organising for a more diverse political science: australia and new zealand

Abstract

Until the 1970s neither Australian nor New Zealand political studies gave much attention to issues of diversity. This reflected both the makeup of the profession and the majoritarian nature of the political system that was the major object of its attention. We argue that feminist organising on both sides of the Tasman had led to greater pluralism within the discipline. Using a comparative institutional approach, we trace the relationship between organising within the professional associations and the acceptance of greater diversity of approach and standpoint. We find, however, that while both countries' Associations have become somewhat more inclusive, a hierarchy of knowledge still exists that may prove an obstacle to feminist and Indigenous political scientists joining discipline-based departments and programs.

Beyond the “Add and Stir” Approach: Indigenizing Comprehensive Exam Reading Lists in Canadian Political Science

“…This proportion is roughly the same when we look at all authors of Indigenous politics readings on the list, where 47 per cent of the authors identified as Indigenous. This number is consistent with some of the scholarship beyond the Canadian context that suggests Indigenous scholars and faculty are underrepresented in political science (see, for example, Sanders, 2015; Sawers and Curtin, 2016). Taken together, these findings suggest that when it comes to the assignment of “canonical” readings on Indigenous politics in the Canadian field, women and Indigenous scholars continue to be marginalized and undercited.…”

“…Although more efforts have been undertaken to incorporate Maori scholarship in political science textbooks and journals in New Zealand, Indigenous peoples also remain underrepresented in political science departments across New Zealand. As Sawer and Curtin (2016: 452) point out, many Maori political scientists work in Maori studies departments, suggesting that “politics departments may be culturally chilly for Indigenous peoples.”…”

Women in the Profession: An Update on the Gendered Composition of the Discipline and Political Science Departments in the UK

“…Since our survey, there has been a significant growth in the literature examining the gendered nature of political science across a variety of regional contexts, including the UK (Allen and Savigny, 2016; Awesti et al, 2016; Briggs and Harrison, 2015; Savigny, 2014; Williams et al, 2015), the US (Mitchell et al, 2013; Mitchell and Hesli, 2013; Mitchell and Martin, 2018; Monroe et al, 2014), Europe (Abels and Woods, 2015; Ballen et al, 2018; Bates and Savigny, 2015b; Elizondo, 2015; Kantola, 2015), Australia and New Zealand (Johnson, 2014; Sawer and Curtin, 2016) and Latin America (Rocha Carpiuc, 2016). Despite formal equality policies and measures designed to address structural inequalities, this research highlights the continued barriers women face within political science departments as well as wider practices within academia that can serve to disadvantage women.…”

Hard Work and You Can’t Get It: An International Comparative Analysis of Gender, Career Aspirations, and Preparedness Among Politics and International Relations PhD Students

“…Nevertheless, there are ongoing “gendering processes among PhD students” in political science departments that result from the gendered organization of graduate schools (Kantola 2008). Gender differences persist within the discipline and the broader university systems in both Australia and Canada (Canadian Political Science Association, Diversity Task Force 2012; Sawer and Curtin 2016). Men still outnumber women at senior levels, and women face challenges that include gaining access to informal networks, limits to mobility to relocate for an academic position, and combining academic careers with care responsibilities that tend to fall disproportionately to them, as witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic (Minello, Martucci, and Manzo 2021; Rutledge-Prior and Casey 2023).…”