Editing Feminist economics (section)

===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>