Women, Gender, and Politics

N15 - Gender, Diversity and Federalism

Date: Jun 1 | Time: 08:45am to 10:15am | Location: Classroom - CL 417 Room ID:15740

Chair/Président/Présidente : Peter (Jay) Smith (Athabasca University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Cheryl Collier (University of Windsor)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Joan Grace (Univesity of Winnipeg)

Session Abstract: Over the years, a growing body of research has begun to examine the impact of federalism and federal arrangements (institutions, ideas and practices) on women’s movements, gender-focussed policies, and democratic access to decision-making bodies (e.g. Teghtsoonian 1992; Chappell 2002; Haussman, Sawer and Vickers 2010). The central question guiding much of this research was whether or not federalism was “good for women” and women’s movement efforts to increase equality in both process and outcomes from the state. The papers in this panel seek to build upon this important research, delving deeper to understand how “gender and federalism” interact and how these interactions might increase state responsiveness in intersectional ways including attention to race, ethnic, religious and sex/gender minority perspectives. How have formal and informal federalizing changes in power distributions, including from changes to state architecture in post-conflict contexts, impacted women’s efforts to increase their participation and representation in governance and their (in)ability to hold governments accountable? The papers in this panel will use gender and diversity as key analytic variables to widen the scope of the gender/federalism research and to provide new insights from the experiences of women and other marginalized groups in federations around the world. As such, they provide a basis for new approaches to comparative analysis to help us better understand how women and other marginalized groups can perhaps improve their approaches to policy-making in federal states.

Women’s Movements in the Age of Decentralization: Canada and the United States in Comparison: Cheryl Collier (University of Windsor)
Abstract: Second-wave North American women’s movements established national groups to lobby the state for women’s equality in the 1970s. The Canadian National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC), and the American National Organization for Women (NOW), worked to mobilize women and pressure national governments for universal child care, reproductive rights, and freedom from violence against women, among other ‘women’s issues’. Yet, even though these groups worked to establish national level changes, the federal governments in both countries took similar paths toward downloading social program responsibility to the meso-levels and were less willing to lead in social program innovation. This paper examines how national women’s movements/groups have adapted (or not) to this decentralization over time. In Canada, one reason suggested for the demise of NAC, was its inability to adequately navigate federalism (Vickers et al 1993; Collier 2012). Yet, its US counterpart NOW, appears to have been better able to adjust in an era of decentralization. What explains this difference? Is successful adaptation tied to the theory of interest group venue-shopping? Can a newer Canadian national-level women’s group, the Feminist Alliance for International Action (FAFIA), succeed where NAC failed? How/can these groups navigate multiple levels of government and intersectional diversity today? This paper seeks to answer these questions by comparatively examining the organizational structures and lobbying strategies of national level women`s groups between 1990 and 2017 to see how and if they have been able to adapt to changing federal landscapes.

Gendering the Federal-Provincial Bargain in Canada: Joan Grace (University of Winnipeg)
Abstract: An extensive literature analyzing political practices and the varying impact of ‘gender-neutral’ public policies has uncovered many factors that limit women’s participation in the upper echelons of economic and political decision-making in Canada (Bashevkin 2009; Cohen and Pulkingham 2009; Dobrowolsky 2009). Given the centrality of the federal system to political practices and policy outcomes, it is not surprising that it has attracted the attention of feminist scholars who have analyzed various aspects of ‘federal arrangements’, including their gendered impacts on policy processes, discourses and decisions (e.g., Chappell 2002; Haussman, Sawer and Vickers 2010; Grace 2011). Despite the potential impact of intergovernmental relations on policy outcomes shaping women’s well-being, there has been remarkably little attention to this aspect of Canadian federalism. The paper lays the groundwork for an analysis of intergovernmental relations as a significant dimension of state architecture in Canada and, potentially, in other federations. The goal is to contribute to the feminist literature on federalism and to inform strategic decisions faced by feminist activists eager to shape policy decisions. The paper situates the discussion of gender and intergovernmental relations within the literature on federalism, feminist activism and policy outcomes to highlight gendered impacts of relevant policies and feminist efforts to shape them and to explore the effects of the intergovernmental context of this policy arena. The paper concludes with a discussion of key issues and questions that feminist scholars of federalism have raised and suggests lines along which future research might usefully be conducted and activism pursued.

Gendering Global Governance: Judit Fabian (University of Calgary)
Abstract: Global Governance is a relatively new field in academic research and scholarship; however, its importance is crucial. To a significant extent, this is because as the world’s population becomes increasingly interconnected and integrated, the problems governments must address are becoming increasingly global in scope and effect. At the same time, increased mobility is helping to increase the growth-rate of interconnectedness, major global companies in all areas relating to interconnectedness are becoming ever larger and more dominant, and digitization, automation and artificial intelligence have begun to change lives beyond economic production and exchange. These trends have also made gender scripts and gender justice a global concern affecting every aspect of Global Governance; however, the study of Global Governance has largely ignored its gendered aspects and implications. The paper begins to address this gap by mapping the current terrain of the gendered aspects of Global Governance, both as a field of study and as a field of governance. In so doing, it considers how federated structures could aid the practical difficulties of addressing gender in the context of Global Governance.

Democratization and the Gender Impacts of Minority Autonomy Arrangements: The Case of the Hong Kong : Susan Henders (York University)
Abstract: Going beyond the common focus on classic federations, the paper concentrates on the gender implications of minority autonomy arrangements in formally unitary states with federalizing elements. It aims to further understanding of how women’s organizing, rights and equality affect and are affected by federalizing processes that coincide with democratic transitions. To do this, it examines in light of the comparative literature developments in the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong, a region with significant, but contested autonomy in the midst of a highly disputed democratic transition, within an authoritarian formally unitary state, the People’s Republic of China. The paper considers the consequences for and roles of diversely positioned women living in Hong Kong of these intertwined processes. It asks how the democratic transition, now at a stalemate, has affected the autonomy arrangement as a power base for conservative elites supportive of patriarchy. The analysis takes into account the effects of geopolitical contestation over the norms of legitimate government; Hong Kong’s evolving position within global capitalism; its fragmented civil society and women’s movement; its polarized, nationalist-infused politics; and a multilevel governance context that extends to United Nations human rights treaties and treaty-bodies. As Hong Kong bridges the global north and the global south, the case offers fruitful starting points for theory building.