• Carol Bacchi
  • Susan Goodwin


The Introduction articulates how a poststructural approach to policy analysis provides an important vehicle for questioning how governing takes place. It begins by sketching the broad parameters of a poststructural approach as a form of critical analysis that allows a refreshing skepticism toward the full range of things commonly associated with policy: policy itself, the knowledges that support policy and policy proposals, as well as conventional forms of policy analysis. The implication of this form of critical analysis for policy work is explained—how a poststructural approach encourages policy workers to reflect on their own role in governing and to engage in the productive and political practices of interrogating, theorizing, and resisting. The Introduction also sets out the structure of the book.


poststructuralism policy analysis policy work Foucault government governmentality policy anthropology policy sociology WPR approach 


  1. Allan, E. (2012). Policy discourses, gender, and education: Constructing women’s status. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing policy: What’s the problem represented to be? Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S.J. (1990). Politics and policy making in education: Explorations in policy sociology. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, S.J. (1993). What is policy? Texts, trajectories and toolboxes. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 13 (2), 10–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ball, S.J. (1997). Policy sociology and critical social research: A personal review of recent education policy and policy research. British Educational Research Journal, 23 (3), 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ball, S.J. (2015). What is policy? 21 years later: Reflections on the possibilities of policy research. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36 (3), 306–313.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, W. (1998). Genealogical politics. In J. Moss (Ed.), The later Foucault: Politics and philosophy. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Coffey, A. (2004). Reconceptualizing social policy: Sociological perspectives on contemporary social policy. Berkshire: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Feldman, G. (2007). Following or facing the governmental gaze: Academic and policy intellectuals in the early twenty-first century, Roundtable, Conference of the Canadian Anthropological Society—American Ethnological Society, University of Toronto, May 8–12.Google Scholar
  10. Fernandez, B. (2012). Transformative policy for poor women: A new feminist framework. Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, C. (1991). Governmental rationality: An introduction. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Harris, P. (1999). Public welfare and liberal governance. In A. Petersen, I. Barns, J. Dudley, P. Harris (Eds.), Poststructuralism, citizenship and social policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. John, P. (1998). Analyzing Public Policy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Lall, M. (2007). A review of concepts from policy studies relevant for the analysis of EFA [Education for All] in developing countries, Consortium for Research on Educational Access, Transitions & Equity (CREATE), Sussex.Google Scholar
  15. Lall, M. (ed.) (2012). Policy, discourse and rhetoric: How New Labour challenged social justice and democracy. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. Lister, R. (2010). Understanding theories and concepts in social policy. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  17. Maddison, S., & Denniss, N. (2013). An introduction to Australian public policy: Theory and practice, 2nd edition. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Miller, P., & Rose, N. (1990). Governing economic life. Economy and Society, 19 (1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mol, A. (1999). Ontological politics: A word and some questions. In J. Law, & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor network theory and after. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. O’Malley, P., Weir, L., Shearing, C. (1997). Governmentality, criticism, politics. Economy and Society, 26 (4), 501–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rose, N., O’Malley, P., Valverde, M. (2006). Governmentality, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2, 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shaw, S.E. (2010). Reaching the parts that other theories and methods can’t reach: How and why a policy-as-discourse approach can inform health-related policy. Health, 14 (2), 196–212.Google Scholar
  23. Shore, C. (2012). Anthropology and public policy. In R. Fardon, T. Harris, T.H.J. Marchand, C. Shore, V. Strang, R. Wilson, M. Nuttall (Eds.), The Sage handbook of Social Anthropology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Shore, C., & Wright, S. (2003). Policy: A new field of Anthropology. In C. Shore, & S. Wright (Eds.), Anthropology of policy: Perspectives on governance and power. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Shore, C., & Wright, S. (2011). Conceptualising policy: Technologies of governance and the politics of visibility. In C. Shore, S. Wright, D. Però (Eds.), Policy worlds: Anthropology and the analysis of contemporary power. New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  26. St. Pierre, E.A. (2000). Poststructural feminism in education: An overview. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 13 (5), 477–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sutton, R. (1999). The policy process: An overview. London: Overseas Development Institute.Google Scholar
  28. Watson, S. (2000). Foucault and the study of social policy. In G. Lewis, S. Gerwitz, J. Clarke (Eds.), Rethinking social policy. New York: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carol Bacchi
    • 1
  • Susan Goodwin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PoliticsUniversity of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Education and Social WorkUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations