Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 18
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Elias, Juanita and Roberts, Adrienne 2016. Feminist Global Political Economies of the Everyday: From Bananas to Bingo. Globalizations, p. 1.

    Jäger, Johannes Horn, Laura and Becker, Joachim 2016. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical International Political Economy.

    Calkin, Sydney 2015. impacts and alternatives: young feminist scholars and the politics of austerity. Feminist Review, Vol. 109, Issue. 1, p. 190.

    McLeod, Laura 2015. A Feminist Approach to Hybridity: Understanding Local and International Interactions in Producing Post-Conflict Gender Security. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, Vol. 9, Issue. 1, p. 48.

    Shields, Stuart and Wallin, Sara 2015. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development's Gender Action Plan and the Gendered Political Economy of Post-Communist Transition. Globalizations, Vol. 12, Issue. 3, p. 383.

    Collins, Andrea M. 2014. Governing the Global Land Grab: What role for Gender in the Voluntary Guidelines and the Principles for Responsible Investment?. Globalizations, Vol. 11, Issue. 2, p. 189.

    Peterson, V. Spike 2012. Rethinking Theory. International Feminist Journal of Politics, Vol. 14, Issue. 1, p. 5.

    Silvey, Rachel 2012. The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Economic Geography.

    Fischer, Anita and Tepe, Daniela 2011. ‘What's “critical” about critical theory’: capturing the social totality (das Gesellschaftliche Ganze). Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol. 14, Issue. 3, p. 366.

    Macartney, Huw and Shields, Stuart 2011. Finding space in critical IPE: a scalar-relational approach. Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol. 14, Issue. 3, p. 375.

    Smith, Nicola J. 2011. The international political economy of commercial sex. Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 18, Issue. 4, p. 530.

    Elias, Juanita 2010. Locating the “Everyday” in International Political Economy: That Roar Which Lies on the Other Side of Silence. International Studies Review, Vol. 12, Issue. 4, p. 603.

    Peterson, V. Spike 2010. Informalization, Inequalities and Global Insecurities. International Studies Review, Vol. 12, Issue. 2, p. 244.

    D’Costa, Bina and Lee-Koo, Katrina 2009. Gender and Global Politics in the Asia-Pacific.

    Elias, Juanita and Beasley, Christine 2009. Hegemonic Masculinity and Globalization: ‘Transnational Business Masculinities’ and Beyond. Globalizations, Vol. 6, Issue. 2, p. 281.

    Peterson, V. Spike 2009. Gender and Global Politics in the Asia-Pacific.

    2009. References. Bulletin of Latin American Research, Vol. 28, p. 178.

    Zalewski, M. 2007. Do We Understand Each Other Yet? Troubling Feminist Encounters with(in) International Relations. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 9, Issue. 2, p. 302.


You still don’t understand: why troubled engagements continue between feminists and (critical) IPE


Relatively early in the attempts to gender the discipline of International Relations (IR), it was argued by some feminist scholars that it was easier to raise feminist concerns in International Political Economy (IPE) than in IR. However, it has subsequently proved very difficult to articulate these concerns within mainstream IPE, as ‘the neo-realist and neo-liberal frameworks, with their common focus on state-centric issues of co-operation and conflict and their positivist and rationalistic methodologies, do not lend themselves to investigating gendered structures of inequality …’. In contrast, more overlap has been discerned between feminist perspectives and methodologies and the less influential ‘globalist’ (also known as critical/transdisciplinary or heterodox) approaches to IPE than with the dominant statist approaches. This article takes this position as its starting point and will focus on the relationship between gendered analyses and critical IPE (as it will be known here). It therefore does not engage with the undoubtedly important question of how far it is possible or desirable to have a gendered analysis that is not linked to feminism, as within both feminist and critical approaches to IPE an emancipatory agenda is entirely legitimate and even an integral part of those approaches.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Review of International Studies
  • ISSN: 0260-2105
  • EISSN: 1469-9044
  • URL: /core/journals/review-of-international-studies
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *