The Beijing Platform for Action charted a future we still need to bring up: building feminist economic policy

ABSTRACT

The Beijing Platform for Action (BPfA), written 25 years ago, is remarkable in its economic diagnostics, analytical framework, and policy prescriptions, which remain fully relevant today. In this article, we revisit the main economic problems identified by the BPfA: GDP growth, employment, care, and poverty. In terms of GDP growth, the BPfA was clear that not any type of growth would suffice, calling for sustainable development avant la lettre. It left open the question of what feminist macroeconomics would look like, on which there has been much progress in defining, if unfortunately not in applying. On employment, it is still the case that sectoral, labour, and employment policies, working in tandem with macroeconomic policies, are necessary to make the promise of decent work for all a reality. On care, this 25 years saw the transition from ‘valuation to transformation’, complementing and deepening the BPfA’s agenda; and the need for social protection for all remains key to alleviate poverty. In the most challenging of times, while the COVID-19 crisis is unfolding, the BPfA charts a future that we urgently need to bring up.

Le Programme d’action de Beijing (Beijing Platform for Action – BPfA), rédigé il y a 25 ans, est remarquable du point de vue de ses diagnostics économiques, de son cadre analytique et de ses prescriptions en matière de politique générale, autant d’aspects qui continuent d’être entièrement pertinents aujourd’hui. Dans cet article, nous revenons sur les principaux problèmes économiques identifiés par le BPfA – croissance du PIB, emploi, soins et pauvreté. Pour ce qui est de la croissance du PIB, le Programme stipulait clairement qu’il ne suffirait pas d’assurer n’importe quel type de croissance et lançait un appel pour le développement durable avant la lettre. Il laissait ouverte la question de la forme que prendrait la macroéconomie féministe, aspect sur lequel on a accompli de grands progrès en matière de définition, mais malheureusement pas en matière d’application. Pour ce qui est de l’emploi, la réalité continue d’être que les politiques sectorielles, et celles relatives à la main d’œuvre et à l’emploi, en tandem avec les politiques macroéconomiques, sont nécessaires pour faire de la promesse de travail décent pour tous une réalité. En matière de soins, durant les 25 dernières années on a assisté à la transition de «l’estimation à la transformation», ce qui est venu compléter et approfondir l’ordre du jour du Programme. Et la nécessité de protection sociale pour tous reste essentielle pour atténuer la pauvreté. Durant cette période des plus difficiles, alors que se développe la crise du COVID-19, le Programme d’action de Beijing trace un avenir auquel nous devons donner forme, ce de toute urgence.

La Plataforma de Acción de Beijing (pab), escrita hace 25 años, es notable por sus diagnósticos económicos, su marco analítico y sus medidas de políticas públicas, los cuales siguen siendo plenamente pertinentes hoy en día. En el presente artículo revisamos los principales problemas económicos identificados por la pab —el crecimiento del pib, el empleo, el cuidado y la pobreza—. En cuanto al crecimiento del pib, la Plataforma tuvo claro que no bastaría con cualquier tipo de crecimiento, sino que exigió un desarrollo sostenible, antes incluso de que este concepto estuviera en boga. Dejó abierta la cuestión de cómo sería la macroeconomía feminista, y, si bien se ha avanzado mucho en su definición, desafortunadamente no ha sucedido lo mismo con su aplicación. Respecto al empleo, sigue siendo cierto que las políticas sectoriales, laborales y de empleo, en conjunción con las políticas macroeconómicas, son necesarias para hacer realidad la promesa de instaurar un trabajo digno para todos. En lo que tiene que ver con la atención en salud, en estos 25 años se ha pasado de la “valoración a la transformación”, complementando y profundizando el programa de la Plataforma. Además, la necesidad de protección social para todos sigue siendo clave para aliviar la pobreza. En estos tiempos aún más difíciles, mientras se desarrolla la crisis de la Covid-19, la Plataforma de Acción de Beijing aborda un futuro que debemos trazar con urgencia.

KEYWORDS:

• Growth
• feminist macroeconomics
• sustainable development
• employment
• unpaid care work
• paid care work
• poverty

Notes on contributors

Valeria Esquivel is Senior Employment Policies and Gender Officer at the International Labour Office (ILO) and co-editor of this issue of Gender & Development. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the position of the ILO or its constituents. Postal address: International Labour Office, 4 Route des Morillons, CH-1211, Geneva, Switzerland. Email: [email protected]

Corina Rodríguez Enríquez is Researcher for the National Council of Research (CONICET) at the Interdisciplinary Centre for the Study of Public Policy (Ciepp) in Buenos Aires, and Executive Committee Member of Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN). Email: [email protected]

Notes

1 By ‘demand side’ we refer to the demand side of the labour market, i.e. the firms that employ women. For example, the BPfA quote mentions that women have lost jobs due to restructuring processes (changes in the composition of sectoral employment).

2 By ‘supply side’ we refer to issues associated to the characteristics of workers, like lack of access to productive resources and inadequate sharing of family responsibilities, amongst those referred to by the BPfA quote.

3 For more information on the ILO Convention (C190, 2019) on Violence and Harassment in the World of Work, see www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C190 (last checked 13 April 2020).

4 See, for example, the ‘Gender Equality and Macroeconomics’ project, www.brettonwoodsproject.org/gender-equality-macroeconomics/ (last checked 31 March 2020).

5 Financialisation describes an economic process of increasing influence of the logic of finance in the world economy and the progressive decoupling between the real economy and the financial sector, which has been a distinctive feature of capitalist development since the mid-1970s (Abeles et al. 2018).

6 The Microfinance Summit Campaign of 1997 demonstrated and stimulated the interest of development organisations of all kinds in microfinance as a ‘magic bullet’ that could end poverty and turn millions of women into entrepreneurs, empowering them in households and wider society in the process. The focus on microfinance has been critiqued by feminists from many different vantage points, notably for exposing women in poverty to the ‘discipline of the market’ (Lairap Fonderson 2003); for depoliticising the notion of women’s empowerment (Mahmud 2003); and defining empowerment from outsider perspectives (Kabeer 1998).

7 World Bank data on this are available at https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY (last checked 13 April 2020).

8 The ‘feminisation of poverty’ argument started around the same period. It should be noted though that women are not necessarily poorer than men, or the majority of the poor. For a critical take, see Chant (2015).

9 The unpaid care work includes the care of persons and housework, performed in households and communities without a remuneration (not for profit or pay). For definitions, see Esquivel (2014).

10 Feminist economists have explored this suggested synergy between gender equality and growth in depth. See, for example, Kabeer and Natali (2013).

11 NEET rates include those who are unemployed (actively seeking and available for work), hence in the labour force. However, young women’s NEET rates are typically associated with inactivity (being out of the labour force).

12 Note that this is not the wages for housework agenda: care workers are in employment, and provide care for pay.