Women's Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in "Randomista" Economics
The 2019 Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to three scholars on the grounds that their pioneering use of randomized control trials (RCTs) was innovative methodologically and contributed to development policy and the emergence of a new development economics. Using a critical feminist lens, this ar...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Feminist economics 2020-04, Vol.26 (2), p.1-26 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 26 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Feminist economics |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Kabeer, Naila |
description | The 2019 Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to three scholars on the grounds that their pioneering use of randomized control trials (RCTs) was innovative methodologically and contributed to development policy and the emergence of a new development economics. Using a critical feminist lens, this article challenges that conclusion by interrogating the storytelling practices deployed by "randomista" economists through a critical reading of a widely cited essay by Esther Duflo, one of the 2019 Nobel recipients, on the relationship between women's empowerment and economic development. The paper argues that the limitations of randomista economics have given rise to a particular way of thinking characterized by piecemeal analysis, ad hoc resort to theory, indifference to history and context, and methodological fundamentalism. It concludes that the randomista argument that broad-based economic development alone - without focused attention to women's rights - will lead to gender equality has not been borne out by recent data.
HIGHLIGHTS
Despite claims of impartiality, Duflo's interpretations of evidence and the language she uses indicate that the randomista method and narrative is not objective or impartial.
The randomistas' treatment of preferences as random and idiosyncratic ignores what feminists have long espoused: that the formation of preferences derives from entrenched social constructions.
The randomistas' claims to methodological superiority result in a discounting or dismissal of findings from nonexperimental studies in favor of experimental studies that report the same findings.
Duflo's main argument discussed in this paper is that while gender equality is desirable in its own right, it is better achieved through gender-neutral policies because gender-affirmative policies "distort" the allocative process and lead to efficiency costs.
Yet, these so-called distortions stem from historical structures that have curtailed women's productive potential and protected male privilege.
In other words, patriarchal discrimination introduces structural costs that are unlikely to be visible when the focus is on individual economic actors. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/13545701.2020.1743338 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_econi</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2403185285</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2403185285</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-ffab642e7ed66c9ab54afe65c6a45ca0fa221625edcb7a4070690677acc3de753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1OGzEUha2qlUjTPgKSFRasJvW_B1ZFIbRIkUDQqkvL8diVoxk72A4ob1-PksKOle3r75x77wHgFKM5Ri36hilnXCI8J4jUkmSU0vYDmGAmRMOoJB_rvTLNCJ2AzzlvEMKUMToBuz9xsOE8w-WwjS821UeBOnRwaWKIgzfw2j7bPm7Hj0t4BW_s4IPPBS6SL_5pZ2F08LHEtC-27334C--TNsUbm6EPcPZQzapPLnr26pm_gE9O99l-PZ5T8Ptm-Wvxs1nd_bhdXK0awyQvjXN6LRix0nZCmAu95kw7K7gRmnGjkdOEYEG47cxaaoYkEhdISKmNoZ2VnE7B2cF3m2IdNRe1ibsUaktFGKK45aQdKX6gTIo5J-vUNvlBp73CSI0Jq_8JqzFhdUy46uBBZ-tePr-pJJEtZrxCU_D9gPjgYhr0S0x9p4re9zG5pIOpMvp-l3_9ao35</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2403185285</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Women's Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in "Randomista" Economics</title><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Kabeer, Naila</creator><creatorcontrib>Kabeer, Naila</creatorcontrib><description>The 2019 Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to three scholars on the grounds that their pioneering use of randomized control trials (RCTs) was innovative methodologically and contributed to development policy and the emergence of a new development economics. Using a critical feminist lens, this article challenges that conclusion by interrogating the storytelling practices deployed by "randomista" economists through a critical reading of a widely cited essay by Esther Duflo, one of the 2019 Nobel recipients, on the relationship between women's empowerment and economic development. The paper argues that the limitations of randomista economics have given rise to a particular way of thinking characterized by piecemeal analysis, ad hoc resort to theory, indifference to history and context, and methodological fundamentalism. It concludes that the randomista argument that broad-based economic development alone - without focused attention to women's rights - will lead to gender equality has not been borne out by recent data.
HIGHLIGHTS
Despite claims of impartiality, Duflo's interpretations of evidence and the language she uses indicate that the randomista method and narrative is not objective or impartial.
The randomistas' treatment of preferences as random and idiosyncratic ignores what feminists have long espoused: that the formation of preferences derives from entrenched social constructions.
