IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v102y2021i4p1699-1718.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do social constructions and gender mainstreaming in policy design affect the evaluation of the policy process? An analysis of a policy intervention in a postconflict society

Author

Listed:
  • Nathalie Mendez

Abstract

Objective The theory of social constructionism has been consolidated as an appropriate tool for understanding policy design, implementation, and evaluation. However, there is little empirical research about the implications of social construction on policy evaluation. The objective of the article is to contribute to the literature in public policy and gender studies by defining the impact of gender as a social construct and gender mainstreaming in public policy on beneficiaries' evaluation of the policy process. Methods I conducted a study of the institutional design of Colombia's policy of assistance to victims of civil war and a quantitative analysis, through ordered logit and logistic regression models, to identify how gender mainstreaming and social constructions affect the evaluation of the policy process measured as the satisfaction levels with the process of application to policy assistance. Results The article confirms the hypothesis that positive social constructions‐in this case, the construction of women victims‐reinforced by a strong institutional design make bureaucrats administer the policy differently to specific groups. As expected, women have more levels of satisfaction with the policy process. However, this effect is not significant for other social constructions such as ethnicity and the elderly. Conclusion Research in this topic should consider the differential effect of certain social constructions on policy evaluation based on how policy design crystallizes symbolic and material messages that benefit some groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathalie Mendez, 2021. "Do social constructions and gender mainstreaming in policy design affect the evaluation of the policy process? An analysis of a policy intervention in a postconflict society," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1699-1718, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:4:p:1699-1718
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13054
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13054
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13054?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schneider, Anne & Ingram, Helen, 1993. "Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 334-347, June.
    2. Linder, Stephen H. & Peters, B. Guy, 1984. "From Social Theory to Policy Design," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 237-259, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. María Elisa Pinto‐Garcia & Renata Serna‐Hosie & Andrés Casas & Nathalie Méndez, 2022. "Art for Reconstruction: A creative and art‐based intervention for peacebuilding and reconciliation to reduce intergroup hostility and stigma after a protracted armed conflict," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(8), pages 1527-1546, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher Weible & David Carter, 2015. "The composition of policy change: comparing Colorado’s 1977 and 2006 smoking bans," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(2), pages 207-231, June.
    2. Nicole Lemke & Philipp Trein & Frédéric Varone, 2023. "Agenda-setting in nascent policy subsystems: issue and instrument priorities across venues," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 633-655, December.
    3. Michael Howlett, 2009. "Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(1), pages 73-89, February.
    4. Maddison, Jonathan & Watts, Richard, 2011. "The technological fix as a frame in media debates about tailpipe emissions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 294-303.
    5. Fritz Sager & Yvan Rielle, 2013. "Sorting through the garbage can: under what conditions do governments adopt policy programs?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(1), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Bruch, Sarah K. & van der Naald, Joseph & Gornick, Janet C., 2022. "Poverty Reduction through Federal and State Policy Mechanisms: Variation Over Time and Across the U.S. States," SocArXiv jz5xp, Center for Open Science.
    7. Frank R. Baumgartner & Christine Mahoney, 2008. "Forum Section: The Two Faces of Framing," European Union Politics, , vol. 9(3), pages 435-449, September.
    8. Yao Zhu & Shousheng Chai & Jieqi Chen & Ian Phau, 2024. "How was rural tourism developed in China? Examining the impact of China’s evolving rural tourism policies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 28945-28969, November.
    9. Sarah K. Bruch & Janet C. Gornick & Joseph van der Naald, 2020. "Geographic Inequality in Social Provision: Variation across the US States," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring Distribution and Mobility of Income and Wealth, pages 499-527, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Giliberto Capano & Andrea Lippi, 2017. "How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 269-293, June.
    11. Thu T. Nguyen & Weijun Yu & Junaid S. Merchant & Shaniece Criss & Chris J. Kennedy & Heran Mane & Krishik N. Gowda & Melanie Kim & Ritu Belani & Caitlin F. Blanco & Manvitha Kalachagari & Xiaohe Yue &, 2023. "Examining Exposure to Messaging, Content, and Hate Speech from Partisan News Social Media Posts on Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-13, February.
    12. Michael Howlett & Ishani Mukherjee, 2014. "Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 57-71.
    13. Momi Dahan, 2023. "Social Construction And The Progressivity Of Local Tax Relief," Israel Economic Review, Bank of Israel, vol. 21(1), pages 1-33, March.
    14. Daniel Béland & Alex Jingwei He & M Ramesh, 2022. "COVID-19, crisis responses, and public policies: from the persistence of inequalities to the importance of policy design [The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(2), pages 187-198.
    15. Annie Everett & Kelly Rosinger & Dominique J. Baker & Hyung-Jung Kim & Robert Kelchen & Justin C. Ortagus, 2024. "Tennessee’s Burden: How Students Apply for State Financial Aid within One Southern State," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 65(8), pages 1826-1852, December.
    16. Sylvie Occelli & Simone Landini, 2021. "Thinking Together and Governance in Transport Planning: Can We Strengthen the Connections?," International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), IGI Global, vol. 10(4), pages 39-62, October.
    17. Claire A. Dunlop & Martino Maggetti & Claudio M. Radaelli & Duncan Russel, 2012. "The many uses of regulatory impact assessment: A meta‐analysis of EU and UK cases," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 23-45, March.
    18. Vladimír Barák & Vojtěch Krebs & Helena Mitwallyová, 2022. "Support for Informal Carers: Has the New Benefit Improved Their Ability to Care?," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2022(1), pages 51-76.
    19. Matt Guardino & Suzanne Mettler, 2020. "Revealing the “Hidden welfare state†: How policy information influences public attitudes about tax expenditures," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    20. Janota, Jessica J. & Broussard, Shorna R., 2008. "Examining private forest policy preferences," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 89-97, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:102:y:2021:i:4:p:1699-1718. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.