What can a feminist interpretation of democratic innovations contribute to a reconceptualisation of democratic consolidation, and vice versa?

The growing public dissatisfaction with political institutions in industrialised liberal democracies has evoked the worry that (liberal) democracy is deconsolidating. This discourse reinvigorates the earlier 1990s’ and 2000s’ paradigm that democratic (re)consolidation is desirable. In response to the concerns about this “democratic malaise”, scholars of democratic innovations have been exploring new ways and/or reforms to widen and deepen democratic participation, with feminist strands emphasising the importance of the inclusion of women and racially, ethnically and economically—and so on—marginalised groups. Amidst these discussions, the persistent political marginalisation of women and the growing attacks on gender equality frameworks in countries where democracy is considered to be deconsolidating raise the question of whether earlier conceptualisations of democratic consolidation contain a male bias. This suggests a need to rethink democratic consolidation. This paper deals with these strands in the democratic scholarship by considering (1) what a feminist reading of democratic innovations can contribute to a reconceptualisation of democratic consolidation; and, in turn, (2) how a mapping of the key dimensions of democratic consolidation can contribute to assessments of feminist democratic innovations. Broadly speaking, this paper takes the view that a democratic innovation’s feminist characteristic can be ascertained from (a) its aims or goals; or/and (b) its mode or process. This study makes two key arguments. First, a feminist reading of democratic innovations can help to clarify the conceptual “core” of democratic consolidation, encouraging a shift from prioritising the persistence of formal liberal democratic institutions towards centring how well practices (and their institutionalised forms) function to empower the inclusion of women and racially, ethnically and economically marginalised groups. In doing so, this perspective can help rectify the male biases embedded in the mainstream conceptualisation of democratic consolidation. On the other hand, second, assessing feminist democratic innovations across democratic consolidation’s three key dimensions, which are constitutional/institutional, behavioural and attitudinal, can help to identify (a) which feminist practices of inclusion are precarious and in what ways; and (b) which are accepted and legitimised. This study demonstrates the value of critical dialogue between scholars of democratic consolidation, democratic innovations and feminist political thought.