Shifting frames: balancing methodological inclusivity and policy relevance of feminist research

ABSTRACT

Feminist scholars working in international development are often challenged to devise inclusive feminist methodologies and produce evidence-based policy recommendations to inform hegemonic policy processes. The quantitative hegemonic policy frames, however, stand in contrast with interpretative feminist approaches. Feminists face a choice between producing purely academic content or acting as mediators and insiders/outsiders in policy arenas. Feminists are thus called to bridge feminist and dominant policy frames and in this way disrupt hegemonic categories of analysis. This article is based on a case study employing two research methods to examine the activism of Indigenous women opposing the Fenix mine operations in Guatemala. Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions confirmed practical recommendations directed at traditional decision makers, while photo elicitation interviews reflected structural and cultural frames demonstrating the deeper repercussions of the exploitative and institutionalized practices of the mining industry. Translating local symbols, norms, and cultural practices into the policy frames of decision makers, however, requires deliberate efforts by feminists. This work should not be undermined, neither in terms of the preparation of feminist researchers, nor in light of debates around collective feminist scholarship and collaboration among community-engaged scholars.

KEYWORDS:

• Feminist methodology
• extractive industries
• Guatemala
• policy frames
• Indigenous studies

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback. This article was initially discussed in 2020, during an International Feminist Journal of Politics conference workshop – we thank Brooke Ackerly for the guidance offered on this occasion. Sincere gratitude is also extended to Marie Lovrod for her support with the finalization of this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Similarly, Cooper and Yarbrough (2010) utilize both focus group and participatory photography methods to explore the nature of health concerns and conditions experienced by comadronas (traditional birth attendants) in western Guatemala. They conclude that the focus group method yielded data grounded in concrete and specific symptoms and syndromes (largely reinforcing documented findings on this topic), whereas the photography method yielded abstract ideas related to health and illness, including Indigenous belief systems, the role of community in health, and the deeper structural issues that impede community health.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Gloria Novovic

Gloria Novovic is a PhD fellow at the University of Guelph, Canada, specializing in global governance and feminist policy. Her research focuses on decolonial paradigms of international cooperation and feminist solidarity, as informed by her professional experience across civil society and multilateral organizations.

Rebecca Tatham

Rebecca Tatham is a PhD fellow at the University of Guelph, Canada, examining the gendered nature of extractive governance in Guatemala. She engages with Latin American Indigenous decolonial theory and gender and development approaches. Her work is informed by years of working in the non-profit sector across countries of the Latin American region.