By Jui Chawan

Abstract

The field of Economics has been criticised for not being fully accommodating of the feminine experience. Feminist Economics argues to change the same. But what exactly does this school of thought represent?

Introduction

The two words ‘feminist’ with ‘economics’ would make a layperson  think that it probably has something to do with women and economics, women’s economic rights, or gender. These assumptions would be correct! The word ‘Feminism’ as per Cambridge Dictionary, essentially means “the belief that women should be allowed the same rights, power, and opportunities as men and be treated in the same way or the set of activities intended to achieve this state”. Combining this word with Economics, one may reasonably say that it means assessing, understanding and applying ideas of economics using feminist notions. Joyce Jacobson, in her recent book “Advanced Introduction to Feminist Economics” concisely delineates this school of thought. According to her, the discipline of Feminist Economics “calls for inclusive inquiry ” turning “a critical and gender-aware eye on the field of economics, as well as on how real-world economies function”. 

The reason I particularly refer to Joyce’s definition is that I find its latter part crucial in understanding the inception of this school of thought. Here, “how real-world economies function” is not only a criticism of the Ceteris paribus assumption but, also is an attempt to bring to focus the different experiences people, especially from varied gender groups, have in economies. To explain this in detail, I would like to tell you three stories.

Story 1- The Rational Man

Let’s go back to the 18th century, to Adam Smith’s desk where he probably wrote the ‘Wealth of Nations’, one of the first important volumes on Classical Economic Theory. Smith is relevant here, as he is the one who created the protagonist of our story – the Rational Man. The Rational Man’s existence became indispensable to economic theories as Smith in particular used him to explain people’s economic activities. His characteristics were specific. He was always driven by self-interest and reason, was an independent actor, and was not affected by emotions. The Rational man was born in the 18th century and his fame in economic theory was widespread; however , it wasn’t until the latter part of the 20th century that people started to criticize him. Do you think there are some issues with Rational Man?

Story 2 – Malti and Raju: Same work?

Coming back to the 21st century, let’s go to a village in the heartlands of Haryana. In the small village, Malti is a young mother, married to Vijay. Every morning she gets up, cleans her house, walks 10 km to get two pots of water for her household, cooks for her family and later helps Vijay till their field. At another village 100 km away, Raju works for a wealthy landowner. His job is to clean the veranda of his employer’s house in the morning, bring groceries from the market, ensure the house water tank is always filled and later work in his employer’s fields. For his work, Raju is paid ₹1000 a month. 

Story 3 – Ayesha cannot lead a project anymore?

Ayesha is a senior architect at XYZ, an architectural firm in Mumbai. She recently got married and has been working at this firm for 6 years. Prior to her marriage, Ayesha had led a number of projects as a team leader. But, post she took a break for her marriage ceremony, none of the lead roles in the projects were offered to her. The reason the management has given is that leads are assigned based on work efficiency and she needs to be better at her work to be a team leader again. After speaking to other female colleagues, Ayesha realized that most of them are not given leading positions post their marriage or pregnancy. Is this a coincidence?

I request you to take a minute and reflect on each of these stories. I am going to dissect them individually to give you a greater insight into Feminist Economics! 

As most of you must have realized, in the first story, I was attempting to bring to your attention the unrealistic assumptions of the rational man in economics. Understanding the development of the rational man in the backdrop of the Victorian period during Smith’s lifetime, one realizes that he embodies the then-accepted normative masculine standards. This assumption assessed in the development trajectory of economic theory becomes a handicap when assessing the economic motivations of individuals not fitting in the mould of the rational man, in particular, women. Katrine Marçal in her book ‘Who Cooked Adam Smith’s Dinner? A Story About Women and Economics’, remarks that such theorisation forgets the difference in experience of women as economic players rendering them invisible. The focus of self-interest also creates problems when analyzing caregiving and domestic work which is mostly done by women without any remuneration. Ergo, as Lebohang Pheko observes, economics forgets women in this ‘man-stream/malestream’ theory, also subsequently impacting practical applications of such theory, resulting in women being invisible and at a disadvantage always. 

Drawing from this, the second story furthers this discussion. We see two individuals engaging in similar work – domestic work & farming, but one gets a payment for the same and the other doesn’t. This also means that in the national accounts of India, only Raju’s work will be reflected whereas Malti’s work will be considered as unpaid and uncountable as it is domestic. Devaki Jain, an Indian feminist economist, has criticized the way in which activities performed by Malti are highly productive yet are not considered as ‘economic contributions’ justifying them as altruistic. 

Let’s go to the third story. Ayesha’s plight may be appropriately explained using Barbara Bergmann’s ideas. Bergmann in her pioneering work in ‘Economic Emergence of Women’, observed that mainstream economics assumes that household duties and domestic roles are very important for women and affect their work and efficiency in the labour market. This assumption is based on another assumption that they will always give greater importance to their domestic duties over their work and thus will have lower efficiency. This results in employers having an implicit bias against women leading to a majority of them being pushed into low-productivity, low paying and not high-ranking jobs as in Ayesha’s case.  Additionally, even in daily labour jobs as construction workers or farmhands, due to this implicit discrimination, women labourers are paid less than men, despite them, at times, doing more work than their male counterparts.

These observations bring to the forefront three most important arguments of feminist economics. Firstly, it criticizes the very masculine construct of economic ideation and its subsequent disregard for the female experience. Secondly, it argues for recognition of unpaid labour work by women. And thirdly, it gauges implicit discrimination prevalent in the labour market and in an economy at large, about women. But the scope of feminist economics doesn’t end here, discrimination persists in eclectic ways, for instance in economic policies not being representative, or lack of access to child care for working women. Feminist Economic ideation has proved to be imperative in recognising the explicit and implicit discrimination faced by women. Taking it further, it has found ways to tackle the same by advocating for policies like affirmative action, intra-household equitability, and provision of subsidized & accessible child care among others. 

I would like to end with a quote by Ruth Bader Ginsberg, “Women belong in all places where decisions are being made. It shouldn’t be that women are the exception”, and feminist economics is ensuring that women don’t lag in the economics wagon. 

Author’s Bio

Jui Chawan is a first-year LLB student at Jindal Global Law School. Her research interests lie at the intersection of political theory, development, postcolonialism, gender studies and marginalization. 

Image Source: Young Scholars Initiative https://ysi.ineteconomics.org/project/5bfd73d80c6cbc1a2e96eb56/event/5bfd77eb0c6cbc1a2e96eb7d