From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec
From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec
3 POVERTY AND WEALTH A TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY ECONOMICSTHE FEMINIST CRITIQUEMainstream economics fails to measure or value the production anddistribution of goods and services that lie outside the monetisedeconomy, notably unpaid work, such as child care, collecting fuelwood and water, or preparing food – precisely the activities that occupythe time and energies of most poor women and which are essential tosustain society. 6While social sustainability is valued in a general way, unpaid workis not recognised in national accounts, even though it subsidises thepaid work that does get counted, since it has to be done each day if theformal economy is to continue running. A UN report on measures ofunrecorded economic activities in 14 countries shows that unpaidwork in households is of the same magnitude as paid work in themarket. 7 Estimates of the value of household work as a proportion ofGDP vary from 35 per cent to 55 per cent. 8All this has huge implications for development policy, as well as forwomen’s rights. The time that unpaid caring work ‘takes away’ frompaid work is considered a drag on the ‘real economy’ rather than acontribution to it. Therefore only those who can work full-time fortheir entire lives – mostly men – are considered ‘real workers’, deservingof decent wages and benefits. The reality is that an increasing numberof households are ever more reliant on the lower earnings of women.This critique is not specifically or uniquely about women.However, the gap between the real and perceived contribution ofunpaid labour perpetuates inequality between women and men, andit can result in discrimination against women in public policy andinvestment decisions. Conventional economic analyses often end uprecommending infrastructure projects that address the need forirrigation but not for household water supplies, credit programmesthat give loans for oxen but not for corn-grinding mills or fuelefficientstoves, or labour policies that set minimum wages but do notguarantee a right to maternity leave.The fact that women and men do different kinds of work springsfrom a combination of inequality in power, built on social norms andinstitutions (known as patriarchy), and natural difference (womengive birth and breast-feed). The different value attributed by society to111
FROM POVERTY TO POWERthe work of women and men is by no means immutable and ought tobe changed, since it is both an outcome and a driver of systematic biasagainst women, transmitted through culture, the family, markets, andthe state.Differences between women and men in terms of what theyconsume also matter. Women on average choose to spend a higherproportion of their incomes on education and health care, whichenhances the well-being and capabilities of their families. Researchfrom many different contexts in both the developing and the developedworld shows a correlation between the proportion of moneycontrolled by women and improved child health. 9 Men are likely tospend a higher proportion of income on themselves, but are also morelikely to invest in longer-term enterprises, including small businesses,which do not bring immediate benefits to the family but may pay offhandsomely in the long run.By ignoring gender-based differences, policy makers may exacerbategender inequality. In parts of sub-Saharan Africa, for example,women have generally been more adversely affected by trade liberalisation.Because of their relative disadvantages in gaining access tocredit, new technologies, and marketing networks, as well as theirrelative ‘time poverty’, women are slower than men to take advantageof new export opportunities. 10 At the same time, liberalisation hasincreased competition from imports in the domestic food market,where women farmers play a predominant role. In households inwhich women’s bargaining power is weak, men may pressure womento spend more time on cash crop production, while retaining controlover the proceeds.To date, feminist economics has not moved into the mainstream,despite overwhelming evidence that gender equity produces a moreprosperous and efficient economy, and despite women’s increasingrefusal to act as an infinite resource to be exploited without cost.If development is to succeed in reducing poverty and inequality,economics must acknowledge household politics and incorporate as apositive contribution the work invested in caring for the next generation.The global spread of women’s rights shows how fast attitudesabout women’s ‘proper’ role are changing. Conventional economicthinking needs to catch up.112
- Page 78 and 79: 2 POWER AND POLITICS WE ORGANISE, T
- Page 80 and 81: 2 POWER AND POLITICS WE ORGANISE, T
- Page 82 and 83: 2 POWER AND POLITICS WE ORGANISE, T
- Page 84 and 85: 2 POWER AND POLITICS WE ORGANISE, T
- Page 86 and 87: 2 POWER AND POLITICS WE ORGANISE, T
- Page 88 and 89: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I OWN, THEREFO
- Page 90 and 91: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I OWN, THEREFO
- Page 92 and 93: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I OWN, THEREFO
- Page 94 and 95: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I OWN, THEREFO
- Page 96 and 97: I VOTE, THEREFORE I AMWhether in Fl
