Editing Feminist economics (section)

==Critiques of traditional economics==
Although there is no definitive list of the principles of feminist economics, feminist economists offer a variety of critiques of standard approaches in economics.<ref name="web">{{cite web |last1=Schneider |first1=Geoff |last2=Shackelford |first2=Jean |author-link2=Jean Shackelford |url=http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/gschnedr/FemPrcpls.htm |title=Ten Principles of Feminist Economics: A Modestly Proposed Antidote |publisher=Dept. of Economics, Bucknell University |access-date=2012-06-20 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120630022557/http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/gschnedr/FemPrcpls.htm |archive-date=2012-06-30 |url-status = dead}}</ref> For example, prominent feminist economist [[Paula England]] provided one of the earliest feminist critiques of traditional economics as she challenged the claims that:

*That interpersonal [[utility]] comparisons are impossible;
*That tastes are [[exogenous variable|exogenous]] and unchanging;
*That actors are selfish; and
*That household heads act altruistically.<ref name="separative">{{cite book|last=England|first=Paula|title=Beyond Economic Man: Feminist Theory and Economics|year=1994|publisher=Univ. of Chicago Press|location=Chicago [u.a.]|isbn=978-0-226-24201-9|pages=37–43|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BFg6lK48EX0C&q=The%20Separative%20Self%3A%20Androcentric%20Bias%20in%20Neoclassical%20Assumptions&pg=PA37|chapter=The Separative Self: Androcentric Bias in Neoclassical Assumptions}}</ref>

This list is not exhaustive but does represent some of the central feminist economic critiques of traditional economics, out of the wide variety of such viewpoints and critiques.

===Normativity===
Many feminists call attention to value judgments in economic analysis.<ref name="nelson1" /> This idea is contrary to the typical conception of economics as a [[positivism|positive science]] held by many practitioners. For example, Geoff Schneider and [[Jean Shackelford]] suggest that, as in other sciences,<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Franklin |first=Sarah |date=1995 |title=Science as Culture, Cultures of Science |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2155934 |journal=Annual Review of Anthropology |volume=24 |pages=163–184 |doi=10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.001115 |jstor=2155934 |issn=0084-6570}}</ref> "the issues that economists choose to study, the kinds of questions they ask, and the type of analysis undertaken all are a product of a belief system which is influenced by numerous factors, some of them ideological in character."<ref name="web" /> Similarly, Diana Strassmann comments, "All economic [[statistics]] are based on an underlying story forming the basis of the definition. In this way, narrative constructions necessarily underlie all definitions of variables and statistics.  Therefore, economic research cannot escape being inherently qualitative, regardless of how it is labeled."<ref name="strassmann">{{cite journal|last=Strassmann|first=Diana|title=Editorial: Expanding the Methodological Boundaries of Economics|journal=Feminist Economics|date=20 January 1997|volume=3|issue=2|pages=vii–ix |doi=10.1080/135457097338771a}}</ref> Feminist economists call attention to the [[value judgement]]s in all aspects economics and criticize its depiction of an objective science.

===Free trade===
A central principle of mainstream economics is that [[trade]] can make everyone better off through [[comparative advantage]] and efficiency gains from specialization and greater efficiency.<ref name=manikiw>{{cite book|last=Mankiw|first=N. Gregory|author-link=Greg Mankiw|title=Principles of Economics|year=1997|publisher=Dryden Press|location=Fort Worth, TX|isbn=9780030982385 |url= https://archive.org/details/principlesofmicr00greg|url-access=registration|quote=comparative advantage.}}</ref><ref name="elson">{{cite book|last=Elson |first=Diane|author-link=Diane Elson|title=Feminist Economics of Trade|year=2007|publisher=Routledge|location=New York|isbn=978-0-415-77059-0|pages=33–48|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SkWUSDW244gC&q=Mainstream%2C%20Heterodox%20and%20Feminist%20Trade%20Theory&pg=PA33 |author2=Grown, Caren |author3=Cagatay, Nilufer |chapter=Mainstream, Heterodox and Feminist Trade Theory}}</ref> Many feminist economists question this claim. [[Diane Elson]], [[Caren Grown]] and [[Nilufer Cagatay]] explore the role that gender inequalities play in international trade and how such trade reshapes gender inequality itself. They and other feminist economists explore whose interests specific trade practices serve.

