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

References

• Ackerly, Brooke. 2008. “Feminist Methodological Reflection.” In Qualitative Methods in International Relations: A Pluralist Guide, edited by Audie Klotz and Deepa Prakash, 28–42. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ackerly, Brooke, and Jacqui True. 2010a. “Back to the Future: Feminist Theory, Activism, and Doing Feminist Research in an Age of Globalization.” Women’s Studies International Forum 33 (5): 464–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ackerly, Brooke A., and Jacqui True. 2010b. Doing Feminist Research in Political and Social Science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Apthorpe, Raymond. 1996. “Reading Development Policy and Policy Analysis: On Framing, Naming, Numbering and Coding.” The European Journal of Development Research 8 (1): 16–35.
   Google Scholar
• Bacchi, Carol. 1999. Women, Policy, and Politics: The Construction of Policy Problems. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Benschop, Yvonne, and Mieke Verloo. 2006. “Sisyphus’ Sisters: Can Gender Mainstreaming Escape the Genderedness of Organizations?” Journal of Gender Studies 15 (1): 19–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buss, Doris. 2015. “Measurement Imperatives and Gender Politics: An Introduction.” Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society 22 (3): 381–389.
   Google Scholar
• Byford, Julia. 2002. “One Day Rich: Community Perceptions of the Impact of Placer Dome Gold Mine, Misma Island Papua New Guinea.” In Tunnel Vision: Women, Mining and Communities, edited by Ingrid Macdonald and Claire Rowland, 30–34. Victoria: Oxfam Community Aid Abroad.
   Google Scholar
• Cairney, Paul, and Kathryn Oliver. 2020. “How Should Academics Engage in Policymaking to Achieve Impact?” Political Studies Review 18 (2): 228–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carden, Fred. 2009. Knowledge to Policy: Making the Most of Development Research. Ottawa, ON: International Development Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Chevalier, Jacques M., and Daniel Buckles. 2013. Participatory Action Research: Theory and Methods for Engaged Inquiry. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, Andrew, Caroline Holland, Jeanne Katz, and Sheila Peace. 2009. “Learning to See: Lessons from a Participatory Observation Research Project in Public Spaces.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12 (4): 345–360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark-Ibáñez, Marisol. 2004. “Framing the Social World with Photo-Elicitation Interviews.” American Behavioral Scientist 47 (21): 1507–1527.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, Patricia Hill. 2004. “Learning from the Outsider within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought.” In The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, edited by Sandra G. Harding, 103–127. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, Patricia Hill. 2008. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, Judith A., and Mary Margaret Fonow. 1990. “Knowledge and Women’s Interests: Issues of Epistemology and Methodology in Feminist Sociological Research.” In Feminist Research Methods: Exemplary Readings in the Social Sciences, edited by Joyce M. Nielsen, 58–69. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, Cheryl, and Susan Yarbrough. 2010. “Tell Me – Show Me: Using Combined Focus Group and Photovoice Methods to Gain Understanding of Health Issues in Rural Guatemala.” Qualitative Health Research 20 (5): 644–653.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornwall, Andrea. 2003. “Whose Voices? Whose Choices? Reflections on Gender and Participatory Development.” World Development 31 (8): 1325–1342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornwall, Andrea, and Althea Maria Rivas. 2015. “From ‘Gender Equality’ and ‘Women’s Empowerment’ to Global Justice: Reclaiming a Transformative Agenda for Gender and Development.” Third World Quarterly 36 (2): 396–415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creese, Gillian Laura, and Wendy Mae Frisby. 2011. Feminist Community Research: Case Studies and Methodologies. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cumes, Aura. 2017. “La cosmovision Maya et le patriarcat: Une interprétation critique.” Recherches féministes 30 (1): 47–59.
   Google Scholar
• Cusicanqui, Silvia Rivera. 2015. Sociología de la Imagen: Miradas Ch’ixi desde la Historica Andina. Buenos Aires: Tinta Limón.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, Norman K., and Yvonna Lincoln, eds. 2011. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Deonandan, Kalowatie, and Rebecca Tatham. 2016. “The Role of Women and International Nongovernmental Organisations in the Resistance to the New Extraction in Latin America: The Unexplored Dimensions.” In Mining in Latin America: Critical Approaches to the New Extraction, edited by Kalowatie Deonandan and Michael Dougherty, 273–283. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Deonandan, Kalowatie, Rebecca Tatham, and Brennan Field. 2017. “Indigenous Women’s Anti-Mining Activism: A Gendered Analysis of the El Estor Struggle in Guatemala.” Gender & Development 25 (3): 405–419.
   Google Scholar
• Eftimie, Adriana, Katherine Heller, and John Strongman. 2009a. Gender Dimensions of the Extractive Industries: Mining for Equity. Extractive Industries and Development Series, No. 8. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed May 3, 2021. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/18236.
   Google Scholar
• Eftimie, Adriana, Katherine Heller, and John Strongman. 2009b. Mainstreaming Gender into Extractives Industries Projects: Guidance Note for Task Team Leaders. Extractive Industries and Development Series, No. 9. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed May 3, 2021. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/18235.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, Iris, Bonnie Stevens, Peter McKeever, and Sylvain Baruchel. 2006. “Photo Elicitation Interview (PEI): Using Photos to Elicit Children’s Perspectives.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5 (3): 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2015. Horizon 2020 Indicators: Assessing the Results and Impact of Horizon 2020. Brussels: European Commission. Accessed May 3, 2021. https://www.ffg.at/sites/default/files/horizon2020indicators.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, Frank. 2003. Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, Frank, and Herbert Gottweis. 2013. “The Argumentative Turn in Public Policy Revisited: Twenty Years Later.” Critical Policy Studies 7 (4): 425–433.
   Google Scholar
• Fonow, Mary Margaret, and Judith A. Cook. 1991. Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fonow, Mary Margaret, and Judith A. Cook. 2005. “Feminist Methodology: New Applications in the Academy and Public Policy.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30 (4): 2211–2236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, Nancy. 2014. Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Condition. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, Nancy, and Nancy A. Naples. 2004. “To Interpret the World and to Change It: An Interview with Nancy Fraser.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 29 (4): 1103–1124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko, and Desmond McNeill. 2019. “Knowledge and Politics in Setting and Measuring the SDGs: Introduction to Special Issue.” Global Policy 10 (S1): 5–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galletta, Anne, and William E. Cross. 2014. “Conducting the Interview: The Role of Reciprocity and Reflexivity.” In Mastering the Semi-Structured Interview and Beyond: From Research Design to Analysis and Publication, edited by Anne Galletta, 75–118. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, Sandra G. 2004. “Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What Is ‘Strong Objectivity’?” In The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, edited by Sandra G. Harding, 127–141. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Harper, Douglas. 2002. “Talking about Pictures: A Case for Photo Elicitation.” Visual Studies 17 (1): 13–26.
