The concept of gender equality and multinational corporations: a methodological proposal
Published 2018-07-31
Keywords
- Legal plualism,
- Gender equality,
- Multinationals,
- Brazil
How to Cite
Abstract
According to the theory of legal pluralism, in all societies there are two or more legal systems that do not belong to a single "system" of values. However, to what extent non-state actors contribute to the "transformation and breakdown" of rules into legal systems that are inherently pluralistic is unknown. While the use of human rights concepts has grown rapidly, there is still a large gap between policy and practice. In other words, the rhetoric of formal rights, as advocated by international development organizations, does not always translate into an improvement of everyday reality, particularly with regard to women. This is because public policies aimed at social justice have no effect if they are not part of a broader culture of political measures for profound and positive change. In this sense, this article proposes a methodology for the empirical analysis of the role played by multinational corporations in the development and implementation of International Human Rights Law. In the case of this article, the focus refers to the influence of multinational corporations on the concept of gender equality. The methodology presented here is based on theories of legal pluralism combined with critical analyses of discourse to map the processes associated with the transformation of key terms and their meanings. The methodology tries to understand the nuances in the use of human rights-based discourses by multinationals and their relationship with the broader human rights movement.
Downloads
References
ARAÚJO, S. (2005). Pluralismo Jurídico e Emancipação Social: Instancias Comunitárias e Resolução de Conflitos em Moçambique. 11a Assembleia Geral CODESRIA: 06–10 Dezembro 2005, Maputo, Moçambique.
BAKKER, I., (1994). Introduction: Engendering Macro-economic Policy Reform in the Era of Global Restructuring and Adjustment. In: I. Bakker, ed. 1994. The Strategic Silence: Gender and Economic Policy: Gender and Economic Policy. London: Zed Books.
CORNWALL, A. and NYAMU-MUSEMBI, C., 2004. Putting the ‘Rights-Based Approach to Development’ into Perspective. Third World Quarterly, 25 (8), pp.1415-38.
DAVID, M. e R. Guerrina. (2013). Gender and European external relations: Dominant discourses and unintended consequences of gender mainstreaming. Women's Studies International Forum 39 (July): 53–62.
ECKERT, P. e S. McConnell-Ginet. (2003). Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ENGLE MERRY, S. (1988). Legal Pluralism. Law & Soc’y Rev., 22 (5): 869-896.
ENGLE MERRY, S. (1992). Anthropology, Law, and Transnational Processes. Annu. Rev. Anthropol, 21: 357- 79.
ESCOBAR, A. (2007). Post-development as a Concept and Social Practice. In Exploring Post-Development: Theory and Practice, Problems and Perspectives ed. Aram Ziai, Routledge.
FORSBERG, T., Heller, R. e W. Reinhard. (2014). Introduction. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 47 (3-4): 261-268.
FOCAULT, M. (1982). The Subject and Power. In: Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, edited by H. L. Dreyfus and P. Rabinow, pp. 208-226. 1st ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
GIDEON, J. (2012). Engendering the Health Agenda? Reflections on the Chilean Case, 2000-2010. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 19 (3), pp. 293-298.
GREADY, P. and ENSOR, J. (2005). Introduction. In: P. Gready and J. Ensor, eds. 2005. Reinventing Development? Translating Rights-Based Approaches from Theory into Practice. London: Zed Books.
GUY, D. (1990). Public Health, Gender and Private Morality: Paid Labor and the Formation of the Body Politics in Buenos Aires. Gender and History, 2 (3), pp. 297-317.
HARAWAY, D., (1991). Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. London: Free Association Books.
HOLBRAAD, M. And PEDERSEN, M. (2017). The Ontological Turn: An Anthropological Exposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
HOLZSCHEITER, A. (2014). Between Communicative Interaction and Structures of Signification: Discourse Theory and Analysis in International Relations. International Studies Perspectives 15 (2): 142-162.
HTUN, M. and POWER, T. (2006). Gender, Parties and Support for Equal Rights in the Brazilian Congress. Latin American Politics and Society, 48 (4): 83-98.
JOSSIA JÚNIOR, C. (2013). Pluralismo Jurídico: O Palimpsesto Politico e Jurídico em Moçambique e Direito de Pasargada no Brasil. Cadernos do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito/UFRGS, 8 (2): 1-38.
MASSEY, D. (2013). Vocabularies of the economy. In: S. Hall, D. Massey and M. Rustin. After neoliberalism? The Kilburn manifesto [online]. Soudings: A Journal of politics and culture. Available at [Accessed 13 July 2013].
MOHANTY, Chandra T. (1984). Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses. Boundary 2, 12 (3): 338-358.
MOLYNEUX, M., (2007). Change and Continuity in Social Protection in Latin America: Mothers at the Service of the State? Gender and Development Programme Paper, 1, Geneva: UNRISD.
PIERSON, P. (1993). When Effect Becomes Cause: Policy Feedback and Political Change. World Politics, 45 (4): 595-628.
PIERSON, P. (2004). Politics in Time: history, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
PRÜGL, E. (2017). Neoliberalism with a Feminist Face: Crafting a new Hegemony at the World Bank. Feminist Economics, 23 (1): 30-53.
ROSE, G. (2001). Visual Methodologies. London: SAGE.
SANTOS, C. MacDowell. (2008). "Beyond "Helping" or "Not Caring About" Them: Teaching "Women in Developing Countries" at an American University", ex aequo. Revista da Associação Portuguesa de Estudos sobre as Mulheres, 17, 89-105.
SMITH, M. J. (1997). Policy networks. In: M. Hill, ed. 1997. The Policy Process: A Reader. 2nd edition. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf/Hemel Hempstead.
SOUSA SANTOS, B. (1988). O Discurso e o Poder: Ensaio sobre a Sociologia da Retórica Juridica. Porto Alegre: Sergio Antonio Fabris.
SOUSA SANTOS, B. (2002). Towards a New Legal Common Sense, London: Butterworth.
SRIWIMON, L. e P. J. Zilli. (2017). Applying Critical Discourse Analysis as a conceptual framework for investigating gender stereotypes in political media discourse. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences 38 (2): 136-142.
TORNHILL, S. (2016). “A bulletin board of dreams”: corporate empowerment promotion and feminist implications. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 18 (4): 528-543.
TURSHEN, M. (2007). Women’s Health Movements: A Global Force for Change. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
VAN DIJK, T. A. (2015). Critical Discourse Analysis. In: D. Tannen, H. Hamilton, e D. Schiffrin (eds.). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Segunda Edição. (vol. 1, pp. 466-486). Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.
VIVEIROS DE CASTRO, E. (2012). “Transformação na Antropologia, Transformação da “Antropologia”. MANA 18 (1): 151-171.
WOLKMER, A. (2001). Pluralismo Jurídico: fundamentos de uma nova cultura no direito. 3. Ed. São Paulo: Alfa Omega.