Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Epistemology of Feminist Economics

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Co-Designing Economies in Transition

Abstract

Feminist economics broadly refers to the application of a feminist lens to both the discipline and subject of economics. It is explicitly interdisciplinary, and encompasses debates about the narrow range of mainstream economic methods and researched areas, to questioning how economics values the reproductive sector, to examinations of economic epistemology and methodology. This chapter provides a brief overview of how feminist economics critiques established theory, methodology and policy approaches and how it aims to produce gender-aware theory, especially in defining economic activity. It argues for a reality check on how people actually live their lives as relational, vulnerable and interdependent beings and the urgency of rethinking of mainstream economic approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akerlof, G. A., & Shiller, R. J. (2009). Animal spirits: How human psychology drives the economy, and why it matters for global capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anand, P., Hunter, G., & Smith, R. (2005). Capabilities and well-being: Evidence based on the sen-nussbaum approach to welfare. Social Indicators Research, 74, 9–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-6518-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A. B. (2015). Inequality: What can be done? London: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barker, D. K. (2003). Emancipatory for whom? A comment on critical realism. Feminist Economics, 9(1), 103–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545700110059270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedict, R. (1934). Patterns of culture. New York: Mariner Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benería, L. (2003). Gender, development, and globalization: Economics as if people mattered. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bibler, S., & Zuckerman, E. (2013). The World Bank and women’s unpaid care work in select sub-Saharan African countries. Retrieved from http://www.genderaction.org/carereport.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Blank, R. M. (1993). What should mainstream economists learn from feminist theory? In M. A. Ferber & J. A. Nelson (Eds.), Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics (pp. 133–143). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordo, S. R. (1987). The flight to objectivity: Essays on cartesianism & culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordo, S. R. (2002). Selections from ‘The flight to objectivity’. In G. Lloyd (Ed.), Feminism and history of philosophy (pp. 82–97). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, K. (1986). What went wrong with economics? The American Economist, 30(1), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braidotti, R. (2006). The ethics of becoming imperceptible. In C. Boundas (Ed.), Deleuze and philosophy (pp. 133–159). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Budlender, D., & Sharp, R. (1998). How to do a gender-sensitive budget analysis: Contemporary research and practice. Canaberra: Commonwealth Secretariat and Australian Agency for International Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, M. (1998). The extended case method. Sociological Theory, 16(1), 4–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S., & Williams, W. M. (2014). Women in academic science: A changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15(3), 75–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100614541236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Code, L. (1996). What is natural about epistemology naturalized? American Philosophical Quarterly, 33(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G. (2006). Two regimes of madness: Texts and interviews 1975–1995. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e).

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, M. (2011). Making care count: A century of gender, race, and paid care work. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., & Jacobs, J. E. (1986). Social forces shape math attitudes and performance. Signs, 11(2), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.1086/494229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenreich, B., & Hochschild, A. R. (Eds.). (2004). Global woman: Nannies, maids, and sex workers in the new economy. New York: Holt Paperbacks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elson, D. (1998). Integrating gender issues into national budgetary policies and procedures: Some policy options. Journal of International Development, 10, 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1328(1998110)10:7<929::AID-JID563>3.0.CO;2-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esplen, E. (2009). Gender and care cutting edge pack—Overview report. BRIDGE. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferber, M. A. (1995). The study of economics: A feminist critique. The American Economic Review, 85(2), 357–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B., & Tronto, J. C. (1990). Toward a feminist theory of caring. In E. Abel & M. Nelson (Eds.), Circles of care: Work and identity in women’s lives (pp. 35–62). Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folbre, N. (1994). Who pays for the kids? Gender and the structures of constraint. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, N., Nelson, J. A., Ackerman, F., & Weisskopf, T. (2005). Microeconomics in context. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannsgen, G., & Papadimitriou, D. B. (2009). Lessons from the new deal: Did the new deal prolong or worsen the great depression? Working Paper 581. The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper Collection.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (Ed.). (1987). Feminism and methodology: Social science issues. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1995a). Can feminist thought make economics more objective? Feminist Economics, 1(1), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/714042212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1995b). Bon voyage: Navigating through the contemporary epistemological landscape. Feminist Economics, 1(3), 125–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/714042254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1999). The case for strategic realism: A response to lawson. Feminist Economics, 5(3), 127–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/135457099337842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (Ed.). (2004). The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekman, S. (1990). Gender and knowledge: Elements of a postmodern feminism. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill Collins, P. (1991). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbes, T. (2010 [1651]). Leviathan (Revised ed., A. P. Martinich & B. Battiste, Eds.). Peterborough: Broadview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jayaratne, T. E., & Stewart, A. J. (1991). Quantitative and qualitative methods in the social sciences: Current feminist issues and practical strategies. In M. M. Fonow & J. A. Cook (Eds.), Beyond methodology: Feminist scholarship as lived research (pp. 44–57). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, A. L. (1993). Public or private? Institutional economics and feminism. In M. A. Ferber & J. A. Nelson (Eds.), Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics (pp. 111–130). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602–611. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalecki, M. (1933). Próba teorii koniunktury. Warszawa: Instytut Badania Koniunktur i Cen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest and money. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. New York: Henry Holt and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosinski, M., Wang, Y., Lakkaraju, H., & Leskove, J. (2016). Mining big data to extract patterns and predict real-life outcomes. Psychological Methods, 21(4), 493–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurence, L. (1999). Domestic abuse. In J. Peterson & M. Lewis (Eds.), The elgar companion to feminist economics (pp. 121–126). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, G. (1979). The man of reason. Metaphilosophy, 10(1), 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.1979.tb00062.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, G. (1984). The man of reason: ‘Male’ and ‘Female’ in Western philosophy. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. (1993). Subjects, power and knowledge: Description and prescription in feminist philosophies of science. In L. Alcoff & E. Potter (Eds.), Feminist epistemologies (thinking gender) (pp. 101–120). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, M. (1995). Feminist economics: From theory to research. The Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d’Economique, 28(1), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.2307/136027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, D. N. (1993). Some consequences of a conjective economics. In M. A. Ferber & J. A. Nelson (Eds.), Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics (pp. 69–93). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. A. (1993). The study of choice or the study of provisioning? Gender and the definition of economics. In M. A. Ferber & J. A. Nelson (Eds.), Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics (pp. 23–36). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. A. (1996a, June 28). The masculine mindset of economic analysis. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 42(42), B3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. A. (1996b). Feminism, objectivity and economics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. A. (2008). Feminist economics. In S. N. Durlauf & L. E. Blume (Eds.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics (Vol. 3, pp. 282–285). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. A. (2013). Would women leaders have prevented the global financial crisis? Teaching critical thinking by questioning a question. Economics Faculty Publication Series, 40. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.umb.edu/econ_faculty_pubs/40

  • Nelson, J. A., & Goodwin, N. (2005). Teaching ecological and feminist economics in the principles course. GDAE Working Paper 05-05. Teaching Ecological and Feminist Economics. Medford: Global Development and Environment Institute, Tufts University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, J. (2007). Care. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century (A. Goldhammer, Trans.). Cambridge: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plato. (1993). The symposium. In W. S. Cobb (Ed.), The symposium and the phaedrus: Plato’s erotic dialogues (pp. 11–60). Albany: State University of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poteete, A. R., Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. (2010). Working together: Collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in practice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Power, M. (2004). Social provisioning as a starting point for feminist economics. Feminist Economics, 10(3), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochelau, D. (1995). Maps, numbers, text, and context: Mixing methods in feminist political ecology. The Professional Geographer, 47(4), 458–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-0124.1995.00458.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, J. (2013). Where are the women? Econ Focus. Second Quarter 2013, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, G., & Shackelford, J. (2001). Economics standards and lists: Proposed antidotes for feminist economists. Feminist Economics, 7(2), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545700110059243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiz, J. (1995). Epistemology and the tasks of feminist economics. Feminist Economics, 1(3), 110–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/714042252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221. https://doi.org/10.2307/2026184

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. K. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. C. Nussbaum & A. K. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–53). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Social Watch. (2015a). The basic capabilities index. Retrieved from http://www.socialwatch.org/node/9376

  • Social Watch. (2015b). Social watch: G8 countries have not met their promises. Retrieved from http://www.socialwatch.org/sites/default/files/ICB_2007_eng/SocialWatch_NewsRelease.pdf

  • Stagoll, C. (2005). Becoming. In A. Parr (Ed.), The Deleuze dictionary (pp. 21–22). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starr, M. A. (2014). Qualitative and mixed-methods research in economics: Surprising growth, promising future. Journal of Economic Surveys, 28(2), 238–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strassmann, D. (1999). Feminist economics. In J. Peterson & M. Lewis (Eds.), The Elgar companion to feminist economics (pp. 360–373). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strober, M. H. (2003). The application of mainstream economics constructs to education: A feminist analysis. In M. A. Ferber & J. A. Nelson (Eds.), Feminist economics today: Beyond economic man (pp. 135–156). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toussaint, E. (2012). A glance in the rear view mirror: Neoliberal ideology from its origins to the present. Chicago: Haymarket Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. C. (1987). Beyond gender difference to a theory of care. Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 12(4), 644–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. C. (1995). Care as a basis for radical political judgements. Hypatia, 10(2), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1995.tb01376.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ungerson, C. (1995). Gender, cash and informal care: European perspectives and dilemmas. Journal of Social Policy, 24(1), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727940002451X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Staveren, I. (2010). Feminist economics, setting out the parameters. In C. Bauhardt & G. Caglar (Eds.), Feministische Kritik der politischen Ökonomie (pp. 18–48). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vyas, S., Mbwambo, J., & Heise, L. (2015). Women’s paid work and intimate partner violence: Insights from Tanzania. Feminist Economics, 21(1), 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2014.935796

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waring, M. (1988). If women counted: A new feminist economics. San Francisco: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to express sincere gratitude to Sara Cantillon for encouraging me to write this chapter, for drafting its initial structure and for discussing it at various stages. I am also grateful to Kirstin Mertlitsch for her continuous philosophical inspiration and feedback, and Stefan Łapniewski for his linguistic support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Economics, Finance and Management, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland

    Zofia Łapniewska

Authors
  1. Zofia Łapniewska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economic and Social Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy

    Vincenzo Mario Bruno Giorgino

  2. Claremont School of Theology, Claremont, CA, USA

    Zack Walsh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Łapniewska, Z. (2018). Epistemology of Feminist Economics. In: Giorgino, V., Walsh, Z. (eds) Co-Designing Economies in Transition. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66592-4_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66592-4_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66591-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66592-4

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation