Meeting, talk and text: policy and politics in practice

Freeman, Richard

doi:10.1332/030557319x15526370368821

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[Table 1 here] In other words, I explored 'meeting, talk and text' (Freeman, 2019). The typology presented here draws on all of these methods: I asked participants directly what intersectionality means to them, sought out meanings in their wider narratives and in documents v , and observed understandings at work in meetings and events.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This sector plays a key and at times overlooked role in equality policymaking and implementation, and is engaged in politics, relations of power characterised by competing interests and conflict among and between actors from the sector and those of the state, in which the applied meaning of intersectionality is contested. Shifting theoretical meanings of intersectionality in the international literature (Hancock, 2016) and empirical ones in UK policy (Christoffersen, 2019), suggested a need to further examine meanings of intersectionality in 'practice' (the work of third sector practitioners in social action and interaction (Freeman, 2019) with one another, their constituents, policymakers, and those delivering services in the public sector), to inform intersectionality's growing interpretation by policymakers:…”

Section: The Politics Of Intersectional Practice: Competing Concepts ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The politics of intersectional practice: competing concepts of intersectionality

Christoffersen

2021

Policy &Amp; Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent intensification of both intersecting inequalities and demands for change calls for an intersectional approach which can account for the complexity of factors and processes structuring social relations, risk and outcomes. Yet intersectionality is thought to be a challenging theory to apply, and represents a puzzle to policymakers and practitioners navigating policy area and equality strand silos. Based on the first empirical study internationally to explore how both practitioners and policymakers themselves understand how to operationalise ‘intersectionality’, this article establishes different ways in which the theory of intersectionality is applied in practice. ‘Intersectionality’ is understood and used in five contradicting ways in UK equality organising and policy, an integral insight because some of these advance intersectional justice while others serve to further entrench inequalities. This typology is proposed as a heuristic to analyse the ways in which intersectionality may be institutionalised in other countries and sectors, and their outcomes, discursive and material.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Politics Of Intersectional Practice: Competing Concepts ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The politics of intersectional practice: competing concepts of intersectionality

Christoffersen

2021

Policy &Amp; Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the pervasiveness of meetings in policy and politics (Freeman, 2019), meetings themselves are rarely studied. Instead, meetings are perceived as simple tools for performing tasks (Schwartzman, 1989) or as a means of studying other topics, such as public participation (Escobar, 2015) or the involvement of civil servants and stakeholders in policymaking (Maybin, 2016).…”

Section: Meeting As a Central Practice For Making Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this article, I first refer to policy scholars who reflected on the role of meetings for the purpose of 'doing policy' (Freeman et al, 2011;Freeman, 2019), before delving into Meeting Science (Allen et al, 2015). By drawing on these two strands of literature I identify the following questions: first, how does a meeting make policy?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meeting in brackets: how mental health policy travels through meetings

Thunus

2022

Evidence &Amp; Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Meetings are essential events for the production of a policy. Yet they are largely taken for granted in policy studies: they are perceived as tools for achieving predefined tasks and used as a means of studying other topics, such as public participation. Aims and objectives:I aim to study meetings themselves and to develop the concept of meeting in brackets, which helps understand how meetings produce the policy to which they relate. I focus on a Belgian mental health policy supporting a shift from hospital to community mental healthcare. Methods:Qualitative methods, including direct observation of 77 meetings and interviews, were combined over an eight-year period in order to comprehensively understand the relationship between meetings and policy production. Findings:The Belgian mental health policy gradually emerged from meetings that took place at international, national and local levels. As a result of references made by the participants to previous meetings or to the resulting documents, these meetings gradually formed a web, outside of which the Belgian mental health policy cannot be understood. Discussion and conclusions:The concept of meeting in brackets led to define meetings as communicative events framed by decisions about meeting structure, which I call bracketing decisions. These decisions facilitate a form of communication described as reflexive. Reflexive communication in turn leads to a collective creation: a unique vision of the policy under discussion. Such unique visions are gradually assembled as meetings succeed each other, thus forming a web of meetings which is inherent to policy production.

show abstract

“…In policy studies, this is expressed in a body of work centred on practice, on what it is that policy makers actually do (Bevir and Rhodes 2010, Colebatch et al 2010, Wagenaar 2011). If institutions matter, they are made to matter in the mundane and everyday, in action and work as patterned forms of human behavior, in the 'doings and sayings' of human (and sometimes non-human) actors (Schatzki 2001, Latour 2005Freeman 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%