Content deleted Content added
fixed CS1 error |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Alter: pages. Add: authors 1-2. Removed parameters. Formatted dashes. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Abductive | #UCB_webform 574/3850 |
||
Line 114:
Advocated chiefly by the [[World Bank]], smart economics is an approach to define gender equality as an integral part of economic development and it aims to spur development through investing more efficiently in women and girls. It stresses that the gap between men and women in [[human capital]], economic opportunities, and voice/agency is a chief obstacle in achieving more efficient development. As an approach, it is a direct descendant of the efficiency approach taken by WID which “rationalizes ‘investing’ in women and girls for more effective development outcomes.”<ref name="Chant and Sweetman (2012)">{{cite journal|last=Chant|first=Sylvia|author2=Sweetman, Caroline|title=Fixing women or fixing the world? 'Smart economics', efficiency approaches, and gender equality in development| journal=Gender & Development| date=November 2012|volume=20|issue=3|pages=517–529|doi=10.1080/13552074.2012.731812|s2cid=154921144}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Chant|first=S.|title=The disappearing of 'smart economics'? The World Development Report 2012 on Gender Equality: Some concerns about the preparatory process and the prospects for paradigm change|journal=Global Social Policy|date=16 August 2012|volume=12|issue=2|pages=198–218|doi=10.1177/1468018112443674|s2cid=145291907}}</ref> As articulated in the section of WID, the efficiency approach to women in development was chiefly articulated by [[Caroline Moser]] in the late 1980s.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Moser|first=Caroline O.N.|title=Gender planning in the third world: Meeting practical and strategic gender needs|journal=World Development|date=November 1989|volume=17|issue=11|pages=1799–1825|doi=10.1016/0305-750X(89)90201-5}}</ref> Continuing the stream of WID, smart economics’ key unit of analysis is women as individual and it particularly focuses on measures that promote to narrow down the gender gap. Its approach identifies women are relatively underinvested source of development and it defines [[gender equality]] an opportunity of higher return investment. “Gender equality itself is here depicted as smart economics, in that it enables women to contribute their utmost skills and energies to the project of world economic development.”<ref name="Chant and Sweetman (2012)"/> In this term, smart economics champions neoliberal perspective in seeing business as a vital vehicle for change and it takes a stance of [[liberal feminism]].
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=Whitehead |first=Ann |title=Of Marriage And The Market: Women's Subordination Internationally And Its Lessons |publisher=Routledge |year=1984 |isbn=9780710202932 |editor-last=Young |editor-first=Kate |edition=2nd |___location=London |page= |chapter='I’m hungry, mum': the politics of domestic budgeting. |editor-last2=Wolkowitz |editor-first2=Carol |editor-last3=McCullagh |editor-first3=Roslyn}}</ref> and Jeffery and Jeffery who analyzed the positive correlation between female education and lower fertility rates.<ref>{{cite book |
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 |access-date=2016-05-05 |archive-date=2016-05-16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160516031212/http://www.ungei.org/resources/files/BIAAG_Summary_ENGLISH_lo_resolution.pdf |url-status=dead }}</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.
Line 141:
===Dependency theory===
Dependency theorists opposed that liberal development models, including the attempt to incorporate women into the existing global capitalism, was, in fact, nothing more than the "development of [[underdevelopment]]."<ref>{{cite book|last=Frank|first=Andre Gunder|title=Capitalism and underdevelopment in Latin America : historical studies of Chile and Brazil|url=https://archive.org/details/capitalismunderd00fran|url-access=registration|year=1969|publisher=Monthly Review P.|___location=New York|isbn=978-0853450931|edition= Rev. and enl.}}</ref> This view led them to propose that delinking from the structural oppression of [[global capitalism]] is the only way to achieve balanced human development.
In the 1980s, there also emerged "a sustained questioning by [[post-structuralist]] critics of the development paradigm as a narrative of progress and as an achievable enterprise."<ref>{{cite book |last=Ghosh |first=Jayati |title=The Women, Gender and Development Reader
===Basic Needs Approach, Capability Approach, and Ecofeminism===
| |||