Feminist Economics - An Introduction

Feminist Economics
1: Introduction
5 June 2014
Belfast Feminist Network
Realta Social Space Dr. Conor McCabe
King St. Belfast UCD School of Social Justice

1.Capital and Society
2.Economics
3.Gender

Rational Economic Man
• An autonomous agent
• able bodied, independent,
rational, heterosexual male
who is able to choose from an
number of options limited
only by certain constraints.
• Weighs cost and benefits to
maximise utility
• Self interested in
marketplace; altruistic at
home

[Lehman collapse, 15 September 2008 - headlines 16 Sep 2008]

Capitalism is first and foremost a historical social
system.

system.
What distinguishes the historical social system we
are calling historical capitalism is that in this
historical system capital came to be used (invested)
in a very special way. It came to be used with the
primary objective or intent of self-expansion.

system.
What distinguishes the historical social system we
are calling historical capitalism is that in this
historical system capital came to be used (invested)
in a very special way. It came to be used with the
primary objective or intent of self-expansion.
It was this relentless and curiously self-regarding
goal of the holder of capital, the accumulation of
still more capital, and the relations this holder of
capital had therefore to establish with other persons
in order to achieve this goal, which we denominate
as capitalism.

The purpose of capitalism is self-expansion – capital
begets capital – and it does so by monetizing social
value and human labour.
This is a circuit of transformation.

Historical capitalism involved therefore the
widespread commodification of processes – not
merely exchange processes, but production
processes, distribution processes, and investment
processes – that had previously been conducted
other than via a ‘market’.

Historical capitalism involved therefore the
widespread commodification of processes – not
merely exchange processes, but production
processes, distribution processes, and investment
processes – that had previously been conducted
other than via a ‘market’.
And, in the course of seeking to accumulate more
and more capital, capitalists have sought to
commodify more and more of these social processes
in all spheres of economic life.
Immanuel Wallerstein, Historical Capitalism
(London: Verso, 2011), 15.

The purpose of capitalism is self-expansion – capital begets capital – and it does so by
monetizing social value and human labour. This is a circuit of transformation.
“Historical capitalism involved therefore the widespread commodification of processes – not
merely exchange processes, but production processes, distribution processes, and investment
processes – that had previously been conducted other than via a ‘market’. And, in the course of
seeking to accumulate more and more capital, capitalists have sought to commodify more and
more of these social processes in all spheres of economic life.”
Immanuel Wallerstein, Historical Capitalism (London: Verso, 2011), 15.

“Capitalism only triumphs when it becomes
identified with the state, when it is the state.
In its first great phase, that of the Italian city-states
of Venice, Genoa and Florence, power lay in the
hands of the moneyed elite. In seventeenth-century
Holland the aristocracy of the Regents governed for
the benefit and even according to the directives of
the businessmen, merchants, and money-lenders.
Likewise, in England the Glorious Revolution of
1688 marked the accession of business similar to
that in Holland.” (Braudel 1977)
The fusion of state and capital was the vital
ingredient in the emergence of a distinctly capitalist
layer on top of, and in antithesis to, the layer of
market economy.

Over the last quarter of a century something
fundamental seems to have changed in the way in
which capitalism works.
The tendency since 1970 has been towards greater
geographical mobility of capital.

the distinction of sectors between what I
have called the ‘economy’ (or the market
economy) and ‘capitalism’ does not seem to
me to be anything new, but rather a
constant in Europe since the Middle Ages.
There is another difference too: I would
argue that a third sector should be added to
the pre-industrial model – that the lowest
stratum of the non-economy, the soil into
which capitalism thrusts its roots but which
it can never really penetrate.
This lowest layer remains an enormous one.
(Fernand Braudel, Civilization and
Capitalism 15th-18th Century vol.II: The
Wheels of Commerce, London: Collins,
1982, pp.229-30.).

Above it, comes the favoured
terrain of the market economy,
with its many horizontal
communications between the
different markets:
here a degree of automatic
coordination usually links supply,
demand and prices.
Capitalism 15th-18th Century vol.II:
The Wheels of Commerce, London:
Collins, 1982, pp.229-30.).

Then alongside, or rather above this
layer, comes the zone of the anti-
market, where the great predators
roam and the law of the jungle
operates. This – today as in the past,
before and after the industrial
revolution – is the real home of
capitalism.”
Capitalism 15th-18th Century vol.II: The
Wheels of Commerce, London:
Collins, 1982, pp.229-30.).

capitalism in the past (as distinct from capitalism today) only
occupied a narrow platform of economic life. How could one possibly
take it to mean a ‘system’ extending over the whole of society?
It was nevertheless a world apart, different from and indeed foreign
to the social and economic context surrounding it. And it is in relation
to this context that it is defined as ‘capitalism’, not merely in relation
to new capitalist forms which were to emerge later in time.
In fact capitalism was what it was in relation to a non-
capitalism of immense proportions.
And to refuse to admit this dichotomy within the economy of the past,
on the pretext that ‘true’ capitalism dates only from the ninetwwnth
century, means abandoning the effort to understand the significance
– crucial to the analysis of that economy – of what might be termed
the former typology of capitalism.
If there were certain areas where it elected residence – by no
means inadvertently – that is because these were the only areas
which favoured the reproduction of capital.” (Wheels, p.239)