For example, they may highlight that in [[Africa]], specialization in the cultivation of a single [[cash crop]] for export in many countries made those countries extremely vulnerable to price fluctuations, weather patterns, and pests.<ref name="web" /> Feminist economists may also consider the specific gendered effects of trade-decisions. For instance, "in countries such as [[Kenya]], men generally controlled the earnings from cash crops while women were still expected to provide food and clothing for the household, their traditional role in the African family, along with labor to produce cash crops.  Thus women suffered significantly from the transition away from subsistence food production towards specialization and trade."<ref name="web" /> Similarly, since women often lack economic power as business owners, they are more likely to be hired as cheap labor, often involving them in exploitative situations.<ref name="elson"/> These examples highlight feminist economic theory's critique of the traditional economic theory.

===Exclusion of non-market activity===

Feminist economics call attention to the importance of non-market activities, such as [[childcare]] and [[domestic work]], to economic development.<ref name="Power, Marilyn 2011">{{cite journal|last=Power|first=Marilyn|title=Social Provisioning as a Starting Point for Feminist Economics|journal=[[Feminist Economics (journal)|Feminist Economics]]|date=November 2004|volume=10|issue=3|pages=3–19|doi=10.1080/1354570042000267608|s2cid=145130126}}</ref><ref name="razavi">{{cite journal|last=Razavi|first=Shahra|title=From Global Economic Crisis to the 'Other Crisis'|journal=[[Development (journal)|Development]]|date=September 2009|volume=52|issue=3|pages=323–328|doi=10.1057/dev.2009.33|s2cid=83754064}}</ref> This stands in sharp contrast to [[neoclassical economics]] where those forms of labor are unaccounted for as "non-economic" phenomena.<ref name="nelson1"/> Including such labor in economic accounts removes substantial gender bias because women disproportionately perform those tasks.<ref>{{cite book|title=Human Development Report 1995|chapter-url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_1995_en_chap4.pdf|pages=87–98|year=1995|chapter=Valuing women's work |publisher=[[United Nations Development Programme]]}}</ref> When that labor is unaccounted for in economic models, much work done by women is ignored, literally devaluing their effort.

[[File:Trabajadora doméstico.JPG|thumb|A Colombian domestic worker. Neighborhood friends and family sharing household and childcare responsibilities is an example of non-market activity performed outside of the traditional [[labor market]].]]

More specifically, for example, [[Nancy Folbre]] examines the role of [[children]] as [[public goods]] and how the non-market labor of parents contributes to the development of [[human capital]] as a [[public service]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Folbre|first=Nancy|author-link=Nancy Folbre|title=Children as Public Goods|journal=[[The American Economic Review]]|date=May 1994|volume=84|issue=2|pages=86–90|jstor=2117807}}</ref> In this sense, children are [[positive externality]] which is under-invested according to traditional analysis. Folbre indicates that this oversight partially results from failing to properly examine non-market activities.

[[Marilyn Waring]] described how the exclusion of non-market activities in the [[national accounts|national accounting systems]] relied on the deliberate choice and the design of the international standard of national accounts that explicitly excluded non-market activities. In some countries, such as [[Norway]], which had included unpaid household work in the GDP in the first half of the 20th century, it was left out in 1950 for reasons of compatibility with the new international standard.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Aslaksen|first1=Iulie|author-link1=Iulie Aslaksen|last2=Koren|first2=Charlotte|editor1-last=Bjørnholt|editor1-first =Margunn|editor1-link=Margunn Bjørnholt|editor2-last=McKay|editor2-first =Ailsa|editor2-link=Ailsa McKay|title=Counting on Marilyn Waring: New Advances in Feminist Economics|year=2014|location=Bradford|publisher=[[Demeter Press]]|pages=57–71|chapter=Reflections on Unpaid Household Work, Economic Growth, and Consumption Possibilities|isbn=9781927335277|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Sbh8AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA57}}</ref>

[[Ailsa McKay]] argues for a [[basic income]] as "a tool for promoting gender-neutral social citizenship rights" partially to address these concerns.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = McKay | first1 = Ailsa | author-link1 = Ailsa McKay | year =2001 | title = Rethinking Work and Income Maintenance Policy: Promoting Gender Equality Through a Citizens' Basic Income | journal = [[Feminist Economics (journal)|Feminist Economics]] | volume = 7 | issue = 1 | pages = 97–118 | doi = 10.1080/13545700010022721 | s2cid = 153865511 }}</ref>

===Omission of power relations===
Feminist economics often assert that power relations exist within the economy, and therefore, must be assessed in economic models in ways that they previously have been overlooked.<ref name="Power, Marilyn 2011"/> For example, in "neoclassical texts, the sale of labor is viewed as a mutually beneficial exchange that benefits both parties.  No mention is made of the power inequities in the exchange which tend to give the employer power over the employee."<ref name="web" /> These power relations often favor men and there is "never any mention made of the particular difficulties that confront females in the [[Gender inequality#In the workplace|workplace]]."<ref name="web" /> Consequently, "Understanding power and [[patriarchy]] helps us to analyze how men-dominated economic institutions function and why females are often at a disadvantage in the workplace."<ref name="web" /> Feminist economists often extend these criticisms to many aspects of the social world, arguing that power relations are an endemic and important feature of society.

===Omission of gender and race===
Feminist economics argue that [[gender]] and [[race (classification of humans)|race]] must be considered in economic analysis. [[Amartya Sen]] argues that "the systematically inferior position of women inside and outside the household in many societies points to the necessity of treating gender as a force of its own in development analysis."<ref name="sen_gender">{{cite journal|last=Sen|first=Amartya|title=Gender and Cooperative Conflicts|date=July 1987|volume=1987/18|series=Working Papers|url=http://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/working-papers/previous/en_GB/wp-18/_files/82530817554384479/default/WP18.pdf|publisher=UNU-WIDER|access-date=2012-06-20|archive-date=2017-10-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171026115251/https://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/working-papers/previous/en_GB/wp-18/_files/82530817554384479/default/WP18.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> He goes on to say that experiences of men and women, even within the same household, are often so different that examining economics without gender can be misleading.

Economic models can often be improved by explicitly considering gender, race, class, and [[caste]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Brewer|first1=Rose M.|last2=Conrad|first2=Cecilia A.|last3=King|first3=Mary C.|author-link2=Cecilia Conrad |title=The Complexities and Potential of Theorizing Gender, Caste, Race, and Class|journal=Feminist Economics|date=January 2002|volume=8|issue=2|pages=3–17|doi=10.1080/1354570022000019038|s2cid=143046656}}</ref> Julie Matthaie describes their importance: "Not only did gender and racial-ethnic differences and inequality precede [[capitalism]], they have been built into it in key ways.  In other words, every aspect of our capitalist economy is gendered and racialized; a theory and practice that ignores this is inherently flawed."<ref>{{cite journal|last=Matthaei|first=Julie|title=Why feminist, Marxist, and anti-racist economists should be feminist–Marxist–anti-racist economists|journal=Feminist Economics|date=March 1996|volume=2|issue=1|pages=22–42|doi=10.1080/738552684}}</ref> Feminist economist Eiman Zein-Elabdin says racial and gender differences should be examined since both have traditionally been ignored and thus are equally described as "feminist difference."<ref>{{cite book|last=Zein-Elabdin|first=Eiman|title=Toward a Feminist Philosophy of Economics|year=2003|publisher=Taylor & Francis|location=London|isbn=978-0-415-28388-5|pages=321–333|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xXt6Ks1f0xcC&q=The%20Difficulty%20of%20Feminist%20Economics&pg=PA321|editor=Barker, Drucilla K.}}</ref> The July 2002 issue of the ''[[Feminist Economics (journal)|Feminist Economics]]'' journal was dedicated to issues of "gender, color, caste and class."<ref name="Power, Marilyn 2011"/>

