ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

Failed State Feminism

Gender
Institutions
Policy Analysis
Jurisprudence
Hege Skjeie
Universitetet i Oslo
Cathrine Holst
Universitetet i Oslo
Hege Skjeie
Universitetet i Oslo
Mari Teigen
Institute for Social Research, Oslo

Abstract

Paper proposal: Failing State Feminism Hege Skjeie, Cathrine Holst, Mari Teigen The proposed paper will discuss the fate of knowledge based gender+ policy development, with examples drawn from a recent (2010-2012) governmental expert commission in Norway, where we all participated. The theoretical and empirical work of this commission was supplemented by three practical attempts to strengthen gender + perspectives in actual public policy: A. A proposal to strengthen the protection against intersectional discrimination through the provision of explicit legal bans. This was accompanied by a demand for a reform of the low threshold system of law supervision (ombud and tribunal), so that actual sanctions can be located at this level. B. A proposal to develop competence to actually implement gender+ mainstreaming by building a national bureaucratic structure in charge of mainstreaming equality (all protected strands) within state and municipal sectors. C. A proposal to implement the positive duties of employers to promote equality in the work place. These activity duties follow from the equality legislation, but are not enforced. The commission suggested a new tripartite cooperation scheme, i.e between the government and labor/employer organisations. The commission’s report has been hailed across decision making elites and civil society groups for its thoroughness in providing a new knowledge platform for gender+ policy making. But very little actual policy making has so far followed. We interpret the policy process as a case of failing state feminism. Why is this so? Three major themes will be adressed: • the ambivalent role of expertise in “state feminist” policy agency; • the administration overload attached to equality policy’s main tool; i.e. “mainstreaming”, • the threat that “judicialisation” discourses may pose to the promotion of effective protection against discrimination In particular, we are interested in how these very different ideas/discourses might interwine to prevent fact based development of gender + public policy.