GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT Reading assignment: Kathryn B. Ward and Jean Larson Pyle, 1995, “Gender, Industrialization, Transnational Corporations and Development: An Overview of Trends and Patterns” in From Modernization to Globalization, eds. Timmons and Hite (book is on SKL reserves)

Millennium Development Goal 3: Gender equality http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ Gender Empowerment Measure: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_20072008_gem.pdf Gender-related development index: http://data.un.org/DocumentData.aspx?id=117 Gender gap in infant mortality: http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/gender/gender_mortality.php Gender gap index: http://www.weforum.org/en/Communities/Women%20Leaders%20and%20Gender%20Parity/GenderGapNetwork/index.htm

“Women in Development” approach in the 1970s (WID) A convergence among: --modernization theory --liberal feminism --international development agencies Main proponents: Irene Tinker, Ester Boserup, etc.

The processes behind the rise of WID - Rise of liberal feminism in the US Poor results of the development project, especially for women: -- high population growth -- increasing poverty, feminization of poverty -- low productivity in agriculture -- growth of the informal sector UN women’s conference in Mexico City in 1975: “Decade of women”

WID Irene Tinker: Gender bias against women in development policies The goals of the WID approach: Equality before law for women, educational opportunities, empowerment, income earning opportunities, welfare (birth control and food aid)

Ester Boserup, Women’s Role in Economic Development (1970) -gender-based division of labor in most countries in agriculture -colonization left a negative legacy for women (losing of land rights; no access to technology, to credit, etc.) -women’s and men’s participation in urban labor markets is differentiated Boserup’s suggestions: equality of opportunity for women; participation in the market will bring positive results

The main contribution of WID perspective: Until the 1970s, women were considered by the development agencies only in terms of “welfare” considerations (population control, social aid) But Boserup’s book brought attention to women’s roles as economic actors: food production, wage employment, etc.

Criticisms against WID assumes that the experience of Third World women are the same everywhere: they are all oppressed! assumes that equity and opportunity will bring positive results for women overlooks class differentiation in Third World countries ignores the sphere of household production and reproduction and women’s crucial role in both It has created a discourse about Third World women as sexually repressed, poor, ignorant, uneducated, traditional, etc. But women have agency; they resist oppression

Critical approaches to women’s role in development Women are active agents of development Patriarchy is not a uniform social order  Policy makers and social scientists should focus on gender relations at home, in the workplace, and in the society Participation of women in the market (income opportunities) has complex consequences (not simply positive or negative)

Women’s work What is work? Paid labor Informal paid labor Unpaid household labor (subsistence and reproduction)  Women have a “triple shift”

Based on this definition of work, in what areas are women active? -- population growth, environmental management -- food production -- formal wage work -- informal wage work -- women’s migration

Women and “population control” 1960s-1970s: population control was considered to be a variable in development How to elevate women’s status? More education, more access to family planning This perspective has since been criticized Why?

Women as “environmental managers” 1980s-2000s: population control is linked to environmental protection High population growth  strain on natural resources  deforestation Solution: women as “environmental managers” : elevate women’s status  fertility decline How to elevate women’s status? More education, more access to family planning Any criticisms?

Women as food producers Women as producers of food Men as wage cash earners (mining, factory work, seasonal migration) Women have limited access to cash, credit and land  Rural poverty

Women as income earners Since the 1970s, urban labor participation rate of women has increased in the developing world Women as factory workers Women as homeworkers Women in the informal economy Why? The New International Division of Labor  relocation of manufacturing in the Third World; initiation of export oriented manufacturing in many countries

Women in the informal economy A case which demonstrates the intersection between class and gender Women’s labor force participation is affected by both gender and class hierarchies in a society

Women in the informal economy (Export-oriented) manufacturing is often layered: --factory production with formal wage labor --subcontracting with formal wage labor --subcontracting with informal labor --piecework for subcontractors at home Where are women located in this schema?

Does earning wages emancipate women? Possible positive results: More agency by unmarried and married women in the household More say in decisions on marriage and divorce In some cases, women become “main bread winners” in a family

Does earning wages emancipate women? Possible negative results: More tension between traditional male and female roles  domestic violence Sometimes women’s income earning might intensify patriarchal pressures Increasing factory employment of women in some countries is accompanied by increasing male unemployment In some countries, female headed households increase  feminization of poverty Women’s overall work burden increases: “triple shift”

Women and migration “Feminization of migration” since the 1970s From which countries to which countries? What do migrant women do? Domestic work, manufacturing work Developmental outcomes of women’s international migration: remittances