This thesis examines whether the adoption of an explicit Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP) influences how development agencies articulate gender equality and intersectional priorities in institutional outputs. Drawing on institutional theories of change and framing theory, the study analyzes Sweden and Norway between 2010 and 2024, comparing Sida and Norad two structurally similar foreign aid agencies operating under different feminist policy orientations. A mixed-methods design combines quantitative text analysis of annual reports with qualitative framing analysis of Sweden's development reports related to Somalia. The quantitative analysis employs a difference-in-differences approach to assess whether Sweden's adoption of an FFP is associated with changes in the visibility of predefined gender-related categories. Results indicate selective post-reform increases in Sida's reports on gender-related terminology, gender-based violence, and parenthood, while no significant changes are observed for women's health, LGBTQIA+, or explicit feminist or intersectional terms. The qualitative analysis shows that during the FFP period, gender equality is increasingly framed in terms of women's rights, political exclusion and agency, alongside continued emphasis on humanitarian vulnerability. However, intersectionality remains marginal and is seldom operationalized as a structuring principle. Overall, the findings indicate that FFP functioned as a selective and reinforcing governance instrument rather than a transformative reform, influencing the articulation of established gender concerns in reports while exhibiting limited reach with regard to more complex intersectional dimensions. Together these results provide partial support for the theoretical expectations and hypotheses.
Rebecca Des Rosiers (Wed,) studied this question.