Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Policy studies within a feminist frame

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Feminist scholarship seeks to identify and purge androcentric bias in traditional disciplines, to reshape dominant paradigms so that women's needs, interests, activities, and concerns can be analyzed and understood systematically, and to develop research methodologies that are neither gender-biased nor gender-blind. This essay provides an overview of feminist scholarship in the field of policy studies. In particular, it considers feminist studies of substantive policy domains and of the policy-making process, as well as feminist critiques of research paradigms, methods, and results that have structured policy studies for the past 50 years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramovitz, Mimi (1988).Regulating the Lives of Women. Boston: South End Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackelsberg, Martha (1992). ‘Feminist analyses of policy,’Comparative Politics 24: 477–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, Katherine (1915).Feminism in Germany and Scandinavia. New York: Henry Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bologh, R. W. (1990).Love or Greatness: Max Weber and Masculine Thinking: A Feminist Inquiry. London: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boneparth, Ellen, ed. (1982a).Women, Power and Policy. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boneparth, Ellen (1982b). ‘A framework for policy analysis,’ in Ellen Boneparth, ed.,Women, Power and Policy. New York: Pergamon, pp. 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boneparth, Ellen and Emily Stoper (1988).Women, Power and Policy: Toward the Year 2000. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Wendy (1988).Manhood and Politics. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R. W. (1987).Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, Margaret, David Ahern and Gertrude Steuernagel (1994).Women and Public Policy: A Revolution in Progress. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornell, Drucilla (1991).Beyond Accommodation: Ethical Feminism, Deconstruction and the Law. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, Irene, ed. (1983).Families, Politics, and Public Policy. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duerst-Lahti, Georgia and Rita Mae Kelly, eds. (1995).Gender, Power, Leadership, and Governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durst, Samantha and Ryan Rusek (1993). ‘Different genders, different votes? An examination of voting behavior in the U.S. House of Representatives,’ a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Washington, D.C., September 2–5.

