Towards a transformative vision for gender and Canadian international policy: The role and impact of ‘feminist inside activists’

Abstract

In this paper, we consider the role of “feminist inside activists” in shaping the Canadian international policy landscape and provide examples of how government employees have actively promoted feminist and gender equality priorities. Specifically, this paper advances our understanding of how policy translates into action, and the transformative potential of agents of change in gender equality and feminist policy-making within Canada’s international policy machinery. Building on studies that identify the significant contributions of mid-level government employees who fight to keep gender equality a priority in government programming, we explore these contributions in the context of inside activism, documenting the significance of the work of both senior and mid-level government officials in advancing feminist policies and priorities. As an agency-focused analysis, this study complements and builds on critical feminist analyses of structural and systemic inequality.

Within the growing and valuable scholarship outlining the weaknesses, omissions, and systemic challenges of promoting gender equality and feminist foreign policy, ¹ there remains a small and under-researched area of focus (a silence) on the role of agents of change who work within larger bureaucratic processes to promote transformative change for gender equality. In considering the reason for this silence—or gap in our understanding—we can look to the “neglect of inside activism within institutional theory” and the way “institutional change has been underestimated” in Political Science, International Development, and Global Studies. ² Jane Parpart and Swati Parashar remind us that, “[w]hile feminist scholarship and activism certainly requires close attention be paid to gender inequality and patriarchal forces at work around the world, feminist strategies also have to be situated within local gendered understandings and practices.” ³ These local spaces include bureaucracies and institutions where decisions about feminist policy and gender equality programming are made and enacted, and the actors working within these spaces to promote change.

This paper draws our attention to the individuals working within bureaucratic institutions, and their local gendered understandings and practices. It examines important scholarship on feminist inside activism that can frame and guide research to fill the gap in scholarly analysis concerning the potential impact of inside activists—individuals who are often unseen outside (and within) bureaucracies. We know little of their strategies and the ways they employ voice and silence strategically to promote social justice and equality. While much research is needed to explore the distinct ways that inside activism advances feminist and gender equality priorities, this paper provides a new angle for exploring feminist policy-making and enactments and highlights the possibilities for agentic change through inside activism, offering an important and underutilized analytical lens for understanding steps toward feminist transformation. The paper begins with an overview of the gaps in our knowledge and in feminist scholarship and highlights the need for greater attention to feminist inside activists in order to build more comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the transformative potential of policy-makers and practitioners within bureaucratic institutions. The second section offers an overview of the scholarship on inside activism, beginning with definitions and conceptual lenses employed in feminist scholarship. The third section outlines evidence of inside activism and its role and impact in promoting transformational change in international policy contexts. In the fourth section, we explore the impact, challenges, and limitations of inside activism as outlined by diverse studies around the world. This research references scholarship on gender mainstreaming and examines feminist priorities as enacted by inside activists. The fifth section narrows its focus to the Canadian context and provides examples of feminist inside activism as important and relevant to the process of policy translation. This section offers examples of actions and shows the importance of considering this agentic potential in relation to ongoing barriers and shifts in political priorities over time.

We consider Canada-specific examples of inside activism in three areas: 1) collaborative cross-sectoral feminists movements that involve policy advocates from civil society who have influenced or supported government officials’ commitments to gender equality and feminist priorities; 2) the role and impact of senior officials and champions of feminist priorities as influential inside activists; and 3) the role of mid-level professionals who have used resistance or defiance when faced with anti-gender equality programs, to ensure gender equality and feminist priorities remain central to government programming and practice, even when official policy does not reflect these priorities. The paper concludes with some insights on the importance (and ongoing limitations) of feminist inside activists, as well as some of the potential reasons why we have seen—and may continue to see—a growing number of feminist inside activists within government. These findings point to areas for further inquiry and analysis so that a more comprehensive picture of the transformational potential of policy-making and practice are explored, whether for gender mainstreaming and/or feminist foreign policies.

As a growing number of countries around the world adopt feminist policies, it is an important moment for reflection on how these feminist policy priorities and commitments arise and the strategies employed to promote innovative, transformative, and sustained leadership and change. Feminist scholarship on Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy, to date, has offered valuable insights into the opportunities (real and missed) and persistent challenges and weaknesses of feminist policy-making and feminist policy translation. In the section below, we provide an overview of the significant contributions of feminist scholarship for understanding the challenges and opportunities of translating policy into practice. We also highlight gaps in our knowledge and the need for greater attention to inside activism to expand our knowledge and to promote the transformative potential of translating policy into practice.

