Sweden as a Norm Entrepreneur: The Case of the Feminist Foreign Policy
Since 2014, the Swedish Government has pursued a Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP).
The purpose of this project is to carry out a first structured analytical assessment of the FFP, based on an examination of external perceptions of the FFP and Sweden as a norm entrepreneur in this regard.
External perceptions are important to study because they indicate (a) the level of resistance or openness to norm diffusion to be expected; (b) key characteristics as well as potential weaknesses of the Swedish FFP; and (c) effectiveness in pursuing this policy. To assess Sweden’s FFP through external perceptions, we will combine theories of norm promotion to international relations (IR) with feminist IR theory. This theoretical advancement constitutes a novel and nuanced way of addressing Sweden as a norm entrepreneur.
We aim to analyze developed and developing countries’ perceptions of the FFP in general, but with specific attention to the six focus areas outlined by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
We will study the perceptions of public officials in a selection of states, and of major newspapers in these states. The project uses mixed-methods, by media analyses (year 1) and interviews with public officials (year 2 and 3).
The interdisciplinary character of the project constitutes a novel way of analysing how norm exports are perceived by norm takers in the international system. Our theoretical and empirical work will also aid decision-makers evaluating the policy.
Final report
Purpose and development of the project
The purpose of the project was to carry out the first structured analytical assessment of Sweden’s Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP), based on an examination of external perceptions of this policy and of Sweden as a norm entrepreneur – the latter because Sweden was the first state in the world to launch a FFP.
The choice to study external perceptions, i.e. other actors’ (states, the media) perceptions, was based on these being an indication of: 1) whether other actors would demonstrate openness or resistance to the norms promoted by FFP; 2) what key characteristics as well as potential weaknesses Sweden’s FFP was regarded to have; and 3) how effective this policy would be. In the project, we have studied perceived efficiency, i.e., the purpose was not to evaluate efficiency based on objectively derived criteria. Based on previous research, we argued that three different qualities of foreign policy were especially important to investigate, since they can affect the perceived efficiency of a policy: legitimacy, credibility and coherence.
The overarching research questions were: (1) How is the FFP perceived and evaluated by other states? and (2) What are the implications of external perceptions on the effectiveness of the FFP? These two research questions have also permeated the work of the entire project.
Some research questions have been added during the project: some were added due to comments provided by the reviewers at the evaluation meeting, others were added because we discovered interesting aspects while working with the project.
Examples of some of the added research questions are: How are norms translated into FFP through strategic narratives? What role does the media have in the presentation/framing of FFP (“mediatization”)? What types of feminism(s) is FFP based on and with what consequences? Why and how was FFP initiated? How was FFP translated into practical diplomatic work (which can also affect how it is perceived)?
The purpose of the project was to study FFP in its entirety, but also to specifically investigate the six focus areas of FFP, both of which we have done.
A brief note on implementation
According to plan, we started with media studies, and in a second step we conducted interviews with diplomats from different groups of states.
Compared to the application, we have added interviews with Swedish diplomats and representatives from the government (2014-2022). We have also interviewed diplomats/representatives from other FFP-states.
Since the new Swedish government rescinded the FFP in October 2022, we have also followed up with interviews during the last year of the project, asking the interviewees how they perceived Sweden’s gender equality work post-FFP.
The three most important findings and conclusions of the project
1) We found marked differences as to whether the FFP was noted, and how it was perceived in different states/regions
Our media studies clearly demonstrated that the prevalence of articles about FFP was very unevenly distributed. The Western press wrote the most, while there were very little/nothing in the press in other parts of the world. The Western press (Europe, USA, Canada) demonstrated differences between newspapers of different political leaning, where left-leaning newspapers wrote more about FFP, as well as in more positive tones. There were, however, also considerable differences within the Western press regarding the number of articles about FFP: in the 11 EU member states included in the study, the press in Western Europe wrote the most, especially in states which are like-minded to Sweden on gender equality. In states like Poland and Hungary, critical articles could possibly have been expected, but instead we found very few articles about FFP, just as we did in the Global South. Our interviews strengthened the observation that the interest in FFP was very diverse, with most interest expressed by representatives of like-minded states. All in all, FFP in relation to the three foreign policy criteria – legitimacy, credibility and coherence – was perceived most positively in like-minded states and in the left-leaning newspapers.
2) FFP is perceived to have been more successful with regard to elite feminism than non-elite feminism
Elite feminism could be described as belonging to the diplomacy domain of this policy. It is noticeable when FFP-states (thus not only Sweden) try to increase the share of women employed at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and as diplomats. It is also about support to professional women, such as politicians, journalists, academics, and others with an interpretative authority.
Non-elite feminism belongs to the development policy domain of FFP. It is expressed through aid to marginalised women, for example by micro-financing, and programmes for entrepreneurship and sexual rights and reproductive health, respectively. These women have no interpretative authority and are termed “subaltern” in feminist literature. The aim of development aid is most often to provide for their existence at an absolute minimum, rather than contributing to their personal development and careers.
The challenge is that the two FFP-domains – development and diplomacy – are rarely aligned, which risks further increasing differences between privileged women (in diplomacy) and non-privileged women (in development). In order to meet this challenge, an intersectional perspective is needed. Such a perspective emphasises that in addition to gender equality, also equality between different women is important.
3) In the EU context, Sweden was perceived as an increasingly constructive norm entrepreneur
In our first study of how representatives of other EU member states perceived the FFP – and Sweden as a norm entrepreneur in this regard – the overall view was tentatively positive. There were, however, also representatives expressing critique, saying that Sweden tended to “preach” to others on how to work with gender equality. In the interviews conducted towards the end of the FFP’s existence, we found a much more positive view on Sweden as a feminist norm entrepreneur. Even EU member states with a stance on gender equality far from Sweden’s, stated that Sweden was a constructive partner who listened to others, while at the same time explaining the Swedish position. In general, legitimacy, credibility and coherence became strengthened over the years. Based on these interviews, Sweden thus seems to have found a more constructive way of working with its FFP in this context. In interviews after the rescinding of the FFP, Sweden is still described as a strong defender of gender equality and women’s rights and one of the leading EU member states, but no longer the leading one. Swedish representatives are perceived as much quieter and tend to support others’ proposals, rather than pushing their own.
The overarching conclusion of the project is that knowledge of Sweden’s FFP were very unevenly distributed. Most knowledge, as well as the most positive perceptions where mainly found among like-minded states. However, Sweden was seen as a leader and a norm entrepreneur for gender equality and women’s rights also among many states and contexts outside of this sphere. Sweden had a strong profile on these issues prior to its FFP but this was definitely strengthened during the years of FFP.
New research questions
During the project period, some new research questions have come to the fore, which we have included in the project, as mentioned in the section on the purpose and development of the project. Other interesting questions that we have not had the possibility to investigate within the existing project, but which can be regarded as suggestions for further research are: What similarities and differences exist between states who adopt a FFP and states who do not name their foreign policy feminist, but still has a strong gender equality profile? Could lessons learned from the FFP-process inform the work with environmental issues and climate change? How do FFP-states work with feminism in different domains of foreign policy (development, diplomacy, security, environment, trade)? What domains are prioritised and why, and with what consequences?
Dissemination of research and findings
We have presented and in other ways disseminated information about the project and our findings in different ways, in addition to the academic publications presented in the list of publications.
We have presented papers at academic conferences: all in all, 16 presentations at international conferences and ten at Swedish conferences. Malena Rosén Sundström (MRS) has been invited to present at two international webinars at Universidad de Complutense Madrid, Spain, and University of Canterbury, New Zealand, respectively. She has also been invited by two different research groups at the Department of Political Science in Gothenburg.
We have also been active outside of academia. Ekatherina Zhukova (EZ) presented what a FFP could be for Central and Eastern Europe at the Eastern and South-Eastern European (ESEE) Panel Network Monthly Webinar Series, invited by Sweden’s Ambassador in Romania. EZ has given a presentation about FFP at Humanistdagarna at Karlstad University as well as at the election night arranged by the department in Lund 2022. MRS and Ole Elgström (OE) participated in a webinar arranged by Concord (NGO) in Brussels, discussing the lessons learned from Sweden’s FFP.
MRS has presented the project at the Foreign Policy Association in Lund. Both project participants and OE has published blog post at BISA’s (British International Studies Association) blog, in connection to an academic publication. The blogpost was widely read. EZ has published a policy brief through the Danish Institute of International Affairs. We have also been interviewed by the media, for example, EZ has been interviewed twice by the Mexican paper El Mercurio. MRS has published a text at Europakommentaren, Centre for European Research, LU.
The purpose of the project was to carry out the first structured analytical assessment of Sweden’s Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP), based on an examination of external perceptions of this policy and of Sweden as a norm entrepreneur – the latter because Sweden was the first state in the world to launch a FFP.
The choice to study external perceptions, i.e. other actors’ (states, the media) perceptions, was based on these being an indication of: 1) whether other actors would demonstrate openness or resistance to the norms promoted by FFP; 2) what key characteristics as well as potential weaknesses Sweden’s FFP was regarded to have; and 3) how effective this policy would be. In the project, we have studied perceived efficiency, i.e., the purpose was not to evaluate efficiency based on objectively derived criteria. Based on previous research, we argued that three different qualities of foreign policy were especially important to investigate, since they can affect the perceived efficiency of a policy: legitimacy, credibility and coherence.
The overarching research questions were: (1) How is the FFP perceived and evaluated by other states? and (2) What are the implications of external perceptions on the effectiveness of the FFP? These two research questions have also permeated the work of the entire project.
Some research questions have been added during the project: some were added due to comments provided by the reviewers at the evaluation meeting, others were added because we discovered interesting aspects while working with the project.
Examples of some of the added research questions are: How are norms translated into FFP through strategic narratives? What role does the media have in the presentation/framing of FFP (“mediatization”)? What types of feminism(s) is FFP based on and with what consequences? Why and how was FFP initiated? How was FFP translated into practical diplomatic work (which can also affect how it is perceived)?
The purpose of the project was to study FFP in its entirety, but also to specifically investigate the six focus areas of FFP, both of which we have done.
A brief note on implementation
According to plan, we started with media studies, and in a second step we conducted interviews with diplomats from different groups of states.
Compared to the application, we have added interviews with Swedish diplomats and representatives from the government (2014-2022). We have also interviewed diplomats/representatives from other FFP-states.
Since the new Swedish government rescinded the FFP in October 2022, we have also followed up with interviews during the last year of the project, asking the interviewees how they perceived Sweden’s gender equality work post-FFP.
The three most important findings and conclusions of the project
1) We found marked differences as to whether the FFP was noted, and how it was perceived in different states/regions
Our media studies clearly demonstrated that the prevalence of articles about FFP was very unevenly distributed. The Western press wrote the most, while there were very little/nothing in the press in other parts of the world. The Western press (Europe, USA, Canada) demonstrated differences between newspapers of different political leaning, where left-leaning newspapers wrote more about FFP, as well as in more positive tones. There were, however, also considerable differences within the Western press regarding the number of articles about FFP: in the 11 EU member states included in the study, the press in Western Europe wrote the most, especially in states which are like-minded to Sweden on gender equality. In states like Poland and Hungary, critical articles could possibly have been expected, but instead we found very few articles about FFP, just as we did in the Global South. Our interviews strengthened the observation that the interest in FFP was very diverse, with most interest expressed by representatives of like-minded states. All in all, FFP in relation to the three foreign policy criteria – legitimacy, credibility and coherence – was perceived most positively in like-minded states and in the left-leaning newspapers.
2) FFP is perceived to have been more successful with regard to elite feminism than non-elite feminism
Elite feminism could be described as belonging to the diplomacy domain of this policy. It is noticeable when FFP-states (thus not only Sweden) try to increase the share of women employed at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and as diplomats. It is also about support to professional women, such as politicians, journalists, academics, and others with an interpretative authority.
Non-elite feminism belongs to the development policy domain of FFP. It is expressed through aid to marginalised women, for example by micro-financing, and programmes for entrepreneurship and sexual rights and reproductive health, respectively. These women have no interpretative authority and are termed “subaltern” in feminist literature. The aim of development aid is most often to provide for their existence at an absolute minimum, rather than contributing to their personal development and careers.
The challenge is that the two FFP-domains – development and diplomacy – are rarely aligned, which risks further increasing differences between privileged women (in diplomacy) and non-privileged women (in development). In order to meet this challenge, an intersectional perspective is needed. Such a perspective emphasises that in addition to gender equality, also equality between different women is important.
3) In the EU context, Sweden was perceived as an increasingly constructive norm entrepreneur
In our first study of how representatives of other EU member states perceived the FFP – and Sweden as a norm entrepreneur in this regard – the overall view was tentatively positive. There were, however, also representatives expressing critique, saying that Sweden tended to “preach” to others on how to work with gender equality. In the interviews conducted towards the end of the FFP’s existence, we found a much more positive view on Sweden as a feminist norm entrepreneur. Even EU member states with a stance on gender equality far from Sweden’s, stated that Sweden was a constructive partner who listened to others, while at the same time explaining the Swedish position. In general, legitimacy, credibility and coherence became strengthened over the years. Based on these interviews, Sweden thus seems to have found a more constructive way of working with its FFP in this context. In interviews after the rescinding of the FFP, Sweden is still described as a strong defender of gender equality and women’s rights and one of the leading EU member states, but no longer the leading one. Swedish representatives are perceived as much quieter and tend to support others’ proposals, rather than pushing their own.
The overarching conclusion of the project is that knowledge of Sweden’s FFP were very unevenly distributed. Most knowledge, as well as the most positive perceptions where mainly found among like-minded states. However, Sweden was seen as a leader and a norm entrepreneur for gender equality and women’s rights also among many states and contexts outside of this sphere. Sweden had a strong profile on these issues prior to its FFP but this was definitely strengthened during the years of FFP.
New research questions
During the project period, some new research questions have come to the fore, which we have included in the project, as mentioned in the section on the purpose and development of the project. Other interesting questions that we have not had the possibility to investigate within the existing project, but which can be regarded as suggestions for further research are: What similarities and differences exist between states who adopt a FFP and states who do not name their foreign policy feminist, but still has a strong gender equality profile? Could lessons learned from the FFP-process inform the work with environmental issues and climate change? How do FFP-states work with feminism in different domains of foreign policy (development, diplomacy, security, environment, trade)? What domains are prioritised and why, and with what consequences?
Dissemination of research and findings
We have presented and in other ways disseminated information about the project and our findings in different ways, in addition to the academic publications presented in the list of publications.
We have presented papers at academic conferences: all in all, 16 presentations at international conferences and ten at Swedish conferences. Malena Rosén Sundström (MRS) has been invited to present at two international webinars at Universidad de Complutense Madrid, Spain, and University of Canterbury, New Zealand, respectively. She has also been invited by two different research groups at the Department of Political Science in Gothenburg.
We have also been active outside of academia. Ekatherina Zhukova (EZ) presented what a FFP could be for Central and Eastern Europe at the Eastern and South-Eastern European (ESEE) Panel Network Monthly Webinar Series, invited by Sweden’s Ambassador in Romania. EZ has given a presentation about FFP at Humanistdagarna at Karlstad University as well as at the election night arranged by the department in Lund 2022. MRS and Ole Elgström (OE) participated in a webinar arranged by Concord (NGO) in Brussels, discussing the lessons learned from Sweden’s FFP.
MRS has presented the project at the Foreign Policy Association in Lund. Both project participants and OE has published blog post at BISA’s (British International Studies Association) blog, in connection to an academic publication. The blogpost was widely read. EZ has published a policy brief through the Danish Institute of International Affairs. We have also been interviewed by the media, for example, EZ has been interviewed twice by the Mexican paper El Mercurio. MRS has published a text at Europakommentaren, Centre for European Research, LU.