===Exaggeration of gender differences===
In other cases gender differences have been exaggerated, potentially encouraging unjustified stereotyping. In recent works<ref>[[Julie A. Nelson]] (2015) "Are Women Really More Risk-Averse than Men? A Re-Analysis of the Literature Using Expanded Methods." ''Journal of Economic Surveys'' '''29'''(3): 566-585, doi: 10.1111/joes.12069; (2014) "The Power of Stereotyping and Confirmation Bias to Overwhelm Accurate Assessment: The Case of Economics, Gender, and Risk Aversion." ''Journal of Economic Methodology'' '''21'''(3): 211-231, doi: 10.1080/1350178X.2014.939691; and (2015) "Not-So-Strong Evidence for Gender Differences in Risk Taking,"  ''Feminist Economics'', doi: OI:10.1080/13545701.2015.1057609</ref> [[Julie A. Nelson]] has shown how the idea that "women are more risk averse than men," a now-popular assertion from behavioral economics, actually rests on extremely thin empirical evidence. Conducting meta-analyses of recent studies, she demonstrates that, while statistically significant differences in measures of mean risk aversion are sometimes found, the substantive size of these group-level differences tend to be small (on the order of a fraction of a standard deviation), and many other studies fail to find a statistically significant difference at all. Yet the studies that fail to find "difference" are less likely to be published or highlighted.

In addition, claims that men and women have "different" preferences (such as for risk, competition, or altruism) often tend to be misinterpreted as categorical, that is, as applying to all women and all men, as individuals. In fact, small differences in average behavior, such as are found in some studies, are generally accompanied by large overlaps in men's and women's distributions. That is, both men and women can generally be found in the most risk-averse (or competitive or altruistic) groups, as well as in the least.

===''Homo economicus''===

The [[neoclassical economics|neoclassical economic]] model of a person is called ''[[Homo economicus]]'', describing a person who "interacts in society without being influenced by society," because "his mode of interaction is through an ideal [[Market (economics)|market]]," in which prices are the only necessary considerations.<ref name="nelson1" /> In this view, people are considered rational actors who engage in [[marginal analysis]] to make many or all of their decisions.<ref name="web" /> Feminist economists argue that people are more complex than such models, and call for "a more holistic vision of an economic actor, which includes group interactions and actions motivated by factors other than greed."<ref name="web" /> Feminist economics holds that such a reformation provides a better description of the actual experiences of both men and women in the market, arguing that mainstream economics overemphasizes the role of individualism, competition and selfishness of all actors. Instead, feminist economists like [[Nancy Folbre]] show that cooperation also plays a role in the economy.

Feminist economists also point out that [[agency (sociology)|agency]] is not available to everyone, such as children, the sick, and the frail elderly. Responsibilities for their care can compromise the agency of caregivers as well. This is a critical departure from the ''homo economicus'' model.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Levison|first=Deborah|title=Children as Economic Agents|journal=Feminist Economics|date=January 2000|volume=6|issue=1|pages=125–134|doi=10.1080/135457000337732|citeseerx=10.1.1.460.2185|s2cid=154879275}}</ref>

Moreover, feminist economists critique the focus of neoclassical economics on monetary rewards. [[Nancy Folbre]] notes, "legal rules and cultural norms can affect market outcomes in ways distinctly disadvantageous to women." This includes [[occupational segregation]] resulting in unequal pay for women. Feminist research in these areas contradicts the neoclassical description of [[labor markets]] in which [[Job (role)|occupations]] are chosen freely by individuals acting alone and out of their own free will.<ref name="web" /> Feminist economics also includes study of [[Norm (social)|norms]] relevant to economics, challenging the traditional view that material incentives will reliably provide the goods we want and need (consumer sovereignty), which does not hold true for many people.

