How pluralist is political studies? How are resources distributed across the discipline? In this article, we turn one of the fundamental questions of politics – who gets what, when, and how – back on to the study of politics itself. Our focus is on two areas that are central concerns to pluralism: gender and sub-discipline. We pose two specific questions: What is the gender and sub-disciplinary composition of political studies? And how are various resources – ranging from jobs to prizes – distributed along gender and sub-disciplinary lines? In addressing these questions, we draw on a pilot and partial audit of departments, journals and other key indicators from 1998 to 2018. The article contributes to long-standing debates about the character of political studies and the extent to which the field is pluralistic or not.
AhmedS (2017) Living a Feminist Life. London: Duke University Press.
2.
AkhtarPFawcettPLegrandT, et al. (2005) Women in the Political Science Profession. European Political Science4: 242–255.
3.
AllenNSavignyH (2016) Experiencing Gender in UK Political Science: The Results of a Practitioner Survey. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations18 (4): 997–1015.
4.
AlmondG (1990) Discipline Divided: Schools and Sects in Political Science. Newbury Park: SAGE Publishing.
5.
BarryB (1999) The Study of Politics as a Vocation. In: HaywardJBarryBBrownA (eds) The British Study of Politics in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at: DOI:10.5871/bacad/9780197262948.003.0014
6.
BatesSJenkinsLPflaegerZ (2012) Women in the Profession: The Composition of UK Political Science Departments by Sex. Politics32 (3): 139–152.
7.
BegumNSainiR (2019) Decolonising the Curriculum. Political Studies Review18 (2): 196–201.
8.
BriggsJHarrisonL (2015) The Status of Women in UK Political Science. European Political Science14: 105–115.
9.
ChildsSKrookML (2006) Gender and Politics: The State of the Art. Politics26 (1): 18–28.
10.
DonovanC (2005) The Governance of Social Science and Everyday Epistemology. Public Administration83 (3): 597–615.
11.
DunlopCA (2018) The Political Economy of Politics and International Studies Impact: REF2014 Case Analysis. British Politics13: 270–294.
12.
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) (2007) International Benchmarking Review of UK Politics and International Studies. Swindon: Economic and Social Research Council.
13.
EmejuluA (2019) Can Political Science Decolonise? A Response to Neema Begum and Rima Saini. Political Studies Review17 (2): 202–206.
14.
FosterEKerrPHopkinsA, et al. (2013) The Personal Is Not Political: At Least in the UK’s Top Politics and IR Departments. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations15 (4): 566–585.
15.
FraserN (1995) From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemmas of Justice in a Post-socialist Age. New Left Review 212(July/August): 68–93.
16.
GambleA (1990) Theories of British Politics. Political Studies38 (3): 404–420.
17.
GoodinRKlingemannH (1996) A New Handbook of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18.
GrantW (2010) The Development of a Discipline: The History of the Political Studies Association. London: Wiley-Blackwell.
19.
HaywardJ (1991) Political Science in Britain. European Journal of Political Research20 (3–4): 301–322.
20.
HaywardJBarryBBrownA (eds) (1999) The British Study of Politics in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
JohnsonN (1989) The Limits of Political Science. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
22.
KennyM (2004) The Case for Disciplinary History: Political Studies in the 1950s and 1960s. British Journal of Politics and International Relations6 (4): 565–583.
23.
LaaksoMTaageperaR (1979) ‘Effective’ Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe. Comparative Political Studies12 (1): 3–27.
24.
LaswellH (1936) Politics; Who Gets What, When, How. New York: Whittlesey House.
25.
LovenduskiJ (1980) Report to PSA Executive on the Survey of the Position of Women in Political Science (Policy Review Meeting).
26.
MackayF (2004) Gender and Political Representation: The State of the ‘Discipline’. British Journal of Politics and International Relations6 (1): 99–120.
27.
MaliniakDPowersRWalterBF (2013) The Gender Citation Gap in International Relations. International Organization67 (4): 889–922.
28.
MarshDSavignyH (2004) Political Science as a Broad Church: The Search for a Pluralist Discipline. Politics24 (3): 155–168.
29.
MattocksKBriscoe-PalmerS (2016) Diversity, Inclusion, and Doctoral Study: Challenges Facing Minority PhD Students in the United Kingdom. European Political Science15: 476–492.
30.
MuellerD (1993) The Future of Public Choice. Public Choice77 (1): 145–150.
31.
Pflaeger-YoungZAmeryFHolden-BatesS, et al. (2019) Women in the Profession: An Update on the Gendered Composition of the Discipline and Political Science Departments in the UK. Political Studies Review32: 139–152.
SilRKatzensteinP (2010) Beyond Paradigms: Analytic Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
38.
SmithNJLeeD (2015) What’s Queer about Political Science?The British Journal of Politics and International Relations17 (1): 49–63.
39.
ThelenK (1999) Historical Institutionalism – In Comparative Politics. Annual Review of Political Science2: 369–404.
40.
WilliamsHBatesSJenkinsL, et al. (2015) Gender and Journal Authorship: An Assessment of Articles Published by Women in Three Top British Political Science and International Relations Journals. European Political Science14: 116–130.
