Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T02:30:04.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Numbers Do(n't) Always Add Up: Dilemmas in Using Quantitative Research Methods in Feminist IR Scholarship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2009

Laura Parisi
Laura Parisi
Affiliation:
University of Victoria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

How might one reconcile feminist international relations theorizing with quantitative methods, if they can be reconciled at all? This question has occupied a central place in the field of feminist international relations theory since its inception, and while it is not my intention to rehash it in its entirety here, my story sheds light on the difficulties that feminist IR scholars may face in choosing the quantitative route. My essay highlights these conundrums from different stages of the research process: formulation of the research question, selection of a research method, usage of quantitative methods, and the dissemination of the findings. I conclude with questions for further consideration.

Type
Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , September 2009 , pp. 410 - 419
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.)

References

Ackerly, Brooke A., Stern, Maria, and True, Jacqui. 2006. “Feminist Methodologies for International Relations.” In Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, ed. Ackerly, Brooke A., Stern, Maria, and True, Jacqui. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barker, Drucilla K. 2006. “A Seat at the Table: Feminists Negotiate Development.” In Feminist Economics and the World Bank: History, Theory, and Policy, ed. Kuiper, Edith and Barker, Drucilla K.. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barriteau, V. Eudine. 2006. “Engendering Development or Gender Mainstreaming? A Critical Assessment from the Commonwealth Caribbean.” In Feminist Economics and the World Bank: History, Theory, and Policy, ed. Kuiper, Edith and Barker, Drucilla K.. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Beetham, Gwendolyn, and Demetriades, Justina. 2007. “Feminist Research Methodologies and Development: Overview and Practical Application.” Gender & Development 15 (2): 199–216.Google Scholar
Benería, Lourdes. 2003. Gender, Development, and Globalization: Economics as If All People Mattered. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Caprioli, Mary. (2004). “Feminist IR Theory and Quantitative Methodology: A Critical Analysis.” International Studies Review 6 (2): 253–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chant, Sylvia. 2006. “Contributions of a Gender Perspective to the Analysis of Poverty.” In Women and Gender Equity in Development Theory and Practice: Institutions, Resources, and Mobilization, ed. Jaquette, Jane and Summerfield, Gale. Durham and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko. 1999. “What Does Feminization of Poverty Mean? It Isn't Just Lack of Income.” Feminist Economics 5 (2): 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Cecile, 2002. “Disciplining Gender?” World Development 30 (3): 497–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinsella, Helen. 2003. “For a Careful Reading: The Conservatism of Gender Constructivism.” Review of International Studies 5: 287–302.Google Scholar
Lind, Amy, and Share, Jessica. 2003. “Queering Development: Institutionalized Heterosexuality in Development Theory, Practice, and Politics in Latin America.” In Feminist Futures: Re-Imagining Women, Culture, and Development, ed. Bhavnani, Kum-Kum, Foran, John, and Kurian, Priya. London and New York: Zed Books.Google Scholar
McIlwaine, Cathy, and Datta, Kavita. 2003. “From Feminising to Engendering Development.” Gender, Place, and Culture 10 (4): 369–82.Google Scholar
Morris, Morris David. 1979. Measuring the Condition of the World's Poor: The Physical Quality of Life Index. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Otto, Dianne. 2001. “Defending Women's Economic and Social Rights: Some Thoughts on Indivisibility and a New Standard of Equality.” In Giving Meaning to Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, ed. Merali, Isfahan and Oosterveld, Valerie, eds. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Parisi, Laura. 2006. “‘Disciplining’ and ‘Engendering’ the World Bank: A Comment.” In Feminist Economics and the World Bank: History, Theory, and Policy, ed. Kuiper, Edith and Barker, Drucilla K.. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Staudt, Kathleen. 2002. “Dismantling the Master's House with the Master's Tools? Gender Work in and with Powerful Bureaucracies.” In Feminist Post-Development Thought: Rethinking Modernity, Post-Colonialism, and Representation, ed. Saunders, Kriemild. London and New York: Zed Books: 57–69.Google Scholar
Tickner, J. Ann. 2006. “Feminism Meets International Relations: Some Methodological Issues.” In Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, ed. Ackerly, Brooke A., Stern, Maria, and True, Jacqui. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
UNDP 1995. Human Development Report, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
World Bank. 2001. Engendering Development: Through Gender Equality in Rights, Resources, and Voice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar