Globalization through Feminist Lenses

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela B. McCracken
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Conceptual Development ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Global Markets ◽  
Feminist Scholarship ◽  
Feminist Literature ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Feminist Perspectives ◽  
Definition Of

Feminist scholarship has contributed to the conceptual development of globalization by including more than merely the expansion and integration of global markets. Feminist perspectives on globalization are necessarily interdisciplinary; their definitions and what they bring to discussions of globalization are naturally shaped by differing disciplinary commitments. In the fields of International Relations (IR) and International Political Economy (IPE), feminists offer four major contributions to globalization scholarship: they bring into relief the experiences and agency of women and other marginalized subjects within processes of globalization; they highlight the gendered aspects of the processes of globalization; they offer critical insights into non-gender-sensitive globalization discourses and scholarship; they propose new ways of conceiving of globalization and its effects that make visible women, women’s agency, and gendered power relations. The feminist literature on globalization, however, is extensively interdisciplinary in nature rather than monolithic or unified. The very definition of key concepts such as globalization, gender, and feminism are not static within the literature. On the contrary, the understanding of these terms and the evolution of their conceptual meanings are central to the development of the literature on globalization through feminist perspectives. There are at least four areas of feminist scholarship on globalization that are in the early stages of development and deserve further attention: the intersection between men/masculinities and globalization; the effects of globalization on women privileged by race, class, and/or nation; the gendered aspects of the globalization of media and signs; and the need for feminists to continue undertaking empirical research.

Gramscian International Political Economy from a Feminist Perspective

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pooja Rishi
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Current Phase ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Women And Gender ◽  
Political Methodology ◽  
Feminist Literature ◽  
Relational Analysis ◽  
Feminist Perspectives ◽  
And Gender

Feminist Gramscian international political economy (IPE) is an interdisciplinary intellectual project that has focused both on theoretical and empirical analysis of women and gender within the field. Feminist Gramscian IPE emerged from the confluence of an eclectic body of work over the last several years encompassing fields as disparate as international relations, IPE, feminist economics, the literature on gender and development, and feminist literature on globalization. As with feminist perspectives in other disciplinary fields, Gramscian feminists have largely embraced postpositivist, interpretivist, and relational analysis while trying to maintain the emancipatory potential of their work for women the world over. Current Gramscian feminist analyses are firmly grounded and draw from early Marxist/Socialist feminist interventions. They have also engaged with the three major categories of analysis in Gramscian thought—ideas, material capabilities, and institutions—in order to understand hegemonic processes that function to (re)construct and (re)produce both gendered categories of analysis and practice. Feminist revisions of Gramscian IPE have focused on international institutions, rules and norms, while simultaneously shedding light on contemporary states and how they are being transformed in this current phase of globalization. Three central tasks that feminist Gramscian scholars may consider in future research are: to be more engaged with the notion of hegemony, to revisit the political methodology employed by many feminist Gramscian analyses, and to devote more attention to non-mainstream perspectives.

scholarly journals You still don’t understand: why troubled engagements continue between feminists and (critical) IPE

2006 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
GEORGINA WAYLEN
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Feminist Perspectives ◽  
Critical Approaches ◽  
The Relationship

Relatively early in the attempts to gender the discipline of International Relations (IR), it was argued by some feminist scholars that it was easier to raise feminist concerns in International Political Economy (IPE) than in IR. However, it has subsequently proved very difficult to articulate these concerns within mainstream IPE, as ‘the neo-realist and neo-liberal frameworks, with their common focus on state-centric issues of co-operation and conflict and their positivist and rationalistic methodologies, do not lend themselves to investigating gendered structures of inequality …’. In contrast, more overlap has been discerned between feminist perspectives and methodologies and the less influential ‘globalist’ (also known as critical/transdisciplinary or heterodox) approaches to IPE than with the dominant statist approaches. This article takes this position as its starting point and will focus on the relationship between gendered analyses and critical IPE (as it will be known here). It therefore does not engage with the undoubtedly important question of how far it is possible or desirable to have a gendered analysis that is not linked to feminism, as within both feminist and critical approaches to IPE an emancipatory agenda is entirely legitimate and even an integral part of those approaches.

scholarly journals Introduction: Feminist Security Studies and Feminist Political Economy: Crossing Divides and Rebuilding Bridges

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (02) ◽  
pp. 406-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juanita Elias
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Financial Crises ◽  
Gender Relations ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Security Studies ◽  
Feminist Scholarship

The essays here reflect on the need to rebuild bridges between two key strands of feminist International Relations (IR) scholarship: feminist security studies (FSS) and feminist (international) political economy (FPE/FIPE). As many of the contributions to this section point out, feminist IR scholarship has long emphasized how gender relations and identities are constituted globally in relation to processes of militarization, securitization, globalization, and governance. In more recent years, however, feminist IR scholarship has come to be dominated by a concern with security (Prügl 2011). Of course, FPE scholarship has continued to provide critical accounts of the gendered nature of global production, work, and financial crises (among other issues). But it is notable that, in doing so, much FPE scholarship has tended to avoid questions of security and/or violence. This CP section, then, looks to the growing divide between FSS and FPE with all of the contributors seeking to analyse how these two traditions of feminist scholarship might be reintegrated and why this reintegration is important.

From Unity to Divergence and Back Again: Security and Economy in Feminist International Relations

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (02) ◽  
pp. 408-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Sjoberg
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Violence ◽  
International Security ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Peace Studies ◽  
Ecological Security ◽  
Global Security ◽  
Early 21St Century ◽  
Feminist Perspectives

InGender and International Security: Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security, J. Ann Tickner (1992) identified three main dimensions to “achieving global security”—national security, economic security, and ecological security: conflict, economics, and the environment. Much of the work in feminist peace studies that inspired early feminist International Relations (IR) work (e.g., Brock-Utne 1989; Reardon 1985) and many of Tickner's contemporaries (e.g., Enloe 1989; Peterson and Runyan 1991; Pettman 1996) also saw political economy and a feminist conception of security as intrinsically interlinked. Yet, as feminist IR research evolved in the early 21st century, more scholars were thinking either about political economy or about war and political violence, but not both.

IR, imperialism, and the Global South: From Libya to Venezuela

Politics ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 026339572110612
Author(s):  
Matteo Capasso
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Global South ◽  
Media Representations ◽  
Capitalist Development ◽  
Secondary Literature ◽  
The World ◽  
Growing Body

This article brings together two cases to contribute to the growing body of literature rethinking the study of international relations (IR) and the Global South: The Libyan Arab al-Jamāhīrīyah and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Drawing on media representations and secondary literature from IR and international political economy (IPE), it critically examines three main conceptual theses (authoritarian, rentier, and rogue) used to describe the historical socio-political formations of these states up to this date. Mixing oil abundance with authoritarian revolutionary fervour and foreign policy adventurism, Libya and Venezuela have been progressively reduced to the figure of one man, while presenting their current crises as localized processes delinked from the imperialist inter-state system. The article argues that these analyses, if left unquestioned, perpetuate a US-led imperial ordering of the world, while foreclosing and discrediting alternatives to capitalist development emerging from and grounded in a Global South context. In doing so, the article contributes to the growing and controversial debate on the meanings and needs for decolonizing the study of IR.

Non-Governmental Organizations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Bloodgood
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
International Ngos

Research on non-governmental organizations (NGOs, often international NGOs, or INGOs) has advanced over the last several decades from demonstrating that NGOs matter in shaping economic development and foreign aid to examining the potential for NGOs to advocate for new rights, set standards for environmental protections, and establish alternative economic arrangements in international relations. The study of NGOs as organizations has opened their potential as interest groups as well as economic actors in their own rights. Moving forward, new data and new theory is needed to fully develop International Political Economy (IPE) understandings of NGO motives, intentions, strategies, and power in global governance.

State of the Art and Research Design

2020 ◽  
pp. 15-30
Author(s):  
Lucia Quaglia
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Financial Regulation ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Capital Requirements ◽  
Empirical Coverage ◽  
Central Counterparties ◽  
Derivatives Markets

This chapter begins by reviewing several bodies of scholarly works that are relevant to this research, notably, the international relations literature on regime complexity and the international political economy literature on financial regulation. It then discusses three mainstream theoretically informed explanations—a state-centric, a transgovernmental, and a business-led accounts—which can be useful to explain how regime complexity in derivatives was dealt with. Finally, it outlines the research design, the analytical framework, the methodology, the sources, the timeframe, and the empirical coverage. Empirically, this book examines all the main aspects concerning the regulation of derivatives markets, namely: trading, clearing and reporting derivatives; resilience, recovery and resolution of central counterparties; capital requirements for bank exposures to central counterparties and derivatives; margins for derivatives non-centrally cleared via central counterparties.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Lucia Quaglia
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
International Standards ◽  
International Regime ◽  
International Regulation ◽  
International Standard ◽  
Derivatives Markets ◽  
Regulatory Reforms

This chapter outlines the theoretical and empirical puzzles that inform the book, its objectives, overall argument, and structure. This research sets out to explain the post-crisis international regulation of derivatives markets. In particular, it addresses three interconnected questions. What factors drove international standard-setting concerning derivatives post-crisis? Why did international regime complexity emerge? How was it managed and with what outcomes? The focus of this volume is on international standards, not the domestic implementation of these standards, or other domestic regulatory reforms concerning derivatives. This chapter also outlines the book’s theoretical and empirical contributions to the international relations literature on regime complexity and the international political economy literature on the regulation of finance.

1. Why Study IR?

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Jackson ◽  
Georg Sørensen
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Social Constructivism ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Global Issues ◽  
Online Resource ◽  
The World ◽  
The Relationship

Introduction to International Relations provides a concise introduction to the principal international relations theories, and explores how theory can be used to analyse contemporary issues. Readers are introduced to the most important theories, encompassing both classical and contemporary approaches and debates. Throughout the text, the chapters encourage readers to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the theories presented, and the major points of contention between them. In so doing, the text helps the reader to build a clear understanding of how major theoretical debates link up with each other, and how the structure of the discipline of international relations is established. The book places a strong emphasis throughout on the relationship between theory and practice, carefully explaining how theories organise and shape our view of the world. Topics include realism, liberalism, International Society, International Political Economy, social constructivism, post-positivism in international relations, and foreign policy. A chapter is dedicated to key global issues and how theory can be used as a tool to analyse and interpret these issues. The text is accompanied by an Online Resource Centre, which includes: short case studies, review questions, annotated web links, and a flashcard glossary.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document