What About Gender in Critical Policy Discourse Analysis? Potentials and Pitfalls of Merging Historic Materialist Policy Analysis with Gender-Sensitive Policy Frame Analysis

Historic materialist policy analysis (HMPA) (Brand, 2013; Brand, Krams, Lenikus, & Schneider, 2022; Kannankulam & Georgi, 2012, 2014; Staatsprojekt Europa, 2014) offers an analytical framework to systematically integrate the material and the discursive dimensions of policy-making by conducting context, actor and process analysis. Combining HMPA and critical discourse analysis (CDA) (Fairclough, 2001, 2013) has recently been proven to be productive in the analysis of hegemony struggles in the process of policy-making (Caterina, 2018, 2019). However, it remains unclear if this innovative analytical framework is capable of scrutinizing underlying gender relations specifically. The aim of the proposed article is to explore potentials and pitfalls of merging HMPA with CDA from a perspective that is informed with feminist contributions to policy analysis (Kantola & Lombardo, 2017a, 2017b; Lombardo, Meier, & Verloo, 2010, 2017). The paper explores how and in which ways gender-sensitive critical policy frame analysis (Lombardo et al., 2017; Verloo, 2007) can be combined with HMPA. Building on this synergy, I argue that gender-sensitive policy frame analysis provides the theoretical and methodological framework for studying diversity of meanings of gender which may correspond to different social forces that struggle over hegemony. Literature: Brand, U. (2013). State, context and correspondence. Contours of a historical-materialist policy analysis. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 42(4), 425-442. Brand, U., Krams, M., Lenikus, V., & Schneider, E. (2022). Contours of historical-materialist policy analysis. Critical Policy Studies, 16(3), 279-296. Caterina, D. (2018). Investigating hegemony struggles: Transdisciplinary considerations on the role of a critical discourse analysis of practical argumentation. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(3), 211-227. Caterina, D. (2019). Historical materialist policy analysis meets critical discourse analysis of practical argumentation: making sense of hegemony struggles in Italys crisis management. In Critical Policy Discourse Analysis (pp. 216-241): Edward Elgar Publishing. Fairclough, N. (2001). Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific research. Methods of critical discourse analysis, 5(11), 121-138. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language: Routledge. Kannankulam, J., & Georgi, F. (2012). Die Europäische Integration als materielle Verdichtung von Kräfteverhältnissen: hegemonieprojekte im Kampf um das ‚Staatsprojekt Europa’. Kannankulam, J., & Georgi, F. (2014). Varieties of capitalism or varieties of relationships of forces? Outlines of a historical materialist policy analysis. Capital & Class, 38(1), 59-71. Kantola, J., & Lombardo, E. (2017a). Feminist political analysis: Exploring strengths, hegemonies and limitations. Feminist Theory, 18(3), 323-341. Kantola, J., & Lombardo, E. (2017b). Gender and political analysis: Palgrave Macmillan. Lombardo, E., Meier, P., & Verloo, M. (2010). Discursive dynamics in gender equality politics: What about ‘feminist taboos’? European Journal of Women's Studies, 17(2), 105-123. Lombardo, E., Meier, P., & Verloo, M. (2017). Policymaking from a gender+ equality perspective. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 38(1), 1-19. Staatsprojekt Europa, F. (2014). Kämpfe um Migrationspolitik: Theorie, Methode und Analysen kritischer Europaforschung. In: transcript Verlag. Verloo, M. (2007). Multiple meanings of gender equality: A critical frame analysis of gender policies in Europe: Central European University Press.