Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-d5ftd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-31T13:18:59.355Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Can Historical Institutionalism Offer Feminist Institutionalists?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 June 2009

Georgina Waylen
Georgina Waylen
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this essay I lay out how historical institutionalism (HI) could serve as an important tool for feminist political scientists, highlighting the potentially distinctive contribution and advantages of a feminist historical institutionalism (rather than a feminist institutionalism) for feminist political science and particularly for a feminist comparative politics. The potentially significant contribution of HI is to help us answer some “big questions,” in particular, how and why institutional change occurs. This, in turn, can help us understand how positive gender change, such as improvements in women's descriptive and substantive representation, can come about. This latter question is obviously not only of academic but also of political concern for feminists who wish to lessen gender inequality.

Information

Type
Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 2009 , pp. 245 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Blyth, Mark. 1997. “Any More Bright Ideas? The Ideational Turn of Comparative Political Economy,” Comparative Politics 29 (2): 229–50.Google Scholar
Chappell, Louise. 2006. “Comparing Political Institutions: Revealing the Gendered ‘Logic of Appropriateness.’” Politics & Gender 2 (June): 223–35.Google Scholar
Charrad, Mounira. 2001. States and Women's Rights: The Making of Postcolonial Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Collier, Ruth Berins, and Collier, David. 1991. Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hay, Colin, and Wincott, Daniel. 1998. “Structure, Agency and Historical Institutionalism,” Political Studies 46: 951–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Htun, Mala. 2003. Sex and the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, Julia, Orloff, Ann Shola, and Shaver, Sheila. 1999. States, Markets, Families: Gender, Liberalism and Social Policy in Australia, Canada, Great Britain and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 1996. “The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutionalist Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 29 (2): 123–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence and the Study of Politics,” American Political Science Review 94 (2): 251–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 2003. “Big, Slow-Moving and Invisible: Macro-social Processes in the Study of Comparative Politics.” In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 2004. Politics in Time: History, Institutions and Social Analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, Paul, and Skocpol, Theda. N.d. “Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science.” University of Harvard. Typescript.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda. 1992. Protecting Soldiers and Mother: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 1999. “Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 2: 369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 2003. “How Institutions Evolve.” In Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. Mahoney, James and Rueschemeyer, Dietrich. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 2004. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States and Japan. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen, and Steinmo, Sven. 1992. “Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics.” In Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, ed. Steinmo, Sven, Thelen, Kathleen, and Longstreth, Frank. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tripp, Aili Mari. 2007. “Historical Perspectives in Comparative Politics and Gender Studies.” Politics & Gender 3 (September): 397–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waylen, Georgina. 2007. Engendering Transitions: Women's Mobilization, Institutions and Gender Outcomes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar