This article proposes an analysis of London's gender system. First, it explores the relationship between gender and the local economy and culture. Second, it examines decision-making structures in the local state and how they are gendered. Third, the article investigates London's autonomous women's movement and the extent to which its constituent groups possess the resources necessary to influence policy. Fourth, it looks at two issue areas, homelessness and hospital reorganization and the ways in which policy-making in these areas deal with gender issues. The authors conclude that women and particularly feminists can influence policy but the degree of influence varies by locality, organizational context and issue.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrar, S. (1996). “Feminist Intervention and Local Domestic Violence Policy.”Parliamentary Affairs, 49 (1): 191-205.
2.
Appleton, L. (1995). “The Gender Regimes of American Cities.” In Gender in Urban Research (J.A. Garber and R.S. Turner, eds), pp. 44-59. London: Sage.
3.
Bagihole, B. (1994). Women, Work and Equal Opportunity.Avebury: Avebury Press.
4.
Bologh, R. (1991). Love or Greatness: Max Weber and Masculine Thinking—A Feminist Enquiry.London: Unwin-Hyman.
5.
Brownhill, S. and S. Halford (1990). “Understanding Women's Involvement in Local Politics: How Useful is a Formal/Informal Dichotomy?”Political Geography Quarterly, 9 (4): 397-414.
6.
Church, J. (1995). Social Trends.London: HMSO.
7.
Connell, W. (1987). Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics.Cambridge: Polity Press.
8.
Coyle, A. (1995). “Women and Organisational Change.”Equal Opportunities Commission, Discussion Series.
9.
Dibblin, J. (1990). “Wherever I Lay My Hat: Young Women and Homelessness.” Shelter, London.
10.
Dowding, K. (1991). Rational Choice and Political Power.Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
11.
Dowding, K. (1996). Power.London: Macmillan.
12.
Eardley, T. (1989) “Move-on Housing: the Permanent Needs of Residents of Hostels and Special Needs Housing Projects in London.”National Federation of Housing Associations, London.
13.
Edwards, J. (1989). “Women's Committees: a Model for Good Local Government.”Policy and Politics, 17 (3): 221-226.
14.
Eisenstein, H. (1985). Gender Shock: Practising Feminism on Two Continents.Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
15.
Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) (1995). “The Gender Impact of CCT in Local Government.” Equal Opportunities Commission, Manchester.
16.
Ferguson, K. (1984). The Feminist Case Against Bureaucracy.Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
17.
London Research Centre (1995). London `95.
18.
Lovenduski, J. (1989). “Implementing Equal Opportunities in the 1980s: An Overview.”Public Administration, 67 (1): 7-18.
19.
Lovenduski, J. and V. Randall (1993). Contemporary Feminist Politics.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
Sabatier, P. and H. C. Jenkins-Smith, (eds) (1993). Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach.Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
21.
Sexty, C. (1990). “Women Losing Out.” Shelter, London.
22.
Stivers, C. (1993). Gender Images in Public Administration.London: Sage.
23.
Stoker, G. (1995). “Regime Theory and Urban Politics.” In Theories of Urban Politics (D. Judge, G. Stoker and H. Wolman, eds.). London: Sage.
24.
Stone, J. (1988). Equal Opportunities in Local Government.Equal Opportunities Commission. London: HMSO.
25.
Tickell, A. and J. Peck (1995). “The Return of the Manchester Men: Men's Words and Men's Deeds in the Remaking of the Local State.” Business Elites and Urban Politics Working Paper, no. 4. University of Manchester, Manchester.
26.
Watson, S. (ed.) (1990). Playing the State.London: Verso.
27.
Watson, S. (1995) “Producing the Right Sort of Chap: the Senior Civil Service as an Exclusionary Culture.”Policy and Politics, 22 (3): 211-222.
