Reimagining value: A feminist commentary in the midst of the COVID‐19 pandemic

Abstract

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines value as, "the monetary worth of something; a fair return or equivalent in goods, services, or money for something exchanged; relative worth, utility, or importance; something (such as a principle or quality) intrinsically valuable or desirable; a numerical quantity that is assigned or is determined by calculation or measurement." Evidenced in this definition, the notion of worth, money, and utility is all hallmark considerations of how we calculate, assign, and attribute "value". Looking at the history of this concept and term, we find its modern articulation in neo-classical economic theory, and its singularly focus on exchange relationships, rational economic "man", and economic productivity. With concepts and language derived from these economic notions, "value as worth" has become central to our understanding of economies, societies, and even individuals. Amid the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, the ways in which we allocate value to our individual and collective human activities, and how we have come to equate value with worth and calculate utility has become fundamental in thinking through women's labor and their role in the economic recovery of nations. For decades, feminist economists have challenged the ways in which traditional economic theories and assumptions forego any consideration of social provisioning, child and elder care, birth and other forms of feminized and gendered activities vital to the very ways we understand worth, utility, and productivity as they relate to the formation, organization, replication, and maintenance of our economies (Ferber & Nelson, 2009; Phillips & Taylor, 1980; Waring & Steinem, 1988; Woolley, 1993). Separately, but in a related fashion, feminist sociological analysis has demonstrated that the ways we theorize organizations and enact organizational life are gendered (Acker, 1990, 2006), demonstrating how the allocation of value to particular organizational processes and outcomes are gendered practices that favor men and the masculine. Joan Acker's prescient observation in 1973, as shared in the starting quote to this article, is a question around the way dominant perspectives arriving from mainstream economics and sociology still do not account for gender as an organizing principle of the economy and society-gender is relegated as an additional and different domain, beyond the interest of the largely male academic population.

Tread lightly: Liminality and Covid‐19 reflections

“…Earlier works on the pandemic have indicated the gendered impact of the pandemic (Carli, 2020; Collins et al., 2021; Ozkazanc‐Pan & Pullen, 2020). Heightened care obligations (Collins et al., 2021) have also had a negative impact on women's financial and employment security (Berkhout & Richardson, 2020).…”

“…Heightened care obligations (Collins et al., 2021) have also had a negative impact on women's financial and employment security (Berkhout & Richardson, 2020). It is no surprise then that many have described the impact of the pandemic on the economy as a “she‐cession” (Ozkazanc‐Pan & Pullen, 2020), where some women have been forced to either exit or exist (Jaim, 2021).…”

The Liminality of Loneliness: Negotiating Feminist Ethics and Intersectional Affectivity

“…Within more explicitly feminist orientated discussions, a number of perspectives and interacting issues have been identified nationally and globally (Nanthini and Nair, 2020;Berkhout, and Richardson, 2020;Ozkazanc-Pan and Pullen, 2020;Ashoff (n.d)). Clearly the impact of COVID-19 on communities of people (and specifically women) is complex and many forms of discrimination, exclusion, disadvantage, have been exacerbated by it, and the policies, introduced to deal with it (Feminist response to COVID-19 (n.d); Ashcroft (n.d); Brooks, 2020; BBC World Service, 2020; Al-Ali, 2020; Rigby, 2020; Gbowee, (n.d)).…”

Occupational health, frontline workers and COVID-19 lockdown: new gender-related inequalities?

“…2 Despite the lack of an agreed definition of essential in this context, we can assume that it includes all those activities that are necessary for the continuation of life and society, which some authors have called 'life-making activities'. 3 This therefore clearly includes the healthcare sector, but also cleaning, food retail, transport and security sectors, which are characterised by a high proportion of jobs that are usually socially under-recognised and significantly invisibilised, 4 ; even categorised as 'dirty work'. 5 The implications of such a cessation of labour varied greatly according to the type of sector.…”

“…As in most European countries, the first wave was controlled through the imposition of a state of alarm and strict lockdown measures, which included the shutdown of most social activities and employment, except for workers in the economic sectors classified as ‘essential’ in ad hoc regulations 2. Despite the lack of an agreed definition of essential in this context, we can assume that it includes all those activities that are necessary for the continuation of life and society, which some authors have called ‘life-making activities’ 3. This therefore clearly includes the healthcare sector, but also cleaning, food retail, transport and security sectors, which are characterised by a high proportion of jobs that are usually socially under-recognised and significantly invisibilised,4; even categorised as ‘dirty work’ 5…”