L9 State feminism and GM

Question 1

GM definition

Answer 1

‘the reorganisation, improvement, development and evaluation of policy processes, so that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at all stages, by the actors normally involved in policy making.’

Question 2

Critiques of GM

Answer 2

limits of feminist bureaucracy, neoliberal discourses, fits in structure without questioning

RHETORICAL BUT WITHOUT SUBSTANCE

Question 3

Key features of GM

Answer 3

1. siloed approach (focus on gender)
   2.transversal (applied to all policy areas)
   3.structural (all cycles of policy)
   4.preventative (starts at the source)

Question 4

Project to promote biking from a gender mainstreaming & budgeting perspective (sex
disaggregated data; awareness event)

Answer 4

collecting data, awareness event, including considerations in budget

Question 5

Integrationist GM & inclusion

Answer 5

integration in existing Policy

Focus on WPA, evidence based

aims for neutral policy making

+effective integration
-technocratic, exclusion of ‘non-experts’, assimilation

Question 6

Agenda setting GM & Reversal

Answer 6

rethinking existing policy from Women’s perspective, aims to include CSO + marginalised

+ recognises elites/non experts
-freezes group identities

Question 7

Transformative GM & Displacement

Answer 7

denaturalises institutionally accepted conceptions of equality by politicizing them/policy aims

+sensitive to diversity/intersectionality
-complex, lack of specificity

Question 8

state response: dual

Answer 8

WM included, frame fits

Question 9

state response: no response

Answer 9

WM not included, frame no fit

Question 10

state response: co-opting

Answer 10

WM included, frame no fit

Question 11

state response:preemtion

Answer 11

WM not included, frame fits

Question 12

alliance: insider

Answer 12

WPA genders, fit WM frame

(strong ally)

Question 13

alliance: marginal

Answer 13

WPA not gendering, fit WM frame

(walk the walk but no talk the talk)

Question 14

alliance: symbolic

Answer 14

WPA not gendering, does not fit WM frame

Question 15

alliance: anti-movement

Answer 15

WPA genders, does not fit WM frame

(nightmare)

Question 16

RNGS found that re: state response over policy

+ over time

Answer 16

50% dual, 17% no response

variety in dual response according to domain

over time there was an increase in dual response, and other options + no response became lowest

Question 17

RNGS found that re: alliance over policy

+ over time

Answer 17

insider highest, symbolic + marginal high, anti-movement low

over time there was an increase + stable at highest level of insider since 1980s, and anti-movement low

Question 18

RNGS concludes that…

Answer 18

46% of dual response cases had an insider WPA - insider enabling, but not necessary

dual explained by = openness of policy context (access) - priority of WM - insider WPA v important when other contexts absent

Question 19

Critiques of GB

Answer 19

lack of transparency

stagnation/limitation to ex-ante approach (technocratic box-ticking)

failure to address neoliberal macroeconomic policy

Question 20

3 phases of GE policy

Answer 20

1. anti discrimination law (1970s) - banning inequalities
2. positive action (1980s) - quota
3. mainstreaming (1990s) - GM

Question 21

Tools of GB

Answer 21

macro (gender-aware alternative budget/medium term economic strategy)

ex-ante (impact assessment, statement/analysis, needs assessment)

concurrent (GP budget incident analysis, GP in resource allocation, G analysis of budget)

ex-post (post impact assessment, gender audit, GP spending review)