scholar
Beckwith, Karen. 2005. “A Common Language of Gender?” Politics & Gender 1 (March): 128–37.Google Scholar
Burton, Clare. 1991. The Promise and the Price: The Struggle for Equal Opportunity in Women's Employment. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Campbell, John L. 2005. “Where Do We Stand? Common Mechanisms in Organizations and Social Movement Research.” In Social Movements and Organization Theory, ed. Doug McAdam, Gerald F. Davis, W. Richard Scott, and Mayer Zald. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 41–68.
Chappell, Louise. 2002a. Gendering Government: Feminist Engagement with the State in Australia and Canada. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Chappell, Louise. 2002b. “The ‘Femocrat’ Strategy: Expanding the Repertoire of Feminist Activists.” In Women, Politics and Change, ed. Karen Ross. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chappell, Louise. 2006. “ ‘Women's Interests’ as ‘Women's Rights’: Developments at the UN Criminal Tribunals and the International Criminal Court.” In The Politics of Women's Interests: New Comparative Perspectives, ed. Louise Chappell and Lisa Hill. London: Routledge.
Charlesworth, Hilary. 2005. “Not Waving but Drowning: Gender Mainstreaming and Human Rights in the United Nations.” Harvard Human Rights Journal 18 (1): 1–18.Google Scholar
Childs, Sarah. 2001. “In Her Own Words: New Labour Women and the Substantive Representation of Women.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 3 (2): 171–90.Google Scholar
Davis, Gerald F., Doug McAdam, W. Richard Scott, and Mayer Zald, eds. 2005. Social Movements and Organization Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dobrowolsky, Alexandra. 2003. “Women's Constitutional Organizing Across Time and Space.” In Women's Movements Facing the Reconfigured State, ed. Lee Ann Banaszak, Karen Beckwith, and Dieter Rucht. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 114–40.
Dobrowolsky, Alexandra, and Vivien Hart, eds. 2003. Women Making Constitutions: New Politics and Comparative Perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Eisenstein, Hester. 1996. Inside Agitators: Australian Femocrats and the State. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Findlay, Sue. 1987. “ ‘Facing the State’: The Politics of the Women's Movement Reconsidered.” In Feminism and Political Economy, ed. H. Maroney and M. Luxton. Toronto: Methuen.
Freeman, Marsha. 1999. “International Institutions and Gendered Justice.” Journal of International Affairs 52 (Spring): 513–32.Google Scholar
Friedman, Elisabeth Jay. 2003. “Gendering the Agenda: The Impact of the Transnational Women's Rights Movement at the UN Conferences of the 1990s.” Women's Studies International Forum 26 (4): 313–31.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Anne. 1997. “Ending the Marginalisation: Strategies for Incorporating Women into the UN Human Rights System.” Human Rights Quarterly 19 (2): 283–332.Google Scholar
Gelb, Joyce. 2003. Gender Policies in Japan and the United States: Comparing Women's Movements, Rights and Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Geller-Schwartz, Linda. 1995. “An Array of Agencies: Feminism and the State in Canada.” In Comparative State Feminism, ed. Dorothy McBride Stetson and Amy G. Mazur. New York: Sage.
Hall, Peter. 1986. Governing the Economy: The Politics of State Intervention in Britain and France. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hawkesworth, Mary. 2003. “Congressional Enactments of Race-Gender: Toward a Theory of Raced-Gendered Institutions.” American Political Science Review 97 (4): 1214–29.Google Scholar
Katzenstein, Mary Fainsod. 1998. Faithful and Fearless: Moving Feminist Protest inside the Church and Military. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kernaghan, Kenneth. 1985. “Representative and Responsive Bureaucracy.” In Regional Responsiveness and the National Administrative State, ed. Peter Aucoin. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Kingdon, John. 2003. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 3d ed. New York: Longman.
Lovenduski, Joni. 1998. “Gendering Research in Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 1: 333–56.Google Scholar
March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1989. Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York: Free Press.
McAdam, Doug, and W. Richard Scott. 2005. “Organizations and Movements.” In Social Movements and Organization Theory, ed. Doug McAdam, Gerald F. Davis, W. Richard Scott, and Mayer Zald. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 4–40.
Miller, J. D. B. 1964. Australian Government and Politics: An Introductory Survey. 3d ed. London: Gerald Duckworth.
Peters, B. Guy. 1999. Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism. London: Pinter.
Phillips, Anne. 1998. The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Research Network on Gender, and the State (RNGS). 2005. RNGS Project Description. http://libarts.wsu.edu/polisci/rngs/pdf/project505.pdf (October 28, 2005).
Savage, Mike, and Anne Witz, eds. 1992. Gender and Bureaucracy. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sawer, Marian. 1990. Sisters in Suits: Women and Public Policy in Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Sawer, Marian. 2004. “Gender Equality in the Age of Governing for the Mainstream.” In The Role of National Mechanisms in Promoting Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women: Achievements, Gaps and Challenges. Rome: United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW).
Skocpol, Theda. 1985. “Bringing the State Back In: Strategies and Analysis of Current Research.” In Bringing the State Back In, ed. Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steinmo, Sven, Kathleen Thelen, and Frank Longstreth, eds. 1992. Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stivers, Camilla. 1993. Gender Images in Public Administration: Legitimacy and the Administrative State. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Thelen, Kathleen, and Sven Steinmo. 1992. “Institutionalism in Comparative Politics.” In Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, ed. Sven Steinmo, Kathleen Thelen, and Frank Longstreth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–32.
Vickers, Jill. 1994. “Why Should Women Care About Federalism?” In Canada: The State of the Federation, ed. Janet Hierbert. Kingston: Queens School of Public Policy.
Vickers, Jill. 2006. “The Problem with Interests: Making Political Claims for ‘Women.’” In The Politics of Women's Interests: New Comparative Perspectives, ed. Louise Chappell and Lisa Hill. London: Routledge.