Looking local, finding global: paradoxes of gender mainstreaming in the Scottish Executive

Abstract

Gender mainstreaming is portrayed as the next step in the global gender equality landscape and has been widely adopted internationally in a variety of governments and political organisations. However, the radical potential of gender mainstreaming to transform organisations has not been fulfilled. In this article, I explore three paradoxes which are inherent in the intent, implementation and institutionalisation of gender mainstreaming. I argue that we cannot fully understand these global paradoxes without a better understanding of local experiences which underpin them in the everyday working lives of those people involved in advocating gender mainstreaming. Using results from an institutional ethnography of the implementation of the Gender Equality Duty by gender mainstreaming advocates in the Scottish Executive, I show that bureaucratic practices, fossilised norms and the continued reliance on soft measures to promote mainstreaming are reflections at the local level of barriers to the advancement of global gender mainstreaming. By taking seriously the local practices and knowledge of those who do gender mainstreaming, we can reflect on the inherent tensions within gender mainstreaming that prohibit its ability to truly transform the gender landscape at both the local and global level.

Gender mainstreaming and policy coherence for development: Unintended gender consequences and EU policy

“…They argue, however, that there are still persistent obstacles to effective implementation, notably: 'inadequate allocation of human and financial resources, evaporation of policy commitments at the level of programme implementation, limited gender competence among staff members, absence of political leadership and political will as well as lack of strong accountability mechanisms' (Karadenizli, 2007). Studies by academics and practitioners support the assertion that commitments to gender equality evaporate before development policy hits the ground (Arts, 2006;Francisco, 2003;Kantola, 2010;Pollack & Hafner-Burton, 2010;Squires, 2007;True, 2009;WIDE, 2011;Wittman, 2010), and interviews with NGO representatives and Commission officials confirm the view that limited resources and limited knowledge and understanding constitute an impediment to implementation. NGOs have argued that there is an even more fundamental reason why development policy commitments to gender equality are not achieving this goal, and this is the incompatibility of gender equality with an approach to development which is centred around trade liberalisation.…”

“…The theoretical literature which informs this article and into which it feeds comprises studies of gender mainstreaming, many of which are concerned with why mainstreaming has failed to realise its radical potential (Beveridge, Nott, & Stephen, 2000;European Women's Lobby, 2010;Porter & Sweetman, 2005;Rao & Kellner, 2005;Squires, 2007;Stratigaki, 2005;Wittman, 2010;Woodward, 2008); and a separate, partially overlapping, literature on horizontal policy integration, which includes studies of policy coherence for development, environmental policy integration, sustainability and gender mainstreaming. The former is informed by, and contributes to, gender theory more broadly, and engages with theories of gender and organisations, as well as feminist institutionalism.…”

“…Many authors draw attention to the contradiction between gender mainstreaming as a transformative, agendasetting idea with radical feminist potential and gender mainstreaming as an integrationist policy practice (Porter & Sweetman, 2005;Stratigaki, 2005;Wittman, 2010). Associated with these two versions of gender mainstreaming are two modes of implementation: an expert-bureaucratic mode, often associated with the integrationist version; and a participatorydemocratic mode, often associated with the agenda-setting version (Beveridge et al, 2000;Squires, 2007).…”

“…The paradoxes of gender mainstreaming implementation identified by Wittman (2010) include the fact that, in order to succeed, gender mainstreaming must be taken out of the hands of its advocates and experts, and responsibility passed to those who have neither the passion nor the expertise. There is also always a contradiction when feminist ideas are adopted or co-opted by the mainstream (Cornwall, 2007).…”

Horizontal policy coordination and gender mainstreaming: The case of the European Union's Global Approach to Migration and Mobility

“…Much of the extensive literature on gender mainstreaming focuses on why mainstreaming has failed to realise its radical potential (Beveridge et al, 2000;European Women's Lobby, 2010;Porter & Sweetman, 2005;Rao & Kellner, 2005;Squires, 2007;Stratigaki, 2005;Wittman, 2010;Woodward, 2008). Many authors draw attention to the contradiction between gender mainstreaming as a transformative, agenda-setting idea with radical feminist potential and gender mainstreaming as an integrationist policy practice (Porter & Sweetman, 2005;Stratigaki, 2005;Wittman, 2010;Zalewski, 2010).…”