[[Institutional economics]] is one means by which feminist economists improve upon the ''homo economicus'' model. This theory examines the role of institutions and evolutionary social processes in shaping economic behavior, emphasizing "the complexity of human motives and the importance of culture and relations of power." This provides a more holistic view of the economic actor than ''homo economicus.''<ref name="Power, Marilyn 2011"/>

The work of George Akerlof and Janet Yellen on [[efficiency wage]]s based on notions of fairness provides an example of a feminist model of economic actors. In their work, agents are not hyperrational or isolated, but instead act in concert and with fairness, are capable of experiencing jealousy, and are interested in personal relationships. This work is based on empirical [[sociology]] and psychology, and suggests that wages can be influenced by fairness considerations rather than purely market forces.<ref name="nelson1" />

===Limited methodology===
Economics is often thought of as "the study of how society manages its [[scarce resources]]" and as such is limited to mathematical inquiry.<ref name="nelson1"/><ref name=manikiw/> Traditional economists often say such an approach assures objectivity and separates economics from "softer" fields such as [[sociology]] and [[political science]]. Feminist economists, argue on the contrary that a mathematical conception of economics limited to scarce resources is a holdover from the early years of science and [[Cartesian philosophy]], and limits economic analysis. So feminist economists often call for more diverse data collection and broader economic models.<ref name="nelson1"/>

===Economic pedagogy===
Feminist economists suggest that both the content and teaching style of economics courses would benefit from certain changes. Some recommend including experimental learning, laboratory sessions, individual research and more chances to "do economics."<ref name="nelson1"/> Some want more dialogue between instructors and students. Many feminist economists are urgently interested in how course content influences the demographic composition of future economists, suggesting that the "classroom climate" affects some students' perceptions of their own ability.<ref name="hall">{{cite journal|author1=Hall, Roberta M. |author2=Sandler, Bernice R. |title=The Classroom Climate: A Chilly One for Women?|date=February 1982|url=http://www.aacu.org/psew/publications/Classroom_Climate_ChilyOne.pdf|publisher=Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges|url-status = dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121003175716/http://aacu.org/psew/publications/Classroom_Climate_ChilyOne.pdf|archive-date=2012-10-03}}</ref>

===2008 financial crisis===
[[Margunn Bjørnholt]] and [[Ailsa McKay]] argue that the [[2008 financial crisis]] and the response to it revealed a crisis of ideas in mainstream economics and within the economics profession, and call for a reshaping of both the economy, economic theory and the economics profession. They argue that such a reshaping should include new advances within feminist economics that take as their starting point the socially responsible, sensible and accountable subject in creating an economy and economic theories that fully acknowledge care for each other as well as the planet.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Bjørnholt|first1=Margunn|author1-link=Margunn Bjørnholt|last2=McKay|first2=Ailsa|author2-link=Ailsa McKay|editor1-last=Bjørnholt|editor1-first =Margunn|editor1-link=Margunn Bjørnholt|editor2-last=McKay|editor2-first =Ailsa|editor2-link=Ailsa McKay|title=Counting on Marilyn Waring: New Advances in Feminist Economics|chapter-url=http://www.margunnbjornholt.no/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Advances-in-Feminist-Economics-in-Times-of-Economic-Crisis.pdf|year=2014|location=Bradford|publisher=[[Demeter Press]]|pages=7–20|chapter=Advances in Feminist Economics in Times of Economic Crisis|isbn=9781927335277}}</ref>