One of Us: Gender, Power and Informal Networks

• In Event: Political Resources and Gender

Abstract

Over the last few decades, a central focus of institutional analyses has been documenting the existence and impact of informal (non-written) “rules of the game”, often in conjunction with the identification of the informal networks that sustain them. Examples abound in feminist institutionalist scholarship, which has pinpointed that one particular way in which male dominance is maintained is through male informal networks (Annesley 2015; Bjarnegård 2013; Kenny 2013; Verge and Claveria, 2018), typically through ‘old boy networks’ (Galligan, Clavero and Calloni 2007; Verge and de la Fuente, 2014) or ‘male power monopolies’ (Jones 2008; Hinojosa 2012; Johnson 2016). Even in formal political institutions and organizations such as parliaments and political parties, important discussions take place informally in the ‘back rooms’ or in locations to which women do not have access or are largely absent (Cheng and Tavits 2011; Sawer 2013: 60). In many countries, connections to informal networks and the resources they control is a prerequisite for even standing a chance of being elected to parliament (Galligan, Clavero and Calloni 2007; Jones 2008; Hinojosa 2012; Johnson 2016), but such networks are highly exclusive, with women and other marginalized political actors often positioned as ’outsiders’ (Franceschet 2001, Bjarnegård 2013; Franceschet and Piscopo 2014). As such, informal networking has been depicted as fundamental to a masculine way of doing politics.

Yet while the study of gender networks is not ’new’, feminist research has applied the concept to a wide range of phenomena – from personal networks to clientelism and corruption – pointing to the need for a more systematic analysis of informal networks. Meanwhile, new institutionalist analyses have put significant effort in defining informal institutions, distinguishing them from formal institutions, and establishing the interactions among them, but the study of how collectives of actors such as networks create and communicate informal rules remains largely understudied (Helmke and Levitsky, 2004: 731). In order to continue unveiling the institutions that operate to facilitate the inclusion of certain individuals while effectively excluding others on the grounds of gender, race, class or other markers of identity, institutions should not be conflated with the collectives of actors abiding by and being affected by the rules, benefitting or losing out as a result of their enactment. This paper theoretically unpacks the key elements of informal networking, namely: how networks are created, how they work, and what effects they produce. Bringing together an inter-disciplinary body of scholarship, we lay the foundations for a systematic analysis of the gender dynamics of informal networks in comparative politics. In doing so, we characterize informal networks as bearers of informal norms and practices in regard to access to the ‘club’, internal operation and maintenance, and relation to the broader institutional setting in which they emerge. This conceptual model helps distinguish informal networking from male actors as well as from informal institutions more broadly while allowing for women’s informal agency. Yet, we argue that informal networking will sustain male power when these arrangements have the capacity to set, interpret, or bias the ‘rules of the game’ in favor of the in-group, thereby producing differential access to and distribution of opportunities, resources, and recognition for women and men.

Authors

• Meryl Kenny, University of Edinburgh

• Elin Bjarnegard, Uppsala University

• Tània Verge, Universitat Pompeu Fabra