Feminist Discursive Institutionalism - what's discursive about it? (original) (raw)
Related papers
This paper is intended to contribute to ongoing discussions about the desirability, or undesirability, of an alliance between feminists involved in the study of politics and the 'new institutionalisms' (Mackay and Meier 2003; Mackay, Krook and Kenny 2010; Krook and Mackay 2010). In developing our position we would like to make clear that we do not see ourselves as involved in marking out 'our turf'. Rather, we want to suggest that methodologies matter politically and therefore that theoretical debates ought to be considered at this level-that is, they ought to be considered in terms of the forms of politics they make possible. Because of our conviction that 'institutionalisms' of whatever kind impose rigidities on the political landscape in ways that hamper progressive politics, we are uneasy about recommendations that feminists makes alliances with the new institutionalisms. This paper lays out, in a preliminary form, political reasons for steering clear of all 'institutionalisms' as modes of explanation along with other conventional political science paradigms.
Staking the Frame of a Feminist Discursive Institutionalism
Politics & Gender, 2009
This essay proposes an integrated discursive institutionalism as a framework for feminist political analysis. Both historical institutionalism and discourse analysis have merits and limitations, and both perspectives complement each other and offer solutions to their respective deficiencies. Traditionally there has been a strong demarcation between the two perspectives. A common way to divide both approaches is between investigating “causal regularities” and “understanding meaning.” I argue that a feminist institutionalism needs to deconstruct the dichotomy of causal explanation versus meaning and description and to reformulate the concept of causality. There is no adequate explanation without “meaning,” and the stretching of institutionalism toward “ideas” exemplifies this inadequacy
Feminist Institutionalism: An Effective Collaboration of New Institutionalism and Feminist Theories
In this study, it is intended to make a theoretical and a conceptual discussion in political science in the context of gender issues. Political science is a gender-blind discipline that ignores gender issues. Even though some feminist theories take part in the mainstream studies, they are evaluated as a marginalized category. One of the most important contributions of this study is the inclusion of feminist theories within the mainstream political studies through new institutionalism. In this study, it is intended to make a conceptual analysis of feminist institutionalism that is an effective cooperation of new institutionalism and feminist theories. This theoretical combination of feminist institutionalism is a brand-new issue in political science discipline. The discussion on that issue has been involved recently in political science literature. Therefore, as a contribution for the brand-new discussion, this study intends to make a conceptual analysis of feminist theory and new institutional approaches and then present a model of feminist institutionalism as combining both new institutionalism and feminist theories within the theoretical categorization.
Taking Discourse Seriously: Discursive Institutionalism and Post-structuralist Discourse Theory
Political Studies, 2013
The article seeks to add to the growing contribution of discursive approaches to the study of political institutions by analysing the possibilities for cross-fertilisation between discursive institutionalism and post-structuralist discourse theory. Analysing Vivien Schmidt's version of discursive institutionalism, it argues that Schmidt's concept of discourse results in a model of explanation of institutional change that overlooks questions about the relations between power, politics and discourse. It further argues that while post-structural discourse theory has made important contributions to the understanding of the discursive nature of social practices, it has so far failed fully to take on board the institutional dimension of politics. It concludes that an integration of Schmidt's insights on discursive institutionalism with post-structuralist discourse theory allows a more rounded analysis of the political dimension of institutions and of the institutional dimension of politics, as well as a better understanding of institutional change. To illustrate our arguments we draw on our own research to analyse the relations between discourse and institutions in the 2002 presidential electoral campaign in Brazil and in Argentina's poverty reduction policies in the 1990s.
Feminist Relational Discourse Analysis: putting the personal in the political in feminist research
Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2017
Discourse analysis is a useful and flexible method for exploring power and identity. While there are many ways of doing discourse analysis, all agree that discourse is the central site of identity construction. However, recent feminist concerns over power, agency, and resistance have drawn attention to the absence of participants' first-hand experiences within broad discursive accounts (Lafrance & McKenzie-Mohr, 2014; Saukko, 2008). For those with an interest in power relations, such as feminist researchers, this is a problematic silence which renders the personal functions of discourse invisible. In this paper, we argue that the 'personal' and 'political' are inextricable, and make a case for putting the 'personal' into broader discursive frameworks of understanding. Further, we assert that feminist research seeking to account for identity must much more explicitly aim to capture this interplay. To this end we argue that voice is the key site of meaning where this interplay can be captured, but that no clear analytical framework currently exists for producing such an account. In response, we propose Feminist Relational Discourse Analysis (FRDA) as a voice-centered analytical approach for engaging with experience and discourse in talk. We then set out clear guidance on how to do FRDA, as applied in the context of women working in UK policing. Finally, we conclude that by prioritizing voice, FRDA invites new and politicized feminist readings of power, agency, and resistance, where the voices of participants remain central to the discursive accounts of researchers.
Resisting gendered change: Feminist institutionalism and critical actors
Feminist institutionalism is concerned with the 'rules of the game' in political institutions. It is interested to explore how institutions create gender-just conditions in terms of the policies and actions they undertake and the make-up of the elected representatives they contain. It also has a growing interest in how institutions can resist or obstruct positive gendered change. It is argued here that employing the concept of 'critical actors' alongside a feminist institutionalist framework can further our understanding of why some institutions resist change. Using the example of abortion legislation in Northern Ireland, this article illustrates how the literatures on feminist institutionalism and critical actors can, when combined, help to build a fuller narrative of why gendered policy change does not happen.