Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Even the most devoted believers in the neoliberal the development enterprise from within. Debates
paradigm will have had their convictions shaken in explored how concepts and principles that emerged
recent times, as the world’s markets have played havoc out of feminist analysis and women’s collective
with their faith. For those who have long questioned struggles, and shaped Gender and Development
the purported benefits of neoliberal economic policies thinking and practice, have been appropriated and
and highlighted their injurious consequences, it comes transformed by neoliberal development institutions
as little surprise that this ‘grab-bag of ideas based on and discourses. Lively discussions explored the
the fundamentalist notion that markets are self- prospects for reclaiming these ideas and using them
correcting, allocate resources efficiently and serve the to reframe and revitalise feminist engagement. They
public interest well’, as Stiglitz (2008) well describes went far beyond mere critique, highlighting
neoliberalism, is in freefall. The focus of this IDS Bulletin submerged or otherwise obscured issues, theorising
is therefore particularly apposite at a time when feminist interventions and exploring new directions
much-cherished axioms are being re-inspected and for feminist praxis within and beyond ‘development’.
where new possibilities and directions are so badly
needed. 1 Gender, feminism and neoliberalism
The term ‘neoliberalism’, as Maxine Molyneux (2008)
Contributors to this IDS Bulletin add to a growing, reminds us, is so commonly used, it has become a
vibrant debate about the past, present and future of catch-all for a multitude of things – a ‘grab-bag’, as
Gender and Development. This IDS Bulletin arises Stiglitz evocatively calls it. For many, it is synonymous
from a conference of the same title that was held at with a set of economic policy prescriptions
the Institute of Development Studies in Brighton in associated with the ‘Washington Consensus’; for
July 2007 in collaboration with the Development others, it evokes something much more diffuse and
Studies Programme at Birkbeck College, London all encompassing, a socioeconomic system in its own
University, under the auspices of the Pathways of right. Despite ongoing debate around definitions,
Women’s Empowerment Research Programme there is a general agreement that we are now
Consortium.1 The conference brought together experiencing a different phase of neoliberalism to
around 50 participants from around the world to that of the 1970s and 1980s where the emphasis was
reflect upon the relationship between feminisms and on ‘market fundamentalism’. Since the 1990s,
neoliberalism, in the context of international revision of some policies has led to the emergence
development. It set out to provoke reflection on the of what has commonly been labelled ‘post-
now ubiquitous notions of ‘empowerment’ and Washington Consensus’ or ‘neoliberalism with a
‘agency’ within neoliberal development discourses on human face’ (Molyneux 2008).
gender. And it sought to raise broader questions
about the politics and political economy of Gender The literature that emerged in the early 1990s
and Development. showing the gender blindness of neoclassical
economics and the markedly negative effects of
The conference brought together women engaged neoliberal policies on women (see, for example,
in movements taking place outside the framework of Elson 1992; Sparr 1995) has been complemented in
‘development’ with women endeavouring to shape recent years by a new wave of studies which
1
document some of the perverse consequences of a disenfranchised diasporic citizens.
swing of the pendulum as development agencies (Hawkesworth 2006: 202)
have turned their attentions to women (see, for
example, Batliwala and Dhanraj 2004). A new Neoliberal policies have given rise to what critics call
direction emerging in recent critical work is a focus a ‘feminisation’ of labour, accompanied by a
on the normative dimensions of development deterioration of working conditions – casualisation,
programmes, and, in particular on the implicit or flexibilisation, violation of international labour
explicit heteronormativity that lies at the heart of standards and low wages (Moghadam 2005). Yet the
the development industry (Bedford 2005; Griffin story of the effects of the process of globalisation
2006). A number of studies highlight the extent to that has accompanied the implementation of
which the anti-poverty programmes that have arisen neoliberal policies is rather more complex than this.
in part to mitigate the effects of neoliberal It becomes important to distinguish different
economic reforms have a marked tendency to elements of the picture, to disentangle neoliberalism
reproduce and reinforce deeply conservative notions from globalisation and from, as we go on to explore,
of womanhood and of women’s role within the neo-conservatism. It is here that some of the
family (Molyneux 2006). Others explore the challenges arise for feminist analysis. For a start,
confluence of influences, including the scale of the neoliberal policies have not been uniformly bad for
influence exerted by neo-conservative elements women – and for some women, policies such as
within foreign and national institutions, that have market liberalisation may have indeed contributed to
come to play a decisive role in shaping policy their pathways of empowerment. After all, as Diane
responses in many countries (see contributions by Elson has pointed out, ‘markets do not always
Bradshaw and Bedford, this IDS Bulletin). operate against the interests of women’ (1992: 51). It
is important not to overlook the empowering
Paradoxically, while those in the mainstream dimensions of the new forms of work that have
development institutions who have championed become available to women – including mobilisation
neoliberal economic policies have never really been in struggles for labour rights in the new globalised
able to grasp the concept of gender, they appear to industries (Kabeer 2008). Yet as Jasmine Gideon’s
have acquired a growing interest in women. Where article in this IDS Bulletin on Chile suggests, it is vital
feminists once highlighted the systematic to look at the bigger picture and at other neoliberal
institutional bias against women in economic policy, reforms which have given rise to effects that
we now see institutions like the World Bank and the compound the impact of the informalisation of
Department for International Development (DFID) work, perhaps most significant amongst them the
lauding the importance of giving women more of a privatisation of care.
