Analysing Failure, Understanding Success: A Research Strategy for Explaining Gender Equality Policy Adoption

Abstract

One of the major challenges within feminist research is to understand the conditions under which gender equality policies are adopted. This article addresses the issue from a methodological point of view: it suggests that previous research on gender equality policy adoption has mostly focused on “successful” cases, and it presents a research strategy for systematically analysing opposition and “failed” attempts at gender equality policy adoption, that is, reform attempts that have not become laws or regulations. A closer analysis of failure is important for understanding success: we cannot be sure that the factors identified as conducive to gender equality reform are really missing in unsuccessful reform attempts unless we pay explicit attention to such attempts. The research strategy suggests three issues that should be addressed: (1) specify and select “unsuccessful” cases, (2) focus explicitly on resistance to the reform proposal, and (3) conduct a dynamic analysis of the strategies of proponents and opponents. We illustrate the research strategy by making use of a failed attempt at reform in the Swedish labour market: the individualization of the parental leave system.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Rianne Mahon, Karl-Oskar Lindgren, panel participants at the Second European Conference on Politics and Gender (Budapest, January 2011), two anonymous reviewers, and the editors of NORA for helpful comments and suggestions. We are also very grateful to Malin Holm and Karolina Lemoine for superb research assistance. The authors are equal contributors to this article: names are listed in alphabetical order.

Notes

¹ It should be noted that the logic presented here pertains to explanations of policy adoption. When the focus is elsewhere and the purpose is to explain failure at another stage in the policy process, the criteria applied will of course have to be adapted to suit that particular stage. For instance, if the purpose is to explain agenda-setting, we may need to show that there has been a suggestion from a gender equality actor in order to be able to argue that the reform attempts stood a reasonable chance of being successful. If we are studying implementation, we of course need to demonstrate that the law has been adopted, etc.

² Allowing 390 days with 80% of income, up to a maximum amount, plus 90 days with a low flat-rate benefit (as of October 2013).

Additional information

Funding

Funding

This article is based on work supported by Forte (The Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare) [grant number 2009-1350].

Notes on contributors

Christina Bergqvist

Christina Bergqvist is Professor of political science at the Department of Government, Uppsala University. Her major areas of research are in the fields of gender and political representation, comparative feminist policy, gender equality and welfare state policies. She was editor-in-chief of Equal Democracies? Gender and Politics in the Nordic Countries (Scandinavian University Press, 1999). Recent publications include “Convergent care regimes? Childcare arrangements in Australia, Canada, Finland and Sweden”, in Journal of European Social Policy. 2012. No 4. Vol 22. (With Rianne Mahon, Anneli Anttonen, Deborah Brennan & Barbara Hobson) and “The Promise and Pitfalls of Gender Mainstreaming: The Swedish Case”, in International Feminist Journal of Politics. 2009. No 2, vol 11. (With Diane Sainsbury).

Elin Bjarnegård

ElinBjarnegård is Assistant Professor at the Department of Government, Uppsala University. She is also affiliated to the Department of Peace and Conflict, Uppsala University, through the East Asian Peace Program. Her research interests are within the field of comparative politics with a particular focus on gender, masculinities, political parties, political recruitment, and informal institutions. Recent publications include “Gender, Informal Institutions and Political Recruitment: Explaining Male Dominance in Parliamentary Representation” (2013, Palgrave Macmillan) and “Revisiting Representation: Communism, Women in Politics, and the Decline of Armed Conflict in East Asia” (2013, International Interactions vol. 39, co-authored with Erik Melander).

Pär Zetterberg

Pär Zetterberg is Assistant Professor at the Department of Government at Uppsala University. His research interests mainly include candidate recruitment and political representation in a comparative perspective, with particular focus on electoral gender quotas. He also has an interest in comparative research on gender equality policy. He has published his research in journals such as Political Research Quarterly, Parliamentary Affairs, Representation, Development and Change, and Politics & Gender.