   Google Scholar
• Hartsock, Nancy C. M. 2019. “Introduction.” In The Feminist Standpoint Revisited and Other Essays, by Nancy C. M. Hartsock, 1–8. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, Christina, Chris Madden, and Nina Collins. 2017. A Guide to Gender Impact Assessment for the Extractive Industries. Carlton: Oxfam Australia. Accessed May 3, 2021. https://www.oxfam.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/2017-PA-001-Gender-impact-assessments-in-mining-report_FA_WEB.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, Christina, Chris Madden, and Maria Ezpeleta. 2016. Gender and the Extractive Industries: Putting Gender on the Corporate Agenda. Carlton: Oxfam Australia. Accessed May 3, 2021, https://www.oxfam.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2016-PA-004-Mining-and-Gender-report_FA_web.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Hirschmann, Nancy J. 2004. “Feminist Standpoint as Postmodern Strategy.” In The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, edited by Sandra G. Harding, 317–333. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, Cecile, and Ruth Pearson. 1998. Feminist Visions of Development: Gender Analysis and Policy. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, Katy. 2017. “Women’s Anti-Mining Activism and Development.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.329.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, Candace. 2020. “Socially Engaged Research across Borders: Feminist Bridges for Global Gender Justice and Human Rights.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 8 (2): 444–452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabeer, Naila. 1994. Reversed Realities: Gender Hierarchies in Development Thought. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Lahiri-Dutt, Kuntala, ed. 2011. Gendering the Field: Towards Sustainable Livelihoods for Mining Communities. Canberra: Australian National University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lahiri-Dutt, Kuntala. 2012. “Digging Women: Towards a New Agenda for Feminist Critiques of Mining.” Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography 19 (2): 193–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapenta, Francesco. 2011. “Some Theoretical and Methodological Views on Photo Elicitation.” In The Sage Handbook of Visual Research Methods, edited by Eric Margolis and Luc Pauwels, 201–213. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Laplante, JP, and Catherine Nolin. 2014. “Consultas and Socially Responsible Investing in Guatemala: A Case Study Examining Maya Perspectives on the Indigenous Right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent.” Society & Natural Resources 27 (3): 231–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leavy, Patricia. 2007. “Feminist Postmodernism and Poststructuralism.” In Feminist Research Practice, edited by Sharlene Nagy and Patricia L. Leavy, 83–108. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Liebenberg, Linda. 2018. “Thinking Critically about Photovoice: Achieving Empowerment and Social Change.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 17 (1): 1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebowitz, Debra J., and Susanne Zwingel. 2014. “Gender Equality Oversimplified: Using CEDAW to Counter the Measurement Obsession.” International Studies Review 16 (3): 362–389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorde, Audre. 2007. Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Reprint ed. Berkeley, CA: Crossing Press.
   Google Scholar
• Macintyre, Martha. 2011. “Modernity, Gender, and Mining: Experiences from Papua New Guinea.” In Gendering the Field: Towards Sustainable Livelihoods for Mining Communities, edited by Kuntala Lahiri-Dutt, 21–32. Canberra: Australian National University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Macleod, Morna. 2016. “Development or Devastation? Epistemologies of Mayan Women’s Resistance to an Open-Pit Goldmine in Guatemala.” AlternNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples 12 (1): 86–100.
   Google Scholar
• Mahon, Rianne, Caroline Andrew, and Robert Johnson. 2007. “Policy Analysis in an Era of ‘Globalization’: Capturing Spatial Dimensions and Scalar Strategies.” In Critical Policy Studies, edited by Miriam Catherine Smith and Michael Orsini, 41–66. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maynard, Mary, and June Purvis, eds. 1994. Researching Women’s Lives from a Feminist Perspective. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mayo Mendoza, María. 2015. Cholel-päk’äbtyak: Crecer desde el nosotros. Tuxtla Gutiérrez: CELALI.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, Ingrid, and Clair Rowland, eds. 2002. Tunnel Vision: Women, Mining, and Communities. Victoria: Oxfam Community Aid Abroad.
   Google Scholar
• Meo, Analía I. 2010. “Picturing Students’ Habitus: The Advantages and Limitations of Photo-Elicitation Interviewing in a Qualitative Study in the City of Buenos Aires.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 9 (2): 149–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merry, Sally Engle. 2011. “Measuring the World: Indicators, Human Rights, and Global Governance.” Current Anthropology 52 (S3): S83–S95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray, Karen B. 2007. “Governmentality and the Shifting Winds of Policy Studies.” In Critical Policy Studies, edited by Miriam Catherine Smith and Michael Orsini, 161–184. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Narayan, Uma. 2004. “The Project of Feminist Epistemology: Perspectives from a Nonwestern Feminist.” In The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, edited by Sandra G. Harding, 213–225. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Otzoy, Irma. 1996. “Maya Clothing and Identity.” In Mayan Cultural Activism in Guatemala, edited by Edward E. Fischer and R. McKenna Brown, 141–155. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Paredes, Julieta, and Adriana Guzmán. 2014. El Tejido de la Rebeldía: Que es el Feminismo Comunitario? Canterbury: Comunidad Mujeres Creando Comunidad.