role in economic development. Women become, in
the language of DFID’s glossy Gender Equality at the As Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay reminded us at the
Heart of Development (2007), a ‘weapon’ in the fight conference, care needs to be taken not to conflate
against poverty, as the World Bank proclaims that neoliberalism with neo-conservatism. After all, she
investing in women entrepreneurs is ‘Smart pointed out, ‘neoliberalism in its pristine form has
Economics’ (Buvinic and King 2007). The scene has destabilised an order context of patriarchy and has
shifted. Women are no longer on the sidelines, or stressed choice’; indeed it is this ‘shared pursuit of
ignored altogether. And yet when we take a closer choice’ that characterises one of the points of
look at the way in which women come to be convergence between feminism and neoliberalism.
represented, it becomes evident that what appears Herein lies another complexity for feminist analysis.
may be far from what feminists might have desired. Where neoliberalism and neo-conservatism
Hawkesworth evokes the tenor of the way women converge, some of the more potentially liberating
come to be represented in these new narratives: elements of neoliberalism become suffocated by
appeals to tradition and the dampening normativity
Women are simultaneously hailed as resourceful of highly conservative religious institutions. However,
providers, reliable micro-entrepreneurs, the discussions at the workshop also underlined the
cosmopolitan citizens, and positioned as need to go beyond a dichotomisation of neoliberal
‘disposable domestics’, the exploited global interventions emphasising choice and destabilising
workforce, and as displaced, devalued and patriarchy and patriarchal social structures rooted in
Neoliberal empowerment narratives not only empty A consequence, Ahikire goes on to highlight, is that
‘empowerment’ of any contentious political content, the language of vulnerability and marginalisation that
Bedford shows the defining role that was played by the A number of contributors go further to signal deep-
bank in the programme, naturalising private provision rooted problems with some of the very axiomatic
of care within the family as ‘an efficient and assumptions that have been so pivotal a part of the
empowering way to resolve tensions between paid and Gender and Development discourse. Kate Bedford,
unpaid labour’. The net result, she contends, is reduced for example, reveals the heteronormativity that
policy space for domestic violence, greater policy resides at the very heart of the notion of ‘gender
openings for conservative religious organisations equality’: an ideal of equality between women and
concerned with ‘the family’ and difficulties arguing for men that speaks about relations within a
social provision outside the family, such as heterosexual couple, to the exclusion of other
institutionalised childcare. She highlights the ironies of gender relations or other kinds of partnership. Other
the extent to which an articulation of the problem that kinds of relationships fall out of the frame. Penny
seemed to address long-standing feminist concerns led Vera-Sanso (this IDS Bulletin) highlights the extent to
to a solution that few feminists might agree with: which narratives about women’s economic
autonomy may misconstrue precisely the power that
After all, many feminists wanted men to stop women may exercise over the household purse, as
shirking domestic work and International Financial well as the basis for solidaristic relations within the
Institutions to take care seriously. However we did household.
not necessarily want childcare erased as a policy
priority, replaced by more shared (but still privatised) What emerges from this is a more fundamental
caring labour within couples ... [or] poor men held critique of Gender and Development. It echoes
responsible for women’s poverty. [p64–5] earlier critiques of the dominance of feminisms that
obscured other dimensions of difference and
4 Revisiting feminist engagements with projected preoccupations amongst a particular group
development of people in one particular context onto all other
Feminists have tended to be more reflexive than people and places (see for example, Mohanty 1991;
many of those engaged with the development Ogundipe-Leslie 1994). Part of the problem is that
enterprise, whether from ‘within’ or ‘outside’. The the field of development is largely so devoid of
landmark volume Feminist Visions of Development historical or contextual understanding, it is in some
(Jackson and Pearson 1998) revisited theoretical respects unsurprising that Gender and Development
contributions made by feminist researchers over the narratives have acquired the same ring of universality
course of the 1980s, reviewing and repositioning their to them. While feminist theory and practice over the
insights. Ten years later, Feminisms in Development: last three decades and more has been systematically
Contestations, Contradictions and Challenges (Cornwall critiqued, re-envisioned and reconstructed, little of
et al. 2007) takes stock of some of the unexpected the dynamic debate about ‘race’, class, imperialism
hurdles and contradictions that arose as the Gender and other interrelated structural inequalities seems
and Development agenda was taken up by to have permeated the field of Gender and
development agencies. This collection continues this Development. At best, we hear talk about
work of revisiting feminist engagements with ‘intersectionality’, a concept that appears to have
development. It complements the focus in both of gathered few adherents. And so, many of the
these earlier volumes on exploring whether certain prescriptions and practices associated with Gender
axioms that have become part of the Gender and and Development continue to be underpinned with
Development field have stood the test of time and universalistic assumptions about women, men and
travel to other contexts, with a critical gaze at the gender relations.
development industry itself.
The cultural specificity of these assumptions is
What emerges from many of the contributions to becoming ever more apparent. In her article Penny
this collection is a sense of unease with the extent Vera-Sanso argues in the context of poor households
Notes for all that she has done to get this IDS Bulletin
* We owe a huge thank you to Jenny Edwards for into print. Lastly, we’d like to thank the UK
all her work supporting the production of this IDS Government’s Department for International
Bulletin, and to Jenny, Julie McWilliam and Patsy Development (DFID) for funding to the Pathways
Tayler at IDS for all their contributions to of Empowerment Research Programme
managing the logistics of the workshop from Consortium that made the workshop, and this
which this IDS Bulletin is derived. Alison Norwood publication, possible.
deserves a medal for her patience which was 1 www.pathways-of-empowerment.org, accessed
tested to the limits, in waiting for us to complete 24 October 2008.
this collection; we are immensely grateful to her