The randomistas' claims to methodological superiority result in a discounting or dismissal of findings from nonexperimental studies in favor of experimental studies that report the same findings.
Duflo's main argument discussed in this paper is that while gender equality is desirable in its own right, it is better achieved through gender-neutral policies because gender-affirmative policies "distort" the allocative process and lead to efficiency costs.
Yet, these so-called distortions stem from historical structures that have curtailed women's productive potential and protected male privilege.
In other words, patriarchal discrimination introduces structural costs that are unlikely to be visible when the focus is on individual economic actors.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1354-5701</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1466-4372</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/13545701.2020.1743338</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Routledge</publisher><subject>Clinical trials ; development ; Development economics ; Development policy ; Discounting ; Discrimination ; Dismissal ; Economic development ; Economics ; Empowerment ; Equality ; Feminism ; Focused attention ; Gender equity ; Gender inequality ; Impartiality ; Nobel prizes ; Policy making ; Research methodology ; Social construction ; Storytelling ; Treatment preferences ; Women ; Womens rights</subject><ispartof>Feminist economics, 2020-04, Vol.26 (2), p.1-26</ispartof><rights>2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group 2020</rights><rights>2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution – Non-Commercial – No Derivatives License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-ffab642e7ed66c9ab54afe65c6a45ca0fa221625edcb7a4070690677acc3de753</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-ffab642e7ed66c9ab54afe65c6a45ca0fa221625edcb7a4070690677acc3de753</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,33751</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kabeer, Naila</creatorcontrib><title>Women's Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in "Randomista" Economics</title><title>Feminist economics</title><description>The 2019 Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to three scholars on the grounds that their pioneering use of randomized control trials (RCTs) was innovative methodologically and contributed to development policy and the emergence of a new development economics. Using a critical feminist lens, this article challenges that conclusion by interrogating the storytelling practices deployed by "randomista" economists through a critical reading of a widely cited essay by Esther Duflo, one of the 2019 Nobel recipients, on the relationship between women's empowerment and economic development. The paper argues that the limitations of randomista economics have given rise to a particular way of thinking characterized by piecemeal analysis, ad hoc resort to theory, indifference to history and context, and methodological fundamentalism. It concludes that the randomista argument that broad-based economic development alone - without focused attention to women's rights - will lead to gender equality has not been borne out by recent data.
HIGHLIGHTS
Despite claims of impartiality, Duflo's interpretations of evidence and the language she uses indicate that the randomista method and narrative is not objective or impartial.
The randomistas' treatment of preferences as random and idiosyncratic ignores what feminists have long espoused: that the formation of preferences derives from entrenched social constructions.
The randomistas' claims to methodological superiority result in a discounting or dismissal of findings from nonexperimental studies in favor of experimental studies that report the same findings.
Duflo's main argument discussed in this paper is that while gender equality is desirable in its own right, it is better achieved through gender-neutral policies because gender-affirmative policies "distort" the allocative process and lead to efficiency costs.
Yet, these so-called distortions stem from historical structures that have curtailed women's productive potential and protected male privilege.
In other words, patriarchal discrimination introduces structural costs that are unlikely to be visible when the focus is on individual economic actors.</description><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>development</subject><subject>Development economics</subject><subject>Development policy</subject><subject>Discounting</subject><subject>Discrimination</subject><subject>Dismissal</subject><subject>Economic development</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Empowerment</subject><subject>Equality</subject><subject>Feminism</subject><subject>Focused attention</subject><subject>Gender equity</subject><subject>Gender inequality</subject><subject>Impartiality</subject><subject>Nobel prizes</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Social construction</subject><subject>Storytelling</subject><subject>Treatment preferences</subject><subject>Women</subject><subject>Womens rights</subject><issn>1354-5701</issn><issn>1466-4372</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>0YH</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1OGzEUha2qlUjTPgKSFRasJvW_B1ZFIbRIkUDQqkvL8diVoxk72A4ob1-PksKOle3r75x77wHgFKM5Ri36hilnXCI8J4jUkmSU0vYDmGAmRMOoJB_rvTLNCJ2AzzlvEMKUMToBuz9xsOE8w-WwjS821UeBOnRwaWKIgzfw2j7bPm7Hj0t4BW_s4IPPBS6SL_5pZ2F08LHEtC-27334C--TNsUbm6EPcPZQzapPLnr26pm_gE9O99l-PZ5T8Ptm-Wvxs1nd_bhdXK0awyQvjXN6LRix0nZCmAu95kw7K7gRmnGjkdOEYEG47cxaaoYkEhdISKmNoZ2VnE7B2cF3m2IdNRe1ibsUaktFGKK45aQdKX6gTIo5J-vUNvlBp73CSI0Jq_8JqzFhdUy46uBBZ-tePr-pJJEtZrxCU_D9gPjgYhr0S0x9p4re9zG5pIOpMvp-l3_9ao35</recordid><startdate>20200402</startdate><enddate>20200402</enddate><creator>Kabeer, Naila</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor & Francis LLC</general><scope>0YH</scope><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200402</creationdate><title>Women's Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in "Randomista" Economics</title><author>Kabeer, Naila</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-ffab642e7ed66c9ab54afe65c6a45ca0fa221625edcb7a4070690677acc3de753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>development</topic><topic>Development economics</topic><topic>Development policy</topic><topic>Discounting</topic><topic>Discrimination</topic><topic>Dismissal</topic><topic>Economic development</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Empowerment</topic><topic>Equality</topic><topic>Feminism</topic><topic>Focused attention</topic><topic>Gender equity</topic><topic>Gender inequality</topic><topic>Impartiality</topic><topic>Nobel prizes</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Social construction</topic><topic>Storytelling</topic><topic>Treatment preferences</topic><topic>Women</topic><topic>Womens rights</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kabeer, Naila</creatorcontrib><collection>Taylor & Francis Open Access</collection><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Feminist economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kabeer, Naila</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Women's Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in "Randomista" Economics</atitle><jtitle>Feminist economics</jtitle><date>2020-04-02</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>26</epage><pages>1-26</pages><issn>1354-5701</issn><eissn>1466-4372</eissn><abstract>The 2019 Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to three scholars on the grounds that their pioneering use of randomized control trials (RCTs) was innovative methodologically and contributed to development policy and the emergence of a new development economics. Using a critical feminist lens, this article challenges that conclusion by interrogating the storytelling practices deployed by "randomista" economists through a critical reading of a widely cited essay by Esther Duflo, one of the 2019 Nobel recipients, on the relationship between women's empowerment and economic development. The paper argues that the limitations of randomista economics have given rise to a particular way of thinking characterized by piecemeal analysis, ad hoc resort to theory, indifference to history and context, and methodological fundamentalism. It concludes that the randomista argument that broad-based economic development alone - without focused attention to women's rights - will lead to gender equality has not been borne out by recent data.
HIGHLIGHTS
Despite claims of impartiality, Duflo's interpretations of evidence and the language she uses indicate that the randomista method and narrative is not objective or impartial.
The randomistas' treatment of preferences as random and idiosyncratic ignores what feminists have long espoused: that the formation of preferences derives from entrenched social constructions.
The randomistas' claims to methodological superiority result in a discounting or dismissal of findings from nonexperimental studies in favor of experimental studies that report the same findings.
Duflo's main argument discussed in this paper is that while gender equality is desirable in its own right, it is better achieved through gender-neutral policies because gender-affirmative policies "distort" the allocative process and lead to efficiency costs.
Yet, these so-called distortions stem from historical structures that have curtailed women's productive potential and protected male privilege.
In other words, patriarchal discrimination introduces structural costs that are unlikely to be visible when the focus is on individual economic actors.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/13545701.2020.1743338</doi><tpages>26</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1354-5701 |
ispartof | Feminist economics, 2020-04, Vol.26 (2), p.1-26 |
issn | 1354-5701 1466-4372 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2403185285 |
source | Business Source Complete; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Clinical trials development Development economics Development policy Discounting Discrimination Dismissal Economic development Economics Empowerment Equality Feminism Focused attention Gender equity Gender inequality Impartiality Nobel prizes Policy making Research methodology Social construction Storytelling Treatment preferences Women Womens rights |
title | Women's Empowerment and Economic Development: A Feminist Critique of Storytelling Practices in "Randomista" Economics |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T11%3A50%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_econi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Women's%20Empowerment%20and%20Economic%20Development:%20A%20Feminist%20Critique%20of%20Storytelling%20Practices%20in%20%22Randomista%22%20Economics&rft.jtitle=Feminist%20economics&rft.au=Kabeer,%20Naila&rft.date=2020-04-02&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=26&rft.pages=1-26&rft.issn=1354-5701&rft.eissn=1466-4372&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/13545701.2020.1743338&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_econi%3E2403185285%3C/proquest_econi%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2403185285&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |