scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 1354-5701

Feminist Economics 

Taylor & Francis
About: Feminist Economics is an academic journal published by Taylor & Francis. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Feminist economics & Wage. It has an ISSN identifier of 1354-5701. Over the lifetime, 932 publications have been published receiving 38232 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors argue that capabilities can help us to construct a normative conception of social justice, with critical potential for gender issues, only if we specify a definite set of capabilities as the most important ones to protect.
Abstract: Amartya Sen has made a major contribution to the theory of social justice, and of gender justice, by arguing that capabilities are the relevant space of comparison when justice-related issues are considered. This article supports Sen's idea, arguing that capabilities supply guidance superior to that of utility and resources (the view's familiar opponents), but also to that of the social contract tradition, and at least some accounts of human rights. But I argue that capabilities can help us to construct a normative conception of social justice, with critical potential for gender issues, only if we specify a definite set of capabilities as the most important ones to protect. Sen's "perspective of freedom" is too vague. Some freedoms limit others; some freedoms are important, some trivial, some good, and some positively bad. Before the approach can offer a valuable normative gender perspective, we must make commitments about substance.

2,008 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper studied the relationship between social norms and social perceptions in intra-household gender dynamics, and found that women are less motivated than men by self-interest and might this affect bargaining outcomes.
Abstract: Highlighting the problems posed by a ''unitary'' conceptualization of the household, a number of economists have in recent years proposed alternative models. These models, especially those embodying the bargaining approach, provide a useful framework for analyzing gender relations and throwing some light on how gender asymmetries are constructed and contested. At the same time, the models have paid inadequate or no attention to some critical aspects of intra-household gender dynamics, such as: What factors (especially qualitative ones) affect bargaining power? What is the role of social norms and social perceptions in the bargaining process and how might these factors themselves be bargained over? Are women less motivated than men by self-interest and might this affect bargaining outcomes? Most discussions on bargaining also say little about gender relations beyond the household, and about the links between extra-household and intra-household bargaining power. This paper spells out the nature of these com...

1,530 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a survey of empirical studies shows that women are worse off than men on some dimensions, better off on others, and similarly placed on yet others, while for some dimensions the evaluation is unclear.
Abstract: This paper investigates how Amartya Sen's capability approach can be applied to conceptualize and assess gender inequality in Western societies. I first argue against the endorsement of a definitive list of capabilities and instead defend a procedural approach to the selection of capabilities by proposing five criteria. This procedural account is then used to generate a list of capabilities for conceptualizing gender inequality in Western societies. A survey of empirical studies shows that women are worse off than men on some dimensions, better off on a few others, and similarly placed on yet others, while for some dimensions the evaluation is unclear. I then outline why, for group inequalities, inequalities in achieved functionings can be taken to reflect inequalities in capabilities, and how an overall evaluation could be arrived at by weighting the different capabilities.

1,101 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, Amartya Sen addresses the question why he is disinclined to provide a fixed list of capabilities to go with his general capability approach and argues that public reasoning and discussion are necessary for selecting relevant capabilities and weighing them against each other in each context.
Abstract: Amartya Sen addresses the question why he is disinclined to provide a fixed list of capabilities to go with his general capability approach. Capability assessment can be used for different purposes (varying from poverty evaluation to the assessment of human rights or of human development), and public reasoning and discussion are necessary for selecting relevant capabilities and weighing them against each other in each context. It would be a mistake to build a mausoleum for a “fixed and final” list of capabilities usable for every purpose and unaffected by the progress of understanding of the social role and importance of different capabilities.

643 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
202320
202240
202151
202031
201936
201839