Canada’s commitments to gender equality and feminist priorities

Canada’s long-standing commitments to women’s rights and gender equality have generated a range of policy priorities and initiatives to support women’s equal access to and control of resources, as well as equal opportunities to realize their full human rights. ⁴ These strategies have faced several setbacks over the years, including the instrumentalization of women or “vulnerable groups” for other strategic objectives (political, military, or economic), ⁵ which distances Canada from broader global insights and commitments to gender and development. By exploiting gender equality to realize other agendas, states and their institutions advance their national interests at the expense of women. ⁶ Other important critiques point to the erasure of gender equality from the diplomatic vocabulary under the Harper Conservative governments. ⁷ More recent critiques of commitments to gender equality emerge in the critical analysis of Canada’s recent Feminist International Assistance Policy, which has a disproportionate focus on “women and girls” rather than gender equality, ⁸ lacks a clear definition of feminism, ⁹ has a limited approach to intersectional feminism, ¹⁰ has limited focus on sexual orientation and gender inclusion, ¹¹ and fails to distinguish itself substantively from previous policies that have been criticized for insufficient attention to feminist and gender equality priorities. ¹²

While much is written on critical policy discourse, little is known about the way that gender equality and feminist foreign policy priorities are enacted and advanced in the day-to-day work of civil servants. Many government workers are well-versed in gender issues, whether through university or other post-secondary courses and/or workplace training, such as the Government of Canada’s Gender-based Analysis Plus (GBA+) program, not to mention any exposure they may have to the readings and scholarly insights of influential thinkers. Research on feminist inside activists provides a particular set of insights into agentic processes and the ways that individuals organize themselves, express their values, and resist structural inequalities or social injustices. As Jan Olsson and Erik Hysing explain, “inside activism brings fresh light on institutional change by upgrading the importance of political agency within public organizations”; it challenges scholars to reconsider how “institutional change has been underestimated” and “places individual political agency at the center of institutional analysis of change and stability.” ¹³

The contribution of this paper to the broader scholarship on gender equality and feminist foreign policies and priorities is the deepening of our knowledge of the distinct ways in which policies are made and enacted through the efforts of inside activists within government. While there are limitations and challenges encountered within bureaucracies, important and incremental advancements need to be documented and understood. This study specifically explores the experiences of feminist inside activists: their gains and ongoing challenges. It does not reflect the actions of the roughly 288,000 civil servants in Canada. It is also worth noting that not all civil servants are trained in gender equality and feminism. However, previous research and scholarship has demonstrated that inside activists are engaged in influencing policy, programming, and projects to advance gender equality and feminist principles.

We begin by defining inside activism and documenting the different ways that inside activists advance and contribute to feminist commitments and gender equality priorities, specifically in relation to international development policies.

Inside activism: A review of the literature

Inside activists work strategically within the formal public sector, promoting their personal values within government policy, programs, and actions. ¹⁴ Mainstreaming gender within institutions, according to Jacqui True, even when done poorly, enables change and encourages collaboration amongst feminist activists, policy-makers, and scholars both inside and outside the government. ¹⁵ Inside activists are actors that hold a formal position in the public sector and act strategically from that position in order to “influence public decision making.” ¹⁶ The activist work of public sector workers can involve deliberate tactics that address power relations and/or influence through networking activities within and outside of government. ¹⁷

Inside activists promoting gender equality and feminist values (described in this paper as “feminist inside activists”) have (since the mid-1980s) focused on deliberate gender mainstreaming strategies. Inside activists start from the position that “organizations are not gender neutral. …[but they] are profoundly gendered, and operate to reinforce and maintain gender divisions in society.” ¹⁸ Joanne Sandler, Aruna Rao, and Rosalind Eyben argue that gender mainstreaming is potentially most effective when “it is about working within and changing existing paradigms at one and the same time. Through their everyday experiences of successes, failure, and compromise as they navigate complex arenas of power, politically astute feminist bureaucrats have learnt to be effective strategists.” ¹⁹ Therefore, to achieve and promote gender equality, institutions require inside activists to combat inequitable processes and to promote gender mainstreaming and feminist priorities within organizations. Other language used to describe inside activists working in government on gender mainstreaming priorities includes “gender policy entrepreneurs” who are internal advocates of gender change and able to persuade others within development institutions of the merit of implementing gender initiatives. ²⁰ These gender entrepreneurs are central to the gender mainstreaming process. ²¹

In the scholarship on inside activists, Olsson and Hysing have identified five distinct types of inside activists: 1) street-level bureaucrats; 2) policy entrepreneurs; 3) policy brokers; 4) femocrats; and 5) grey-zone and network administrators. ²² Street-level bureaucrats enact their horizontal networks to remain more connected to the local context. This type of inside activist values these networks as they enable greater resource mobilization and legitimacy grounded in values. Moreover, this type of inside activist refrains from reacting to pressures stemming from policy implementation; rather, they influence agenda setting and policy formulation. ²³

In contrast, policy entrepreneurs argue that everyone is a policy entrepreneur because they promote values and interests, even if not their own. They are continuously searching for opportunities to promote their values and ideals. ²⁴ True argues that policy entrepreneurs are knowledgeable about different policies and are able to tailor their recommendations for the gender mainstreaming of these policies to fit different policy debates and groups, while maintaining a consistent story. ²⁵ Furthermore, she argues that gender policy entrepreneurs at the executive level of government are “instrumental in leveraging policy change [towards gender justice] at the national level, especially in democratic states.” ²⁶

Policy brokers are politically neutral and focused on combating poorly-developed ideas. Policy brokers focus on developing “better policy” and resolving any conflicts that may arise through a learning process culminating in synthesis. ²⁷ With policy brokers, there is a “[r]isk of neglecting the political nature of policy processes and administrative behaviour if we actively search for policy brokers in empirical studies.” ²⁸ Policy brokers must not be viewed as separate from advocates, as there is crossover between the two types of inside activists. For example, brokers can have an interest in policy, and advocates can also promote conflict resolution.

A femocrat is a public official working who prioritizes furthering gender equality. “Femocrats are often perceived as connected to the women’s movement, not as formal representatives or agents, but rather as legitimate ‘experts’ on women’s policies and gender equality.” ²⁹ Femocrats believe that the method of achieving social and political change is not as important as actually achieving change within the government. ³⁰ Therefore, as Rosalind Eyben indicates, femocrats keep a distance from external activists, but may use the “threat” of engaging in radical movements to promote organizational change. ³¹ Furthermore, they may form external networks or work with external organizations to promote gender equality within the public sphere. ³² Sarah Hendriks agrees, suggesting that building networks enables greater insight into formal and informal power hierarchies within mainstream development organizations. ³³ Additionally, True argues that femocrats have been vital to policy formation, as they have legitimized women’s issues and incorporated gender into institutional agendas. ³⁴ The term “femocrat” is, however, a contested one. It has been used as a derogatory term in some countries such as Australia, to describe feminists who have entered into women’s policy positions in government. The arguments arising in these debates have challenged the role of femocrats as actors engaged in institutionalizing feminism and the impact they may have on strengthening or weakening women’s rights movements. ³⁵

Finally, grey-zone and network administrators “promote the establishment of strong networks within their policy areas that not only include a variety of private actors but also central political actors.” ³⁶ This type of inside activist engages private and political actors within networks to promote gender priorities within organizations. In order to garner greater support and legitimacy, grey-zone and network administrators use resources grounded in “specific value-based networks for political purposes.” ³⁷

Networking is a vital component of all the inside activist types. Inside activists may employ their personal networks strategically to enhance their personal values. Networking is a key aspect, identified by Eyben, related to gender mainstreaming and inside activism. ³⁸ Specifically, she argues that “trust-based alliances” are key, as is investing time into building relationships. ³⁹ In addition, Eyben argues that subverting spaces intended for non-feminist purposes is often safest for planning and learning by feminist policy actors. ⁴⁰ This subversion of non-feminist spaces involves inside activists using the existing structures, budget, and time of their organizations to promote feminist objectives undetected, because they are able to conceal their activism within their everyday duties. This tactic can involve capitalizing on policy contradictions, using instrumentalist claims to highlight key gender issues, and other similar strategies. Thus, feminist bureaucrats may act deliberately to promote their feminist values within their everyday work. The same can be said of bureaucrats who value, for example, environmental protection or the integration of two-spirited, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, queer, and plus (2SLGBTQ+) equality.

Moving beyond the specific types of inside activists and networking, Eyben considers the strategies they employ. Inside activists invite their allies inside and outside their organizations (including lobbyists and other civil society actors) to engage in policy spaces as a critical voice in gender mainstreaming debates. ⁴¹ This tactic can strengthen the gender mainstreaming agenda, as it enables outright discussion and examination of a topic through a gender lens. However, gender proponents and inside activists often feel pressure from the continuous challenges they face. Eyben suggests that inside activists face discursive tactics from their opponents, even though they (inside activists) also have tactics of their own to promote change; including discursive ambiguity, strategic ambiguity, and outflanking manoeuvres. ⁴² Discursive ambiguity involves non-specific common goals in complex environments. In contrast, strategic ambiguity involves directly influencing stakeholders to support specific strategy implementation. Outflanking manoeuvres prioritize political activity over gender mainstreaming as organizational change. ⁴³

While different characterizations and roles for inside activists are notable among those who work to promote gender equality and feminist priorities within governments, they remain central to working from within the centre while “maintaining a critical voice and perspective—being simultaneously inside and outside the dominant discourse and institutions.” ⁴⁴ Inside activists may employ a range of subversive strategies to combat gender inequality within their organization and advance gender equality in policy and practice, through activities involving networking and developing professional relationships inside and outside government. Joni Lovenduski argues that inside activists have enhanced the success of the women’s movement. ⁴⁵ She argues that inside activists are closely associated with those movements experiencing growth and cohesion. ⁴⁶ Furthermore, although they are effective in open policy environments, inside activists are deemed more important to closed policy environments. In such instances, inside activists act as policy enablers to incorporate the women’s movement into policy debates. ⁴⁷ Scholarship on gender mainstreaming has therefore offered important insights into the diverse tactics and strategies employed by inside activists. The introduction of feminist foreign policies around the world since 2014 provides a new lens through which to consider the diverse strategies of inside activists, in relation to the development of feminist foreign policies as well as the potential for sustained informal commitments to feminist priorities, even when official feminist foreign policies may be revoked.

Inside activism and feminist foreign policy

Since the introduction of Sweden’s feminist foreign policy in 2014, several countries, including Chile, Spain, Luxembourg, Libya, Sweden, France, Mexico, and Canada, have articulated and adopted feminist foreign policies, with varying degrees of commitment to their operationalization. While Sweden was the first to declare a feminist foreign policy, it was also the first to officially revoke it. In October 2022, under new party leadership, the elected prime minister, Ulf Kristersson, announced that the government was reversing the feminist foreign policy while continuing to prioritize gender equality as one of Sweden’s core values. ⁴⁸ This example offers further insight into what is possible once feminist foreign policy becomes a core bureaucratic approach, even if the official status changes, as we will explore in greater detail in this paper. At the time of writing this paper, Canada remains committed to a feminist foreign policy, one which has been promoted by Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s deputy prime minister, and the prime minister Justin Trudeau on several occasions. Nonetheless, no official and comprehensive feminist foreign policy has been launched to date. Canada’s articulated commitments to feminist foreign policy, however, are found in its Feminist International Assistance Policy (FIAP). Introduced in 2017, the FIAP highlights several important priorities and strategies that build on Canada’s long-standing commitments to gender equality. ⁴⁹

Examining feminist foreign policies is particularly significant as principles of gender equality have been widely ignored in mainstream international relations circles. ⁵⁰ When attention is given to feminist and gender equality priorities in foreign policy, the scholarship has focused extensively on the structural limitations and discursive shortcomings of policies, as explored above. Few studies have documented how feminist foreign policies came about, the role of inside activists in their design, the significance of these feminist foreign policies in relation to incremental change, and the possibilities for sustained formal or informal commitments to feminist values if governments change course and revoke official feminist foreign policy priorities. A 2021 study by Liz Gill-Atkinson and a team of researchers is one example of the few studies exploring the impetus for the development of feminist foreign policies. Their research reinforces the importance of examining the role of government officials at different levels of government, and the specific strategies they have used to promote gender equality and feminist priorities. ⁵¹ Their study concludes that work in support of feminist foreign policy declarations was “enabled by decades of groundwork by feminist civil society actors.” ⁵² However, “the source of the demand for FFP is unclear in terms of whether it has been driven from within government or from civil society.” ⁵³ In other studies, the importance of “uptake” of feminist foreign policies is addressed, with examples of the connections to “longer histories of ideas around women and gender” that is, in some contexts, becoming “increasingly institutionalized,” as in the case of Canada’s long-standing gender equality commitments. ⁵⁴ Documenting the source or origins of feminist foreign policy priorities has also been linked to norms around “liberal modernity” ⁵⁵ that have gained popularity, in part, from growing international policy commitments that include gender equality and feminist priorities. In the section that follows, we consider the significant contributions of feminist inside activists as important to the institutionalization and “uptake” of feminist foreign policy activities.

Challenges and limitations of feminist inside activism

Scholarship outlining the limitations of feminist and gender equality priorities has been influenced by important research on gender mainstreaming strategies and the issues encountered in the process of translating policies into practice. These challenges are summarized here as: institutional challenges, gatekeepers, resistance, and instrumental versus transformational approaches. Each may be linked to the struggles faced by inside activists.

The category of institutional challenges, as Parpart identifies, provides a range of considerations for the full adoption of gender mainstreaming, gender equality, or feminist visions within bureaucracies. ⁵⁶ Examples include the limited impact and marginalized position of “focal point” staff tasked with implementing an organization’s priorities around gender. These staff may be isolated from senior management (removing them from decision-making processes and limiting the potential for vertical integration of gender priorities) and/or from other sectoral units within the organization (thereby limiting the potential to integrate gender priorities horizontally across the organization). ⁵⁷ Other limitations linked to poor performance on gender mainstreaming or the integration of feminist perspectives across the organization stem from untrained staff or those lacking the skills to implement gender-based policies; a lack of accountability mechanisms in place to ensure gender and feminist priorities are addressed in all programs and projects (for example, poor results-based management data collection that focus on women’s involvement rather than gender relations); and few opportunities to share and learn within and beyond the organization. ⁵⁸

Writing on gender mainstreaming within the United Nations (UN), Sandler, Rao, and Eyben agree with Parpart’s assertions regarding institutional challenges that inside activists face. ⁵⁹ Problems may include ostracization from decision-making realms and the invalidation of their opinions and suggestions. Additionally, they argue that the UN kept UN Women at a disadvantaged level, essentially restricting its “effectiveness in a hierarchy where organisational access is determined by the level of leadership.” ⁶⁰ They propose that to combat these issues, UN WOMEN must ensure that the UN bureaucracy is providing the required space and institutional support to promote change. ⁶¹ An additional challenge for inside activists within the UN is the “pay-to-play” system, which means that only those organizations with sufficient resources have their opinions considered. ⁶² This is particularly concerning as financing and budgeting specific to gender equality initiatives is not common practice. Furthermore, outsider feminists may not know who to approach within an organization in their bid to connect with inside activists. ⁶³ Familiarizing themselves with the names of inside activists can enable outside activists to improve their work and efficiency in change-making. ⁶⁴ Anne Carbert notes that one of the challenges that inside and outside activists face when trying to advance gender equality priorities is communication, particularly with those in bureaucracies. ⁶⁵ She argues that at minimum, insiders and outsiders must respect one another, their work, and in a best-case scenario, develop stronger links. ⁶⁶

A second major challenge stems from common perceptions of gender-related work and the role of gender-focused staff, since gender work is generally performed by women and for women. This limited understanding of gender equality means that expectations of “gender work” often fall to women within the organization, even if those employees lack the training or power to influence other staff members. ⁶⁷ By extension, many of the gender inside activists are women. While men can also be feminist and gender–equality inside activists, they face specific barriers and challenges within inside activist groups. For example, Sandler, Rao, and Eyben state that “[t]he men that [they’ve] met who work on gender equality issues in multilateral organizations have told [them] about the snickers and the teasing that they encounter from other men. Relatively innocuous comments like, ‘What does the gender man have to say about that?’ to far more sexist and misogynistic remarks.” ⁶⁸ It is clear that greater support for inside activists is required from their colleagues in the different departments and managerial levels within such organizations. Eyben also reports how men who act as feminist inside activists face specific challenges associated with inside activism, noting that men are often made to feel uncomfortable or belittled by other male staff for supporting women’s or gender equality priorities. ⁶⁹ In addition, racism is often overlooked in feminist inside activism, particularly when feminism is associated with the interests of white middle-class women. While some gender and feminist advocates support an intersectional feminist approach, others see gender equality and women’s rights in a more universalistic manner. ⁷⁰ This is a huge missed opportunity to address the double burden of repression and inequality that racialized women experience. Intersectional approaches and strategies for feminist inside activists are therefore essential to reflect diverse experiences of marginalization and inequality.

Ines Smyth, Laura Turquet, and Eyben also argue that being an inside activist promoting gender issues and empowerment within an international NGO can prove demoralizing because of the constant exclusion and continuously having to insert themselves into other’s work. ⁷¹ She notes that the process of mainstreaming “positions these gender officers as the ‘gender nag,’ or the gender police, wearily having to ‘gender proof’ documents, rather than spending their time energetically making a positive case for a women’s rights approach.” ⁷² This correlates to the reactive rather than proactive approach to gender programming within which inside activists often engage. Another limitation is that “gender practitioners may confront bureaucratic machinery that provides little institutional support for the integration of women’s interests within mainstream development projects and programs.” ⁷³ Resources such as staff, money, and time, as well as organizational policy support, are often withheld from gender programs and gender practitioners. ⁷⁴ Similarly, True suggests that limited financial and human capital resources negatively impact gender mainstreaming efforts within institutions. ⁷⁵

Furthermore, even institutions with gender policies often fail to develop corresponding implementation strategies. ⁷⁶ Feminists such as Louise Chappell question the purpose of having social actors attempt to challenge the so-called status quo if institutions are masculine in nature. ⁷⁷ Chappell answers her own question by turning to institutional dynamism and states that institutions are fluid and able to change; therefore, in theory, institutions should be able to adapt to the prioritization of gender equality. ⁷⁸ Nonetheless, some government departments face substantial challenges to adopting feminist approaches and GBA+ strategies. These challenges can arise from different organizational cultures, a lack of dedicated resources to complete the work, diverse priorities of leaders in different departments, and a lack of trained staff to promote feminist and GBA+ commitments. Several opportunities also exist for the advancement of gender equality and feminist priorities, including the contributions of feminist inside activists. In the next section, we consider three specific observations of feminist inside activism in the Canadian context.

Evidence of feminist inside activism within Canada

Feminist inside activism in the Canadian context, particularly within Global Affairs Canada, can be observed through: 1) Collaborative, cross-sectoral feminist movements involving civil society policy advocates who influence and/or support government commitments to gender equality and feminist priorities; 2) Senior government officials who have demonstrated commitments to feminist priorities and the significance of their strategies to inside activists; and 3) Acts of subtle resistance, defiance, and persistence among mid-level government employees who circumvent official directives (when those directives are not supportive of gender equality and feminist priorities) and continue to promote feminist practices.

Collaborative cross-sectoral feminist engagements

Studies on feminist inside activism within Global Affairs Canada have examined different collaborative strategies and activities, including the role of civil society actors in supporting inside activist strategies. Alexandra Dobrowolsky, for example, found that inside activists within the Canadian government would often reach out to Canadian feminist civil society organizations to put pressure on the government when a law or policy change with a feminist or gender-related aspect was emerging. ⁷⁹ She observed that inside activists in government would provide civil society lobbyists with advice on strategies, information about relevant files, and even copies of draft documents to facilitate policy advocacy work and achieve maximum results. ⁸⁰ This example demonstrates the connection and support that inside activists can offer one another.

Research by Sarah Hendriks provides some of the most comprehensive information on the role of inside activists focused on gender and feminist priorities within the Government of Canada. ⁸¹ She considered the role of inside activists in the then-CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency) and the collaborations and strategies employed in connection with the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), as well as NGOs and civil society organizations (CSOs). Her findings support previous research that feminists from government and civil society sectors collaborate to push a gender and development vision for Canada, and that this work has incorporated feminist values into projects, values, and commitments. ⁸² Strategies employed included “both formal tactics and informal strategies within the confines of bureaucratic mainstream development contexts.” ⁸³ In addition to interpersonal relationships across sectors, it is also important to consider that the movement of people between these sectors can have an additional impact on creating inside activists. For example, staff working in CSOs can move into government roles at different points in their careers, bringing with them knowledge and values that reflect feminist values, thereby fostering deeper commitments to gender equality and feminist priorities among mid-level government employees.

Feminist leadership among senior government officials

Under the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, gender equality became a leading priority, starting with the 2015 announcement of a gender-balanced cabinet. When asked why a gender-balanced cabinet was important, Trudeau responded: “because it’s 2015.” ⁸⁴ Two years later, in 2017, Trudeau announced Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy which, while a surprise to many within and outside the government, ⁸⁵ reinforced Trudeau’s multiple public references to his own feminist values and priorities. In these ways, the most senior government official in Canada displays his commitment to feminist inside activism and principles. These commitments, however, have not gone unchallenged. For example, the headline of a 2016 Maclean’s article by Anne Kingston asks, “Is Justin Trudeau a fake feminist?” ⁸⁶ This and other critical analyses of Trudeau’s track record on feminist strategies ⁸⁷ point out inconsistencies, including selling arms to Saudi Arabia, as well as insufficient commitments or unfinished business in various matters, such as institutionalizing gender equality in leadership positions, funding childcare, preventing sexual violence, and addressing the diverse needs of women and gender non-conforming individuals through an intersectional lens.

Research by Francesca Scala and Stephanie Paterson analyzes the role and impact of senior officials promoting gender equality. ⁸⁸ They examined the role of inside activists in gender mainstreaming activities and found that gender mainstreaming policies, like other policy initiatives, are designed by senior officials but “enacted by local bureaucratic actors.” ⁸⁹ Their research reinforces the need to consider the role of inside activists at different levels of government. As they point out, the implementation of gender mainstreaming must take into account the “broader political and managerial prerogatives that are changing the nature of policy work in general” ⁹⁰ and the importance of senior managers as organizational champions who advocate for gender mainstreaming. These champions for gender equality can “use their positional authority and political capital to rally resources and support for gender work.” ⁹¹ Furthermore, when government leadership values gender equality and champions feminist commitments, those government employees seeking to access higher levels of power and authority in government (moving from mid-level positions to senior bureaucratic roles) may also adopt the language and priorities of feminist policy-making and gender equality as a strategic tool for career advancement.

The significance of positional authority in shaping the policy landscape is also true for leaders who do not prioritize gender equality and feminist values. When Stephen Harper’s Conservative governments were accused of “erasing gender” from the national policy priorities and international strategies, ⁹² they issued top-down internal directives to replace all references to gender equality with “equality between women and men.” ⁹³ This strategy was harshly criticized, highlighting the limited knowledge and understanding of the meaning of gender equality among senior Conservative party leaders. In removing the language of gender equality, the Harper Conservatives failed to acknowledge the inherent power relations that promote gender inequality, and also the marginalizing impact of recognizing only “women and men” (thereby erasing nonbinary and 2SLGBTQ+ people, as well as youth).

Senior leadership, therefore, matters in the prioritization of feminist and gender equality principles and priorities. Gill-Atkinson and her co-authors found that decisions to introduce feminist foreign policies were often high-level political decisions.

Feminist foreign policy declarations, particularly the explicit use of the label feminist on these policies, have tended to come as a surprise to many working within government and civil society. Government and civil society representatives from Mexico, Sweden, France, and Canada reported that they had not anticipated the declaration of an explicitly “feminist” foreign or international assistance policy. Whilst civil society played a significant role in creating an enabling environment for these policies to be declared, government and civil society representatives reported that in all cases, the decision to label the policy as explicitly feminist was sparked from within government, and was often the decision of an individual minister or Head of Government. ⁹⁴

This raises questions about what it means to be an inside activist and who we think of in terms of inside activists if key feminist transformations or policy priorities are initiated at the highest levels of government. In the Canadian case, the feminist activists might be seen as heads of state, such as the self-declared feminist prime minister Trudeau. As a result, Canada’s feminist foreign policy and commitments will remain subject to criticism that they may be “too strongly associated with the legacy of an individual leader,” ⁹⁵ and may be swiftly reversed under different leadership (as in the example of the Harper Conservative government). Gill-Atkinson and her co-authors argue that strategies that seek to further “embed” feminist priorities “within the broader vision of a political group could help to address and overcome this potential pitfall.” ⁹⁶ Therefore, actively working towards systems of practice and procedures that reflect feminist priorities across all levels of government and government activities is crucial for building a sustainable set of feminist commitments, and inside activists can play a central role in that process. Feminist priorities associated with a particular leader, and in the case of Canada, particular senior officials within the Liberal party, are a significant challenge to sustainable solutions for gender equality and feminist programming.

Mid-level government employees’ subtle resistance and strategic practices

Participants in the study by Scala and Paterson noted that the work of gender mainstreaming or gender-based analysis was not explicitly included in job descriptions, but rather part of unofficial duties and responsibilities. Others took up gender-based analysis work in proactive or even “maverick” ways. By sustaining unofficial gender equality activities, government employees demonstrated a high degree of commitment to gender equality and feminist values. Study participants talked about being unwilling to “abandon” gender equality principles or gender-based analysis imperatives, regardless of their job descriptions. ⁹⁷ As one participant noted, a “subtle strategy” employed by mid-level inside activists included using templates in programming as an “effective strategy to advance gender work.” ⁹⁸ The participant noted that as femocrats, their strategies went beyond going to senior management for a mandatory reporting system on gender outcomes. Rather, they would foster relationships with computer technicians who were involved in the mandatory reporting systems within the organization. They would take the technicians for coffee and, in this social setting, ask for a few additional boxes to be added to reporting templates and program evaluation forms to ensure that gender priorities were included. While these strategies did not lead to “organizational or social change,” these “conservative instrumentalists” ⁹⁹ were able to “work within the rules of the game to bring gender and diversity concerns into policy deliberations.” ¹⁰⁰

Similar examples of subtle resistance and defiance were documented as a result of the Harper government’s decision to remove references to gender equality, particularly among staff working for then-CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency, now incorporated into Global Affairs Canada). ¹⁰¹ Examples of resistance and resilience were noted as mid-level government officials continued “to carry the gender equality ‘torch’…[through]…their continued, often surreptitious, efforts to support the advancement of gender equality.” ¹⁰² These examples demonstrate the commitment of mid-level CIDA officials who “kept pressing for gender equality in development outcomes.” ¹⁰³ Thus, the inside activism observed within Government of Canada shows that much is possible with strong and dedicated mid-level bureaucrats who are committed to gender equality and feminist priorities. It also points to the sustained impact of government staff who have benefited from education and training in gender equality and feminist values.

Strategies for sustained engagement and prioritization of gender equality and feminist principles

Some of the above examples point to a sustained and pioneering commitment to feminist priorities and gender equality in the Canadian policy environment, but also ongoing backlash and resistance. It is important, therefore, to consider why current commitments continue to keep gender equality on the table. There are important connections between the nature of the training that has taken place in recent years to help Government of Canada employees to understand gender equality and feminist priorities and their roles as inside activists. Among the different examples of training, we can consider the GBA+ training toolkit. GBA+ is a federal toolkit designed to provide training to all government departments on the inclusion of women, men, and gender-diverse individuals by emphasizing their heterogeneity across different axes of difference, including gender, sex, race, ethnicity, religion, age, and mental or physical disability. ¹⁰⁴ The GBA+ training is now widely mandated across government departments, but its impact has been highly questioned by feminists who fault its “asymmetrical approach to intersectionality” due to its prioritization of gender above other systems of oppression. ¹⁰⁵ While GBA+ training has highlighted the importance of gender-based analyses in government policies and programs and has been widely adopted across federal government departments, there remain many examples of resistance to integrating a GBA+ lens and/or treatment of GBA+ as a secondary consideration in the design of programs. ¹⁰⁶

Understanding the Government of Canada’s commitments to gender equality and feminist priorities over time also requires consideration of changing norms and discourses, improved knowledge, and expansion of training activities for those entering government positions. In other words, the knowledge and experiences that students gain in their academic programs contribute to changing discourses and practices within government. While evidence of impact in student training on changing norms and priorities within government is elusive, we turn here to some reflections on the potential for changes to government priorities, particularly through increasingly trained cohorts of graduates from academic programs such as Women and Gender Studies, International Development Studies, Canadian Foreign Policy, and International Relations. It is important to note here that there is great variation within and across these programs in terms of the extent of training in feminism, intersectionality, and gender equality theories, policies, and practices. These variations can be explained, in part, by differing ideological and epistemological preferences of different course instructors, which determines the level of attention they give these issues. Moreover, studies evaluating course syllabi and course textbooks in the above-noted fields of study demonstrate that gender equality and/or feminist approaches are often marginalized topics, included as afterthoughts near the end of the course or textbook, and/or given insufficient attention as cross-cutting issues. ¹⁰⁷

However, when students actively engage in the study of gender equality and feminist approaches (whether through courses, readings, or independent research projects), they gain advanced training in important skills and are then able to apply their knowledge in influencing, formulating, and implementing gender sensitive and transformative policies when they enter Canadian government departments and agencies, think-tanks, NGOs, other influential spaces. The expansion of expertise in gender and feminist studies fosters the development of networks of informed activists, policy-makers, and practitioners who are strategically positioned to drive the feminist agenda in relevant policy spaces. Over the past several decades, dedicated efforts by a growing body of scholars and highly trained experts in gender and feminist approaches ¹⁰⁸ have equipped many graduates to support feminist priorities, gender equality, and GBA+ in the public service sector, civil society, and in other careers. These trained experts represent a growing community of feminists who may also be working to promote improved government-civil society collaborations to advance feminist priorities and objectives. Through collaborations and networking within and across sectors, the incremental bureaucratic change wrought by the individual agency of inside activists is likely to ensure sustained commitments to feminist and gender equality priorities.

Conclusion

This paper began by exploring the need for a stronger agency-centred approach to understanding gender equality, gender mainstreaming, and feminist policy-making. While the structural limitations of patriarchal organizations may prevent many feminist inside activists from having as much of an impact as they may desire, there is evidence to suggest that feminist inside activists play a significant role in broad policy strategies (i.e., introducing feminist foreign policies) and incremental changes in line with gender equality and feminist values. The review of inside activist scholarship provides insights into the different kinds of roles and impacts made in this process and the strategies employed by inside activists. Evidence of feminist inside activism in Canada is outlined here to show diverse acts of agency by government employees, from networking and collaborating with outside/external organizations for feminist advocacy work and for the promotion of change from within. Other examples document the role of diverse levels of government officials and their distinctive and complementary roles in advancing feminist and gender equality priorities (particularly at the senior level of government, as observed with Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy and its promise of a feminist foreign policy). Moreover, when governments have implemented policies or directives that limit or marginalize gender equality programming, inside activists have resisted or circumvented these directives and promoted feminist and gender equality principles.

While this research provides an important context within which to understand feminist inside activism, it also sheds light on some of the additional research needed to further document these day-to-day enactments of gender equality and feminist principles. Research that provides more insight into acts of strategic agency and resistance to regressive practices or policies and proactive attempts to transform institutions in line with feminist principles will bring us closer to understanding the transformative potential of gender mainstreaming and feminist priorities, ¹⁰⁹ and the strategic impact of feminist inside activists. Furthermore, research on the career trajectories of mid-level feminist inside activists (including career shifts from CSOs to government) may help us understand how feminist training and background influences foreign policy development. Similarly, improved understanding of the nature and extent of organizational training and how this training contributes to inside activism in the day-to-day work of government employees is important for documenting new and sustained approaches and feminist priorities within government departments. Finally, university-level training and exposure to feminist theories, policies, and strategies can also play a major role in understanding how feminist foreign policies have gained popularity in recent years. Additional research that tracks the level of training received at different career stages as well as previous training can tell us more about the skills, knowledge, and values that contribute to feminist inside activist priorities within government departments.

Among the challenges of sustained commitments to feminist values and principles in foreign policy-making is securing a large-scale institutional commitment to these values and strategies. For example, as Gill-Atkinson and her co-authors note: “Political leaders who are personally associated with FFP [feminist foreign policy] should develop strategies to ensure policy longevity beyond their tenure” ¹¹⁰ so that commitments and advances do not lose ground over time. Senior leadership on gender equality and feminist priorities can be a significant factor in the introduction of policies (as was the case with Canada’s commitments to the Feminist International Assistance Policy and to broader messaging among senior leaders in government for a proposed official Canadian feminist foreign policy); however, those gains can be quickly and easily lost when new governments come into power. Thus, mid-level bureaucrats who maintain commitments to social justice, equity, inclusion, and feminist approaches can continue to play a role in advancing these priorities in the long term, whether as subtle acts of resistance observed among government officials who continued to engage in gender equality work even when directed to focus on “equality of men and women” under the Harper government, ¹¹¹ or through other strategies, such as entrenching feminist principles across departments in ways such as gender-responsive budgeting, feminist methodologies, and data collection processes. These inside activists and their activities can prevent backsliding and can help with moving incrementally to a transformational vision of government policy and practice. Additional strategies that build on effective practices of collaboration and networking across sectors (government and civil society) can also help entrench feminist and gender equality principles within government practices. As Rao notes, “strategic external critics” are also important to promoting gender equality within institutions, often resulting in institutions changing their attitudes to supporting women’s agency and gender equality. ¹¹²

This paper is ultimately about recognizing the voice and agency of individuals working within government to advance gender equality and feminist priorities and developing a more nuanced understanding of the various levels and strategies through which these objectives are pursued. It fills gaps in knowledge where assumptions of silence have obstructed our understanding of the internal workings of complex organizational practices. This paper also adds to our understanding of inside activists at all levels of government, though with ongoing challenges and opportunities that result from different positions of authority or capacities for resistance.

As an important contribution to scholarship, feminist inside activism offers examples of institutional change that can take place through senior government official grand gestures (feminist policy announcements) or mid-level bureaucratic incremental change (through strategic networking or resistance). These examples give voice to feminist change-makers within government bureaucracies and encourage greater attention to the system-wide changes that contribute to a growing cohort of feminist advocates (with examples of increased training and expertise in gender equality, feminist theory, and GBA+ tools arising from and contributing to a growing number of feminist students, educators, and trainers). Increased attention to the distinctive contributions of feminist inside activists, and additional research that documents their strategies for change, is therefore needed as part of a broader consideration of a transformative vision for gender equality and feminist principles in Canada’s international policy priorities.