Abstract
Development literature on global gender empowerment devotes much attention to employment, a code word for the inclusion of women’s labor in the global market. Recent work in transnational feminisms shows that the emphasis on employment over assets may not prevent exploitation of labor and perpetuity of poverty. This paper first highlights research on how women are increasingly taking on too much responsibility, working in a confluence of survival-oriented activities that undermine their own well-being. I also address how women are increasingly able to get out of poverty: when they can labor in such a way that they are not merely working to survive but also working for accumulation of their own material assets, foremost of which is basic housing. Finally, I consider these transnational feminist insights about the importance of housing for women in light of philosophical concerns about property ownership, specifically Locke’s theory of property. In justifying property rights through labor, and arguing against the state’s right to usurp property, a Lockean can give a defense against forced evictions that still occur in some contexts and give support for a normative connection between women’s labor and assets.
Highlights
The Misguided Emphasis on Employment over Assets Development literature on women, gender, and poverty has stressed the importance of investment in women’s labor as the key to poverty reduction
Some theorists consider women in terms of their economic utility, envisioning women’s labor as the ‘solution’ to poverty (World Bank 2001, 2012). They encourage women, and young girls especially, to be the so-called “Double X solution” to the problem of economic inequality between nations, and even the Published by Scholarship@Western, 2020
Transnational feminists worry that some trends in development economics have co-opted the insights of second-wave feminism, and that well-meaning development efforts instrumentalize women and reproduce the intersecting inequalities they set out initially to address (Benería, Berik, and Floro 2015, 22; Calkin 2015, 626; Chant 2016, 16; Chant and McIlwaine 2016, 176)
Summary
The Misguided Emphasis on Employment over Assets Development literature on women, gender, and poverty has stressed the importance of investment in women’s labor as the key to poverty reduction. I focus on urban contexts because of global trends in poverty and urbanization; cities are where most poor women live and work.3 I argue that Locke’s theory of property is useful to transnational feminists who are worried about the global exploitation of women’s labor in the context of urban poverty because it (a) bolsters a normative connection between work and labor and (b) gives a theoretical protection against forced evictions that (c) reorients property rights along the lines of labor instead of inheritance or capital.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