Going beyond Braudel’s original argument, household production can be
considered as a case in point for such daily, unconscious routines. This
then signals one trajectory for understanding aspects of social
reproduction over time.
Indeed the politics of the everyday offers a current consideration of the
separation of life purposes (such as working life, family life and sex life)
and the social construction of such spaces.
It should be noted that, despite Braudel’s many valuable conceptual
inroads, he does not apply gender to his analysis and does not explicitly
consider the sexual division of labour in his trilogy.
However… his conceptualisations of material life can aid us in
understanding the historical dynamics that underpin social reproduction.
Isabella Bakker (2007) ‘Social Reproduction and the Constitution of a Gendered
Political Economy’, New Political Economy 12:4.

Economics is a social subject.
It’s the interactions and relationships between people
that make the economy go around.
Debates over economic issues are not technical
debates where expertise alone settles the day. They
are deeply political debates.

A society in which ordinary people know more
about economics, and recognize the often conflicting
interests at stake in the economy, is a society in
which more people will feel confident deciding for
themselves what’s best – instead of trusting the
experts. It will be a more democratic society.

A society in which ordinary people know more
about economics, and recognize the often conflicting
interests at stake in the economy, is a society in
which more people will feel confident deciding for
themselves what’s best – instead of trusting the
experts. It will be a more democratic society.
Quite apart from whether you think capitalism is
good or bad, capitalism is something we must study.
It’s the economy we live in, the economy we know.

Social Reproduction
Renewing life is a form of work, a kind of production, as
fundamental to the perpetuation of society as the production of
things.
Moreover, the social organization of that work, the set of social
relationships through which people act to get it done, has varied
widely and that variation has been central to the organization of
gender relations and gender inequality.
From this point of view, societal reproduction includes not only the
organization of production but the organization of social
reproduction, and the perpetuation of gender as well as class
relations.
Barbara Laslett and Johanna Brenner, ’ Gender and Social Reproduction: Historical
Perspectives,’ Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 15 (1989): 383

Gender and Caring
Notes on Lynch and Lyons, ‘The Gendered Order of Caring’ in
Ursula Barry (ed) Where Are We Now? New Feminist Perspectives
on Women in Contemporary Ireland (Dublin: Tasc, 2008)

There are deep gender inequalities in the doing of care and love
work that operate to the advantage of men.
It is women’s unwaged labour and related domestic labour that
frees men up to exercise control in the public sphere of politics,
the economy and culture.
… there is a moral imperative on women to do care work that
does not apply equally to men ; a highly gendered moral code
impels women to do the greater part of primary caring, with most
believing they have no choice in the matter.

The Irish government collects data
on unpaid caring within households
in
1. the Census
2. the Quarterly Household
Survey (QNHS).
Within the Census, care is defined
as being given by ‘persons aged
15yrs and over who provide regular
unpaid help for a friend or family
member with a long-term illness,
health problem or disability
(including problems due to age).
P.167-8

The way care is defined in the Census excludes what constitutes a
major category of care work, that of the ordinary, everyday care
of children (unless the child has a recognised disability). Data on
the care of children is compiled in the QNHS, however, and is
also available through the European Community Household Panel
(ECPH) survey. The focus in all three is on the hours of work
involved in caring so we do not know the nature and scope of the
caring involved. P.168

According to the [2006]
Census there are less than
150,000 people, 5 per cent
of the adult population in
unpaid care work (mostly
with adults) of whom 61
per cent are women and 39
per cent are men.
However, when we
measure all types of caring
activity, as has been done in
the European Community
household Panel (ECPH)
we see that there are 1
million people who do
caring who are not named
in the census.

Even though it is no doubt
unintentional, the failure to
collect data on hours spent
on child care work in the
Census, means that child
care, which is the major
form of care work in Irish
society, is no counted in
terms of work hours.
… women are almost five
times as likely to work long
care hours than is the case
for men.
Women spend much more
time at care work than men,
even when they are
employed.

Conventional androcentric assumptions have not been critically
examined in scientific and technological (S&T) culture; in the
international, national and local mediating agencies that deliver
S&T development; or in the communities that are the recipients
of development.
However, because women are primary deliverers of community
welfare on a daily basis to children, the sick and elderly, their
households, and the larger social networks that maintain
communities, the failure of development projects with respect to
women is automatically felt by social groups who depend on their
labour and social services.
Sandra Harding (1995) ‘Just add women and stir?’ Missing Links: Gender Equity in
Science and Technology for Development.

Feminist Economics - An Introduction

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Feminist Economics - An Introduction (13)

More from Conor McCabe (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Feminist Economics - An Introduction