  • Eisenstein, Hester (1991).Gender Shock: How Australian Feminists Make the System Work and What American Women Can Learn From Them. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Sarah and Nelson, Barbara (1989).Wage Justice: Comparable Worth and the Paradox of Technocratic Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Kathy (1984).The Feminist Case Against Bureaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flammang, Janet (1985). ‘Female officials in the feminist capital: The case of Santa Clara County,’Western Political Quarterly 38: 94–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, Nancy (1989).Unruly Practices. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, Nancy (1991). ‘Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracies,’Social Text 26: 56–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Jo (1975).Women: A Feminist Perspective. Palo Alto, CA.: Mayfield Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Jo (1979).Women: A Feminist Perspective. 2nd ed., Palo Alto, CA.: Mayfield Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Jo (1982). ‘Women and Public Policy: An Overview,’ in Ellen Boneparth, ed.,Women, Power and Policy. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Jo (1989).Women: A Feminist Perspective. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co, 4th ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frug, Mary Jo (1992).Postmodern Legal Feminism. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehlen, Frieda L. (1977). ‘Women members of Congress: A distinctive role’ in Marianne Githens and Jewell Prestage, eds.,A Portrait of Marginality. New York: McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelb, Joyce and Marian Lief Palley (1982).Women and Public Policies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelb, Joyce and Marian Lief Palley (1987).Women and Public Policies. Princeton: Princeton University Press, rev. ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, Judith (1993).Fundamental Feminism: Contesting the Core Concepts of Feminist Theory. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guy, Mary Ellen, ed. (1992).Men and Women of the States. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna (1991). ‘Gender for a Marxist dictionary: The sexual politics of a word,’ in herSymians, Cyborgs, and Women. New York: Routldege.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, Sandra (1986).The Science Question in Feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, Sandra (1991).Whose Science, Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, Sandra (1992). ‘After the neutrality ideal: Science, politics, and strong objectivity,’Social Research 59 (3): 567–587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkesworth, M. E. (1985). ‘Workfare and the imposition of discipline,’Social Theory and Practice 11 (2): 163–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkesworth, M. E. (1990).Beyond Oppression: Feminist Theory and Political Strategy. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkesworth, M. E. (1991). ‘From objectivity to objectification: Feminist objections,’Annals of Scholarship 8 (3/4): 451–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, David (1982). ‘Women state legislators and party voting on the E.R.A.,’Social Science Quarterly 64: 318–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaggar, Alison (1983).Feminist Politics and Human Nature. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allenheld.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaggar, Alison and Paula Rothenberg (1993).Feminist Frameworks. New York: McGraw Hill, 3rd ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Kathleen B. and Anna Jonasdottir, eds. (1988).The Political Interests of Gender: Developing Theory and Research with a Feminist Face. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantor, Rosabeth M. (1977).Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, Gisela (1992).Contemporary Western European Feminism. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kathlene, Lyn (1995). ‘Position power versus gender power: Who holds the floor?’ in Georgia Duerst-Lahti and Rita Mae Kelly, eds.,Gender, Power, Leadership and Governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay, Herna Hill (1974).Sex Based Discrimination. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co., 3rd ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leader, Susan Gilbert (1977). ‘The policy impact of elected women officials,’ in Louis Maisel and Joseph Cooper, eds.,The Impact of the Electoral Process. Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino, Helen (1990).Science As Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren, J. Ralph and Nadine Taub (1988).Sex Discrimination. St. Paul, MN.: West Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovenduski, Joni (1986).Women and European Politics: Contemporary Feminism and Public Policy. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, Catharine (1979).The Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, Catharine (1987).Feminism Unmodified. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, Catharine (1993).Only Words. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minow, Martha (1990).Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion and American Law. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, Chantal (1992). ‘Feminism, citizenship, and radical democratic politics,’ in Judith Butler and Joan Scott, eds.,Feminists Theorize the Political. New York: Routledge, pp. 369–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumby, Dennis K. and Linda L. Putnam (1992). ‘The politics of emotion: A feminist reading of bounded rationality,’Academy of Management Review 17 (3): 465–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, Barbara (1984). ‘Women's poverty and women's citizenship: Some political consequences of economic marginality,’Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 10 (2): 209–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, Meredith Ann (1995). ‘The gendered nature of Lowi's typology: Or who would guess you could find gender here?’ in Georgia Duerst-Lahti and Rita Mae Kelly, eds.,Gender, Power, Leadership, and Governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhode, Deborah (1989).Justice and Gender. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinehart, Sue Tolleson (1992).Gender Consciousness and Politics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina (1974).Women and Social Policy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapiro, Virginia (1986). ‘The gender basis of American social policy,’Political Science Quarterly 101 (2): 221–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage, A. and Witz, M. (1992). ‘The gender of organizations,’ in theirGender and Bureaucracy. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, Anne and Helen Ingram (1993). ‘Social constructions of target populations: Implications of politics and policy,’American Political Science Review 87 (2): 332–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, Hilda (1984).Women Work their Way to the Bottom: The Feminization of Poverty. Boston: Pandora Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, Joan (1986). ‘Gender: A useful category for historical analysis,’American Historical Review 91 (5): 1053–1075.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda J. Gage, eds. ([1881] 1969)The History of Women's Suffrage. New York: Arno Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stetson, Dorothy McBride (1991).Women's Rights in the U.S.A.: Policy Debates and Gender Roles. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiehm, Judith Hicks (1994). ‘Different is not opposite,’ a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Western Political Science Association. Albuquerque, NM, March 10–13.

  • Stivers, Camilla (1993).Gender Images in Public Administration: Legitimacy and the Administrative State. Newbury Park, CA.: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamerius, Karin L. (1995). ‘Sex, gender, and leadership in the representation of women,’ in Georgia Duerst-Lahti and Rita Mae Kelly, eds.Gender, Power, Leadership and Governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, Sue (1989). ‘Voting patterns in the California Assembly: The role of gender,’Women and Politics 9: 45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, Joan (1993). ‘Social welfare policy and the ethic of care,’ a paper presented at the Feminist Ethics and Social Policy Conference, University of Pittsburgh, November 5–7.

  • Vianello, Mino, Renata Siemienska, Natalia Darmian, Eugen Lupri, Enzo D'Arcangelo and Sergio Bolasco (1990).Gender Inequality: A Comparative Study of Discrimination and Participation. Newberry Park, CA.: Sage Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walby, Sylvia (1986).Patriarchy at Work. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman, Lenore (1985).The Divorce Revolution: The Unexpected Social and Economic Consequences for Women and Children in America. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winston, Kenneth and Mary Jo Bane (1993).Gender and Public Policy. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, Iris (1990).Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hawkesworth, M. Policy studies within a feminist frame. Policy Sci 27, 97–118 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999883

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999883

Keywords

Navigation