Abstract

Improving the conceptualisation and measurement of women's empowerment has been repeatedly identified as a research priority for global development policy. We apply arguments from feminist and political philosophy to develop a unified typology of empowerment concepts to guide measurement and evaluation. In this typology, empowerment (1) may be a property of individuals or collectives (2) may involve removing internal psychological barriers or external interpersonal barriers (3) may be defined on each agent’s own terms or by external agents in advance (4) may require agents to acquire a degree of independence or require others to ‘empower’ them through social support (5) may either concern the number of present options or the motivations behind past choices. We argue a careful examination of arguments for and against each notion of empowerment reveal fundamental fact-, theory- and value-based incompatibilities between contrasting notions. Thus, empowerment is an essentially contested concept that cannot be captured by simply averaging a large number of contrasting measures. We argue that researchers and practitioners measuring this concept may benefit from making explicit their theory-, fact- and value-based assumptions about women’s empowerment before settling on a single primary measure for their particularly context. Alternative indicators can subsequently be used as sensitivity measures that not only measure sensitivity to assumptions about women’s social reality, but also to investigators’ own values.

Highlights

  • Women’s empowerment is widely recognized as a global policy objective (UN General Assembly 2015) and a key component of strategies to promote health and combat poverty world-wide (World Bank 2012; Every Women Every Child 2017)

  • A woman might be asked if she performs work inside the house, outside the house or both followed by questions on whether she performs the type of work she has mentioned because she wants to, because it is personally important, because she will get into trouble with others otherwise, or because she is afraid of others’ ill-judgment

  • We present our typology as a pragmatic tool for researchers and policy-makers6 to provide greater clarity on the meaning of empowerment; short, broad definitions based on terms such as ‘choice’, ‘opportunity’, ‘agency’ or ‘autonomy’ often turn out just as unclear and ambiguous as the original ‘empowerment’ concept

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Women’s empowerment is widely recognized as a global policy objective (UN General Assembly 2015) and a key component of strategies to promote health and combat poverty world-wide (World Bank 2012; Every Women Every Child 2017). We draw on feminist and political philosophy to clarify debates over the meaning of women’s empowerment and generate a typology for its plural interpretations. We argue for a series of fact-, theory- and value-based judgments inherent in most measures of empowerment that create fundamental incompatibilities between contrasting notions of empowerment. We argue researchers and practitioners might benefit from selecting a single notion of empowerment as their primary measure in empirical applications and treating other measures as secondary measures testing sensitivity to their own assumptions

The Need for a Typology
A Typology of Concepts
Why the Distinction Matters
Collective Empowerment May Increase in Individual Empowerment
Collective Empowerment May be Independent of Individual Empowerment
Collective Empowerment May Decrease in Individual Empowerment
What this Means for Measurement
External Notions of Empowerment Ignore Issues of False Consciousness
External Notions of Empowerment Ignore Second‐Order Desires
External Notions of Empowerment Reflect Masculinist Bias
Too Much Choice can Demotivate Decision‐Making
Forward‐Looking Freedoms Do Not Entail Exercise of Freedom
Backward‐Looking Freedoms Do Not Entail Availability of Opportunity
Indirect Freedom May Encourage Dependency on External Agents
Direct Freedom Expects Too Much from Self‐Reliance
Direct Freedom Reflects Masculinist Bias
Indirect Freedom May Marginalise Women’s Voices
Classification of Existing Indicators
Objective interests Indirect freedom
Decision‐Making Measures
Self‐Efficacy
The Relative Autonomy Index
Women’s Collective Empowerment?
10.1 Defining Women’s Empowerment
10.2 Applying the Typology in Practice
Findings
10.3 Limitations
11 Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call