- Page 98 and 99: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I VOTE, THEREF
- Page 100 and 101: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I VOTE, THEREF
- Page 102 and 103: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I VOTE, THEREF
- Page 104 and 105: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I STEAL, THERE
- Page 106 and 107: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I STEAL, THERE
- Page 108 and 109: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I RULE, THEREF
- Page 110 and 111: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I RULE, THEREF
- Page 112 and 113: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I RULE, THEREF
- Page 114 and 115: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I RULE, THEREF
- Page 116 and 117: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I RULE, THEREF
- Page 118 and 119: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I RULE, THEREF
- Page 120 and 121: 2 POWER AND POLITICS I RULE, THEREF
- Page 122 and 123: 2 POWER AND POLITICS FROM POVERTY T
- Page 124 and 125: PART THREEAn economics for the twen
- Page 126 and 127: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH A TWENTY-FIRST
- Page 130 and 131: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH A TWENTY-FIRST
- Page 132 and 133: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH A TWENTY-FIRST
- Page 134 and 135: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH A TWENTY-FIRST
- Page 136 and 137: LIVING OFF THE LANDThe smoky, cold
- Page 138 and 139: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 140 and 141: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 142 and 143: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 144 and 145: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 146 and 147: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 148 and 149: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 150 and 151: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 152 and 153: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 154 and 155: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 156 and 157: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 158 and 159: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 160 and 161: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 162 and 163: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 164 and 165: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 166 and 167: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 168 and 169: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 170 and 171: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 172 and 173: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 174 and 175: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 176 and 177: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
3 POVERTY AND WEALTH A TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY ECONOMICSTHE FEMINIST CRITIQUEMainstream economics fails <strong>to</strong> measure or value the production anddistribution of goods and services that lie outside the monetisedeconomy, notably unpaid work, such as child care, collecting fuelwood and water, or preparing food – precisely the activities that occupythe time and energies of most poor women and which are essential <strong>to</strong>sustain society. 6While social sustainability is valued in a general way, unpaid workis not recognised in national accounts, even though it subsidises thepaid work that does get counted, since it has <strong>to</strong> be done each day if theformal economy is <strong>to</strong> continue running. A UN report on measures ofunrecorded economic activities in 14 countries shows that unpaidwork in households is of the same magnitude as paid work in themarket. 7 Estimates of the value of household work as a proportion ofGDP vary from 35 per cent <strong>to</strong> 55 per cent. 8All this has huge implications for development policy, as well as forwomen’s rights. The time that unpaid caring work ‘takes away’ frompaid work is considered a drag on the ‘real economy’ rather than acontribution <strong>to</strong> it. Therefore only those who can work full-time fortheir entire lives – mostly men – are considered ‘real workers’, deservingof decent wages and benefits. The reality is that an increasing numberof households are ever more reliant on the lower earnings of women.This critique is not specifically or uniquely about women.However, the gap between the real and perceived contribution ofunpaid labour perpetuates inequality between women and men, andit can result in discrimination against women in public policy andinvestment decisions. Conventional economic analyses often end uprecommending infrastructure projects that address the need forirrigation but not for household water supplies, credit programmesthat give loans for oxen but not for corn-grinding mills or fuelefficients<strong>to</strong>ves, or labour policies that set minimum wages but do notguarantee a right <strong>to</strong> maternity leave.The fact that women and men do different kinds of work springsfrom a combination of inequality in <strong>power</strong>, built on social norms andinstitutions (known as patriarchy), and natural difference (womengive birth and breast-feed). The different value attributed by society <strong>to</strong>111
Change language