Sandra Grey

Numbers and Beyond: The Relevance of Critical Mass in Gender Research

Political scientists concerned with gender relations have long been interested in the numbers of women in national legislatures. Women make up slightly more than 50% of the worlds population, yet average only 16% of the worlds elected political posts. This has led to calls for action that would increase the number of women in legislatures based both on arguments of justice and on claims that an increase will substantively change decision-making processes and outcomes. Part of the debate about substantive changes in political decision making has centered on whether women in a legislature must reach a “critical mass” in order to bring about change in the political arena. The term critical mass is frequently used by politicians, the media, and academics, but can it offer insights into the influence of gender on political processes and outcomes? In this essay, I argue that critical mass is only useful if we discard the belief that a single proportion holds the key to all representation needs of women and if we discard notions that numbers alone bring about substantive changes in policy processes and outcomes. I use a longitudinal textual analysis of New Zealand parliamentary debates to begin development of a joint-effect model that can better explain the factors that aid (or hinder) the substantive representation of women.

When No “Official Record” Exists?

Social movements seek social and political change in very specific political, economic, and cultural contexts. Their very imperative for structural change means that they are nonbureaucratic, noninstitutional, fluid collectives that have no single head office and few formal records of their existence. This poses a substantial problem for researchers—how do we locate, measure, and record the trajectories of these phenomena?

Activist Academics: What Future?

Four decades on from the Year of the Student, when university campuses were sites of protest and dissent, it is crucial to consider how the involvement of university academics in activist causes has changed. Using social movement frameworks this article examines how organisational, political and cultural contexts have hindered social and political activism by New Zealand academics. Declining resources and increased accountability mechanisms in the tertiary education sector have intersected with a cultural context dominated by pragmatism and instrumentalism to constrain activism by academics. Despite these constraints, the author argues that it is crucial for academics to be involved in forms of day-to-day resistance and to establish ongoing connections to activist organisations in order to challenge the hegemonic narratives of marketisation and managerialism which are impacting on all parts of New Zealand society, including universities.