   Google Scholar
• Perks, Rachel. 2011. “Towards a Post-Conflict Transition: Women and Artisanal Mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo.” In Gendering the Field: Towards Sustainable Livelihoods for Mining Communities, edited by Kuntala Lahiri-Dutt, 177–196. Canberra: Australian National University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pérez Piñán, Astrid, and Elizabeth Vibert. 2019. “The View from the Farm: Gendered Contradictions of the Measurement Imperative in Global Goals.” Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 20 (4): 436–450.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radcliffe, Sarah, and Andrea Pequeño. 2010. “Ethnicity, Development and Gender: Tsáchila Indigenous Women in Ecuador.” Development and Change 41 (6): 983–1016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rai, Shirin. 2003. Mainstreaming Gender, Democratizing the State? Institutional Mechanisms for the Advancement of Women. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Razavi, Shahra. 1998. “Becoming Multilingual: The Challenges of Feminist Policy Advocacy.” In Missionaries and Mandarins: Feminist Engagement with Development Institutions, edited by Carol Miller, 20–41. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Redman-Maclaren, Michelle, Jane Mills, and Rachael Tommbe. 2014. “Interpretive Focus Groups: A Participatory Method for Interpreting and Extending Secondary Analysis of Qualitative Data.” Global Health Action 7 (1): 25214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, Adrienne, and Susanne Soederberg. 2012. “Gender Equality as Smart Economics? A Critique of the 2012 World Development Report.” Third World Quarterly 33 (5): 949–968.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandoval, Chela. 2000. Methodology of the Oppressed. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sandoval, Chela. 2004. “US Third World Feminism: The Theory and Method of Differential Oppositional Consciousness.” In The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, edited by Sandra G. Harding, 195–211. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Scheyvens, Regina, and Leonard Lagisa. 1998. “Women Disempowerment and Resistance: An Analysis of Logging and Mining Activities in the Pacific.” Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 19 (1): 51–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, Ronald, Sr. 2006. “Value-Critical Policy Analysis: The Case of Language Policy in the United States.” In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, edited by Dvora Yanow and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, 300–315. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Shdaimah, Corey, Roland Stahl, and Sandford Schram. 2009. “When You Can See the Sky through Your Roof: Policy Analysis from the Bottom Up.” In Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power, edited by Edward Schatz, 255–274. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. 2013. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Soroka, Stuart N. 2007. “Agenda-Setting and Issue Definition.” In Critical Policy Studies, edited by Miriam Catherine Smith and Michael Orsini, 185–210. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1999. A Critique of Postcolonial Reason: Toward a History of the Vanishing Present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, Deborah A. 2002. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. New York: W. W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, Caroline, Mary Ann Buris, and Xiang Yue Ping. 1996. “Chinese Village Women as Visual Anthropologists: A Participatory Approach to Reaching Policymakers.” Social Science and Medicine 42 (10): 1391–1400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward, Bernie, and John Strongman. 2011. Gender-Sensitive Approaches for the Extractive Industry in Peru: Improving the Impact on Women in Poverty and Their Families. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed May 5, 2021. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/2516.
   Google Scholar
• Weldon, S. Laurel. 2018. “Power, Exclusion and Empowerment: Feminist Innovation in Political Science.” Women’s Studies International Forum 72 (January–February): 127–136.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, Sue. 1998. “Focus Groups in Feminist Research: Power, Interaction and Co-construction of Meaning.” Women’s Studies International 21 (1): 111–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, Sue. 1999. “Focus Groups: A Feminist Method.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 23 (2): 221–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Bank. 2009. Mainstreaming Gender into Extractive Industries Projects: Guidance Note for Task Team Leaders. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed July 1, 2021. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/18235.
   Google Scholar
• Wylie, Alison. 2004. “Why Standpoint Matters.” In The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, edited by Sandra G. Harding, 339–353. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Yanow, Dvora, and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea. 2006a. “Doing Social Science in a Humanistic Manner.” In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, edited by Dvora Yanow and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, 380–394. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Yanow, Dvora, and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, eds. 2006b. Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
   Google Scholar
• Young, Iris Marion. 2011. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar