CATEGORISATION
KEYWORDS
GENERAL OBJECTIVES, RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND SCIENTIFIC RELEVANCE
The interfaces between gender studies and public policy studies have been shaped throughout the development of both fields, albeit not without tensions (Marcondes & Farah, 2021). Over time, the possible articulations between these two fields have expanded in scope and complexity, incorporating new dimensions of the policy process, multiple actors, and diverse epistemological, theoretical, and methodological approaches.
In this context, the emergence of Critical-Interpretive Policy Studies, including its regional specificities and contributions—such as the Latin American approach (Boullosa, 2025)—has opened promising avenues for dialogue with Gender Studies. This includes not only feminist scholarship but also other perspectives, such as queer theory and discussions related to the LGBTIA+ community. Both fields share core concerns with power relations; processes of meaning-making; the role of ideas and ideologies; and the importance of language, discourse, and narratives in shaping public problems and institutional responses (Fischer, 2003; Rein & Schön, 1993; Hawkesworth, 2012; Paterson & Scala, 2015).
Despite these convergences, the articulation between gender studies and public policy studies remains uneven and still under construction, including within Critical Policy Studies. Advancing this interface requires the development of mediations between these fields, with ontological, epistemological, theoretical, methodological, political, and empirical implications. These mediations may take different forms, with two particularly promising trends: (1) the consolidation of an interdisciplinary field focused on gender public policies; and (2) the incorporation of gender perspectives into critical policy analysis.
The first trend refers to scholarly work that contributes to the development of an interdisciplinary field focused on gender public policies, in which concepts and approaches from feminist and gender studies and public policy are mobilized in an integrated manner. This includes research on affirmative action (Farah et al., 2018) and, especially, the strategy-concept of “gender mainstreaming,” understood as the systematic incorporation of gender perspectives across different dimensions of public action (Walby, 2005; Bacchi, 2005; Verloo & Lombardo, 2007; Guzmán & Montaño, 2012; Forest & Lombardo, 2012; Marcondes & Farah, 2021).
The second trend enables the incorporation of gender perspectives into Critical-Interpretive Policy Studies, expanding the analytical capacity of this field by highlighting dimensions often rendered invisible in the processes of policy formulation and implementation. Gender studies provide robust conceptual tools for analyzing the power relations that permeate public action. The notion of gender as an analytical category (Lugones, 2010; Collins, 2022) allows for an understanding of how socially constructed differences are mobilized to organize social and institutional relations. At the same time, contemporary feminist approaches emphasize the centrality of institutions, political practices, and governance processes in reproducing or transforming inequalities (Hawkesworth, 2012).
Reflections on intersectionality (Gonzalez, 1984; Crenshaw, 2002; Collins & Bilge, 2021), as well as the notion of imbrication (Falquet, 2022), associated with gender, represent another key trend in building such mediations. These approaches enable the analysis of how gender intersects with race, ethnicity, class, generation, disability, and territory in public policy processes. Research on domestic work (both paid and unpaid) and care is an important example of this second trend (Teixeira, 2021; Guimarães, 2024).
The potential of the interface between critical and gender studies is not limited to the theoretical level but also encompasses a wide range of methodological approaches, often within the interpretive tradition. Research at this intersection may employ qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods, reflecting the complexity of the phenomena under analysis. Discourse, document, and narrative analysis, for instance, can be combined with case studies, comparative analyses, and statistical methods, enabling a more comprehensive understanding of policy dynamics.
From an empirical perspective, a broad range of policy areas can be explored, including labor, health, education, social protection, violence, sexual and reproductive rights, and care, among others. These areas constitute privileged sites for analyzing gender relations, both in terms of the reproduction of inequalities and the possibilities for transformation through public action.
References:
Bacchi, C. (2005). Discourse, discourse everywhere: Subject “agency” in feminist discourse methodology. NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 13(3), 198–209.
Boullosa, R. de F. (2025). Critical policy studies in Latin America. In L. Secchi & C. N. Cruz-Rubio (Eds.), Handbook of public policy in Latin America (pp. 105–120). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Collins, P. H. (2022). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Routledge.
Crenshaw, K. (2002). Documento para o encontro de especialistas em aspectos da discriminação racial relativos ao gênero. Revista Estudos Feministas, 10(1), 171–188.
Falquet, J. (2022). Imbricación: Más allá de la interseccionalidad. Mujeres, raza y clase en los movimientos sociales. Madreselva.
Farah, M. F. S., Diniz, A. P. R., Marcondes, M. M., Youssef, L. M., & Silva, M. C. F. (2018). Gênero e política pública: Panorama da produção acadêmica no Brasil (1983–2015). Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 16(3), 1–18.
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford University Press.
Forest, M., & Lombardo, E. (2012). The Europeanization of gender equality policies: A discursive-sociological approach. In M. Forest & E. Lombardo (Eds.), The Europeanization of gender equality policies. Palgrave Macmillan.
Gonzalez, L. (1984). Racismo e sexismo na cultura brasileira. Revista Ciências Sociais Hoje, 223–244.
Guimarães, N. A. (2024). A “crise do cuidado” e os cuidados na crise: Refletindo a partir da experiência brasileira. Sociologia & Antropologia, 14, e230050.
Guzmán, V., & Montaño, S. (2012). Políticas públicas e igualdade de gênero. CEPAL.
Hawkesworth, M. (2012). Political worlds of women: Activism, advocacy, and governance in the twenty-first century. Westview Press.
Lugones, M. (2010). Toward a decolonial feminism. Hypatia, 25(4), 742–759.
Marcondes, M. M., & Farah, M. F. S. (2021). Transversalidade de gênero em política pública. Revista Estudos Feministas, 29(1), e65398.
Paterson, S., & Scala, F. (2015). Feminist policy analysis. In M. Howlett & I. Mukherjee (Eds.), Handbook of policy formulation. Edward Elgar.
Rein, M., & Schön, D. (1993). Reframing policy discourse. In F. Fischer & H. Gottweis (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Duke University Press.
Teixeira, J. C. (2021). Brazilian housemaids and COVID-19: How can they isolate if domestic work stems from racism? Gender, Work & Organization, 28(S1), 250–259.
Verloo, M., & Lombardo, E. (2007). Multiple meanings of gender equality: A critical frame analysis of gender policies in Europe. Central European University Press.
Walby, S. (2005). Gender mainstreaming: Productive tensions in theory and practice. Social Politics, 12(3), 321–343.
CALL FOR PAPERS
In this context, the panel aims to foster reflections on the opportunities and challenges involved in bridging gender studies and Critical-Interpretive Policy Studies. What are the main opportunities and obstacles to building integrated analytical frameworks? Which theoretical and methodological approaches appear most promising? How can feminist studies and queer theory contribute to challenging and renewing the field of public policy? Conversely, how can Critical-Interpretive Policy Studies enrich the analysis of gender dynamics in public action? Are new frameworks emerging from this interface? Which themes, policy areas, and actors are being addressed in this body of research? Considering the two promising trends identified, what is the current state of the art—both in terms of the interdisciplinary field of gender public policies and the incorporation of gender perspectives (including feminist and queer approaches) into critical policy analysis?
By bringing together contributions from diverse theoretical traditions, methodological approaches, and national contexts, this panel seeks to create a space for dialogue, exchange, and ongoing mutual learning. In doing so, it aims to contribute to the consolidation of an interdisciplinary, critical research agenda committed to the construction of more just and equitable public policies.
EXPORT PDF (FULL)