IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/femeco/v8y2002i3p55-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Poverty Naturalized: Implications for Gender

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Shaffer

Abstract

The article illustrates how philosophical assumptions affect the theory, practice, and results of poverty analysis, to the potential detriment of women and girls. It links the income/consumption approach to poverty with naturalist normative theory, which developed historically from the moral theory of David Hume. It then traces the historical development of naturalist normative theory from Hume to modern utility theory and examines its links with the British empiricist tradition. Finally, it reviews some of the practical consequences for gender and argues that the philosophical baggage of the income/consumption poverty approach may ignore important issues for women and girls, thereby creating significant gender "gaps" in the analysis of deprivation.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Shaffer, 2002. "Poverty Naturalized: Implications for Gender," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 55-75.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:8:y:2002:i:3:p:55-75
    DOI: 10.1080/1354570022000026896
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1354570022000026896
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1354570022000026896?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haddad, Lawrence & Hoddinott, John & Alderman, Harold & DEC, 1994. "Intrahousehold resource allocation : an overview," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1255, The World Bank.
    2. Lipton, Michael & Ravallion, Martin, 1995. "Poverty and policy," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 41, pages 2551-2657, Elsevier.
    3. Shaffer, Paul, 1998. "Gender, poverty and deprivation: Evidence from the Republic of Guinea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(12), pages 2119-2135, December.
    4. Diana Strassmann, 1997. "Editorial: Expanding the Methodological Boundaries of Economics," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 7-8.
    5. Samuelson, Paul A & Swamy, S, 1974. "Invariant Economic Index Numbers and Canonical Duality: Survey and Synthesis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(4), pages 566-593, September.
    6. Strober, Myra H, 1994. "Rethinking Economics through a Feminist Lens," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 143-147, May.
    7. Ferber, Marianne A. & Nelson, Julie A. (ed.), 1993. "Beyond Economic Man," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226242019, December.
    8. Bina Agarwal, 1997. "''Bargaining'' and Gender Relations: Within and Beyond the Household," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1-51.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kanbur, Ravi & Shaffer, Paul, 2007. "Epistemology, Normative Theory and Poverty Analysis: Implications for Q-Squared in Practice," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 183-196, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dipankar Purkayastha, 1999. "Patriarchal Monopoly and Economic Development," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 61-78.
    2. Astrid Agenjo‐Calderón & Lina Gálvez‐Muñoz, 2019. "Feminist Economics: Theoretical and Political Dimensions," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 78(1), pages 137-166, January.
    3. Gillian Hewitson, 2001. "A Survey of Feminist Economics," Working Papers 2001.01, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    4. Ellen Mutari, 2001. ""...As broad as our life experience": visions of feminist political economy, 1972-1991," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 379-399, December.
    5. Joanna Tyrowicz & Lucas van der Velde & Irene van Staveren, 2018. "Does Age Exacerbate the Gender-Wage Gap? New Method and Evidence From Germany, 1984–2014," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 108-130, October.
    6. Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Haddad, Lawrence James & Peña, Christine, 2001. "Are women overrepresented among the poor?," FCND discussion papers 115, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Leanne Roncolato & John Willoughby, 2017. "Job Quality Complexities," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 49(1), pages 30-53, March.
    8. Ellen Mutari & Deborah Figart & Marilyn Power, 2001. "Implicit Wage Theories in Equal Pay Debates in the United States," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 23-52.
    9. Koko Siaka Koné, 2002. "Pauvreté, genre et stratégies de survie des ménages en Côte d'Ivoire," Documents de travail 73, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    10. Giandomenica Becchio, 2018. "Gender, Feminist and Heterodox Economics: Interconnections and Differences in a Historical Perspective," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 1, pages 5-24, March.
    11. Shelley Phipps & Peter Burton & Lars Osberg, 2001. "Time as a Source of Inequality Within Marriage: Are Husbands More Satisfied With Time for Themselves than Wives?," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21.
    12. Cristina Echevarria & Karine Moe, 2000. "On the Need for Gender in Dynamic Models," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 77-96.
    13. Haddad, Lawrence James & Peña, Christine & Nishida, Chizuru & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Slack, Alison T., 1996. "Food security and nutrition implications of intrahousehold bias," FCND discussion papers 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Berry, R. Albert, 2003. "Policy response to poverty and inequality in the developing world," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), April.
    15. Jongsoog Kim & Lydia Zepeda, 2004. "When The Work Is Never Done: Time Allocation In Us Family Farm Households," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 115-139.
    16. Stephanie Seguino, 2005. "All Types of Inequality are Not Created Equal: Divergent Impacts of Inequality on Economic Growth," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_433, Levy Economics Institute.
    17. Julie A. Nelson, 1995. "Feminism and Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 131-148, Spring.
    18. Berry, R. Albert, 2001. "Policy response to poverty and inequality in the developing world: where should the priorities lie?," Sede de la CEPAL en Santiago (Estudios e Investigaciones) 33125, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    19. Therese Jefferson & John King, 2001. ""Never Intended to be a Theory Of Everything": Domestic Labor in Neoclassical and Marxian Economics," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 71-101.
    20. Anuradha Seth, 1998. "Intra-Household Consumption Patterns: Issues, Evidence and Implications for Human Development," Human Development Occasional Papers (1992-2007) HDOCPA-1998-18, Human Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:8:y:2002:i:3:p:55-75. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFEC20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.