Gender and development: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:39, 26 June 2021

Revision as of 05:57, 3 October 2021

Line 117:

The thinking behind smart economics dates back, at least, to the lost decade of the [[Structural adjustment|Structural Adjustment]] Policies (SAPs) in the 1980s.<ref name="Chant and Sweetman (2012)"/> In 1995, World Bank issued its flagship publication on gender matters of the year Enhancing Women's Participation in Economic Development (World Bank 1995). This report marked a critical foundation to the naissance of Smart Economics; in a chapter entitled ‘The Pay-offs to Investing in Women,’ the Bank proclaimed that investing in women “speeds economic development by raising productivity and promoting the more efficient use of resources; it produces significant social returns, improving child survival and reducing fertility, and it has considerable intergenerational pay-offs.” <ref>{{cite journal|last=World Bank|title=Enhancing Women's Participation in Economic Development|year=1995|issue=Washington, DC: World Bank|page=22}}</ref> The Bank also emphasized its associated social benefits generated by investing in women. For example, the Bank turned to researches of Whitehead that evidenced a greater female-control of household income is associated with better outcomes for children's welfare <ref>{{cite book|last=Young|first=edited by Kate|title=Of marriage and the market : women's subordination internationally and its lessons|year=1984|publisher=Routledge & Kegan Paul|___location=London|isbn=9780710202932|page=Whitehead, A. (1984) ‘I’m hungry, mum: the politics of domestic budgeting.’|edition= 2nd |author2=Wolkowitz, Carol|author3= McCullagh, Roslyn}}</ref> and Jeffery and Jeffery who analyzed the positive correlation between female education and lower fertility rates.<ref>{{cite book|last=Jackson|first=edited by Cecile|title=Feminist visions of development : gender analysis and policy|year=2002|publisher=Routledge|___location=London|isbn=978-0415157902|page=Jeffrey, P., & Jeffrey, R. (1998). Silver Bullet or Passing Fancy? Girl’s Schooling and Population Policy|edition= 1st publ.|author2=Pearson, Ruth}}</ref> In the 2000s, the approach of smart economics came to be further crystallized through various frameworks and initiatives. A first step was World Bank's Gender Action Plan (GAP) 2007-/2010, followed by the “Three Year Road Map for Gender Mainstreaming 2010-13.” The 2010-13 framework responded to criticisms for its precursor and incorporated some shifts in thematic priorities.<ref>{{cite web|last=World Bank.|title=Applying Gender Action Plan Lessons: A Three-Year Road Map for Gender Mainstreaming (2011- 2013).|url=http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/336003-1241561860207/GAPtransitionplan_may25.pdf.|work=World Bank Report|publisher=World Bank|access-date=1 December 2013}}</ref> Lastly but not least, the decisive turning point was 2012 marked by its publication of “[[World Development Report]] 2012: Gender Equality and Development.”<ref name="World Bank">{{cite web|last=World Bank|title=World Development Report 2012: Gender Equality and Development.|url=http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/EXTWDRS/EXTWDR2012/0,,contentMDK:22999750~menuPK:8154981~pagePK:64167689~piPK:64167673~theSitePK:7778063,00.html|work=World Development Report|publisher=World Bank|access-date=1 December 2013}}</ref> This Bank's first comprehensive focus on the gender issues was welcomed by various scholars and practitioners, as an indicator of its seriousness. For example, [[Shahra Razavi]] appraised the report as ‘a welcome opportunity for widening the intellectual space’.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Razavi |first=S. |title=World Development Report 2012: Gender Equality and Development: An Opportunity Both Welcome and Missed (An Extended Commentary) |pages=2 |url=http://www.unrisd.org/80256B42004CCC77/(httpInfoFiles)/E90770090127BDFDC12579250058F520/$file/Extended%20Commentary%20WDR%202012.pdf}}</ref>

Other [[international organizations]], particular [[UN]] families, have so far endorsed the approach of smart economics. Examining the relationship between child well-being and gender equality, for example, [[UNICEF]] also referred to the “Double Dividend of Gender Equality.”<ref>{{cite book|last=UNICEF|title=The state of the world's children 2007: women and children: the double dividend of gender equality.|url=https://archive.org/details/stateofworldschi0000unic|url-access=registration|year=2006|publisher=United Nations Children's Fund|isbn=9789280639988}}</ref> Its explicit link to a wider framework of the [[Millennium Development Goals]] (where the Goal 3 is Promoting Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment) claimed a wider legitimacy beyond economic efficiency. In 2007, the Bank proclaimed that “The business case for investing in MDG 3 is strong; it is nothing more than smart economics.”<ref>{{cite book|last=World Bank|title=Global Monitoring Report 2007: Millennium Development Goals: Confronting the Challenges of Gender Equality and Fragile States (Vol. 4).|publisher=World Bank-free PDF|pages=145}}</ref> In addition, “Development organisations and governments have been joined in this focus on the ‘business case’ for gender equality and the empowerment of women, by businesses and enterprises which are interested in contributing to social good.”<ref name="Chant and Sweetman (2012)"/> A good example is “Girl Effect initiative” taken by Nike Foundation.<ref>{{cite news |title=Nike Harnesses 'Girl Effect' Again |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/11/giving/11VIDEO.html?_r=0 |newspaper=The New York Times |date=November 10, 2010 |access-date=1 December 2013}}</ref> Its claim for economic imperative and a broader socio-economic impact also met a strategic need of NGOs and community organizations that seeks justification for their program funding.<ref name="Chant and Sweetman (2012)"/> Thus, some NGOs, for example [[Plan International]], captured this trend to further their program. The then-president of the World Bank [[Robert B. Zoellick]] was quoted by Plan International in stating “Investing in adolescent girls is precisely the catalyst poor countries need to break intergenerational poverty and to create a better distribution of income. Investing in them is not only fair, it is a smart economic move.”<ref>{{cite book |last=Plan International |title='Because I Am a Girl: The State of the World's Girls 2009. Girls in the Global Economy. Adding it All Up.' |publisher=Plan International |page=11 and 28 |url=http://www.ungei.org/resources/files/BIAAG_Summary_ENGLISH_lo_resolution.pdf}}</ref> The global financial meltdown and austerity measures taken by major donor counties further supported this approach, since [[international financial institutions]] and international NGOs received a greater pressure from donors and from global public to design and implement maximally cost-effective programs.

'''Criticisms'''