Mainstream(ing) Has Never Run Clean, Perhaps Never Can: Gender in the Main/Stream of Development

Jong, Sara de

doi:10.1007/978-1-137-38273-3_7

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These experiences attest to de Jong's emphasis that ‘a realization that the main/stream itself never runs clean and cannot be purely hegemonic might encourage a search for the cracks and interstices where gender mainstreaming could be placed as a productively complicit intervention’ (de Jong, 2016: 102). In terms of their own careers, gender experts emphasize the strategies they deploy in their positions and how the boundaries between the inside and the outside in terms of power are never clear.…”

Section: Circulations: Moving Beyond Co‐optation and Advocacymentioning

confidence: 81%

“…However, from a practical perspective the question is whether a complete disengagement from institutions of power is feasible (Miller and Razavi, 1998; True, 2003). Furthermore, the idea of a binary of co‐optation inside institutions of governance and ideological purity on the outside assumes there is/was a pure and monolithic feminist knowledge and activism outside of institutional frameworks (Calkin, 2015; Eschle and Maiguashca, 2014; de Jong, 2016). This assumption makes it difficult to recognize the complex connections between the history of feminist mobilizations and national and international institutions: behind the ability of women's movements to influence the structure and agenda of the UN system lies a history of intricate contestations, alliances and victories (Antrobus, 2004; Hannan, 2013; Rai, 2004).…”

Section: Politics Of Engagement and Feminist Debatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This narrative echoes feminist works that discuss the divisive outcomes of assuming a strict partition between those inside and outside of international institutions (Eschle and Maiguashca, 2014; Striedinger, 2017). These actors felt a need not only to maintain ties with the outside and draw on them for alliances, but also to convince those on the outside that they were still allies and were doing good work under constrained circumstances (de Jong, 2016).…”

Section: Circulations: Moving Beyond Co‐optation and Advocacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Feminist scholars who discuss the uneasy incorporation of seemingly feminist ideas in states, international development institutions and corporate discourses warn against depoliticization, instrumentalization and co‐optation, a process that undermines egalitarian and liberating possibilities (Fraser, 2009; McRobbie, 2009; Mukhopadhyay, 2016). Yet there is also a burgeoning literature that problematizes the binary of co‐optation inside and purity of feminism outside and in the past (de Jong, 2016; Prügl, 2009; Rao and Sandler, 2016; True and Parisi, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Politics of Engagement: Gender Expertise and International Governance

Altan‐Olcay¹

2020

Development and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article studies the experiences of gender experts in international institutions of governance and examines their interactions with multiple actors in the governance system as they negotiate their authority to act as experts. Moving beyond binaries, such as those on the inside of hegemonic institutions versus those on the outside, or co‐optation versus activism, the analysis uses processes of instrumentalization as a vantage point to lay out the multiple paths emerging in these politics of engagement. The article frames politics of engagement in terms of micropolitical tensions, ambivalences and contradictions that unfold in these interactions. It first argues that the boundaries that exist between inside and outside institutions are not clear cut because actors circulate between them. The study shows how gender experts instrumentalize their own life and career trajectories, navigating between advocacy and governance, to enhance their power in current institutional settings. It then focuses on instrumentalist discourses and traces their emergence in unequal negotiations. It demonstrates how gender experts can become part of the processes that they also critique. Finally, the study analyses strategies in which experts instrumentalize institutional inequalities to their advantage to produce diverse political possibilities with open‐ended outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Circulations: Moving Beyond Co‐optation and Advocacymentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Politics Of Engagement and Feminist Debatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Circulations: Moving Beyond Co‐optation and Advocacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Politics of Engagement: Gender Expertise and International Governance

Altan‐Olcay¹

2020

Development and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The question is how to give space to the so-called grey texts (advocacy documents, videos, personal reflections, blog posts, reports and so on) of gender experts working in NGOs and social movements that are critical of gender and development policy and give insights into how international development is being practiced. There is a new body of literature that looks at the behind-the-scenes politics of the insider knowledge and negotiations in the government and UN arena in what has been called the 'velvet' triangle to reach agreements (Ferguson, 2015;de Jong, 2016). The velvet triangle refers to the 'patterned dance of needy bureaucrats, dedicated activists and eager academics who are active at national and international levels and frequently linked to each other through informal as well as formal processes' (Woodward, 2012, p. 145).…”

Section: Dilemma Two: Politics Of Engagement In Gendered Knowledgesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Dilemmas in International Development Studies

Harcourt

2016

Eur J Dev Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article looks at how recent thinking on gender has led to discussions on how development itself is powerfully gendered, with important implications for international development studies. The essay is based on reflections from editing two handbooks for Palgrave and Oxford University Press. It describes how feminist critiques of gender can create dilemmas in international development studies and practices by examining five issues. These include the engagement of theory and practice-based knowledge, development as transformative politics, inter-sectionality issues and the inter-section with sustainability issues. The author concludes that radical theoretical agendas require new methodologies that bridge the divide between practice-based analysis and 'global' theory, on the basis of research in high-income countries. The challenge here is to learn from theory and research in the Global South, through those who are breaking new ground from the perspectives of living and working in the South.Cet article s'intéresse à la manière dont des points de vue récents sur les différents genres humains ont pu mener à des débats. Ces débats portent sur la manière dont le développement lui-même est, de manière signifiante, différent selon le sexe, ce qui inclus des conséquences importantes pour les études en matière de développement international. Cet article est fondé sur les réflexions de deux éditions de manuels : Palgrave et Oxford University Press. Il décrit la manière dont les critiques féministes sur l'étude des genres peuvent créer des dilemmes sur l'étude et la pratique du développement international, en examinant cinq points clés. Parmi ces derniers on peut retrouver l'engagement du savoir fondé sur la théorie et la pratique ; le développement comme une politique transformative ; des questions d'intersectionalité, et leur intersection avec des problématiques de durabilité. L'auteur conclut en disant que les agendas théorétiques radicaux nécessitent des nouvelles méthodologies qui puissent rapprocher la division entre l'analyse basée sur la pratique et la théorie dite "globale", basée sur des études sur les pays à revenus élevés. Ici, le défi consiste alors à en apprendre davantage sur la théorie et les recherches conduites dans le Sud global, à travers les perspectives des innovateurs qui y habitent et y travaillent.

show abstract

Feminist International Political Economy in Europe

Altan‐Olcay

2022

Feminist IR in Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter reviews the contributions feminist scholars situated in Europe have made to international political economy. It discusses three main areas of influence in the form of critique of capitalism and neoliberalism; debates on international development discourses, governance, and programming; and the conceptual connections established between macroeconomic decision-making and gendered everyday experiences. It also highlights the limits of the scholarship in the form of the hegemony of English language production, the limits brought by the unique positionality of being situated in the European continent, and the restrictions in the dialogue with the broader IPE field.

show abstract

Mainstream(ing) Has Never Run Clean, Perhaps Never Can: Gender in the Main/Stream of Development

Cited by 9 publications

References 24 publications

Politics of Engagement: Gender Expertise and International Governance

Politics of Engagement: Gender Expertise and International Governance

Gender Dilemmas in International Development Studies

Feminist International Political Economy in Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About